HomeMy WebLinkAbout3296_001MINUTES
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
JANUARY 12, 1982
I. ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Krause at
7:30 p.m., in the Public Safety Building, 112 East
Northwest Highway. Present at the meeting were:
Trustees Ralph Arthur, Gerald Farley, Leo Floros,
Norma Murauskis and Ted Wattenberg. Absent was
Trustee Edward Miller. Also in attendance were
Assistant Village Manager Geick, Fire Chief Lawrence
Pairitz, Police Chief Ronald Pavlock, Director of
Public Works Herbert Weeks, Assistant Director of
Public Works Glen Andler, Village Engineer Dennis
Valentine, representatives from the press and one
person in the audience.
II. MINUTES
The Minutes of the. Committee of -the Whole meeting of
December 8, 1981 were accepted and filed with the
following addition: Under the section of the meeting
discussing_the_sa.le of,yprop,erty at the Rauenhorst
Development, the Minutes should include the Committee
of the Whole voted 4-3 to sell the property and earmark
the funds for future capital facilities or equipment.
Voting in favor was Trustee Arthur and -voting against
were Mayor Krause and Trustee Murauskis.
III. NORTHWEST HIGHWAY STREET LIGHTING PROGRAM
The Committee of the Whole reviewed documents from the
Department of Public Worksindicating that the planned
street lighting improvements along Northwest Highway
from Waterman to Mount Prospect Road had now increased
in cost to more than $400,000 from the original estimate
of $266,000. Additionally, energy costs have escalated
from an earlier estimate of $5,250 to $8,300 annually.
The reason for this is the Illinois Department of
Transportation mandating that in order to use Motor Fuel
Tax Funds, the light standards must be located approximately'
100 feet apart rather than the initial design of 160 feet.
It is the State's position that the lighting system must
illuminate the entire roadway from sidewalk to curbline
and these additional lights are, therefore, necessary.
The Village staff indicated that in their opinion less
lighting would still accomplish the general purpose
IV.
proposed by the Board end that in fact the lighting at
the new Maple Streit Parking Lot is based on 130 foot
distances and at that distance, the entire Parking Lot
is well lit. After some general discussion, the Committee
of the Whole concluded that the administration should
make an effort on behalf of the Mayor and Board of
Trustees to have the Illinois Department of Transportation
reduce the spacing. If there is no movement on the
regulations on the part of the State, then the matter is
to be brought back to the Committee of the Whole for
further discussion.. However, if the State will allow
the Village to locate the lights at either 160 foot
spacing or approximately 130 foot spacing, then the
matter can be directed to the Village Board for final
contract bidding. During this discussion, Trustee
Wattenberg asked that the administration notify the
Euclid Lake Homeowners Association, President Peter
Downing, the next time this matter appears on the Agenda
as they have some views about street lighting in general.
MANAGER'S REPORT
The Village Manager reviewed for the Committee of,,
the Whole that the matter of ELECTRONIC GAMES is,
scheduled for Committee discussion later in January.
Additionally, at that last meeting in January, the
administration plans to bring up for discussion the
proposed improvements along MOUNT PROSPECT ROAD including
notification to the residents along that roadway. The
Village Manager reported that the 1982-1983 BUDGET is
still on schedule having been reviewed by the Finance
Commission on Wednesday, January 6. After this initial
review, the Finance Commission asked for some additional
data regarding various matters and a subsequent meezing,
is scheduled for Wednesday, January 20.
V. WELL, _#17
The Committee of the Whole reviewed reports from the
staff, our consulting engineer', Baxter and Woodman, and
Fletcher Engineering. The Village Manager reported that
after the initial repairs authorized by the Mayor and
the Board of; Trustees earlier in 1981, the Well pump
stopped operating and after it was removed from the Well,
it was determined by staff and our consulting engineers
that the pump failed because of either manufacturer's
defect or the installer's error. The manufacturer,
Peerless Pump, the the installer, J. P. Miller have
offered to replace the bowl assembly together with a
contract for the removal of sand at an expense not to
exceed $80,000. The staff and the consulting engineers
2
have found less expensive alternatives by using other
contractors and suppliers. The Village Manager indicated
that Fletcher Engineering was brought into the project
in order to obtain an independent opinion as to whether
or not Well #17 was really critical to the Village of
Mount Prospect water system. It was the conclusion of
Fletcher Engineering that we are not likely to receive
Lake water until 1985 and that even after Lake water,
Well #17 should be kept in reserve status for emergency
and supplemental pumping. Fletcher Engineering recommended
that the Village install stainless steel bowls and put
the Well on line as soon as possible. Baxter and Woodman
also concluded that the Well should be placed back on line
and repairs made. After some general discussion, the
Committee of the Whole concluded that the repairs should
be scheduled for a subsequent Board Agenda for formal
authorization. Furthermore, the Village Manager was
authorized to inquire of the Village Attorney as to
whether or not we have any legal action against J. P.
Miller and/or Peerless Pump.
VI. FACILITIES PLAN
Chief Pairitz, Task Force Chairman of the Facilities
Planning Committee, introduced member's of the Committee
including Chief Pavlock, Mr. Weeks, George Busse, Robert
McBride and Gregory Trepani. Chief Pairitz then reviewed
the,procedure"utilized'by the Committee in assessing,the
operational needs of the various departments., Village
Manager Burghard indicated that while this was not the
most opportune time to go to the market for long-term
debt, this was in his opinion the time that the -Village
ought to be planning for its long-term needs so that it
might take benefit of lower interest rates in the future.
A general discussion of the report then ensued with some
members of the Committee suggesting that a tour of our
present facilities be established so that they could
update themselves on the operational needs of the various
departments. Trustee Arthur pointed out that in his
opinion, the administration could have included additional
alternatives such as outside storage of vehicles on some
municipally -owned property, the installation of a salt
storage shed on municipal
cipal property at Carboy Road, and
the use of Maple Street Parking Lot for employee parking.
Trustee Murauskis felt that the staff could better
utilize some of its existing spaces and indicated her
reluctance together with that of Trustee Arthur of
approaching the taxpayer at this time for such sizable
expenditures. Mayor Krause indicated her reluctance to
proceed with any such expenditures at this time and also
expressed the opinion that existing facilities could better
- 3 -
be utilized. After some further general discussion,
the administration was directed to arrange a tour of
existing facilities for those officials and citizens
who might be interested and that the matter should be
rescheduled for a future Committee of the Whole meeting
for further evaluation and direction.
VII. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
Trustee Farley inquired as to whether or not the
municipality ought to be considering a local Cable TV
Commission to monitor the operations of Cablenet and
to sponsor and coordinate the efforts of local groups
for local programming,. The Village Manager was directed
to place this item on the Deferred List and to bring
the matter up for discussion at a future Committee of
the Whole meeting.
VIII.ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9.20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
TERRANCE L. BURGHARD
Village Manager
TLB/rcw
4
®I of Mount'Prospeta t
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Village Manager
FROM: Village Engineer
SUBJECT: Mt. ProsTDect Road
DATE- January 21, 1982
1. As part of the present trend for the Illinois Det)artment of
Transportation (IDOT) to divest itself of unnumbered state highways
such as Wolf Road, IDOT has undertaken a program where county and
local municipalities would assume maintenance responsibilities for
such roads after upgrading. In the same pattern, Cook County will
be assuming maintenance of some new roads from IDOT while
simultaneously divesting itself of the maintenance of other roads.
Each agency is attempting to concentrate its resources on those
patterns of roads which provide for a coherent transportation grid.
In developing such a transportation pattern, Cook County has
determined that that portion of Mount Prospect Road between North-
west Highway on the south and Central Road on the north can better
be served by the Village and allow the County to expend its
resources in other locations.
2. Initial contact from the Cook County Department of Highways
(County) took place on June 22, 1979 in a letter from the County
Highway Superintendent, Mr. Golterman to Mayor Krause. A response
dated July 11, 1979 highlighted the Village's concern with accept-
ing a substandard road, particularly with view towards proper
drainage and traffic control.
A letter dated March 31, 1981 from the Village is the next
correspondence which stated that pavement widening, installation
of curb and gutter and drainage ac)uld be required as a minimum for
further consideration. A meeting was held July 22, 1981 between
the Village staff and th(? COullty :,!Htaff to discuss the improvements.
As a result of this meeting, it was determined that there was a
MUtUal, interest in proceeding. SIDecific improvements discussed
included:
A. Novak/Dempsey PaveMent Condition Report
B. Curb and gutter improvements
C. Storniwater drainage imq?rovements
D Pl_,vei"roent �,✓jjcrjjng to 40 feet
E. 1'�O c>i j(.?Ctiorl tO PaT:-Lillel parking
F. No cost to the Villi.:ige Of '10,jnt Prospect
janury 21, 198,
1"It. Prospect Roac
Page 2
At this time and with indication from both parties that there were
mutual interests, an informal meeting,not an official public
hearing, was held on September 9, 1981. The meeting was interpreted
by the public as a foregone conclusion with strenuous objections
and options being voiced and are tabulated as follows®
A. Elected representatives should have attended meeting
to hear concerns firsthand. Response is
publicized, discussion by Committe of the
Whole.
B. Flooding of ditchs.. Notwithstanding resident
comment, flooding will be alleviated with new
storm sewers inlets and has decreased with
repair of collapsed existing storm sewer.
C. Residents prefer to leave jurisdiction with
County. Transfer of jurisdiction is optional-,
not mandatory.
D. Limit improvement to resurfacing. Will lead to
early failure, if riot contained with curb.
E. Resident questioned options of assuming
jurisdiction without widening pavement.
F. Weight limit for trucks could be imposed by Village
if road under municipal jurisdiction.
At the present time and in the recent past, I have met with Dan
Angelos from IDOT and Glen Redlin from Pinner Electric Co., at the
Mt. Prospect Road/Rand Road and Central Road intersection at least
2 times. While there have been problems at the intersection since
it was placed in operation due to the initial shakedown and the failure
of a controller struck by lightning, the intersection appears to be
functioning as well as possible at this time as a result of timing
modification, designation of dual left turn lanes on Mt. Prospect Road
at Rand, and the installation of DO NOT BLOCK INTERSECTION signs. At
this time, traffic flows do not require the installation of a left turn
arrow for northbound Mt. Prospect Road at Central. Placement of a
NO TURN ON RED sign for southbound Mt.Prospect Road would decrease
the limited storage capacity available and is not supported by accident
analysis.
With the high traffic volume on the two major legs (Rand and Central)
and the substantial traffic volume on the remaining leg Mt. Prospect
Road, and the physical impossibility of providing traffic signal co-
ordination on all three legs, the design on Mt. Prospect Road does not
have signal coordination. because it has the lowest traffic volume.
A physical limitation of the intersection geometry itself results in
Mt. Prospect Road
Page 3
restricted storage capacities on Mt. Prospect Road between Central
and Rand Roads and along Central between Mt. Prospect and Rand Roads.
This limitation arises because of the development of the area.
A review of the traffic accident history for the intersection does not
show an identifiable pattern of accidents which can be related to
either (1) the signal pattern or (2) the signal timing. While the
intersection is a relatively high accident area within the Village, the
incidence of accidents and their patterns typify other similar multileg
intersections. Chief Pavlok has submitted an accident analysis to
your office, dated December 30, 1981.
4. The signage on the Mount Prospect side of Mt. Prospect Road is
posted at 30 MPH between Central Road and Mt. Prospect Road except
for the curve area near Central Road which is posted at 20 MPH. The
Village Code, Section 18.2001 cites the speed limit as
40 MPH through its jurisdiction, a conflict with the posting. The City
of Des Plaines has a corresponding 30 MPH speed limit along Mt. Prospect
Road. The Village Code should be amended to be consistent with the
posting in consultation with the County.
Speed limit signs (30 MPH) are posted at alternate blocks which is
at variance with the usual Village practice of posting speeds at the
start of each block. It should be pointed out that the existing signage
can be considered consistent with IDOT standards.
5. The Cook County Highway Department will have Mr. Art Kaindl,
Acting Chief Engineer of the Transportation and Planning Bureau in
attendance. At this time the Cook County proposal remains as originally
presented, and it should be noted that the Cook County Highway
Department has been agreeable with previous Village requests.
6. The ownership of the 30 -inch storm sewer in Mt. Prospect Road
resides with the Metropolitan Sanitary District as is carried as such
on the Village sewer maps and confirmed by Mr. Wally Harris, MSD
Field Inspector. Although preliminary design has not been done, the
present concept is predicated on using the existing storm sewer. Any
use would have to be supported by computations showing available capacity.
7. The Novak/Dempsey Pavement Analysis Report lists poor soil
condition in both the base and subbase at various segments of Mt.
Prospect Road. Without correcting these known problems and improving
the drainage, Mt. Prospect Road is heading for early failure, regardless
of who has jurisdiction.
* Current engineering practice suggests that drainage
improvements are necessary and correction of poor soils
condition is required to -prr,clude early pavement failure.
January 21, 1982
Mt. Prospect Road
Page 4
Remedial action has been taken to alleviate prior
flooding conditions.
Signal improvements have been adjusted to relate
and respond to traffic, considering volumes and
turning movements.
If jurisdictional transfer of Mt. Prospect Road from
the County would become a reality it should only be
accepted with complete improvements included. Partial
improvements such as reduction of roadway width or
leaving the existing drainage ditch intact would be
unsafe and has the potential for future substantial
maintenance problems.
Transfer of jurisdiction for maintenance on Mt. Prospect
Road is optional, not mandatory.
Village` Prospect
INTEROFFICE-- NIENIIORANDUM
TO: MAYOR CAROLYN H. KRAUSE AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
FROM: VILLAGE MANAGER
DATE: JANUARY 21, 1982
SUBJECT: GAMES AND GAME ROOM REGULATIONS
The staff has developed a dual approach to the regulation
of electronic games. Our current Zoning Ordinance permits
arcades and game rooms in B-4 Districts and in other Districts,
their placement and operation is permitted as long as the
games do not become a principal use. Our licensing regulations
merely establish the authority to license and establish a fee
of $37.50 per game.
The Zoning Ordinance proposal creates a definition of amusement
devices and defines a game room as any establishment having
more than 6 amusement devices. There are additional definitions
proposed to differentiate between conventional sit-down
restaurants and fast-food establishments. The proposal permits
up to 6 amusement devices in bowling alleys, Park District
property, certain restaurants, taverns, temporary carnivals
and circuses and theaters. Amusement devices are not permitted
in any other use. Game rooms, when more than 6 devices are
operated, are proposed to be special uses in the B-1, B-3
and B-4 Districts. The proposal also includes updated
parking requirements for the newly established use definitions.
The licensing Ordinance draft uses similar definitions as
contained in the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment and
regulates both the operator and the supplier. There is
established an annual business license for the supply company
and the establishment of an entertainment tax for the machines
defined as amusement devices. The usage of an entertainment
tax is, in the Manager's opinion, less likely to be challenged
than a license fee per machine. Typically, license fees
must have some relationship to the cost of licensing and
inspection. The usage of a tax does not have to be justified
in the same manner. The overall Ordinance establishes an
amortization schedule so that existing devices would be
authorized continued operation until May 1, 1985.
If the Board agrees, in principle, with the direction of
these suggested changes, the attorney will undoubtedly make
certain language and format changes before the matter is formally
scheduled for consideration at a .•gular meeting.
CERRANC*E-1. B1:.TRGr RD
�
T11B ercw
.............................
iiiaga -df N. jrva; Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Terrance L. Burghard, Village Manager
FROM: Stephen M. Park, �7illage Planner
SUBJECT: REQUESTED INVESTIGATION OF ELECTRONIC GAME REGULATIONS
DATE: January 8, 1982.
Per your request, I have completed the attached draft of regulations
for electronic games. The regulations proposed include:l) definitions,
2) revisions to general provisions, 3) changes in permitted and
special uses, 4) parking requirements, and 5) information needed
for zoning applications. Because of the approach used, games as an
allowable accessory use, some regulations are proposed for related
uses; particularly restaurants.
In brief, the philosophy is that games are a reasonable accessory
use, with restrictions on number and location, in certain uses where
supervision is not a problem. Game rooms, anything in excess of
six games, are allowed only as a Special Use in the B-1, B-3, and
B-4 Districts. Associated with all of this are more realistic
regulations of floor_ area, parking, and location.
As the investigation proceeded, several suggestions occurred that
may be desired for the licensing regulations. These suggestions
are as follows:
1. A specific type of business license should be issued to
any individual wishing to operate a game room or accessory games.
This license, similar to a liquor license, would specify requirements
for the individual or business.
2. Rather than a license for each machine, an amusement
device tax could be levied on each machine. The tax could approximate
the revenues expected if the receipts were subject to sales tax.
A range of $40-$100 per machine was found for an annual tax.
3. The license requirements should specify that a pre-
requisite of any amusement device license is in conformance with
the Zoning Ordinance. In this manner, those games located with
uses which do not conform to the proposed zoning regulations,
would be removed upon expiration of the annual fee.
I would appreciate some time to disci -ms the r)ropos(--2 d regulations,
with you after you have had time to revieT.,,r the draft.
SMP: hg
Attach.
19
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING LICENSING PROCEDURES
FOR AMUSEMENTS
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT:
SECTION ONE: ARTICLE VIII OF CHAPTER 11 of the Municipal
Code of the Village of Mount Prospect is hereby created and
entitled, "Amusement Devices."
Amusement Devices. No person, firm or corporation shall
keep, install, maintain, operate or place within the
Village for use by the public without first having
obtained a permit for each such device. The operation
of such devices shall be subject to the following
conditions:
1. No permit for an amusement device shall be issued
except as an accessory and subordinate use to an
authorized licensed business, except that permits
also may be issued to operators of games rooms
under the terms of each special use permit
authorizing such game rooms:
A. An "authorized licensed business" shall mean
any operation which qualifies for an amusement
device license whether or not such license
has been issued at the time of application
for a permit for an amusement device.
B. A "game room" shall mean any establishment
having more than six (6) amusement devices,
whether or not operated as a principal use.
A special use permit is required in accordance
with the zoning regulations of the Municipal
Code.
2. Permits for amusement devices shall be issued
only to the licensee of the premises where the
devices will be operated or to the supplier of
such devices with written authority to place the
devices at the premises designated. Responsibility
for compliance with the regulations pertaining
to amusement devices shall rest with the licensee
of the premises where located. Each application
must be accompanied by an accurate scale drawinCDp,
showing the floor plan of the establishment,
including the placement of amusement devices. An
application for a special use shall specify the
maximum number of coin-operated devices to be
operated.
3. No amusement device shall be permitted where the
reward for skill in the operation thereof is not
plainly posted upon such machine or where the
opportunity for a reward for skill in the operation
thereof is not the same for each individual player.
4. No gambling or individual wager on any coin-
operated amusement device shall be permitted.
If any amusement device provides replays, no
person, firm, corporation or licensee shall buy
back replays,
5. Each amusement device shall be authorized by
permit by the Village as provided herein.
A. One (1) to six (6) devices shall be authorized
as an accessory and subordinate use in an
authorized licensed business.
-2-
5
13. than six (6) devices stx__l _ authorized,
whether or not a principal use, in an
authorized licensed business provided such
authority has been granted as a special use
in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance.
C, Permittee shall provide adequate and orderly
parking for all bicycles and shall keep the
premises unobstructed so that sidewalks are
clear and open to pedestrian traffic. Bicycle
racks shall not be placed in a required
parking stall.
D. No coin-operated amusement device shall be
placed in any required exit path of travel.
E. No person shall operate any game room in any
place within one thousand (1000) feet of any
lot line of any elementary or secondary school
after adoption of this Ordinance.
F. No amusement device on the premises of a retail
alcoholic liquor establishment shall be played
by anyone under twenty-one (21) years of age,
unless accompanied by a parent or guardian.
G. All licensed amusement devices shall display
a permit issued by the Village in a manner
convenient to Village and public inspection.
H. All game rooms shall have an adult supervisor
on the premises at all times the game room is
open to the public.
6. Fees and taxes:
A. Annual business license fee to obtain
permits for amusement devices for a
supply/vending company not otherwise
licensed by the Village ...................$300.00
-3-
B. Annual permit fee for any amusement
device on which no annual- tax is
required ................... __ ............ $ 50.00
C. There is hereby levied a tax in the
amounts listed below upon each amuse-
ment device. The tax shall not be
applicable to music machines, kiddie
rides, non -electrical machines or to
any amusement device which requires
no further manipulation by the player
after the deposit of the necessary
coins:
Per coin-operated amusement device
when operated as an accessory and
subordinate use, and less than seven
(7) devices are located in the
licensed business.. .................... _.$100.00
Per coin-operated amusement device
when operated as a game room, or more
than six (6) devices are located in
the licensed business, ..................... $150.00
7. The fees and tax enumerated above shall apply to
all machines installed after the effective date
of this Ordinance. The annual fee or tax per
device and the permit issued upon payment of the
fee or tax shall be based on the number of
machines in the establishment, which machines may
be replaced, exchanged, or rotated without payment
of additional taxes during the taxable year.
Businesses with authorized "Coin In Slot" licenses
on January 1, 1982 may renew such permits until
May 1, 1985 as an exemption to the limitations
on the number of devices and Zoning requirements.
8. Any person, firm, or corporation desiring a
permit or license shall make application
through the Village Clerk. The application shall
set forth the names and addresses of the applicant
or of a corporation, partnership or association,
the principal officers and registered agent there-
of and their addresses, and the owners of the
machine(s), and any other information deemed
necessary by the Village.
The application shall be referred to the Police
Chief for investigation and verification of the
facts stated therein. The Chief of Police shall
determine whether the applicants, or if a partner-
ship or corporation, any stockholder or member of
the partnership or any employee or manager, has
been convicted of a criminal offense in either
the State or Federal court. The Police Chief
shall also determine whether the applicant or
if a corporation or partnership, any stockholder,
member, employee or manager, has employed coercive
or illegal measures to promote the use of his
machines. The Police Chief shall further determine
whether the applicant or its principals, employees
or managers are persons of good moral character.
If the Police Chief shall determine that the
applicant, its stockholders, members, employees
or managers, or any of them, have in fact been so
convicted or have engaged in such coercive or
-5-
_Lliegal measures, or otherwise are not persons
of good character and fitness, he shall report
the results of his findings to the Village Manager.
The Village Manager shall then order that said
License shall not be issued. The applicant shall
have the right to appeal to the Village Board;
provided, however, that the appeal is made within
30 days of the written findings of the Manager.
If the Village Manager shall determine at any
time that any licensee is not in fact eligible
by reason of any facts which would not have made
him eligible for the issuance of the original
license, said license may be revoked consistent
with this Chapter.
9. Any person, firm or corporation violating the
provisions of this Section, and any licensee
permitting any violation of this Section, shall
be fined not more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500)
for each such offense. If a licensee shall be
convicted of violating a provision of this Section
his licenses for all coin-operated amusement
devices shall be suspended for one (1) year.
SECTION TWO: 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:
NAYES:
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of 1982.
I
DEFINITIONS
ACCESSORY BUILDING, STRUCTURE, OR USE
An accessory building, structure, or use is one which:
(a) is subordinate and customarily incidental to a principal
building or use; and
(b) is subordinate in building arca, inte:islty of use and
purpose to the principal building or use served, an.l
(c) contributes to the comfort, convenience, or necessity of
occupants of the principal building or use served; and
(d) is located on the same lot as the principal building or
use served, with the single exception of such accessory
off-street parking facilities as are permitted to be
located elsewhere than on the same lot with the building
or use served.
AMUSEMENT DEVICE
An amusement device shall. mean, any machine, game, table or
device which is designed, intended, or used as a test of skill or
entertainment, and may be operated by the public upon the insertion
of coin, or token, or the use of which is made available for any
valuable consideration; it is operated by the manipulation of
buttons, dials, trigger devices or electrical impulses. "Amusement
device" shall include, but not be limited to, devices commonly
known as pinball machines, video games, electronic games, pool
table, and all games or operations similar_ thereto under whatever
name they may be indicated. Not included within the definition of
"amusement device`® are regulation bo-lingalleys and co in- opera ted
MIAM
A game room shall mean any establishment having more than
six (6) amusement devices, whether or not operated as a principal use.
RESTAURANI, LA�S I (Conventional, Sit -Down)
A Class I Restaurant is a retail esLablishmenL where food and
drink is prepared and served to be consumed at a table or counter on
the premises and served primarily in or upon non -disposable con-
tainers. Any serving of alcoholic beverages shall be incidental to
the serving of food.
RESTAURANT, CLASS II (Pub)
A Class II Restaurant is a retail establishment where both
food and liquor are prepared and served to be consumed on -premises
and served Primarily in or upon non -disposable containers.
RESTAURANI_t_CLA�S
A Class III Restaurant is a retail establishment where food
is prepared and served primarily in disposable containers for con-
sumption off -premise --M
RESTAURANT, CLASS IV (Fast Food)
A Class IV Restaurant is a retail. establishroent- where food
I
and drink is prepared and served primarily in disr_)osal.)le containers
for consumption either on- or off -premises. For the piirT_)oSes of
this Ordinance, a drive-through facility shall be a separate use.
RETA'r L
A retail establishment is any buildiiiq or use whero the
-2-
primary occup'C-. -on J. -s ...ne sale of merchandise an-- ices directly
to and for use by consumers, as opposed to sale of merchandise or
service to institutional, commercial, and industrial consumers or
for the purpose of resale.
TAVERN OR LOUNGE
A tavern or lounge is a building or portion thereof wher-4
alcoholic beverages are sold to L):-, consui-iied on the promises; but
not including restaurants where the principal business is serving
VZOM
I
MMMAWS
A theatre is any building or structure designed for the enact-
ment of dramatic or musical performances and/or showing of motion
pictures. For the purpose of this Ordinance, a dinner theatre shall
be deemed a RESTAURANT:', and a drive-in motion picture theatre and
adult amusement or entertainment theatres are deemed separate and
distinct uses.
USE
Use is any purpose for which a structure or a tract of land
may be designed, arranged, intended, maintained, or occupied; also,
any activity, occupation, business or operation carried on, or in-
tended to be carried on, in or on a structure or on a tract of land.
USE, PRI14CIPAL
Principal use is the main use of land, buildings, or structures
as distinguished from a subordinate or accessory use, building or
structure.
=0
Special Use is a use which, because of its unique chara-
cteristics® cannot be properly classified as a permitted use in a
particular district.
A wholesale establishment is any building or use where the
primary occupation is the sale of itierchandise in gross for re;aje,
or where the primary occupation is the sale of merchandise to
institutional, commercial and industrial consumers.
j
APPLICATION INFORMATION
Add to Section 14.602.B. (variation Application)
9. A current plat of survey of the subject property, at a
maximum scale of 1"=50', which plat shall show all
structures on the lot, drives, and parking areas, all
lot dimensions, and distances of structures from lot lines.
10. A site plan of the proposed improvements, at a maximum
scale of 1"=50', which plat shall show all structures,
parking areas, drives, landscaping on the lot, and those
located within twenty (20) feet of all property lines ;
with relevant dimensions.
Add to Section 14.$03.8.2. (Amendment Application)
f. A current plat of survey of the subject property, at a
maximum scale of 1"=50', which plat shall show all
structures on the lot, drives, and parking areas, all
lot dimensions, and distances of structures from lot lines.
g. A site plan of the proposed improvements, at a maximum
scale of 1"=50', which plat shall show all structures,
parking areas, drives, landscaping on the lot, and those
located within twenty (20) feet of all property lines;
with relevant dimensions.
. Case Application)
Add to Section 1.4.702.,_.(Special.._v__..��._.�..�_�..w�..�.._.�_.._._.._..�
7. A current plat of survey of the subject property, at a
maximum scale of 1"=501, �,rhich plat shall shoe all
1/82
structures, the lot, drives and parking arc -as, all lot
dimensions, and distances of structures from lot lines.
1. A site plan of the proposed improvements, at a maximum
scale of 1"=50', which plat shall show all structures,
parking, drives, landscaping on the lot and those
located within twenty (20) feet of all property lines;
with relevant dimensions.
9. The particular benefits for the community resulting from
the location of the Proposed use on the requested site.
j
10. Any application for a game room shall also be accompanied
by a building plan, showing all dimensions, indicating
the intended division of floor space, exits and entrances,
Rreas for games, and common aisles.
Add to Section 14.'704.A. '(Special' Use Standards)
B. The location and site improvements proposed provide for
2dequate safety for vehicles, and pedestrians.
9. Provision has been made on the site for adequate open
space and landscaping.
-2-
RE", .ONS TO GENERAL PROVISIO
Revision to Section 14.102.
Section 14.102. Asicessor_yar.
Incidental F3uildin:s and Uses.
Unless otherwise prohibited or restricted, a permitted use
allows accessory buildings, structures and uses. However,
such accessory building, structure or use shall not be
established or erected prior to the establishment- or con-
struction of the principal use or building.
A. No more than six (6) amusement devices may be permitted,
subject to the standards for parking and floor area,
set forth in this Chapter, when accessory to the following
principal uses:
1. Bowling Alley
2. Municipal, Park District, or Township Community
Center
3. Restaurant, Class I
4. Restaurant, Class II
5. Tavern or Lounge
6. Temporary Carnival or Circus
7. Theatre
Add to Article 1, New Section (General Provisions)
Section 14.1 e Amusement Devices
No Amusement Device may be located within the Village of Mount
Prospect unless the device, and its location, conform to the
requirements of this Zoning Ordinance.
1/82
A. A mi. .- _®f forty (40) square feet flo, area shall
be devoted to each amusement device. Such area shall
include each game and its immediate vicinity and may
include aisles but shall not include office space, storage,
or other areas not specifically devoted to amusement devices.
B. No Amusement Device shall be located so as to cause any
building entrance or exit to be blocked by the Amusement
Device or by patrons.
C. Floor area devoted to Amusement Devices, accessory to a
principal use, shall. not exceed twenty (20) percent of
the gross floor area of the building.
D. No game room shall be located within one thousand (1000)
feet of an elementary or secondary school.
-2-
_HANGh, _iN PEMMITTED AND SPECIAL
B-1 Add to Section 14.1701. (Permitted Uses)
Class I Restaurant
Class II Restaurant
Class III Restaurant
Class IV Restaurant
B-1 Add to Section 14.1701.
C. The following uses may be allowed by Special Use
permit in accordance with Article VII of this Zoning
ordinance
1. Game Rooms
B-3 Delete from Section 14.2001.A. (Permitted Uses)
11. Restaurant (except drive-in variety), tavern, or
confectionery.
B-3 Add to Section 14.2001.A. (Permitted Uses)
Class I Restaurant
Class II Restaurant
Class III Restaurant
Class IV Restaurant
Tavern
B-3 Add to Section 14.2002.C. (Special Uses)
2. Game Rooms
B-4 Delete from Section 14.2101.A.1. (Permitted Uses,)
1. Amusement Arcades
12. Drive-in Restaurants
21. Restaurant, tavern, or Confectionery
M
I t- 4 Add to Section 14.2101. (PermiLted Uses -j'
Class III Restaurant
Class IV Restaurant
®4 Add to Section 14.2101.
C. The following uses may be allowed by Special Use
permit in accordance with Article VII of this
Zoning Ordinance
-1. Game Rooms
2. Drive-through facilities for a Class IV
Restaurant (Fast Food)
M
MM1!
PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Delete Section 14.2005.A.1. (Restaurant Parking)
Add to Section 14.2005.A. (Parking)
Parking shall be provided at the ratio of one (1) space
for each one hundred and fifty (150) square feet of gross
floor area, or fraction Lhereof, for Ej Cl.:tss I
Restaurant (Conventional - Sit-down).
Parking shall be provided at the ratio of one (1) space
for each one hundred (100) square feet of gross floor
area, or fraction thereof, for Class II Restaurants, (Pub),
Class III Restaurants (Take -Out), Taverns,, Came Rooms,
and floor area devoted to accessory amusement devices.
Parking shall be provided at the ratio of one (1) space
for each fifty (50) square feet of gross floor area, or
fraction thereof, for a Class IV Restaurant (Fast Food).
For any building having drive-through or drive -up facilities,
stacking room shall be provided in the ratio of seven (7)
spaces for each drive -up window or station. Such stacking
spaces shall be exclusive of off-street parking spaces
or maneuvering aisles.
Delete Section 14.2105.A.1. (Restaurant Parking)
Add to Section 14.2105.A. (Parking)
Parking shall be provided at the ratio of one (1) space
for each one hundred and fifty (150) square feet- of gross
floor area, or fraction thereof, for a Class I
Restaurant (Conventional - Sit-down).
1/82
Parking shall be provided at the ratio of one (1) space
for each one hundred (100) square feet of gross floor
area, or fraction thereof, for Class II Restaurants (Pub),
Class III Restaurants (Take -Out), Taverns, gaTfle Rooms,
and floor area devoted to accessory amusement devices.
Parking shall be provided at the ratio of one (1) space
for each fifty (50) -Feet of (_irross floor area, or
fraction thereof, for a Class IV Restaurant (Fast Food).
For any building having drive-through or drive -up facilities,
I
stacking room shall be provided in the ratio of seven (7)
spaces for each drive -up window or station. Such stacking
spaces shall be exclusive of off-street parking spaces
or maneuvering aisles®
-2-
MINUTES
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
JANUARY 12, 1982
I. ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Krause at
7:30 p.m., in the Public Safety Building, 112 East
Northwest Highway. Present at the meeting were:
Trustees Ralph Arthur, Gerald Farley, Leo Floros,
Norma Murauskis and Ted Wattenberg. Absent was
Trustee Edward Miller. Also in attendance were
Assistant Village Manager Geick, Fire Chief Lawrence
Pairitz, Police Chief Ronald Pavlock, Director of
Public Works Herbert Weeks, Assistant Director of
Public Works Glen Andler, Village Engineer Dennis
Valentine, representatives from the press and one
person in the audience.
II. MINUTES
The Minutes of the Committee of the Whole meeting of
December 8, 1981 were accepted and filed with the
following addition: Under the section of the meeting
discussing the sale of property at the Rauenhorst
Development, the Minutes should include the Committee
of the Whole voted 4-3 to sell the property and earmark
the funds for future capital facilities or equipment.
Voting in favor was Trustee Arthur and voting against
were Mayor Krause and Trustee Murauskis.
III. NORTHWEST HIGHWAY STREET LIGHTING PROGRAM
The Committee of the Whole reviewed documents from the
Department of Public Works indicating that the planned
street lighting improvements along Northwest Highway
from Waterman to Mount Prospect Road had now increased
in cost to more than $400,000 from the original estimate
of $266,000. Additionally, energy costs have escalated
from an earlier estimate of $5,250 to $8,300 annually.
The reason for this is the Illinois Department of
Transportation mandating that in order to use Motor Fuel
Tax Funds, the light standards must be located approximately
100 feet apart rather than the initial design of 160 feet.
It is the State's position that the lighting system must
illuminate the entire roadway from sidewalk to curbline
and these additional lights are, therefore, necessary,
The Village staff indicated that in their opinion less
lighting would still accomplish the general purpose
proposed by the Board and that in fact the lighting at
the new Maple Street Parking Lot is based on 130 foot
distances and at that distance, the entire Parking Lot
is well lit. After some general discussion, the Committee
of the Whole concluded that the administration should
make an effort on behalf of the Mayor and Board of
Trustees to have the Illinois Department of Transportation
reduce the spacing. If there is no movement on the
regulations on the part of the State, then the matter is
to be brought back to the Committee of the Whole for
further discussion. However, if the State will allow
the Village to locate the lights at either 160 foot
spacing or approximately 130 foot spacing, then the
matter can be directed to the Village Board for final
contract bidding. During this discussion, Trustee
Wattenberg asked that the administration rotify the
Euclid Lake Homeowners Association, PresiEent Peter
Downing, the next time this matter appears on the Agenda
as they have some views about street lighting in general.
IV. MANAGER'S REPORT
The Village Manager reviewed for the Committee of
the Whole that the matter of ELECTRONIC GAMES is
scheduled for Committee discussion later in January.
Additionally, at that last meeting in January, the
administration plans to bring up for discussion the
proposed improvements along MOUNT PROSPECT ROAD including
notification to the residents along that roadway. The
Village Manager reported that the 1982-1983 BUDGET is
still on schedule having been reviewed by the Finance
Commission on Wednesday, January 6. After this initial
review, the Finance Commission asked for some additional
data regarding various matters and a subsequent meeting
is scheduled for Wednesday, January 20.
V., WELL #17
The Committee of the Whole reviewed reports from the
staff, our consulting engineer, Baxter and Woodman, land
Fletcher Engineering. The Village Manager reported that
after the initial repairs
epairs authorized by the Mayor and
the Board of Trustees earlier in 1981, the Well pump
stopped operating and after it was removed from the Well,
it was determined by staff and our consulting engineers
that the pump failed because of either manufacturer's
defect or the installer's error. The manufacturer,
Peerless Pump, the the installer, J. P. Miller have
offered to replace the bowl assembly together,.with a
contract for the removal of sand at an expense not to
exceed $80,000. The staff and the consulting engineers
2
VI
have found less expensive alternatives by using other
contractors and suppliers. The Village Manager indicated
that Fletcher Engineering was brought into the project
in order to obtain an independent opinion as to whether
or not Well #17 was really critical to the Village of
Mount Prospect water system. It was the conclusion of
Fletcher Engineering that we are not likely to receive
Lake water until 1985 and that even after Lake water,
Well #17 should be kept in reserve status for emergency
and supplemental pumping. Fletcher Engineering recommended
that the Village install stainless steel bowls and put
the Well on line as soon as possible. Baxter and Woodman
also concluded that the Well should be placed back on line
and repairs made. After some general discussion, the
Committee of the Whole concluded that the repairs should
be scheduled for a subsequent Board Agenda for formal
authorization. Furthermore, the Village Manager was
authorized to inquire of the Village Attorney as to
whether or not we have any legal action against J. P.
Miller and/or Peerless Pump.
FACILITIES PLAN
Chief Pairitz, Task Force Chairman of the Facilities
Planning Committee, introduced members of the Committee
including Chief Pavlock, Mr. Weeks, George Busse, Robert
McBride and Gregory Trepani. Chief Pairitz then reviewed
the procedure utilized by the Committee in assessing the
operational needs of the various departments. Village
Manager Burghard indicated that while this was not the
most opportune time to go to the market for long-term
debt, this was in his opinion the time that the Village
ought to be planning for its long-term needs so that it
might take benefit of lower interest rates in the future.
A general discussion of the report then ensued with some
members of the Committee suggesting that a tour of our
present facilities be established so that they could
update themselves on the operational needs of the various
departments. Trustee Arthur pointed out that in his
opinion, the administration could have included additional
alternatives such as outside storage of vehicles on some
municipally -owned property, the installation of a salt
storage shed on municipal property at Carboy Road, and
the use of Maple Street Parking Lot for employee parking.
Trustee Murauskis felt that the staff could better
utilize some of its existing spaces and indicated her
reluctance together with that of Trustee Arthur of
approaching the taxpayer at this time for such sizable
expenditures. Mayor Krause indicated her reluctance to
proceed with any such expenditures at this time and also
expressed the opinion that existing facilities could better
- 3 -