Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/26/2006 COW minutes MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE SEPTEMBER 26, 2006 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:08 p.m., in the Village Board Room of Village Hall, 50 South Emerson Street, by Mayor Irvana Wilks. Present at the meeting were: Trustees Timothy Corcoran, Paul Hoefert, John Korn, Michaele Skowron and Michael Zadel. Absent from the meeting was Trustee Richard Lohrstorfer. Staff members present included: Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Village Attorney Everette Hill, Public Works Director Glen Andler, Deputy Public Works Director Sean Dorsey and Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker. II. MINUTES Approval of Minutes of August 8, 2006. Motion made by Trustee Skowron and Seconded by Trustee Zadel. Minutes were approved. Trustee Corcoran abstained. Approval of Minutes of August 22, 2006. Motion made by Trustee Korn and Seconded by Trustee Zadel. Minutes were approved. Mayor Wilks abstained. III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. Mayor Wilks stated that she wanted to move the ComEd Rate Hike discussion up on the Agenda to follow the Smoking Regulations discussion. The Village Board concurred with the change in the Agenda order. IV. SMOKING REGULATIONS DISCUSSION Village Manager Janonis stated this is the third discussion on this topic. He stated there are two versions with different drafting styles presented for the Village Board's consideration. The Village Board had suggested some additional exception language for consideration which also is included for discussion purposes. He would like the Village Board to provide direction to staff as to the intent of the regulations for Ordinance drafting purposes. Village Attorney Buzz Hill spoke. He provided an overview of the two different Ordinances and the styles associated with each Ordinance. He stated one draft is based on the model draft Ordinance of several other communities and the other draft is similar to the style of Ordinances normally considered by the Village Board. 1 Resident David Rowe spoke. He stated the language that is presented does not prohibit outdoor smoking and would request consideration for such a definition. Jim Pappas, co-owner of Papp's Bar and Grill, spoke. He stated he is concerned about the difference in regulations with Des Plaines compared to Mount Prospect and the possible impact upon his business. He stated the draft, as presented, would necessitate a major economic investment and feels that the regulation as proposed is fair. Madeline May, 621 South George, spoke. She stated she is also a community health nurse and would support full regulation with cooperation with businesses. Rick Russo, owner of EI Sombrero Restaurant spoke. He stated that he has seen the table counts between smoking and non-smoking flip-flop over the years and would support a separation of smoking areas from the restaurant. David Rowe, spoke again. He stated that the two Ordinances are substantially different and one significant difference that he would like to have addressed by the Board is the smoking on the train platforms and transportation facilities. He also suggested regulation of smoking in parks and a better definition of semi-enclosed areas. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: It was suggested that the Board define the intent of the regulation and allow staff to draft the necessary language to support the intent. It was also suggested that the Village should define an exception list for regulation. It was also noted that some physical limitations may be present for some businesses to comply with the Ordinance for separating smoking and non-smoking areas. A comment was made that a total ban should be considered due to the exposure of smoke to employees in the businesses that allow smoking. Summary of the Intent for Requlation Consideration . Smokinq in Enclosed Areas: Prohibited . Smokinq in Outdoor Areas: Smoking prohibited within 15' around the entrance of a building. Smoking would be prohibited in outdoor eating areas. Smoking would be prohibited in bus stops and the Village parking garage. Smoking prohibition on transportation platforms or conveyance areas. (Tie vote). . Smoking Allowed Based on Lounge Exception as Defined in Part 0 with specific Liquor License Class designation: Tie vote . Smoking Allowed as Defined in the Proposed Ordinance for hotel/motel rooms. Tobacco store. . Private residence. . Smokinq Allowed in Desiqnated Smokinq Area Motion failed. . Smokinq Allowed in Non-Public Business where all employees were smokers: Motion failed. 2 · Phase-in period for prohibition of smoking on impacted businesses would be considered once proposed by staff. Consensus of the Village Board was to ask staff to provide a recommended Ordinance based on the intent as described previously and any areas that there were tie votes to include in the Ordinance as prohibitions but identify them as items which did not garner consensus at the time the draft Ordinance is considered. V. COM ED RATE HIKE Deputy Public Works Director Sean Dorsey provided a general introduction as to the projected increased electrical rates effective January 1, 2007. Mr. Dorsey provided an overview of the electrical usage of the Village whereby the usage for the Village operations is primarily dedicated to water pumping and streetlight use. He stated ComEd recently has undertaken a reverse auction whereby electrical providers bid on the amount of electrical power they can provide into the grid and ComEd would be the transportation provider of the power. He projects the water and sewer electrical rates to increase approximately 49% and the streetlight electrical cost to increase approximately 51 % which would bring the cost of streetlight electricity up to approximately $200,000 per year and water to approximately $90,000 per year. He stated there are options that have been discussed including participation in an electrical cooperative whereby the power needs are pooled and bid as a group. There also is an option for a separate bid by the Village for its specific power or the Village can stay with ComEdo Any consideration for power supply alternatives must be made by January 1, 2007 and such alternatives would be in place for approximately 17 months from that date. Staff recommendation is to consider participation in the electrical cooperative while simultaneously submitting a separate bid for comparison purposes. The opportunity to compare these two prices would potentially allow the Village to enjoy lower rates since the ComEd rates are already published for January 1. He also stated that such a recommendation would require timely Village Board action including authorization of the Village Manager to enter into a contractual agreement due to a short turn-around time and a Village Board Resolution to waive the bid process. Once the power rates are provided to the Village the Village would have approximately 24 hours to either accept or reject the rates, thereby, the need to authorize the Village Manager to enter into a contractual agreement on a short-term basis. Consensus of the Village Board was to support the staff recommendation as proposed. VI. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CODE MODIFICATIONS/FEE IN LIEU OF STORMWATER DETENTION Village Engineer Jeff Wulbecker stated this is a continuation of the discussion of June 13, 2006. He stated staff would recommend the collection of a fee in lieu of storm water detention for projects of limited scope in order to build adequate resources for larger scale detention efforts which would be required due to the culmination of many smaller projects. He stated the Village Board had asked the staff to survey surrounding communities. A survey was prepared by the Northwest Municipal Conference of which 18 surveys were received with seven municipalities considering such a change and five municipalities having already implemented such a modification. 3 Mr. Wulbecker outlined the conditions for the fee in lieu of storm water detention. Such conditions include the following: 1. Detention would be required as per Code for the project under consideration. 2. The relief would be allowed by the Village Engineer if such detention was impractical and was on less than one acre. He is suggesting a fee based on the square footage of impervious surface. Development projects less than one acre would be assessed a $2.00 per square foot of impervious surface rate. This would apply to projects that trigger the Development Code including: 1) All commercial/industrial/multi-family developments. 2) Additions greater than 25% of the existing building footprint to any commercial/industrial/institutional or multi-family development. 3) Parking lot expansions greater than 50% of the existing lot to any commercial/industrial/institutional or multi-family development. 4) Single-family developments involving two or more units. The fee would apply to residential improvements at $.50 per square foot of impervious surface. Examples of projects that the fee would apply to include: a. Single-family new homes including teardowns and rebuilds. b. Single-family home building additions. c. Single-family garages. He stated the proposed fee would generate approximately $350 for a typical detached garage, approximately $200 for a typical building addition and between $2,000 and $5,000 for a typical new home. The fee would be collected at the time the permit is issued and the fee would be consolidated with other fees from other such developments and used for detention projects to benefit the smaller projects on a consolidated basis. The fee could be used for maintenance of basins, expansion of basins, relief storm sewers, flood control projects, combined sewer improvements and drain way improvements. He stated that once the Village Board provided the necessary direction, a draft could go to the Planning and Zoning Commission on October 26 for approval and forwarded to the Village Board for consideration in November of 2006. General comments from the Village Board members included the following items: There was a proposal that any money collected from a specific geographic area should be spent in that same area. It was also suggested that the fee only apply to areas with increased impact. Village Manager Janonis stated that the proposal is not intended as a revenue generator because a single home improvement would have minimal impact, however, the cumulative effect of the teardown and rebuild phenomenon would have an effect for which these funds would be utilized to rectify. This proposal is suggested as a proactive approach. 4 Richard Bonderovich spoke. He had suggested this program for consideration by the Village staff and Village Board based on his experience of developing four homes in Mount Prospect. Consensus of the Village Board was to move forward with the staff proposal to the appropriate Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and ultimately additional discussion with the Village Board. VII. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT Village Manager Janonis stated the Family Bike Ride is October 14 and the Farmers' Market is winding down for the season. VIII. ANY OTHER BUSINESS Mayor Wilks mentioned that the Historical Society has an upcoming event at the Mount Prospect Public Library on October 7. Trustee Hoefert requested Village Board consider a discussion on regulation of c1ear- cutting of private trees after January 1. Mayor Wilks stated she would be attending the Illinois Municipal League Conference. IX. CLOSED SESSION There was no Closed Session. X. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:09 p.m. r -<= ,--::> CAJ_j s-LtJ DAVID STRAHL Assistant Village Manager 5