HomeMy WebLinkAbout4379_001Next Ordinance No. 4395
Next Resolution No. 3-92
A G E N D A
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
O R D E R O F B U S I N E S S
REGULAR MEETING
Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time:
Meeting Room, 1st Floor Tuesday
Senior Citizen Center February 4, 1992
50 South Emerson Street 7:30 P. M.
Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
Mayor Gerald "Skip" Farley
Trustee Mark Busse Trustee Leo Floros
Trustee George Clowes Trustee Paul Hoefert
Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Irvana Wilks
III. INVOCATION - Trustee Wilks
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, January 21, 1992
V. APPROVAL OF BILLS
VI. COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS - CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
VII. MAYORIS REPORT
A. PRESENTATION TO THE VILLAGE ON THE OCCASION OF
THE 75TH ANNIVERSARY OF MOUNT PROSPECT:
1. Congressman David Harris
2. Mayor Edward P. Rotchford
B. 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13
OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
This Ordinance creates a Class "S" liquor license
for the Retro Bistro Restaurant, 1744 West Golf Road (Exhibit A)
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
A. ZBA 77 -SU -91, Wal-Mart - Mount Prospect Plaza
2nd reading of AN ORDINANCE.GRANTING A SPECIAL
USE FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS WAL-MART AND
LOCATED WITHIN THE MOUNT PROSPECT SHOPPING PLAZA
This Ordinance grants a Special Use to permit
a 5' 10" diameter satellite antenna on the roof
of their new store. The Zoning Board of Appeals
recommended granting the Special Use by a vote
of 7-0. (Exhibit B)
B. ZBA 79-V-91, 2016 East Euclid Avenue
2nd reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING VARIATIONS
FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 2016 E. EUCLID AVENUE
This ordinance grants the following variations:
a 5 foot building setback from the interior lot
line; a 15 foot building setback from the rear
property line; parking lot setback variations;
and a variation to allow 78% lot coverage, the
Zoning Board of Appeals recommended granting
this request. (Exhibit C)
C. 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18
(TRAFFIC CODE) OF THE VILLAGE CODE
This ordinance establishes the prohibition of
parking on the east side of Maple Street between
Northwest Highway and Central Road. The Safety
Commission recommends granting this amendment. (Exhibit D)
IV. NEW BUSINESS
A ZBA 78-V-91, 1710-84 West Golf Road, Mount Prospect
Commons Shopping Center
The Petitioner is requesting variations to allow a
zero foot sideyard setback rather than the required
10 feet; to allow a 83% lot coverage, rather than
the required 75; and, to allow 214 parking spaces,
rather than the required 215 parking spaces. The
Zoning Board of Appeals granting these requests
by a vote of 5-1.
B. ZBA 3-V-92, 909 Tower Lane
The Petitioner is requesting a variation to
permit a chimney to encroach into the required
side yard by 24 inches, rather than the
permitted 18 inches. The Zoning Board of Appeals
recommended granting this variation by a vote
of 6-0.
C. ZBA 4-V-92, 106 North Emerson Street
The Petitioner is requesting a variation to permit
a detached garage to be constructed 2-1/2 feet from
the side lot line rather than the required 5 feet.
The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended granting
this variation by a vote of 6-0.
D. ZBA 6-V-92, 1500 North River Road
The Petitioner is requesting a variation to reduce
the required 30 foot front yard to 6 feet to allow
for the installation of a self-service canopy over
the existing gasoline pumps. The Zoning Board of
Appeals recommended granting this variation by
a vote of 6-0.
E. 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE THE
ISSUANCE OF 1992 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS (Exhibit E)
F. 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18
(TRAFFIC CODE) OF THE VILLAGE CODE
This ordinance designates a portion of the
former Aldi's Building parking lot as commuter
parking at a cost of $1.00 for a 12 hour period. (Exhibit F)
G. Request to amend Ordinance No. 3777, granting
a Planned Unit Development for the buildings
at the southwest corner of Wolf and
Kensington Roads, located within the Kensington
Center for Business, to permit two free standing
signs on the perimeter berms. The Sign Review
Board voted 2-2 and referred this matter to
the village Board without a recommendation.
X. VILLAGE KANAGERIS REPORT
A. Request to waive bidding procedure and authorize
purchase of water system control panel upgrade
from J. M. Process System. This item was
deferred from the January 21st meeting in
order to obtain additional information.
B. Request to renew contract with Compsych
Employee Assistance Program (EAP) for 1992.
C. A RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO COMPLIANCE WITH
THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (Exhibit G)
D. Request to waive the bidding procedure
and authorize trading in Cable T.V. equipment
in.order to obtain upgraded equipment.
E. Status Report
XI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
;1 Z G 1;4 11 Y
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING 07
TUB XAyOR AM BOA" OF TRUSTEES
OP TEE VILLAGE Oy MOUNT PROSPECT
jAMARY 21, 1992
CALL TO ORDER
CALL TO ORDER
Farley called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M.
Mayor
CALL
call: Mayor Gerald Farley
Present upon roll
Trustee Mark Busse
Trustee Timothy Corcoran
Trustee George ClOwes
Trustee Leo Floros
Trustee Paul Hoefert
Trustee irvana Wilks
INVOCATIONINVOCATION
by Trustee Floros.
The invocation was given
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
I by Trustee Wilks, moved
APPROVE
MINUTES
Trustee Busse, seconded lar Meeting of the
the minutes Of the Regul
to approve
Board of Trustees held January 7, 1992, as
Mayor and
amended.
Upon . roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
APPROVAL Op BILLSAppRDVE
by Trustee Clowes, moved
BILLS
Trustee Floros, seconded
the following list of bills:
to approve
$ 533,107
General Fund 180,922
Refusal Disposal Fund 27,880
Motor Fuel Tax Fund Grant Fund 5,892
Ilock.
Community Development Block
75,978
Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund
320,774
Waterworks & Seweragle Fund
5,953
Fund
Parking System Revenue 115,451
Risk Management Fund 1,647
Vehicle Replacement Fund -
Motor Equipment Pool Fund . or Rep. Fund 10,833
Improvement, Repl
Capital 1,571
Downtown Redev. Const. Fund 125,878
Fire & police Building Const. 234,483
Flood Control Revenue Fund
Improvement 1990
Corporate Purpose 80,827
Debt,Service Funds 7,320
Flexcomp Trust Fund 24,964
Escrow Deposit Fund -
Police Pension Fund
Firemen's Pension Fund
Benefit Trust Fund $1,755,647
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, ClOw8s, Corcoran,
Wilks
Floros, Hoefert,
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Trustee Floros, seconded by Trustee Busse, moved to
accept the financial report dated December 31, 1991,
subject to audit.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floras, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Page 2 - January 21, 1992
COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS, CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
PRESENTATION:
Police Officer Bill Roscop stated that during a recent
HOLIDAY BUCKLE
State-wide program, co-sponsored by local Police UP
LOTTERY
Departments and the Illinois Coalition for Safety Belt
Use, tickets were issued to motorists who were using
their seats belts. These tickets were placed into a
lottery drawing with prizes of $500 issued to the first
two names drawn and $250 issued to the next four names
drawn.
Officer Roscop announced that Mrs. A. Mazewski of Mount
Prospect was one of the two lucky motorists to receive
the $500.00 prize. A check was presented to Mrs.
Mazewski.
REQUEST TO
Steve Schwartz, 1216 Crabtree, and owner of Bel -Aire
AMEND CH. 14:
Plumbing, requested the Village Board to consider an
VEHICLES
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 14) to allow
EXCEEDING 8,000#
vehicles weighing more than 8,000 lbs. to be parked
IN RESIDENTIAL
inside a garage in a residential district.
DISTRICT
It was noted that this request is a result of
complaints issued by the Village due to the fact that
Mr. Schwartz's commercial vehicle has been parked in
his residential driveway. Mr. Schwartz stated that his
garage door could be altered, allowing the commercial
vehicle to be parked in the garage and out of sight.
Mayor Farley stated that the appropriate method of
making this request would be to file an application for
a hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals and ask
that thetext of the Zoning Ordinance be amended
accordingly. The village Board would then consider the
recommendation of the Zoning Board.of Appeals.
MAYOR'S REPORT
CLASS "SIN
A request was presented to create a Class 'IS" liquor
LIQUOR LICENSE:
license for a new restaurant to be known as Retro
RETRO BISTRO
Bistro, to be located at 1744 West Golf Road.
1744 W.GOLF RD.
It was noted that the proposed restaurant would consist
,of 3,600 square feet with a seating capacity of 75,
as well as another 15 in the bar area.
Trustee Busse, seconded by Trustee Corcoran, moved to
authorize the creation of a Class INS" liquor license
for Retro Bistro.
Upon roll call: Ayes; Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
An Ordinance will be presented for first reading at the
February 4th meeting of the Village Board,
Page 2 - January 21, 1992
OLD BUSINESS
ZBA 76-V-91, 418 South Emerson Street
An ordinance was presented for first reading that
would grant a variation to allow a 1.71 side yard
setback to accommodate an existing deck. The
Zoning Board of Appeals recommended granting this
request by a vote of 7-0.
Trustee Floros, seconded by Trustee Busse, moved
to waive the rule requiring two readings of an
ordinance.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Trustee Floros, seconded by Trustee Busse, moved
for passage of Ordinance No. 4393
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION FOR
PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 418 S. EMERSON ST.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ZBA 77 -SU -91, Wal-Mart, Mount Prospect Plaza
An ordinance was presented for first reading
that would grant a Special use to permit a
51 1011 diameter satellite antenna on the roof
of their new building, located within the
Mount Prospect Plaza. The Zoning Board of
Appeals recommended granting this request by
a vote of 7-0.
This ordinance will be presented for second
reading at the next regular meeting of the
Village Board on February 4th.
ZBA 79-V-91, 2016 East Euclid Avenue
An ordinance was presented for first reading
that would grant the following variations:
A five foot (51) building setback from the
interior lot line;
A fifteen foot (151) building setback from
the rear property line;
Parking setback to within zero feet.
from the front lot line and ten feet (101)
from the side lot line; and
A 78% lot coverage.
This Ordinance will be presented February 4th for
second reading.
An ordinance was presented for first reading that
would amend ordinance No. 4274 by extending the
effective period for variations granted to
the Mount Prospect Historical Museum, 101 South
Maple Street.
Page 3 - January 21, 1992
ZBA 76-V-91
418 S. EMERSON
ORD.NO. 4393
ZBA 77 -SU -91
WAL-MART
MOUNT PROSPECT
PLAZA
ZBA 79-V-91
2016 E. EUCLID
AMEND
ORD.NO.4274
101 S.MAPLE
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Wilks, moved to
waive the rule requiring two readings of an Ordinance.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ORD.NO. 4394 Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Wilks, moved for
passage of Ordinance No. 4394
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4274
BY EXTENDING THE EFFECTIVE DATE
Upon roll call: Ayes: -Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilke
Nays: None
Motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS
MFT FUNDS A Resolution was presented that would authorize the
appropriation of Motor Fuel Tax Funds (MFT) in the
amount of $400,000.00 for the improvement of specified
Village streets.
RES.NO. 2-92
Trustee Busse, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved for
passage of Resolution No. 2-92
A RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING MOTOR
FUEL TAX FUNDS
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Notion carried.
ACKNOWLEDGE
The Village Manager presented the annual results of the
RECEIPT
audit for 1990 Motor Fuel Tax Funds, conducted by the
1990 MFT AUDIT
Illinois Department of Transportation.
Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Floros, moved to
acknowledge receipt of the 1990 audit of Motor Fuel Tax
Funds.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilke
Nays: None
Motion carried.
NO PARKING
A recommendation of the Safety Commission was presented
EAST SIDE OF
to prohibit parking on the east side of Maple Street
MAPLE STREET
between Northwest Highway and Central Road. This
would allow easier access for emergency vehicles
leaving the Fire and Police Station at Northwest
Highway and Maple Street. The residents of the area
had been contacted and they had no objections to this
proposal.
Trustee Busse, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved to
concur with the recommendation of the Safety commission
Page 4 - January 21, 1992
and prohibit parking on the east side of Maple
Street between Northwest Highway and Central Road.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
An Ordinance will be presented February 4th for
first reading.
VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT
Village Manager John Fulton Dixon presented a proposal WAIVE BIDS:
to waive the bidding procedure and authorize the WATER SYSTEM
purchase of specialized software for the water system CONTROL: .
control panel for the Village's water system. The J.M.PROCESS
proposal recommends the purchase of the needed software SYSTEMS,INC.
from J. M. Process Systems, Inc.in the amount of
$35,064.00.
Trustee Corcoran noted that the report indicated that
the Village has only had the existing software for 7 years
and replacement parts should be available, rather than
purchasing a new system. Trustee Corcoran also asked
what type of warranty would be provided for the
software being proposed.
Trustee Clowes stated that the report indicates the
Village maintains 5 deep wells and asked why the Village
needs these wells.
In order to answer the questions raised, Mayor Farley
deferred this matter to the February 4th meeting of the
Village Board.
The Village Manager presented a request to waive
SANITARY
the bidding procedure and authorize entering into a
SEWER
contract with Insituform Midwest, Inc. for the
improvement of specified sewers at a cost not to
exceed $86,500.00.
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Wilks, moved
INSITUFORM
to concur with the recommendation of the
MIDWEST,INC.
administration and accept the proposal received
from Insituform Midwest, Inc. in an amount not
to exceed $86,500.00.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Mr. Dixon presented a request to waive the bidding
PAINT
procedure and accept the proposal submitted by
STATION 12
J. Bernard Mullen in the amount of $8,390.00 to
paint the ceiling of the apparatus floor at Fire
Station 12 on Golf Road.
It was noted that over the years,.the exhaust from
the vehicles has coated the ceiling which will
have to be cleaned and then painted.
Page,5 - January 21, 1992
Page 6 - January 21, 1992
Trustee Corcoran asked if chemicals would be used to
clean the ceiling and if so, if there was an alternate
method of preparing the ceiling.
Mr. Dixon suggested this item be deferred to the
February 4th meeting in order to obtain the requested
information.
PURCHASE
Mr. Dixon stated that the Village will probably have
ALDI PROPERTY:
the closing and take possession of the Aldi's property
100 W.NORTHWEST
on January 24th.
HIGHWAY
Mr. Dixon also stated that the parking lot for that
building will be divided off, leaving the westerly area
for Sara Lee and Steak N stuff customers. The back,
or northerly, parking area will become metered parking
for $1.00 per day.
HEARINGS:
Dates have been established for informational hearings
CITIZEN
on the proposed purchase of the Citizens Utilities
UTILITIES
Water System. Mr..Dixon stated that River Trails Jr.
PURCHASE
High will be the location of hearings on February 13
at 7:00 PM and February 22 at 2:30 PM. Additional
hearings will be held within the area serviced by
Citizens Utilities.
NEWLY APPOINTED
Trustee Wilks stated that the following men were
VOLUNTEER
recently appointed to the Mount Prospect Volunteer Fire
FIREMEN
Department:
Mark Fedor
Scott Slaasted
James Sugrue
Steven Thompson
ARTS COUNCIL
Trustee Floros asked if it was the accepted practice
INSURANCE
to require $1,000,000 insurance for events held at
Prospect High School or other schools. Mr. Dixon
stated that it was the accepted, practice. Trustee
Floros expressed his concern that this could create a
hardship on civic organizations.
EXECUTIVE
Trustee Wilks, seconded by Trustee Corcoran, moved to
SESSION
adjourn into Executive Session for the purpose of
discussing Personnel.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
The Village Board went into Executive session at
8:38 P.M.
RECONVENE
Mayor Farley reconvened the meeting at 9:13 P.M.
Present upon roll call: Mayor Farley
Trustee Busse
Trustee Clowes
Trustee Corcoran
Trustee Floros,
Trustee Hoefert
Trustee Wilks
Page 6 - January 21, 1992
ADJOURNMENT ADJOURN
Trustee Busse, seconded by Trustee Cloves, moved to
adjourn the meeting.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Unanimous
Motion carried.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:14 P.M.
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
Page 7 - January 21, 1992
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
CASH POSITION
January 30, 1992
Cash & Invest
Receipts
Disbursements
Cash & Invest
Balance
1/17/92 through
Per Attached
Journal Balance
1/16192
1130192
List of Bills
Entry 1130192
General & Suecial Revenue Funds
General Fund
$ 1,362,542
$ 406,538
$ 511,140
$ 1,257,940
Refuse Disposal Fund
-
7,711
7,711
-
Motor Fuel Tax
400,328
88,525
14,131
474,722
Community Development Block Grant Fund
2,049
2,000
3,933
116
Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund
498
18,496
11,482
7,512
Entervrise Funds
Water & Sewer Fund
2,968,406
346,919
66,360
3,248,965
Parking System Revenue
170,794
7,909
1,927
176,776
Internal Service Funds
Risk Management Fund
1,069,698
29,662
168,159
931,201
Vehicle Replacement Fund
447,290
-
350
446,940
Capital Projects
Capital Improvement Fund
1,370,539
57,038
25,784
1,401,793
Downtown Redev Const Funds
328,085
50
-
328,135
Police & Fire Building Construction
5,653,769
222,251
6,513
5,869,507
Flood Control Construction Fund
1,974,061
-
3,357
1,970,704
Debt Service Funds
676,289
76,437
-
752,726
Trust & Aaency Funds
Flexcomp Trust Fund
7,013
4,529
-
11,542
Escrow Deposit Fund
1,658,334
19,509
16,500
1,661,343
Police Pension Fund
16,806,656
184,980
41,603
16,950,033
Firemen's Pension Fund
18,826,760
189,607
79,386
18,936,981
Benefit Trust Funds
245.018
-
245.018
$53,968,129
$1,662,161
$ 958,336
;, $54,671,954
VENDOR
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
A & H ENTERTAINERS, INC.
ABC PLUMBING
MARK ACKERMAN
ADDITION & DESIGNS
AKEBONO AMERICA INC.
JACK AMOROSO
ARCO PRODUCTS CO.
R. MICHAEL CAMPBELL
CONNIE CAROSIELLI
CHICAGO TANK LINING INC.
RUEY CHIU
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
COLDWELL BANKERS RELOCATION
CONCRETE & STEEL
PERRY DAZZO
ED DELCASTILLO
DISBURSEMENT ACCOUNT
DOYLE SIGNS, INC
FATHER & SON HOME IMPROVEMENT
FELDCO PATIO ROOM, INC.
FLUSH SEWER
JOANN FULKERSON
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 1
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30%92
PURCHASE -DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
REFUND OVERPMT BUSINESS FEES
$915.00
$915.00
C10181 ABC PLBG
$100.00
C10288 ABC PLBG
$75.00,
$175.00
RESIDENT RE TR TAX REBATE
$289.00
$289.00
C9978 ADDITION & DESIGNS
$100.00
$100.00
BUSINESS LICENSE OVERPMT
$20.00
$20.00
OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$.48
OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$4.76
$5.24
910418 ARCO PRODUCTS
$41.67
$41.67
RESIDENT RE TR TAX REBATE
$890.00
$890.00
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$.72
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$7.14
$7.86
07833 CHGO TANK
$100.00
$100.00
OVERPMT FINAL BILL 12/6/90
$2.52
OVERPMT FINAL BILL 12/6/90
$.23
$2.75
PMT P/R 1/23
$224.25
$224.25*
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$75.24
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$7.26
$82.50
C10307 CONCRETE & STEEL
$100.00
$100.00
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$38.76
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$3.74
$42.50
C10005 DELCASTILLO
$25.00
$25.00
P/R ENDING 1/23/92
$392,643.09
PZR ENDING 1/23%92
$1,236.55
PZR ENDING 1/23/92
$728.58
PZR ENDING 1j23f92
$34,535.06
P/R ENDING 1/23/92
$2,079.21
$431,222.49*
1448 DOYLE SIGNS
$100.00
1449 DOYLE SIGNS
$100.00
1450A DOYLE SIGNS
$100.00
1451 DOYLE SIGNS
$100.00
$400.00
C10024 FATHER & SON
$75.00
$75.00
C7439 FELDCO PATIO
$75.00
$75.00
C8732 FLUSH SEWER
$75.00
C9951 FLUSH SEWER
$100.00
$175.00
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$.96
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 2
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$9.52
$10.48
ARTHUR J GALLAGHER & CO
COMM GEN LIABILITY BINDER
$52,553.00
$52,553.00
DALE W. GUTMAN
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$18.24
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$1.76
$20.00
JAMS$ HELM
REFUND ZBA FEE
$250.00
$250.00
PAUL HOEFERT
C8696 HOEFERT
$50.00
$50.00
HOMES BY HEMPHILL, INC.
WATER USAGE
$74.25
$74.25
IMRF VOLUNTARY LIFE
FEBRUARY PREMIUM
$234.00
$234.00
INTRASTATE CORP.
C9427 INTRASTATE CORP
$584.50
$584.50
J.F. HAULING
910605 JF HAULING
$62.64
$62.64
J-MAC ASSOCIATION
C10265 J-MAC ASSOC
$70.00
$70.00
JEWEL FOOD STORES
VENDING LICENSE OVERPMT
$20.00
$20.00
ANDREA JUSZCZYK
PMT P4R 1423/92
$254.00
$254.00*
CASIMIR KACZOR
REFUNbD FINAL WATER BILL
$8.41
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$.75
$8.76
MARK KLOSS
OVERPMT FINAL BILL 4/28/90
$16.42
OVERPMT FINAL BILL 4/28190
$1.58
$18.00
JACK KOGUT
C9932 KOGUT
$100.00
$100.00
ROBERT KOOIKER
OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$1.68
OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$16.66
$18.34
MIKE KOSAC
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$2.28
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$.22
$2.50
RUSKIN LACK
NUISANCE ABATEMENT GUARANTEE
$2,758.00
$2,758.00
LAKE-COOK FARM SUPPLY COMPANY
SUPPLIES
$12,844.83
$12 844.83
CHARLES LENZ & SONS, INC.
REFUND BUSINESS LICENSE
$300.00
300.00
JAMES H. LEWIS, JR.
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$25.08
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$2.42
$27.50
MAC'S FIRE AND SAFETY, INC.
TURN OUT GEAR
$1,890.00
TURN OUT GEAR
$1,890.00
CLOTHING
$630.00
$4,410.00
SUSAN MACATANGAY
OVERPMT P36943424P3694343
$80.00
$80.00*
COREY MILLER
RE TR TAX OVER CHHG REFUND
$100.00
$100.00*
MT. PROSPECT CITGO
REFUND BUSINESS OVERPMT
$20.00
$20.00
MT. PROSPECT PARK DISTRICT
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$14.28
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$1.44
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$2.88
$18.60
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 3
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
RICHARD MURRAY
C10077 MURRAY
$100.00
$100.00
NBD BANK MOUNT PROSPECT, N.A.
DUE TO FED DEP PJR 1/23
$93.47
DUE TO FED DEP PZR 1223
$141.27
DUE TO FED DEP PZR 1223
$2,593.95
DUE TO FED DEP PZR 1/23
$11,482.47
DUE TO FED DEP PZR 1123
$55.31
DUE TO FED DEP 1/23
$1,209.78
J7R
SAVINGS BONDS P 1 3
$450.00
$16,026.25*
NORTHWEST HEATING & AIR CONDIT
C9734 NW HVAC
$75.00
$75.00
JOHN OZAG
C8656 OZAG
$75.00
$75.00
JANET PASCOE
INSURANCE PREMIUM REFUND
$46.89
$46.89*
PENSION DISBURSEMENTS
JAN FIRE PENSION DISH
$79,385.86
JAN POLICE PENSION DISH
$41,602.60
$120,988.46*
JIM PETERSON
C6719 PETERSON
$75.00
$75.00
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISC EXPENSES
$20.00
$20.00*
PATRICK PRITCHARD
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$14.28
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$1.44
$15.72
ARTHUR J. ROGERS & CO.
C10227 AJ ROGERS
$100.00
$100.00
SANTI CONSTRUCTION
C9652 SANTI CONST
$75.00
$75.00
SCARSDALE DEVELOPMENT, LTD.
C7740 SCARSDALE LTD
$75.00
C7740A SCARSDALE LTD
$1,425.00
FINAL WATER BILLS OVERPMT
$9.12
FINAL WATER BILLS OVERPMT
$.88
$1,510.00
RICHARD SENGER
C10234 SENGER
$100.00
$100.00
PAUL W. SOHN
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$13.68
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$1.32
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$18.00
$33.00
SUNSPACE DESIGN
C9995 SUNSPACE DESIGN
$75.00
$75.00
DAVID TALEND
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$5.48
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILLg
52
$6.00
THIRD DISTRICT CIRCUIT COURT
920117 BOND MONEY
$1,300.00
920123 BOND MONEY
$1,250.00
920128 BOND MONEY
$2,050.00
920130 BOND MONEY
$1,400.00
$6,000.00*
ANGELO TOURLIS
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$30.94
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$3.12
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 4
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1130/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$3.41
$37.47
VIKING FIRE PROTECTION
C9635 VIKING FIRE PROT
$75.00
$75.00
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
881201 WATER USAGE
$15.75
910418 ARCO PRODUCTS
$58.33
910605 JF HAULING
$37.36
$111.44
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
C10005 DEL CASTILLO$25.00
C10024 FATHER & SON
$25.00
C10213 WOLF POINT
$475.00
010228 WALLACE
$25.00
C10265 J -MAC ASSOC
$30.00
010288 ABC PLBG
$25.00
C6719 PETERSON
$25.00
C7439 FELDCO
$25.00
C7740 SCARSDALE
$25.00
C8656 OZAG
$25.00
C8696 HOEFFERTS
$50.00
C8732 FLUSH SEWER
$25.00
C8767 WEIDNERS
$50.00
09635 VIKING FIRE PROT
$25.00
C9652 SANTI CONST
$25.00
C9734 NORTHWEST HVAC
$25.00
C9995 SUNSPACE DESIGN
$25.00
$930.00
SCOTT WALLACE
010228 WALLACE
$75.00
$75.00
WEIDNER SEWER SERVICE
C8767' WEIDNERS SEWER
$50.00
$50.00
WILLIAM WESLEY
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$37.48
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$3.56
$41.04
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
***TOTAL**
$656,498.93
GENERAL FUND
$409,276.70 REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND
$2,220.48
COMMUNITY DEVLPMT BLOCK GRANT
$1,330.02 ILL. MUNICIPAL
RETIREMENT FUND
$11,482.47
WATER & SEWER FUND
$37,537.27 PARKING SYSTEM
REVENUE FUND
$783.89
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
$52,599.89 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
$3,780.00
POLICE PENSION FUND
$41,602.60 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND
$79,385.86
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 5
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1130192
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
ESCROW DEPOSIT FUND $16,499.75
VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
MOUNT PROSPECT HISTORICAL SOCI
DONATION -JOHNSON
$75.00
$75.00*
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISC EXPENSES
$24.00
$24.00*
SCHWEPPE & SONS
COFFEE SUPPLIES
$85.05
$85.05
VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
$136.50
***TOTAL**
$184.05
GENERAL FUND
$184.05
$174:38
********************************************************************************************************
DECEMBER LEGAL
VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE
ALTHEIMER & GRAY
DECEMBER LEGAL
SERVICES
$900.00
$900.00
ARNSTEIN & LEHR
DECEMBER LEGAL
FEES
$105.00
DECEMBER LEGAL
FEES
$136.50
DECEMBER LEGAL
FEES
$174:38
DECEMBER LEGAL
FEES
$580.65
DECEMBER LEGAL
FEES
$295.80
DECEMBER LEGAL
FEES
$157.50
DECEMBER LEGAL
FEES
$3,500.00
DECEMBER LEGAL
FEES
$262.50
DECEMBER LEGAL
FEES
$262.50
DECEMBER LEGAL
FEES
$766.40
DECEMBER LEGAL
FEES
$73.50
DECEMBER LEGAL
FEES
$285.90
$6,600.63
EDWARD CAVELLO
DISASTER MGMT
CONF EXP
$120.00
$120.00
COMPUTERLAND
REPAIR PRINTER
$500.00
$500.00
HUMAN RESOURCES MGMT. ASSN.
MEMBER DUES -RUSSELL
$180.00
$180.00
INTERNATIONAL DIARIES
1992 DIARY-DIXON
$51.90
$51.90
********************************************************************************************************
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 6
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE
RONALD W. PAVLOCK
EXPENSES
$282.52
$282.52
PEDERSEN & HOUPT
DECEMBER LEGAL FEES
$467.55
DECEMBER LEGAL FEES
$82.65
DECEMBER LEGAL FEES
$13.75
DECEMBER LEGAL FEES
$170.00
DECEMBER LEGAL FEES
$21.25
$755.20
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
EMPLOYEE BENEFIT FAIR
$84.50
$84.50*
VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE
***TOTAL**
$9,474.75
GENERAL FUND
$9,474.75
********************************************************************************************************
COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION
FRETTER SUPERSTORES
COMPUTER & MONITOR
$2,847.00
$2,847.00
ILLINOIS TELEPHONE SERVICE
COM SEMI-ANNUAL MICE
$1,239.84
$75.00
$1,314.84
MARISHA JASON
TELEPHONE SERVICE
COMM ASST COW MTG
$25.00
$25.00
JOHN KEANE
COMM ASST BD MTG
$25.00
$425.00
$25.00
$425.00
NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES
MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$136.38
$136.38
OFFICE MAX
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISC EXPENSES
$45.74
$8.97
$54.71*
JONNA SHOUB
MISC EXPENSES
COMM ASST ZNG BD MTG
$25.00
$25.00
WALTER SOSIN
COMM ASST COW MTG
$25.00
$25.00
COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION
***TOTAL**
$4,877.93
GENERAL FUND
$4,877.93
********************************************************************************************************
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 7
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30%92
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
AMBASSADOR OFFICE EQUIP., INC.
CANNON PC -11 COPIER
$620.00
$283.49
NATIONWIDE PAPERS
CANNON PC -11 COPIER
$534.00
$47.63
ON TIME MESSENGER SERVICE
CANNON PC -11 COPIER
$100.00
$1,254.00
BUTLER PAPER COMPANY
PAPER
$202.86
XEOROX PAPER
$70.36
$273.22
GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS A.
SUBSCRIPTION
$55.00
$55.00
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISC EXPENSES
$15.16
MISC EXPENSES
$5.57
$20.73*
PITNEY BOWES INC.
MAIL MACHINE SUPPLIES
$76.20
MAIL MACHINE MICE AGREEMNT
$402.00
$478.20
POSTMASTER
VEHICLE APPLICATON POSTAGE
$6,122.83
$6,122.83 `
RCM DATA CORP
DEVELOPER CARTRIDGE KIT
$204.32
$204.32
SHESHUNOFF INFO. SERVICES INC.
REPORTS
$207.95
$207.95
SPEEDY MESSENGER SERVICE
MESSENGER
$20.60
$20.60
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
***TOTAL**
$8,636.85
GENERAL FUND
$8,636.85
********************************************************************************************************
VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE
COMP USA
FONT
$283.49
$283.49
NATIONWIDE PAPERS
CARD STOCK
$47.63
$47.63
ON TIME MESSENGER SERVICE
DELIVERIES
$61.60
$61.60
PADDOCK PUBLICATIONS INC
LEGAL PAGE
$65.93
LEGAL PAGE
$68.57
LEGAL PAGE
$81.76
LEGAL PAGE
$68.57
LEGAL PAGE
$65.93
LEGAL PAGE
$65.93
LEGAL PAGE
$23.73
LEGAL PAGE
$60.66
VENDOR
VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE
GENERAL FUND
RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
BROOKFIELD
DAVE & JIM'S AUTO BODY, INC.
FAHEY MEDICAL CENTER, S.C.
FORT DEARBORN LIFE INSURANCE
GAB BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.
GAB BUSINESS SERVICES INC.
ARTHUR J GALLAGHER & CO
HMO ILLINOIS
HOBBS GROUP, INC.
JOHN KERAMIDAS
LOYOLA MED PRACTICE PLAN
NORTHWEST COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
NORTHWESTERN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
GREGORY L. OSTROM, PH.D., M.D.
SCHWAS REHABILITAION'CENTER
RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1130192
PURCHASE.DESCRIPTION
LEGAL PAGE
LEGAL PAGE
MISC EXPENSES
$1,043.03
PAGE 8
INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
$55.38
$73.85 $630.31
$20.00 $20.00*
***TOTAL** $1,043.03
FEBRUARY ADMIN FEES
$4,274.03
MEDICAL CLAIMS THRU 1120
$49,736.30
MEDICAL CLAIMS THRU 1128
$19,828.05
$73,838.38*
P7 BODY REPAIRS
$456.50
$456.50
SERVICES -WELLS
$71.00
$71.00
JAN 92 LIFE INSURANCE
$2,147.74
$2,147.74
JANUARY SERVICE FEES
$886.00
$886.00
ADMINISTRATION FEES
$1,000.00
REIMBURSEMENT
$396.00
$1,396.00
COMM GEN LIABILITY BINDER
$26,277.00
$26,277.00
FEBRUARY HLTH INSURANCE
$7,390.95
$7,390.95
PROF LIABILITY PREMIUM FEE
$25.00
$25.00
MAILBOX REIMBURSEMENT
$95.31
$95.31
SERVICES STRAUB
$175.00
$175.00
SVCS 9001837131-X
$136.00
$136.00
SERVICES CANNING
$1,886.50
$1,886.50
SERVICES BAUTISTA
$45.00
$45.00
SERVICES VINCENZO
$732.96
$732.96
***TOTAL**
$115,559.34
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 9
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND $115,559.34
********************************************************************************************************
INSPECTION SERVICES
AMERICAN BACKFLOW PREV. ASSOC
AMERICAN SOCIETY CIVIL ENGRS
IAFSM
ILLINOIS PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOC
DREW JOHANSON
JOLIET JUNIOR COLLEGE
JOURNAL OF LIGHT CONSTRUCTION
NAARSO
NORTHWEST BLDG. OFFICIALS AND
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
V & G PRINTERS INC.
VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS
INSPECTION SERVICES
GENERAL FUND
MEMBER DUES HANNEMAN•
$27.00
$27.00
1992 CALENDAR
$8.00
$8.00
REGISTER VAN DORNICK
$75.00
$75.00
MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL
$40.00
$40.00
CLOTHING ALLOWANCE
$182.39
$182.39
REGISTER KRUPA
$525.00
$525.00
SUBSCRIPTION RENEWAL
$27.50
$27.50
MEMBERSHIP DUES
$25.00
$25.00
MEMBERSHIPS
$70.00
$70.00
MISC EXPENSES
$5.57
MISC EXPENSES
$6.05
MISC EXPENSES
$35.12
MISC EXPENSES
$44.05
$90.79*
NOTE SHEETS
$96.00
$96.00
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$293.88
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$74.10
$367.98
***TOTAL**
$1,534.66
$1,534.66
********************************************************************************************************
POLICE DEPARTMENT
AETNA TRUCK PARTS PARTS
ANDERSON LOCK COMPANY SECURITY KEYS
BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS, IN LAW OFFICERS BULLETIN
CHICAGO CRIME COMMISSION 1992 DONATION
$112.71 $112.71
$54.00 $54.00
$120.00 $120.00
$120.00 $120.00
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 10
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30%92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
POLICE DEPARTMENT
COMPUSERVE, INC
COMPUTER SERVICE INFO
$10.00
$10.00
BRIAN R. DONEY
300 CUSTOM T-SHIRTS
$1,675.00
$1,675.00*
FULLER'S CARWASH DES PLAINES
DEC 91 CAR WASHES
$552.00
$552.00
GOODYEAR SERVICE STORES
FRONT WHEEL ALIGNMENT
$39.00
FRONT WHEEL ALIGNMENT
$39.00
FRONT WHEEL ALIGNMENT
$39.00
FRONT WHEEL ALIGNMENT
$39.00
FRONT WHEEL ALIGNMENT
$39.00
TIRES
$206.60
TIRES
$39.00
TIRES
$39.00
$479.60
H R HART PHOTO
FILM PROCESSING
$197.74
$197.74
HANSEN ASSOCIATES
MICE & COPIES
$106.30
MTCE & COPIES
$120.08
MTCE & COPIES
$145.50
$371.88
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO.
SERVICE
$501.83
$501.83
ILLINOIS CHAPTER I.A.A.I.
MEMBER DUES GIBSON
$13.00
$13.00
ILLINOIS CRIME ANALYSIS ASSN.
MEMBER DUES DRAFFONE
$25.00
$25.00
ILLINOIS TELEPHONE SERVICE COM
SEMI-ANNUAL MTCE
$826.56
$$26.56
LATTOF CHEVROLET, INC.
PARTS
$37.13
PARTS
$7.26
PARTS
$9.60
PARTS
$3.00
PARTS
5.70
PARTS
$3.38
$66.07
LOKL BUSINESS PRODUCTS & OFFIC
SUPPLIES
$16.95
SUPPLIES
$47.12
$64.07
NORTH SUBURBAN OFFICERS ASSN &
DUES-SCHMIDT
$15.00
$15.00
RAY O'HERRON CO., INC.
CODE 3 NUTS
$8.88
GOLD TIE TACS/BARS
$125.13
$134.01
PROSPECT BOARDING KENNEL
DEC 91 STRAYS
$522.00
$522.00
PUBLIX OFFICE SUPPLIES INC.
SUPPLIES
$58.84
$58.84
QUALEX, INC.
PHOTO CONTACT SHEETS
$8.91
$8.91
QUICK PRINT PLUS, INC.
MEMO DT
SCARDSISCHMIDT
$44.50
BUSINESS
$67.85
$112.35
JOHN E. REID AND ASSOCIATES
POLYGRAPH EXAMS
$6,615.00
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
AIR ONE EQUIPMENT, INC.
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
$84.75
PAGE 11
BASIC FIRE PROTECTION INC.
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
$39.23
$39.23
THE BRAKE ALIGN COMPANY
PAYMENT DATE 1/30%92
$224.84
$224.84
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
POLICE DEPARTMENT
MISC STEEL
$88.32
$88.32
COUNCIL ON EDUCATION IN MGMT.
POLYGRAPH EXAMS
$540.00
$350.00
FEDERAL SIGNAL CORPORATION
POLYGRAPH EXAMS
$270.00
POLYGRAPH EXAM
$135.00
$7,560.00
RPM AUTOMOTIVE INC.
PARTS
$87.36
$87.36
SAVE -A -PET
DEC 91 STRAYS
$245.00
$245.00
SOMAR ENTERPRISES
REMINGTON GLASSES
$21.00
$21.00
TRANSPORTATION SAFETY DEVICES
RELAY
$145.89
$145.89
TRIODYNE INC.
SERVICES RENDERED
$300.00
$521.74
HAGEN AUTO PAINT & SUPPLY
SERVICES RENDERED
$700.00
$77.20
HANSEN ASSOCIATES
SERVICES RENDERED
$1,810.00
$2,810.00
POLICE DEPARTMENT
***TOTAL**
$16,909.82
GENERAL FUND
$16,909.82
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
AIR ONE EQUIPMENT, INC.
HYDROTES.AIR CYLINDER
$84.75
$84.75
BASIC FIRE PROTECTION INC.
REFILL & TEST EXTINGUISHERS
$39.23
$39.23
THE BRAKE ALIGN COMPANY
REPAIRS
$224.84
$224.84
CELLULAR ONE - CHICAGO
SERVICE
$157.26
$157.26
COLFAX WELDING FABRICATING
MISC STEEL
$88.32
$88.32
COUNCIL ON EDUCATION IN MGMT.
REGISTER HEREDIA
$350.00
$350.00
FEDERAL SIGNAL CORPORATION
SUPPLIES
$49.16
SUPPLIES
$110.25
$159.41
FULLER'S CARWASH DES PLAINES
DEC 91 CAR WASHES
$20.00
$20.00
GALL'S, INC.
SUPPLIES
$161.38
$161.38
GENERAL BINDING CORPORATION
SUPPLIES
$144.20
$144.20
GOODYEAR SERVICE STORES
TIRES
$260.08
TIRES
$261.66
$521.74
HAGEN AUTO PAINT & SUPPLY
PAINT SUPPLIES
$77.20
$77.20
HANSEN ASSOCIATES
MTCE & COPIES
$106.30
VENDOR
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
ILL. EMERGENCY SERVICES MGMT.
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO.
ILLINOIS STATE POLICE
ILLINOIS TELEPHONE SERVICE COM
KREST UNIFORMS, INC.
LOKL BUSINESS PRODUCTS & OFFIC
MABAS DIVISION 1
MAC TOOLS
MAC'S FIRE AND SAFETY, INC.
MACACADEMY
MEDICAL PRODUCTS
MICROSOFT
NATIONAL SEMINARS
NWC BODY WORKS, INC.
ORR SAFETY EQUIPMENT COMPANY
R & R UNIFORMS INC.
SAFETY KLEEN CORPORATION
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
GENERAL FUND
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 12
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
MICE & COPIES
$120.07
MICE & COPIES
$145.50
$371.87
MEMBERSHIP-CAVELLO
$30.00
$30.00
SERVICE
$192.14
SERVICE
$75.08
SERVICE
$22.19
SERVICE
$20.88
$310.29
FINGERPRINT PROCESSING FEE
$35.00
$35.00*
SEMI-ANNUAL MICE
$826.56
$826.56
UNIFORM SUPPLIES
$70.00
UNIFORM SUPPLIES
$61.35
$131.35
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$219.73
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$13.35
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$18.70
$251.78
ANNUAL DUES
$250.00
$250.00
TOOLS
$242.85
$242.85
TURN OUT GEAR
CLOTHING
$6.50
$6.45
$12.95
VIDEO TRAINING TAPES
$103.00
$103.00
SUPPLIES
$262.20
$262.20
SOFTWARE UPGRADE
$134.50
$134.50
SEMINAR-HEREDIA
SEMINAR-PEYTON
$89.00
$99;00
$188.00
REPAIRS
$425.00
$425.00
SUPPLIES
$2,162.03
$2,162.03
UNIFORM SUPPLIES
$11.90
$24.00
$35.90
UNIFORM SUPPLIES
SERVICE PARTS WASHER
$69.50
$69.50
***TOTAL**
$71871.11
$7,621.76 CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT FUND
$249.35
********************************************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************************
HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO. SERVICE $34.70 $34.70
ILLINOIS TELEPHONE SERVICE COM SEMI-ANNUAL MICE $413.28 $413.28
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT. MISC EXPENSES $45.90
MISC EXPENSES
HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION
$6.00 $51.90*
***TOTAL** $499.88
GENERAL FUND
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 13
********************************************************************************************************
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
ILLINOIS PRAIRIE GIRL SCOUT CO
BOXWOOD ADVOCACY PROGRAM
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
CENTRAL DISPATCH SERVICES
MISC EXPENSES$15.00
NORTHWEST CENTRAL DISPATCH SYS
FEBRUARY SVCS RENDERED
$27,410.00
$27,410.00
CENTRAL DISPATCH SERVICES
$78.30*'`
***TOTAL**
$27,410.00
GENERAL FUND
$27,410.00
********************************************************************************************************
HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO. SERVICE $34.70 $34.70
ILLINOIS TELEPHONE SERVICE COM SEMI-ANNUAL MICE $413.28 $413.28
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT. MISC EXPENSES $45.90
MISC EXPENSES
HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION
$6.00 $51.90*
***TOTAL** $499.88
GENERAL FUND
$499.88
********************************************************************************************************
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ILLINOIS PRAIRIE GIRL SCOUT CO
BOXWOOD ADVOCACY PROGRAM
$2,555.56
$2,555.56
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISC EXPENSES
$15.41
MISC EXPENSES$15.00
MISC EXPENSES
$47.89
$78.30*'`
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
***TOTAL**
$2,633.86
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
PAGE 14
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
GENERAL FUND $30.41 COMMUNITY DEVLPMT BLOCK GRANT $2,603.45
STREET DIVISION
A.C.C.I.
AAN PUBLICATIONS
AETNA TRUCK PARTS
AKZO SALT INC.
ALEXIAN BROTHERS MEDICAL CENTE
AMERICAN ARBORIST SUPPLIES, IN
ANDERSON LOCK COMPANY
BOWMAN DISTRIBUTION CENTER
CADE INDUSTRIES
CELLULAR ONE - CHICAGO
CHEM RITE PRODUCTS COMPANY
CITIZENS UTILITIES CO. OF ILLI
SANDRA CLARK
COMMODORE MAINTENANCE SYSTEMS
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
R. L. CORTY & COMPANY
DOALL NORTHERN ILLINOIS
ROADMARKERS
$353.75
$353.75
PUBLICATION
$10.00
$10.00
PARTS
$118.38
$118.38
ROAD SALT
$1,528.21
ROAD SALT
$12,272.71
$13,800.92
AIDS SPEAKER
$50.00
$50.00
SUPPLIES
$130.53
SUPPLIES
$43.24
SUPPLIES
$255.61
$429.38
USED PRIVACY
$16.00
PADLOCKS -76
$323.19
KEY SWITCH & SCREWS
$100.34
$439.53
PARTS
$14.06
CREDIT PARTS
$17.10 -
PARTS
$34.39
PARTS
$85.10
PARTS
$345.54
PARTS
$410.61
PARTS
$237.75
$1,110.35
CLEANING SUPPLIES
$173.70
$173.70
DEC 91 SERVICE
$92.54
$92.54
CLEANING SUPPLIES
$375.94
CLEANING SUPPLIES
$449.92
SUPPLIES
$85.00
$910.86
WATER USAGE
$74.27
$74.27
CLOTHING ALLOWANCE
$82.18
$82.18
JANITORIAL SVC 1/16-31
$1,796.00
$1,796.00
BF80-JT-17006
$215.04
$215.04
CLEANING SUPPLIES
$118.00
$118.00
SUPPLIES
$187.95
VENDOR
STREET DIVISION
DOOR SYSTEMS, INC.
DREISILKER ELECTRIC MOTORS, IN
ENGINEMASTERS, INC.
E. D: ETNYRE AND CO.
FREUND INTERNATIONAL
FULLER'S CARWASH DES PLAINES
G & K SERVICES NORTH CHICAGO
GERRARD PACKAGING SYSTEMS, INC
GOODYEAR SERVICE STORES
H & H ELECTRIC CO.
P J HARTMANN COMPANY
HEARTH & HOME INC.
IBBOTSON HEATING CO.
ILLINOIS FWD TRUCK & EQUIPMENT
ILLINOIS NATURAL HISTORY SURV.
ILLINOIS TURFGRASS FOUNDATION
JUST FAUCETS
LAND AND LAKES CO
LATTOF CHEVROLET, INC.
MACMILLAN PUBLISHING
MARIO MALLARI
MORAN EQUIPMENT CORP.
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 15
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
SUPPLIES.
$31.01
$218.96
SERVICE OVERHEAD DOOR
$139.71
$139.71
FRT -SEAL KIT
$1.89
SEAL KIT
$68.68
$70.57
IGNITION KIT
$30.61
$30.61
VALVE
$173.61
$173.61
PUBLICATIONS
$70.00
$70.00
DEC 91 CAR WASHES
$16.00
$16.00
UNIFORM SERVICE
$153.12
UNIFORM SERVICE
$153.12
$306.24
FOLDING STOP SIGNS
$165.25
$165.25
TIRES
$334.28
TIRES
$902.36
$1,236.64
ELECTRICAL WORK
$153.60
ELECTRICAL WORK
$176.60
$330.20
STORAGE TANK REMOVAL
$5,331.18
$5,331.18
UMBRELLA POLE
$14.96
$14.96
2-12" DRAW BANDS
$12.52
$12.52
REPL MOLDBOARD SNOW PLOW
$3,513.00
$3,513.00
PUBLICATION
$4.00
$4.00
MEMBER DUES-GATTAS
$75.00
$75.00
JIFFY REPAIR KIT
$22.00
$22.00
REFUSE DISPOSAL
$621.00
$621.00
PARTS
$13.20
PARTS
$15.40
PARTS
$77.40
PARTS
$119.66
PARTS
$87.07
PARTS
$11.72
PARTS
$91.00
PARTS
$13.00
PARTS
$52.00
PARTS
$13.00
$493.45
PUBLICATION
$50.00
$50.00
REIMB SAFETY SHOES
$50.00
$50.00
MICE SUPPLIES
$237.50
VENDOR
STREET DIVISION
MORTON GROVE AUTOMOTIVE WEST
EDWARD NASTEK
NELSON-HARKINS INDUSTRIES
NORTHERN ILLINOIS GAS CO.
PETTY CASH - PUBLIC WORKS
POLLARD MOTOR COMPANY
POWER DYNAMICS INC.
PROSAFETY
PRYOR RESOURCES, INC.
RIC MAR INDUSTRIES, INC.
RJN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES
RPM AUTOMOTIVE INC.
SCHUSTER EQUIPMENT COMPANY
SEARS, ROEBUCK AND COMPANY
SERVICEMASTER OF PROSPECT
SOUTH SIDE CONTROL COMPANY
SOUTHSIDE FORD
STANDARD PIPE & SUPPLY INC
SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS
TERRACE SUPPLY COMPANY
VHF COMMUNICATIONS INC.
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
WAY -KEN CONTRACTORS SUPPLY CO.
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 16
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
MTCE SUPPLIES
$127.04
$364.54
STARTER REBUILD
$65.00
$65.00
CONTRACTUAL SNOW REMOVAL
$108.50
$108.50
INTERIOR SIGN
$83.97
$83.97
1830,E KENSINGTON
$715.34
$715.34
TRAVEL & EXPENSES
$19.49
TRAVEL & EXPENSES
$53.15
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$5.80
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$26.48
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$40.47
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$115.50
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$9.95
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$1.60
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$74.48
$346.92*
PARTS
$85.37
$85.37
DELTA VALVE
$54.95
$54.95
SUPPLIES
$103.72
$103.72
REGISTER -BOTH
359.00
59.00
$
QUICK WASH
$248.00
48.00
COMPUTER SUPPORT SYSTEM
$1,000.00
$1,000.00
PARTS
$123.16
$123.16
PARTS
$58.71
$58.11
TOOLS
$31.47
$31.47
CHAIRS CLEANED
$100.00
$100.00
JOHNSON THERMOCOUPLE HUSKY
$35.20
POCKET ENG THERMOMETER
$7.42
$42.62
SUPPLIES
$36.18
$36.18
PLUMBING SUPPLIES
$9.89
PLUMBING SUPPLIES
$14.70
PLUMBING SUPPLIES
$189.08
$213.67
AGRICULTURE HANDBOOKS
$65.00
$65.00
ARGON CYLINDER EXCHANGE
$30.89
$30.89
REPAIR DESK RADIO
$115.10
$115.10
101 S MAPLE
$110.04
$110.04
BULK CHAIN
$492.00
REPAIR HEDGE TRIMMER
$73.00
VENDOR
STREET DIVISION
WILLIAM WOJCIK
STREET DIVISION
GENERAL FUND
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
REPAIR HEDGE TRIMMER
CONTRACTUAL SNOW REMOVAL
$19,740.12 MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND
$3,652.71
PAGE 17
i i►+Zile �LN2j � [il i i � I r r � ��3 � it � � l
$27.00 $592.00
$50.00 $50.00
***TOTAL** $37,523.95
$14,131.12
********************************************************************************************************
WATER AND SEWER'DIVISION
AETNA TRUCK PARTS
AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIAT
GLEN ANDLER
BADGER METER INC
BOWMAN DISTRIBUTION CENTER
ARTHUR CLESEN, INC.
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
R. L. CORTY & COMPANY
SEAN DORSEY
DUPAGE TOPSOIL INC.
ENGINEMASTERS, INC.
FULLER'S CARWASH DES PLAINES
G & K SERVICES NORTH CHICAGO
THE GOVERNMENT BOOK STORE
PARTS
$31.54
$31.54
ANNUAL RENEWAL FEES
$575.00
$575.00
REIMBURSE AIRFARE-CONF
$534.24
$534.24
WATER METERS$762.00
WATER METERS
$762.00
WATER METERS
$762.00
WATER METERS
$3,476.00
$5,762.00
PARTS
$345.55
PARTS
$410.62
PARTS
$237.75
$993.92
SUNNY MIX SEED
$570.00
$570.00
BJ80-JT-23598
$5,194.32
$5,194.32
BH67-JT-1310-A
$58.46
$58.46
CLEANING SUPPLIES
$504.00
$504.00
CONFERENCE-DORSEY
$685.00
$685.00
TOPSOIL
$140.00
$140.00
PARTS
$30.26
PARTS
$18.70
$48.96
DEC 91 CAR WASHES
$28.50
$28.50
UNIFORM SERVICE
$153.12
UNIFORM SERVICE
$153.12
$306.24
FEDERAL CODE BOOKS
$50.00
$50.00
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 18
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE -DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
H -B -K WATER METER SERVICE
WATER METER LABOR
$285.48
WATER METER LABOR
$71.37
WATER METER LABOR
$356.85
$713.70
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO.
SERVICE
$52,50
SERVICE
$30.66
SERVICE
$203.83
SERVICE
$533.12
SERVICE
$37.05
SERVICE
.$30.63
SERVICE$30.63
SERVICE
$61.25
SERVICE
$30.63
SERVICE
$97.32
SERVICE
$17.50
SERVICE
$16.94
SERVICE
$23.94
SERVICE
$42.75
SERVICE
$17.49
$1,226.24
ILLINOIS TELEPHONE SERVICE COM
SEMI-ANNUAL MICE
$826.56
$826.56
LATTOF CHEVROLET, INC.
PARTS
$13.21
PARTS
$7.62
PARTS
$23.48
PARTS
$173.28
PARTS
$10.78
PARTS
$1.84
PARTS
$13.00
PARTS
$39.00
PARTS
$91.00
PARTS
$26.00
$399.21
LOKL BUSINESS PRODUCTS & OFFIC
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$124.45
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$200.03
$324.48
MEYER MATERIAL CO.
GRAVEL
$407.92
$407.92
MJB TOOLS
PARTS
$33.85
$33.85
MORAN EQUIPMENT CORP.
MICE SUPPLIES
$95.00
$95.00
MOTRA TRANSMISSIONS
RESEAL & CK TRANSMISSION
$100.00
$100.00
EDWARD NASTEK
PHOTOS -JUBILEE LIGHTS
$108.35
$108.35
********************************************************************************************************
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 19
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
NET MIDWEST, INC.
DECEMBER WATER SAMPLES
$67.50
$67.50
NORTHERN ILLINOIS GAS CO.
SS GOLF 1W WAPELLA
$16.27
112 E HIGHLANDJEMMERSON
$186.86
$203.13
PETTY CASH - PUBLIC WORKS
TRAVEL & EXPENSES
$45.00
TRAVEL & EXPENSES
$29.56
TRAVEL & EXPENSES
$31.90
TRAVEL & EXPENSES
$11.60
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$2.48
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$6.17
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$.98
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$37.26
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$27.16
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$32.24
$224.35*
PROSAFETY
SUPPLIES
$103.72
$103.72
RAINBOW 1 HR PHOTO EXP.
FILM PROCESSING
$7.37
$7.37
RJN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES
COMPUTER SUPPORT SYSTEM
$550.00
COMPUTER SUPPORT SYSTEM
$1,850.00
ENGINEERING SERVICES
$3,096.08
$5,496.08
RPM AUTOMOTIVE INC.
PARTS
$123.15
$123.15
SAFETY KLEEN CORPORATION
SERVICE PARTS CLEANERS
$336.50
$336.50
SCHUSTER EQUIPMENT COMPANY
PARTS
$124.80
$124.80
TERRACE SUPPLY COMPANY
OXYGEN/ACETYLENE CYLINDERS
$38.29
$38.29
V & G PRINTERS INC.
NOTE PADS
$240.00
$240.00
WAY -KEN CONTRACTORS SUPPLY CO.
REPAIR HEDGE TRIMMER
$46.00
$46.00
HERBERT WEEKS
REIMB DAMAGED RAINCOAT
$134.27
REIMB CDL
$40.00
$174.27
ZIEBELL WATER SERVICE PRODUCTS
CLAMPS
$1,482.16
CLAMPS
$437.80
$1,919.96
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
***TOTAL**
$28,822.61(
WATER & SEWER FUND
$28,822.61
********************************************************************************************************
VENDOR
PARKING SYSTEM DIVISION
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
NORTHERN ILLINOIS GAS CO.
STRAND ASSOCIATES
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PARKING SYSTEM DIVISION
PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 20
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
BH66-JT-0498-A
$22.10
BH66-JT-3710-A
$16.34
BH66-JT-X262-A
$162.92
BH66-JT-5266-C
BH68-JT-7498-A
$149.97
$22.10
$373.43
19 NORTHWEST HWY
ENGINEERING SERVICES
$181.62
$570.00
$181.62
$570.00
19 E NORTHWEST HWY
$18.08
$18.08
$1,143.13
***TOTAL** $1,143.13
********************************************************************************************************
REFUSE DISPOSAL DIVISION
SOLID WASTE AGENCY OF NORTHERN EQUITY CHG $5,490.04 $5,490.04
REFUSE DISPOSAL DIVISION ***TOTAL** $5,490.04
REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND $5,490.04
********************************************************************************************************
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
ACTON MOBILE INDUSTRIES, INC. RENT -TRAILER $230.00
RENT --TRAILER $230.00
RENT -TRAILER $200.00 $660.00
BRISTOL HOSE & FITTING HYDRAULIC FITTINGS $325.33 $325.33
CAMP DRESSER & MCKEE SERVICES RENDERED $15,372.00 $15,372.00
VENDOR
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
COLFAX WELDING FABRICATING
THE FIRST CHICAGO BANK OF M.P.
RJN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES
SOUTHERN SPECIALTIES CORP.
TROW MIRZA
VANITIES INC.
WARNING LITES OF ILLINOIS
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND
POLICE & FIRE BOND PROCEEDS
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 21
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 1/30/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
STAINLESS STEEL
$25.00
$25.00
FEBRUARY RENT
$2,600.00
$2,600.00
ENGINEERING SERVICES
$3,357.46
$3,357.46
2-60 SPACE COIN BOX
$1,585.17
2 POSTS FOR COIN BOXES
$310.00
$1,895.17
SERVICES & TESTING
$913.80
SOIL BORINGS
$2,100.00
ADDTL SOIL BORING
$239.00
$3,252.80
DIVIDER WALL
$572.50
$572.50
50-2# 7' GREEN U -POST
$262.00
$262.00
***TOTAL**
$28,322.26
$350.33 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
FUND
$18,101.67
$6,512.80 FLOOD CONTROL CONST
FUND 1991
$3,357.46
********************************************************************************************************
COMMUNITY AND CIVIC SERVICES
BUDGET SIGN COMPANY
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
FOLGERS FLAG & DECORATING, INC
MOUNT PROSPECT HISTORICAL SOCI
COMMUNITY AND CIVIC SERVICES
GENERAL FUND
CHANGEABLE COPY LETTERS
BG21-JT-1838-A
BH67-JT-3858-B
REMOVE & INSTALL BANNERS
REMOVE & INSTALL BANNERS
4TH BUDGET ALLOC
$3,899.67
$475.80
$70.23
$28.64
$331.00
$119.00
$2,875.00
***TOTAL**
$475.80
$98.87
$450.00
$2,875.00
$3,899.67
ALL DEPARTMENTS TOTAL $958,335.87
DATE RUN 1/30/92
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 22
TIME RUN 11.07.56
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL
LISTING ID-APPBAR
SUMMARY BY FUND 1/30/92
NO.
FUND NAME
AMOUNT
1
GENERAL FUND
$511,139.63
21
REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND
$7,710.52
22
MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND
$14,131.12
23
COMMUNITY DEVLPMT BLOCK GRANT
$3,933.47
24
ILL. MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT FUND
$11,482.47
41
WATER & SEWER FUND
$66,359.88
46
PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND
$1,927.02
48
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND
$350.33
49
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
$168,159.23
51
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
$25,783.73
53
POLICE & FIRE BOND PROCEEDS
$6,512.80
58
FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND 1991
$3,357.46
71
POLICE PENSION FUND
$41,602.60
72
FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND
$79,385.86
74
ESCROW DEPOSIT FUND
$16,499.75
TOTAL ALL FUNDS $958,335.87
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13 OF THE
VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SEC -MON ONE: That Subsection A of Section 13, 107 of Chapter 13 of the Village
Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, be and the same is hereby further amended by
increasing the number of Class "S" liquor licenses by one (1) (Retro Bistro, Inc. d/b/a
Retro Bistro Restaurant, 1744 West Golf Road), so that hereafter said Subsection A of
Section 13.107 of Chapter 13 shall be and read as follows:
Sf.ctign 13.107, Number of Licenses:
Two (2)
Class A Licenses
Two (2)
Class B Licenses
Ten (10)
Class C Licenses
One (1)
Class D License
Two (2)
Class E Licenses
One (1)
Class G License
One (1)
Class H License
One (1)
Class M License
One (1)
Class P Licenses
Nineteen (19)
Class R Licenses
Nine (9)
Class S Licenses
One (1)
Class T License
Eight (8)
Class W Licenses
SECTION DYO: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after
its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law.
AYES:
NAYS:
PASSED and APPROVED this
ATTEST:
Village Clerk
day of
Village -President
1992.
Class
Establishment Number
A
Midwest Liquors; Mrs. P & Me
2
B
Dumas Walker's Bar B Q Pit and Fish Shack;
Ye Olde Town Inn
2
C
Alvee's Liquors; Bolzano Liquors; Dominick's
(83 & Golf); Gold Eagle Liquors; Jay Liquors;
Mt. Prospect Liquors, Osco Drugs; Phar -Mor;
Walgreens (83 and Golf); Walgreens
(Mt. Prospect Plaza)
10
D
Prospect Moose Lodge
1
E
Bristol Court Banquet Hall; Mr. Peter's
Banquet Hall
2
G
Mount Prospect Park District -Golf Course
1
H
Zanie's
1
M
Holiday Inn
1
P
Shimada Shoten
1
R
Artemis; Boo ill; DJB Brunetti; Dragon City;
Edwardo's; Fellini; Giordano's (Rand Road);
Giordano's (Elmhurst Road); House of Szechwan;
Izakaya Sankyu; Little America; Magic Dragon Restaurant;
Nina Restaurant, Pepe's; Sakura, Shin Jung; Sunrise;
Torishin; Yasuke
19
S
El Sombrero; Emerson House; Jake's Pizza;
Jameson's Charhouse; Kampai; Old Orchard Country
Club Restaurant; ro is= Sam's Place;
Wild Stallions Cafe
8
T
Thunderbird Lanes
1
W
Mr. Beef & Pizza; Pete's Sandwich Palace;
Photo's Hot Dogs; Pizza Hut; Rosati's Pizza;
Sizzler Restaurant; Taqueria Fiesta; Wag's
8
58
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER Ny.,
T
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE: DECEMBER 13, 1991
SUBJECT: ZBA-77-SU-91, WAL-MART STORES, INC.
LOCATION: 930 EAST MOUNT PROSPECT PLAZA
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation on
a Special Use Permit application filed by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. The applicant is requesting
a Special Use Permit to allow a Y-10" diameter satellite antenna on the roof of the new
Wal-Mart Store in Mount Prospect Plaza. Satellite antennas with diameters larger than 40"
are only permitted as a special use.
The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the request at their meeting of December 12,
1991. At the meeting Mark Courtney, Architect for Wal-Mart, presented testimony in
support of the request. Mr. Courtney explained that the Wal-Mart utilizes satellite antennas
for their system of nationwide monitoring of merchandise and for security and fire alarm
purposes. He noted that the antenna should not interfere with other television reception
in the area. He also stated that Wal-Mart would prefer not to retrofit a screening device
on the roof as it would require puncturing the roof structure which could cause leakage
problems. He further stated that the screening device may be more noticeable than the
antenna itself. However, if necessary, screening would be provided.
Julie Farnham, Planner, explained that the Y-10" antenna has been installed on the roof
and noted that this request is very similar to one granted for Walgreen's in Mount Prospect
Plaza a few months ago. She noted that the antenna complies with most of the special use
standards listed in the ordinance. However, it should be screened on the north side. She
suggested that a screening box similar to what Walgreen's proposed would provide adequate
screening.
Two residents expressed some concerns about potential interference with television reception
but stated that they had not experienced any problems.
The Zoning Board generally discussed the request and the screening requirements. Several
members stated that the screening requirements are clearly established in the ordinance and
since others have had to abide by them, Wal-Mart should too. It was also noted that there
are several satellite antennas in the area which have not created any apparent problems with
local television reception.
John Fulton Dixon
December 16, 1991
Page 2
Accordingly, by a 7-0 vote, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommends approval of a Special
Use Permit to allow a 5', 10" diameter satellite antenna on the roof of Wal-Mart conditioned
on:
Screening the antenna per ordinance requirements and staff approval.
DMC:hg
Satellite Dish Antenna
-4
GROUND WIRE
TIE•WRAP CABLE To
FEED SUPPORT ARM
IL
1 & -nE.WRAP
w
5F
ALLOW LOOP
IN CABLE TO,
AVOID STRAIN ON
POINT A CONNECTOR
LEVEL WITH
ANTENNA
LOWEST POINT
WHEN ANTENNA
IS VERTICAL ALLOW AOECUAT;: SLACK FOR
EI—E-VATICN ANO AZIMUTH CHANGES
PES2.490 I
I Figure 4. Prodelin I SM Quick Repoint Antenna Cable Routing
�Tio►�t �� �T
7 .w'!B SING
2. hiTE �41`,k-, N--P-TTI
YIN
1 t �
IN
t s
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 77 -SU -91
PETITIONER:
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
PUBLICATION DATE:
REQUEST:
ZBA MEMBERS PRESENT:
ABSENT:
Hearing Date: December 12, 1991
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
930 East Mount Prospect Plaza
November 26, 1991
Special Use Permit per Section 14.2001.C.5 to
install a 5'-10"diameter roof -mounted satellite
antenna.
Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ronald Cassidy
Peter Lannon
Richard Pratt
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
None
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: Richard Hendricks, 1537 E. Emmerson Lane
Cliff Wesa, 109 North Louis
Chairman Basnik introduced this case stating that the petitioner is requesting a Special Use
Permit per Section 14.2001.C.5 to install a 5'-10" diameter roof -mounted satellite antenna
at Wal-Mart in Mount Prospect Plaza.
Mark Courtney, B.S.W. Architects, Tulsa, Oklahoma, representing Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
presented his case stating that during the permitting process for building construction, Wal-
Mart inadvertently failed to get a separate permit for the satellite antenna which the Village
requires. He stated that all Wal-Mart Stores utilize satellite antennas for monitoring
merchandise, security and fire alarm systems. The special use permit is requested to allow
the antenna to remain as installed.
Julie Farnham, Planner for the Village of Mount Prospect, stated that a 51-10" diameter
satellite antenna was installed on the roof of the new Wal-Mart Store and a Special Use
Permit is required because it is larger than 49' in diameter. She stated that this request is
very similar to one recently reviewed and approved for Walgreens in Mount Prospect Plaza.
She explained that this antenna meets all of the Special Use standards listed in the
Ordinance for roof -mounted satellite antennas except with regard to screening. She noted
that the building parapet walls screen the antenna from three sides, but the antenna is
visible from the adjacent property to the north (Thunderbird Lanes). Staff requests that the
ZBA-77-SU-91
December 12, 1991
Page 2 of 3
antenna be screened to comply with the Ordinance requirements.
Richard Hendricks, 1537 E. Emmerson Lane stated that he wanted to go on record to
express concern about the storage of many bales of cardboard boxes behind Wal-Mart He
stated that this is a fire hazard and is not in keeping with the strong values and ordinances
of the Village of Mount Prospect. He stated that he spoke with the Store Manager in this
regard. He also contacted the Village Manager and Fire Chief Cavello.
Chairman Basnik stated that the Zoning Board appreciates his concern but has no
jurisdiction over such matters.
Cliff Wesa, 109 North Louis asked why so many satellite antennas are allowed for businesses
but not for residents.
Julie Farnham explained that the regulations on satellite antennas are the same in all zoning
districts. Antennas under 40" in diameter are permitted, but any larger antenna would only
be permitted as a Special Use which would require the public hearing process.
Mr. Wesa also expressed concern about the impact on TV transmission in the area.
Mr. Basnik noted that this antenna is currently operating in addition to others in the area.
He asked if Mr. Wesa has experienced any problems to date. If he hasn't had problems yet,
he shouldn't in the future. Mr. Wesa sated that he has not had problems.
Mr. Courtney responded to staffs recommendation for screening stating that the dish is
relatively small and that a screening box as suggested by staff might be more visually
obtrusive. He also stated that it would be necessary to penetrate the roof to construct the
screening device. T"his, could lead to problems with roof leaks.
Mr. Basnik stated that he was inclined to agree that the screening device might be more
visible than the antenna itself.
Mr. Lannon stated that Walgreens was required to screen their antenna and so should Wal-
Mart. The Ordinance is very clear on screening requirements and these should be adhered
to for all applicants.
Mr. Saviano asked how many stores with satellite antennas Wal-Mart has, and whether
they are screened, and if there have been problems reported with regard to interference
with TV transmission.
Mr. Courtney stated that there are about 1,700 stores nationwide and he is not aware of any
interference problems. He stated that some stores have screened their satellite antennas
but usually with the building parapet walls.
ZBA-77-SU-91
December 12, 1991
Page 3 of 3
Mr. Lannon noted that most of the stores are in rural locations and may not be subject to
screening requirements. Only recently has Wal-Mart began to move into suburban locations
where appearance is more important.
Mr. Cassidy stated that the specifics on frequency are not the main concern of the Zoning
Board, but appearance is. He believes the antenna should be screened for aesthetic and
consistency reasons.
Chairman Basnik then entertained a motion to grant the petitioner's request for a Special
Use Permit per Section 14.2001.C.5 to allow a 5'-10" roof -mounted satellite antenna at Wal-
Mart in Mount Prospect Plaza subject to screening per staff approval. Mrs. Skowron moved,
Mr. Pratt seconded.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Lannon, Saviano, Pratt, Cassidy, Brettrager, Skowron and
Basnik
NAYS: None
Motion carried by a vote of 7-0
This recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for their consideration.
Julie Farnham,
Recording Secretary
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
MO TNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAIRMAN
FROM:
JULIE FARNHAM, PLANNER
DATE:
DECEMBER 2, I"l
CASE NO.:
ZBA-77-SU-91
APPLICANT:
WAL-MART STORES,INC.
ADDRESS:
930 EAST MOUNT PROSPECT PLAZA
LOCATION MAP:
Ems
LlW
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING:
LOT SIZE:
% COVERAGE:
F.A.R. :
B-3 Business Commercial
N/A
N/A
N/A
Gil Basnik, Chairmar
Mount Prospect Zoninb Board of Appeals Page 2
The applicant is reques-,Jing a Special Use Permit per Section 14.2001.C.5 to install a 5'-
10" diameter roof -mounted satellite antenna.
Summary of application: The applicant installed a 5'-10" diameter satellite antenna on the
roof of the new Wal-Mart Store in Mount Prospect Plaza. A separate permit was never
obtained for the antenna and a special use permit is requested to allow the antenna to
remain as installed.
The applicant states that the satellite antenna is essential for store operation,
communication, security and fire safety.
Surrounding Area Development and Potential Impact: Wal-Mart was recently constructed
in the Phase II area of Mount Prospect Plaza. Staff notes that a similar sized roof -mounted
antenna was recently approved for Walgreens. While most of the surrounding properties
are commercial, Centennial Apartments, a high-rise senior apartment complex abuts the
northeast corner of the Wal-Mart property. Staff's primary concern with this request is the
view of the satellite antenna by residents of upper floor apartments.
The proposed satellite antenna meets most of the standards for non -ground mounted
antennas as follows:
1. The antenna is located on the roof above the Wal-Mart Store to which it is an
accessory.
2. The proposed 5'-10" diameter antenna is less than 1/3 the height of the building (22
building height X 33% = 7.26).
3. The overall height including the antenna and the building will be 29 ft. Code allows
a maximum building height of 30 ft.
4. The antenna will be at least 20 ft. from all property lines.
5. The antenna and screening will be in scale with the building.
The applicant states that the antenna will be screened from pedestrian view by pakapet walls
on three sides of the building. Staff notes that the antenna is visible from the parking lot
of Thunderbird Lanes. According to the special use standards, the antenna must be
screened from view from adjacent properties at grade level. Staff requests that screening
be provided on all sides of the antenna to comply with this standard.
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3
OTHER VILIAGE STAEF COMM
No objections were expressed by other Village staff.
UMMARYIRECOMMEN-DA3:10
This request is very similar to one recently approved for Walgreens in Mount Prospect
Plaza. Staff recommends approval of the request noting that the standards for a roof -
mounted antenna have been met except screening. As such, staff recommends that approval
be conditioned on providing screening around the satellite antenna.
JF:bg
Approved:
& M -
David M. Clements, Director
CAF/
1/14/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE FOR PROPERTY
COMMONLY KNOWN AS WAL-MART
LQCATED AT 930 EAST MPUNT PROSPECT J?LAZA
WHEREAS, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as
Petitioner) has filed a petition for a Special Use with respect to
property located at 930 East Mount Prospect Plaza (hereinafter
referred to as Subject Property); and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is legally described as follows:
That part of Lot 1 (excepting therefrom those parts
thereof taken for the Department of Transportation by
condemnation registered as Document Number 3201616) ; also
(excepting therefrom that part thereof taken for
Centennial Subdivision by plat registered as Document
Number 3202476), in Plaza Subdivision, being a Subdivision
of part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 35, Township
42 North, Range 11 East of the Third Principal Meridian,
according to plat thereof registered in the Office of the
Registrar of Titles of Cook County, Illinois, on July 16,
1979, as Document Number 3104778; described as follows:
Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Lot 1; thence
South 29 degrees 46 minutes 10 seconds east along the
Southwesterly line of said Lot 1, being also the
Northeasterly right-of-way line of Rand Road as dedicated
by Document Number 4104778, a distance of 296.41 (Record
= 297.66) feet to a point of curvature; thence continuing
Southeasterly along said Southwesterly line on a
tangential curve, concave to the Northeast, having a
radius of 2,072.46 feet, for an arc distance of 730 feet;
thence North 20 degrees 56 minutes 31 seconds East, 615.26
feet to the Southwest corner of Centennial Subdivision,,
according to the plat thereof recorded February 11, 1981
as Document Number 3202476; thence North 00 degrees 00
minutes 30 seconds East along the West line of Centennial
Subdivision aforesaid, 234.66 feet to a point on the North
line of said Lot 1 in Plaza Subdivision; thence North 89
degrees 39 minutes 13 seconds West along said North line,
832.35 (Record = 832.55) feet to the point of beginning
and
WHEREAS, Petitioner seeks a Special Use to permit installation of
a roof (non -ground) mounted satellite antenna, as provided in
Section 14.1701.C.5; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the request for Special use,
being the subject of ZBA 77 -SU -91, before the Zoning Board of
Appeals of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 12th day of
December, 1991, pursuant to proper legal notice having been
published in the Mount Prospect Herald on the 26th day of November,
1991; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals has submitted its findings
and recommendations to the President and Board of Trustees in
support of the request being the subject of ZBA 77 -SU -91; and
WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of
ZBA 77 -SU -91
Page 2 of 2
Mount Prospect have given consideration to the request herein and
have determined that the same meets the standards of the Village
and that granting the Special Use requested in ZBA 77 -SU -91 would
be in the best interest of the Village.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF
TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SECTION ONE' The recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated
as findings of fact by the President and Board of Trustees of the
Village of Mount Prospect.
SECTION TWO: The President and Board of Trustees of the Village
of Mount Prospect do hereby grant a Special Use to the subject
property to permit a 51 10" diameter roof mounted satellite
antenna, as provided in section 14.1701.C.5, subjext to
installation of required screening.
SECTION THREE; This ordinance shall be in full force and effect
from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet
form in the manner provided by law.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
PASSED and APPROVED this _ day of
Gerald L. Farley
Village President
ATTEST:
Carol A. Fields,
Village Clerk
1992.
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECt'
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER fAT__",
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE: DECEMBER 16, I"l
SUBJECT: ZBA-79.V.91, RAY NAEGELE
LOCATION: 2016 EAST EUCLID
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation on
a variation applicaiton filed by Ray Naegele. The applicant is requesting the following
variations to accommodate construction of a retail store and associated parking at 2016 East
Euclid Avenue:
1. Section 14.2102.13 to allow a 0 ft. building setback from the interior side lot line. Code
requires 10 ft.
2. Section 14.2102.0 to allow a 10 ft. building setback from the rear property line. Code
requires 20 ft.
3. Section 14.2102.E to allow the parking lot to come as close as 0 ft. to the front and side
lot lines. Code requires 30 ft. and 10 ft. setback; and 10 ft. from the side lot line -Code
requires 20 ft.
4. Section 14.2103 to allow 78% lot coverage rather than 75% as allowed by Code.
The Zoning Board considered the request at their meeting of December 12, 1991. At the
meeting, Cary Cbickerneo, Attorney for the applicant, presented testimony in support of the
request. Mr. Chickerneo explained that this is a very difficult site to develop due to it small
size and shape. Variations are needed to create an economically viable development. He
stated that in order to attract a video franchise they needed to provide about 5,000 square
feet of space. He further described the specific variations proposed.
Julie Farnham, Planner, agreed that this is a difficult site to develop and stated that staff
believes the proposed single use retail store is one of the best proposals staff has seen for
this site. She explained that staff has some concerns about substantially reducing the
required yards, particularly adjacent to residential property. While yard variations are
necessary to develop this site, the impact on adjacent residential property should be
minimized. She presented a modified plan staff developed that would create a 5 ft. building
setback on the east, 20 ft. rear setback to the north and provide 20 parking spaces as
required by Code. She explained that the major drawback was that the building size would
be reduced to approximately 4,080 square feet.
Also presenting testimony in support of the request were, Warren Kostak, Architect for the
applicant, and Ray Naegele, applicant and property owner. Mr. Kostak provided
John Fulton Dixon
Page 2
December 16, 1991
information relative to the design and appearance of the building. Mr. Naegele stated that
he intends to use the space for a video store. He also has concerns about the impact on the
residential, and believes the proposed use and site plan are sensitive to the surroundings.
The Zoning Board of Appeals discussed the request and its potential impact on surrounding
residents. Members concurred that this is one of the best plans for this site, noting that the
site constraints presented a hardship for development. Concerns were expressed about the
larger variations requested and discussion ensued about potential areas of compromise
between the applicants and staff's recommended plan.
Accordingly, by a 7-0 vote, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommends approval of the
following variations to accommodate construction of a retail store and parking at 2016 East
Euclid Avenue.:
1. Section 14.2102.8 to allow a 5 ft. building setback from the interior side lot line.
2. Section 14.2102.0 to allow a 15 ft. building setback from the rear property line.
3. Section 14.2102.E to allow the parking lot to come as close as 0 ft. to the front
(south) and side (east) lot lines, and 10 ft. from the side (west) lot.
4. Section 14.2103 to allow a maximum of 78%.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. Providing a six foot solid wood fence along the west property line as shown on the
submitted site plan.
2. Providing face brick on all building facades, as shown on submitted drawings.
3. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened, and not visible from the ground.
4. Any security lighting which faces residential property consist of cut-off fixtures (down -
lighting).
5. No signage shall be allowed on the back side of the building.
6. Continuous hedge to be planted along the north property line to provide solid
screening adjacent to residential property.
JF:hg
i In #OLIO
ROOD Ilocs
R -f
01111,71¢7
R -f
Di{TRICT
N reXD �
SITE PLAN EUCLID
AVENUE
1
FRONT EI EVATION !,.rs: µ�Y i tytt flet
SUMMARY OF ZONING VARIANCES
ITAW
O DEAD VARO
O♦ARRINO {l T{ACR
O{IDE YARD FARRIND
OMOR YARD SIRLDiMO
A
YI.]YiE.C.
4.
RE
N.]IOLE
]D FROM
�+�f*D
RIR LAW
.�Ay
].TROY
AF
REiIO{XTIAt
II{
H.910].i
10
FROPIRTr I
MOM
GENERAL ZONING DATA
cool OF ca lD
{{cnoN sr can
LOT sin IYR
FLOOR AREA RATIO RtR
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 79-V-91 Hearing Date: December 12, 1991
PETITIONER: Ray Naegele
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 2016 East Euclid
PUBLICATION DATE: November 26, 1991
REQUEST: The following variations are requested to
accommodate construction of a retail store and
associated parking: 1) Section 14.2102.8 to
allow a 0 ft. building setback from the interior
side lot line instead of the required 10 ft.; 2)
Section 14.2102.0 to allow a 10 ft. building
setback from the rear property line instead of
the required 20 ft.; 3) Section 14.2102.13 to
allow the parking lot to come as close as 0 ft.
to the front lot line - Code requires 30 ft.
setback; and 10 ft. from the side lot line - Code
requires 20 ft.; 4) Section 14.2103 to allow 78%
lot coverage rather than the permitted 75%.
ZBA MEMBERS PRESENT:
ABSENT:
Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ronald Cassidy
Peter Lannon
Richard Pratt
Dennis Saviano
Nfichaele, Skowron
None
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: David Schien
512 NaWaTa
Chairman Basnik introduced this case stating that the petitioner is requesting the following
variations to accommodate construction of a retail store and associated parking:
1. Section 14.2102.11 to allow a 0 ft. building setback from the interior side lot line.
Code requires 10 feet.
2. Section 14.2102.0 to allow a 10 ft. building setback from the rear property line.
Code requires 20 feet.
ZBA-79-V-91
December 12, 1991
Page 2 of 5
3. Section 14.2102.E to allow the parking lot to come as close as 0 ft. to the front lot
line - Code requires 30 ft. setback; and 10 ft. from the side lot line - Code requires
20 ft.;
4. Section 14.2103 to allow 78% lot coverage rather than 75% as allowed by Code.
Cary Chickerneo, 350 West Kensington Road, Attorney for the petitioner, indicated that he
would be presenting the case for his client but would like to swear -in all witnesses
beforehand.
Chairman Basnik proceeded to swear -in Warren Kostak, 55 East Euclid Avenue, Architect
and Ray Naegele, 2016 East Euclid, the petitioner.
Mr. Chickerneo proceeded to explain the proposal. He stated that the petitioner is
proposing to construct 4,895 sq. ft. retail store and parking to be used for a video store.
He indicated that this is a challenging site to develop because of its small size and long,
narrow shape. The proposal is attempting to create an economically viable development
and be sensitive to the surroundings. The petitioner believes that a single use will be more
sensitive to the surrounding residents. However, to make a video store economically viable
to attract a major franchise, a minimum store size of around 5,000 sq. fL is necessary. He
indicated that the typical video store is between 6,000-6,500 square feet.
Mr. Chickerneo continued to explain the specific variations requested. With regard to the
zero foot building setback from the east property line, he stated that they believed that this
was the best side to maximize encroachment as it abuts commercial property.
He noted that footings could be constructed that wouldn't extend beyond the lot line. He
also noted that there are utility and drainage easements on three of the four sides of this
lot which could be considered a hardship.
He stated that the proposed 10 ft. rear setback is the same as the adjacent gas station. He
noted that the building will only be 14 ft. tall and will be brick on all facades. He stated
that the petitioner is willing to increase landscaping along the rear if necessary.
Regarding the parking lot setback variations, he stated that the zero foot along the east is
something staff suggested to encourage flow-through traffic to the gas station site. The 10
ft. setback proposed on the west side would be screened with landscaping and a 6 ft. solid
wood fence. In addition, he presented a petition signed by the adjacent property owner and
two other neighbors stating that they did not object to the proposal He further stated that
the lot coverage variation was relatively minor considering the site constraints.
Julie Farnham, Planner for the Village of Mount Prospect, thanked Mr. Chickerneo for the
thorough presentation. She stated that this is one of the best proposals staff has seen for
this site, noting that it is very similar to a proposal presented earlier this year. She then
presented staffs concerns with the proposed variations.
ZBA-79-V-91
December 12, 1991
Page 3 of 5
With regard to the zero foot building setback from the east property line, staffs primary
concerns are the impact on future redevelopment of the neighboring gas station site and
constructing a permanent structure on top of an easement. Allowing a zero foot building
setback could impose a hardship on the redevelopment of the adjacent site due to building
separation requirements. The easement would have to be vacated to allow construction of
a permanent structure. Staff would recommend maintaining the 5 fL setback instead. Ms.
Farnham suggested making the building longer by expanding to the west, eliminating four
proposed parking spaces. She noted that there would still be 20 parking spaces which meets
Code.
She stated that staff cannot support such a drastic reduction of the rear yard adjacent to
residential property. She also suggested additional landscaping along the rear property line
to ensure continuous screening.
With regard to the parking lot setbacks, Ms. Farnham stated that staff believes allowing
flow-through driveway access to the gas station site makes sense as both are very small lots,
and could share access off Euclid. She suggested that the property owners may want to set
up a cross access agreement. She noted that the front setback tapers from 14 ft. to zero ft.
at the driveway opening. Staff believes there is adequate space for landscape screening.
She stated that the 10 ft, setback on the west will be amply landscaped and a fence will
eliminate headlights shining into the adjacent residential property. She noted that the
adjacent house is about 40 ft. away from the parking lot.
She stated that the 784 lot coverage requested is a relatively minor variation from the 75%
allowed given the constraints of this small lot. She noted that on-site detention will be
required.
Mr. Basnik questioned why staff was concerned about the 10 ft. setback to the rear but not
to the west side. I
Julie Farnham stated that the rear yard abuts 3-4 residents whereas the west only abuts one
and it is a sideyard with a garage in between the house and parking lot.
Mrs. Skowron asked if the 10 ft. rear yard would be green space or if any would be used for
parking. Is staffs concern primarily because 10 ft. is less than ideal?
Julie Farnham stated that staff prefers to minimize the impact on residential property
whenever possible. She noted that while a video store is not a very intense use, the use
could change in the future.
Mr. Saviano thanked Mr. Kostak for the site plan which clearly indicates the variations
requested. He asked how staff felt about a 15 ft. rear yard and how far away the homes are
on the north.
ZBA-79-V-91
December 12,
1991
Page 4 of 5
Julie Farnham stated that they are at least 25 ft.; some may be 35-40 ft away. She also
stated that staff realizes this is a difficult site to develop and that there might be justification
for compromise, but would be looking for additional screening for compensation.
Mr. Cassidy acknowledged that while 5,000 sq. ft. may be the ideal store size, this site can't
accommodate the ideal.
Mr. Chickerneo stated that 5,000 sq. ft. is not ideal but workable. It is the minimum size
to make development economically feasible. He noted that to ensure business success, size
is critical. He further noted that the property will be owner -operated and not leased.
Mr. Lannon expressed concerns about a future change of use noting that B-4 zoning permits
much more intensive uses.
Mr. Chickerneo stated that he didn't foresee a quick change of ownership but agreed there
are no guarantees. Mr. Cassidy also expressed concern about the future development along
Euclid Avenue.
Mrs. Skowron stated that it is not the Board's purpose to redesign the plan and suggested
that a new plan which takes into consideration the concerns expressed, be brought back for
review at the next meeting, She also stated concerns about the lack of buffering between
the parking lot and the gas station site and potential traffic problems resulting from through -
access between lots. She also stated that she is not overly concerned about reducing the
rear setback if it will be green space, but would like to get closer to the ideal.
Mr. Chickerneo stated that the proposed plan is flexible and that his client was open to
suggestions. However, the site has many constraints, including easements on three sides,
whereas the adjacent property only has easements on two sides.
Mr. Lannon stated that the properties were owned by the same person who was involved
with the subdivision and creation of the easements. This property was purchased with the
existing easements in place.
Some discussion ensued on how to modify the plan to increase the setbacks without
significantly reducing the building size.
David Schien, 512 NaWATA expressed concerns about lot coverage variations in general, in
light of the Villages flooding problems.
Mr. Brettrager noted that the plan modifications suggested would reduce the lot coverage
from the 78% requested -possibly to below the 75% maximum allowed.
Chairman Basnik then entertained a motion to approve the following variations to
accommodate construction of a retail store and associated parking at 2016 East Euclid
Avenue:
ZBA-79-V-91
December 12, 1991
Page 5 of 5
1. Section 14.2102.B to allow a 5 ft. building setback from the interior side lot line.
2. Section 14.2102.0 to allow a 15 ft. building setback from the rear property line.
3. Section 14.2102.E to allow the parking lot to come as close as 0 ft. to the front
(south) and side (east) lot lines, and 10 ft. from the side (west) lot.
4. Section 14.2103 to allow a maximum of 78% lot coverage.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. Providing a six foot solid wood fence along the west property line as shown on the
submitted site plan.
2. Providing face brick on all building facades, as shown on submitted drawings.
3. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened, and not visible from the
ground.
4. Any security lighting which faces residential property consist of cut-off fixtures
(down -lighting).
5. No signage shall be allowed on the back side of the building.
6. Continuous hedge to be planted along the north property line to provide solid
screening adjacent to residential property.
Mr. Cassidy moved; seconded by Mr. Saviano.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Lannon, Saviano, Pratt, Cassidy, Brettrager, Skowron and
Basnik
NAYS: None
Motion carried by a vote of 7-0.
This recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for their consideration.
Julie Farnham,
Recording Secretary
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECI�
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: MCUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAIRMAN
FROM: JULIE FARNHAM, PLANNER
DATE: NOVEMBER 25, 1991
CASE NO.: ZBAr79-V-91
APPLICANT: RAY NAEGELE
ADDRESS: 2016 EAST EUCLID
LOCATION MAP:
77-
e�L
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION.
ZONING: B4
LOT SIZE: 18,165 sq.ft.
% COVERAGE: 78% proposed
FAX: N/A
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2
REQUEST
The applicant is requesting the following variations to accommodate construction of a retail
store and associated parking:
1. Section 14.2102.13 to allow a 0 ft. building setback from the interior side lot line. Code
requires 10 ft.
2. Section 14.2102.0 to allow a 10 ft. building setback from the rear property line. Code
requires 20 ft.
3. Section 14.2102.E to allow the parking lot to come as close as 0 ft. to the front lot line -
Code requires 30 ft. setback; and 10 ft. from the side lot line -Code requires 20 ft.
4. Section 14.2103 to allow 78% lot coverage rather than 75% as allowed by Code.
PLANNING AND ZOMNG COMMENTS A—ISM CONCERNS
Summary of application: The applicant is proposing to construct a 4,895 sq. ft. retail store
and required parking on this lot. As proposed, 24 parking spaces will be provided including
two handicapped stalls. Code only requires 20 spaces and one handicapped stall. The
building will be 14 ft tall and have face brick on all sides.
Because of the small size of the lot, several setback variations are requested for the building
and parking lot.
Surrounding Area Development and Potential Impact: The proposal is similar to one
presented to the Zoning Board of Appeals earlier this year. One of the primary differences
is that only one retail store will be created. The previous proposal included four stores (2
retail; 2 restaurants) within a similar -sized building.
The primary concern with the previous proposal was granting a substantial parking variation
without knowing specific tenant needs. The Zoning Board of Appeals approved the
proposal with some modifications to create more parking. However, the Village Board
ultimately denied the request, primarily due to uncertainty about parking demand for
restaurant uses and concern about overbuilding this lot.
Staff generally supported the previous request but had concerns about severely reducing the
perimeter yards, particularly adjacent to residential property. Staff has the same concerns
with this request. Following is a discussion of the individual variations requested:
The applicant is requesting a 0'-0" building setback adjacent to the service station.
A 10 foot sideyard is required by Code. Staff has several concerns with such a drastic
variation. First, building footings typically span at least 18" at their base. No part
of a footing can be located off-site. To accommodate the footings, staff suggests
providing a minimum setback of 2 feet. Second, staff notes that while the existing
gas station building is 20'-0" from the proposed new lot line, it is likely that future
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page
redevelopment of the gas station site would involve construction of a new building
potentially with a shallower setback. The adjoining gas station site is a rather small
corner lot, and any new construction would undoubtedly require variations. Allowing
the proposed retail store to be built 0'-0" or 2'-0" from the lot line, could limit the
feasibility of granting reasonable variations for redevelopment of the Mobil site, due
to separation requirements between buildings.
Staff believes a minimum of a 5 ft, setback should be maintained, so the proposed
use will not have any adverse impact on redevelopment potential of the Mobil site.
In addition, a 5 ft. utility easement was created along the east property line when this
lot was resubdivided earlier this year. The Development Code prohibits placing
permanent structures over an easement. A portion of the easement would have to
be vacated to construct the building over it. To increase the setback, staff suggests
shifting the building to the east. This would require elimination of parking spaces
#9-12, however, 20 spaces would still remain which meets Code requirements.
RIEFUN MOM
A 10 ft. rear setback is requested from the north property line for the 97.9 ft. length
of the building. Code requires 20 feet. Staff cannot support such a significant (50%)
reduction of the rear yard in this location. This property abuts 3 or 4 residential lots
and a 10 ft. rear yard would not provide an adequate buffer between a commercial
building and residential property.
Staff notes that the building will only be 14 ft. tall and will have face brick on all
sides. This will give the building a more residential scale and reduce the visual
impact on the neighbors. The building will have to be reduced in size to provide a
larger rear yard. It might be possible to make the building longer to minimize the
amount of square footage lost. The applicant should address the feasibility of a
smaller and/or reconfigured building.
The residents abutting this lot all have solid wood fences along their rear property
lines which will provide some screening. In addition, the applicant is proposing to
plant some trees in the rear yard. Staff notes that this meets the requirements of the
landscape ordinance for perimeter yard screening. However, the fences are on the
neighbor's property and may not always provide a continuous screen. Therefore, staff'
suggests that a hedge be planted along the fence to ensure continuous screening in
the future.
A 0'-0" setback is requested along the proposed east property line. This would allow
a direct connection between the proposed parking lot and the existing Mobil site.
Staff encourages the coordinated development of these lots, since they are both
relatively small. Staff also believes flow-thru circulation makes sense.
The front setback along Euclid Avenue tapers from 14 ft. to zero ft. at the narrowest
point. This results from the angled front lot line along Euclid Avenue. The zero ft.
setback is adjacent to the driveway 'opening onto Euclid Avenue. The area
immediately adjacent to the driveway must be free of any significant. landscaping in
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
Page 4
order to maintain unobstructed site lines. Staff feels adequate parking lot screening
can be achieved along the frontage, but parking space #8 should be eliminated to
provide additional landscape area between the sidewalk and the parking lot. The
dumpster area could be converted to a parking space and the dumpster relocated
near the building.
A 10 ft. setback is requested adjacent to residential property to the west. A 20 foot
setback is required by Code. The adjacent residential lot is oriented lengthwise along
Euclid Avenue. As such, ample sideyard setbacks exist. The garage is 16' from the
lot line. A shed exists between the garage and the lot line, providing some additional
separation between the parking lot and the neighboring home. The home is
approximately 40 ft. feet from the parking lot.
While this is a significant variation, 10 ft. provides adequate space for landscape
screening. Staff recognizes that this is a difficult site to develop. Providing
conforming setback would require significantly reducing the size of the building. This
could effect the development economics substantially, however, again the petitioner
should fully explain the absolute hardship in this instance.
Where parking lots abut residential property, landscape screening must be provided
which is at least 6 feet in height. The site plan shows that a six foot solid wood fence
will be installed along the west edge of the property. This will eliminate headlights
shining into the adjacent residential property. Natural landscape materials proposed
should also help improve the appearance.
4. Lot Coverage.
As proposed, the lot coverage is 77.7%, slightly over the maximum 75% allowed by
Code. Given the constraints of this small lot, staff does not believe this is a
significant variation and has no major objections to this request. However, sufficient
on-site detention will be required.
OTHER VILLAGE STAEECOMME
Some concerns were expressed regarding the variations including:
a. Detention must be provided on-site. Engineering notes that some water may be
stored on the parking lot surface. A grading/site engineering plan is required.
b. An access permit to Euclid Ave. must be obtained from the Cook County Hwy. Dept.
C. Utilities are available, however, permits must be obtained from Citizens Utility
Company and Cook County.
d. Public improvements on Euclid Avenue Right -Of -Way, including a sidewallc, street
lights, and parkway trees are required.
GH Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5
SUDIAYa=OMMENDAIM
Despite some significant variations, this is one of the best proposals the planning staff has
seen for this difficult site. A single retail tenant may be the most appropriate scale of
development for this small commercial property. As proposed, the required amount of on-
site parking can be provided. In addition, a small retial use will have less impact on
adjacent residences than other uses permitted in the B4 District.
Staff generally supports the proposal with the following exceptions:
1. A minimum 5' building setback should be provided from the proposed east property
line. This will increase the distance between existing and potential future buildings,
and will keep the drainage easement unobstructed as required by the Development
Code. The applicant should justify the need for the variance, including the feasibility
of reducing the size of the building or shifting it to the west to further increase the
building side setback.
2. A conforming 20 ft. building setback should be provided from the north property line.
This will buffer the encroachment of the 98 ft. long building from adjacent residents.
While the proposed video store may not have a significant impact on the adjacent
residents, the use could change in the future.
3. Eliminating parking space #8 to provide green area between the sidewalk and
parking lot. This parking space could be replaced by converting the dumpster area
to a parking stall and relocating the dumpster next to the building.
In addition, staff suggests approval of the request should be conditioned on:
- Providing a 5 ft. building setback from the east property line or vacating the portion
of the easement occupied by the proposed building.
- Providing a six foot solid wood fence along the west property line as shown on the
submitted site plan.
- Providing face brick on all building facades, as shown on submitted drawings.
. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened, and not visible from the ground.
- Any security lighting which faces residential property consist of cut-off fixtures (down -
lighting).
- No signage shall be allowed on the back side of the building.
- Continuous hedge to be planted along the north property line to provide solid
screening adjacent to residential property.
Approved:
David M. Clements, Director
CAF
1/14/92
1/30/92
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING VARIATIONS FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT, 2916 EAST EUCLID AVENUE
WHEREAS, Ray Naegele (hereinafter referred to as Petitioner) has
filed an application for variations from Chapter 14 of the Village
Code of Mount Prospect, Illinois, for property commonly known as
2015 East Euclid Avenue (hereinafter referred to as Subject
Property), legally described as:
Lot 2 in River -Euclid Resubdivision, being a Resubdivision of
Lot 1 in Mobil Oil Corp. subdivision of parts of the northeast
quarter and the southeast quarter of Section 25, Township 42
North, Range 11, East of the Third Principal Meridian,
according to plat thereof registered on September 13, 1985
with the Registrar of Titles of Cook County, Illinois, per
Document No. LR 43 62091 in Cook County, Illinois
and
WHEREAS, Petitioner seeks the following:
1. A variation from Section 14.2102.B to allow a 0 foot building
setback from the interior side lot line, instead of the
required 10 feet.
2. A variation from Section 14.2102.0 to allow a 10 foot building
setback from the rear property line, instead of the required
20 feet.
3. A variation from Section 14.2102.E to allow a parking lot to
come as close as zero feet to the front lot line, instead of
the required 30 feet; and 10 feet from the side lot line,
instead of the required 20 feet.
4. A variation from Section 14.2103 to allow 78% lot coverage,
instead of the permitted 75%.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the variation requested being
the subject of ZBA Case No. 79-V-91 before the zoning Board of
Appeals of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 12th day of
December, 1991, pursuant to due and proper notice thereof published
in the Mount Prospect Herald on the 26th day of November, 1991; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals has submitted its findings
and recommendation to the President and Board of Trustees of the
Village of Mount Prospect and the President and Board of Trustees
of the Village have given further consideration to the variations
being the subject of ZBA 79-V-91 and have determined that the best
interests of the Village of Mount Prospect would be served by
granting variations, as modified from the original request.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF
TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SECTION ONE: The recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated
herein as findings of fact by the President and Board of Trustees
of the Village of Mount Prospect.
SECTION TWO: The President and Board of Trustees of the Village
of Mount Prospect hereby grant to the Subject Property the
following:
1. A variation from Section 14.2102.8 to allow a five foot (51)
building setback from the interior side lot line, instead of
the required 10 feet.
ZBA 79-V-91
Page 2 of 2
2. A variation from Section 14.2102.0 to allow a fifteen foot
(151) building setback from the rear property line, instead
of the required 20 feet.
3. A variation from Section 14.2102.E to allow a parking lot to
come as close as zero foot (01) to the front lot line, instead
of the required 30 feet; and ten feet (101) from the side lot
line, instead of the required 20 feet.
4. A variation from Section 14.2103 to allow 78% lot coverage,
instead of the permitted 75%.
SECTION TffREE: That the variations granted herein are subject to
the following conditions:
1. A six foot (61) wood fence shall be installed along the west
property line, as shown on the site plan, a copy of which is
attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof as Exhibit "A".
2. Face brick shall be provided on all building elevations.
3. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened and not
visible from ground level.
4. Any security lighting that may be installed which faces
residential property shall consist of cut-off fixtures (down
lighting).
5. No signage shall be allowed on the back side of the building.
6. Continuous hedge shall be planted along the north property
line to provide solid screening adjacent to residential
property.
SECTION Fogg: Except for the variations granted herein, all other
applicable Village of Mount Prospect ordinances and regulations
shall remain in full force and effect as to the Subject Property.
SECTION FIVE,, In accordance with the provisions of Section 14.604
of Chapter 14 of the Village Code, the variations granted herein
shall be null and void unless permits are issued and construction
begins within one (1) year from the date of passage of this
Ordinance.
SECTION SI' This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from
and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form
in'the manner provided by law.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
PASSED and APPROVED this - day of 1992.
Gerald L. Farley
Village President
ATTEST:
Carol A. Fields
CAF/
1/29/92
ORDINANCE NO.
-• 14"t 4"MMEMA 01"Iffm
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SECTION ONE: That Section 18.2006 entitled "No Parking Any Time"
of Chapter 18 (Traffic Code) of the Village Code of Mount Prospect,
as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting therefrom "Maple
St. West Btw. 197 ft. and 370 ft. south of the south line of
Busse Ave.".
SECTION TWO: That Section 18.2006 entitled "No Parking Any Time"
of Chapter 18 (Traffic Code) of the Village Code of Mount Prospect,
as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting therefrom "Maple
St. East Btw. 135 ft. and 175 ft. south of the south line of
Busse Ave.".
SECTION THREE: That Section 18.2006 entitled "No Parking Any Time"
of Chapter 18 (Traffic Code) of the Village Code of Mount Prospect,
as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting therefrom "Maple
St. East Btw. 50 ft. to 200 ft. north of Evergreen St.".
SECTION FOUR: That Section 18.2008 entitled "Weekday Parking" of
Chapter 18 (Traffic Code) of the Village Code of Mount Prospect,
as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting therefrom "Maple
St. East 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. From point 240 ft. north of
Evergreen St. to Central Rd."
SECTION FIVE: That Section 18.2011.A entitled "Two Hour Parking"
of Chapter 18 (Traffic Code) of the Village Code of Mount Prospect,
as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting therefrom "Maple
St. East The first 50 ft. north of Evergreen Ave."
SECTION SIX: That Section 18.2011.B entitled "Two Hour Parking"
of Chapter 18 (Traffic Code) of the Village Code of Mount Prospect,
as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting therefrom "Maple
St. West Btw. Busse & Evergreen Aves., excluding the area from
a point 197 ft. south of the south line of Busse Ave., to a point
370 ft. south of south line of Busse Ave."
SECTION SEVEN: That Section 18.2005 entitled "No Stopping,
Standing or Parking" of Chapter 18 (Traffic Code) of the Village
Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, is hereby, further adding
thereto in proper alphabetical sequence the following:
Name of Side of Between
Street Street Hours of Description
Maple St. East At any time Btw. Northwest Hwy.
& Central Rd. 11
SECTION EIGHT: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and
Chapter 18
Maple Street
Page 2 of 2
effect from and I after its passage, approval and publication in
pamphlet in the manner provided bylaw.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
PASSED and APPROVED this day of
Gerald L. Farley
Village President
ATTEST:
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
1992.
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount -Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLA�GAGER
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE: JANUARY 27, 1992
SUBJECT: ZBA-78-V-91, DIMUCCI DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
LOCATION: 1710-84 GOLF RD. - MOUNT PROSPECT COMMONS SHOPPING CTP_
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation on
an application for variations filed by DiMucci Development Corporation. The applicant is
requesting the following variations to allow an existing parking lot to remain as constructed:
1. Section 14.2002.E to allow a 0 ft. interior sideyard setback. Code requires 10'.
2. Section 14.2003 to allow 83% lot coverage. Code allows 75%
Section 14.3014 to allow 214 parking spaces. Code requires 215 parking
spaces.
The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the request at their meeting of January 23, 1992.
At the meeting, Rick Filler and Anthony DiMucci provided evidence in support of the
request. Mr. Filler explained that the site plan had originally been approved with a 24 foot
landscaping area between the shopping center parking lot and Artemis Restaurant. During
construction, owners of Artemis indicated that the landscape separation fell within the area
of a lease agreement that the restaurant has with DiMucci Corporation, providing overflow
parking spaces. Mr. Filler stated that the landscape area was deleted as a result of this
lease agreement. Mr. DiMucci confirmed that the lease was entered into by his father, and
the company was not aware of the lease when the original site plan was prepared.
Dave Clements, Director of Planning, explained the variations and the details of the original
plan. He pointed out the lease area on a shopping center site plan. He explained that the
variations are necessary to allow the parking lot to remain as constructed. Mr. Clements
stated that, if the Zoning Board of Appeals recommended approval of the request, it was
suggested that a condition be included to upgrade plant stock at key locations on the
shopping center property.
The Zoning Board of Appeals discussed the request. Mr. Lannon and Mrs. Skowron
John Fulton Dixon
January 27, 1992
Page 2
believed that the landscape buffer could be moved west, to provide more green space. The
impact of this suggestions on existing parking was discussed, Mr. Saviano and Chairman
Basnik believed that staff could work with the petitioner to upgrade landscaping. They
could not support a reduction of parking spaces.
After discussion, it was the concurrence of the Zoning Board of Appeals that parking not
be reduced at the shopping center.
Accordingly, by a 5-1 vote, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommends approval of the
following variations:
1. Section 14.2002.E to allow a zero ft. interior sideyard setback.
2. Section 14.2003 to allow 83% lot coverage.
3. Section 14.3014 to allow 214 parking spaces.
This recommendation is subject to the petitioner working with staff to upgrade or replace
plant quality at the shopping center.
DMC:hg
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 78-V-91
Hearing Date: December 12, 1991 and
January 23, 1992
PETITIONER:
DiMucci Development Corporation
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
1710-84 Golf: Mt. Prosp. Commons Shop. Ctr.
PUBLICATION DATE:
November 26, 1991
REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting the following
variations to allow an existing parking lot to
remain as constructed: 1) Section 14.2002.E to
allow a 0 ft. interior sideyard setback instead
of 10 ft; 2) Section 14.2003 to allow 83% lot
coverage instead of 75%; 3) Section 14.3014
to allow 214 parking spaces instead of 215
parking spaces.
ZBA MEMBERS PRESENT:
Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ronald Cassidy
Peter Lannon
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
ABSENT: Richard Pratt
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: None
Chairman Basnik introduced the requestand asked for representatives of the petitioner.
Mr. Rick Filler from the DiMucci Company introduced himself to the Zoning Board and
stated that the request was filed in order to authorize changes that were made in the field
to the approved plan. Mr. Filler stated that a 24 foot landscape setback between the
Artemis Restaurant and the Village Commons Shopping Center was deleted due to a
supplemental lease agreement with Artemis Restaurant providing them with overflow
parking. Mr. Filler stated that the 24 foot landscape island was replaced by a single curbli�ne
in order to keep parking closer to the restaurant
David Clements, Director of Planning, presented a staff summary of the request. Mr.
Clements concurred that the original site plan for the Mount Prospect Commons Shopping
Center provided a 24 foot wide landscape buffer between the shopping center parking lot
and the Axten-ds Restaurant. He indicated that this area was paved during construction,
because part of, this landscape area was in the boundaries of the lease agreement that Mr.
ZBA-78-V-91
January 23, 1992
Page 2 of 4
Filler had referred to. He stated that the curbline that now separates the two parcels has
no landscaping and that the variations are necessary to allow the parking lot to remain as
constructed. Mr. Clements stated'that the variations include a zero foot interior sideyard
setback for the parking lot, a lot coverage variation to permit 83%, and a minor parking
variation of 1 space.
Mr. Clements continued and stated that the'Zoning Ordinance typically requires a 10 foot
setback for a parking lot, and that the approved plan, as indicated, provided a 24 foot
landscaped island. He indicted that removal of this landscaping island contributes to a lot
coverage factor, and that parking was also reconfigured as a result of this change. Mr.
Clements pointed out that the original 24 foot landscape buffer made an ideal separation
between the shopping center and the restaurant, however, it could not be provided at this
time because of the lease agreement with the management of Artemis. Mr. Clements noted
that overall the shopping center has good planter islands and buffering with adequate
landscaping and suggested that, should the Zoning Board of Appeals recommend approval
of this request, the petitioner work with staff to upgrade plant quality in several locations
on the shopping center property.
The Zoning Board of Appeals then generally discussed the request. Mr. Lannon noted that
the DiMucci Company ownss both of the parcels and that, in effect they had created the
problem for themselves.
Mrs. Skowron noted that she does not like the appearance of the two parldng lots abutting
each other at this key location near Golf Road. She indicated that it is necessary to design
for the maximum number of parking spaces but maybe this center does not need the
number that are required. She questioned if any spaces lost as a result of moving this
landscaping wound be significant. Mfrs. Sko%Ton and Mr. Lannon discussed the possibility
of moving the 24 foot landscape island to the west to provide some separation and buffer,
and asked Mr. Clements how many spaces might be lost.
Reviewing the site plan, Mr. Clements indicated that the 24 foot island would replace two
bays of parking with an estimate of 36 spaces lost. Mrs. Skowron stated that additional
landscaping at this location would enhance the corner.
Chairman Basnik asked the petitioner if they would be willing to work with staff on
upgrading the plant quality as indicated in the staff report.
,Mr. Anthony.:DiMucei introduced himself to the Zoning Board and stated that he would.
agree to upgrade landscaping as discussed, and he provided further background as to the
history of the lease arrangement. He stated that the lease was entered into by his father
and that the Company's files did not show this supplemental agreement. During
construction, the ownership of Artemis Restaurant pointed this out and Mr.. D1Mucci
attempted to modify the parking lot design to accommodate the lease.
ZBA-78-V-91
January 23, 1992
Page 3 of 4
Mrs. Skowron questioned the lot coverage and indicated that it would be her preference to
have more green space on the shopping center property, rather than upgrading the plant
stock. Mrs. Skowron and Mr. Lannon questioned Mr. Clements on the existing lot coverage
at the shopping center. Mr. Clements indicated that the 81% figure that is shown on the
staff report was a result of calculations done at the time that this application was filed. He
stated that staff went back and reviewed the original building permit in an attempt to find
calculations for the shopping center that were done at the time of permit approval. Mr.
Clements stated that there are no actual calculations for lot coverage in the permit file but
that calculations done with this application provide 81%.
Mr. Saviano noted that increasing green space at the shopping center would provide bonding
decrease in parking, and he was concerned at arbitrarily reducing parking. He suggested
that staff work with the petitioner on improvements to plant stock and upgrades. Mrs.
Skowron stated that she would rather review a parking variation than a lot coverage
variation for the property.
Mr. Lannon suggested that perhaps the application could be deferred so the petitioner and
staff could work on alternatives. Mr. Brettrager indicated that this would require a re-
publication to carry over the request. Mr. Saviano again noted that the Zoning Board was
making a recommendation to the Village Board and he believed it was appropriate for the
staff to work with the petitioner to present a plan to the Board.
Mr. Lannon believed that it was important that the Zoning Board express their opinion on
lot coverage to the Village Board, and pointed out that as best as he could recall there had
not been any lot coverage variations for commercial properties.
Mrs. Skowron again emphasized that she believed there should be some sort of buffer
between the two parking lots. ,
Mr. Clements then presented an overview of the landscaping islands on the property and
indicated that the spacing of the parking lot islands was appropriate throughout the site and
that only one possible place seemed to be available to provide additional green space. Mr.
Clements pointed out this location on the plan and stated it would result in a reduction of
14 parking spaces.
Chairman Basnik and Mr. Lannon both had a concern with taking away parking at the
location described by Mr. Clements and noted that peak parking at the restaurant often is
necessary at this location. Mr. Fuller noted that the spaces described by Mr. Clements are
fully utilized by the restaurant and evening hours and that it would not be reasonable to
provide landscaping at this point.
Chairman Basnik then indicated that he would prefer to bring this matter to a close at this
public hearing and requested a motion on the request.
ZBA 7&V-91
January 23, 1992
Page 4 of 4
Mr. Saviano moved that the Zoning Board of Appeals recommend rov l of a zero foot
interior sideyad setback, 53,0/c lot coverage and a parking variation of 1 space to the Village
Board subject to the petitioner working with staff to upgrade e or replace plant stock in the
shopping center as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Brettrager.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Lannon, Saviano Cassidy, Brettrager and Basnik
NAYS: Skowron
Motion carried by a vote of 5-1
This recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for their consideration.
Respectfully Submitted,
David M. Clements
ViAA AGE OF MOUNT-PROVELt
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAIRMAN
FROM:
JULIE FARNHAM, PLANNER
DATE:
DECEMBER 2, I"l
CASE NO.:
ZBA-78-V-91
APPLICANT:
DI MUCCI DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
ADDRESS:
1710-94 GOLF ROAD
MOUNT PROSPECT COMMONS SHOPPING CENTER
LOCATION MAP:
I
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: B-3 Business Retail and Service
LOT SIZE: Approximately 5.6 acres
% COVERAGE: 93%
F.A.R.: N/A
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
Page 2
The applicant is requesting the following variations to allow an existing parking lot to
remain as constructed:
1. Section 14.2002.E to allow a 0 ft. interior sideyard setback. Code requires 10 ft.
2. Section 14.2003 to allow 83% lot coverage. Code allows 75%
Section 14.3014 to allow 214 parking spaces. Code requires 215 parking spaces.
Summary of application: The site plan originally approved for Mount Prospect Commons
Shopping Center included a 24 ft. wide landscape buffer between the shopping center and
Artemis Restaurant parking lots. This area was paved during construction because part of
the landscaped area is within the boundaries of a lease agreement with Artemis Restaurant.
The agreement allows Artemis Restaurant to use this area for parking. The applicant states
that they were not aware that the boundaries of the lease area overlapped the shopping
center lot at the time the site plan was developed. As constructed, a curb separates the
restaurant and shopping center parking lots. The variations are necessary to allow the
parking lot to remain as constructed.
Surrounding Area Development and Potential Impact: Mount Prospect Commons Shopping
Center was constructed about two years ago. However, the parking lot was not constructed
in accordance with the approved plan. Following is a brief description of the variations
requested:
1. Emking lot setback, of zero feet from an interior lot line The Zoning Ordinance
requires a 10 ft. setback. The parking lot was constructed without any separation in
the pavement between Artemis Restaurant lot and the shopping center. A concrete
curb separates the two lots, however, one row of parking stalls for Artemis is actually
on the shopping center lot. These spaces are part of a lease agreement between
DiMucci and the restaurant.
The approved site plan indicated a 24 ft. wide landscaped buffer along the east
property line. However, this was never installed once it occupied space within the
boundaries of the lease agrement. The zero foot setback requested would allow the
parking lot to remain as constructed without the required 10 ft. separation between
the lots. Staff notes that while the properties are separate lots, they are both owned
by the DiMucci Company.
2. Lot =n1ge of 83%. The Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum of 75%. Upon
review of this application, staff determined that the property was developed at an
83% lot coverage. The 24 ft. landscape buffer would reduce lot coverage to 81%.
This additional paving should not substantially increase the amount of stormwater
run-off, but revised detention calculations should be submitted.
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
Page 3
Providing 214 parking 5p&m The Zoning Ordinance requires 215 spaces. Staff
notes that 214 spaces are available on-site. This is a minor variation and should not
adversely affect the parking supply for the shopping center.
Engineering and Inspection Services requests that "as -built" detention volume calculations
and engineering drawings be submitted for review. Engineering also noted that the
applicant might want to consider a shared access agreement between the two lots (Artemis
Restaurant and Mount Prospect Commons). However, staff notes that the applicant owns
both lots and there may not be any need for such an agreement unless one lot were sold to
another owner.
The originally approved 24 ft. landscape buffer would make an ideal separation between the
shopping center and the restaurant. However, this buffer cannot be provided due to the
lease agreement with Artemis. Provided that the petitioner adequately demonstrates the
restrictions of this lease agreement, staff has no objections to this request.
Overall, the shopping center has good planter islands and buffer with adequate landscaping.
Should the Zoning Board of Appeals recommend approval of the request, it is
recommended that the petitioner work with the staff to upgrade plant quality in several
locations. Also, as -built engineering drawings should be submitted for review as soon as
possible.
JF:hg
Approved:
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER hqA L
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE: JANUARY 27, 1992
SUBJECT: ZBA-3-V-92, STEVEN J. GALASSINI
LOCATION: 909 TOWER LANE
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation on
an application for a variation filed by Steven Galassini of 909 Tower Lane. The variation
was filed to allow a chimney to encroach 24 inches into a sideyard rather than the 18 inches
allowed by the Zoning Ordinance.
The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the request at their meeting of January 23. At
the meeting, Steven Galassini presented evidence in support of the request. He explained
that the variation would allow a 24 inch foundation for support of the two-story chimney,
and that this was better support than the 18 inches permitted by the Zoning Ordinance.
Dave Clements, Director of Planning, explained that this was a minor variation, and would
have no impact on the adjoining property.
The Zoning Board of Appeals generally discussed the request, and there were no serious
issues raised. It was noted that the adjoining property owner was not present to object to
the request.
Accordingly, by a 6-0 vote, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommends that the Village
Board approve a 24 inch encroachment into a sideyard at 909 Tower Lane, to allow
construction of a chimney.
DMC:hg
4„
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 3-V-92
Hearing Date: January 23, 1992
PETITIONER:
Steven L and Deborah F. Galassini
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
909 Tower Lane
PUBLICATION DATE:
January 11, 1992
REQUEST:
Variation of Section 14.1102.D.2 to permit a
chimney to encroach 24 inches into a required
side yard, rather than 18 inches as permitted by
the Zoning Ordinance.
ZBA MEMBERS PRESENT:
Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ronald Cassidy
Peter Lannon
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
ZBA MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Pratt
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: None
The petitioner, Steven, GalassK introduced himself to the Zoning Board of Appeals and
stated that the application was filed to allow a chimney to encroach 24 inches into a
required sideyard, rather than the 18 inches allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. He indicated
he would like to construct a fireplace in an existing family room, and that the 6 inch
variation is necessary to accommodate the foundation for the two-story fireplace chimney.
Mr. Clements then summarized the staff report for the Zoning Board of Appeals and
indicated that the Zoning Ordinance permits an 18 inch encroachment into a sideyard, and
that this request was filed to allow a 24 inch encroachment into the 6'-6" required sideyard.
He stated that the applicants are proposing to build a fireplace in an existing family room.
He stated that the family room is located behind the two -car garage of this two-story house.
Mr. Clements noted that the fireplace chimney would have no impact on surrounding
properties as the chimney would be located inside the line of an existing service walk on the
petitioner's property, and that this service walk seems to define the usable portion of the
sideyard. Therefore, Mr. Clements believed that there would be no impact on the
neighboring property. 'Mr. Clements also noted that the Inspection Service Department
pointed out that a 24" dimension for the foundation and chimney would allow the chimney
to be constructed without doing substantial modifications to the roof trusses to accommodate
ZBA-3-V-92
January 23, 1992
Page 2
the construction. Mr. Clements recommended approval of the request and concluded by
stating that in researching other suburban zoning ordinances, many communities allow a 24!'
encroachment, such as this, and that perhaps this is a change that should be examined.
The Zoning Board of Appeals then discussed the request and there were no mor concerns
or objections to the 6" encroachment Mr. Lannon asked if the petitioner had spoken with
the neighbor to the south, and Mr. Galassini indicated that they, had no objection, and
questioned why such a or item needed to go through a public hearing process. Mr.
Basnik asked if the chimney had a bend in the structure, and Mr. Galassini stated that it is
a straight vertical chimney.
Mr. Clements also indicated that this request would have to go to the Village Board for final
approval.
Mr. Lannon then moved that the Zoning Board of Appeals recommend approval of Case
No. ZBA-3-V-92 to allow a 24" encroachment into a required sideyard rather than 18". The
motion was seconded by Mr. Brettrager.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Brettrager, Cassidy, Lannon, Saviano, Skowron, Basnik
NAYS: None
The motion was approved by a vote of 6-0.
This recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for their consideration.
Respectfully Submitted,
60k /V1, co*yth�
DAVID M. CLE NTS
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK,
FROM:
DAVID M. CL.EMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE:
JANUARY 14, 1992
CASE NO.:
ZBA-3-V-92
APPLICANT:
STEVEN J. GALASSINI
ADDRESS:
909 TOWER LANE
LOCATION MAP:
L J7 809_
t; ORCHARD
=A
�811
en -0 o �jo o�o�o 310, nln n� zg13
iYM� N � N N N � ,
817 �� o o o� o o p ao n .t CN N
819 N0
SUNSETCN Ln In
.7
o N t
.. SUNSET
�f�
M901 ' 901'
o o
„„r� 900 I
-'
------ /400 , a 903 t ,
903' 05 902 m r-- - 9112
r
902 z , 905
905 904 0 0 904
907 90a� 907
907906 1 9 906
906 ---
ai g09' z
w , r - ' `909 1
---
909 908 ? �; 91 A �� 908 1 1 ti 908 - -"
91 t .910 9~��91 3 910 — { �"1
i1 913
913° 91 u �0*
" N ',31 ii fl�
P 'Q
917 914 TOWER DR ,
919 916 N< 1 C 00 rn M r wy
N N 'e N ON1 rn
921
uOUN4 PROSPECT CORP. "yXrS GOLF ;D
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: R-1 Single Family Residential
LOT SIZE: N/A
% COVERAGE: N/A
FAX: N/A
GH Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2
The petitioner is requesting a variation to allow a chimney to encroach 24" into a required
sideyard. Section 14.1102.D.2 allows a chimney to encroach IW into a required sideyard.
Summary of application: The applicants are proposing to building a fireplace in an existing
family room The family room is located behind the two -car garage. The fireplace chimney
would encroach 24" into the 6'-6" required sideyard, and project above the roof line of the
two-story house. The petitioner indicates that, because of foundation requirements for the
fireplace, and the need for the chimney to not impact the second story and eaves, the 6"
encroachment is necessary.
Impact on Surrounding Properties: The house is built at the minimum setback
requirement, as is the house to the south. The chimney would be located inside an existing
sidewalk. The sidewalk appears to help define the useable part of the required sideyard.
Therefore, it is not believed that the additional 6" encroachment would have any impact on
the neighboring structure.
DEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS
No major objections or comments were raised by other Village Departments. Inspection
Services points out that the 24" dimension would prevent the petitioner from modifying the
roof trusses to accommodate the chimney.
SINMAMIRECOMMEW)A330N
Staff recommends approval of this minor request. It should be noted that research into
our revised Zoning Ordinance finds many communities permit a 24" encroachment into a
required sideyard. We may took at such a change.
DMC:hg
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND Zoning Board of AppeabONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
JOHN F. DIXON, VII,AGER
FROM:
DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE:
JANUARY 27, 1992
SUBJECT-
ZBA4.V.92, MARC A. JENSEN
LOCATION:
106 NORTH EMERSON STREET
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation on
an application for a variation filed by Marc Jensen of 106 North Emerson. The application
was filed to reduce the 5 foot required sideyard to 2 1/2 feet to allow construction of a
detached two -car garage.
The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the request at their meeting of January 23. At
the meeting, Robert Jensen, father of the petitioner, presented information that his son
would like to construct the garage 2 1/2 feet from the lot line, in order to save usable rear
yard space on this 50 foot lot.
The Zoning Board of Appeals discussed the request. It was noted that it is reasonable to
reduce the sideyard for garages on 50 foot lots, to save rear yard area. It was also found
that the neighbors have a detached garage at a similar setback. However, this garage is on
the opposite lot line, so the structures will not be adjoining. This request should have no
impact on the neighbor's property.
Accordingly, by a 6-0 vote, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommends that the Village
Board approve a variation to reduce the 5 foot sideyard to 2 1/2 feet to allow a detached
garage to be constructed at 106 North Emerson Street.
DMC:hg
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 4-V-92 Hearing Date: January 23, 1992
PETITIONER: Marc A. Jensen
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
106 North Emerson Street
PUBLICATION DATE:
January 11, 1992
REQUEST:
Variation of the accessory structure standards
of Section 14.102.132 of Mount Prospect Zoning
Ordinance to permit a detached garage to be
constructed 2-1/2 ft. from a side lot line rather
than the 5 ft. required by the Zoning Ordinance.
ZBA MEMBERS PRESENT:
Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Robert grettrager
Ronald Cassidy
Peter Lannon
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
ZBA MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Pratt
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: None
Robert Jensen introduced himself to the Zoning Board of Appeals stating that he is
representing his son, Marc Jensen with this request. Mr. Jensen stated that the application
had been filed to allow a detached garage to be located 2 1/2 feet from a side lot line to
allow more yard space behind the existing house.
Chairman Basnik asked if there was any further testimony by the petitioner, and then asj ed
for the staff summary.
Mr. Clements summarized the request and indicated that the subject property is a typical
50 foot lot and that the proposal fora 2 1/2 foot sid'eyard is an effort to maintain as much
usable rear yard behind the home as possible on this narrow lot. He indicated that this is
not an unusual request and that there are a number of garages with reduced sideyards
throughout this particular neighborhood. He noted that there would be no impact on the
property to the north, as this property has a detached garage, but that, this structure is
located on the north lot line which is opposite of the location of the petitioner's garage. Mr.
Clements recommended approval of the request and stated that a garage is desirable and
that this is a characteristic that is often experienced on 50 foot lots.
ZBA-4-V-92
January 23, 1992
Page 2
Mr. Cassidy asked if the property currently had a garage, and Mr. Jensen stated that there
is no garage. He also added that this would be a two -car garage. Mr. Basnik noted that this
application is typical to many others that have: been bled on 50 foot lots, and asked Mr.
Clements about the adequate amount of si+eyard for such a structure. Mr. Clements
indicated that a 2 1/2' to 3' sideyard would allow access to the side of the structure for
maintenance and for any work under the eaves, for example.
Mr. Cassidy then moved that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve a 2 1/2 foot sideyard
at 106 North 'Emerson. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lannon.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Brettrager, Cassidy, Lannon, Saviano, Skowron, Basnik
NAYS: None
The motion was approved by a vote of 6-0.
This recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for their consideration.
Respectfully,
®1
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT"
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
1 201 200
GIL BASNIK, C RMAN
FROM:
DAVID NL CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE:
JANUARY 14, 1992
CASE NO.:
ZBA-4-V-92
APPLICANT:
MARC A. JENSEN
ADDRESS:
106 NORTH EMERSON STREET
Mrs
20
E201 2�60 -]
1 201 200
E THAYER 5T.
123
122,
123 122
117311106
117
116
21
118
119 120
118
115
114
119
117
117 116
113
112
115
14
113 114
ill
110
113
112
ill 112
10,
109
108
ill
109
10
10
ill 110
107
106
10 108
107
1 107 106
105
104
105
104
105 104
103
102
103
102
103 102
101
100
101
100
10 100
E. HENRY 3-r
23
24
23 22
23
16
2 21
22
21 20
1
18
21
19
14
11
20
1 9 16
17
71182
12
17
18
17
12
15
9
9
16
14
15 8
13
3
10
12
11 6
6
11
>1 11
8
7N
10
9
7
6
5N
6
1 4
5
5
5
3N
4
4
3
2�i
3
3
2
2
i
_
c. CENTRAtl 2D
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: R-1 Single Family Residential
LOT SIZE: 7,621 sq. ft.
% COVERAGE: 42%
F.A.R. : 0.17
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2
The applicant is requesting a variation to allow a detached garage to be constructed 2-1/2
ft. from a side lot line. Section 14.102.11 of the Zoning Ordinance requires a detached
garage to be 5 ft. from a side lot line.
Summary of application: The petitioner intends to construct a two -car detached garage in
their backyard. Presently, the house does not have a garage. The petitioner notes that a
conforming 5 fL sideyard would reduce the useable rear yard behind the house, by placing
the garage towards the middle of the 50 ft. wide lot.
Impact on Surrounding Properties: The property to the north abutting the garage location
has a detached garage, but it is located near the north lot line, away from the petitioner's
garage. The neighbor's garage is at a reduced setback, as are many detached garages on
50 ft. wide lots.
No major objections were raised by other Village Departments. Inspection Services notes
that information on grading and drainage will be necessary with the building permit.
Staff recommends approval of the request. A garage is desirable, and on a 50 ft. lot, we
frequently see sideyard variation requests in order to maximize useable yard space behind
the house. Reduced sideyards for detached garages are prevalent in this neighborhood, so
the request is consistent with existing conditions.
DMC:hg
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAG AGER
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DI CTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE: JANUARY 27, 1992
SUBJECT: ZBA-b-V-92, RICHARD AUER, (PROSPECT MOBIL)
LOCATION: 1500 NORTH RIVER ROAD
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation on
an application for a variation filed by Richard Auer, the operator of Prospect Mobil at 1500
North River Road. The application was filed allow to the construction of a self-service
canopy that would reduce the 30 foot front yard to 6 feet.
The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the request at their meeting of January 23. At
the meeting, Mr. Auer presented testimony in support of the request. He explained that he
would like to erect a canopy over existing pump islands. The canopy would provide lighting
and weather protection for self-service customers. The upright canopy supports would be
at the same location as the pump islands, but that the edge of the canopy would project to
within 6 feet of the front property line. However, the canopy would be 14'-6" above grade.
The Zoning Board of Appeals discussed the request, and noted that the canopy and its
supports would not cause a sight -line problem for traffic leaving the station and entering
River Road. The Zoning Board of Appeals also noted a similar request recently approved
at 2020 Euclid.
Accordingly, by a 6-0 vote, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommends that the Village
Board approve a variation to reduce the 30 foot front yard to 6 feet to allow the
construction of a canopy.
DMC:hg
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 6-V-92 Hearing Date: January 23, 1992
PETITIONER: Richard Auer, Prospect Mobil
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1500 North River Road
PUBLICATION DATE: January 11, 1992
REQUEST: Variation of Section 14.2002 of Mount Prospect
Zoning Ordinance to reduce the 30 ft. required
front yard to 6 ft. to allow the installation of a
self-service canopy over existing gasoline pumps.
ZBA MEMBERS PRESENT: Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ronald Cassidy
Peter Lannon
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
ZBA MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Pratt
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: None
Mr. Richard Auer introduced himself to the Zoning Board of Appeals as the petitioner with
this case, and stated he is the operator of the Mobil Station at 1500 North River Road. Mr.
Auer indicated that he would like to construct a self-service canopy over the existing pump
islands at his station to provide convenience for customers and weather protection as well
as increase lighting. He stated that the canopy would project into the required front yard
on River Road.
Mr. Clements then summarized the staff report and indicated that the location of the pumps
dictates the final location of the canopy and necessitates the variation. He stated that the
upright canopy supports will be located 17 feet from the front lot line, but that the edge of
the canopy will be 6 feet from the front lot line on River Road. Mr. Clements stated that
the gas station is non -conforming as to setbacks and lot coverage and that the canopies will
not contribute to any additional stormwater ran -off. He indicated that the vertical canopy
supports will not block visibility of the River Road traffic as automobiles exit the gas station,
and that the canopy 14'-6" above grade will also not create a sight -line problem. Mr.
Clements stated that the canopy will upgrade the facility and provide weather protection for
customers, and that the staff would recommend approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals. -
He also noted that this is similar to a case recently approved by the Zoning Board at 2020
Euclid Avenue.
ZBA-6-V-92
January 23, 1992
Page 2
The zoning Board of Appeals then discussed the request, and Mr. Cassidy asked if there
W. Brettrager noted that the operator of the station had made some improvements recently
and he urged them to continue. He stated that railroad timbers and planters had been
installed at the station to improve the appearance.
There being no further discussion, Chairman Basnik asked for a motion on the request. Mr.
Brettrager moved that the Zoning Board of Appeals recommend approval of a variation to
allow a canopy to be located 6 feet from the front lot line on River Road. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Cassidy.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Brettrager, Cassidy, Lannon, Saviano, Skowron, Basnik
NAYS: None
The motion was approved by a vote of 6-0.
This recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for their consideration.
Respectfully Submitted,
NW14 M. uhnp�t�-
DAVID M. CLEMENTS
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PtANNMG AND ZONWG DEPARTWNT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAT -
FROM:
DAVID NL CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE:
JANUARY 14,1992
CASE NO.:
ZBA-6-V-92
APPLICANT:
RICHARD AUER, (PROSPECT MOBIL)
ADDRESS:
1500 NORTH RIVER ROAD
LOCATION MAP:
t-�
�v Cq 61 172IJ
0
WOODAEW
Fir rl�*l 1612
1613
04, "4, N 1608 1611
0
1609
0
1509
rc
1507
1505 SL
1503 0 C04 10)
6 0 0 4
1501
F CAMP WC DONALD
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: B-3 Business Retail Sales & Service
LOT SIZE: I50'x1251 = 18,750 sq. ft.
% COVERAGE: no change - existing non -conformity
F.A.R.: N/A
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2
The applicant is requesting a variation to reduce the 30 ft. required front yard of Section
14.2002 to 6 ft. to allow the installation of a canopy over existing gasoline pumps at 1500
North River Road.
Summary of application: The location of the pumps dictates the canopy location, and
necessitates the variation. The upright canopy supports will be located at the same 17 ft.
setback as the pump islands, but the edge of the canopy will be 6 ft. from the front lot line
on River Road.
Impact on Surrounding Properties: The gas station is non -conforming as to setbacks and
lot coverage. The lot is entirely paved, so the proposed canopies will not contribute to
additional lot coverage. As stated, the canopy support columns will be at the same 17 ft.
setback as the pump islands. These vertical support columns will not block visibility of
River Road traffic as automobiles exit the gas station. In addition, the bottom of the canopy
will be 14'-6" above grade, also not blocking visibility.
No comments were received by other Village Departments.
The proposed canopy will upgrade the facility and provide weather protection for customers.
Staff recommends approval of the request, as the encroachment into the front yard does not
block visibility, and there is no reasonable way to construct the canopies to meet the 30 ft.
setback requirement. Also, the case is similar to canopies approved in September at 2020
Euclid Avenue. Lastly, the petitioner should note the signage on the canopies needs to be
checked for compliance with the Sign Ordinance.
DMC:hg
CAF/
1/30/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18 (TRAFFIC CODE)
OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SECTION ONE: That Section 18.2015.A entitled "Parking Meter Zones"
of Chapter 18 (Traffic Code) of the Village Code of Mount Prospect,
as amended, is hereby further amended by adding thereto, in proper
alphabetical sequence the following; so that hereinafter Section
18.2015.A shall include:
of District or Stregt Description
North Wille Street Lot The area lying on the west side South
Wille St. approximately 110 ft. south
of Central Rd. it
SECTION TWO: That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect
from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet
in the manner provided by law.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
PASSED and APPROVED this
ATTEST:
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
day of
Gerald L. Farley
Village President
a
, 1992.
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE: JANUARY 29, 1992
SUBJECT: NTN SIGNS - 1600 BISHOP COURT
I thought I would provide staff comments on the NTN sign matter that should be reviewed
by the Village Board along with the Sign Review Board recommendation. Please note that
this includes details on the reasons for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) amendment,
and the role of the Sign Review Board.
1. NTN, through Federal Sign, did contact staff to obtain information on sign
requirements. They were advised of all regulations from the Sign Ordinance.
2. The Sign Ordinance does not specifically prohibit signs from being installed on a
berm. Sign height is measured from "finished grade", which is defined as "elevations
or contours resulting from excavation or filling....".
3. Federal Sign submitted permits that provided for signs that complied with the Sign
Ordinance. The permit was reviewed, but staff did not note the existing berm when
reviewing the permit. However, no topographic information was provided to indicate
a sign location on the berm from the sign contractor.
4. Federal Sign installed the two freestanding signs prior to the permits being issued.
Federal Sign states that they were given a verbal approval.
5. After installation of the signs, staff observed the location on the berm and chose not
to issue the sign permit.
6. Staff was concerned about signs on the berms. There are no other signs on the berm
along Kensington Road, and staff believes the purpose of the berm was for
landscaping. Regardless of being allowed by the Sign Ordinance, staff believed an
interpretation should be made that would prevent additional signs from being
installed on the berm by any adjoining business.
7. The Annexation Agreement has expired. However, it included wording that "the
entire perimeter.... will consist of landscaped berms or landscaping, or both, to provide
visual and noise barriers from the surrounding residential areas."
John Fulton Dixon
Page 2
January 29, 1992
8. The NTN building was developed as a PUD. We reviewed the PUD Ordinance, site
plan and minutes. The site plan did not show signs on the berms. The minutes
include a statement by a representative of OPUS that "the berm would be maintained
in its present fashion." NTN believes that the maintenance referred to pertains to
maintaining the landscaping. The tape of the public hearing includes discussion
about a large development sign that has been removed, but does not include any
mention of permanent signs on the berms.
9. Staff, with the concurrence of the Village Attorney, took a conservative approach and
advised NTN that the PUD would need to be amended to allow signs on the berm,
inasmuch as signs are not included on the original PUD site plan. This was done so
any action to allow signs on the berms would be limited to this property, and not
applicable to other businesses adjoining the berm, as they are not part of a PUD.
10. Because staff believes the original purpose of the berms was a landscape buffer, we
felt like we did not want the Sign Ordinance to allow signs on berms at Kensington
Center. The PUD amendment was the best way to review the matter on a case by
case basis.
11. The PUD amendment was reviewed by the Sign Review Board as they have been
authorized by the Village Board to consider sign matters. While this approach is
different than the Zoning Board of Appeals reviewing a PUD amendment, staff
believes it was the proper way to consider the request. This is consistent with the
recently approved PUD for the Courtesy Home Center, where a PUD condition
recommended by the Zoning Board and approved by the Village Board delegates
sign approvals to the Sign Review Board.
12. NTN concurs with our concerns about other businesses wanting signs on the berms,
but they believe they need corporate identification at this location.
13. NTN believes that lowering the signs from 12 feet in height to 7.8 feet helps reduce
the scale of the signs on the berm, and is sensitive to the situation. NTN points out
that they are across the street from a church and park, and not a single family area.
14. Staff recommends approval of the NTN proposal. This compromise helps resolve
the question of whether the Sign Ordinance or the PUD takes precedence in the
matter.
DMC:hg
Vi.t,AGE OF MOUNT PROSPEC
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER qtL.,,
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE: - DECEMBER 31, I"l
SUBJECT: SIGN -21-91,1600 BISHOP COURT
AMENDMENT TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE #3777
The Sign Review Board transmits for your consideration, their findings on a request for an
amendment to PUD Ordinance #3777. The application was filed by NTN Bearing for their
property at 1600 Bishop Court, and seeks approval of two freestanding signs on the
perimeter berms along Kensington and Wolf Roads.
The Sign Review Board reviewed the request at their meeting of December 16. At the
meeting, Attorney David Freeman presented information for the petitioner. The attorney
explained that NTN needs freestanding signs for proper identification, and that their sign
contractor had contacted the Village to obtain information about sign permit requirements.
The sign permit had been submitted and was being processed, and the sign contractor
proceeded with the sign installation.
Mr. Freeman explained that the signs were 12 feet in height, meeting the requirements of
the Sign Ordinance, but that NTN is proposing to reduce the sign height to 7.8 feet in order
to reduce the scale of the signs on the berms. Also, the base of the sign would be modified
with materials to match the color of the building. The attorney also pointed out that the
NTN property is across the street from a church and a park and that the signs would not
be visible to any nearby homeowners.
Director of Planning and Zoning Dave Clements explained that after the two signs were
installed, staff noted the actual location on the berms and determined that the permit could
not be issued. Mr. Clements pointed out that this property was developed as a PUD, and
that the approved site plan did not depict signs on the berms. Staff believed that the PUD
should be amended in order for the signs to remain on the berms. Mr. Clements also
explained that the Sign Ordinance does not prohibit signs on berms, nor was this addressed
in the original annexation agreement, He stated that the staff believed that the proposal
by NTN was reasonable, but there was concern about additional signs on the berm west
along Kensington Road. Mr. Clements pointed out that the PUD Ordinance, including signs
on the berms, would be specific for this property, so action to allow the signs would not be
applicable to other properties.
John Fulton Dixon
Page 2
December 31, 1991
The Sign Review Board generally discussed the request. There was discussion about the
overall sign height from curb level and the impact of signs on the berm. The Board also
questioncd how visible the proposed sign height would be considering the mature
landscaping. Mr. Borrelli and Mr. Rogers were concerned about signs on the berms, and
the original intent of the berms to provide only landscaping. Mr. Kostak and Ms. Thulin
believed that perimeter signs were appropriate at this comer location due to difficult access
to the Office building. Also, Mr. Kostak noted that lowering the signs was sensitive to the
location, and that the PUD ordinance including signs would not be applicable to other
properties.
Accordingly, by a 2-2 vote, the Sign Review Board refers this matter to the Village Board
without a recommendation for the final decision of the Village Board.
DMC:hg
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT SIGN REVIEW BOARD
December 16, 1991
CALL TO ORDER.
The meeting of the Sip Review Board (SRB) was called to order by Chairperson Adelaide
Thulin at 7:33 p.m. Monday, December 16, 1991 at the Village Hall, 100 South Emerson
Street, Mount Prospect, Illinois.
0111AXW
Members of the SRB present: Warren Kostak, Thomas Borrelli, Richard Rogers, and
Chairperson Adelaide Thulin. Absent: Hal Predovich. Also present. Eric Rasmussen,
Attorney David Freeman, and Anita Frances of NTN Bearing; Chuck Pasco of Federal Sign;
Ron Cassidy and Pete Lannon of the Zoning Board of Appeals; Laura McWhirt; Attorney,
Bob Doig representing Charlie Club; Dave Clements, Planning and Zoning Director for the
Village, and Kenneth Fritz, Economic Development Director.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
The minutes for the meeting of November 11, 1991 were considered for approval. The motion
was made by Mr. Borrelli, seconded by Mr. Kostak to approve the minutes as submitted.
The motion passed 4 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent.
SI!QN-8-91, Rouse-Randburg "2 North Fjmhurit Road
Rouse-Randhurst request an increase in height of two proposed freestanding signs from a
12 feet maximum height to 22 feet and 26 feet respectively was continued to allow the
petitioner time to develop the technical data in support of an electronic message center for
one of the freestanding signs proposed to be located adjacent to Elmhurst Road. This case
was continued until January 6, 1992.
SIGM-21-91, NTN Bearing CorWration of Ameriga, I(M East BishQg Coull
NTN is seeking an amendment to the Special Use Ordinance No. 3777 to allow two
freestanding identification signs, reducing the height from 12 feet to 7.8 feet and changing
the color and/or the material of the sign base to dark brown or brick to match the building.
The NTN building was constructed as part of a Planned Unit Development. The approved
PUD site plan for the site did not include signs on the berms, therefore the staff directed
NTN to seek an amendment to the PUD through the Sign Review Board process before a
determination is made to allow the signs to remain on the berms.
Background
Permit applications depicting the sign location were submitted and reviewed by staff.
However, no details indicating a berm were on the permit drawing. The signs were installed
Sip Review Board Minutes
Page 2
prior to the permits being issued and the staff became aware of the actual location on the
elevated berm adjacent to Kensington Road and Wolf Roads.
in the Kensington Center for Business, all freestanding signs are located on interior roads
throughout the development. However, identification signs from the business park are located
at the main entrances. The NTN building, with access from an interior cul-de-sac (Bishop
Court) is located on the comer lot at Wolf and Kensington. Because of the location on two
intersecting arterial streets, NTN believed that the signs on the perimeter of the site were
appropriate for identification and visibility.
Staff met with representatives from NTN and explained that the landscaped berms of
Kensington Center are designed to buffer the park from adjoining residential areas, and
that signs on the hems were
ideparturefr
o"
this original in
tent'Another additional concern
oft regardingthe signs �n the bes was that
other
properties along Kensington Road
might esirage on the ens for additional
identification, even though their main entrances
on the interior
road systn had identification signs.
NTN Presentation
= A
00=- —
Special Use
Mew the identification Sips indicaung thit 11TA-bearing c
Federal sign instaU twofreestanding sips on their property at the southwest comer of
Kensington and Wolf in the Kensington Center for Business.
9--1 01n1hq surroundi two identification
1#11
Staff Recommendation
After careful evaluation of the proposed modification to the freestanding signs on NTN's
property, the staff feels that the solution offered by NTN to lower the sips by 4.2 feet in
height and to change the sip base in color or material, is a realistic solution to the need
for identification signs on the property. This change in the identification sip would bring
the signs closer in size to the profile of the typical identification sip for the properties in
the Kensington Center for, Business, and be supported by staff. Any action to amend the
PUD would be brought before the Village Board with a decision from the Sip Review Board
relative to signage on the property. Any action on this particular amendment would apply
to this property only and would not apply to other properties, along Kensington Road without
additional PUD approvals. The proposal by NTN is sensitive to the matter of signage on
their berms yet provides the company with important corporate identification. It should be
noted that the restrictive covenants. of Kensington Center for Business do not allow wall
signage as a means of identification.
Sip Review Board Minutes
Page 3
Comments from Commissioners
Mr. Rogers indicated that the berm is elevated above the roadway more than shown on the
plan. Mr. Fritz indicated that in checking the plans for landscaping and the plans for
construction of the roadway improvements at the intersection of Wolf and Kensington, there
is a 5 foot differential in elevation from the top of curb to the top of the berm as shown
on plans on file, but explained that there may be a difference from the grades shown on the
plans and the "as built" conditions.
Mr. Borrelli stated that there was no reason why the signs should be permitted to remain
on the berms since the berms were intended to protect the residential areas to the north across
Kensington Road from the development in Kensington Center.
Adelaide Thulin felt that the signage was needed given the layout of the property and the
fact that the entrance location off of Bishop Court was difficult to find from the interior road
system. Mr. Kostak felt that the proposal to lower the signs on the berms by NTN was a
reasonable solution so long as the special use PUD would only affect this property and
recognize the unique problems presented for identification to this site from an interior cul-
de-sac.
Other Comments
Peter Lannon, member of the Zoning Board of Appeals, and a resident in the area to the
north of Kensington indicated that residents had contacted him stating their concerns about
the freestanding signs that were erected by NTN on the berms, particularly, the one located
on the berm adjacent to Kensington Road. He further stated that Opus made the statement
at the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting that no signs would be installed on berms, and that
the only signs to be permitted would be the "Kensington Center for Business" monument signs
at the main entrances. He also stated that improved/larger interior road signage might
well be needed to give better identification for NTN. He urged the Sign Review Board to
deny the request for the Special Use for signage and thought that the Sip Review Board
was being asked to disregard the earlier principles for screening the office park development
from the neighboring residential areas. Mr. Ron Cassidy, member of the Zoning Board of
Appeals appeared and indicated that he had also heard from neighbors in the area objecting
to the freestanding signs on the perimeter berms. He indicated that the landscaping was
recommended by the Zoning Board of Appeals and approved by the Village Board and that
the landscaping plans did not call for any signage.
Mr. Clements stated that the site plan submitted by the sign contractor did not indicate
signage on top of berms. He also indicated again the difficult access/visibility problems that
NTN experiences having their main entrance on an interior cul-de-sac roadway.
Motion
Mr. Warren Kostak made a motion to approve the proposed modification in height and change
in the color or material of the sign base provided that the Village Board be alerted to the
Special Use Ordinance with the recognition that this proposed amendment to the Sign PUD
Sign Review Board Minutes
Page 4
PH I I, M. 6=4 rTs 5 M# 17T�MINXVXVI t
Mr. Spyrakos, owner, is seeking a special use equity option to permit an existing freestanding
identification sign of 72 square feet instead of the maximum sign area of 50 square feet when
located within 100 feet of a residence district. The present sip is 35 feet high and would
be reduced to 12 feet in height if the request for the increased sip area is approved. Mr.
Spyrakos intends to use the same location for the sip base. The main panel of the existing
freestanding sip. is 72 square feet in area is located at the top of the 35 foot freestanding
sign. He proposes to lower this sign to 12'feet and utilize the existing 72 square foot panel
as the only freestanding identification for the shopping center.
Mr. Spyrakos is willing to stipulate that the wall signage on the strip shopping center not be
increased over the present approximately 600 square feet of signage. The total of maximum
signage permitted on this site, including wall and freestanding signs, is approximately 1,100
square feet. The wall signage represents roughly 61% 1 of the total permitted sip area for
the property, The Pizza Hut is located on the same parcel of land but leased by Mr. Spyrakos.
We anticipate receiving a request from the Pizza Hut Company for a second sip to conform
to our Ordinance. This matter will be pursued separately by the Pizza Hut organization.
The Sip Review Board reviewed the request and statements made by Mr. Spyrakos regarding
his request to lower the sip and to maintain the sip at 72 square feet instead of 50 square
feet maximum.
Motion
A motion was made by Mr. Rogers, seconded by Mr. Borrelli, to approve the sip request
subject to a stipulation that no new additional wall signage be added. The motion to approve
passed 4 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m. _
Economic Development
Viu AGE OF MOUNT PROSPEIL
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: ADELAIDE THULIN, SIGN REVIEW BOARD CHAIRPERSON '2,
FROM: KENNETH H. FRIT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: DECEMBER 11, 1991
SUBJECT: SIGN -21-91, NTN BEARING CORPORATION OF AMERICA
LOCATION: 1600 EAST BISHOP COURT
The petitioner seeks an amendment to Special Use Ordinance #3777 to modify two (2)
freestanding identification signs by reducing the height from 12 ft. to 7.8 ft and changing
the color and/or material of the sign base to dark bronze or brick to match the existing
office building.
NTN Bearing Corporation installed two freestanding signs on their property at the southwest
comer of Kensington and Wolf in the Kensington Center for Business. It should be
explained that the company's sign contractor submitted permit applications depicting the
sip locations, and these applications were reviewed by staff. However, the detail of the
berm was not on the permit drawing. The signs were installed prior to the permits being
issued, and staff became aware of the actual location on the berm.
The building at 1600 Bishop Court was constructed as part of a Planned Unit Development
(P.U.D.). The approved P.U.D. site plan did not include signs on the berms, so staff
believes that Sip Review Board action is necessary to allow the signs to remain on the
berms.
In the Kensington Center for Business, all freestanding signs are located on the interior
roads throughout the development. However, identification signs for the business park are
located at the main entrances. The NTN building, with access from Bishop Court, is a
comer lot at Wolf and Kensington. Because of this location on two arterial streets, NTN
believes signs on the perimeter of the site are appropriate for identification and visibility.
In meeting with representatives of NTN, staff explained that the landscape berms of
Kensington Center are designed to buffer the park from adjoining residential areas, and that
signs on the berms was a move away from this original intent.
Adelaide Thulin - Page 2
December 11, 1991
SIGN -21-91
An initial concern of staff regarding the signs on the berms is that other properties along
Kensington Road might seek signage on the berms for additional identification.
After careful evaluation of the proposed modification to the freestanding signs on NTN's
property, the staff feels that the solution offered by NTN to lower the signs by 4.2 feet in
height and to change the sign base in color or material is a realistic solution to the need for
identification signs on the property. This change in the identification sign would bring the
signs closer in size to the profile of the typical identification sip for other properties in the
Kensington Center for Business and would be supported by the Village staff.
Ibis P.U.D. action to allow the signs would be for this property only, and would not be
generally applicable to other properties along Kensington Road, without additional M.D.
approvals. The proposal by NTN is sensitive to the matter of signage on the berms, yet
provides the Company with important corporate identification.
Lastly, staff would recommend approval of the reduced sip height for the NTN freestanding
signs, with a sip base of brick to match the building.
KHF:hg
Mount Prospect Public Works Department
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Village Manager
FROM: Director Public Works
DATE: January 28; 1992
SUBJECT: Replacement of Water System Control Panel
A memorandum dated January 2, 1992 outlined our request to up-
grade and replace our water system control panel software and
related hardware. The system currently in place is seven years
old, we have exceeded the capacity of the software, and the
computer hardware has failed on numerous occasions over the past
year. The hardware for our computer is no longer manufactured
and when our system fails, we rely on securing used parts from
other communities whose systems have been replaced.
The software of the new system as proposed has extra capacity,
which would enable us to program all our water system controls
and alarms and our sewage lift station operations. The new soft-
ware is IBM compatible, thus offering us flexibility in select-
ing hardware and would give us many years' service without the
pressing need to replace equipment. The proposed system would
give us the option of making program changes by our staff, which
would result in savings of time and money.
The water system control panel is very important to the opera-
tion of our water system. when we began receiving water from
Lake Michigan, there were several changes we had to make in our
operations to accept the delivery of water. For example, the
water agency stipulates that members must have minimum storage
capabilities to meet peak demands. At about noon every day, we
call the water agency's main pumping station and place our order
for water over the next 24-hour period. our computer shows us
how much water has been depleted from our storage tanks, and we
add to that our estimated requirements. If our combined esti-
mate is six million gallons, we would receive that amount of
water spread over a 24-hour period. During peak demand times,
the computer activates the high service pumps at out storage
reservoirs to draw water out in order to maintain, volume and
pressure. The computer is programed to activate special valves
which refill those reservoirs during off-peak hours. -
All of our pumpingstationswere built and operating prior to
the Village's receiving Lake Michigan water. Each facility has
a water storage reservoir ranging in capacity from 840,000 to
two million gallons, and each reservoir has two or more high
service pumps, which draw the water from the storage tank and
pump it into the distribution system at a set pressure.
An integral part of each pumping station is our artesian wells.
Prior to our obtaining Lake Michigan water, each of these wells
pumped from 800 to 1,550 gallons of water per minute from under-
ground aquifers to fill our reservoirs and meet the system de-
mands. When we applied for our Lake Michigan water allocation
from the Division of Waterways, we were'allowed to maintain some
of our existing wells for emergency or standby use. We did
abandon four deep and two shallow wells plus a 250,000-gallon
concrete reservoir. The remaining five wells are test-pumped an
a quarterly basis and are maintained for standby use. We have
spent no money on maintenance of these wells other than minimal
labor and energy costs for test pumping.
In August of 1988, the main transmission line for the JAWA water
agency was shut down due to a water main break, but we were able
to provide uninterrupted water service to our residents by ut7
lizing these wells. Within the past month, there was a mechani-
cal problem at the main agency station and again water supply
service from the agency was interrupted.
During the summer months, when there is a heavy draw on the
water agency's water supply, member communities do not receive
an unlimited supply just for the asking; they are only required
to supply us with 1.8 times our normal usage on any given day.
For the past couple of years, the Chicago area has experienced
drought conditions periodically and, on several occasions, we
were close to operating our wells in order to meet demand:
Thege wells serve as our water insurance or backup system.
Their existence was a factor that earned us our highly favored
fire rating and, if we were to abandon these wells, we would run
a risk of water shortages in critical times. These wells repre-
sent an investment of between. $500,000 and $1 million. each. It
abandoned, very minimal salvage money would be realized, plU.% we
would then be required to spend thousands of dollars plugging
them.
Although our request is for the replacement of a water system
control panel, this computer and associated hardware serve other
needs of the department as well. All our sewage lift and relief
station operations are continuously being monitored, as well as
equipment in the basement of the Village Hall. our pump opera-
tor drives a minimum of 22 miles and spends approximately two
hours daily to physically inspect each of the facilities we moni-
tor. With the operation of the computer, we are able to re-
trieve information in a matter of minutes and correct some opera-
tional problems by remote. For example, in the event of an
alarm condition for chlorine, our operator is made aware of a
potentially dangerous situation before he arrives at the station
and is instructed to contact the Fire Department for assistance
if necessary.
The following is also worthy of review in conjunction with a
decision to replace our computer system.
1) Question: What warranties or guarantees did we receive
with the original purchase?
Answer: The contract was awarded in September 1984, with
the equipment, including hardware and software, being deliv-
ered and installed January 1985. Terms of the contract
called for a five-year maintenance/guarantee on all equip-
ment, parts, labor and software. This expired January
1990. If the new ProSoft software and associated hardware
are approved for purchase, the hardware will carry a stan-
dard one-year parts and labor warranty. However, given the
fact that the software is totally user expandable, it is
probable to have its continued use for up to twenty years.
2) Question: Can the existing software be installed in a new,
larger -capacity Intel computer?
Answer: Yes. However, Acquatrol does not recommend it
and, even though we would have the extra capacity, we would
still need Aquatrol to make any changes to the configura-
tion on additions to the program. Two of the changes we
had Aquatrol make were the addition of the chlorine moni-
tors and system demand monitors. These two changes cost
the Village in excess of $10,000. The new ProSoft water
control system software that we are proposing to purchase
from Aquatrol is completely expandable and programmable by
the operator and is IBM compatible.
In addition to the. limitations our existing computer impos-
es onus, the control monitor that supports that computer
is obsolete and no longer available. In the past two
years, we have purchased three replacement monitors, one
new and two used, and we did try other monitors but our
current software will not recognize any other type of moni-
tor.
Two weeks ago, the system again went down and fortunately
we were able to obtain parts from the City of St. Charles'
old hardware system. They were one of the original purchas-
ers of the software in 1984/85 and have since upgraded to
the new system.
3) Question: Who are the other users of the proposed software?
Answer: The following agencies currently use the new soft-
ware and are extremely satisfied with its expanded benefits:
Great Lakes Naval Base Northwest Water Commission
Park Ridge Arlington Heights
Bartlett Brookfield Water Commission
Hoffman Estates Bedford Park
Freeport Orland Park
Hinsdale Sanitary District St. Charles
Northlake Glendale Heights
* These communities originally had the same software we
are currently using but, because of similar problems,
have upgraded to the new ProSoft system.
In summary, I feel that the present computerized water control
system has been a cost-saving improvement to the village. The
computer control system has been a major tool in forecasting and
tracking our water needs for JAWA and for monitoring other pump-
ing facilities. I recommend waiving the bidding process and
awarding a contract to J.M. Process system for replacement of
software and hardware at our main control point at a cost not to
exceed $35,064.
Herbert L. Weeks
HLW/td
CONTRPNL.REP/FILES/WATER
1-29-92
Pumping Station #4 ' - airline length 10501, pumping rate 1000
gpm; 117 N. Waverly, has a deep well, four high 'service pumps,
and an 840,000 -gallon concrete water storage reservoir.
Pum in Station #5 - airline length 10501, pumping rate 1260
gpm; 112 E. Highland, has four high service pumps, including one
auxiliary, and two million -gallon ground -level steel water stor-
age tanks.
Pumping Station #11 - airline length 10381, pumping rate 1490
gpm; WeGo & Shabonee (middle of the golf course), has two high
service pumps, one million -gallon ground -level steel water stor-
age tank.
Pumping Station #16 - airline length 10501, pumping rate 1550
gpm; 1629 W. Algonquin, has three high service pumps, and one
ground -level 2,000,000 -gallon steel water storage tank.
Pumping station #17, airline length 1030', pumping rate 850 gpm;
1480 N. Elmhurst Rd., has three high -service pumps (2 constant
speed and I variable speed) and one ground -level 2,000,000 -
gallon steel water storage tank.
Abandoned wells (since the acquisition of Lake Michigan water):
Well No. 2 - shallow limestone well formerly located at 10
S. Pine.
Well No. 3 - deep well formerly located at 12 S. Pine; had
an attached 250,000 -gallon underground water storage tank
plus two high service pumps. complete facility was aban-
doned.
All structures at the above two sites have been razed and the
area leveled and planted with grass.; future use property in
downtown redevelopment program.
Well No. 6 - deep well formerly located at 308 E.
Kensington; brick structure still- standing; currently used
for housing surplus bicycles from the Police Department.
This site was originally donated to the Village by the
developers of Randhutst and has a potential use as a satel-
lite fire station, or it could be sold back to the
Randhurst Corp. Water from the well was pumped through a
transmission main to the pumping station #5 site at High-
land and Emerson.
Well No. 7 - formerly located at the corner of Waterman and
Gregory, adjacent to Mount Prospect Park District's Meadows
Park. This well pumped into a transmission main to our
pumping station no. 4. All buildings have been removed and
the site cleared and levelled off. Per prior agreement
with the mount Prospect Park District, the use of this
property has reverted back to the district for recreational
purposes.
Well No. 8 - formerly located at the rear of 1818 Bonita,
was a deep well pumping directly into the water distribu-
tion system; no storage and no high service pump.
Well No. 9 - located at the rear of 1818 Bonita; shallow
limestone well with minimal pumping capacity and pumped
directly into the water distribution system. The Village
still owns and maintains this site, which includes a trian-
gular shaped lot and two buildings; used by the Village and
by the Mount Prospect Park District for storage; not a
marketable piece of property as it does not have frontage
on a street.
WELLINFO/FILES/WATER
Mount Pr pect Public Works Dep tment
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM T1=3Z larrY
TO: Village Manager
FROM: Director of Public Works
DATE: January 2, 1992
SUBJ: Water System Control Panel Upgrade
In December of 1985 Lake Michigan water began flowing through
the Village's water distribution system. Prior to that historic
time and in preparation for, major improvements were needed on
our water distribution system. In excess of $500,000 was expend-
ed making the physical connections to the JAWA delivery struc-
tures; repiping of our water reservoirs to fill from the distri-
bution system; all new telemetry controls at all pumping sta-
tions; and installation of a new centralized supervisory comput-
er system to control all the new telemetry.
The Village's water distribution system comprises five standby
deep wells, three JAWA delivery structures, six ground storage
reservoirs and one elevated tank having a total storage capacity
of 8.8 million gallons, five pumping(booster) stations and a
water distribution system pipe network. The elevated tank water
level serves as the control variable for starting and stopping
all the booster pumps.
A centralized supervisory computer system is responsible for the
complete control and monitoring of the entire water distribution
system and is located at the Public works Facility. in addi-
tion, this system also monitors two sewage lift stations, six
sewer relief stations and currently one of our public buildings
(the Village Hall).
The core of the centralized computer system is specialized super-
visory software that was developed by Aquatrol Corporation of
Minneapolis, MN. They were also the company that supplied all
of the new telemetry equipment. The current system, as original-
ly designed and supplied, has served our system well over the
past six years. The system now, however, has reached its capaci-
ty and some of the associated hardware is no longer serviceable
or available.
We have lost all maintenance tracking capabilities of all pump-
ing equipment; we have no capacity for adding additional public
building monitoring alarms; and every time we want to add any
new alarm monitors we are faced with deciding what to eliminate
to make room for the new, i.e. we recently installed new chlo-
rine monitors at the three delivery structures.
Another major concern is our alarm system control terminals.
The current "Visual" model is no longer manufactured and because
of its unique configuration and the existing software limita-
tions, we have been unable to find a replacement. This terminal
has frequently been down and our only means of repairing it was
to purchase two used units to be used for parts.
Aquatrol Corporation has recently upgraded their supervisory
software. This new system addresses all of our current system's
shortfalls and is expandable for our future needs. The new.
system will also interface with all our existing telemetry,i
s
user configurable and IBM compatible, which eliminates our prob-
lem with the alarm/system control terminals.
J.M. Process Systems, Inc. is the local Aquatrol distributor and
they have submitted a proposal to upgrade our centralized super-
visory control,system for $35,064.00. This includes all soft-
ware, hardware replacement, installation and. training. Because
we are not replacing our entire system it is necessary to stay
with the same manufacturer.
Therefore, I request a waiver of the bidding requirement and
approval to award a contract to J.M. Process System for
$35,064.00. On Page 147, Account Number -41-072-08-8038 there is
$40,000 allocated for this proposedexpendituxe. J.M. Process
System. was the firm that supplied and installed the original
system.
Q
141Xt-CLA-t e5r�VAA4�41
Herbert L. Weeks
HLW/eh
coNTPANL.UPG/FILES/WATER
AQUATROL
CORPORATION
----- ------- --- ----A
TM
PF'
so
Ffn osofto :3
A
1!4jor advance
m operator ease and system, flexibliffity.
Professional supervisory
control and data acquisition
software for water/
wastewater and industrial
process applications.
• Powerful
• Flexible
• User configurable
• IBM compatible
• Expandable
• Wide range of applications
• Reliable, accurate
performance
ProSoft from Aquatrol represents the next logical and
evolutionary step in supervisory control and data acquisition,
SCADA, system programming easy programming in the
field by the operator.
Interfaces with existing
systems.
It is sometimes desirable to have two or more types of
computers for various monitoring and control functions.
ProSoft provides interface capabilities for communicating
with existing systems or for distributing control among
programmable remote terminal units, RTUs.
ProSoft 1000, 2000 and 3000 allows the operator to
generate full-oolor graphics, customize logs and reports,
modify setpoints; and establish control strategies from the
central console, without the need for a computer
programmer.
Database management functions provide easy review,
addition, deletion and revision of setpoints as needed.
Simple keyboard commands written in everyday operator
terminology makes for quick learning and comfort with the
system.
Modular design meets
changing needs.
All basic software includes resident programs for:
• Periodic logs
Hourly, daily, monthly and annual power consumption
• Interface with other computers and allied equipment
• Database for all analog and digital points
• CRT trend packages
• Historic trend packages
• Color process graphics
• Color alarm summary screens
ProSoft's modular design allows for easy system upgrades
and expansion as needs change. A full complement of
software and hardware options are available to meet specific
operating needs, including:
• Log formats
• Control block methodology
• Drivers to programmable controllers
• Drivers to SCADA system RTUs
• PID or ratio control templates
• Operator maintenance scheduling
With ProSoft, the operator can manipulate data to create a
wide variety of reports, graphs and displays for trend
analysis, troubleshooting, system performance evaluations
and more.
As needs grow more complex, the system allows the
addition of more power, greater functional capability, higher
resolution displays and more detailed reporting capabilities.
P
qunow 30 ObVTTTA 9144 Aq pa4dopp aq TTvqs '40V 9tT4 144TM 90UrTTdm00
-UOU bUTbOTTV l4oadsoad 4unoW go 96VTTTA Oq4 4SUTVbP S4UT-e'Tdmoo
jo ual-4r(TOSSI 4dmoad aq4 ao; saripsooid v 4eql ' -aAla g0ja-,-3-g-S
*99009 STOUTTTI '4oadsoad
ma
qunox 1499a4S uosaa144nQS OOT 'a9bvUpW ;9bvTTTA' 9q4 04 bUT4Tam
Aq aO 0009-Z6C/80L 4v PaqOvaa 9q URO aOBQUPK ObVITTA 9144 4elli pup
''40Y OT44 14'4Tm s0u'eTTduxoo-uou buTbaTTv 4oadsoad 4unOW go abvTTTA 9q4
4SUTPbp 4UTeTdmoo Awe a-4,ebT4sa,&UT 04 Pup 140V W44 tMm aOUVTTduioo
90 UOTqPUTPaOOO 914q aoj 9TqTsuodsaa uosaad aq4 sP '9bvuvW OLeTTTA
aqq saqpubTS9p qoadsoad qunoW go 9bvTTTA OtT4 4Pql *aao-a—Roil-las
*C66T '9Z AAPnUPf Uvqq
J94PT 40u P949Tduioo aq 04 u0T4PnTP,&9 eons 's9T4TTTqP5TP tMm aTdoad
JOJ SOTAa9S SAT409gja ss9T V JO UOTSTAoid 91q4 UT aO
S9T4TTTqpsTp
T44Tm aTdoad go uoTsnTOxa 9T44 UT ' TnS9.2 APM ' tlOTlqM UOTSTAO'
. 4 id
90TA,Z9S UT PUP 4U9MU0aTAUa 9T44 UT SIOTaapq A;T4u9PT 04 'S9T*4.TT'
TOVJ
s4T buTpnTOUT 'S9OT4ovad pup ISOTOTTod IsaoTtuxas 4uaazno s4T
aqpnTeA9 TTR14s 4oadsoad 4unON JO ObPTTTA 9lq4 4vtfllla�aldj,�ojLoas
*aTna 9q4 Pup 40V 9q4 q4Tm
4U94STSU03 a9UUPM P UT 'A4TTTqes.
TP JO STSVq Oqq UO UOTqVUTMTJOSTP
4nOq4Tm P9a9ATT9P aq S9T4TAT40e pup sumabo id I
S9oTAa;S
tons qeT44 4u9m9aTnb9;E e apn
TOUT TTV14s S9T-4TAT'40p PUP lsmvbond
'S90TA-19S go )Lx9ATT9P 914-4 4Tnsa;t TT UT vqs qo-p4m -4oadsoicl -4unoJ4
;0 9beTTTA auk Aq 0-4UT P9Zt9 '
4ua s4Oel4uOa Up 4e'41 :OMI NOIL5-a,§
*qoadsoad 4unOR 90 9beTTTA aq4 Aq PPPTAoad S9T4TAT409
pup smpaboad 'SaOTAaOS aoj s4uamaaTnbaa 44TTTqTbTT9 TET4U;Ssa
4a9M 04 S9T4TTTqVSTP tMm aTdoad aTqPU9 TTTm SUOT-4VPaUrMOOOP
tons U914M 's4uguLzT-edMT 4146TS 10 bUTaP9tj 144Tm 9'Tdoad ggTM
I
UOT4POTUnMMOO JO 4U9M90UPquq aiq4 109 SaOTAa9S -10 SP
TV AaPTTTxnP
JO bUTPTA0ad w44 'PUP !S90TqoRad pup 'SOTOTTod 'sBTn2 JO buTbuvqo
9q4 !SI9TaaPq d UOT4POTunurmoo pup lU0T4P4a0 suP24 'TPan4o94Tqoav go
TPAOUIaa 9q4 SV �Ons *'S9TqTTTqpSTP T4-4TM aTdoad joj SUOT-41PPOUIM003e
9TqPuosPaa bUT3[VM Aq 'S9T4TAT40V PUP Ismpaboad 'S90TA.19S
S4T JO AJOATTOP 9q4 UT 40Y S9T4TTTqPSTG T44TM SUPOT19W OtM q4Tm
ATdmoo 04 SPU94UT 4oadsoad 4un0k 90 ObvTTTA 914,4 4*etll :aNO-N -11-0-n
:SIONIUqI 'AINnOD XOOD '10adSOUd ixnow ao aDviaIA alli ao
SaalSaHl dO GHY09 GNV HOAVW alll AS GaAUOSaH II aq 'aaojauaHl 'MON
*suosaad P94SOJ94UT a9q4O PUP S9TaPT0T39uaq IsqupdTOT4jpd
P m
IsquPoTTdde o4 9TqRTTPAP S9T4TAT40P UP 'sviboad Is9'oT'&Z9S
9q4 04 UOT4eOTTdde s4T PUP :40V 8T44 bUTU-T90U00 UOT4eUUOJUT '94PM
TTP14s 10adsOUd lNfIOW aO aE)VqrlIA 9t[4 4PI44 "aTnbaj aTn'a aq4 IsVaUaHM
PUV !ODTqSnf go 4u9mqavd9a aq4 Aq (SE 4aPd HdD SZ)
T66T '9Z ATnr P9qSTTqnd SPM 40V 9lq4 bUTquemeTdMT BTna aq4 IsvauaHm
Pup !Z66T 19Z Aapnupr go sp ljoaaalq4
s9T4TTPquamnaqSUT PUP S9T4TTPdTDTunm bUTpnTOUT '4U9MUa9AOb TPOOT
PUP 9-4v4s JO s4Tun TTe Aq A:ITTTqleSTP JO sTsvq alq-4 UO UOT-4UUTMTaDSTP
s4TqTiqoad 40V SaT4TTTqPSTG tl4TM suleoT.29mv atiq IsvauaHm
PUP !S8T4TTTqPSTP
tlqTm saldoad 4SUTlebR UOT-49UTMT.XDSTP f)u-r4PUTMTT9 go asocland 'aTqq
-T
*s9i4TTiq' OJ (9££ -TOT mle'l DTlqnd) 066T JO 4�Y . PsTG q4TM SUPOTJOMV
aiq4 paqdopp spq saqpqS peqTun aT4q go ssaabuoD aqq ISVaHaHt4
PUP !S9T4TTTqVSTP lq4Tm aTdoad Aq
A49TOOS UT U0T-4edToTqaPd TTnj 9Ae'q 04 s94v4S P94Tun 0lq4 10 AOTTod
9 aq TTv'4s 4T 4vT44 P94P49 PUP 'sBT4TTTqPSTP ggTM aTdoad go S4qbTa
OT44 P9zTuf:)00;9-1 splq s9-41e4S P94Tun 9q-4 JO ss9abuO0 9144 'SVaUaHM
10V SaIlIqI9VSIU HIIM SNV3I'daKV aln HIIM
aoNviriaxoo oL DNimilymad Nomriaosad v
*ON Noilnuosau
Z6/6Z/T
law)
AWDA
Page 2 of 2
Prospect not later than January 26, 1992, and that a description
of the procedure shall be available not later January 26, 1992 for
the information of the general public.
SECTION SIX: That the Village of Mount Prospect shall adopt a plan
for the removal of barriers in existing facilities, and that all
work which is structural in nature and necessary for compliance
with the Act shall occur by January 26, 1995.
SECTION SEVEN:. That this Resolution shall be in full force and
effect from and after its passage and approval in the manner
provided by law.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
PASSED and APPROVED - day of
Gerald L. Farley
Mayor
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
, 1992.
Village of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
119
TO: John F. Dixon, Village manager
Dave Jepson, Finance Director
FROM: Cheryl L. Pasalic, Communications Administrator
0( -7 -
DATE: January 28, 1992
RE: Character generator trade with ROSCOR
I have been approached by ROSCOR, our major video equipment
supplier, to consider trading in our Quanta Font 500 character
generator that was purchased in 1985 and is currently in storage
pending the arrival of our VHS editing equipment. ROSCOR has a
client that wants a Quanta Font 500 as soon as possible. In
exchange, ROSCOR is offering the Village a brand new computerized
character generator/controller with full features and monitor
valued at $5,210 in even trade. This new unit will suit our
production needs much better than the Quanta Font 500 as we can not
only use it as a character generator, but can also utilize it for
editing control features as well.
The Quanta Font 500 was purchased for $11,995 in the Fall of 1985.
It would have an average life for parts and competitiveness of
approximately 7 years. This would leave an approximate value of
the Quanta at just under $2,000 if depreciated on a seven year
scale. Because ROSCOR has an urgent need for this used piece of
equipment, they are willing to trade us for a much higher quality
machine worth over $3,000 more than the value of the item we would
be trading in. I would therefore recommend we ask the Village
Board to approve the trade-in and swap of equipment.
RESOLUTION APPROVING FINDINGS OF FACT
RESOLUTION NO. R-17-21
WHEREAS, Scott Saef, on behalf of Commonwealth Edison, filed an application for a variation to the
fence height regulations for the property commonly known as 1650 Dempster Street and 1510 South Busse
Road in the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois; and
I ,
WHEREAS, the subject property is described as follows:
PARCEL 1: �v
THAT PART OF LOT TWO (2) IN EDWARD BUSSE'S DIVISION OF PART OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF SECTION FIFTEEN (15), AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION
TWENTY-TWO (22), TOWNSHIP FORTY-ONE (41) NORTH, RANGE ELEVEN (11) EAST OF THE
THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, AS RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 1919, AS DOCUMENT NO,
6696216, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT A POINT IN THE OLD CENTER LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD WHICH IS TWO
HUNDRED TEN (210) FEET EAST OF (MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) THE WEST LINE OF
THE EAST HALF OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH ALONG A LINE TWO
HUNDRED TEN (210) FEET EAST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST
HALF OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER A DISTANCE OF ONE HUNDRED THREE AND FIVE
HUNDREDTHS (103.05) FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG A
DIAGONAL LINE DRAWN FROM SAID ANGLE POINT TO A POINT IN THE EAST LINE OF SAID
LOT TWO (2) WHICH IS THREE HUNDRED TWENTY-SIX AND TWENTY-FIVE HUNDREDTHS
(326.25) FEET NORTH OF -THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION FIFTEEN (15) (AS MEASURED
ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2)) A DISTANCE OF THREE HUNDRED THIRTY-
THREE AND EIGHTY-FIVE HUNDREDTHS (333.85) FEET FOR A POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS
PARCEL OF LAND (SAID POINT OF BEGINNING IS SIX HUNDRED THIRTY-SIX AND EIGHT
HUNDREDTHS (636.08) FEET SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2) AS
MEASURED ALONG SAID DIAGONAL LINE); THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG A LINE
DRAWN AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID DIAGONAL LINE A DISTANCE OF TWO HUNDRED
NINETEEN AND EIGHTYAWO HUNDREDTHS (219.82) FEET TO T14E INTERSECTION OF SAID
LINE WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID
SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF FOUR HUNDRED FOUR AND FIFTY-NINE HUNDREDTHS
(404.59) FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-ONE (18 1) FEET WEST OF THE
EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2); THENCE NORTH ALONG A LINE DRAWN AT RIGHT
ANGLES TO SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF TWO HUNDRED NINETY-FOUR (294) FEET
TO THE INTERSECTION OF SAID LINE WITH THE AFORESAID DIAGONAL LINE (SAID
INTERSECTION BEING ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-SIX AND EIGHTY-FIVE HUNDREDTHS
(186.85) FEET SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2) AS MEASURED
ALONG SAID DIAGONAL LINE); THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID DIAGONAL LINE
A DISTANCE OF FOUR HUNDRED FORTY-NINE AND TWENTY-THREE HUNDREDTHS (449.23)
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS PARCEL OF LAND, SITUATED IN THE COUNTY
OF COOK, IN THE STATE OF ILLINOIS.
PARCEL 2:
THAT PART OF LOT TWO (2) IN EDWARD BUSSE'S DIVISION OF PART OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF SECTION FIFTEEN (15) AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION
TWENTY-TWO (22), TOWNSHIP FORTY-ONE (4 1) NORTH, RANGE ELEVEN (11) EAST OF THE
THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, AS RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 1919, AS DOCUMENT NO.
6696216 IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT AT
THE INTERSECTION OF THE OLD CENTER LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD WITH THE WEST
LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION FIFTEEN (15),
WHICH POINT IS A DISTANCE OF ONE HUNDRED SIXTY-THREE AND SIXTY-FOUR
H �L."W".g & Zoning CONWIM7 20).1 AWti ... �] 1.21 1650 D,.�& & 1510 S 9— Rd (VqR-F= Haght) da
HUNDREDTHS (163.64) FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID EAST HALF OF
THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST HALF
OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER A DISTANCE OF ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY-ONE AND
NINETY-TWO HUNDREDTHS (171.92) FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY
ALONG A DIAGONAL LINE DRAWN FROM SAID POINT TO A POINT IN THE EAST LINE OF
SAID LOT TWO (2), WHICH IS A DISTANCE OF FIVE HUNDRED THIRTY-NINE AND EIGHTY
HUNDREDTHS (539.80) FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION FIFTEEN (15)
(AS MEASURED ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2); A DISTANCE OF ONE
THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-THREE AND SIXTY HUNDREDTHS (1183.60) FEET TO
THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT TWO (2); THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT
TWO (2) A DISTANCE OF TWO HUNDRED THIRTEEN AND FIFTY-FIVE HUNDREDTHS (213.55)
FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS TWO HUNDRED TEN (210) FEET SOUTHEASTERLY OF
(MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) AND PARALLEL WITH THE AFORESAID DIAGONAL
LINE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF NINE
HUNDRED SIXTY-NINE AND NINETY-THREE HUNDREDTHS (969.93) FEET TO THE
INTERSECTION OF SAID PARALLEL LINE WITH A LINE WHICH IS TWO HUNDRED TEN (2 10)
FEET EAST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST HALF OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF ONE
HUNDRED THREE AND FIVE HUNDREDTHS (103.05) FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF SAID
PARALLEL LINE WITH THE OLD CENTER LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD; THENCE
NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE OLD CENTER LINE OF ALGONQUIN ROAD, A DISTANCE OF
TWO HUNDRED THIRTY-FIVE AND THIRTY-TWO HUNDREDTHS (235.32) FEET TO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING.
Property Index Numbers: 08-15-400-019-0000, 08-15-400-084-0000, and 08-15-400-085-0000; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the variation request (designated as Case No. PZ -17-21) before
the Planning & Zoning Commission in the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois on December 9, 2021
pursuant to due and proper notice thereof published in the Daily Herald Newspaper on November 24, 2021;
and
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning & Zoning Commission does hereby grant a variation to the fence
height regulations in order to allow an eleven foot (11') tall expanded black metal perimeter (security)
fence with an additional 12"of Y-shaped barbed wire atop and four (4) sixteen -foot (16') tall fence posts,
as per the plans attached as Exhibit A.
Except for the variation granted herein, all other applicable Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois ordinances
and regulations shall remain in full force and effect as to the subject property.
PASSED AND APPROVED the 9th day of December, 2021 and effective five (5) days after this date, as
provided for by Section 5.504.E of the Mount Prospect Code.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Joseph P. _ D . onnelly, Chairperson
Planning & Zoning Commission
H Unn, COMAP.W21650 D=p9e1&& 1510 S Snw RA (VAR -Yen, lieight)d
1650 Dempster Street and 1510 South Busse Road
PIN: 08-15-400-019-0000,08-15-400-084-0000, and 08-15-400-085-0000
Exhibit A
H \PLANTI i.g & L,,,,g COWWPPoIo¢31 , 610 )-". s, & 1510 s 8,-, m
H