Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3061_001MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MAY 14, '1996 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Farley, called the meeting to !order at 7:37 p.m.. Present at the imeeting were: Trustees George Clowes, Timothy Corcoran,, Richard Hendricks, Michaele Skowron and lrvana, Wilks. Trustee Paul'Hoefert arrived at 8:24 p.m. Also present were: Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Fire Chief Edward Cavello, Finance Director David Jepson, Assistant Finance Director Carol Widmer and Finance Director designee Brian Caputo. MINUTES Minutes of April 23, 1996. Motion made by Trustee Corcoran and Seconded by Trustee Skowron to accept the Minutes. Minutes were approved unanimously. CITIZENSCIRZENS TO BE IIE tRD Village MlanagerJanonis introduced Finance Director designee Brian Caputo to the Village Board and the viewing audience and stated his first day would be June 17, 1996, -: r-411*0, Fire Chief Edward Cavello provided a general overview of the previous discussions with the Board: He had previously recommended a deferment of an Ordinance which would require the detectors in all residential dwellings until the technology improves. He stated that his Department has worked very closely with the Communications Division in providing proper installation information to residents through cable tv. He also stated that he has worked very closely with the manufacturers to implement some changes in the devices. Among the changes which have come online since October 1995 are a UL listing, a reset button and instructions which are more specific in terms of what to do in case the detector sounds: He stated that although changes have been made and the standards are becoming more consistent, issues still remain concerning the detectors. Among the issues: which remain are price, enforcement and accuracy of the device itself. He would recommend that any Ordinance requiring the installation of the detectors be deferred at this time. He will continue to monitor the developments of the devices and report back to the Board periodically. Consensus of the Village Burd was to continue to monitor the technology of carbon monoxide detectors and staff is to periodically update the Village Board of any changes in the industry. Mr. Janonls stated the public relations effort will season. V. REVIEW OF,FINANCIAL COCCI' DITI Finance Director David Jepson prow Village Board. He stated that by we compared to Chicago area corporatia He stated things have improved subs' ismuch stronger based on the divers which the Village Board undertook strong and the 'Pillage should be ab long term. The financial statements % a snapshot taken at one point in time is currently in process and should t provided,a general overview of the B including Fund Balance. He also pro, sheets which illustrate the ending poi for fiscal year 1997. One of the items which was discuss( company was the need to increase months. !Mr. Jepson stated that Bale, year. Village Manager Janonis stated that living within specific spending targets is to smooth out changes In econom are utilized by Mount Prospect are I socio-economic make-up of the com Information provided as a general uI Beard. a general overview of this topic to the a comparison, if Mount Prospect were flaunt Prospect would be in the top 200. illy since 1992 and the financial position on and expansion of the Revenue base at time. Projections for the future are maintain its financial position over the were provided in the packet are virtually *ruing the financial position. The Audit mpeted by the end of May. He also * Sheets and defined numerous terms an overview of available Fund Balance r fiscal year 1996 and the starting point a recent meeting with the Bond Rating id Balance from two months to three revenues are on target so far this fiscal eview reflects an efficient operation and stated the need for the Fund Balances ,ndi#ions. The Revenue sources which )d'toward the community type and the ty. : and requires no action by the Village a VI. RVISED SOLICITATION REGUI ATIQNS Assistant Village Manager David Strahl provided a general overview of this topic based on the previous discussions with Village Board members and a Court Order which was arrived at in March 1996 between Precision Home Delivery and the Village of Mount Prospect. He stated the general focus of the Ordinance is to regulate the delivery methods not necessarily the type of material which is delivered. He stated the Village has received approximately 15 calls from residents concerning the delivery method of the Chicagoland Express. The proposed Ordinance is presented for discussion and revision to Board members to address the concerns which had been presented by the Board to staff at an earlier meeting. General comments by the Board members included the following items: Concern was raised about distribution of Election -style material and material which could be considered for the public good. Some Board members voiced concerns that the Ordinance as presented appears reasonable if the No Solicitors Invited language is deleted from the Ordinance itself. Village Manager Janonis stated that this Ordinance, as with many other Ordinances, is considered a tool which is enforced on a complaint -only basis and this Ordinance revision is brought forth based on previous concerns and limited ability to follow-up on complaints. Consensus of the Village Board was to revise the Ordinance by deleting the No Solicitors Invited language and bring back to a Village Board meeting for review and possible approval. VII. VILLAGE MAN AGIEWS _REPORT Village ManagerJanonisprovided a general invitation to all citizens concerning the Public Works Open House scheduled for May 18. Vill. ANY OTHER BUSINESS Trustee Clowes invited the public to Youth Sports and More scheduled for May 19 at RecPlex from 1:30 p.m. until 4:00 p.m. Trustee Wilks wanted to thank members of the United States Air Force Air Refueling Wing at O'Hare for the recent tour and also voiced thanks to the Village staff for the successful South Side Clean -Up effort. 3 Mayor Farley wanted to welOO616 Hacienda RostaUrant, which officially opens today., Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM e TO: MAYOR GERALD L. FARLEY AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM: TRUSTEE MICHAELE SKOWRON DATE: MAY 28, 1996 SUBJECT: COMMERCIAL VEHICLE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS Mount Prospect has had a Commercial Vehicle Ordinance for at least sixteen years. Commercial vehicles were permitted in residential neighborhoods under the following conditions: 1. An 8,000 pound commercial vehicle could be stored in a garage. 2. An 8,000+ pound commercial vehicle could be stored in a garage with a Conditional Use permit. 3. Commercial vehicles were not permitted outside of a garage. 4. Enforcement was on a complaint basis. From time to time, complaints were filed and citations written. A recent citation resulted in a Court appearance. The presiding Judge determined that our Ordinance was not specific enough. To define a commercial vehicle seemed to be ordinary Village business. Who would have imagined that having the topic up for definition would open the door to consider whether commercial vehicles had a place in residential neighborhoods - a place other than in the garage? There are non-commercial van and trucks which are the same size or larger than commercial vehicles. There are trucks with commercial truck "B" plates. They are for fun, family, errands, weekend projects, transportation, look just like a commercial vehicle but are not. Oh, how to tell them apart!! Staff tried. Following standard procedure, the staff defined commercial vehicles. The definition involved more than Webster's dictionary. Staff wrote criteria to determine what was a commercial vehicle. Since this definition was m Text Amendment ho the Zoning Code, the newly crafted definition was oerd to the Zoning Board of Appeals for its discusoion, debate and recommendation hothe Village Board. After much discussion and citizen input, the ZBA recommended tothe Village Board, "Do not accept this dafiniUon." Procedure being what it is, the Village Board was now faced with needing a super majority -five votes -to accept the new definition (nemember. the definition was a set ofmibsrie). The Board was esdiverse as the community in defining a commercial vehicle. There were not five votes for any one position. Rather than let the Village continue with an Ordinance that gives no guidelines to citizens on commercial vehicles and a Court system which would not enforce the existing Ordinance, the Mayor established a six person committee. The committee had three people infavor oywriting a definition hocontinue the old Ordinance and three people who wanted ochange. The Committee determined that commercial vehicles shall be defined as follows: "Commercial vehicles may include, but shall not necessarily be restricted to, any vehicle carrying work equipment such anladders, snow plows, hand and mechanical tools ormachinery any place onthe outside ofthe vehicle; any vehicle containing m name, logo orother signage of any business enterprise visible from the outside of the vehicle; any vehicle used for public transportation purposes capable of carrying more than seven (7) persons unless used as commuter vans as defined by the Illinois Motor Vehicle Code; and any commercial vehicle msdefined bythe Illinois Motor Vehicle Clearly. the integrity of residential neighborhoods was important to each committee member. How tomaintain that integrity varied in the face of defining commercial vehicles. Remambar, wmwere appointed toreflect our diverse opinions. There was unanimous agreement that only one commercial vehicle be permitted per residence. It may be in the garage or on the driveway. While individual families may have greater needs from time to time, the Ordinance is for the good of the majority. We are recommending a change to a long-standing Ordinance but the Ordinance must still protect residential neighborhoods. We agreed to prohibiting vehicles with more than four wheels and also prohibiting rafhgemoted units. VVedebated storage un the property outside the garage. Much discussion later, we agreed that rear and/oraideyomd storage of commercial vehicle was preferable and would be encouraged. Vehicle dimensions were the first real test cfdefining acommercial vehicle. Committee members supplied their own vehicle's dknensionm, nakam brochures of dealerships and ultimately, a meet -and -measure session of vans and trucks on the Village Hall's parking lot. That physical activity was well worth the time. Personal non-commercial vehicles were the same size amthose wewere attempting boregulate. Clearly, itisnot ovehicle's sheer size alone, sitting on a driveway, which causes us to want to regulate it. We were mindful that the transportation industry could change just as dramatically in the future as it has in the recent past. The stafro chart ofboth unmmenjo| and non-commercial vehicle dimensions was of great value in determining size. In the vvonda of one committee member, vvodetermined on''enve/ope"ofsize. Each commercial vehicle must fit inthe following envelope: Notaller than seven feet from the ground totop ofroof; no wider than seven feet (mirrors excluded) ;and no longer than nineteen feet from bumper to bumper. Nmwdhotvvahaddefinedhmwmnny.vvhenaitnou|dbeporkod.ondhovvbiQitcou|dbe. what about the signage on it? Sune|y, the signage is one area that clearly separates commercial from non-commercial. We all know signage when we see it; hovvever, how much, if any, signage are we willing to accept in o neighborhood? The old Ordinance said, "none." The vehicle was to be stored in a garage and, conoequenUy, no signage would be visible on the driveway. At last, o commercial vehicle criteria for which the Village already had guidelines. The Village has taken quite seriously the necessity of business advertising via signage and the corresponding impact onthe community. The Village not only has oSign Ordinance but Sign Review Board. Advertising on a commercial vehicle is still advertising. We applied the same percentage which governs business: 25% ofoignab|n area on each side will beallowed for signage. We concluded that the Village Board establish m fair amount of time for residents of current commercial vehicles to prepare for e sign change. From Committee members' discussion of vehicle purchasing pattnrnm, depreciation and company notificotion, we concluded that four and m half (4-1/2) years was a fair amount of time. All signage on currently owned commercial vehicles will begrandfathered until 1/i/2OO1. From i/iX2OO1 fonwand, all signage must bncovered from view. Any commercial vehicle established after the new criteria ieadopted must cover the signage immediately. The old Ordinance permitted no signage on the driveway because the commercial vehicle was garaged; this new criteria permits no signage because it will be covered. All we had left to discuss was the external storage on vehicles. It is so often external storage which jars a neighborhood's concept of residential and calls into question whether one neighbor has stepped over the line of what other neighbors should rightfully tolerate. We agreed to recommend that: 1Rear. No trailers or other attachments (storage of trailers or other attachments shall baprohibited onresidential property). 2. Front. Only snowplows during the winter season. 3. Sides. Nothing attached to the aide and no extension of the oidewoUo. 4� Top. Storage racks not to exceed 18 inches above the top of the cob (including ladder and equipmant);may not exceed 8feet from ground totop of truck. 5. Pick-up truck bed. No equipment (other than permanently attached bmo| box)bnbavisible above top ofpick-up truck bed. Nolandscaping material can be stored in the bed of the truck. |nconclusion, weare recommending that commercial vehicles belimited tonot more than one (1) per residence; they must be stored in the sideyard or backyard where possible; they fit in an envelope of seven feet (T) high by seven feet (T) wide by nineteen feet (19') long; that the attachments be limited to snowplows (in oaaeon>, built-in too|boxeo, top racks nfno more than eighteen inches (18") (hobo| vehicle height of eight feet (8'); and covered signage. For those who hoped that commercial vehicles would be prohibited — you are surely disappointed. For those who hoped that no restrictions would apply — you are surely disappointed. For those who believed that o middle ground could be found to protect neighborhoods and to accommodate the needs of commercial vehicle owners, we look tuyour support on our recommendations. For all citizens who maintain their homes their vehicles, their property; who follow our sprinkling ordinances, our parking ordinances, our solid waste and recycling ordinances; for those who are considerate of their neighbors when they mow the lawn, listen to music, celebrate with parties; for those who buy vehicle stickers, pet licenses, and garage sale pannite, we believe these criteria for commercial vehicles will be another instance of establishing the guidelines which allow us to live together. KAVVG/ncc Commercial Vehicle Committee Chair