HomeMy WebLinkAbout4505_001Next ordinance No. 4444
Next Resolution No. 21-92
VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE
A G E N D A
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
0 R D E R 0 F B U S I N E S S
REGULAR MEETING
Meeting Location:
Meeting Room, 1st Floor
Senior Citizen Center
50 South Emerson Street
Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
Mayor Gerald
Trustee Mark Busse
Trustee George Cloves
Trustee Timothy Corcoran
III. INVOCATION - Trustee Wilks
ALL
Meeting Date and Time:
Tuesday
July 7, 1992
8:00 P. K.
"Skip" Farley
Trustee Leo Floros;
Trustee Paul Hoefert
Trustee Irvana Wilks
IV. APPROVE MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, June 16, 1992
V. APPROVAL OF BILLS AND FINANCIAL REPORT
Vi. COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS - CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
VII. MAYOR'S REPORT
A. NTN Sign, Kensington Center For Business
Approval by Village Board, resolving the dispute
between the Village and NTN Corporation relative
to signs on the berm. The proposal provides
for the sign to be lowered from 12 feet to 7.8 feet
with the construction of a brick base to match
the building.
B. Request to create one additional Class 11R"
liquor license for Wonderful Restaurant,
1839 W. Algonquin Road.
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
A. 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. 4388 ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ARTICLE XIV OF CHAPTER 5 ENTITLED "SIGN REVIEW
BOARD"
This amendment includes the provision that at
no time shall the Sign Review Board consist of
less than five residents of the Village.
(Exhibit A)
B. ZBA 28 -SU -92, 1500 South Elmhurst Road
lst reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL
USE FOR PAYLESS SHOESOURCE LOCATED AT
1500 SOUTH ELMHURST ROAD
This Ordinance grants a Special Use to allow
the installation of a roof -mounted satellite
antenna for the Regional Office of Payless
Shoe Stores. The Zoning Board of Appeals
recommended approving this request by a vote
of 6-0. (Exhibit B)
C. ZBA 31-V-92, 202 South See Gwun
1st reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A
VARIATION FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS
202 SOUTH SEE GWUN
This Ordinance grants a variation to allow
a five foot side yard setback in order to
construct a concrete patio. (Exhibit C)
D. ZBA 32-V-92, 1000 East Central Road
1st reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A
SPECIAL USE FOR T J MAXX, LOCATED AT
1000 EAST CENTRAL ROAD
This Ordinance grants a Special Use to
to allow a roof -mounted satellite dish
10 feet in radius. The Zoning Board of Appeals
recommended granting this request by a vote
of 5-1. (Exhibit. D)
E. ZBA 34-V-92, 302 South Lancaster
1st reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A
VARIATION FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN
AS 302 SOUTH LANCASTER
This Ordinance grants a variation to allow
a driveway width of 19 feet. The Zoning Board
of Appeals recommended approving this
request by a vote of 6-0. (Exhibit E)
F. ZBA 35 -SU -92, Randhurst Shopping Center
1st reading of AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 3604 GOVERNING A PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY
KNOWN AS RANDHURST SHOPPING CENTER
This Ordinance grants an amendment to the
Planned Unit Development governing Randhurst
Shopping Center to allow expansion of a
proposed building to house a restaurant from
5,000 square feet to 7,000 square feet.
The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended
granting this request by a vote of 6-0. (Exhibit F)
G. ZBA 26-A-92, Text Amendment
1st reading of AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CERTAIN ARTICLES OF CHAPTER 14 (ZONING),
OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF
MOUNT PROSPECT
This Ordinance amends the Zoning Ordinance
by creating a Special Use category to allow
commercial vehicles to park in residential
garages. (Exhibit G)
IX. NEW BUSINESS
A. Sign Review Board Case No. 26-92
Petitioner, Charlie Club, is requesting
an amendment to the Sign ordinance to
to create a Special Use category which
would permit off -premise signs. The Sign
Review Board recommended this request be
denied by a vote of 4-1. This case
was continued at the request of the
Petitioner.
B. ZBA 37-V-92, 430 Lakeview Court
The Petitioner is requesting a variation to
allow an I-1 (Light Industrial District) lot
of approximately 3.16 acres within the
Kensington Center for Business, rather than
the required 4 acres. The Zoning Board of
Appeals recommended granting this request by
a vote of 7-0.
C. ZBA 39 -SU -92, Randhurst Shopping Center
The Petitioner is requesting a Special use
to allow a Game Room in space formerly
occupied by Madigans. The Zoning Board of
Appeals recommended granting this request
by a vote of 6-1.
D. ZBA'40-V-92, 1001 East Cardinal Lane
The Petitioner is requesting the following
variations to allow an existing structure:
to allow a zero foot sideyard setback,
instead of the required 5 feet; to allow
a driveway with a maximum width of 34 feet,
instead of the previously permitted 24 feet.
The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended
denying these requests.
E. Request for modification from Chapter 16
(Development Code) to allow a 321 wide
driveway apron in the parkway for property
located at 1110 West Central Road. The
Plan Commission recommended granting this
request by a vote of 7-0.
F. Elizabeth A. Korn Plat of Subdivision
In accordance with State law, the Village Board
must approve proposed subdivisions in
unincorporated areas located within 1-1/2
miles of the village limits. This subdivision
is located south of Kensington, east of Wolf
Road, 145 Anita. The Plan commission recommends
approval of this subdivision.
G. .1st reading of AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ARTICLE VIII OF CHAPTER 4 OF THE VILLAGE CODE
This Ordinance amends the provisions established
for Community Service Officers, bringing local
regulations into conformance with State laws. (Exhibit H)
H. A RESOLUTION TO INCLUDE COMPENSATION PAID
UNDER AN INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 125
PLAN AS ILLINOIS MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT FUND
EARNINGS
This Resolution is required by IMRF to
include specified items. (Exhibit J)
I. 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING
MICHAEL E. JANONIS AS REPRESENTATIVE TO
THE JOINT ACTION WATER AGENCY (Exhibit K)
J. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
AND ILLINOIS PRAIRIE GIRL SCOUT COUNCIL BOXWOOD
ADVOCACY PROGRAM (Exhibit L)
K. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
AND SUBURBAN PRIMARY HEALTH CARE COUNCIL PRIMARY
HEALTH CARE PROGRAM (Exhibit M)
L. Accept installation of public improvements
in conjunction with the Kylemore Subdivision
located in Des Plaines. The developer installed
street lights on the west side of Wolf Road,
which is within the jurisdiction of Mount Prospect.
M. 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING
AN INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT WITH THE
COUNTY OF COOK IN LIEU OF INSURANCE AND
SURETY BOND REQUIREMENTS (Exhibit N)
X. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Bid results:
1. Recommendation for Cook County School Bus Water
Main Improvement
2. Recommendation for State bid purchase of one
vehicle
B. soils and materials testing, Police and Fire
Headquarters site
C. Request for field change within the Rogers
Corporate Park, 1840 - 1894 South Elmhurst Road,
to permit limited retail sales for kitchen
cabinets within this industrial park.
D. Status Report
X1. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
JUNE 16, 1992
CALL TO ORDER CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Farley called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present upon roll call: Mayor Gerald Farley
Trustee George Clowes
Trustee Leo Floros
Trustee Paul Hoefert
Absent: Trustee Mark Busse
Trustee Irvana Wilks
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Trustee Floros. INVOCATION
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Trustee Clowes, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, APPROVE
moved to approve the minutes of the regular MINUTES
meeting of the Mayor and Board of Trustees
held June 4, 1992.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Floros, Hoefert
Farley
Nays: None
Pass: Corcoran
Motion carried.
APPROVAL OF BILLS
Trustee Floros, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, APPROVE BILLS
moved toapprove the following list of bills:
General Fund
$ 529,323
Refusal Disposal Fund
2,191
Motor Fuel Tax Fund
148,493
Community Development Block Grant Fund
4,524
Illinois Municipal Retirement
Fund
72,074
Water & Sewer Fund
426,122
Parking System Revenue Fund
48,017
Risk Management Fund
73,439
Vehicle Replacement Fund
34,309
Motor Equipment Pool Fund
-
Capital Improvement, Repl. or
Rep.
3,189
Downtown Redev. Const. Fund
485
Fire & Police Building Const.
26,004
Flood Control Revenue Fund
-
Corporate Purpose Improvement
1990
-
Debt Service Funds
2,931
Flexcomp Trust Fund
7,693
Escrow Deposit Fund
14,773
Police Pension Fund
32
Firemen's Pension Fund
-
Benefit Trust Fund
2-167
$1,395,766
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes,
Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS, CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
Mayor Farley and Fire Chief Cavello presented awards HEROIC
to Michael Barber and Jeff Petersen, employees of SERVICE
Randhurst Shopping Center, for heroic service.
These men pulled a man from a burning car and saved
his life.
BOY SCOUT Village Manager Dixon stated that the Village was
AWARD recently honored by,the Northwest Suburban Boy Scout
Council for outstanding service and support of that
organization.
PACA Beverly Cusick, '1024'Wheeling Road, President of PACA,
a local neighborhoodorganization, gave a brief
presentation noting the various activities sponsored
by PACA in an effort to give the local youth
alternative activities'. Mrs. Cusick also stated that
PACA, which includes the northern portion of the
Village, is working to promote pride and community
spirit in the area.
MAYOR'S REPORT
RECONSIDER Mayor Farley asked the Board to reconsider Ordinance
ORD.NO.'4438 No. 4438, which amended the Sign Review Board
AMEND CH. 5 membership by increasing the number of members from 5
to 7. Mayor Farley explained that he had previously
said that all members of the Board were members of the
Village, however, he learned that one member of the
Sign Review Board is a Village businessman but does not
reside in the Village.
Members of the Board expressed concern and stated that
it was their intention that a majority of the members
be residents of the Village.
Trustee Corcoran suggested the Ordinance be amended to
include the following statement: "There shall be a
minimum of 5 residents of the Village on the Sign
Review Board at any one time".
An Ordinance will be presented July '7th amending
Article XIV of Chapter 5 to include` the suggested
language,
OLD BUSINESS
REDEVELOPMENT: An Ordinance was presented for second reading that
CATHOLIC would authorize execution of an Option Agreement
CHARITIES with Catholic Charities for the purchase of Village
OPTION AGREEMENT owned property for the purpose of constructing senior
citizen housing.
ORD.NO. 4442 Trustee Cl owes,, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved for
passage of Ordinance No. 4442
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
AN OPTION AGREEMENT WITH CATHOLIC CHARITIES
FOR CERTAIN REAL ESTATE NECESSARY FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF SECTION 202 SENIOR HOUSING
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floras,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ILLINOIS BELL An Ordinance was presented for second reading that
FRANCHISE would authorize a new franchise agreement between the
AGREEMENT Village and Illinois Bell Telephone, as negotiated by
the 'Northwest Municipal Conference.
ORD.NO. 4442 Trustee Clowes, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved for
Page 2 - June 16, 1992
passage of ordinance No. 4442
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE
OF MOUNT PROSPECT AND ILLINOIS BELL
TELEPHONE
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS
Sign Review Board Case No. 24-92
SIGN CASE•
The Petitioner, Charlie Club, is requesting
NO. 24-92
a text amendment to the Sign Ordinance to
CHARLIE
create a Special Use category which would
CLUB
permit off -premise signs. The Sign Review
Board recommended denying this request by
a vote of 4-1.
At the request of the Petitioner, this case
is continued to the July 7th meeting of the
Village Board.
ZBA 28 -SU -92, 1500 S. Elmhurst Road
ZBA 28 -SU -92
The Petitioner is requesting a Special Use
1500 S.EIMLIRST
to allow the installation of a roof -mounted
satellite antenna for the regional office of
Payless Shoe Stores. The Zoning Board of
Appeals recommended granting this request by
a vote of 6-0.
It was noted that the Petitioner has offices
in the Venture Department Store. The proposed
antenna would not be mounted into the roof,
which could create problems such as leaking.
The antenna is constructed in such a manner
that the base is weighted to hold the antenna
secure.
The Petitioner requested the requirement to
screen the antenna be waived, noting that
there are apartments approximately 300 yards
away from the property line with the
Commonwealth Edison high-tension wires between
those apartments and the property line of the
Venture Store building. If screening is
required it would have to be secured to the
roof which would create a problem with the
landlord.
Members of the Board expressed concern relative
to screening, noting that maybe the antenna
should be screened from the apartments. Staff
was asked to look into it further.
An ordinance will be presented for first reading
at the July 7th meeting of the Village Board.
ZBA 31-V-92, 202 South See Gwun ZBA 31-V-92
The Petitioner is requesting a variation to 202 SEE GWUN
allow a zero foot side yard setback, rather
Page 3 - June 16, 1992
than the required 7.15 feet, in order to construct a
concrete patio. The Zoning Board of Appeals
recommended denying this request by a vote of 2-4.
There was discussion as to size of the proposed patio
and the fact that the Petitioner has a very large rear
yard, however, there is no access from rear of the
house'to the back yard. The Petitioner did say that
they would compromise on the width of the patio. It
was noted by members of the Board that a 5 foot setback
would be more desirable than the zero foot setback
requested.
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Clowes, moved to
grant a 5 foot, side yard variation for the subject
property, being the subject of ZBA Case No. 31-V-92.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert, Farley
Nays: None
Motion carried.
An ordinance will be presented for first reading at the
July 7th meeting of the Village Board.
ZBA 32 -SU -92 ZBA 32 -SU -92, 1000 East Central Road
1000 E.CENTRAL The Petitioner, T. J. Maxx, is requesting a Special Use
to allow a w4ll-mounted satellite dish, 10 feet in
radius. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended
approval of a roof -mounted, rather than wall-mount;d,
satellite antenna by a vote of 5-1.
Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Floros, moved to
concur with the recommendation of the Zoning Board of
Appeals and grant a Special Use for a roof -mounted
satellite antenna, being the subject of ZBA 32 -SU -92.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ZBA 34-V-92 ZBA 34-V-92, 302 South Lancaster
302 S.LANCASTER The Petitioner is requesting a variation to allow a
driveway width of 19 feet, rather than the permitted
15 foot width. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended
granting this request by a vote of 6-0.
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved
to concur with the recommendation of the Zoning Board
of Appeals and grant the variation requested in
ZBA 34-V-92.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ZBA 35 -SU -92 ZBA 35 -SU -92, Randhurst Shopping Center
RANDHURST The Petitioner is requesting an amendment to the
SHOPPING CENTER existing Planned Unit Development to allow expansion
of an approved 5,000 square foot restaurant to 7,450
Page 4 - June 16, 1992
square feet. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended
granting this Special Use by a vote of 6-0, with the
following conditions:
1. Landscaping plans shall be redesigned to meet the
requirements of the Landscape ordinance.
2. The design of the proposed building shall be
discussed with emphasis on the rear elevation
and the loading area.
3. Proposed signage shall meet provisions of the
Sign Ordinance and the Randhurst Sign Planned
Unit Development.
It was noted that the proposed restaurant would be
built and occupied by "Hooters", with the restaurant
to be constructed at the northeast corner of Rand
and Elmhurst Roads.
Trustee Clowes, seconded by Trustee Corcoran, moved
to concur with the recommendation of the Zoning
Board of Appeals and grant the Special Use requested
in ZBA 35 -SU -92 with the conditions as specified.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floras,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ZBA 26-A-92, Text Amendment
A request has been filed to amend the text of
Chapter 14 (Zoning) to allow commercial
vehicles over 8,000 lbs. to park in residential
garages. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended
granting this request by a vote of 5-1.
Trustee Corcoran read a memorandum from Trustee
Busse expressing his concern relative to the
proposed text amendment and suggesting that
such a use should be obtained through a Special
use permit.
Members of the Board stated that it may be better
to make this type of use the subject of a Special
Use, rather than allowing commercial vehicles
in a residential garage with no permission or
input from neighbors.
It was noted by staff that the overall size of
a garage would remain the same, 12 feet high,
however, if the resident could make modifications
to the garage to accommodate the commercial
vehicle, then the proposed text amendment would
allow the vehicle to be parked in the garage.
There was discussion as to what alterations could
be made to modify the garage in order to provide
adequate space to accommodate a commercial
vehicle.
Page 5 - June 16, 1992
ZBA 26-A-92
TEXT
AMENDMENT:
COMMERCIAL
VEHICLES IN
RESIDENTIAL
GARAGES
Trustee Corcoran stated that he could support
authorizing commercial vehicles pending on the state
license plate designation.
Following this discussion, it was suggested that legal
counsel review the publication for this case to see if
the intent could be applied to create a Special Use
category, rather than a text amendment.
This case was continued to the July 7th meeting of the
Village Board.
PREVAILING An Ordinance was presented for first reading that would
WAGE RATES formally adopt the prevailing wage schedule, as
established by the State, which wages would apply to
contractors performing projects with the Village.
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved
to waive the rule requiring two readings of an
Ordinance.,
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Page 6 - June 16, 1992
Motion carried.'
ORD.NO. 4443
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved
for passage of Ordinance No. 4443
AN ORDINANCE DETERMINING, THE PREVAILING WAGE
RATES FOR PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ACKNOWLEDGE
The annual report for the Mount Prospect, Public Library
RECEIPT OF
was presented,
LIBRARY REPORT
Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Corcoran, moved
to acknowledge receipt of the Mount Prospect Public
Library report for fiscal year 1991/92.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
COMPREHENSIVE
An Ordinance was presented for first reading that
PLAN
would adopt the Official Comprehensive Plan for the
Village.
Trustee Corcoran stated that he .had not had a chance
to read the entire document. Mayor Farley explained
that the State Statutes require the Village Board to
take action on the Comprehensive Plan no more than 90
days following the date of Public Hearing before the
Plan Commission. The only alternative, in order to
comply with the law, is to refer the proposed
Comprehensive Plan back to the Plan Commission,
following proper legal notice, in order to begin the
90 approval process.
Page 6 - June 16, 1992
Trustee Clowes, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved
to waive the rule requiring two readings of an
Ordinance.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Hoefert, Farley
Nays: Corcoran, Floros
Motion failed.
It was determined that the proposed Comprehensive
would be sent back to the Plan Commission,
,Plan
which would allow sufficient time for members of
the Village Board to review the document.
A Resolution was presented that would appropriate
MFT FUNDS
Motor Fuel Tax Funds for the reconstruction of
Bittersweet Lane between Quince and Burning
Bush, Lane.
Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Corcoran,
RES.NO.19-92
moved for passage of Resolution No. 19-92
A RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING MOTOR FUEL
TAX FUNDS
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
A Resolution was presented that would authorize
IDOT
extending the Agreement with the Illinois
AGREEMENT:
Department of Transportation providing
ROADWAY
reimbursement to the Village for highway
MAINTENANCE
maintenance of state roads located within
the Village.
Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Corcoran,
RES.NO. 20-92
moved for passage of Resolution No. 20-92
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXTENSION OF AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
AND THE ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FOR ROADWAY MAINTENANCE AS SET FORTH IN
RESOLUTION NO. 23-91
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
VILLAGE MANAGERIS REPORT
Village Manager John Fulton Dixon presented the
BID RESULTS
following bid results.
The following bids were received for Fire Department
FIRE DEPT.
Dress Uniforms, Work Uniforms and Winter Wear:
UNIFORMS
Dress Work Winter
Bidder Uniform Uniform Wear
Kale $415.25 $255.65 $366.65
R & R 373.95 233.72 404.23
Page 7 - June 16, 1992
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Clowes, moved to
concur with the recommendation of the administration
and accept the low bid submitted by R & R for Dress
Uniforms in the amount of $373.95 each; the low bid
submitted by R & R for Work Uniforms in.the amount of
$233.72 each; and, the, low bid submitted by Rale for
Winter Wear in the amount of $366.65 each.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
FIRE DEPT.
EXERCISE
It was noted that bid specifications were sent to 4
CLOTHING
suppliers of Fire Department Exercise clothing, however
the only bid received that met specifications was from
Connections Unlimited.
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Clowes, =ved to
concur with the recommendation of the administration
and accept the bid submitted by Connections Unlimited
for the Fire Department Exercise Clothing.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
FIRE DEPT,
Request for bids were sent to 3 local vendors for
FOOTWEAR
exercise footwear, however, only one bid was received,
submitted by Footlocker, which provided for a 20%
discount,
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Clowes, moved to
concur with the recommendation of the administration
and accept the bid submitted by Footlocker, which
provides for a 20% discount,
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floras,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
FIRE DEPT.
The following bids were received for Fire Protective
PROTECTIVE
Clothing:
CLOTHING
Gloves & Coat
Bidder Soots Helmets Hoods & Pants
Mac $256.25 A-$176 $ 42.35 $715,00
B-$161
GFE $228.15 A-$ NIB $ 43.35 $ NIB
B-$138.75
A = Ben Franklin
B = Classic 1000
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Clowes, moved to
concur with the recommendation of the administration
and accept the bid from GFE for Boots, and the bids
from Mac for Helmets, Gloves & Hoods and Coat and
Pants.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Page 8 - June 16, 1992
Bids were received for water meters from the following
WATER
companies for various sized meters: Badger Meter,
METERS
Midwest Meter, and Utility Equipment.
Based on the number of meters and various sizes, it:
was the recommendation of the administration that the
J.DOHENY
bid submitted by Badger Meter, Inc. be accepted for a
two year contract.
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved
BADGER
to concur with the recommendation of the administration
and accept the low bid submitted by Badger Meter, Inc.
and authorize entering into a two year contract at
a cost not to exceed $70,000 for the current fiscal
year.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
CATCH BASIN/
Hoefert
INLET REPAIR
Nays: None
Motion carried.
The following bids were received for catch basin/
CATCH BASIN/
inlet cleaning:
INLET CLEANING
Bidder Inlets Catch Basins
ARTLEY
J. Doheny, Inc. $ 6,422.00 $14,420.00
Dombrowski & Holmes 8,450.00 15,130.00
Stanton Equipment Co. 10,123.10 13,795.00
National Power Rodding 15,886.00 19,758.00
Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Corcoran,
J.DOHENY
moved to concur with the recommendation of the
administration and accept the low bid submitted
by J. Doheny, Inc. in an amount not to exceed
$30,000.00 for catch basin/inlet cleaning.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
The following bids were received for catch basin/
CATCH BASIN/
inlet repair:
INLET REPAIR
Bidder Total
Artley Paving $20,450
Suburban General Const. 21,839
Abboreno Construction 23,438
Trustee Clowes, seconded by Trustee Floros, moved
ARTLEY
to concur with the recommendation of the
PAVING
administration and accept the low bid submitted by
i
Artley Paving n an amount not to exceed $35,000
for catch basin/inlet repairs.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Page 9 - June 16, 1992
PAVEMENT MARKING The following bids were received for the pavement
marking program:
Bidder Amount
A C Pavement Striping Co. $24,239.11
Preform Traffic Control Systems 26,627.41
Mark -It Corporation 28,541.35
Marking Specialists Corp. 41,917.22
A C PAVEMENT
Trustee Clowes, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved to
concur with the recommendation of the administration
and accept the low bid submitted by A C Pavement
Striping Company in the amount not to exceed
$17,000.00.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
SHARED COST
The following bids were received for the shared cost
SIDEWALK
sidewalk program:
PROGRAM
Bidder Amount
FMT Concrete$49,375.00
Plaza Construction 50,487.50
Illinois Concrete Corp. 53,782.50
GEM Construction 85,120.00
Unison Construction 58,700.00
Pyramid Concrete', 61,200.00
C & A Construction 66,335.00
Globe Construction 72,375.00
Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Corcoran, moved
to concur with the recommendation of the administration
and accept the low bid submitted by FMT Concrete in the
amount of $49,375.00 for the shared cost sidewalk
program.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ANY 0THER BUSINESS
SWANCC
Trustee Clowes questioned the increased in casts far
personnel in SWANCC' and asked that the Board be
provided with information as to the actual direct
salaries.
RESIGNATION
Mayor Farley announced that John Fulton Dixon had
JOHN F. DIXON
submitted his resignation as Village Manager. In order
for the Village to continue operations without
interruption, the Village Board had considered
potential candidates for the position of Village
Manager. Following several Executive Sessions the
Village Board made an offer to Michael E. Jannis to
assume the position of Village Manager.
EXECUTIVE
Mayor Farley stated that while the agenda reflects an
SESSION
Executive session for the purpose of discussing
Page 10 - June 16, 1992
I
Personnel, it would not be necessary if it was
the pleasure of the Board to make motions to
accept the resignation agreement with John Fulton
Dixon and to authorize execution of an employment
agreement with Michael E. Janonis.
Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Clowes, moved
to consider items not listed on the agenda.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Clowes, moved
to authorize execution of the resignation agreement
with John Fulton Dixon, effective July 5, 1992.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved
to authorize entering into an employment contract
with Michael E. Janonis as Village Manager effective
July 6, 1992.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ADJOURNMENT ADJOURN
There being no further business to come before
the Village Board, Mayor Farley declared the
meeting adjourned.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:12 P.M.
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
Page 11 - June 16, 1992
General & Spcdal Revenue Fund
General Fund
Refuse Disposal Fund
Motor Fuel Tax
Community Development Block Grant Fund
Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund
Enterprise Funds
Water & Sewer Fund
Parking System Revenue
Internal Service Funds
Risk Management Fund
Vehicle Replacement Fund
vital Protects
Capital Improvement Fund
Downtown Redev Const Funds
Police & Fire Building Construction
Flood Control Construction Fund
Debt Service Funds
19
Flexcomp Trust Fund
Escrow Deposit Fund
Police Pension Fund
Firemen's Pension Fund
Benefit Trust Funds
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
CASH POSITION
June 30, 1992
Cash & Invest Receipts Disbursements Cash & Invest
Balance 6/12/92 through Per Attached Journal Balance
6111192 6/3Q/92 Dist of Bills Entry 6130192
$ 2,724,417
$1,082,939
$ 631,738
< 51,000> $ 3,124,618
179,730
34,364
209,558
4,536
627,050
-
241,828
385,222
26,654
-
17,817
8,837
13,334
17,852
82,002
51,000 184
3,087,460
208,155
123,587
3,172,028
164,661
9,339
1,684
172,316
1,182,944
17,154
126,129
1,073,969
1,109,197
-
10,898
1,008,299
1,299,991
80,217
27,358
1,352,850
551,870
-
7,765
544,105
4,565,704
-
3,260
4,562,444
4,618,489
81,740
46,463
4,653,766
1,027,876
-
139,026
888,850
1,654
4,749
-
6,403
1,420,103
34,445
28,337
1,426,211
17,482,401
47,734
41,472
17,488,663
19,358,200
79,251
50,685
19,386,766
242,5
-
242.925
4 1
VENDOR
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
ABC PLUMBING
GERALD ADAMS
AHERN SIGN CO.
AMERICAN COMFORT GROUP, INC.
GERALD ANKERHOLTZ
ARROW ROAD CONSTRUCTION
MARY F. BERGER
BISHOP PLUMBING COMPANY
ALBERT F. BOLDT
KEVIN BOLGER
HERBERT BRANT
BROADACRE CONSULTING COMPANY
C & C ROOFING
CAB PLUMBING & SEWER
JOHN CAGLE SEWER
THOMAS CALCATERRA
JOHN CANTIERI
MARY E. CARNEY
ANTHONY CAROLAN
CHICAGO TITLE & TRUST COMPANY
MICHAEL CIMA
CITIBANK, N.A.
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
HENRY COCO
COLDWELL BANKERS RELOCATION
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
COUNTRYSIDE COURT
CREATIVE DECK BUILDERS, INC.
CROSSTOWN ELECTRIC
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 1
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
C10355 ABC PLBG
$100.00
$100.00
C10026 ADAMS
$75.00
$75.00
1543 AHERN SIGN CO
$100.00
$100.00
C10841 AMERICAN COMFORT
$100.00
$100.00
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$1.25
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$12.50
$13.75
STREET RECONSTRUCTION
$2,484.29
STREET RECONSTRUCTION
$151,392.85
$153,877.14
VEHICLE REFUND
$30.00
$30.00
C10692 BISHOP PLBG
$100.00
$100.00
RESIDENT RE TR TAX REBATE
$380.00
$380.00
C10607 BOLGER, KEVIN
$100.00
$100:00
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$5.00
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$.50
$5.50
CONSULTING SERVICES
$11,033.23
$11,033.23
C10716 C&C ROOFING
$100.00
$100.00
C10862 CAB SEWER
$100.00
$100.00
C10778 JOHN CAGLE SEWER
$100.00
$100.00
C10913 CALCATERRA
$35.00
$35.00
010753 CANTIERI
$35.00
$35.00
S C SIDEWALK REFUND
$96.00
$96.00
C 0401 CAROLAN
$475.00
$475.00
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$11.90
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$1.20
$13.10
C10835 CIMA
$100.O0
C10835 CIMA
$35.00
$135.00*
PMT INSURANCE CLAIMS -GAB
$900.52
PMT IJNSUR%ANCE CLAIMS -GAB
$3,868.46
$4,768.98*
PMT PRREFUND
$25
$224.25*
AMBULANCE PMT
$11 0505..0202
$105.02
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$9.52
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$.96
$10.48
BOXWOOD STREET LIGHT IMP
$889.75
$889.75*
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$2.50
$2.50
C10777 CREATIVE DECK
$100.00
$100.00
1557 CROSSTOWN ELECTRIC
$100.00
$100.00
[t/N zII *
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
DES PLAINES LAWN SPRINKLERS
DISBURSEMENT ACCT
DO IT RIGHT ROOTER
DOYLE SIGNS, INC
EHMAN, INC.
ELEGANT CONCEPTS
ELEK-TEK, INC.
ELEK-TEK, INC.
PAUL ENGERISER
EVERYTHING'S A DOLLAR, INC.
FARNESI ASSOCIATION INC
FIRST GENERAL SYSTEMATIC SERV.
FOX VALLEY FIRE
RICHARD FRAHM
LISA FREECHACK
WILLIAM C. FRENCH
JAMES FULLER
FUN STATION
MARIO GAMBINO LANDSCAPING INC
GEISER-BERNER
BALDEV GILL
GREAT LAKES FIRE EQUIPMENT
EMIL GREINKE
GULDEN-BITTEL SEWER SERV
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 2
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30%92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
C9859 DES PLAINES LAWN
$100.00
$100.00
PZR ENDING 6/25/92
$408,439.73
P/R ENDING 6/25/92
$1,347.65
P/R ENDING 6/25/92
$748.20
P/R ENDING 6/25/92
$40,435.39
P R ENDING 6/25792
$1,713.04
$452,684.01*
C 119 DO IT RIGHT ROOTER
$50.00
C9360 DO IT RIGHT ROOTER
$50.00
$100.00
1504 DOYLE SIGNS
$100.00
1553 DOYLE SIGNS
$100.00
1559 DOYLE SIGNS
$100.00
$300.00
VGA MONITOR
$413.95
$413.95
1562 ELEGANT CONCEPTS
$100.00
$100.00
COMPUTER SUPPLIES
$270.00
$270.00
COMPUTER EQUIPMENT
$2,615.99
SOFTWARE
$588.89
$3,204.88
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$30.94
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$3.12
$34.06
BUSINESS LICENSE OVERPMT
$75.00
$75.00
C8626 FARNESI ASSC
$100.00
$100.00
C10542 FIRST GENERAL SYS SERV
$150.00
$150.00
C11049 FOX VALLEY FIRE
$100.00
$100.00
C10613 FRAHM
$100.00
$100.00
C9507 FREEJACK
$100.00
$100.00
REFUND STICKER OVERPMTS
$16.00
$16.00
C10941 FULLER
$75.00
$75.00
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$4.76
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$.48
$5.24
SODDING
$1,949.00
$1,949.00
C8047 GEISER BERNER
$75.00
$75.00
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$11.90
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$1.20
$13.10
TOOLS
$1,173.75
$1,173.75
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$4.29
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$.42
$4.71
C10711 GULDEN BITTLE
$75.00
$75.00
VENDOR
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
H -B -K WATER METER SERVICE
L. R. HEIN CONSTRUCTION CO.
BRUCE HENIKEN
IBBOTSON HEATING CO.
ILLINOIS MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT
IMRF VOLUNTARY LIFE
INTERNATIONAL ELEVATOR SERVICE
J & L BUILDERS
STEVEN R. JENKINS CO., INC.
ERIC JONES
ANDREA JUSZCZYK
DARSHAN JUTLA
KAUSHAGEN CONST
KINNEY SHOE CORPORATION
CHARLES KLEHM & SON NURSERY
PETER KLUG
KIMINORI KUMADA
GARY KUZMANIC
LAKE -COOK FARM SUPPLY COMPANY
DAVID LOCKARD
MARCRES MANUFACTURING
ROBERT MARTINSON
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 3
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT 'DOTAL
WATER METER LABOR
$547.17
WATER METER LABOR
$214.11
WATER METER LABOR
$1,498.77
$2,260.05
C10283 LR HEIN
$100.00
$100.00
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$.96
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$9.52
$10.48
C10802 IBBOTSON
$100.00
$100.00
EMPLOYEE SHARE IMRF JUNE 92
$16,685.61
EMPLOYER SHARE IMRF JUNE 92
$41,862.02
$58,547.63
P R JULY 1992
$225.00
$225.00
C 352 INTERNATIONAL
$100.00
$100.00
C10535 J&L BLDRS
$20.00
$20.00
JACKETS
$363.93
$363.93
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$9.52
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$10.48
PMT P/R 6/25
$25$.96
0
$254.00*
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$1.20
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$11.90
$13.10
C10572 KAUSHAGEN
$75.00
$75.00
SHOES
$67.99
SHOES
$52.01
$120.00
2 CRABAPPLE TREES
$100.00
TREE
$199.00
TREE
$400.00
TREES
$3,083.00
TREES
$4,727.00
TREE
$650.00
$9,159.00
C10884 KLUG
$100.00
$100.00
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$2.38
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$.24
$2.62
C9957 KUZMANIC
$100.00
$100.00
NO LEAD GASOLINE
$9,326.48
$9,326.48
C8594 LOCKARD
$100.00
$100.00
010648 MARCRES
$75.00
C9945 MACRES MFG
$475.00
$550.00
06368 MARTINSON
$75.00
$75.00
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 4
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6%30/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
ROBERT MCELHATTAN
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$7.14
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$.72
$7.86
RAYMOND R. MCKEE
RESIDENT RE TR TAX REBATE
$366.00
$366.00
NBD BANK MOUNT PROSPECT, N.A.
DUE TO FED DEP PR 6/11
$1,353.32
DUE TO FED DEP PR 6/11
$112.00
DUE TO FED DEP PR 6/11
$98.50
DUE TO FED DEP PR 6/11
$11,530.67
DUE TO FED DEP PR 6/11
$3,018.12
DUE TO FED DEP PR 6 11
$56.77
SAVINGS BONDS PR 6/25
$500.00
DUE TO FED DEP PR /25
$3,039.60
DUE TO FED DEP PR 6/25
$101.99
DUE TO FED DEP PR 6/25
$1,295.56
DUE TO FED DEP PR 6/25
$113.61
DUE TO FED DEP PR 6/25
$11,923.35
DUE TO FED DEP PR 6/25
$56.73
$33,200.22*
TIM O'CONNELL
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$11.90
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$1.20
$13.10
OLYMPIC SIGNS, INC.
1494 OLYMPIC SIGNS
$120.00
$120.00
PALDO SIGN & DISPLAY CO.
1546 PALDO SIGN
$100.00
$100.00
PANTRY EXPRESS
1554 PANTRY EXPRESS
$100.00
1555 PANTRY EXPRESS
$100.00
$200.00
LYNN PATE
RECAPTURE FEE
$6,293.45
$6,293.45
PEDERSEN & HOUPT
APRIL CREDIT
$37.95 -
APRIL CREDIT
$446.25-
$484.20
PENSION DISBURSEMENTS
JUNE POLICE PENSION DISB
$41,471.80
JUNE FIRE PENSION DISB
$50,685.13
$92,156.93*
KENNETH PHILLIPS
REFUND WATER PMT
$100.00
$100.00
ELLEN PLATE
PMT P/R 6/25
$225.00
$225.00*
HATIM POONAWALLA
C106255 POONAWALLA
$100.00
$100.00
PRINCETON BUILDERS
C6338 PRINCETON BLDRS
$500.00
$500.00
PROSPECT CITGO
1529 PROSPECT CITGO
$100.00
1530 PROSPECT CITGO
$100.00
1531 PROSPECT CITGO
$100.00
$300.00
PUBLIX OFFICE SUPPLIES INC.
FILE CABINETS
$1,558.00
FRT ON FILE CABINETS
$86.21
$1,644.21
VENDOR
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
R & R UNIFORMS INC.
R J & G SEWER
R M C CONSTRUCTION
RETAIL CONSTRUCTION
RICK'S BLACKTOP
MAUREEN ROMESBURG
RUEGSEGGER LANDSCAPING
G. SCHENDEL
MARGARET M. SCHWIND
LEA SEVIGNY
SIGN CENTRAL INC.
SIGNCRAFTERS
STANDARD ENTERPRISES
STATE OF ILLINOIS
STEDER CONSTRUCTION
SUBURBAN BRANCH A.P.W.A.
THE SUN BED ETC.
SURE LIGHT SIGNS
TESSENDORF MECHANICAL
THIRD DISTRICT CIRCUIT COURT
JAMES TOFF
DANIEL TOKARSKI
TURF SPRAY
PHYLLIS UDANY
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 5
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6130%92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
SHIRTS
$56.25
$56.25
C10264RJG SEWER
$100.00
C10570
RJG SEWER
$100.00
$200.00
C10906
RMC CONST
$450.00
$450.00
C7862
RETAIL CONST
$500.00
$500.00
C11149
RICHS BLACKTOP
$15.00
$15.00
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$1.20
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$11.90
$13.10
C10459
RUEGSEGGER
$100.00
C10853
RUEGSEGGER
$100.00
$200.00
C10654
D SCHENDEL
$100.00
$100.00
REFUND
DUPLICATE STICKER
$5.00
$5.00
REFUND
OVERPMT
$2.00
$2.00
1566
SIGN CENTRAL
$100.00
$100.00
1547
SIGNCRAFTERS
$100.00
1551
SIGNCRAFTERS
$100.00
$200.00
1544
STANDARD ENTERPRISES
$100.00
$100.00
LIQUOR
APP RCD CKIKIM
$70.00
LIQUOR
APP RCD CK CHONGIYI
$70.00
$140.00*
C10712
STEDER CONST
$100.00
$100.00
SEMINAR -GRAHAM
$25.00
$25.00
C11051
SUN BED
$100.00
$100.00
1387
SURE LIGHT
$100.00
1388
SURE LIGHT
$100.00
1389
SURE LIGHT
$100.00
$300.00
C10466
TESSENDORF
$500.00
$500.00
920612
BOND MONEY
$1,100.00
920617
BOND MONEY
$2,550.00
920619
BOND MONEY
$4,398.00
920626
BOND MONEY
$1,350.00
920630
BOND MONEY
$750.00
$10,148.00*
C10868
TOFF
$100.00
$100.00
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$31.54
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$3.17
$34.71
C10062
TURF SPRAY
$100.00
$100.00
REFUND
DUPLICATE PMT
$125.00
$125.00
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 6
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-EXTENS
REGISTER FRONTZAK
$700.00
$700.00
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
C10026 ADAMS
$25.00
C10401 CAROLAN
$25.00
C10535 J & L BUILDERS
$30.00
C10572 KAUSHAGEN CONST
$25.00
C10648 MACRES MFG
$25.00
C10711 GULDEN BITTLE
$25.00
C10906 RMC CONST
$50.00
C10941 JAMES FULLER
$25.00
C3015 VIAN CONST
$100.00
C3048 BU WHA KIM
$100.00
C6368 MARTINSON
$25.00
C8047 GEISER BERNER
$25.00
C9119 DO IT RIGHT ROOTER
$50.00
C9360 DO IT RIGHT ROOTER
$50.00
C9945 MACRES MFG
$25.00
$605.00
VILLAGE SEWER
C10987 VILLAGE SEWER
$100.00
$100.00
T. WILLIAMS & SON, INC.
1540 T WILLIAMS
$100.00
1541 T WILLIAMS
$100.00
$200.00
WILSON'S LANDSCAPE CONT. INC.
TREE PLANTING
$7,495.00
$7,495.00
KARL WINTERSTEIN
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$9.52
REFUND FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$.96
$10.48
DAN WITONSKI
C10827 WITONSKI
$100.00
$100.00
WOLF AND COMPANY
1991/92 AUDIT$750.00
19911[92 AUDIT
$750.00
$1,500.00
WORKMASTERS
C10738 WORKMASTERS
$100.00
C10876 WORKMASTERS
$100.00
$200.00
JANET ZITZEWICZ
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$.62
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$6.32
$6.94
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
***TOTAL**
$875,410.22
GENERAL FUND
$453,232.15 REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND
$1,938.65.
MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND
$151,392.85 COMMUNITY DEVLPMT
BLOCK GRANT
$1,548.14
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 7
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
ILL. MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT FUND $82,001.65 WATER & SEWER FUND $49,728.47
PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND $861.70 RISK MANAGEMENT FUND $4,768.98
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND $1,949.00 DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1991 $7,495.00
POLICE PENSION FUND $41,471.80 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND $50,685.13
ESCROW DEPOSIT FUND $28,336.70
VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
BUSSE'S FLOWERS & GIFTS
CENTRAL CONTINENTAL BAKERY
JOHN F. DIXON
MISSIONARIES OF CHARITY
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
SCHWEPPE & SONS
VILLAGE OF ELK GROVE VILLAGE
SYM STAND JOHANSON
SYMPATHY-KOVASNAY
SYMPATHY -CALABRESE
SYMPATHY-CAFFARELLI
SWEET ROLLS 75TH ANN COMM
EXPENSES
THULIN DONATION
MISC EXPENSES
SUPPLIES
2 DINNER-FARLEY
$175.00
LEGAL
$68.50
$549.10
$68.50
LEGAL
$43.50
$355.50
$6.48
$6.48
$3,650.00
$3,650.00*
$50.00
$50.00-
$121.53
$121.53*
$8.75
$8.75
$50.00
$50.00*
VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES ***TOTAL** $4,242.26
GENERAL FUND $4,242.26
********************************************************************************************************
VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE
ARNSTEIN & LEHR MAY
LEGAL
SERVICES
$549.10
MAY
LEGAL
SERVICES
$134.00
MAY
LEGAL
SERVICES
$166.50
MAY
LEGAL
SERVICES
$12.00
MAY
LEGAL
SERVICES
$55.50
MAY
LEGAL
SERVICES
$447.10
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 8
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30192
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$1,082.25
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$3,980.24
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$480.60
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$111.00
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$16.55
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$172.90
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$820.33
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$55.50
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$555.00
$8,638.57
CERTIFIED REPORTING COMPANY
SERVICES RENDERED
$386.95
SERVICES RENDERED
$65.25
$452.20
JOHN F. DIXON
ADVANCED EXPENSES
$520.00
EXPENSES
$2.66
$522.66*
ENGRAVING & SIGNS
NAME SIGN-JANONIS
$19.74
$19.74
HOLY FAMILY HOSPITAL
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
CREDIT JESSE
$23.00 -
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$53.00
EMPLOYEE EXAM
$30.00
$749.00
DAVID C. JEPSON
DEPT DIRECTORS MTG
$80.36
$80.36
MARKLUND CHILDREN'S HOME
DIXON RETIREMENT GIFT
$500.00
$500.00*
JOHN MILNE
SUBPOENA FEE
$30.00
$30.00*
PEDERSEN & HOUPT
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$102.95
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$892.50
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$370.75
********************************************************************************************************
COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION
GLORIA BARLETTA
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
$25.00
PAGE 9
BUSSE'S FLOWERS & GIFTS
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
$55.00
$55.00
CHICAGO SUBURBAN TIMES NEWSPAP
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
$33.00
$33.00
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE
SERVICE
$30.63
$30.63
PHYLLIS MOLIERE
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$16.25
$25.00
SUSAN MUELLER
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$29.70
$25.00
NATOA/NLC
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$27.64
$105.00
NFLCP
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$42.68
$305.00*
CHERYL L. PASALIC
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$332.80
$1,815.27
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISC EXPENSES$63.82
$22.55
$63.82*
PETTY CASH - FIRE DEPT.
EXPENSES
$15.91
$15.91*
SHERATON BOSTON HOTEL & TOWERS
DEPOSIT -WEEKS
$500.00
$500.00*
BARRY A. SPRINGER
MAY LEGAL FEES
$2,410.93
$2,410.93
JEFFREY WULBECKER
MISC EXPENSE
$18.80
$18.80
VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE
***TOTAL**
$15,817.26
GENERAL FUND
$15,817.26
********************************************************************************************************
COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION
GLORIA BARLETTA
COMM ASST BD MTG
$25.00
$25.00
BUSSE'S FLOWERS & GIFTS
SYMPATHY-CAFFARELLI
$55.00
$55.00
CHICAGO SUBURBAN TIMES NEWSPAP
SUBSCRIPTION
$33.00
$33.00
HEWLETT PACKARD
MTCE AGREEMENT
$84.00
$84.00
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO.
SERVICE
$30.63
$30.63
PHYLLIS MOLIERE
COMM ASST COW MTG
$25.00
$25.00
SUSAN MUELLER
COMM ASST BD MTG
$25.00
$25.00
NATOA/NLC
PROGRAMMING ENTRIES
$105.00
$105.00
NFLCP
REGISTER PASALIC/SANBORN
$305.00
$305.00*
CHERYL L. PASALIC
ADVANCE NFLCP CONF EXPENSE
$188.75
$188.75
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISC EXPENSES
$22.55
$22.55*
CHRIS SANBORN
EXPENSE NFLCP CONF
$386.89
$386.89
WALTER SOSIN
COMM ASST COW MTG
$25.00
$25.00
COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION
***TOTAL**
$1,310.82
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 10
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
GENERAL FUND $1,310.82
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
AA PRINTERS, INC.
RE TRANSFER TAX FORMS
$652.05
$652.05
BUSSE'S FLOWERS & GIFTS
FLOWERS
$33.50
$33.50
BUTLER PAPER COMPANY
WHITE COPY PAPER
$63.70
$63.70
THE DRAWING BOARD INC.
IST CLASS MAIL LABELS
$66.96
$66.96
ELEK-TEK, INC.
SOFTWARE
$.08
$.08
FORMS GROUP
PAYROLL CHECKS
$329.62
$329.62
ILLINOIS CPA SOCIETY
DUES-WIDMER
$115.00
$115.00
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISC EXPENSES
$13.94
$13.94*
PITNEY BOWES INC.
MAIL SCALE MTCE AGREEMENT
$171.00
$171.00
PUBLIX OFFICE SUPPLIES INC.
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$189.44
$189.44
RCM DATA CORP
CARTRIDGES
$660.08
$660.08
SECRETARY OF STATE
NOTARY FEE-WIDMER
$10.00
$10.00
XEROX CORPORATION
MAY CHGS 1090 COPIER
$2,973.97
$2,973.97
XL/DATACOMP INC.
JUNE MICE SERVICE
$13.04
$13.04
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
***TOTAL**
$5,292.38
GENERAL FUND $5,292.38
********************************************************************************************************
VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE
PADDOCK PUBLICATIONS INC LEGAL
PAGE
$42.20
LEGAL
PAGE
$47.47
LEGAL
PAGE
$73.85
LEGAL
PAGE
$68.57
LEGAL
PAGE
$63.30
LEGAL
PAGE
$60.66
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 11
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6%30192
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE
LEGAL PAGE
$68.57
LEGAL
$73.85
$498.47
POSTMASTER
POSTAGEAGE FOR NEWSLETTER
$2,817.00
$2,817.00*
VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE
***TOTAL**
$3,315.47
GENERAL FUND
$3,315.47
********************************************************************************************************
RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
BROOKFIELD
PPO SERVICE FEE
$313.95
JULY ADMIN FEES
$4,405.16
JULY EXCESS LOSS PREMIUM
$10,503.02
MEDICAL CLAIMS THRU 6117
$31,017.77
MED CLAIMS THRU 6125
$45,063.74
MEDICAL CLAIMS TH U 6129
$8,308.47
$99,612.11*
FORT DEARBORN LIFE INSURANCE
LIFE INS JULY 92
$2,115.26
$2,115.26
GAB BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.
REIMBURSEMENT
$378.00
$378.00
VIRGINIA GARDNER
FULLIFINAL SETTLEMENT
$653.67
$653.67
HMO ILLINOIS
JULY HEALTH INSURANCE
$8,441.50
$8,441.50
HOBBS GROUP, INC.
SURETY PREMIUM
$900.00
SURETY PREMIUM
$350.00
SURETY PREMIUM
$1,150.00
CRIME PREMIUM
$1,129.00
SURETY PREMIUM
$350.00
PRIMARY GENERAL LIABILITY$1,571.50
PRIVICESRY -HEMESATHENERAL LIABILITY
,53,608.50
$9,059.00
HOLY FAMILY HOSPITAL
SER
$.00
9
9
$$.00
LORETTA PAPE
REIMB DAMAGED MAILBOX
$19.98
$19.98
1
$1
POSTMASTER
POSTAGE FOR HLTH MAGAZINE
$67.33
$67.33*
THUNDERBIRD.LANES
STATE TREASURER
RATE ADJ FUND ASSESSMENT
$299.85
EMPLOYEE HLTHIFITNESS
$144.00
$144.00*
VENDOR
RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
INSPECTION SERVICES
ANDERSON PEST CONTROL
RODNEY ERB
FAIRVIEW PRINTING SERVICE
FROSTLINE
DAN JAKES
NORTHWEST ELECTRICAL SUPPLY
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
TRI STATE ELECTRONIC CORPORATI
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-EXTENS
WORDPERFECT PUBLISHING CORP.
XEROX CORPORATION
XL/DATACOMP INC.
INSPECTION SERVICES
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE. 6%30/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
$121,359.70
INVOICE AMOUNT
***TOTAL**
PAGE 12
$121,359.70
SEWER BAITING
$260.00
$260.00
CLOTHING ALLOWANCE
$111.43
$111.43
PERMIT FORMS
$842.00
BUSINESS CARDS-ROELS
$30.00
PLBG SEWER WORK APPS
$248.00
ELECTRICAL WORK PERMITS
$189.00
FORMS
$51.00
FORMS
$33.00
$1,393.00
REPAIRS
$90.32
$90.32
CLOTHING ALLOWANCE
$100.00
$100.00
SUPPLIES
$144.00
SUPPLIES
$42.26
$186.26
MISC EXPENSES
$13.94
MISC EXPENSES
12.00
MISC EXPENSES
818.76
$44.70*
SUPPLIES
$327.00
$327.00
REGISTER FRONTZAK
$450.00-
$450.00
SUBSCRIPTION
$24.00
$24.00
DRY INK PLUS
$216.00
SERVICE CALL
$140.90
SERVICE CALL
$32.90
$389.80
JUNE MTCE SERVICE
$13.04
$13.04
***TOTAL**
$2,489.55
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 13
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6130/92
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
GENERAL FUND $2,489.55
POLICE DEPARTMENT
AETNA TRUCK PARTS
PARTS
10.88
PARTS
50.57
PARTS
$107.15
PARTS
$18.60
PARTS
$71.70
$258.90
BOWMAN DISTRIBUTION CENTER
SUPPLIES
$236.84
$236.84
JACK BROGAN
EXPENSES
$83.20
$83.20
BUSSE'S FLOWERS & GIFTS
FLOWERS
$63.00
$63.00
CRAIG CHARAK
EXPENSES
$100.00
$100.00
COMPUSERVE, INC
COMPUTER SVC INFO
$10.00
$10.00
COMPUTERLAND
COMPUTER SUPPLIES
$300.00
$300.00
JOHN DAHLBERG
EXPENSES
$12.00
$12.00
DIRECT SAFETY COMPANY
GLOVES
$254.31
$254.31
FULLER'S CARWASH DES PLAINES
MAY92 CAR WASHES
$447.00
$447.00
GALL'S, INC.
BATONS
$96.46
$96.46
H R HART PHOTO
FILM PROCESSING
$3.42
FILM PROCESSING
$13.78
FILM PROCESSING
$5.19
FILM PROCESSING
$11.86
FILM PROCESSING
$3.55
FILM PROCESSING
$10.04
FILM PROCESSING
$14.63
FILM PROCESSING
$7.34
$69.81
HANSEN ASSOCIATES
MTCE & COPIES
$129.74
MTCE & COPIES
$105.70
MTCE & COPIES
$143.36
$378.80
I.C.P.A.
DUES-ROSCOP/WAGNER
$50.00
$50.00
I -PAC
MEMBERSHIP
$50.00
$50.00
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO.
SERVICE
$149.94
$149.94
ILLINOIS STATE POLICE ACADEMY
TUITION-NOWAK
$60.00
$60.00
STEVEN R. JENKINS CO., INC.
JACKETS
$4.38
$4.38
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 14
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6%30/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
POLICE DEPARTMENT
KALE UNIFORMS, INC.
SHOES
$68.95
UNIFORM SUPPLIES
$85.80
$154.75
LION PHOTO SUPPLY INC.
CAMERA & SUPPLIES
$583.76
FILM BATTERIES
$283.25
CREDIT
$449.90-
PHOTO SUPPLIES
8.90
PHOTO SUPPLIES
$ 8.12
$494.13
LOKL BUSINESS PRODUCTS & OFFIC
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$117.28
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$59.80
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$52.42
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$19.75
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$132.00
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$326.95
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$29.70
$737.90
NATIONAL SEMINARS GROUP
TUITION-NICHOLSON
$59.00
$59.00
MICHAEL NELSON
EXPENSES
$100.00
$100.00
NORTHWEST POLICE ACADEMY
BANAS%LEE%GAVEL/BESTHOFF
$100.00
$100.00
RAY O'HERRON CO., INC.
BAL DUE-SUPPLIES
$49.80
SCANNER
$164.25
EQUIPMENT
$1,539.89
$1,753.94
ORDER FROM HORDER
SUPPLIES
$48.48
SUPPLIES
$48.48
SUPPLIES
$48.48
SUPPLIES
$48.49
SUPPLIES
$43.85
$237.78
PERF PUBLICATIONS
PUBLICATIONS
$50.05
$50.05
ERIC E. PIEE
RADIO REPAIRS
$215.00
$215.00
PREMIER MOTORING ACCESS., INC.
SUPPLIES
$185.85
$185.85*
PROSPECT BOARDING KENNEL
APRIL 92 STRAYS
$425.00
$425.00
QUALITY DISCOUNT AUTO PARTS
PARTS
$50.64
PARTS
$48.70
PARTS
$35.40
PARTS
$9.48
PARTS
$17.64
$161.86
QUICK PRINT PLUS, INC.
FORMS
$107.25
$107.25
RAPP'S
PARTS
$48.16
********************************************************************************************************
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
AAA TRAVEL AGENCY
VILLAGE OF 'MOUNT PROSPECT
$265.00
PAGE 15
AMBER, DENNIS
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
$407.84
$407.84
DON ANDERSON
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
$69.06
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
POLICE DEPARTMENT
SUPPLIES
$33.74
$126.63
ARMSTRONG MEDICAL IND. INC.
PARTS
$217.02
$265.18
ROBERT RIORDAN
SEMINAR EXPENSES
$54.96
$54.96
ROBERT RZEPECKI
EXPENSES
$18.00
$18.00
SAYE -A -PET
APRIL 92 STRAYS
$245.00
$245.00
STANARD & ASSOCIATES, INC.
COMM SVC OFFICER TESTS
$444.00
$444.00
STREICHER'S
8 DOOR OPENING TOOLS
$76.65
10 DOOR OPENING TOOLS
$93.85
$170.50
TREASURER, STATE OF ILLINOIS
USER FEES
$11,820.00
$11,820.00
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBA
TUITION-BROGAN/SMITH
$830.00
$830.00
VHF COMMUNICATIONS INC.
RADIO REPAIRS
$258.00
DIO
1ASET
$39.00
$29.00
WEST PUBLISHING CO.
ILPREVISED STATUTES
$191.50
$1911.50
WIPECO INC
POLO RAGS
$203.36
$203.36
WOLF CAMERA AND VIDEO
FILM
$118.86
FILM
$452.50
$571.36
POLICE DEPARTMENT
***TOTAL**
$22,518.01
GENERAL FUND
$22,518.01
********************************************************************************************************
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
AAA TRAVEL AGENCY
AIRFARE TO NFA
$265.00
$265.00
AMBER, DENNIS
EXPENSES
$407.84
$407.84
DON ANDERSON
SUPPLIES
$69.06
SUPPLIES
$23.83
SUPPLIES
$33.74
$126.63
ARMSTRONG MEDICAL IND. INC.
CHAIR COT
$1,675.00
$1,675.00
THE BEDDING EXPERTS
5 SETS -BEDDING
$900.00
$900.00
ANDY BROUSEAU
EXPENSES
$20.00
$20.00
CAREER TRACK PUBLICATIONS,INC.
REGISTER FELSKI
$99.00
$99.00
CELLULAR ONE - CHICAGO
SERVICE
$254.28
$254.28
VENDOR
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
CHAMPION SALES CORP.
CHICAGO COMM. SERVICE, INC.
CITY OF DES PLAINES
COLFAX WELDING FABRICATING
COMPUTERLAND
CONNECT INC.
CUMBERLAND SERVICENTER INC.
DOUGLAS TRUCK PARTS
EDUCATION ALLIANCE
ELEK-TEK, INC.
EMERGENCY RESOURCES, INC.
EXPERT ADVISOR VIDEO
FULLER'S CARWASH DES PLAINES
GALL'S, INC.
GIUSEPPE'S ITALIAN RESTAURANT
GOODYEAR SERVICE STORES
H R HART PHOTO
HANSEN ASSOCIATES
HIGH TECH
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO
ILLINOIS FIRE INSPECTORS ASSN.
IOMEGA CORPORATION
LONNIE JACKSON
KAR PRODUCTS INC
KINNEY SHOE CORPORATION
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 16
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
MICE SUPPLIES
$469.43
$469.43
SERVICE
$109.64
SERVICE
$105.00
PARTS
$156.50
$371.14
CLASS -CANNING
$150.00
$150.00
STEEL
$46.02
$46.02
APPLE TALK ADAPTERS
$29.00
$29.00
BASE RATE FOR SERVICE
$22.04
6 MONTHS USAGE
$96.00
$118.04
SAFETY LANE COUPONS
$52.00
$52.00
SUPPLIES
$37.14
$37.14
COMPUTER SERVICE
$387.50
$387.50
COMPUTER SUPPLIES
$1.25-
$1.25
PUBLICATIONS
$43.21
$43.21
VIDEO
$127.90
$127.90
MAY92 CAR WASHES
$20.00
$20.00
RADIO CARRIER
$104.43
SMOKE CUTTER LIGHTS
$147.40
$251.83
EMERG SVCS PIZZAS
$20.00
$20.00
REPAIR FLAT TIRE
$12.25
WHEEL BALANCE
$170.02
$182.27
SUPPLIES
$249.90
$249.90
MTCE & COPIES
$129.75
MTCE & COPIES
$105.70
MTCE & COPIES
$143.36
$378.81
SHOES
$42.75
$42.75
SERVICE
$192.14
SERVICE
$75.08
SERVICE
$106.31
SERVICE
21.76
SERVICE
21.64
$416.93
REGISTER CORR/WISNIEWSKI
$250.00
$250.00
COMPUTER EQUIPMENT
$644.00
$644.00
EXPENSES
$162.48
$162.48
SUPPLIES
$179.51
$179.51
SHOES
$7.93
$7.93
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 17
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30%92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
LIQUID AIR CORPORATION
OXYGEN CYL RENTAL
$20.00
$20.00
LOKL BUSINESS PRODUCTS & OFFIC
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$53.65
$53.65
M & R RADIATOR INC.
REPAIRS
$80.87
REPAIRS
$33.00
$202.50
$316.37
MAC TOOLS
REPAIRS
$43.30
$43.30
MAC'S FIRE AND SAFETY, INC.
1 PR RANGER BOOT
$94.50
$90.50
MACACADEMY
SYSTEM 7.0 VIDEO
$53.00
$53.00
JOHN MALCOLM - F.D.
TUITION REIMB
$141.69
$141.69
MORTON GROVE AUTOMOTIVE WEST
REBUILD SIRENS
$110.00
$110.00
NAPA -HEIGHTS AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY
PARTS
$165.00
PARTS
$55.38
PARTS
$50.20
PARTS
$5.10
PARTS
$130.28
PARTS
$41.99
CREDIT
$2.55 -
PARTS
$43.14
PARTS
$9.69
PARTS
$38.56
PARTS
$56.59
PARTS
$300.00
PARTS
$15.25
PARTS
$70.95
PARTS
$12.70
PARTS
$17.99
$1,010.27
NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL
REGISTER-ULREICH/KORDECKI
$500.00
$500.00
NORTHEASTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSI
HLTH EVAL-HUNT/KOEPPEN
$560.00
$560.00
NORTHWEST ELECTRICAL SUPPLY
SUPPLIES
$139.53
$139.53
NORTHWEST FORD TRUCK CENTER
CLUTCH
$139.78
$139.78
PETTY CASH - FIRE DEPT.
EXPENSES
$2.67
EXPENSES
$8.96
EXPENSES
$66.59
EXPENSES
$29.36
EXPENSES
$14.27
EXPENSES
$5.00
VENDOR
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
PROMAC
PROFESSIONAL FINISH
SAVANT WELDING SUPPLY, INC.
R. SCHMITT
TERRACE SUPPLY COMPANY
TRISTAR INDUSTRIES/AAA FASTEN.
XEROX CORPORATION
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
GENERAL FUND
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 18
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
EXPENSES
$13.57
EXPENSES
$15.00
SES
$10.31
$$49.73*
1XYRNSUBSCRIPTION
$49.95
$49.95
CLEANING SUPPLIES
$85.78
$85.78
OXYGEN CYLINDER
$70.96
$70.96
3 BACKPACKS
$195.00
$195.00
SUPPLIES
$56.42
$.63
PHIL PHMS
$56.63
$
$56$56.42
SUPPLIES
$121.75
$121.75
***TOTAL**
$12,605.60
$11,467.30
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
$1,138.30
CENTRAL DISPATCH SERVICES
NORTHWEST CENTRAL DISPATCH SYS JULY SERVICES RENDERED $29,484.50 $29,484.50
CENTRAL DISPATCH SERVICES ***TOTAL**
$29,484.50
GENERAL FUND $29,484.50
********************************************************************************************************
HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION
AATP REGISTER -MORGAN $65.00 $65.00
AMERICAN TAXI CO.,INC. SENIOR TAXI RIDES $331.05 $331.05
GENERAL FUND
$2,173.41
********************************************************************************************************
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BROADACRE CONSULTING COMPANY
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
$10,668.22
PAGE 19
FAIRCHILD PRINTING
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
$847.00
$847.00
G & S ELECTRIC COMPANY
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
$380.00
$380.00
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION
CDBG-713 N EASTWOOD
$30.00
$305.00
COMMUNITY CAB CO.
SENIOR TAXI RIDES
$307.10
$307.10
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO.
SERVICE
$43-.78
$43.78
MIGHTY MITES AWARDS & SONS
PLAQUE ENGRAVING
$75.87
$75.87
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISC EXPENSES
$5.66
#
WHY NOT ALUMINUM
MISC EXPENSES
$13.95
$963.50*
WILKIN INSULATION COMPANY
MISC EXPENSES
$20.00
$399.50
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
MISC EXPENSES
$7.00
$46.61*
SHELTER, INC.
BUDGET ALLOCATION
$1,125.00
$1,125.00
V & G PRINTERS INC.
BUSINESS CARDS/PAPER
$179.00
$179.00
HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION
***TOTAL**
$2,173.41
GENERAL FUND
$2,173.41
********************************************************************************************************
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BROADACRE CONSULTING COMPANY
CONSULTING SERVICES
$10,668.22
$10,668.22
FAIRCHILD PRINTING
ZONING MAPS
$847.00
$847.00
G & S ELECTRIC COMPANY
SVC WIRING 315 S MAIN
$380.00
$380.00
MICHAEL J. MORAN
SERVICES RENDERED
75.00
CDBG-713 N EASTWOOD
$30.00
$305.00
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISC EXPENSES
$.29
MISC EXPENSES
$13.65
MISC EXPENSES
$4.00
$17.94*
WALLEM CONSTRUCTION
CDBG 908 S HILUSI
$14$29613.500
$14,217.00
WHY NOT ALUMINUM
CDBG-119 AUDREY LANE
$963.50*
WILKIN INSULATION COMPANY
CDBG 1430 S HICKORY
$399.50
$399.50
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
***TOTAL**
$27,798.16
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6%30/92
PAGE 20
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
GENERAL FUND $11,529.16 COMMUNITY DEVLPMT BLOCK GRANT $16,269.00
STREET DIVISION
ADDISON BUILDING MATERIAL CO.
SUPPLIES_
$47.06
SUPPLIES
$9.08
SUPPLIES
$14.22
SUPPLIES
$13.73
SUPPLIES
$19.44
SUPPLIES
$96.19
SUPPLIES
$19.24
SUPPLIES
$10.24
SUPPLIES
$38.48
SUPPLIES
$23.85
SUPPLIES
$31.63
SUPPLIES
$8.50
$331.66
AERIAL EQUIPMENT, INC.
BAR OIL
$25.00
$25.00
AETNA TRUCK PARTS
PARTS
$152.20
PARTS
$52.80
PARTS
$30.16
PARTS
$103.47
$338.63
EDDIE AGENT
REIMB SAFETY SHOES
$47.03
$47.03
ALDRIDGE ELECTRIC, INC.
SERVICES RENDERED
$154.50
$154.50
ALLIED ASPHALT PAVING COMPANY
PAVING MATERIALS
$536.30
PAVING MATERIALS
$103.20
PAVING MATERIALS
$135.60
PAVING MATERIALS
$924.45
PAVING MATERIALS
$698.00
$2,397.55
ANDERSON LOCK COMPANY
LOCK SERVICE
$368.72
LOCK SERVICE
$193.19
KEYS
$13.50
KEYS
$30.00
KEYS/CYLINDERS
$49.35
$654.76
ARROW ROAD CONSTRUCTION
RESURFACING PROGRAM
$55,029.96
$55,029.96
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 21
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30192
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
STREET DIVISION
AUTUMN LANDSCAPING & MTCE.INC.
TURF MOWING
$3,928.00
TURF MOWING
$380.00
$4,308.00
B & H INDUSTRIES
SUPPLIES
$37.22
$37.22
BEHM PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE, INC
CRACK SEALING
$30,000.00
CRACK SEALING
$3,955.00
$33,955.00
BOWMAN DISTRIBUTION CENTER
CREDIT$37.10-
CREDIT
14.70-
SUPPLIES
$430.83
SUPPLIES
$49.30
SUPPLIES
$117.25
SUPPLIES
$236.85
SUPPLIES
$261.66
SUPPLIES
$77.10
$1,1.19
BUSSE HARDWARE
SUPPLIES
$81.25
$81.25
$8
CELLULAR ONE - CHICAGO
SERVICE
$127.44
$127.49
CHEM RITE PRODUCTS COMPANY
CLEANING SUPPLIES
$178.24
CLEANING SUPPLIES
$413.70
CLEANING SUPPLIES
$413.71
$1,005.65
CITIZENS UTILITIES CO. OF ILLI
WATER USAGE
$85.79
$85.79
CITRON CHEMICAL, INC.
SUPPLIES
$284.34
SUPPLIES
$284.34
$568.68
ARTHUR CLESEN, INC.
SUNNY MIX
$288.00
SUPPLIES
$68.30
SUPPLIES
$271.50
$627.80
COMMODORE MAINTENANCE SYSTEMS
TEMP JANITORIAL SERVICE
$425.25
$425.25
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
BJ80-JT-23212
$165.03
$165.03
CONRAD AND SON
LINCOLN FITTINGS
$52.60
$52.60
ED CURTIS RENTAL, INC.
1 AMPLIVOX
$17.50
$17.50
DREISILKER ELECTRIC MOTORS, IN
PARTS
$14.86
$14.86
DURABLE PAVING CO.
LYNN CT PAVING
$2,565.00
$2,565.00
EARNIES TIRE REPAIR SERV. INC.
TIRE REPAIR
$73.00
$73.00
ENGINEMASTERS, INC.
PARTS
$16.60
$16.60
FULLER'S CARWASH DES PLAINES
MAY92 CAR WASHES
$24.00
$24.00
G & K SERVICES
UNIFORM SERVICES
$151.69
UNIFORM SERVICE
$151.70
UNIFORM SERVICE
$151.69
$455.08
VENDOR
STREET DIVISION
JOE GATTAS
GERRARD PACKAGING SYSTEMS, INC
GLENBROOK EXCAVATING
HEARTH & HOME INC.
HYDROTEX, INC.
ILLINOIS ARBORIST ASSOCIATION
ILLINOIS IRRIGATION SUPPLY INC
ITEC
LAND AND LAKES CO
LEWIS EQUIPMENT CO.
J.C. LICHT COMPANY
MEYER MATERIAL CO.
ROGER MEYER
MINOLTA BUSINESS SYSTEMS, INC.
THE MORTON ARBORETUM
NATIONAL GUARDIAN SECURITY SEV
NATIONAL HEAT AND POWER CORPOR
NORTHWEST FIRE EXTINGUISHER &
NUTOYS LEISURE PRODUCTS
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
PETTY CASH - FIRE DEPT.
PETTY CASH - PUBLIC WORKS
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 22
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6130%92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
ADVANCE EXPENSES
$140.00
REIMB SAFETY SHOES
$41.91
$181.91
STEEL BANDS
$385.00
$385.00
PVC PIPE
$580.00
$580.00
CRANK ASSY FOR UMBRELLA
$43.70
$43.70
MTP -60 GREASE
$367.84
$367.84
MEMBER FEES SCHULTZIRILEY
$50.00
$50.00
12 COUPLINGS
$1.92
$1.92
SUPPLIES
$280.77
$280.77
REFUSE DISPOSAL
$1,320.00
REFUSE DISPOSAL
$1,056.00
$2,376.00
BATTERY
$115.95
$115.95
SUPPLIES
$48.15
SUPPLIES
$93.00
SUPPLIES
$28.97
SUPPLIES
$93.00
SUPPLIES
$29.25
SUPPLIES
$75.55
$367.92
LIMESTONE SCREENING
$673.52
LIMESTONE SCREENINGS
$725.88
$1,399.40
HAULING MATERIALS
$1,877.18
$1,877.18
EQUIPME T 2060505C28
$388.00
EQUIPMENT 2060505C29
$824.95
$1,212.95
1992 ARBOR DAY TREES
$14.69
$14.69
ALARM SVC CHARGE
$25.00
$25.00
SERVICES RENDERED
$540.00
$540.00
1992 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SVC
$106.66
1992 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SVC
$106.66
1992 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SVC
$106.66
1992 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SVC
$106.65
1992 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SVC
$106.66
1992 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SVC
$106.66
$639.95
BENCH
$1,254.00
$1,254.00
MISC EXPENSES
$13.00
$13.00*
EXPENSES
$4.24
$4.24*
EXPENSES
$5.15
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 23
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
STREET DIVISION
EXPENSES
$70.45
EXPENSES
$6.48
EXPENSES
$20.00
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$10.80
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$3.35
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$54.57
TRAVEL & EXPENSES
$177.49
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$159.86
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$40.00
$548.15*
PLANT CLINIC
SAMPLE TESTING
$10.00
$10.00
POLLARD MOTOR COMPANY
PARTS
$3.10
PARTS
$392.18
$395.28
PORTABLE TOOL SALES
SUPPLIES
$101.61
$101.61
QUALITY DISCOUNT AUTO PARTS
PARTS
$48.70
PARTS
$57.41
PARTS
$57.41
PARTS
$7.72
$171.24
ROADWORKS, INC.
CURB GUTTER PROGRAM
$35,250.59
CURB/GUTTER PROGRAM
$600.00
$35,850.59
SAUBER MFG. CO.
LID PPROPS
$49.24
$49.24
SHEPP PEST CONTROL
JUNE 92 PEST CONTROL
$40.00
JUNE 92 PEST CONTROL
$40.00
JUNE 92 PEST CONTROL
$40.00
JUNE 92 PEST CONTROL
$40.00
JUNE 92 PEST CONTROL
$40.00
JUNE 92 PEST CONTROL
$40.00
$240.00
SOUTH SIDE CONTROL COMPANY
IRON PUMP
$208.43
ANTISCALE TABLETS 16
$35.12
$243.55
STANDARD PIPE & SUPPLY INC.
SUPPLIES
$59.93
SUPPLIES
$44.98
$104.91
TECH SYN CORPORATION
SUPPLIES
$215.60
$215.60
TERRACE SUPPLY COMPANY
SUPPLIES
$3.00
OXYGEN ACETYLENE
$38.29
$41.29
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
REGIST R-GATTAS
$25.00
$25.00*
VHF COMMUNICATIONS INC.
RADIO REPAIRS
$210.60
$210.60
VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS
PAPER SUPPLIES
$26.64
$26.64
VENDOR
STREET DIVISION
VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
WESTERN DETROIT DIESEL -ALLISON
WIPECO INC
WORLD WINDOW CLEANING CO
STREET DIVISION
GENERAL FUND
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 24
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6130/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
FUEL
$651.52
$651.52
PARTS
$29.20
$29.20
POLO RAGS
$203.36
POLO RAGS
$67.78
$271.14
WINDOW CLEANING
$81.00
$5.76
WINDOW CLEANING
$81.00
PARTS
WINDOW CLEANING
$81.00
$243.00
$64,831.01 MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND
$600.00
***TOTAL** $155,866.06
$90,435.05
********************************************************************************************************
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
ADDISON BUILDING MATERIAL CO.
SUPPLIES
$29.04
SUPPLIES
$49.39
SUPPLIES
$65.46
SUPPLIES
$5.76
$149.65
AETNA TRUCK PARTS
PARTS
$28.49
PARTS
$42.18
2 BATTERIES
$153.20
PARTS
$126.14
PARTS
$58.27
$408.28
AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK
BOND TRANSFER FEES
$107.75
SERIES 1987B INT D7/1/92
$44,375.00
$44,482.75*
JAMES ANICHINI
REIMB CDL
$30.00
$30.00
B & H INDUSTRIES
XEROX VELLUM COPY
$3.00
DIAZO PRINT
$6.00
$9.00
ERIC BJORK
REIMB CDL
$30.00
$30.00
BOWMAN DISTRIBUTION CENTER
SUPPLIES
$470.00
SUPPLIES
$117.25
VILLAGE OF'MOUNT PROSPECT
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
PAGE 25
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
BRISTOL BABCOCK
MELISSA CALE
JENNIFER CARR
CITRON CHEMICAL, INC.
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
COMP USA
CORNER STONE SERVICE, INC.
DREISILKER ELECTRIC MOTORS, IN
DUPAGE TOPSOIL INC.
DURABLE PAVING CO.
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP
FINISHMASTER, INC.
FLUID CONSERVATION SYSTEMS COR
FREDRIKSEN & SONS
FULLER'S CARWASH DES PLAINES
G & K SERVICES
BRETT GILLIAN
GLENBROOK EXCAVATING
H -B -K WATER METER SERVICE
HEWLETT PACKARD
HYDROTEX, INC.
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO.
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
PREV MICE CART RECORDERS
REIMB CDL
REIMB CDL
SUPPLIES
BJ80-JT-23598
BH67-JT-1310-A
COMPUTER SUPPLIES
COMPUTER SUPPLIES
HP TONER & RIBBONS
UTILITY STAKES
PEABODY BARNES PUMP
TOPSOIL
ASPHALT REPAIR
2 DELIVERIES
4 PRIORITY LETTERS
PRIORITY PACKAGE
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
REWIRING OF 50X
EXTINGUISHER SERVICE
MAY92 CAR WASHES
UNIFORM SERVICES
UNIFORM SERVICE
UNIFORM SERVICE
REIMB CDL
CONTRACTUAL REPAIRS
SERVICES RENDERED
WATER METER LABOR
WATER METER LABOR
WATER METER LABOR
SUPPORT AGREEMENT
MTP -60 GREASE
SERVICE
$236.84
$261.66
$1,085.75
$1,387.50
$1,387.50
$30.00
$30.00
$30.00
$30.00
$162.48
$162.48
$4,405.77
$4,405.77
$55.60
$55.60
$127.98
$35.37
$174.93
$338.28
$67.84
$67.84
$935.38
$935.38
$1,120.00
$1,120.00
$900.00
$900.00
$98.75
$62.00
$13..25
$196.00
38
$69.59
$13.38
$96.35
$168.00
$168.00
$20.00
$20.00
$21.00
$21.00
$151.70
$151.69
$151.70
$455.09
$30.00
$30.00
$1,500.00
$3,400.00
$4,900.00
$356.85
$35.69
$178.43
$570.97
$132.00
$132.00
$367.84
$367.84
$99.22
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 26
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6(30/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
SERVICE
$31.06
SERVICE
$203.83
SERVICE
$533.12
SERVICE
$37.56
SERVICE
$30.63
SERVICE
$30.63
SERVICE
$61.25
SERVICE
$30.63
SERVICE
$97.32
SERVICE
$17.18
SERVICE
$17.11
SERVICE
$29.05
SERVICE
$17.45
SERVICE
$56.47
SERVICE
$17.61
$1,310.12
ITEC
2 HYDRAULIC FILTERS
$53.28
$53.28
TRACI JESSE
REIMB CDL
$30.00
$30.00
JULIE, INC.
MAY SERVICES
$237.65
MAY SERVICES
$12.67
$250.32
MIKE KAISER
REIMS SAFETY SHOES
$50.00
$50.00
KARL KREWENKA
REIMB CDL
$30.00
$30.00
J.C. LICHT COMPANY
SUPPLIES
$165.65
SUPPLIES
$9.45
$175.10
ELIZABETH MAJERUS
REIMB CDL
$30.00
$30.00
METRO WOOD, INC.
OAK PLANKING
$279.80
$279.80*
ROGER MEYER
HAULING%MATERIALS
$452.74
$452.74
MIDRANGE COMPUTING
SUBSCRIPTION RENEWAL
$84.00
$84.00
MINOLTA BUSINESS SYSTEMS, INC.
MICE COPIER 2060405949
$1,500.00
$1,500.00
MORAN EQUIPMENT CORP.
CABLE
$31.24
POWER SUPPLY
$256.55
$287.79
MORTON GROVE AUTOMOTIVE
PARTS
$65.00
PARTS
$65.00
$130.00
NATIONAL ELECTRIC CABLE
SUPPLIES
$676.47
$676.47
NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL -FILM L
SAFETY FILM
$83.00
SAFETY FILM
$83.00
$166.00
PHILIP NAUG.HTEN
REIMB CDL
$30.00
$30.00
VENDOR
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
NEENAH FOUNDRY CO.
NORTHERN ILLINOIS GAS CO.
NORTHWEST FORD TRUCK CENTER
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
PETTY CASH - PUBLIC WORKS
JAMIE PLUCINSKI
POLLARD MOTOR COMPANY
POSTMASTER
PROSAFETY
QUALITY DISCOUNT AUTO PARTS
RAINBOW 1 HR PHOTO EXP.
ROSEMONT BUILDING & SUPPLY CO.
SAUBER MFG. CO.
SEWER EQUIPMENT CO. OF AMERICA
SNAP-ON TOOLS CORPORATION
STANDARD INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
STATE CONCRETE PRODUCTS, INC.
MIKE VERCIGLIO
VHF COMMUNICATIONS INC.
VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
TIM WATERS
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 27
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
FRAME
$75.00
$75.00
NS E KENSINGTON lE RAND
$29.85
112 E HIGHLAND/ MMERSON
$59.20
$89.05
PARTS
$4.02
PARTS
$41.80
$45.82
MISC EXPENSES
$.50
$.50*
EXPENSES
$29.00
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$99.27
TRAVEL & SUPPLIES
$21.24
TRAVEL & EXPENSES
$19.02
$168.53*
REIMB CDL
$30.00
$30.00
PARTS
$71.98
PARTS
$59.44
PARTS
$238.18
$369.60
POSTAGE FOR WATER BILLS
$539.10
$539.10*
SUPPLIES
$267.99
$267.99
PARTS
$48.71
PARTS
$15.06
PARTS
$14.56
$78.33
FILM PROCESSING
$7.37
FILM PROCESSING
$10.49
FILM & PROCESSING
$6.59
FILM & PROCESSING
$46.80
FILM & PROCESSING
$26.00
FILM PROCESSING
$6.59
$103.84
CEMENT BLOCK SUPPLIES
$281.43
$281.43
LID PROPS
$49.24
$49.24
MTCE SUPPLIES
$309.70
$309.70
TIMING GUAGE
$256.50
$256.50
SUPPLIES
$251.00
$251.00
O/S CONE
$72.32
$72.32
REEIMB CDL
$30.00
$30.00
RADIO REPAIRS
$351.00
RADIO REPAIRS
$23.40
$374.40
FUEL
$651.52
$651.52
REIMB CDL
$30.00
$30.00
********************************************************************************************************
PARKING SYSTEM DIVISION
ANDERSON LOCK COMPANY SERVICE CALL $370.20 $370.20
COMMONWEALTH EDISON BH66-JT-0498-A $22.09
BH66-JT-3710-A
BH66-JT-5262-A
BH66-JT-5266-C
BH68-JT-7498-A
WORLD WINDOW CLEANING CO WINDOW CLEANING
PARKING SYSTEM DIVISION
PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND $822.17
$18.06
$157.24
$151.49
$22.09 $370.97
$81.00 $81.00
***TOTAL** $822.17
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 28
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
WESTERN DETROIT DIESEL -ALLISON
PARTS
$70.56
PARTS
$70.56
PARTS
$116.64
PARTS
$25.10
$282.86
WIPECO INC
POLO RAGS
$135.57
POLO RAGS
$203.36
POLO
$135.57
$474.50
ZIEBELL WATER SERVICE PRODUCTS
SUPPLIESS
$118.35
SUPPLIES
$183.60
SUPPLIES
$604.00
$905.95
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
***TOTAL**
$73,858.33
WATER & SEWER FUND
$73,858.33
********************************************************************************************************
PARKING SYSTEM DIVISION
ANDERSON LOCK COMPANY SERVICE CALL $370.20 $370.20
COMMONWEALTH EDISON BH66-JT-0498-A $22.09
BH66-JT-3710-A
BH66-JT-5262-A
BH66-JT-5266-C
BH68-JT-7498-A
WORLD WINDOW CLEANING CO WINDOW CLEANING
PARKING SYSTEM DIVISION
PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND $822.17
$18.06
$157.24
$151.49
$22.09 $370.97
$81.00 $81.00
***TOTAL** $822.17
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 29
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
REFUSE DISPOSAL DIVISION
ARC DISPOSAL COMPANY
MAY COLLECTIONS
$105,771.21
MAY COLLECTIONS
$45,411.32
MAY COLLECTIONS
$25,264.55
$660.00
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
MAY COLLECTIONS
$30,673.84
$207,120.92*
SEVENTEEN SPECIALTIES INC.
RECYCLING GIVE -A -WAYS
$431.01
$431.01
STONE CONTAINER CORPORATION
YARD BAGS -CREDIT OWED
$67.60
$67.60
REFUSE DISPOSAL DIVISION
MUSEUM RESTORTION
***TOTAL**
$207,619.53
REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND
$207,619.53
$21.77
$21.77
********************************************************************************************************
DEVELOPER DONATION
$2,800.00
$2,800.00*
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
ACTON MOBILE INDUSTRIES, INC.
FIELD OFFICE TRAILER
$230.00
FIELD OFFICE TRAILER
$230.00
FIELD OFFICE TRAILER
$200.00
$660.00
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
BH66-JT-5388-C
$279.30
$279.30
DONOHUE & ASSOCIATES, INC.
ENGINEERING SERVICES
$7,699.54
$7,699.54
FIRST CHICAGO BUILDING CORP.
JULY RENT
$2,600.00
$2,600.00
MOUNT PROSPECT HISTORICAL SOCI
MUSEUM RESTORTION
$20,569.50
$20,569.50
NORTHERN ILLINOIS GAS CO.
100 W NORTHWEST HWY
$21.77
$21.77
PROSPECT HEIGHTS PARK DISTRICT
DEVELOPER DONATION
$2,800.00
$2,800.00*
RJN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES
SERVICES RENDERED
$38,663.28
$38,663.28
SOIL & MATERIAL CONSULTANTS, I
SOIL INSPECTION%TESTING
$100.00
$100.00
BARRY A. SPRINGER
MAY LEGAL FEES
$270.00
$270.00
TOM TODD CHEVROLET
1992 CHEVY WAGON
$10,898.42
$10,898.42*
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
***TOTAL**
$84,561.81
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND
$10,898.42 CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT FUND
$23,670.57
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 30
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
POLICE & FIRE BOND PROCEEDS $3,260.00 DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1991 $270.00
FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND 1991 $46,462.82
********************************************************************************************************
COMMUNITY AND CIVIC SERVICES
BUDGET SIGN COMPANY
POSTERS
$240.00
$240.00
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
BG21-JT-1838-A
$53.88
$500.00
BH67-JT-3858-B
$33.89
$87.77
COURTESY HOME CENTER
BUILDING SUPPLIES
$25.47
$25.47
E.I.T., INC.
SUPPLIES
$208.50
$208.50
FOLGERS FLAG & DECORATING, INC
FLAG ARRANGEMENT
$196.68
$196.68
MIGHTY MITES AWARDS & SONS
PLAQUE
$36.59
$36.59
MOUNT PROSPECT HISTORICAL SOCI
BUDGET ALLOCATION
$2,875.00
$2;875.00
PETTY CASH - PUBLIC WORKS
EXPENSES
$63.36
$63.36
RAYCO
BANNER SUPPLIES
$130.45
$130.45
WORLD WINDOW CLEANING CO
WINDOW CLEANING
$171.00
$171.00
COMMUNITY AND CIVIC SERVICES
***TOTAL**
$4,034.82
GENERAL FUND
$4,034.82
********************************************************************************************************
DEBT SERVICE
AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK
BOND TRANSFER FEES
$392.54
BOND TRANSFER FEES
$500.00
BOND TRANSFER FEES
$500.00
1987C GO BONDS INT 7 1 92
$11,307.50
SERIES 1987E INT D7f / 2
$89,115.00
$101,815.04*
THE FIRST CHICAGO BANK OF M.P.
SSA#1 INT DUE 7/1/9
$4,235.00
$4,235.00*
FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CHICAGO
1973 GO BONDS INT 7/1192
$10,375.00
$10,375.00*
NBD BANK MOUNT PROSPECT, N.A.
CORP PURP 1974 INT 7/1/92
$22,600.00
$22,600.00*
ALL DEPARTMENTS TOTAL $1,789,605.10
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 31
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 6/30/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
DEBT SERVICE
***TOTAL**
$139,025.04
CORPORATE PURPOSES B & I 1973
$10,375.00 CORPORATE'PURPOSES
B & 11974
$22x600.00
SSA #1 PROSPECT MEADOWS B & I
$4,235.00 DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT
B & 11991B
$500.00
P W FACILITY B & 11987B
$89,507.54 DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT
B & I 1987C
$11,807.50
ALL DEPARTMENTS TOTAL $1,789,605.10
DATE 6/30/92
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
,RUN
TIME RUN 14.00.19
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL
LISTING
SUMMARY BY FUND 6%30/92
NO.
FUND NAME
AMOUNT
1
GENERAL FUND
$631,738.10
21
REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND
$209,558.18
22
MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND
$241,827.90
23
COMMUNITY DEVLPMT BLOCK GRANT
$17,817.14
24
ILL. MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT FUND
$82,001.65
41
WATER & SEWER FUND
$123,586.80
46
PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND
$1,683.87
48
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND
$10,898.42
49
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
$126,128.68
51
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
$27,357.87
53
POLICE & FIRE BOND PROCEEDS
$3,260.00
56
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1991
$7,765.00
58
FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND 1991
$46,462.82
60
CORPORATE PURPOSES B & I 1973
$10,375.00
61
CORPORATE PURPOSES B & I 1974
$22,600.00
62
SSA #1 PROSPECT MEADOWS B & I
$4,235.00
65
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT B & I 1991B
$500.00
69
P W FACILITY B & 11987B
$89,507.54
70
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT B & I 1987C
$11,807.50
71
POLICE PENSION FUND
$41,471.80
72
FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND
$50,685.13
74
ESCROW DEPOSIT FUND
$28,336.70
TOTAL ALL FUNDS
$1,789,605.10
PAGE 32
ID-APPBAR
*xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
General and Special Revenue Funds
General Fund
Motor Fuel Tax Fund
Community Development Block Grant
Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund
Refuse Disposal Fund
Enterprise Funds
Water & Sewer Fund
Parking System Revenue Fund
Internal Service Funds
Risk Management Fund
Vehicle Replacement Fund
Capital Projects
Capital Improvement Fund
Downtown Redev. Const. Funds
Police & Fire Building Construction
Flood Control Const. Fund
Debt Service Funds
Trust & Aaenctr Funds
Flexcomp Trust
Escrow Deposit Fund
Police Pension Fund
Firemen's Pension Fund
Benefit Trust Funds
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
FINANCIAL REPORT
May 1, 1992 - May 31, 1992
Fund Revenues Expenses Fund
Balance for for Balance
May 1. 1992 Mat, 1992 May, 1992 May 31 1992
$ 3,156,751
$1,020,711
$1,126,582
$ 3,050,880
568,907
2,421
54,918
516,410
-
12,974
3,046
9,928
60,177
4,813
56,691
8,299
< 29,335>
69,496
4,907
35,254
3,453,339
361,974
365,297
3,450,016
171,279
14,568
13,342
172,505
1,044,056
63,047
179,671
927,432
435,741
631,245
34,235
1,032,751
1,679,779
27,105
482,011
1,224,873
548,111
4,036
16,167
535,980
5,179,315
27,247
553,853
4,652,709
4,725,725
19,324
157,432
4,587,617
1,246,601
112,887
296,515
1,062,973
17,527,304
121,489
43,347
17,605,446
19,381,754
140,645
47,350
19,475,049
247,778
1,491
2,167
247.102
59 397 2822
635 47-3
3 417 531
58 595 224
V I L L A G E O F M 0 U N T P R O S P E C T
B U D G E T R E V E N U E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 5/31/92
MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE 1,047,500.00 .00 .00 1,047,500.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 50.100.00 2.421,48 _ _ 2,421.48 47,67&52 95.16
FUND TOTALS 1,097.600.00 2�421.48 2,421.48 1,095,178.52 99.77 X
COMMUNITYRA
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE 250,900.00 .00 .00 250,900.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 25.000.00 12.974,05 12.974.05 12,02595 48.10
FUND TOTALS 27,5.900.00112,974.05 12 974.05 262,925.95 95.29 X
JLLMUNICIP& RETIREMENT FUND
BUDGET
CUR MO
AMOUNT
BUDGET
PERCENT
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
RECEIVED
RECEIVED
BALANCE
BALANCE
TAX REVENUE
10,671,550.00
127,967.31
127,967.31
10,543,582.69
98.80
FEE REVENUE
1,833,000.00
819,170.38
819,170.38
1,013,829.62
55.30
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE
2,570,700.00
57.07
57.07
2,570,642.93
99.99
SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE
376,500.00
2,461.59
2,461.59
374,038.41
99.34
FINES AND FORFEITS
325,700.00
13,651.07
13,651.07
312,048.93
95.80
OTHER REVENUE
565,550.00
57,403.09
57,403,09
508,146.91
89.85
FUND TOTALS
16,343,000.00�,
1,020 710.51
1 02�
15,322,2W49
93.75 X
REFUSE DISPOSAL FUN
TAX REVENUE
1,852,650.00
11,232.71
11,232.71
1,841,417.29
99.39
SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE
717,250.00
58,040.39
58,040.39
659,209.61
91.90
OTHER REVENUE
2,500.00
221.97
221.97
2.278.03
91.12
FUND TOTALS
2.572.400,00
69,,,495;07
69.495.07
2.502,904.93
97.29 %
MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE 1,047,500.00 .00 .00 1,047,500.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 50.100.00 2.421,48 _ _ 2,421.48 47,67&52 95.16
FUND TOTALS 1,097.600.00 2�421.48 2,421.48 1,095,178.52 99.77 X
COMMUNITYRA
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE 250,900.00 .00 .00 250,900.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 25.000.00 12.974,05 12.974.05 12,02595 48.10
FUND TOTALS 27,5.900.00112,974.05 12 974.05 262,925.95 95.29 X
JLLMUNICIP& RETIREMENT FUND
TAX REVENUE
760,950.00
4,537.12 4,537.12
756,412.88 99.40
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE
55,000.00
.00 .00
55,000.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE
2.500.00
276.44 276.44
2,223.56 88.94
FUND TOTALS 818.450.00 4,815,;56_ 4,811 6_ 8M636.44 99.41 %
V I L L A G E O F M 0 U N T P R O S P E C T
8 U D G E T R E V E N U E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 5/31/92
BUDGET CUR NO AMOUNT BUDGET PERCENT
BENEFIT TRUST #2 AMOUNT RECEIVED RECEIVED BALANCE BALANCE
OTHER REVENUE 18,500.00 1.480.14 1,480.14 17.019.86 91.99
FUND TOTALS 18,500.00 17,019.86 91.99 %
BENEFIT TRUST #3
OTHER REVENUE .00 10.88 10.88 10.88- ..00
FUND TOTALS D0 10.88 10.88 10.88- .00 %
LIBRARY FUND
FEE REVENUE
TAX REVENUE
21220,425.00
.00 .00
2,220,425.00
100.00
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE
75,370.00
.00 .00
75,370.00
100.00
OTHER REVENUE
57�
.00 .00
574.630.00,
100.00
FUND TOTALS 2 87� .00 .00 2.870,425.00 100.00 %
WATER & SEWER FUND
FEE REVENUE
2,880.00
TAX REVENUE
1,357,900.00
9,455.19
9,455.19
1,348,444.81
99.30
FEE REVENUE
17,500.00
.00
.00
17,500.00
100.00
SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE
4,437,500.00
330,245.57
330,245.57
4,107,254.43
92.55
OTHER REVENUE
652,750.00
22.272.80
g 27?„ 2.60_
630.477.20
96.58
FUND TOTALS 6,461,650=__ 361,973.56 361,973.56 6.103.676.44 94.40 %
PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND
FEE REVENUE
2,880.00
240.00
240.00 2,640.00 91.66
PARKING REVENUE
177,500.00
13,408.25
13,408.25 164,091.75 92.44
OTHER REVENUE
12,000.00
919.58
919.58 1142_ 92.33
FUND TOTALS 192J80.00 14,567.83 14,567.83 177,812 17 92.42 %
V I L L A G E O F M 0 U N T P R O S P E C T
8 U D G E T R E V E N U E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 5/31/92
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE 2,092,000.00 6,976.70 6,976.70 2,085,023.30 99.66
OTHER REVENUE 426_ ,500.00 56.069.34 56,069.34 370 43_ 0.66 86.85
FUND TOTALS 2,5,1$ 500.00 63.046.04 63 G46,04 2,455,453.96 97.49 X
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
BUDGET
CUR NO
AMOUNT
BUDGET
PERCENT
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND
AMOUNT
RECEIVED
RECEIVED
BALANCE
BALANCE
SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE
627,600.00
627,600.00
627,600.00
.00
.00
OTHER REVENUE
47.500,00
�
3.645.30
43,854.70
92.32
FUND TOTALS
675.100.00
,3`3t 7245,30_
631 245.3043,854�70
425,000.00
6.49 %
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE 2,092,000.00 6,976.70 6,976.70 2,085,023.30 99.66
OTHER REVENUE 426_ ,500.00 56.069.34 56,069.34 370 43_ 0.66 86.85
FUND TOTALS 2,5,1$ 500.00 63.046.04 63 G46,04 2,455,453.96 97.49 X
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
TAX REVENUE
293,300.00
2,517.13
2,517.13
290,782.87
99.14
FEE REVENUE
120,000.00
8,323.67
8,323.67
111,676.33
93.06
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE
990,000.00
.00
.00
990,000.00
100.00
INTERFUND TRANSFERS
425,000.00
.00
DO
425,000.00
100.00
OTHER REVENUE
266.500.00
...16.264.36
16.264.36
250,235.64
93.89
FUND TOTALS 2,094„800,00 27.105.16 27,105.16 _?,067,694.84 98.70 X
POLICE &FR 0 FUND
OTHER REVENUE 100,1000.00_ t? 8W22 1 8W22 _ 8„7�7Q33.78 87.10
FUND TOTALS 100.000.00 1?,$96.x? 1”9b �8 87.10 X
POLICE & FTRE BOND PR C
OTHER REVENUE 75,000.00 14,350.55 14.350,55 60 644.45 80.86
FUND TOTALS 75� 14,350,:,59, 14,350.555 � 60,649.455 $0.86 X
DOWNTOWN R 4 MT CQNST 19$5
FEE REVENUE 16,500.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 15,000.00 90.90
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
8 U D G E T R E V E N U E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 5/31/92
BUDGET CUR NO AMOUNT BUDGET PERCENT
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1985 AMOUNT - RECEIVED RECEIVED BALANCE BALANCE
OTHER REVENUE 2,600.00 621.79 621.79 1,978.21 76.08
FUND TOTALS 191100�00 2,121.79 2,121.79 16�978.21 88.89 %
DOUNTOVN REDEVLPMT CONST 1991
OTHER REVENUE 10,000.00 1,157.64 1,157.64 8,942.36 88.42
FUND TOTALS 1 10,000.00 1,157.64 1,157.64 8j42.36 88.42 %
DOWNTOWN REDEVMT CONST 1992
OTHER REVENUE 10,000'00 755.50 755.50 9,Z44.50
92.44
FUND TOTALS 101000.00 755.50 755.50 9,244.50 92.44 Z
FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND 1991
TAX REVENUE 800,000.00 .00 .00 800,000.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 90,000.00 10,092.18 10,092.18 79,907.82 88.78
FUND TOTALS 890.000.001 0,092.18 10.092 ,18 879,907.82 98.86 %
FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND I M
OTHER REVENUE 50,000.00 2,231.50 9,231,50 40368.50 81.53
FUND TOTALS so.w-Gloo 9,231.50 9,231.50 ---gLzktl"- 81.53 %
CORPORATE PURPOSES 9 & 1 1973
TAX REVENUE 136,650.00 904.54 904.54 135,745.46 99.33
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE 4,100.00 .00 DO 4,100.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 7,8011 00 766.39 766,39 6,733,61 89.78
FUND TOTALS 148,250-00 1,670-93 1.670.93 146,579.07 98.87 %
V I L L A G E 0 F M 0 U N T P R 0 S P E C T
B U 0 6 E T R E V E N U E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 5/31/92
$$A #1 PROSPECT MEADOWS 8& I
BUDGET
CUR NO
AMOUNT
BUDGET
PERCENT
CORPORATE PURPOSES B 8 I 1974
AMOUNT
RECEIVED
RECEIVED
BALANCE
BALANCE
TAX REVENUE
192,000.00
1,273.43
1,273.43
190,726.57
99.33
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE
5,700.00
Do
.00
5,700.00
100.00
OTHER REVENUE
101000-00
981.77
981.77
9,018.23
90.18
FUND TOTALS
207,700.00
2,255.20
2,255.20
205,444.80
98.91 %
$$A #1 PROSPECT MEADOWS 8& I
TAX REVENUE
19,750.00
56.56 56.56
19,693.44 99.71
OTHER REVENUE
2,250.00
161.39 161,39
2,0"& 92.82
FUND TOTALS
22x,00
217,95 217.95
21782,05 99.00 %
SSA #2 BLACKHAWK 0
TAX REVENUE
16,850.00 195.84
195.84
16,654.16 98.83
OTHER REVENUE
2,250-00 103.88
163.88
2,086.12 92.71
FUND TOTALS
IM00A 359,72
359,72
18,740.28 98.11 %
POLICE & FIRE O�LDG I 1991A
TAX REVENUE
342,600.00 .00
.00
342,600.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE
900-00 333.30
333,30
566.70 62.96
FUND TOTALS
_343.500.00 333.30
333.30
343,166.70 99.90 %
QgWNTOWN R. PMT 9 & 1 19916
INTERFUND TRANSFERS
32,750.00
15,868.75
15.868.75
161$81.25 51.54
FUND TOTALS
32350.00
15,868 .75
15,868.7516,881�25
51.54 %
INSURANCE RESERVE 9 9 1 1987
FUND TOTALS .00 .00 .0-0 .00 %
V I L L A G E 0 F M 0 U N T P R 0 S P C C T
B U D G E T R E V E N U E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 5/31/92
BUDGET CUR NO AMOUNT BUDGET PERCENT
FLOOD CONTROL B & I 1991A AMOUNT RECEIVED RECEIVED BALANCE BALANCE
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 375,500.00 87,260.00 87,260.00 288.240.00 76.76
FUND TOTALS 375,$Qg.0087,260.00 87,260.00 288,240.00 76.76 %
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT 8 & 1 19870
TAX REVENUE 146,500.00 .00 .00 146,500.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 10,000.00 530.97 530.97 9,469.83 94.69
FUND TOTALS 156,500.00 530.97 530.97 155,969.03 99.66 %
P W FACILITY 8 & 1 19878
TAX REVENUE 362,250.00 2,245.27 2,245.27 360,004.73 99.38
OTHER REVENUE 15,000.00 1,832.49 1,832.49 13,167JI 87.78
FUND TOTALS 377,250,()0 4,077,76 4.077.76 373,172.24 98.91 %
DOWNTOWN RCOEVLPMT 8 & 11987C
TAX REVENUE 78,500.00 .00 .00 78,500.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 115.00 „00 - DO 115100 100.00
FUND TOTALS 78,615.00 .00 .0078,615.00 100.00 %
POLICE PENSION FUND
TAX REVENUE 89,000.00 471.98 471.98 88,528.02 99.46
OTHER REVENUE 2,056,500.00 121 017.55 121,017.55 1.935A82,45 94.11
FUND TOTALS 2,145,500.00 121,489.53 121,489.53 2,Og4,010.47 94.33 %
FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND
TAX REVENUE 38,000.00 182.49 182.49 37,817.51 99.51
OTHER REVENUE 2.g72,000,00 140,463.11?J31,536.89 93.81
FUND TOTALS 2 3101000.00140,645,6_0 140,645,60 2J69,354,40 93.91 %
V I L L A G -E 0 F M 0 U N T P R 0 6 P E C T
8 U D G E T R E V E N U E S U M N A R Y
5/01/92 - 5/31/92
FLOOR CONTROL, 8 & 11992A
BUDGET
CUR NO
AMOUNT
BUDGET
PERCENT
CAPITAL IMPR OVMENT 8 & I 1992A
AMOUNT
RECEIVED
RFCEIVgQ
MANCE
BALANCE
INTERFUND TRANSFERS
64,500.00
.00
.00
64,500.00
100.00
OTHER REVENUE
100.00
13.54
13.54
86.46
$6.46
FUND TOTALS
64,600,00
13J4
13J4
6,4j$6.46
99.97 %
FLOOR CONTROL, 8 & 11992A
43,531,520.00
2,635,470.92
2,635,470.92
40-1896,049.08
INTERFUND, TRANSFERS
110,300.00
.00
.00
110,300.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE
200,00
22.65
22.65
177.35 88.67
FUND TOTALS
110.500,00
22,65
_2.65
110 477,35 99.97 %
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT 8 & 1 19928
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 9,650.00 .00 .00 9,650.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 1,89- .00
FUND TOTALS 9,650.00 1.89 1.89 9,648j1 99.98 %
$$A #6 GEQR§EZALRERT 8 & I
TAX REVENUE 32,300.00 189.14 189.14 32,110.86 99.41
OTHER REVENUE 1,OwQQ 85.03 85.03 914.97 91.49
FUND TOTALS ____3_,3300.00 274.17 274,17 33,025.83 99.17 %
TOTALS ALL FUNDS
43,531,520.00
2,635,470.92
2,635,470.92
40-1896,049.08
93.94 %
LESS TRANSFERS
1,017,700 .00. -
_
..103.128..75-
J 1 328,75-
914.571.25-
89.86 %
TOTAL REVENUES
42.513j&oo
2,532,342.17
_2,,5 ,,8„42.17
39,981,477.83
94.04 %
V I L L A G E O F M 0 U N T P R O S P E C T
B U D G E T E X P E N D I T U R E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 5/31/92
REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND
BUDGET
CUR MO
Y -T -D
BUDGET
PERCENT
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
EXPENDED
EXPENDED
BALANCE
BALANCE
PERSONAL SERVICES
11,553,510.00
877,880.95
877,880.95
10,675,629.05
92.40
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,862,325.00
200,573.12
200,573.12
3,661,751.88
94.80
COMMODITIES
796,415.00
25,195.83
25,195.83
771,219.17
96.83
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
229,855.00
765.00
765.00
229,090.00
99.66
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE
21,795.00
21,280.60
21,280.60
514.40
2.36
PENSION EXPENSE
10 600, QQ
M-3, Z,2_
8M22
4.,,316.78
91.66
FUND TOTALS
10.474.500,00
1,126,578.72
1.1ieS78.72
15.347,921.28
93.16 X
REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND
PERSONAL SERVICES
56,930.00
4,075.80
4,075.80
52,854.20 92.84
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,469,700.00
816.27
816.27
2,468,883.73 99.96
COMMODITIES
17,50Q, ,QQ
-, ,4. Q
14.69
17,485.31 99.91
FUND TOTALS _44 13Q,Q� 4,76 - _,�¢ 2.939.223.24 99.80 X
tQTOR FUE TAX FUM
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 66,000.00 1,232.00 1,232.00 64,768.00 98.13
COMMODITIES 75,000.00 .00 .00 75,000.00 100.00
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 11007,500M 53,685.63 53 685,63 953.,814.37 94.67
FUND TOTALS 1,148,500,00 54.917.63 54.917.63 1.093,582.37 95.21 X
COMM N TY OfYLPMT BLOCK GRANT
PERSONAL SERVICES
46,750.00
2,889.16
2,889.16
43,860.84
93.81
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
42,850.00
.00
.00
42,850.00
100.00
COMMODITIES
1,200.00
7.99
7.99
1,192.01
99.33
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
185,100.00
148.00
148.00
194,,952..,00
99.92
FUND TOTALS 275,900.00 3,Q45,15_ 3,045.15 272.$54.85 9$.89 X
ILL, MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT FUN
PERSONAL SERVICES 782.835,00 56.6$9.27 56.689.27 77,�6145.73 92.75
FUND TOTALS 782 835.00 56.689,2756,M�27 72.�145 73 92.75 %
V I L L A G E 0 F M 0 U N T P R 0 S P E C T
8 U D G E T E X P E N D I T U R E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 5/31/92
BUDGET CUR NO Y -T -D BUDGET PERCENT
BENEFIT TRUST #2 AMOUNT EXPENDED EXPENDED BALANCE BALANCE
PENSION EXPENSE 26, 000. 00 2,166.83 2,166.83 23,833.17 91.66
FUND TOTALS 26,000.00 2,166.83 2,166.83 23.833.17 91.66 %
LIBRARY FUND
LIBRARY OPERATIONS2,870.425500 Do 2,870,425.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 2,870,425.00 00
2,870,425.00 100.00 %
WATER & SEWER FUND
PERSONAL SERVICES
PERSONAL SERVICES
1,250,230.00
85,244.79
85,244.79
1,164,985.21
93.18
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,045,700.00
232,806.62
232,806.62
3,812,893.38
94.24
COMMODITIES
351,200.00
12,463.45
12,463.45
338,736.55
96.45
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
396,800.00
14,141.59
14,141.59
382,658.41
96.43
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE
601.925.00
20,637.50
20,637.50
581,287.50
96.57
FUND TOTALS 6,645,855.00 365,293.95 365,293.95 6,290,561,05 94.50 %
PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND
PERSONAL SERVICES
24,110.00
1,778.94 1,778.94
22,331.06
92.62
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
62,900.00
11,366.94 11,366.94
51,533.06
81.92
COMMODITIES
5,800.00
195.72 195.72
5,604.28
96.62
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
11,000,00
Do Do
11,000.00
100.00
FUND TOTALS 103,810,00 13,341,60 13,341,60 90,468,40 87.14 %
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 583,415.00 34,234,60 34,234.60 549,180.40 94.13
FUND TOTALS 583,415,00 34,234,60 3J,234. LQ 549J80.40 94.13 %
V I L L A G E 0 F M 0 U N T P R 0 S P E C T
8 U D G E T E X P E N D I T U R E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 5/31/92
BUDGET CUR No Y -T -D BUDGET PERCENT
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND AMOUNT EXPENDED EXPENDED BALANCE BALANCE
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,512,00o,gg 179,670,09 179670.09 2,332,329.91 92.84
FUND TOTALS 2 a 512 aQ00. 00 179,670,09 179.670.09 2,332,329.91 92.84 %
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 498,500.00 481,812.08 481,812.08 16,687.92 3.34
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 1,310,960.00 199.00 199.00 1,310,761.00 99.98
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 64j.00.QQ ,00 00 64.5W00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 1'873,960'00 482.011,0$ 482,011,00 1,391_948.92 74.27 %
POLICE & FIRE BLDG CONST FUND
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 1,830,285.00 M 00 1,830,285.00 100.00
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 425,000,00 00 M 425,000,00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 21255,285.00 OQ .00 212551285,00 100.00 %
POLICE & FIRE, BOND PROCEEDS
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 2,122,215.QQ 553,852,97 553,852,97 1,568,302,03 73,90
FUND TOTALS 2,122,215-00 553,852,97 553,852.97 1,5§§,349,03 73.90 X
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1991
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 250,000.00 298.33 298.33 249,701.67 99.88
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 32,750,0011,868.75 15,M§.75 16,881,25 51.54
FUND TOTALS 289,750.00 16,167.08 16,167,08 266,542.9,1 94.28 %
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1992
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 9.650.00 QQ .00 9,650.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 9650.00, 00 00 9,650,00 100.00 %
V I L L A G E 0 F M 0 U N T P R 0 S P E C T
8 U D G E T E X P E N 0 1 T U R E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 5/31/92
FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND 1992
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 3,850,000.00 Do '00 3,850,M0.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 3,85,0,000.00 00 .00 31850,000.00 100.00 %
CORPORATE PURPOSES 8 & 1 1973
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 166,500.00 M Do 166,500.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 166,500.00 .00 M 166,500.00 100.00 %
CORPORATE PURPOSES 8 & 1 1974
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 245,400.00 .00 Do 245,400.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 245.400.00 M Do 245,400.00 100.00 %
SSA #1 PROSPECT MEADOWS 8 & I
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE ZZ 470. DO .00 -.00 470.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 22,470.00 ,00 .00 22,470.00 100.00 %
SSA #2 BLACKHAQK 8 & I
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE YL800.00 21900.00 2,900.00 R7,900,00 90.58
FUND TOTALS 30,800.00 2,900.00 2,900.00 27,900.00 90.58 %
BUDGET
CUR NO
Y -T -D
BUDGET
PERCENT
FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND 1991
AMOUNT
EXPENDED
EXPENDED
BALANCE
BALANCE
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
00,000.00
600.00
600.00
79,400.00
99.25
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
390,000.00
69,571.69
69,571.69
320,428.31
82.16
INTERFUND TRANSFERS
485,800.0087,260,00$7,260.00
39$,540.00
82.03
FUND TOTALS
955,800.00
157,431.69
157,431.69
798,368.31
83.52 %
FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND 1992
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 3,850,000.00 Do '00 3,850,M0.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 3,85,0,000.00 00 .00 31850,000.00 100.00 %
CORPORATE PURPOSES 8 & 1 1973
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 166,500.00 M Do 166,500.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 166,500.00 .00 M 166,500.00 100.00 %
CORPORATE PURPOSES 8 & 1 1974
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 245,400.00 .00 Do 245,400.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 245.400.00 M Do 245,400.00 100.00 %
SSA #1 PROSPECT MEADOWS 8 & I
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE ZZ 470. DO .00 -.00 470.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 22,470.00 ,00 .00 22,470.00 100.00 %
SSA #2 BLACKHAQK 8 & I
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE YL800.00 21900.00 2,900.00 R7,900,00 90.58
FUND TOTALS 30,800.00 2,900.00 2,900.00 27,900.00 90.58 %
V r L L A G E 0 F M 0 U N T P R 0 S P E C T
8 U D G E T E X P E N D I T U R E S U N M A R Y
5/01/92 - 5/31/92
BUDGET CUR 140
Y -T -D
BUDGET
PERCENT
P ICE & FIRE BLDG 0 & I 1991A AMOUNT EXPENDED
EXPENDED
BALANCE
BALANCE
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 244.455.00 121,726,75
12 25
122,728.75
50.20
FUND TOTALS 244,455 & 121,72§.21
._Q
121326,25
12,2328.75
50.20 %
DOWN12UN REDEVLPMT 0 & 1 19910
& I 1991A
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE
32J50.00 15,96&75
15,868.75
16,881.25 51.54
FUND TOTALS
32.750,00 15,868 .75
15,868.75
16,801.25 51.54 %
FLOOD, CONTROL 0
& I 1991A
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE
114,375.00
DEBT SERVICE
EXPENSE
375,500.00
87,260.0087,260,00
5!I,936,25
2W240�00 76.76
FUND
TOTALS
375 500,00
87,26Q.QQ
87,260.00
288,240,90 76.76 x
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT 8 4 11987
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE
114,375.00
5§,93&2556,936.25
57,438,75 50.21
FUND TOTALS
114,375.00
5!I,936,25
56,936.,25 57.438,75 50.21 %
P W FACILITY & 198V8
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 434.13Q Q6 Do 00 434,130.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 434,130,00 M Do 434,]30,00 100.00 %
DOWNTOWN RMT 9 & I 1987C
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 7$,615,00 .-.I QQ .00 78,615.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 78,615.00 .00 Mo, 78.615,0
,-0. 100.00 x
POLICE PENSION FUND
PERSONAL SERVICES
333,500.00
.00
.00
333,500.00
100.00
PENSION EXPENSE
56$.QM.00,
43,346.64
43,346_6,4
524,623.3.6
92.36
FUND TOTALS
901.500.00
43,346.64
4,3, 346,64
858,153,U
95.19 %
V I L L A G E 0 F M 0 U N T P R 0 S P E C T
B U D G E T E X P E N D I T U R E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 5/31/92
CAPITAL 114PROVMENT 8 & I 1992A
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 68.5DO.00 .00 .00 68J00.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 68,500.00 Poo e .DO 68,500.00 100.00 %
FLOOD CONTROL 9 & 11992A
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 118,50O.QQ .00 .00 118,50().00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 118500.00 Do M 118,500.00 100.00 %
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT 8 & 1 19928
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE .00 10,250-00 100.00
FUND TOTALS .00 '00 10,250.00 100.00 x
SSA #6 GEORGE ALBERT B & I
D98T SERVICE EXPENSE 33,650.00 11,823.75 11,823.75 21,826.25 64.86
FUND TOTALS 33,650.00 11,823.7511,823.75 ... 1.. 82.6_.g55. 64.86 %
TOTAL EXPENSES 49,209.425.00 3,437,518.39 3,437,518.39 45371,9,06,61 93.01 %
BUDGET
CUR MO
Y -T -D
BUDGET
PERCENT
FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND
AMOUNT
EXPENDED
EXPENDED
BALANCE
BALANCE
PERSONAL SERVICES
410,000.00
.00
.00
410,000.00
100.00
PENSION EXPENSE
605,000.00
47,349.33
47,349.33
557,650.67
92.17
FUND TOTALS
1,015,000.0047,349.33
47,349.33
967,650.67
95.33 %
CAPITAL 114PROVMENT 8 & I 1992A
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 68.5DO.00 .00 .00 68J00.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 68,500.00 Poo e .DO 68,500.00 100.00 %
FLOOD CONTROL 9 & 11992A
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 118,50O.QQ .00 .00 118,50().00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 118500.00 Do M 118,500.00 100.00 %
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT 8 & 1 19928
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE .00 10,250-00 100.00
FUND TOTALS .00 '00 10,250.00 100.00 x
SSA #6 GEORGE ALBERT B & I
D98T SERVICE EXPENSE 33,650.00 11,823.75 11,823.75 21,826.25 64.86
FUND TOTALS 33,650.00 11,823.7511,823.75 ... 1.. 82.6_.g55. 64.86 %
TOTAL EXPENSES 49,209.425.00 3,437,518.39 3,437,518.39 45371,9,06,61 93.01 %
Village of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois'
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO:
VILLAGE MANAGER JOHN FULTON DIXON
FROM:
EVERETTE M. IIILI.., JR., ESQ.
DATE:
JULY 2, 1992
SUBJECT:
NTN BERM SIGN RESOLUTION
As you are aware, we have had significant problems in bringing this matter to a close.
The Board bad previously rejected the concept of accepting a Field Change which would
permit the NTN sign to remain on the berm with a change in its height and a change
in the method of constructing it.
I am recommending once again that we attempt to dispose of this matter. I have had
numerous calls from the attorneys for NTN and I know that you have had the same calls.
I am recommending that the Board, by Motion, approve a resolution of this dispute by
accepting a reduction in the height of the sign and a reconstruction of the base of the
sign out of materials consistent with the building. I don't believe it is necessary to
reconsider the Board's prior action because we have had renewed discussion with NTN
with respect to litigation over the issue.
I see this as an opportunity to resolve the dispute but I do think it needs Board approval
so I am requesting that by a Motion, the Board approve this method of resolving this
issue.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
EVERETTE M. HILL, JR.
EMH/rcc
Village of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR GERALD L FARLEY AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
FROM: VILLAGE MANAGER
DATE: JUNE 16, 1992
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR CLASS R - CONSUMPTION AT DINING TABLES
ONLY LIQUOR LICENSE FOR A NEW RESTAURANT,
WONDERFUL RESTAURANT, 1839 WEST ALGONQUIN ROAD
I met with Mrs. Kim and her son, who is representing his father, Sang, who wish to be
owners of a new restaurant and have a Liquor License for a Korean -style barbecue
restaurant. The Kims do not have any experience with liquor licenses in the past
although Mrs. Kim has been a waitress in a Korean restaurant that did serve beer and
wine.
Their experience in the past has been operating a cleaning establishment and they have
not operated a restaurant. They anticipate hiring a chef who will take care of the
cooking chores. Mrs. Kim is planning on being there at all times the restaurant is open.
Mr. Kim would be there in the late evening hours.
The expected hours of operation would be from 10:30 a.m. to 1:00 am. six days a week
and on Sunday from 4:00 p.m. until 1:00 a.m. They do not request nor do they desire
to have a lounge in their establishment. They strictly wish to have sales of liquor at
tables at which time dinners are served. They will have full plate dinners and will have
individual barbecue grills at each of the tables typical to other Korean restaurant requests
that we have seen.
They anticipate opening in July after they do remodeling to the existing establishment.
JOHN FULTON ON
JFD/rcc
attachment
VILLA E 0 F MOU NT PR OS PECT
COOK CQUNTYILLINOIS
LOCAL LIQUOR CONTROL COMMI
APPLICATION FOR RETAIL LIQUOR DEALER'S LICENSE
RENEWAL DATE May 5, 1992
NEW x ($150 Non -Refundable Application Fee for issuance of new
Liquor License; one-time only fee)
Honorable Gerald L. Farley, Village President
and Local Liquor Control Commissioner
Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois
Pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code of Mount Prospect of 1957, known as
Section 13.103, passed by the Board of Trustees of said Village on the 15th day of
January, 1957, as amended, regulating sale of alcoholic liquors in the Village of Mount
Prospect, County of Cook, State of Illinois:
The undersigned, WONDERFUL RESTAURANT, INC.
hereby makes application for a Class R liquor dealer's license for the period ending
April 30, 19 , and tenders the SUM Of $ 2,000.00 the prescribed fee as set
forth in the following:
SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL FEES FOR THE VARIOUS CLASSES OF
RETAIL LIQUOR DEALERS' LICENSES (SECTION 13.106):
Annual Fee
CLASS A: Retail package and consumption on premises $ 2,500.00
CLASS B: Consumption on premises only 2,000.00
CLASS C: Retail package only 2,000.00
CLASS D: Non-profit private clubs, civic or fraternal
organizations; consumption on premises only 750.00
CLASS E: Caterer's license 2,000.00
CLASS G: Park District Golf Course; beer and wine;
limited number of special events to include
full service bar facilities; consumption on
premises only 00.00
CLASS H: Supper Club; offering live entertainment 2,000.00
CLASS M: Hotels, motels, motor inns, motor lodges;
retail package and consumption on premises 2,500.00
CLASS P: Retail package - refrigerated and non -
refrigerated beer and wine only - no
consumption on premises 1,750.00
CLASS R: Restaurant - consumption at dining tables only 2,000.00
CLASS S: Restaurant with a lounge 2,500.00
CLASS T: Bowling Alley 2,500.00
CLASS V: Retail package - wine only 1,500.00
CLASS W: Restaurant - consumption of beer or wine only
and at dining tables only
1,500.00
SURETY BOND REQUIRED 1,000.00
EACH LICENSE TERMINATES ON THE 30TH DAY OF APRIL.
Your petitioner, WONDERFUL RESTAURANT, INC. , doing business as
WONDERFUL RESTAURANT I respectfully requests
permission to operate a retail liquor business at 1839 w. ALGONQUIN
Mount Prospect, Illinois.
Description and name of premises: WONDERFUL RESTAURANT
LOCATED AT 1839 W. ALGONOUIN - 1st floor in a small shopping
strip with parking lot.
(Description must be complete as to floor area, frontage, etc.)
Is applicant owner of premises: NO
If not owner, does applicant have a lease? YES State date applicant's lease expires:
MARCH 31,1993 If not owner, attach copy of lease hereto.
plus eight year option
Does applicant have a management contract with another person or entity for the
operation or management of the licensed premises? NO
If so, state the name and address of the manager or management company.
. (The manager or management company must complete
the same application as the owner).
Is applicant an individual,ccorporation, co -partnership or an association? sociation? (Circle one)
If an individual, state your name, date of birth, address, telephone number and Social
Security Number:
If co -partnership, state name, date of birth, address, telephone number and Social
Security Number of each person entitled to share in the profits thereof:
If a co -partnership, give the date of the formation of the partnership:
If a corporation, give state and date of incorporation:_ ILLINOIS
I�% 09 -z -
If a corporation incorporated in a state other than the State of Illinois, indicate date
qualified under Illinois Business Corporation Act to transact business in Illinois:
If a corporation, give names, addresses, dates of birth, telephone numbers and Social
Security Numbers of Officers and Directors. Also, list the names, addresses, dates of
birth and Social Security Numbers of shareholders owning in the aggregate more than
5% of the stock of such corporation.
NAME
YONG KOO KIM 4300 LAKE, GLENVIEW, ILLINOIS
OFFICE AND/OR
PERCENT OF
STOCK HELD
PRESIDENT -50%
Date of Birth: 11-1-41 Social Security # 354-78-4353 Phone # 708) 437-0699
SANG SOCK KIM 4300 LAKE, GLENVIEW, ILL. SECRETARY - 50%
Date of Birth: 10-14-48 Social Security # 348-78-4667
Date of Birth: Social Security #
Phone # 708)437-0699
Phone #
Objects for which organization is formed: To engage operation of a rnstaurant
serving alcoholic beverages.
If an individual, a co -partnership, a corporation or an association, has the applicant or
any of the partners, incorporators, directors, officers, agents or stockholders ever been
convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor? NQ If so, explain:
If applicant is an individual, state age: Marital status:
Is applicant a citizen of the United States? If a naturalized, citizen, state date and
place of naturalization:
How long has applicant been a resident of Mount Prospect, continuously next prior to
the filing of this application?
I
State character or type of business of applicant heretofore: NONE
State amount of goods, wares and merchandise on hand at this time:
CERTAIN TRADE FIXTURES ONLY - WAITING TO REOPEN RESTAURANT
How long has applicant been in this business? NEW VENTURE
Is the applicant an elected public official? No If so, state the particulars thereof:
Is any other person directly or indirectly in applicant's place of business an elected public
official? NO
In the case of an application for the renewal of a license, has the applicant made any
political contributions within the past 2 years?
If so, state the particulars thereof:
Does the applicant hold any law enforcement office? NO If so, designate title:
Does the applicant possess a current Federal Wagering or Gambling Device Stamp?
No If so, state the reasons therefor.
Has applicant ever been convicted of a gambling offense as presented by any of
subsections (a) (3 through a) (10) of Section 28-1, or as prescribed by Section 28-3 of
the "Criminal Code of 1961" as heretofore or hereafter amended? No If so,1ist
date(s) of said conviction(s):
Has applicant ever made similar application for a similar or other license on premises
other than described in this application? NO If so, state disposition of such
application:
Is applicant qualified to receive State and Federal license to operate an alcoholic liquor
business? YES Has applicant ever had a previous license revoked by the Federal
government or by any state or subdivision thereof? No If so, explain:
Is applicant disqualified to receive a license by reason of any matter or thing construed
by this Ordinance, the laws of this State or other Ordinances of this Village? No
Does applicant agree not to violate any of the laws of the State of Illinois, the United
States of America or any of the Ordinances of the Village of Mount Prospect in the
conduct of his/her place of business? YES
Does applicant currently carry Dram Shop Insurance coverage. Yes," 7"Yes," attach
copy.
If applicant is not the owner of the premises, does the owner thereof carry Dram Shop
Insurance coverage? — (If the answer to either of the foregoing questions is "No,"
no license shall issue.)
Does Surety Bond required by Ordinance accompany this application at the time of
filing? NO
State name and address of each surety next below:
Give name, address, date of birth, telephone number and Social Security Number of
manager or agent in charge of premises for which this application is made:
OWNER OPERATED
cvppoe:&fuI,
T) y
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANTZl,-f P tC�1 P0,yr
Corporate Seal
(If applicant is corporation)
Who, first being duly sworn, under oath deposes and says that rhea X/are the
applicant(s) for the license requested in the foregoing application; ftii tReL ,./are of
good repute, character and standing and that answers to the questions asked in the
foregoing application are true and correct in every detail.
STATE OF ILLINOIS
) SS.
COUNTY OF COOK
Subscribed and Sworn to before me this Ctt day ofA�t
_,A.D., 101—
NotA5y Nbllc
OFFICIAL SEAL
PETER K. LEE
NOTARY PUBLIC. STATE OF ILLINOIS
IMY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6/19/951
APPLICATION APPROVED;
Local Liquor Control Commissioner
CAF/
6/25/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4388
ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE XIV OF CHAPTER 5
ENTITLED "SIGN REVIEW BOARD" OF CHAPTER 5
OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PRO,9PE!QT11,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
5Y&TIQN OE: That SECTION TWO of Ordinance No. 4388 is hereby
amended to add the following sentence **Section 5.1402.A entitled
"Membership" of Chapter 5 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect,
as amended, is hereby further amended by increasing the number of
members from 5 to 7; so that hereinafter said Section 5.1402.A of
Chapter 5 shall be and read as follows:
Sec. 5.1402. Membership.
A. The voting members of the Sign Review Board shall be seven ( 7 )
members.
5ECTIQN- TWO: That Section 5.1402.A.3 entitled "Membership" of
Chapter 5 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, is
hereby further amended; so that hereinafter said Section 5.1402.A.3
of Chapter 5 shall be and read as follows:
3. The membership of the Sign Review Board shall consist of the
following:
Two (2) members of existing advisory commissions of the
Village;
Two (2) members who shall be residents of the Village; and
Two (2) members to be recommended by the Mount Prospect
Chamber of Commerce who shall be in the design profession;
One (1) member to be recommended by the Mount Prospect
Chamber of Commerce who shall be a Mount Prospect retail
or service business owner.
At no time shall there be less than five (5) residents of the
Village of Mount Prospect on the Sign Review Board. 11
SECTION THREE: That Section 5.1403.D entitled "Organization" of
Chapter 5 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, is
hereby further amended; so that hereinafter said Section 5.1403.D
of Chapter 5 shall be and read as follows:
D. For the purpose of conducting business four (4) members of the
Sign Review Board shall be deemed a quorum. to
Q
SECTION FOUR: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and
effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in the
manner provided by law.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
PASSED and APPROVED this day of 1992.
Gerald L. Farley, Village President
Carol A. Fields, Village Clerk
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
JOHN F. DIXON, VW MANAGER
FROM:
DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE:
JUNE 4, 1992
SUBJECT-
ZBA-28-SU-92, PAYLESS SHOE SOURCE
LOCATION:
1500 SOUTH ELMHURST ROAD
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation for
a Special Use Permit application filed by Payless Shoe Source. The applicants are
requesting a Special Use Permit to allow a satellite antenna which is 6 foot in diameter and
roof -mounted.
The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the request at their meeting of May 28, 1992. At
the meeting, Attorney Mr. Mike Schmidt was present to represent this request. Mr. Schmidt
explained that the antenna was requested so that the Chicago Regional Office could
communicate with the company headquarters in Topeka.
Ray Forsythe, Planner, indicated that all the standards for a Special Use Permit for a
satellite antenna have been met except for the proposed screening. Mr. Forsythe suggested
that a condition be added to any approval which required appropriate screening.
The Zoning Board generally discussed the request. By a vote of 6-0, the Zoning Board of
Appeals recommends approval of the Special Use request with a condition that the
appropriate screening be installed.
DMC:hg
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 28 -SU -92 Hearing Date: May 28, 1992
PETITIONER:
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
PUBLICATION DATE:
REQUEST:
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Payless Shoe Source
1500 South Elmhurst Road
May 12, 1992
The petitioner is requesting a Special Use
Permit under Section 14.2101.C.3 to allow the
installation of a roof -mounted satellite antenna
Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ronald Cassidy
Richard Pratt
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
ABSENT: Peter Lannon
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: None
Chairman Basnik introduced case ZBA-28-SU-92 as being a request for a Special Use
Permit to allow a roof -mounted satellite antenna at the Payless Shoe Source office at 1500
South Elmhurst Road.
Attorney Mike Schmidt introduced himself to the Zoning Board and stated he was an
attorney representing the petitioner in this matter. He stated that the company would like
to install a roof antenna at their office at South Elmhurst Road for purposes of
communicating with the national headquarters in Topeka. Mr. Schmidt explained that this
office on South Elmhurst Road is the Chicago Regional Office, and that it is essential that
this regional headquarters have the ability to do tele -conferencing with the national
headquarters out of state. He also noted that staff had pointed out that screening is
required with a satellite antenna, and the attorney asked that this be waived due to the
three to four foot parapet on the building, that would help screen the support materials of
the antenna. Mr. Schmidt stated that the satellite is not near any residential areas and that
the abutting uses are commercial or institutional, and that the screening would not
accomplish much considering these adjoining land uses.
3
ZBA-28-SU-92
Page 2
Ray Forsythe z f 6u.,•�,,-.iarized the staff report and stated that a Special Use Permit is
red to allow the instaliation of a roof -mounted antenna. Mr. Forsythe stated that this
-....Jar to other requests recently approved in the Village and he did point out that the
antenna installation would have to meet all Building Code requirements concerning
installation. Mr. Forsythe stated that he would need to see a cross-section of the building
and the satellite antenna, to determine if the building parapet could properly screen the
antenna base.
Mr. Cassidy asked if the 28 foot dimension in the staff report is measured from grade and
how tall the building was. Mr. Forsythe stated that the 28 foot overall height is from grade
to the top of the antenna, and that the building height is 22 feet.
Mr. Brettrager asked where the exact location of the antenna on the roof was, and that this
would make some difference as to whether the building parapet could provide screening.
Chairman Basnik stated that the Zoning Board could recommend approval subject to the
petitioner working with staff on adequate screening.
The Zoning Board generally discussed the request and it was determined that if the building
parapet could screen the antenna there would be no objections, but that they believed that
the petitioner should work with staff to provide more information on the subject.
Accordingly, Mr. Brettrager moved that the Zoning Board of Appeals recommend approval
of the Special Use Permit to allow a satellite antenna at 1500 South Elmhurst Road, subject
to a condition that adequate screening be provided. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Cassidy.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Pratt, Cassidy, Brettrager, Skowron, Saviano and Basnik
NAYS: None
Motion carried by a vote of 6-0.
This recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for their consideration.
I
41A,
David A Clements,
Director of Planning
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAIRM
FROM;
DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE:
MAY 21, 1992
CASE NO.:
ZBA-28-SU-92
APPLICANT:
PAYLESS SHOE SOURCE
ADDRESS:
1500 SOUTH ELMHURST ROAD
LOCATION MAP:
Tolut".' �
01, 1 —
1400
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: B4 Planned Unit Development
LOT SIZE: N/A
% COVERAGE: N/A
F.A.R.: N/A
0.
At
0
2
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2
The petitioner is requesting a Special Use Permit under Section 14.2101.C.3 to allow the
installation of a roof -mounted satellite antenna
Summary of application: The applicant is proposing to install a 6 foot diameter satellite
antenna on the roof of the Payless Shoe Source Chicago Store Operations and Real Estate
Corporate Office located at 1500 South Elmhurst Road. The satellite antenna is needed to
link the store to the corporate headquarters. The Mount Prospect Zoning Ordinance only
permits satellite antennas larger than 40" as Special Uses.
Impact on Surrounding Properties: Payless Shoe Source is located in the May Properties
building next to the Venture Store.
Following is a discussion of the standards for satellite antennas.
1. The antenna is located on the roof of the store to which is an accessory.
2. The proposed 6 foot antenna diameter is less than 1/3 the height of the building. (22
ft. building height x 33% = 7.26 feet.)
The overall height of the dish will be approximately 28'-3". The Code allows a
maximum building height of 30 feet.
4. The antenna will be at least 20 feet from all property lines.
5. The antenna will be in scale with the building.
No indication of screening has been submitted by the petitioner. Staff would like the
petitioner to be prepared to discuss the type of screening that will be proposed for this
satellite dish.
MER MAL COEN'D`S
No other comments or concerns have been raised by Village staff.
SLM MMAECOMMMATION
Staff has no objections to the Special Use requested to allow a 6 foot diameter roof -
mounted satellite antenna, with the condition that acceptable screening be installed. Also,
information submitted by the petitioner indicates a "non -penetrating" roof -mount installation.
Any such installation is subject to appropriate building code.
DMC:hg
6' amllY L17tX ffilo" C`
—Z5.37`N1rn h6/J
11-6
7° '9 `.i # Ltv irmsf&` m- Pad— -
r.
P10175} -
i
71 b
5 h/fte/ Stops
4�VC
Sse Sryeet 5 2 � �
9 VENTURE STORE
MARKET
\\
� 4 �
o l `L'#r Yloctr
k
I
t 7
}, � 25"
15 .err. 92 I ENTRANCES
t IS S At P
G
Lax
lurr�red S ot t y
F 1 70, L6 f 05.2 ; '.N+00.2 h'' 65.2 i+fit 2
'i, co f�00.Z 4f 4r63 l �f3 -� 4ttid 4+6.3 #
f 9+�3 l X35.4 I
X73 s3TtY \ PM
M
OtfCI j 4//5 #r 4r - ,`_` _ 4+F,3
6Ii ttG.3'
t i'JJ 3+� .JO g ( 4P G( 4 w
G 4J,
5 4
_f + g'! +
i
C+67.4
0.5 ;
r2 � tYP + pf 79. `t E/44.7 ' f1+T4.7 1 ff 04,7 I 4 7
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, V&r MANAGER
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: JUNE 4, 1992
SUBJECT: ZBA-28-SU-92, PAYLESS SHOE SOURCE
LOCATION: 1500 SOUTH ELMHURST ROAD
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation for
a Special Use Permit application filed by Payless Shoe Source. The applicants are
requesting a Special Use Permit to allow a satellite antenna which is 6 foot in diameter and
roof -mounted.
The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the request at their meeting of May 28, 1992. At
the meeting, Attorney Mr. Mike Schmidt was present to represent this request. Mr. Schmidt
explained that the antenna was requested so that the Chicago Regional Office could
communicate with the company headquarters in Topeka.
Ray Forsythe, Planner, indicated that all the standards for a Special Use Permit for a
satellite antenna have been met except for the proposed screening. Mr. Forsythe suggested
that a condition be added to any approval which required appropriate screening.
The Zoning Board generally discussed the request. By a vote of 6-0, the Zoning Board of
Appeals recommends approval of the Special Use request with a condition that the
appropriate screening be installed.
DMC:hg
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 28 -SU -92
PETITIONER:
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
PUBLICATION DATE:
REQUEST:
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Hearing Date: May 28, 1992
Payless Shoe Source
1500 South Elmhurst Road
May 12, 1992
The petitioner is requesting a Special Use
Permit under Section 14.2101.C.3 to allow the
installation of a roof -mounted satellite antenna.
Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ronald Cassidy
Richard Pratt
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
ABSENT: Peter Lannon
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: None
Chairman Basnik introduced case ZBA-28-SU-92 as being a request for a Special Use
Permit to allow a roof -mounted satellite antenna at the Payless Shoe Source office at 1500
South Elmhurst Road.
Attorney Mike Schmidt introduced himself to the Zoning Board and stated he was an
attorney representing the petitioner in this matter. He stated that the company would like
to install a roof antenna at their office at South Elmhurst Road for purposes of
communicating with the national headquarters in Topeka. Mr. Schmidt explained that this
office on South Elmhurst Road is the Chicago Regional Office, and that it is essential that
this regional headquarters have the ability to do tele -conferencing with the national
headquarters out of state. He also noted that staff had pointed out that screening is
required with a satellite antenna, and the attorney asked that this be waived due to the
three to four foot parapet on the building, that would help screen the support materials of
the antenna. Mr. Schmidt stated that the satellite is not near any residential areas and that
the abutting uses are commercial or institutional, and that the screening would not
accomplish much considering these adjoining land uses.
ZBA-28-SU-92
Page 2
Mr. Ray Forsythe then summarized the staff report and stated that a Special Use Permit is
requirf!d to allow the installation of a roof -mounted antenna. Mr. Forsythe stated that this
isar to other requests recently approved in the Village and he did point out that the
antenna installation would have to meet all Building Code requirements concerning
installation. Mr. Forsythe stated that he would need to see a cross-section of the building
and the satellite antenna, to determine if the building parapet could properly screen the
antenna base.
Mr. Cassidy asked if the 28 foot dimension in the staff report is measured from grade and
how tall the building was. Mr. Forsythe stated that the 28 foot overall height is from grade
to the top of the antenna, and that the building height is 22 feet.
Mr. Brettrager asked where the exact location of the antenna on the roof was, and that this
would make some difference as to whether the building parapet could provide screening.
Chairman Basnik stated that the Zoning Board could recommend approval subject to the
petitioner working with staff on adequate screening.
The Zoning Board generally discussed the request and it was determined that if the building
parapet could screen the antenna there would be no objections, but that they believed that
the petitioner should work with staff to provide more information on the subject.
Accordingly, Mr. Brettrager moved that the Zoning Board of Appeals recommend approval
of the Special Use Permit to allow a satellite antenna at 1500 South Elmhurst Road, subject
to a condition that adequate screening be provided. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Cassidy.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Pratt, Cassidy, Brettrager, Skowron, Saviano and Basnik
NAYS: None
Motion carried by a vote of 6-0.
This recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for their consideration.
&'A' uqna�-
David M. Clements,
Director of Planning
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PIANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO.
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAI w
FROM:
DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE:
MAY 21, 1992
CASE NO.:
ZBA-28-SU-92
APPLICANT:
PAYLESS SHOE SOURCE
ADDRESS:
1500 SOUTH ELMHURST ROAD
LOCATION MAP:
1400
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: B4 Planned Unit Development
LOT SIZE: N/A
% COVERAGE: N/A
FAX: N/A
9
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2
The petitioner is requesting a Special Use Permit under Section 14.2101.C.3 to allow the
installation of a roof -mounted satellite antenna
Summary of application: The applicant is proposing to install a 6 foot diameter satellite
antenna on the roof of the Payless Shoe Source Chicago Store Operations and Real Estate
Corporate Office located at 1500 South Elmhurst Road. The satellite antenna is needed to
link the store to the corporate headquarters. The Mount Prospect Zoning Ordinance only
permits satellite antennas larger than 40" as Special Uses.
Impact on Surrounding Properties: Payless Shoe Source is located in the May Properties
building next to the Venture Store.
Following is a discussion of the standards for satellite antennas.
1. The antenna is located on the roof of the store to which is an accessory.
2. The proposed 6 foot antenna diameter is less than 1/3 the height of the building. (22
ft. building height x 33% = 7.26 feet.)
3. The overall height of the dish will be approximately 2$'-3". The Code allows a
maximum building height of 30 feet.
4. The antenna will be at least 20 feet from all property lines.
5. The antenna will be in scale with the building.
No indication of screening has been submitted by the petitioner. Staff would like the
petitioner to be prepared to discuss the type of screening that will be proposed for this
satellite dish.
OTHER DEPAUMML COMMENT
No other comments or concerns have been raised by Village staff.
Staff has no objections to the Special Use requested to allow a 6 foot diameter roof -
mounted satellite antenna, with the condition that acceptable screening be installed. Also,
information submitted by the petitioner indicates a "non -penetrating" roof -mount installation.
Any such installation is subject to appropriate building code.
DMC:hg
6' CKAlN 1J!!X FftfG?E �
—PS.3T Mm f,+f�1J to Fence
7fbl.92
t � —
C*7}32;1
see meet 52
o? F VENTURE STORE I MARKET
toCtr.
6c C 9 t J0 Ctr, I
t .39 6/
5rJ91 ENTRANCES
RAYG" zJC.R.
. I
Pa+otf�
j) `r 752 Ciacz :� 70-e .6_f do,? 'Yooa2 { Nl —I 371 Z
C++4'fF d 4r E3 f+CS.2_ dr Qrb3 lt63 4t? 4 615
� Q
79�
7
+dt2 Ig !P Niftte f a r#57,2
.,. 971 R I 4115 ftl qty ` d+3 ' d8;
'?i _ •c6 a a v g T
77
175.10 e
}
.
f � tI+OA.7tYf+ F.71 .
E SS
r �`'
CAF/
6/23/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE FOR PROPERTY
COMMONLY KNOWN AS PAYLESS SHOESOURCE
LOCATED AT 1500 SOUTH ELMHURST ROAD
WHEREAS, Payless ShoeSource (hereinafter referred to as Petitioner)
has filed a petition for a Special Use with respect to property
located at 1500 South Elmhurst Road (hereinafter referred to as
Subject Property); and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is legally described as follows:
Lot 2, except the east 200.00 feet (measured
perpendicularly) of the north 145.00 feet (measured along
the east line thereof) in Kenroy's Huntington being a
subdivision of part of the east half of Section 14,
Township 41 North, Range 11, East of the Third Principal
Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois, Parcel 1 and 2 of land
are also known as Lot 2 in Kenroy's Elmhurst -Dempster
Subdivision being a subdivision of part of the east half
of Section 14, Section 41 North,Range 11, East of the
Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois, dated
April 19,'1973 and recorded May 16, 1973 as Document No.
22327173
and
WHEREAS, Petitioner seeks a Special Use to permit installation of
a roof -mounted satellite antenna, as provided in Section
14.2101.C; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the request for Special Use,
being the subject of ZBA 28 -SU -92, before the Zoning Board of
Appeals of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 28th day of May,
1992, pursuant to proper legal notice having been published in the
Mount Prospect Herald on the 12th day of May, 1992; 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 28 -SU -92; and
WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of
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 28 -SU -92 would
be in the best interest of the public.
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 roof mounted satellite antenna, and that the
requirement to screen the antenna is hereby waived.
SECN THREE: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect
W
ZBA 28 -SU -92
Page 2 of 2
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 DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: JUNE 4, 1992
SUBJECT. ZBA-31-V-92, DANIEL GERAGHTY
LOCATION: 202 SOUTH SEEGWUN
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation for
a variation request filed by Daniel Geraghty. The applicant is requesting a variation to
Section 14.1102 to allow a zero foot setback along the side yard to allow the construction
of a patio.
The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the request at their meeting of May 28, 1992. At
the meeting, Mr. Geraghty indicated that the house has no access to the rear yard and
therefore, he wanted to be able to have a patio on the side of his home just off of the side
door. Mr. Geraghty indicated that a fence would be constructed along the side yard to
screen the patio from the neighbors.
Ray Forsythe, Planner, indicated staff had concerns with such a large variation request. He
indicated that other departments recommended that the request be reduced so that drainage
could be maintained in this area. Mr. Forsythe also pointed out that there was ample room
in the rear of the house and perhaps an L-shaped patio could be designed so that there
would be access by the side door, and no variation would be required.
The Zoning Board generally discussed the request. Several members felt that the request
was a convenience to the homeowner and not a hardship. They felt that there was adequate
room in the rear of the house to build a patio. By a vote of 2-4 the Zoning Board
recommends denial of the variance request.
DMC:hg
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF —;..- '- '-
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 31-V-92
Hearing Date: May 28, 1992
PETITIONER:
Daniel Geraghty
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
202 South SeeGwun
PUBLICATION DATE:
May 12, 1992
REQUEST:
The petitioner is requesting a variation to
Section 14.1102 to allow a side yard setback of
zero feet instead of the minimum required
setback of 7.15 feet in order to construct a
concrete patio.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ronald Cassidy
Richard Pratt
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
ABSENT:
Peter Lannon
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES:
None
Chairman Basnik introduced the next case ZBA-30-V-92, as being an application filed by
Daniel Geraghty at 202 South SeeGwun, in order to allow a zero foot sideyard setback for
a patio rather than the 7.15 feet required by the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Geraghty introduced himself to the Zoning Board of Appeals and explained he would
like to construct a patio in the sideyard of his home. He explained that there is no back
door at the house and that there was only a side door, and that this side door dictates the
location of the patio. He explained that a fence would be constructed adjacent to the patio
and that this would screen the area from neighboring properties. Mr. Geraghty made
reference to a recommendation in the staff report that suggested that the patio would be
reduced to provide a better side yard, and that this reduction be accomplished by
constructing an L, -shaped patio behind the house. Mr. Geraghty stated that there is a large
tree behind the house and also a central air conditioning unit, and these two conditions
would prohibit him from constructing an L-shaped patio which wrapped around the house.
ZBA-31-V-:,/
Page 2
Mr, Forsythe then summarz,,,-d the staff report for the Zoning Board of Appeals. He
exp,ained chat the applicant would like to construct a 16' x: 27' concrete patio on the side
of the house that would reduce the required side yard to zero feet. Mr. Forsythe concurred
that there was no rear access from the house and pointed out that the petitioner would like
to construct the patio off of the existing side door. Mr. Forsythe stated that a 20 foot alley
right-of-way adjacent to this property was vacated in 1976, and that this provided additional
land area in the petitioner's side yard, and that it is this area that he is proposing for the
patio installation. Mr. Forsythe stated that the patio is very large and will occupy the entire
side yard and he believed that this would have an adverse impact on the area even with the
proposed 5 foot fence. Mr. Forsythe recommended that the request be denied. He pointed
out that the subject lot is a very large parcel and that a conforming side yard could be
installed and still provide a sufficient patio size for the petitioner.
The Zoning Board of Appeals then discussed the request and Mr. Basnik noted that the
proposed patio is to be on the land area that was vacated by the Village. He stated that the
petitioner is taking unfair advantage of the former public right-of-way when he is considering
building such a large patio. ,
Mr. Cassidy asked about any drainage problems in the area and he noted in his staff report
that the Engineering Division recommends a three or five foot open setback so that
drainage patterns are not altered. Mr. Geraghty explained that there are no drainage
problems in this area and that he did not believe such a setback for drainage was necessary.
Mr. Geraghty stated that his proposal was for the patio as he would like to see it
constructed, but that he could compromise, and he pointed out that the property to the
south is at a substantial distance away from the patio and that the nearest structure is the
neighbor's garage.
Mr. Saviano looked at the picture of the petitioner's home, and Mr. Geraghty pointed out
the large tree in the rear yard that would prohibit the L-shaped patio from being
constructed behind the house.
Mrs. Skowron pointed out that side yard variations are more typical on smaller lots, such
as lots with a 50 foot width, and that this is a very large lot and that she could not see the
hardship in this request.
Mr. Basnik pointed out that the vacation of the right-of-way creates the opportunity for this
patio installation, and that the petitioner should provide a better setback, so as to not take
advantage of the property that he acquired due to the right-of-way being vacated.
ZBA-31-V-92
Page 3
Mr. Saviano asked about the interior room layout of the home and Mr. Geraghty pointed
out that the kitchen is at the side door.
Mr. Brettrager asked how far the existing tree was behind the house and Mr. Geraghty
stated the tree is approximately 4 feet from the house. Mr. Brettrager suggested that the
patio could be reduced in width to 12 feet, and that this would provide a 4 foot side yard.
Mr. Saviano asked the staff's opinion of a 4 foot side yard and Mr. Clements stated that
staff recommends providing a 7.15 foot sideyard to meet the Ordinance requirement.
Mr. Brettrager suggested that the Zoning Board make a motion on his compromise for a
12 foot patio width with a 4 foot sideyard. Mr. Brettrager then moved that the Zoning
Board approve a variation to allow a 4 foot sideyard. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Pratt.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Pratt, Brettrager,
NAYS: Cassidy, Skowron, Saviano and Basnik
The members who voted in opposition to the request explained that they believe this is a
very large lot and that there was no apparent hardship necessary to allow a zero foot
sideyard. They believe that the petitioner could install a reasonable sized patio on this
property and that there was concern for a precedent with such a large variation.
Mr. Basnik explained that the Zoning Board is making a recommendation to the Village
Board on this item and that Mr. Geraghty could discuss his position with the Village Board
in an attempt to overturn the recommendation by the Zoning Board. Mr. Basnik explained
that this would be referred to the Village Board meeting of June 16.
David M. Clements,
Director of Planning
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
nANNWG DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAI
FROM:
DAVID M. CLE S, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE:
MAY 21, 1992
CASE NO.:
ZBA-31-V-92
APPLICANT:
DANIEL GERAGHTY
ADDRESS:
202 SOUTH SEEGWUN
LOCATION MAP:
7
,4"02, s'. 6ealwCAAJ
119 CATHY
12, 01:1
0 0114 1 5
t1l 7
125 0 0
0 O 118 EVERGREEN
127
DRESSER 201
201 204 z 03 — 0
D Ln 2 5
203 206 205 F, —0 —0 �_-2 0 6
(M 205
0
0
E20 9
"t CN 0 co (0 213
21 C14 0 co
CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a CON 0
M M 00 in QD r, P. r, r, P.
1USURN
301 rn oro 10 In 00 G 0 0 r, 0 ul 0 'n
0 00 0 co 0 0 0
303
40 go r' f, r, r, r,
220
30 307 7
30 9
11 '
3
313
315
317
40 C4 0 ko 0
0 0 0 0
a) cp w co co
r,
LINC06;-
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: R-1 Single Family Residential
LOT SIZE: 11,740 sq. ft.
% COVERAGE: 23% (27% proposed)
FAX : N/A
a
0
z
WILBURN
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2
The petitioner is requesting a variation from the side yard setback of 7.15 feet to zero feet
to allow the construction of a concrete patio with the dimensions of 16'x 27'.
Summary of application: The applicant is requesting to construct a 16' x 27' concrete patio
on the side of the existing dwelling which would reduce the side yard setback to zero feet.
The applicant indicated that there is no rear yard access from the home and would like the
patio off of the side door.
Surrounding Properties and Potential Impact: There was a 20 foot right-of-way for an alley
between the subject property and the prop" to the south which was vacated in 1976. This
vacation has created an additional ten feet on each lot, which provided a large sideyard.
The proposed patio is very large, and is to occupy this entire sideyard. Staff believes this
will have an adverse impact on the neighboring property, even with the proposed 5 foot
fence.
There is currently a swale which runs along the side yard property line to accomplish storm
water run-off. Staff is concerned that, allowing a patio to encroach this swale, storm water
will now go onto the neighbor's property.
DERMUMENIAL COMMEM
Several departments indicated concern with granting a variation up to the property line. A
3 foot or 5 foot open area is recommended so that current drainage patterns are not altered.
SUMMARYIRECOMMENDATION
Staff would recommend that this request be denied. The subject property is a large lot, and
there is no need in placing the patio on the lot line. Staff recommends a conforming 7 ft.
sideyard be provided. If a larger patio is necessary, it can be reconfigured into an V shape
at the rear of the house.
DMC:hg
7
Nti Z
_ ori
w r
w �
cl
38.90
1 �
PENC1
1-037 /S 0.2'7oo
202
O
/3.53
1
r
OD
N
FC.
SEE- GWUN AVE.
cvouF� o
01
cOrv..r os rr✓CE s 0.15LrA(
Y' O.s'ia wFS/
TS7vr/`/ yM + -^�.
sovrc,
.�cmCF -osr .Cf
-wvry
4
3ouTN
/.I
7
Nti Z
_ ori
w r
w �
cl
38.90
1 �
PENC1
1-037 /S 0.2'7oo
202
O
/3.53
1
r
OD
N
FC.
SEE- GWUN AVE.
CAF/
6/23/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 202 SOUTH SEE GWUN
WHEREAS, Daniel K. Geraghty (hereinafter referred to as Petitioner)
has filed an application for a variation from Chapter 14 of the
Village Code of Mount Prospect, Illinois, for property commonly
known as -202 South See Gwun (hereinafter referred to as Subject
Property), legally described as:
Lot 133 in Town Development Company's We Go Park Unit
Number 2, being a subdivision of the West 1/2 of the
Northeast factional 1/4 and the East 1/2 of the Northwest
fractional 1/4 of Section 11, Township 41 North Range 11,
East of the Third Principal meridian, Cook County,
Illinois
and
WHEREAS, Petitioner seeks a variation from Section 14.1102.B to
allow a zero foot (01) sideyard setback, rather than 71 511 as
required, to accommodate a concrete patio; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the variation requested being
the subject of ZBA Case No. 31-V-92 before the Zoning Board of
Appeals of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 28th day of May,
1992, pursuant to due and proper notice thereof published in the
Mount Prospect Heralgl on the 12th day of May, 1992; 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 to deny said request; and
WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of the Village have
given further consideration to the variation being the subject of
ZBA 31-V-92 and have determined that the best interests of the
Village of Mount Prospect would be served by granting a variation
to allow a five foot (51) side yard variation.
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 a variation
from Section 14.1102.B to allow a five foot (51) sideyard setback
in order to construct a concrete patio as shown on the Site Plan
attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof as Exhibit "A".
SECTION THREE: Except for the variation granted herein, all other
applicable Village of Mount Prospect ordinances and regulations
ZBA 31-V-92
Page 2 of 2
shall remain in full force and effect as to the Subject Property.
SECTION FOUR: 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 FIVE: 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.
F.V#**3
NAYS:
ABSENT:
PASSED and APPROVED this day of 1992.
Gerald L. Parley
Village President
ATTEST:
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER
W,
FROM:
DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE:
JUNE 4, 1992
SUBJECT:
ZBA-32-SU-92, T. J. MARX
LOCATION:
1000 EAST CENTRAL ROAD
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation for
a Special Use Permit application filed by T. J. Maxx Company, Inc. The applicants are
requesting a Special Use Permit to allow a satellite antenna which is 6 foot in diameter and
mounted on the wall of the building.
The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the request at their meeting of May 28, 1992. At
the meeting Mr. Richard James of K W. Renfro, the installer, indicated that the antenna
had been put up without a permit. They were proposing to move the dish from the side of
the building to the rear and also proposing to paint the apparatus to match the building.
Ray Forsythe, Planner, indicated that all the standards for a Special Use Permit for a
satellite antenna have been met except for the proposed screening. Mr. Forsythe suggested
that some screening be required so that the dish be screened from the apartment building
to the north.
The Zoning Board generally discussed the request. Most members felt that the wall -
mounted dish could not be adequately screened from view, and for consistency in the
Center, thought a roof -mounted satellite dish was more appropriate. By a vote of 5-1, the
Zoning Board recommends approval of a satellite dish with the condition that it be roof -
mounted and appropriately screened.
DMC:hg
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 32 -SU -92
Hearing Date: May 28, 1992
PETITIONER:
T. J. Maxx
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
1000 East Central Road
PUBLICATION DATE:
May 12, 1992
REQUEST:
The petitioner is requesting a Special Use
Permit as required under Section 14.2001.0 to
allow the construction of a satellite dish which
is ten (10) foot in radius.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ronald Cassidy
Richard Pratt
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
ABSENT:
Peter Lannon
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES:
None
Chairman Basnik then introduced the next case ZBA-32-SU-92 for the T. J. Maxx Store
at 1000 East Central Road, being a Special Use request to allow a satellite dish.
Mr. Richard James introduced himself to the Zoning Board of Appeals and stated that he
is a representative of K W. Renfro Company, the installer of the satellite dish. He
explained that his company had installed the wall -mounted satellite dish at the T. J. Maxx
Store, and that they would be willing to paint the satellite supports the same color as the
building in an effort to minimize the visual impact of the installation.
Mr. Forsythe then summarized the staff report for the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr.
Forsythe pointed out that a Special Use Permit is required for a satellite dish in a
commercial location and that this antenna had been installed on the west wall of the
building without having the proper approval. He stated that the petitioner is proposing to
relocate the antenna from the west wall to the rear wall, or the north wall, in an attempt
to minimize its impact. Mr. Forsythe stated that Centennial Apartments are located to the
ZBA-32-SU-92
Page 2
north of the store and that the Wal-Mart Department Store is west of the antenna
installation. Mr. Forsythe stated that the satellite installation meets all requirements of the
Zo--'.,g Ordinance with the exception of the screening. Mr. Forsythe stated that the
petitioner is proposing to paint the antenna supports in a color to match the building
exterior, but stated that the Zoning Ordinance requires that screening be provided. Mr.
Forsythe explained that staff did not know how a wall -mounted antenna could be screened
and suggested if there was concern about the screening of the installation, that perhaps, the
best thing to do would be to relocate the wall -mounted antenna to the roof of the store to
provide screening on the roof as had been done with Walgreens and Wal-Mart.
The Zoning Board of Appeals then discussed the request and Mr. Basnik asked why the
antenna is, proposed to be removed from the west wall to the north wall. Mr. James
explained that he believed that the north wall is behind the store and that it would be less
visible to shoppers in front of T. J. Maxx and Wal-Mart.
Mr. Cassidy stated he believed that the satellite dish should be installed in a manner that's
consistent with other antennas in Mount Prospect Plaza, and that would be a roof -mounted
installation with proper screening. Mr. James explained that it was his understanding that
the owner of the property would not allow the antenna to be installed on the roof and that
is why the unit was mounted to the wall.
Mrs. Skowron asked if the existing antenna could be installed on the roof rather than the
wall if approved by the property owner, and Mr. James stated that this antenna could be
roof -mounted.
Mr. Brettrager pointed out that he believed the screening could be adequately provided on
the roof and that the petitioner should work to provide the screening as required by the
Zoning Ordinance.
The Zoning Board of Appeals generally discussed the request and it was believed that Mr.
Cassidy's position ofa roof -mounted antenna with proper screening would be consistent with
other recent action at Mount Prospect Plaza and that this was probably the best approach
to take concerning this antenna proposal.
Accordingly, Mr. Brettrager moved that the Zoning Board of Appeals recommend that the
Village Board approve a Special Use Permit for a roof -mounted antenna with proper
screening for the T. J. Maxx Store at 1000 East Central. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Pratt.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Pratt, Brettrager, Skowron, Saviano and Basnik
NAYS: Cassidy
ZBA-32-SU-92
Page 3
When Mr. Cassidy agreed with the concept of relocating the antenna to the roof of the
store, he believed the Zoning Board of Appeals should know the exact location and the type
of screening to be provided.
This recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for their consideration.
b -411 CaWA;t5-
David M. Clements,
Director of Planning
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAIRMAN
FROM:
DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE:
MAY 21, 1992
CASE NO.:
ZBA-32-SU-92
APPLICANT:
T. J. MARX
ADDRESS:
1000 EAST CENTRAL ROAD
LOCATION MAP:
0
1
0
N
V
0 0
0 0 N vi
2021
- n- - )A K144
Q Q w 0 w Q 0 0 a a 0
900 1 1 1
E ARCYCE I -A,'
0 0 110
(A — — — — — - C! C� 108
0 00
r F -9 0-07 CEm
MNtML
106"
1010
a 110.50 IE6 10>0
A,9
WT. PROSPECT PLAZA-ZI
SHOPPING CENTER
�1
43
1200-1220
E CENTRAL JM
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: B-3 Business Sales & Service
LOT SIZE: N/A
% COVERAGE: N/A
F.A.R. : N/A
4
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2
The petitioner is requesting a Special Use Permit as required under Section 14.2001.0 to
allow the installation of a wall -mounted satellite antenna.
Summary of application: The applicant is proposing to install a 6 foot diameter satellite
antenna on the rear wall of the T. J. Maxx Store at 1000 East Central Road (Mount
Prospect Plaza). Mount Prospect Zoning Ordinance only permits satellite antennas larger
than 40" diameter by Special. Use permit. It should be noted that the antenna is presently
installed on the west wall, and will be relocated to the rear of the building.
Impact on Surrounding Properties: T. J. Maxx is located toward the west end of Mount
Prospect Plaza Shopping Center. A Senior Citizen Apartment Complex, Centennial
Apartments, is located directly to the north of T. J. Maxx. A primary concern is the view
of the satellite antenna by residents of upper floor apartments.
Following is an outline of the requirements for satellite antennas, and how this installation
meets appropriate standards:
1. The antenna will be located on the rear wall of the T. J. Maxx Store to which it is
an accessory.
2. The proposed 6 foot antenna diameter is less than 1/3 the height of the building (20
ft. building height x 33% = 6.6 feet).
3. The overall height of the dish will be approximately 28.5 feet. The Code allows a
maximum building height of 30 feet.
4. The antennaa will be at least 20 feet from all property lines.
5. The antenna will be in scale with the building.
The application indicates that the antenna components will be painted with a color to blend
with the building exterior. The requirement of the Zoning Ordinance is that the antenna
be fully screened from view from adjacent properties (from grade level) with materials
which are compatible with the building to which they are accessory. Staff is concerned that
only Painting the antenna will not be sufficient screening to the residential areas to the
north. However, screening of a wall -mounted antenna appears difficult as such an
installation does not lend itself to screening as a roof -mounted antenna. The Special Use
Permit for the nearby Walgreens and Wal-Mart included a roof -mounted antenna with
proper screening. Staff would like the petitioner to discuss with the Zoning Board of
Appeals this issue so that an adequate screen can be provided.
M , *.
COMMISNP
The other staff members indicated that some sort of screening should be developed.
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
� UJUTUR, WIVIN
Page 3
Subject to development of acceptable screening, staff would recommend approval of the
request. As stated, a wall -mounted antenna is difficult to screen and neutral paint may be
the best alternative. If there are major concerns about the screening issue, it might be best
to relocate the antenna to the roof, similar to installations at Walgreens and Wal-Mart. If
the antenna cannot be placed on the root it's existing location on the west wall might be
better for residents of Centennial Towers.
DMC:hg
> F2nwr nw 4r c=
T?�aa�d
SCALE
CAP/
6/23/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE FOR PROPERTY
COMMONLY KNOWN AS T J MAXX
LOCATED AT JQQQ EAST CENT EAL ROA
WHEREAS, R. W. Renf ron, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as
Petitioner) has filed a petition for a Special Use with respect to
property located at 1000 East Central Road (hereinafter referred
to as Subject Property); and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is legally described as follows:
Lot I in Plaza Subdivision, being a Subdivision of part
of the southwest 1/4 of Section 35, Township 42 North,
Range 11, East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook
County, Illinois, according to the plat thereof registered
July 16, 1979 as Document Number LR 3104778
and
WHEREAS, Petitioner seeks a Special Use to permit installation of
a wall -mounted satellite antenna, as provided in Section
14.2001.C; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the request for Special Use,
being the subject of ZBA 32 -SU -92, before the Zoning Board of
Appeals of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 28th day of May,
1992, pursuant to proper legal notice having been published in the
Mount Prospect Herald on the 12th day of May, 1992; 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 32 -SU -92 and
recommended said satellite antenna be mounted on the roof, rather
than on the wall as requested; and
WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of
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 32 -SU -92 would
be in the best interest of the public.
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 roof mounted satellite antenna with required
screening.
ECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect
0
ZBA 32 -SU -92
Page 2 of 2
from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet
form in the manner provided by law.
AYES:
NAYS:
PASSED and APPROVED this day of r 1992.
Gerald L. Farley
Village President
ATTEST:
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
4 r
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER
nw_
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: JUNE 4, 1992
SUBJECT: ZBA-34-V-92, JOHN AND DELIGHT EILERING
LOCATION: 302 SOUTH LANCASTER
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation for
a variation request filed by John and Delight Eilering. The applicants are requesting a
variation to Section 14.3016 to allow a 19 foot wide driveway.
The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the request at their meeting of May 28, 1992. At
the meeting, Mr. Eilering indicated that the wider drive was requested to accommodate two
cars off of the street. He also noted that there are other wide driveways in the
neighborhood.
Ray Forsythe, Planner, indicated that the proposed driveway will not significantly impact the
front yard lot coverage and that the driveway will allow additional off-street parking.
The Zoning Board of Appeals discussed the request noting that there is a parking ban on
streets at night and this was a common request. Accordingly, by a 6-0 vote, the Zoning
Board of Appeals recommends approval of the 19 foot driveway.
MC:hg
,MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT :�`;aviiNG BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 34-V-92
PETITIONER.
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
PUBLICATION DATE:
REQUEST:
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Hearing Date: May 28, 1992
John and Delight Eilering
302 South Lancaster
May 12, 1992
The petitioner is seeking a variation from
Section 14.3016 to allow a 19 foot driveway
instead of the maximum allowed 15 foot.
Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ronald Cassidy
Richard Pratt
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
ABSENT: Peter Lannon
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: None
Chairman Basnik then introduced the next request being ZBA-34-V-92, an application filed
by John Eilering at 302 South Lancaster, in order to increase the maximum 15 foot driveway
to 19 feet.
Mr. Eilering introduced himself to the Zoning Board of Appeals and stated that the
application was filed to allow a 19 foot driveway width. He explained that he has a one -
car garage at his property and that the 19 foot driveway width would allow two cars to be
parked side by side in the driveway and not overhang the sidewalk or be parked in the
street. Mr. Eilering explained that this is a common driveway width in this area and stated,
by his count, there were nine homes in a one -square block area that had a similar driveway
width. Mr. Eilering stated that this is being done in conjunction with a recent major
remodelling of the home, and that this would be the last phase of work with that
remodelling.
Mr. Forsythe summarized the staff request for the Zoning Board and stated that a variation
was filed to increase the maximum 15 foot driveway width to 19 feet, and that this is typical,
ZBA-34-V-92
Page 2
and that many residents like the convenience of parking two cars side by side in a
driveway. Mr. Forsythe stated that front yard coverage and overall lot coverage are below
the maximum with this proposal, and that there are other such driveway widths in the
neighborhood, and that this would not have any impact on adjoining properties.
The Zoning Board of Appeals briefly discussed the request and Mrs. Skowron pointed out
that this is another example of a Mount Prospect resident undertaking major remodelling
to an existing home in order to allow them to remain in the community.
There being no concerns with the driveway width variation, Chairman Basnik asked for a
motion on the request. Mr. Cassidy moved that the Zoning Board of Appeals recommend
approval of a 19 foot driveway width for the property at 302 South Lancaster. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Brettrager.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Cassidy, Pratt, Brettrager, Skowron, Saviano and Basnik
NAYS: None
This recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for their consideration.
1 M, UjW4�
David M. Clements,
Director of Planning
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PL4NN NG DEPARTWNr
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIR, CHAIRM
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: MAY 21, 1992
CASE NO.: ZBA-34-V-92
APPLICANT: JOHN AND DELIGHT EILERING
ADDRESS: - 302 SOUTH LANCASTER
LOCATION MAP:
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: R-1 Single Family Residential
LOT SIZE: 9,975 sq. It.
% COVERAGE: 32% (34% proposed)
F -A -R.: N/A
CLEVEN
201
200
�j A • , ,may 0 20
502— S. IA f'iAs f M!�- •-
214
201
20
O N � 0 0 0 0 200
•- •_ •- •- � ::
N N N o 0 0 0 0 -T C141 01 00 1 101
203
205
213
ZO2
204
214
216
215
216
MIBURN
217
218
21 8
301 300
301 300
301
300
300
303 302
302
303
�t
30
302
305 304
304
306
308
310
.x
3
x
r
>
<
3
305 304
307 306
309 308
`� 0
<
305
307
.t
0
304
306
N O
0 0
8
W
3
307 306
309 308
311�1N.
312
PANDLET
14
O 0 0 0 0 m1n to
at0
C1432316 ^
N
0
OO OO
N
0 0
0
0d
0 0
o Oo
Nn
0350
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: R-1 Single Family Residential
LOT SIZE: 9,975 sq. It.
% COVERAGE: 32% (34% proposed)
F -A -R.: N/A
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2
REQUEST
The petitioner is seeking a variation from Section 14.3016 to increase the maximum
driveway width from 15 feet to 19 feet for a one -car garage in an "R-1" Single family
District.
PIANNINGAND ZONING COMMENTS AND CONCERNS
Summary of application: The applicant is seeking to replace an existing 15 foot driveway
with a 19 foot driveway for a one -car garage. The wider driveway is requested so that two
vehicles can park on the driveway.
Impact on Surrounding Properties: The existing lot coverage is 32% and will be increased
to 34% with the wider driveway. Front yard lot coverage is 21% and will be increased to
27%. This is well below the maximum allowed coverage. There is not sufficient room in
the sideyard for an addition to the existing garage. The wider driveway will help parking
and maneuvering for the petitioner.
I" 1 AM a.Y I V W1103 1
No major concerns were expressed by other Village staff. The Engineering and Inspection
Services Department note that the grading shall be maintained so that existing drainage
patterns are not altered.
SSU I, RYIRECOMMENDATIO
Staff recommends approval of this request. This is a typical request for homes with one -
car garages, and the additional pavement will not alter the character of the neighborhood
as there are other wider driveways in this area.
DMC:hg
exv4,f.
" x, w r "" , yrv. y, !�!'..dro/ •..1 'r ""' ""x'
.. ,rao x. a 'e... +�, -t+F ,r+"; ' •' ,/ "1;450 d m$,y tt ' f,
+ w ,'d' 3iw_yap+y 'y "`` rA {• ..+.�„s' 4 �Cr "'.
{, r ,�., d 'RC1yr, :x, rem +a�6. ^'.Gy+r, 'a :•.'
!' .." ♦.�„,...., ;• ..w $t.�" `;rte .�}� •fir w x� l{^' '�hc�,y
p "'. ,,�, "., �." ~� :"", .' ,^ �" P ', .., �„x ,..fir. �°,^�. r w ".",3.•.i. +ate w Cv^:a i^*,„;+y� a�'.
0!0
Vlr
aa"" ", �W k Fl� !� c " ° r y y,r m'*,�y, � � ��4"�� �, �i r � �r ✓.".*+'r5 X�° '�+ #,�" 'm". a+"2" �' t ^�
�,'�": � �x 'a' ��'"�* a r't ar, x`. *^ ^� - � '� F'"}i a.,��F"'` '•w�, r �,t � xr."v^*"4� "�«^e.
•� �"""� a x4 1 *mom ms F+"'^ .P w * ; ""` "� r r �#' /. •, a"'� r w3'''
CAF
6/23/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 302 SOUTE LANCASTER
WHEREAS, John and Delight Eilering (hereinafter referred to as
Petitioners) have filed an application for a variation from Chapter
14 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, Illinois, for property
commonly known as 302 South Lancaster (hereinafter referred to as
Subject Property), legally described as:
Lot 30 in Alfini's Second Addition to Mount Prospect,
being a subdivision of part of the South 990 feet of the
East 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 11, Township 41
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 January
20, 1955, as Document Number 1571480;
WOW
WHEREAS, Petitioners seek a variation from Section 14.3016 to allow
a driveway nineteen feet (191) wide; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the variation requested being
the subject of ZBA Case No. 34-V-92 before the Zoning Board of
Appeals of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 28th day of May,
1992, pursuant to due and proper notice thereof published in the
Mount Pros ect Herald on the 12th day of May, 1992; 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 variation
being the subject of ZBA 34-V-92 and have determined that the best
interests of the Village of Mount Prospect would be served by
granting said variation.
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 a variation
from Section 14.3016 to allow a driveway nineteen feet (191) in
width.
SECTION THREE.•, Except for the variation 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 FOUR: In accordance with the provisions of Section 14.604
of Chapter 14 of the Village Code, the variations granted herein
a
ZBA 34-V-92
Page 2 of 2
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 FIVE., 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
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
1992.
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM:
DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE:
JUNE 5, 1992
SUBJECT:
ZBA-35-SU-92, ROUSE-RANDHURST SHOPPING CENTER, INC.
LOCATION:
S.E. CORNER ELMHURST AND EUCLID, (999 N. ELMHURST RD.)
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation on
an amendment to the Planned Unit Development Ordinance No. 3604 to allow the approved
5,000 square foot future restaurant on the P.U.D. site plan to be expanded to approximately
7,540 square feet. This proposal is for a new restaurant building, immediately west of"Bell
Federal Savings.
The Zoning Board considered the request at their meeting of May 28, 1992. At the
meeting, Mr. Kevin Rielley, Attorney, for the petitioner, gave an overview of the proposed
Hooter's Restaurant. Mr. Rielley indicated that the petitioners are willing to make the
changes requested in the staff report and would resolve all outstanding issues prior to review
by the Village Board.
Mr. Sal Melilli of Hooter's Restaurant indicated that the proposed restaurant is similar in
nature to a Bennigans, or T.G.I. Friday. He described hours of operation and the type of
customers expected at the restaurant. He discussed a typical menu, and provided
background on the company.
Ray Forsythe, Planner, indicated that a restaurant is an approved use in this location and
that the proposed enlargement would have no negative impact on the surrounding
properties.
The Zoning Board of Appeals generally discussed the request. By a vote of 6-0, the Zoning
Board recommends approval of the P.U.D. amendment to allow a 7,540 square foot
restaurant with the following conditions:
1. Landscaping plans shall be redesigned to meet the requirements of the
Landscape Ordinance. There are deficiencies in foundation plantings and
parking lot landscaping.
2. The design of the proposed building shall be discussed, with emphasis on the
rear elevation and the loading area.
John Fulton Dixon
Page 2
June 5, 1992
1 Proposed signage shall meet provisions of the Sign Ordinance and the
Randhurst Sign Planned Unit Development.
4. Any outstanding issues and concerns of the Engineering, Public Works,
Inspection Services and Fire Departments shall be resolved prior to the
issuance of any building permits.
DMC:hg
MOUNT PROSPF.r"! -G BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 35 -SU -92
Hearing Date: May 28, 1992
PETITIONER:
Rouse-Randhurst Shopping Center
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
S.E.C. Elmhurst and Euclid
PUBLICATION DATE:
May 12, 1992
REQUEST:
The petitioners are requesting to amend the
Planned Unit Development Ordinance No.
3604 as adopted on February 4, 1986 to allow
the approved 5,000 square foot future restaurant
to be expanded to approximately 7,540 square
feet.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ronald Cassidy
Richard Pratt
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
ABSENT: Peter Lannon
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: None
Chairman Basnik then introduced the next agenda item being a request to amend the
Planned Unit Ordinance for Randhurst Shopping Center which previously allowed a 5,000
square, foot restaurant on the P.U.D. site plan to be expanded, to permit a 7,500 square foot
restaurant.
Attorney Kevin Rielley introduced himself to the Zoning Board of Appeals stating he was
with the firm of Rudnick & Wolfe at 203 North LaSalle Street and explained he is the
attorney for Rouse-Randburst. Mr. Rielley indicated that in 1986 the Planned Unit
Development for Randhurst Shopping Center was established, and this included a footprint
of a 5,000 square foot restaurant west of Bell Federal Savings. Mr. Rielley explained that,
at this time, Rouse-Randhurst has a specific user identified and that this specific restaurant
requires a footprint of 7,500 square feet. Mr. Rielley explained that this consists of 6,000
square feet in the building and 1,500 square feet in a covered patio area.
Mr. Rielley stated that the proposed restaurant is a Hootees and that this is a restaurant
that provides an emphasis on food and only 25% of their revenues are provided from liquor
sales. He explained that the restaurant will be requesting a liquor license at the appropriate
time, but that this would only be a beer and wine license and not a full service liquor
license. Mr. Rielley stated that during the week he would expect that the Hooter's
customers would be more families, and at weekends the patrons of the restaurant would
ZBA 35 -SU -92
Page 2
be younger professionals. Mr. Rielley stated that the larger restaurant would have no
adverse impact on surrounding properties and that this would be an improvement to
Ra dburst to upgrade the Center by including a full service restaurant; som " that is
presently lacking at the property.
Mr. Rielley concluded by stating that Hoote
the community and additional tax revenues
to comments in the staff report concerns
elevation, and stated that Rouse-Randhurs
that he would submit a revised plan to thi
make a recommendation on the requi
Ball, the Manager of Randburst
Operations for Hooter's, in case the
would provide employment opportunities for
help the Village. He briefly made reference
the landscape plan and ' the rear building
,greed to work with staff on these items and
pillage Board if the Zoning Board chose to
rening. Mr. Rielley also introduced Mr. Scott
Center and Mr. Sal Melilli, Director of
were questions.
Ray Forsythe then summarized the staff report for the .'honing Board of Appeals and
concurred with the attorney's statements that the original Randhurst P.U.D. provided; for
a future 5,000 square foot restaurant at this location. Mr. Forsythe explained that the
amendment for the P.U.D. was necessary to increase this restaurant size to 7,500 square
feet. He explained that required parking is provided for the restaurant and that all
appropriate setbacks are met. Mr. Forsythe stated that information provided by the
petitioner indicates that Hooter's is a full service restaurant offering a menti of sandwiches,
salads and similar light meals, and that the restaurant will be requesting a beer and wine
license. Mr. Forsythe then described the hours of operation for the restaurant, and pointed
out that the staff feels that a restaurant at this location would have no adverse impact on
surrounding properties.
Mr. Forsythe then noted that staff was
elevation Lof the building facing the shop
the rear elevation be designed to Prov
shopping center. He also stated staff had
block wall at the delivery area. Mr. Fo
have a positive economic impact on the
Randhurst, and that staff recommends a
subject to the four conditions in the st
signage details, and other issues to be di
Chairman Basnik asked Mr. Rielley if all
restaurant, and Mr. Rielley stated that Hoc
awaiting the final P.U.D. approval by the N
.ed about the lack of detail on the rear
ter, and that staff would recommend that
)re attractive building facadefacing the
i with the landscape plan and the concrete
so pointed out that the restaurant would
nd complement the larger, retail center of
of the expanded restaurant at Randhurst
rt about landscaping, the rear elevation,
d by Village Departments.
approvals had been completed for this
is committed and ready to go ,and is only
Board.
Mr. Cassidy asked why the company is proposing to build a new restaurant when there is
an existing restaurant just west of the proposed location that has been vacant for two years.
Mr. Rielley indicated that Hooter's had considered occupancy of the former Florenz
Restaurant, but that, this building was too small for their needs and that more importantly,
Hooter's builds a prototype building that provides a specific architectural identity for the
restaurant.
ZBA-35-SU-92
Mr. Sal Melilli introduced himself as Director of Operations for Hooter's Restaurants and
described the restaurant in greater detail. He talked about typical menu items, hours of
operation, and the types of customers the restaurant attempts to attract. He explained that
Hooter's has been in operation for ten years. The company started originally in. Florida and
that presently there are 75 Hooter's Restaurants across the United States. He compared
the proposed restaurant to Bennigan's, Chile's, or T.G.I. Fridays, but stated that what sets
them apart from their competitors is their ability to identify the type of community that they
will be successful in, and that they do participate in a variety of community events.
Mr. Cassidy asked what was unique about the Hooter's Restaurant and Mr. Melilli stated
that the restaurant features 50's and 60's music that is attractive to 'baby -boomers", and that
a "kid's" menu is available for younger children. He also stated that he believes it is a
feature that the restaurant does not serve hard liquor.
Mr. Saviano stated that from the description provided by the petitioner, the restaurant
sounds like other chain restaurants that are found in Arlington. Heights and Schaumburg,
and that Mount Prospect could benefit from having this type of facility at Randhurst
Shopping Center.
Mr. Basnik asked if there had ever been a Hooter's Restaurant that had been closed and
Mr. Melilli stated that no restaurant had yet been closed by the company.
The Zoning Board of Appeals generally discussed the request and it was determined that
the proposed theme restaurant would provide tax revenues and food and beverage tax to
the municipality and offer dining alternatives and entertainment to families and young
persons in the Village.
There being no further questions, Chairman Basnik asked for a motion on the request. Mr.
Brettrager moved that the Zoning Board of Appeals recommend approval of an amendment
to the Randhurst P.U.D, to allow a 7,5W square foot restaurant rather than a 5,000 square
foot restaurant subject to the petitioner working with staff" on the four conditions identified
in the staff report. The motion was seconded by Mr. Pratt.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Pratt, Brettrager, Skowron, Saviano, Cassidy and Basnik
NAYS: None
This recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for their consideration.
David M. Clements,
Director of Planning
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAIRMAN
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENW, IRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: MAY 21, 1992
CASE NO.: ZBA-35-SU-92
APPLICANT. ROUSE-RANDHURST SHOPPING CENTER, INC.
ADDRESS: S.E. CORNER ELMHURST AND EUCLID
LOCATION MAP:
'F(XfIAP-E je%W1AF&JT ij
RANDHURST'
SHOPPING
CENTER J
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING:
LOT SIZE:
% COVERAGE:
FA. R. :
B-3 Planned Unit Development
N/A
N/A
N/A
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2
The applicant is seeking an amendment to the Planned Unit Development Ordinance No.
3604 as adopted on February 4, 1986 to allow the approved 5,000 square foot future
restaurant to be expanded to approximately 7,540 square feet.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMNTS AND CONCERN
Summary of application: The applicant is seeking a modification to the Randhurst Shopping
Center Planned Unit Development in order to expand the previously approved restaurant
pad at the southwest corner of the site from 5,000 square feet to 7,540 square feet. The
proposed restaurant will be developed as a Hooter's Restaurant. Hooters is a full-service
restaurant offering a full menu of sandwiches, salads, and similar light meals. Hooters will
also be requesting a liquor license to sell beer and wine only at the restaurant. Hooters
emphasis is on food with approximately 65% of its revenues being generated by food sales,
approximately 25% from beer and wine sales, and approximately 10% from the sale of T-
shirts and other souvenirs. The hours of the restaurant will be 11:30 A.M. - 12:00 A.M.,
Monday through Thursday; 11:30 A.M. to 1:00 A.M., Friday and Saturday; and 12 noon to
10:00 P.M. on Sunday. Enclosed with this staff report is a copy of the menu.
Impact on Surrounding Properties: The restaurant will be located at the southwest corner
of the Randhurst property, situated between the Randhurst water tower and Bell Federal.
Access to the restaurant will be from the interior ring road. There is business and retail
zoning and land uses on all sides of the proposed site. Staff feels that a restaurant of this
size will have no major impact on the surrounding areas.
Landscaping: The petitioners have submitted landscape plan for review. The following
items shall be added to the landscape plan: 1. A title block; 2. Utilities; 3. Proposed
lighting; 4. Proposed berms; 5. Signage location and detail; 6. Refuse disposal locations and
detail; 7. Irrigation plan; 8. Additional plantings along the foundation.
Site Plans and Elevations: The petitioners are seeking to expand the previously approved
"future restaurant" on the Planned Unit Development. Because there is a tenant for the
space, a sample elevation has been submitted. Because the petitioners are proposing a
larger building than that previously approved, a more detailed submittal has been included
for information of the Zoning Board.
The site plan indicates a single story building and covered deck totalling 7,540 square feet.
The plan also indicates a parking lot with 62 parking spaces.
The elevations that have been submitted indicate that the front of the building will face
Kensington Road. Staff is concerned with the lack of amenities on the rear wall facing the
mall. Staff would recommend that the rear elevation be redesigned to match the front
elevation without the railing. The elevations indicate the building to be constructed of
vertical wood siding and a metal roof. There will be a covered deck with fencing along the
front and left sides. Staff would note that the site plan and the elevations do not match in
the location of the covered deck. Also, the plans indicate a concrete block wall to screen
the delivery area. Because this area is visual to the drive-through of Bell Federal, staff
would suggest that brick be used instead.
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3
The petitionck, :,,, prepared to discuss the exact location of the deck on the proposed
building. Start wouid like the petitioners to bring a colored rendering or photos of any
similar Hooters Restaurants, if possible to the public hearing,
Economic Impact: The proposed restaurant will provide a positive economic impact
complementing the larger retail center, Randburst. The proposed hours of operation will
extend the business activity at Randhurst and serve a clientele in the growing area of theme
restaurants. This will complement the proposed family restaurant planned for the Kroch's
and Brentano's space at the shopping center. There will be a positive impact on job
creation and sales tax revenues, in addition to assessed value to the Village of Mount
Prospect.
03HER DEPMUMENTAL gDMMEM
1. 1aaptdiQn-"den i=: Grading plan shall be submitted along with development plans.
There are several water mains in the area of the existing water tower. It appears the
new parking lot will be over some of the water mains. Will the mains be relocated?
2. Engiaccring: Amendment to PUD should require detention for this site based on
our current ordinance.
3. Public Works: On landscape plan the— appears to be a potential conflict with
existing water control vaults, and valves adjacent to existing water tower. Otherwise,
Public Works has no objections.
4. Fire Dgpartment: Fire lanes must be dedicated and signed - hydrants on engineering
plans.
5-VMMA9YLRECQMMMATJ!QN
Staff recommends approval of the expanded restaurant on the Rouse Randhurst property
as indicated on the site plan. There are several outstanding issues that should be considered
when reviewing the subject plans:
1. Landscaping plans shall be redesigned to meet the requirements of the Landscape
Ordinance. There are deficiencies in foundation plantings and parking lot
landscaping.
2. The design of the proposed building shall be discussed, with emphasis on the rear
elevation and the loading area..
3. Proposed signage shall meet provisions of the Sip Ordinance and the Randhurst
Sip Planned Unit Development. .
4. Any outstanding issues and concerns of the Engineering, Public Works, Inspection
Services and Fire Departments shall be resolved prior to the issuance of any building
permits.
DC:hg
FOOD COOKED
TO ORDER
E AVAILABLE TO GOI
LOOK DEEPLY INTO
MY EYES AND
CONSIDER THIS
e
NEW ENGLAND STYLE CLAM CHOWDER movAl....... .................
HOOTERS GUMBO OR CHILI_ __..::._...._.._._.........._._......_....
HOOTER SHOOTER {oysta. »., ._......._......_._...._......_
HOOTER SALAO.
OYSTERS
FRED — not hero. bul it you
STEV" (a marled i you p@W A ACAS OVUL V. A ROASTERFUL
NUDE(artmanewholstwR ONTIENALFSHELL OOZENL A DOZEN -
SAMPLER PLATTER EXPENSIVE BUT WORTH TT..__._
A LITTLE BIT OF ►NTS AND A LITTLE BIT OF THAT. SOME STEMMED SHAMIP AND
SOME BOILED CRAB LEGS THAT WONTMAKE YOU FAT. ITS SEAFOOD SALAD
AND SOME FAMOUS VAW*l ITS A LITTLE BIT OF EVERYMVOG SO ORDER ONE
NOW AND GME ITA TRY. YOU CAN TRUST US WE NEVER LIE.
STEAMED LB.
MIM Cockbi Sauce or Drawn Buller Sauce (BY OUR SCALE)
SHR#4P SERVED HOT d READY TO PEEL
FIELD TESTED W RURAL 101444 — SO YOU KNOW THEVIRE GOOD.
SEAFOOD SA _ _ _ ____._--_—•----•—.__..T Oz.
A CONGLOMERATE OF SHRIMP AND CRABMEAT THAT, WHEN WATER
IS ADDED, DOUBLES AS A HIGH OUALITY CONCRETE AND STUCCO
PATCHING MATERIAL (— JUST KJOD#4 HOOTERS' 61)
GROUPER'S COUSIN SANDWICH.--_-__.__._..
Served wAh Cole Siaw. Pkkis. Laam. Tomato and Tarter Sauce)
'WE FOLMA COUSIN OF THE GROUPER AND DEQDED IT WAS BETTER THAN
PLAiV OLD QROWM BECAUSE IT HUNG OUT AT THF M"T SCHOOLS -
CRAB LEGS—.---.-
tI:GS Served �_.:__ __.__.___._.._._._._.._.__
25 OUNCES OF JUMBO CRAB wills Drawn Butler Sauce.
THESE BABIES ARE REALLY GOOD!
'
STEAMED CLAMS — HOOTERS STYLE —
Sen ed with Drawn BuVw Sauca
MADE SEM! -FAMOUS RIGHT HERE AT HOOTERS ..----•---._._ --......_.._........----
The OtAgatcey STEAK SANDWICH s o,. Cho+Ce Ribeye...-.
sIKE IT — BUT THEN WE THINK THAT THE CHICAGO
******tilt********~ir**�k**yir�llr*iririiriAr*tiiratckTi-a
* 1 OOTERS NEARLY WORLD FAMOUS
,*
CHICKEN WINGS
*
OFTEM"rATED
HARDLY E4.: DUPLK:ItTED
* (SERVED MILD, MEDIUM, HOT
* OR 3 MILE ISLAND) THE HOT ONES
WILL DEFINITELY
40 Pts....... _...._.. .
Ar GET YOUR ATTENTION
.. ......._...—•
GOURMET CHICI(EN WING R ..... _.................
* ?D WINGS t A BOTTLE OFDOA{PERIGNLW
ArA MEAL OR A SNACK)))
* ltd W wilih Nue t A COWTI...
Exna 94a Chooaa / a sauo. _ — _ ._..., _ ._.__..._
1t **til•�t****�t**********#,k*,k*******�r�Ar'A
THE U ATE HAM & CHEESE SANDWICHW.
--
THE PIGGY CAME FROM A MARKET, THE CHEESE CAME FROM A CO
WE ADDED SOME SECRET SAUCE AND THEY•RE ON A ROLL NOW.
CHICKEN
AFTER THE WINGS WERE GONE WHAT ELSE COULD WE DO BUT
SAVE THE BREAST. Sar-B•Gue Sauce on Request.
HOOTERS (MORE THAN A MOUTHFUL) BURGER_._._.__--_—
ITHELPS IF YOU LET LS KNOW WHAT YOU WANT ON IT.. .
Mayo or Bor•B•Uw
PHILLY CHEESE STEAK______
A FAVORITE AMONG THE TSERS FLYERS PHIL ES, EAGLE�I AND YES
EVEN THE LHERTY BELL THNAY SLICED STEAK COVERED W"H
MUS#MOOMS. PEPPERS A CFEFSE
HOOTER SALAD
OUR ORIGINAL SALAD MW ADDED HAIR CHEESE BACON ARID EGGS —
A DELIGHTFUL ExPEWNCE THAT ANY RABBIT WOULD ENJOY.
GOURMET HOT DOG PLATTER
A UAHOUE LJT TLE REM... lAfM ChX Add___._._.__
CURLEY & FRIES .._._.._.___.__._REG.... LARrA _.
FRENCH FAZES ARE FUN'AGA.K PEELED AND CURLED ENTIRELY BY ER A
PROGRAMMED BY AN IDAHO REFUGEE WHOM WE IWVE TO THE WALL IN
THE BACK ROOM — TOURS ON REOLEST — PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE EIUPLOYEES
COLE SLAW, BEANS OR POTATO SALAD--
BEFORF, DURING. OR AFTER YOUR FEEDING+ E, !=Y
WASH IT DOWN WITH ONE OF THESE BEV E�':i. x£
GO AHEAD. BE D YOUR MOMS NOT Y ATSIG
:1
COKE, SPRITE, DIET COKE, ORANGE, MILK OF l O TEA
°Y VERY OWN' "OOTERS CUP REGULAR..., JUMBO....
(SOON TO BE A COLIECTOR*S REM AROUND TIB: WORLD i._ .................... :..... _... EXTRA
WE TNINK YOU LL L
BEARS ARE SEGAETLYA ROVING f31tyD OF FLJfiAADFR &PFR E
n
vc,A #•.»w=i?�.ac.,.a.,1+$,.'A + _ . s. sa•w,..' 'nt.,t. .+... v�.a. 3 �1 t-
CAF/
6/23/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 3604
GRANTING A SPECIAL USE IN THE NATURE
OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
GOVERNING PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS
EMDHURST SHOPPING CENTER
WHEREAS, Rouse-Randhurst Shopping Center (hereinafter referred to
as Petitioner) has filed a petition to amend ordinance No. 3604,'
being an Ordinance authorizing a Special Use in the nature of a
Planned Unit Development with respect to property commonly known
as Randhurst Shopping Center (hereinafter referred to as the
Subject Property) and legally described as follows:
Lots 1, 2 and 3 in Randhurst Center Resubdivision No. 1, being
a resubdivision of Lot I in Randhurst Center, being a
subdivision of part of the Southeast 11/4 of Section 27,
Township 42 North, Range 11, East of the Third Principal
Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois according to plat thereof
registered in the Office of the Registrar of Titles of Cook
County, Illinois on July 24, 1987 as Document No. 3637429;
and
WHEREAS, Petitioner seeks an amendment to the Site Plan of the
Planned Unit Development being the subject of Ordinance No. 3604
to a 5,000 square foot building, proposed to be built in the
general vicinity of the northeast corner of Elmhurst Road and Rand
Road; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the request for amendment
being the subject of ZBA Case No. 35 -SU -92 before the Zoning Board
of Appeals of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 28th day of May,
1992, pursuant to proper legal notice having been published in the
Mount Prosvegt. Herald on the 12th day of May, 1992; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals has submitted its findings on
the proposed amendment to a Special Use to the President and Board
of Trustees; and
WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of
Mount Prospect have determined that the best interests of the
Village of Mount Prospect will be attained by granting the request
in ZBA 35 -SU -92.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF
TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SECTION ONE: That 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: That ordinance No. 3604 entitled "An Ordinance
Approving and Authorizing a Planned Unit Development and Expansion
of the Area Commonly Known as Randhurst Shopping Center For
Development of Two Department Stores, Three office Buildings and
a Restaurant in the Village of Mount Prospect" by attaching a
amended Site Plan, as depicted on the following plans:
1. Site and Landscape Plan #9221 by Seton Engineering; and
2. Building elevations #9210 by Hanson -Rause Architects
which amendment provides for the expansion of a 5,000 square foot
building to approximately 7,540 square feet.
SECTION THREE: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and
ZBA 35 -SU -92
Page 2 of 2
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
Village Clerk
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Village Manager r
FROM: David M. Clements, Director of Planning
DATE: July 1, 1992
SUBJECT: ZBA-26-A-92 Text Amendment
Attached please find an ordinance for Village Board consideration providing for a Special
Use Permit for parking of commercial trucks in residential garages. The ordinance amends
the appropriate Sections of the Zoning Ordinance, and allows trucks of more than 8,000
pounds in typical residential garages. The size of a residential garage is provided in the
Zoning Ordinance, and this Special Use requirement further provides that the overhead
door opening shall be no more than 9'.
The 9' door opening was selected as this dimension is listed on a garage handout used by
the Inspection Services Department, depicting typical garage dimensions.
I believe this addresses the concerns of the Village Board from the last meeting.
DMC:cl
attachment
DMC:c1
07/01/92
ORDINANCE NO.
WHEREAS, Mr. Steve Schwartz, through the Village of Mount Prospect (hereinafter
referred to as petitioner), has filed an application for a text amendment to Chapter 14,
Zoning Ordinance, of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, Illinois, in order to allow
commercial trucks with a licensed weight of more than 8,000 pounds to be parked in
residential garages;
WHEREAS, the petitioner seeks a text amendment to the following sections:
14.1001
RX District
14.1501
R4 District
14.1101
R1 District
14.3009
Off-street parking
14.1201
RA District
14.2602
Rules & Definitions
14.1301
R2 District
14.116
Home Occupations
14.1401
R3 District
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the Proposed amendment of ZBA Case No. 26-
A-92 before the Zoning Board of Appeals on the 28th day of May, 1992, as continued from
April 23, 1,992, pursuant to due and proper notice thereof published in the Mount Prospect
Herald on April 7, 1992,
WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals has submitted its findings and recommendations
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 request of
ZBA-26-A-92.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF
TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SECTION: That 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 : That Sections 14.1001.B.3, 14.1101.B.3, 14.1201.B.4, 14.1301.B.3,
14.1401.B.4, 14.1501.B.4 are hereby deleted in their entirety and replaced with 14.1001.C.7,
14.1101.0.8, 14.1201-D.7, creating a Special Use category as follows:
"Allow garages designed to house more than two (2) motor vehicles, and garages for
parking of commercial vehicles and/or commercial trailers with a licensed weight of
more than 8,000 pounds. Such garage for commercial vehicles shall not exceed the
Accessory Building standards of 14.102B, and shall not have a garage door opening
of more than nine feet (9)."
And adding the following wording as a Special Use to Sections 14.1301.C.6, 14.1401.C.4,
14.1501.0.4:
"Garages for parking of commercial vehicles and/or commercial trailers with a
licensed weight of more than 8,000 pounds. Such garage for commercial vehicles
shall not exceed the Accessory Building standards of 14.102.B, and shall not have a
garage door opening of more than nine feet (9')."
SEC -MON THREE:That Section 14.3009 is hereby amended by adding the following
wording:
No truck commercial vehicle or oMmercial trailer with license plates indicating a
gross weight or licensed weight in excess of 8,001 pounds shall be parked or stored
in any T&Sidential garag,,without a 5pg_dal Use Permit, except when making a
Page 2 of 2
delivery, rendering a service at such premises. Personal use vehicles, such as pickups and
vans, are not subject to this restriction."
SECTION FOUR: That Section 14.2602 is hereby amended as follows:
"Garage Private: A private garage is an accessory portion of the principal building
which is intended and used to store motor vehicles." (Delete next sentence)
SECTION That Section 14.116.1 is hereby amended by adding the following
language:
"Any contracting or service business truck used as part of a home occupation shall
be permitted up to a licensed weight of eight thousand (8,000) pounds, and shall be
parked in a garage. No garage shall exceed the Accessory Building standards of
Section 14.1028 of this Chapter 14. Trucks with a licensed weight of more than eight
thousand one (8,001) pounds are subject to a,,Special Use,.Permit as s2ecified in g
re�idential zoning glassification,
SECT—ION SIX: That this Ordinance shall be in fall 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
Village Clerk
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM: KENNETH M FRITZ, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
DATE: MAY 14, IM
SUBJECT.- SIGN -24-92, TEXT AMENDMENT
The Sip Review Board transmits their recommendation on a proposed amendment to the
Sip Ordinance filed by Charles Vavnis by Attorney Robert Doig. The application was filed
to create a Special Use category to allow off -premise sips.
This application for a text amendment was filed as a result of the sip amortization program
which requires the removal of the existing of sip for Charlie Club at Elmhurst
Road and Midway Drive.
The Sip Review Board considered the request at their meeting of May 4, 1992. At the
meeting, Attorney Robert Doig explained that Charlie Club would like to continue use of
an off -premise sip location for identification of their building at 501 Midway Drive. Mr.
Doig stated that a conforming sip would be installed, but the off -premise location is
important for the facility.
Mr. Doig explained that a solution for Charlie Club is to amend the Sip Ordinance to allow
off -premise sips. The proposed amendment would modify the language for advertising
sips and crate a new section under the Special Use category for off -premise sips. Mr.
Doig believes that the Special Use procedure would allow the Village to review off -premise
sips on a case-by-case basis using the special use standards. Mr. Doig pointed out that a
sip easement exists at this location and that his client feels the Charlie Club has a right to
a sip at this location.
The Sip Review Board recommends by a 4-1 vote that the amendment be denied. The
Sip Review Board believes that the amendment only benefits a specific property and that
provisions for off -premise signs would make the Sip Ordinance more permissive. Off -
premise signs would adversely effect the purpose of the Sip Ordinance.
KBF:hg
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT SIGN REVIEW BOARD
May 4, IM
CALL TO ORDER.
The meeting of the Sign Review Board (SRB) was called to order by Chairperson Adelaide
Thulin at 7:29 p.m. Monday, May 4, 1992 at the Village Hall, 100 South Emerson Street,
Mount Prospect, Minois.
ROLL CALL:
Members of the SRB present: Richard Rogers, Tbomas Borrelli, Warren Kostak, Hal
Predovich and Chairperson Adelaide Thuhn. Also present were Mr. Robert Doig representing
Charlie Club; Donald Anderson, President of Park National Bank; Sue Elliot, Legal Counsel
for Park National Bank; Dennis and Tom Reindl, representing Northwest Electric Supply.
Village staff present was Kenneth Fritz, Economic Development Coordinator.
This case was continued from April 6, 1992 meeting for the purpose of checking with our
legal counsel on a question of an extension of time for a non -conforming freestanding sip
at Northwest Electric Supply parking lot adjacent to Wille Street.
It was the general feeling of Mr. Predovich that because of the downtown redevelopment
an extension of time be considered for the freestanding sip adjacent to Wffle Street_ The
question of the starting date for the extension was debated briefly. Consideration was given
to starting the one year extension from January 1, 1992. Others felt that the extension should
be granted from a date nearest the public hearing meeting.
Sign Review Board Minutes
Page 2
Motion
A motion was made by Mr. Predovich, seconded by Mr. Kostak to grant an extension for
the 18 foot freestanding sign adjacent to Wille Street until April 30,1:993 on the basis of past
considerations for Firestone Tire Company and Convenient Food Stores wherein extensions
of time were granted due to time for fabrication and economic considerations. The motion
to approve passed, 4 ayes, 1 nay (Mr. Rogers).
bio
A motion was made by Mr. Predovich, seconded by Mr. Borrelli that a special use equity
option be approved to continue the use of a second wall sign adjacent to Main Street on the
basis that the maximum wall sign area had not been used, and in consideration that the signage
will very likely be modified with the expansion of the Northwest Electric Supply business or
relocation. Motion passed, 5 ayes, 0 nays.
SIGN -24-22, Chades V
This case was continued by the Sign Review Board to allow an opportunity for all of the
members to be present to discuss the case fully. It is recognized that this is an unusual
situation and the Sign Review Board's opinion required the full attention of the five members.
The request presented initially on April 20 by Mr. Doig on behalf of the Charlie Club was
to seek a text amendment to Section 7.330 and Section 7.701 to create a special use for off -
premise signs. Mr. Doig restated the request which basically is a request to amend the
ordinance to permit off -premise signs as an amendment to the special use section of the
ordinance 7.330, thereby permitting off -premise signs as a text amendment requiring a special
use. if the text amendment were approved by the Board, then Mr. Doig on behalf of his
client would seek to erect a sign under a special use provision on the sign easement legally
conveyed to Charles Vavrus at the time of the development of Charlie Club in 1980.
Discussion
Mr. Kostak read from the minutes of April 20 and indicated that it was significant that Mr.
Vavrus owner of Charlie Club owned the parcel of land subsequently purchased by Park
National Bank until 1985. He agreed with Mr. Donald Anderson, President of Park National
Bank, who contended that Mr. Vavrus had the option ' of seeking a change in the Sign
Ordinance that would provide a more permanent solution for the Charlie Club signage
adjacent to Elmhurst Road.
Other members of the Sign Review Board commented upon the request for the text
amendment for a modification to the special use section of the Ordinance to allow off -
premise signs indicating that:
1. An amendment to the text would appear to benefit only a single property owner
instead of providing a potential solution for other existing signage situations
in the community.
Sip Review Board Minutes
Page 3
2. That to amend the ordinance to provide for a special use for off -premise
sips would open up the opportunity for other off -premise sps to be established
which the Commission felt was not desirable.
Mr. Doig stated that Park National Bank had not cooperated with Charlie Club in this
matter. Mr. Don Anderson, President of Park National Bank, stated that he had made
contact with the manager of the Charlie Club facility prior to the construction of the Park
National Bank indicating that the sign according to the Village Sip Ordinance was non-
conforming and passed a copy of the Sign Ordinance on to the manager. He stated that the
bank had offered to remove the sign which had been substantially wind -damaged from the
location since it was in violation of the Code at no expense to Charlie Club. He also indicated
that they did take under advisement Charlie Club's proposal for a new sign on the sip
easement adjacent to Elmhurst Road, but was rejected by the Battles Board of Directors.
Motion
A motion was made by Mr. Kostak, seconded by Mr. Rogers, to recommend denial for the
request for a text amendment under Section 7330 and Section 7.701 to create a special use
for off -premise signs based on the fact that this amendment would result in satisfying only
one private property owner and not have general application in the Village. The motion
passed, 4 ayes, 1 nay (Adelaide Thulin).
Mr. Predovich asked that the record show that he was disappointed that somehow Park
National Bank and Charlie Club ownership could not come to some agreement on a possible
solution for the signage, needs between the two businesses. Mrs. Thulin also indicated her
disappointment.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
The minutes of April 27, 1992 were approved ►unanimously on a motion by Mr. Rogers,
seconded by Mr. Kostak, 5 ayes, 0 nays.
Discussion d Amen -
The Board reviewed with Mr. Fritz the items carried over from the special meeting of April
27, at which time the proposed amendments were discussed with business persons invited
to comment on sections of the Code that they felt needed some revision. There were six
items that the Sip Review Board was not in general agreement on that were identified.
These were items 14, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 33. (The item numbers correspond to those on the
April 23 memo.) Following discussion, items #22 and 23 were, in the opinion of the Sip
Review Board, not necessary. Items 24, 25 and 33 were generally acceptable pending final
wording. Item 14, dealing with the definition for a Sip Planned Unit Development still,
in the opinion of the Sip Review Board, needed additional discussion after a refinement
in language by staff or legal counsel.
Sign Review Board Minutes
Page 4
A scheduled public hearing to consider the proposed changes to the Sip Ordinance was
discussed. Mr. Fritz indicated that the earliest possible date for a public hearing would be
May 18 and that would depend upon the Mount Prospect Chambers readiness to present
changes on behalf of the business persons in the community and also to report the findings
of their sip survey among business people in the community.
The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Respectfn�submitted,
Vieth H. Fritz,'
Economic DevelopmenttIW,-)r=,for
YtLLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPL%,T
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
To: ADELAIDE THULIN, SIGN REVIEW BOARD CHAIRPERSOI–N—.
FROM: KENNETH H. FRITZ, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: APRIL 15, 1992
to.
SUBJECT: SIGN -24-92, CHARLES VAVRUS
LOCATION: 501 MIDWAY DRIVE
REQUEST
The petitioner seeks a text amendment to Section 7.330 and Section 7.701 to create a
special use for off -premise signs.
PLANMNG AND ZONING COMMENTS
This is a proposal for a text amendment by the owner of Charlie Club to amend the text in
order to allow off -premise signs by adding the following language to Section 7.701, Scope
of Appeals, Variations and Special Uses to read as follows:
"A special use may be requested to allow for an electronic message center,
development identification signs, non -conforming wall signs, the equity option,
and for relief from the prohibitions of Section 7.310 relating to advertising
signs."
Mr. Vavrus was cited for violation of the non -conforming section of the Sign Code and his
attorney; Mr. Doig, appeared in his behalf at the circuit court hearing on April 7. The
presiding Circuit Court Judge continued the court proceedings until Monday, May 11, at
10:00 a.m. to allow the Sign Review Board and Village Board to take action on their
request for a text amendment presented in this petition.
RECOMMENDAnO
The petitioner earlier riled a request for an appeal of the staff's interpretation regarding
Charlie Club's right to have an off -premise sign adjacent to Elmhurst Road on Park
National Bank's property. It was the opinion of the Village's legal counsel, Everette Hill,
that the sign is not eligible for variation or a special use equity option to allow it to be
placed on an improved off -premise property even though they have a sip easement on the
adjacent property where the legal non -conforming sign is presently located. (See attached
legal opinion in memorandum dated 11/11/91.)
A solution for Charlie Club's request to allow an off -premise freestanding sip is a text
amendment to the Ordinance. Such an amendment would modify the language for
advertising signs and create a new section under special uses to create a category for off -
premise signs. Mr. Doig believes that such a Special Use category still allows the Village
to review off -premise signs on a case-by-case basis using the special use standards.
Adelaide Ilulin - Page 2
April 15, 1992
SIGN-24-92
However, staff is concerned about amending the Sign Ordinance to create such a Special
Use category. A prohibition for off-premise signs is usually found in sign ordinances of
communities that have recognized signs as an important item to be regulated. To a great
degree this amendment would make the Sign Ordinance more permissive. Further, care
must be taken in amending ordinances when the goal is only to benefit a specific property.
Staff recognizes the unusual circumstances concerning the Charlie Club sign. We have
recommended that ownership contact Zanies at the southwest comer of Elmhurst Road and
Midway Drive. We believe that a reasonable alternative would be for Charlie Club to
install a panel on a relocated Zanies' sign. This could provide them identification on
Elmhurst Road. Staff has received no response on what we believe is the best solution for
this matter.
Accordingly, staff recommends that the proposed amendment to create a Special Use
category for off-premise signs be denied. We believe that such an amendment adversely
effects the purpose of the Sign Ordinance.
However, staff would support an amendment to the Sign Ordinance that would allow an
off-premise panel on a permitted freestanding sign, such as a Charlie Club panel on the
Zanies' sign. This alternative addresses the immediate need of the Charlie Club, and does
not impact the Sign Ordinance as significantly as provisions for off-premise signs.
KHF:hg
nOv id '91 tno 4WM ,v4GTEIN i LEW O -GO
REMORANDUM
P. 4/4
TO: Ken Frit3
FROM: Everette M. Bill, Jr./Village Attorney
RE: Charlie Club Sign
DATE: November 11, 1991
It is my understanding that the staff has determined that
the existing Charlie Club sign along Elmhurst Road must be
removed because it is located off the premises that it advertises
and is therefore an illegal "advertising sign." The staff has
also determined that the sign is not eligible for either a
variation or equity option relief. The Charlie Club has filed an
appeal of the determination before the Sign Review Board pursuant
to Section 7.701 of the village Code which allows appeals of all
staff decisions with respect to the interpretation of the sign
ordinance. The Charlie Club is apparently claiming that since
they own an easement on adjacent property where the sign is
located, that the sign is not really "off -premise" and therefore
a smaller version of the current sign should be permitted.
A number of questions arise with respect to the issue. My
comments follow:
1. Is the sign eligible for a variation?
No, it is not. Pursuant to our sign ordinance,
variations may be granted only with respect to "height, area and
minimum distance requirements."
2. Is the sign eligible for equity option consideration?
Nov 12 ' 91 04; 49w, arS rUM i LL)* Q -W
P. 2/4
No, it is not. Zven though the equity option language
is very broad, it is avilable only if the granting will:
1. Reduce the overall area of signs on the
property and building: or
2. Not exceed the maximum permitted sign area
and contain.a minimum of one bonus provision
listed in 57.320.
Clearly, the sign will not reduce the overall area of signs
on the property. To the contrary, it will add to it. Further,
it will exceed the maximum permitted sign area as the permitted
sign area for this type of sign is zero. The equity option was
meant to allow modifications to otherwise permitted signs, not to
permit signs where they are not allowed.
3. Does the fact that the sign is to be placed on an
easement on property that is adjacent to the Club remove it from
the "off premise" category?
No, it does not. The sign remains "off premise". Off
premise" is determined by the existence of separate lots used for
separate purposes. Separate ownership is not an element of a
definition of "off premise". Therefore, unity of ownership
between the lot on which the facility is located and the lot on
which the sign is located would not remove a sign from the "off
premise" category.
The only case where the separate lots as between the sign
and the facility would not ,amount to "off premise" advertising
might be in a shopping center where the whole plan is clearly for
joint advertising and joint use of common signs and common
C- .
ncri/ 12 '91 0a: a pt1 p EiN s LEW C -GO P. 3/4
areas. The Charlie Club situation doer not fall within thet
category.
If you have further questions, please contact Me.
EMH/kml
//CAC/EMH11-12
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO:
Village Manager �X
FROM:
David M. Clements, Director of Planning
DATE:
July 1, 1992
SUBJECT:
ZBA-37-V-92
LOCATION:
430 Lake View Court, Lot 59
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation on
the variation requested by Opus North Corporation. The applicant is requesting a variation
to Section 14.2203 to allow an 1-1 Light Industrial lot of approximately 3.16 acres instead
of the minimum 4 acres in conjunction with a proposed two -lot subdivision.
The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the request at their meeting of June 25, 1992, At
the meeting, Joe Mikes explained that the subdivision and variation are needed in order
for NBD Bank to remodel and expand an existing building. Mr. Mikes added that tentative
plans indicate a future addition which would utilize the 3.16 acre lot. Mr. Mikes also
introduced a conceptual plan which indicated that a building with appropriate parking and
setbacks could easily fit on the proposed lot, if it is not to be used by NBD,
Ray Forsythe, Planner, explained that the proposed variation would not have been necessary
under the annexation agreement, which has expired. Mr. Forsythe indicated that the
annexation agreement allowed an average lot size of 2.7 acres, which is less than the
requested lot size.
The Zoning Board discussed the request and, with a unanimous vote, recommends Village
Board approval of the variation request.
DMC:cl
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: GIL BASNIK, CHAIRMAN
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: JUNE 17, 1992
CASE NO.: ZBA-37-V-92
APPLICANT: OPUS NORTH CORPORATION
ADDRESS: 430 LAKE VIEW COURT (LOT 509 KENSINGTON BUSINESS CENTER)
LOCATION MAP:
q i I. I - I I- L '*"
14171
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: 1-1 Light Industrial
LOT SIZE: 6.01 acres (3.16 acres proposed)
% COVERAGE: n/a
F.A.R.: n/a
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
Page 2
The petitioners are requesting approval of a variation to Section 14.2203 to allow an "I -l"
Light Industry lot approximately 3.16 acres instead of the minimum four acres in conjunction
with a two lot subdivision.
b—t1M0V1tX41*JUV9
Summary of application:
In a separate action, the petitioners are seeking to subdivide a 6.01 acre lot into two parcels.
Parcel one will be approximately 2.85 acres and will become part of the adjacent parcel so
that an addition to an existing building can be constructed. Parcel two will be approximately
3.16 acres which will be available for the adjacent parcel at a later date or developed
separately. The application indicates that there are several lots which are under the 4 acre
minimum required by the Zoning Ordinance. The original annexation agreement for
Kensington Center required an average lot size of 2.7 acres.
Impact on Surrounding Properties: The subdivision is requested so that approximately 2.85
acres can be joined with the existing parcel to the north which is proposed to be the regional
processing center for NBD Bank. The added acreage will allow an expansion of
approximately 31,200 square feet along with the necessary parking. The submitted plans
also indicate a Phase II expansion of 35,000 square feet which would utilize the 3.16 acre
lot, if necessary for the facility.
The current standards would still apply as far as required setbacks for the residential district
to the south. A minimum of 40' setback is required on yards that abut residential districts.
The annexation agreement as mentioned above has expired. Because this subdivision is
before the Plan Commission, the Zoning Ordinance regulates the lot size requirements, and
necessitates the variation.
OTHER VILLAGE STAFF COMMENTS:
Inspection Services:
1. Storm Sewers: There is a storm sewer in the areas where expansion is shown. It will
have to be relocated. Depending on location, this sewer may be privately owned and
maintained.
2. Water Supply: Water service to building may have to be checked to see if it is
adequate to serve expansion area for domestic and fire service.
3. Additional Comments: All site improvements and buildings shall comply with Village
Code. Development plans and building permits required prior to construction.
SUMMAUMEMMMENDA110 :
The petitioners are requesting a variation to allow an 1-1 zoned lot with a minimum lot size
of 3.16 acres as opposed to the required 4 acres. Based upon other lots in the Kensington
Center which are similar in size, staff feels that the required setbacks can be obtained with
the smaller lot and would recommend approval of the variation. The proposed lot size is
consistent with the area, and can support a permitted 1-1 use. Staff recommends approval
of the request.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO: 37-V-92 HEARING DATE: June 25, 1992
PETITIONER. Opus North Corporation
PUBLICATION DATE: June 9, 1992
SUBJECT PROPERTY. Lot 509 Kensington Center for Business (430
Lakeview Court, Mt. Prospect, Illinois
REQUEST: Variation to Section 14.2203 to allow an 1-1 Light
Industrial lot of approximately 3.16 acres instead
of the minimum four (4) acres, in conjunction with
a proposed two -lot subdivision.
ZBA MEMBERS PRESENT:
ABSENT:
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ron Cassidy
Peter Lannon
Richard Pratt
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
None
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: Mrs. Lorraine Triptoe, 1418 Loudon Lane
Chairman Besnik introduced ZBA-37-V-92 as a request by Opus North Corporation for a
variation to allow a 3.16 acre lot size instead of a 4 acre minimum lot size in a 1-1 Light
Industrial District. Mr. Joe Mikes introduced himself to the Zoning Board of Appeals as
the Director of Real Estate for Opus North Corporation. Mr. Mikes indicated that the
application was filed to reduce the 4 acre minimum lot size in a 1-1 District to 3.16 acres.
He stated that this resubdivision is being done in conjunction with the occupancy of an
existing building by the NBD Processing and Regional Headquarters. Mr. Mikes stated that
NBD would be remodeling 430 Lake View Court and adding a 30,000 square foot addition
to the building to provide for their 24-hour check processing center and the regional
headquarters for all their Chicago area banking facilities.
Mr. Mikes pointed out that a third phase for a 35,000 square foot future addition is also
possible and that this addition would be constructed on the 3.16 acre lot. However, if the
third phase were not to occur, Mr. Mikes demonstrated that this proposed lot size could
support a typical one-story office or industrial building that met all the required parking and
setbacks. Mr. Mikes pointed out that the original annexation agreement for Kensington
Business Center had recently expired and that this annexation agreement permitted lot sizes
less than four acres throughout the industrial park. Mr. Mikes made reference to a lot size
ZBA-37-V-92
Page Two
summary with the application that pointed to a number of lot sizes smaller than the 3.16
acre size as proposed.
Mr. Ray Forsythe then summarized the
vointed out that a resubdivision plat
as requested. Mr. Forsythe stated that
all zoning setbacks and parking. And
agreement for the office industrial park
Mr. Forsythe stated that the proposed 1(
the annexation agreement and that this'
park. Mr. Forsythe concluded and state
industrial building in Kensington Cente
ort for the Zoning Board of Appeals. He
ently being processed through the Plan
essary in order to reduce the 4 acre lot size
. prepared by Opus North for NBD meets
-sythe stated that the original annexation
I for a 2.7 acre average minimum lot size.
larger than the average size as required in
size is larger than many existing lots in the
e proposed lot size could support a typical
tg all setback requirements.
Mrs. Lorraine Triptoe, 1418 London Lane, addressed the Zoning Board of Appeals and
asked if this would be a 24-hour' operation. Mrs. Triptoe pointed out that she lives
immediately south of the proposed lot and that she was concerned about parking near the
lot line and activities generated from the building. Mr. Mikes explained that the facility
would only be receiving small vans that transport checks and that there would be no large
trucks, at the facility. He stated that approximately 200 employees would be based in the
building and that they would all arrive in their, individual automobiles. Mr. Mikes also
pointed out that much of the total NBD facility is office space and that the 24-hour check
processing operation only accounts for a small portion of the overall building.
Mr. Basnik asked if Mrs. Triptoe is objecting to the lot size as requested or the fact that
parking could be placed closer to her lot. Mrs. Triptoe stated that she was objecting to the
smaller lot size and believed that this would have an adverse impact on her adjoining single-
family size.
Mr. Basnik asked Mr. Clements to explain the lot sizes in Kensington Center. Mr. Clements
responded and pointed out that a number of existing lots are smaller than the lot sizes
requested at this time and that the proposed lot size is sufficient to allow a building that met
all setback requirements and parking, regulations.
Mr. Clements pointed out that there was no building planned for this lot at this particular
time but that the conceptual plan &played by Mr. Mikes is only to demonstrate to the
Board that the lot size is sufficient for typical development
Mr. Pratt asked if the lot would be maintained in its present condition, that being an open
space grass area. Mr. Mikes responded that the lot would continue to be maintained by
Opus North.
Mr. Cassidy asked what height building was proposed for the NBD bank and Mr. Mikes
stated that this would be a 22' overall, building height and that the elevations of the *
ZBA-37-V-92
Page Three
proposed'addition would match the existing building.
Mr. Saviano, asked if the processing operation was relocating from elsewhere and if this
would be generating new employment for the Village. Mr. Mikes stated that NBD presently
operates a 15,000 square foot temporary facility in Skokie and that they are looking at
Kensington Business Center as a permanent long-term home. Mr. Mikes stated that this
facility would generate new jobs for the community.
I
Mr. Cassidy confirmed that the original Annexation Agreement allowed for a 2.7 acre
average lot size and that this proposed lot size is larger than what was permitted in the
Annexation Agreement.
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 3.16 acre lot size at 430 Lakeview Court. The motion was seconded by Mr. Pratt.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Basnik, Brittrager, Cassidy, Lannon, Pratt, Saviano,
Skowron
NAYS: None
Respectfully submitted,
6 /w CUA
David M. Clements, AICP
Director of Planning
DMC:cl
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Village Manager l o' " -
FROM: David M. Clements, Director of Planning
DATE: July 1, 1992
SUBJECT: ZBA-39-SU-92, Rouse-Randhurst and Company/Edison Brothers Mall
Entertainment Special Use Permit
LOCATION: Space #2000 Randhurst Mall
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation on
a Special Use Permit for a game room filed by the Rouse Company and Edison Brothers
Mall Entertainment.
The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the request at their meeting of June 25, 1992. At
the meeting, Kevin Rielly indicated that the Special Use request was for a "Party Zone"
which is a family oriented entertainment center. Mr. George McAuliffe, a representative
of Edison Brothers, gave an overview of the "Party Zone" and a summary of the Edison
Brothers Company. Mr. McAuliffe indicated that he had met with the Police Chief and staff
as well as with a citizen group P.A.C.A. and has agreed to specific language in the approval
for store operations and security.
Ray Forsythe, Planner, explained that the Zoning Ordinance allows a game room in a
"B-3" zoned area with a Special Use Permit. Mr. Forsythe indicated that a use of this nature
is common in a regional mall. Mr. Forsythe also indicated that Village staff had concerns
with a use such as this. However, after meeting with members of Edison Brothers staff and
the Police Department, staff feels comfortable with the use as long as certain conditions
would be added to the approval.
Several neighbors and concerned citizens spoke on the matter. There were neighbors who
felt that a game room would be an undesirable amenity to the Village. There were also
comments from individuals that believed this is a good place for teens to go for supervised
activities.
The Zoning Board members generally discussed the request and by a 6-1 vote voted to
recommend approval of the Special Use Permit for the "Party Zone" at Randhurst mall,
subject to the following conditions:
1. Security personnel in police type uniforms shall be on duty from 6:00 P,M. to closing,
Friday to Sunday, as well as those times determined necessary by the Mount Prospect
Police Chief.
ZBA-39-SU-92
Page Two
2. This Special Use Permit is for the general layout as indicated on the Site Plan dated
May 19, 1992 as submitted by the petitioners. Modification of this layout is subject
to approval of the Village Manager.
3. Personnel shall be present in the facility at all times and at least one shall be a
minimum of twenty-one years of age.
4. Should the Police Department or Village Manager determine the original intent of
the "Party Zone" has been lost, this Special Use Permit can be brought before the
Village Board for review.
DMC:cl
I sit,
(AF
Y
tir. rao
}
CI]j PLaY 4 pg S� o r�,c � t
Y,IM FNS Tyr
t a q
Mn1g nt.
-�Xntb. ruwTeic j r><,s7a NTrt�
T PMro9eo s,bn.,.
\ •�- �' Or�d6NJrlf�&r 91dMAbC ' �•lE�
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO: 39 -SU -92 HEARING DATE: June 25, 1992,
PETITIONER: Rouse/Randhurst Shopping Center and Edison
Brothers Mail Entertainment
PUBLICATION DATE: June 9, 1992
SUBJECT PROPERTY- Space #2000 (formerly Madigans) of the
Randhurst Shopping Center
REQUEST: Special Use Permit as required under Section
14.200I.C.2 to allow a game room to occupy Space
2000 (formerly Madigans) of the Randhurst
Shopping Center
ZBA MEMBERS PRESENT- Gil Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ron Cassidy
Peter Lannon
Richard Pratt
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
ABSENT. None
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: Mr. Robert Bush, 1112 Heritage Drive
Ms. Diane Gear, 709 Hackberry
Ms. Marsha Jason, 673 Pickwick
Ms. Peg Combs, 107 Straford
Kevin Reilly introduced himself to the Zoning Board of Appeals as the attorney for the
petitioner. He stated that the Special Use Application was filed to permit a game roorn,
specifically a 6,500 square foot Party Zone Entertainment Center operated by Edison
Brothers. He stated that the company operates 160 such centers in the country and that
Edison Brothers also operates three other retail stores in the mall.
Mr. Reilly then introduced Mr. Scott Ball, the Manager of Randhurst Shopping Center, and
Mr. Tom Fricke and George McAuliffe from Edison Brothers Mall Entertainment. Mr.
McAuliffe introduced himself to the Zoning Board and stated he is Vice -President of Edison
Brothers andhis address is 501 North Broadway in St. Louis, Missouri. He stated that since
this application had been filed, he had learned much about the community and had come
to understand the number of concerns that were expressed in the staff reports. He indicated
that these were the same concerns that the company has in operating an entertainment
center and believes that the use would, be operated and managed in a fashion that would
ZBA-39-SU-92
Page Two
be beneficial to the shopping center. As background for Edison Brothers, he stated that
the company has been in operation for over seventy years and that they operate seventeen
types of specialty retail stores. He explained that the company has diversified into the
entertainment field in recent years and Edison Brothers believes that entertainment centers
are good compatible uses in retail shopping centers where they do have their retail stores.
He stated that the company has a good reputation and they are excellentoperators of these
types of facilities and that they are sought out by shopping center owners and managers to
bring their uses to the centers. He explained that the Randhurst location would provide
children and family entertainment and that this is a distinction from the typical pinball
arcade and game room that the Village may have experienced in the past.
Mr. McAuliffe distributed a informational brochure on the company and the proposed use
and described an organizational chart of management that illustrated the experience and
understanding that the company: has in managing game rooms. He stated that the.facility
would include several party rooms and that these would be available for community oriented
uses, such as churches, athletic teams, and individuals.
Mr. McAuliffe then described a floor plan which provide an overview of the activities,
showing the location of the party rooms, a concession area, an indoor play structure for
smaller children, and the video games. Mr. McAuliffe stated he had met with the Police
Department and that the company was in agreement with conditions recommended by the
Chief of Police and he also pointed out that: he had met with the local chairperson of
PACA, a community organization to explain the proposed use to this representative of the
adjoining neighborhood
Mr. McAuliffe stated that while the company operates 160 game roohis across the country,
they are looking at the Randhurst site as being a prototype, meant to attract more family
entertainment with the indoor play; structure, redemption machines, and party rooms. Mr.
Basnik asked how many of Edison Brothers game rooms are in malls of this type. Mr.
McAuliffe stated that 85% of their stores are in regional malls. Mr. McAuliffe also stated
that the company has a ten-year lease with house/Randhurst and that they believe this is
an indication that they are committed for a+long term operation that helps guarantee they
will be successful,
Mr. Saviano questioned the primary age of the market for the entertainment center. Mr.
McAuliffe stated that the primary market would be ages three to eleven, Mr. Saviano asked
the percent of revenues that would come from parties generated from three to eleven year
olds. Mr. McAuliffe stated that two-thirds of the revenues would come from party activities
and that one-third of the revenues would come from the existing video machines. Mr.
Saviano also questioned the hours of operation and Mr. McAuliffe stated that they would
like to be open one hour past the mall closing
Mr. Lannon questioned the type of food service offered at the Party Zone. Mr. McAuliffe
stated there would be pre-packaged food items with items such as soda and ice cream.
ZBA-39-SU-92
Page Three
Mrs. Skowron questioned the square footage necessary for the video games and if the aim
of the establishment is to attract three to eleven year olds with games. Mr. McAuliffe stated
that the types of games that will be present will be a variety meant to be entertaining to the
entire family but that the three to eleven market he had mentioned was not specifically
targeted for the video games. Mrs. Skowron also stated she had a concern about young
people congregating at the Party Zone. Mr. McAuliffe stated that their management is
trained with personnel responsibilities for managing the facility. He stated that no smoking
is allowed in their stores, no loitering is allowed and their is an anti -truancy policy that all
personnel are trained in, in an effort to spot children at the facility who should, perhaps, be
in school.
Mr. Saviano stated that he has a security concern with the operation and Mr. McAuliffe
stated that pursuant to the Police Department condition, there would be an adult person
over twenty-one with a police -type uniform at the facility from Friday at 6:00 P.M. through
Sunday closing.
Mr. Cassidy asked the petitioner what the benefits to the Village were for having this party
room. Mr. McAuliffe stated that the entertainment center fits the mix of activities at
Randhurst and that the Rouse Company believes that this would be a good addition to the
shopping center. He said both Rouse and Edison Brothers see this as a desirable addition
to the mall and that there is a need for properly managed activities for younger children.
Mr. Ray Forsythe summarized the staff report for the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr.
Forsythe stated that while this entertainment center provides a number of activities, it is
defined as a game room in our ordinance and that the Special Use Permit is necessary. Mr.
Forsythe stated that such a facility is common in a regional mall and that staff has no
particular objections to the proposed use but that they believe management and operation
is essential to the success of the operation that are necessary in order for the business not
to have an adverse impact on the mall. He stated that the Police Chief was comfortable
with the entertainment center if it is managed as represented. Mr. Forsythe read the memo
from Police Chief Ron Pavlock to the Zoning Board. Mr. Forsythe concluded and stated
that Edison Brothers had indicated they would cooperate with the Police Department on
management training and security measures and that Edison Brothers was in agreement with
all of the conditions as summarized in the memo.
Mr. Basnik asked if there were any concerns for the entertainment center being open one
hour later than the mall and if Randhurst Security would also be available in addition to
Edison Brothers staff. Scott Ball, Manager of Randhurst, stated that presently Kohl's is
open an hour later than other mall stores and that occasionally other anchors have special
events that keep them open later. Mr. Ball stated that Randhurst security is available
twenty-four hours a day and that his personnel would be available to assist Edison Brothers
staff, if became necessary.
Mr. Saviano asked if the Merchants Association had reviewed the proposed use and Mr.
Ball stated they had reviewed the Party Zone Entertainment Center and were aware of its
pending opening. Mr. Ball also stated that -
game rooms and carefully evaluated Edison I
with them.
Mr. Robert Bush, 1112 Heritage Drive, stated
on the floor plan. He has concerns about
properties on the east. He believes that the i
shopping center and discourage shoppers fra,
be a burden for the Police Department in to
loitering problems.
ZBA-39-SU-92
Page Four
e Rouse Company is very particular about
others before reaching a lease agreement
the video games seem to be predominant
type of activity abutting the residential
rtainment center will adversely affect the
iming to Randhurst and that the use will
of extra staff time necessary to enforce
Diane Gear, -709 Hackberry, stated she had a concern about security and the possibility of
any number of incidents happening at the facility.
Mr. Basnik made a reference to one condition that stated that the Village Board and the
Village Manager could re-evaluate the proposed Special Use if it was determined that the
entertainment center was not being operated as initially presented. Mr. Basnik asked if the
Village made this determination if there would be a problem with Rouse/Randhurst and
the long tenure lease.
Attorney Tom Fricke from Edison Broi
contingent upon all Village approvals and
lease if circumstances warranted such acti
Marsha Jason, 673 Pickwick, stated that sl
need a controlled environment with super
that many parents would feel comfortable
young people in the Village have a place
Peg Combs, 107 Stratford, stated that she
she thought that the business should close
concerned about spillover into the Wedge
leaving the entertainment center.
Mr. Basnik confirmed if the conditions in
reasonable to Edison Brothers, and Mr.
appropriate.
Mr. Cassidy stated that this use is primarily
a good history with such activities. He sta
party room and the indoor play structures, I
the mall should be retail oriented and not
Mr. Brettrager stated that this is the best ,
regional mall provides a number of functio
for a variety of reasons.
`s stated that the lease with Randburst is
% Ball stated that Rouse could terminate the
,rted the application and that teenagers
order to have'a place to go. She stated
; and she believed it was important that
-ved this was a reasonable request but that
he same time as the mall. She was also
I Terrace neighborhood from young people
e staff report and Police Chiefs memo were
IcAuliffe stated that those conditions were
game room and that the Village does not have
I that this is a new approach by including the
t he stated that it is the same business and that
,t up with amusement or entertainment uses.
tce for an entertainment center and that a
, most importantly bringing people to the mall
ZBA-39-SU-92
Page Five
Mr. Basnik stated he supports the application and primarily did so based on the condition
that the Village could revoke the Special Use Permit if it was ever operated in a fashion
that was contrary to statements from the petitioner at the public hearing.
The Zoning Board of Appeals generally discussed the request and it was determined that
the proposed entertainment center would be appropriate at this location provided that
Edison Brothers commits to security and management techniques as described by the staff.
There being no further discussion, Chairman Basnik asked for a motion on the request. Mr.
Brettrager moved that the Zoning Board recommend approval of this Special Use Permit
to allow a game room to space 2,000 at the Randburst Shopping Center. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Saviano. The motion was subject to the conditions as specified in the staff
report and the memo from the Chief of Police.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Basnik, Brettrager, Lannan, Pratt, Saviano,
Skowron
NAYS: Cassidy
Mr. Cassidy voted in opposition to the motion and stated he did not believe a game room
was appropriate in a regional shopping center such as Randhurst
Respectfully submitted,
D, /A, �0�
David M. Clements, AICP
Director of Planning
DMC:cl
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAIRMAN fx—
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: JUNE 18, 1992
CASE NO.: ZBA-39-SU-92
APPLICANT: ROUSE RANDHURST & COMPANY/EDISON BROTHERS MALL
ENTERTAINMENT
ADDRESS: SPACE 2000 RANDHURST MALL, 999 ELMHURST ROAD
LOCATION MAP: ) V~
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: B-3 Planned Unit Development
LOT SIZE:
% COVERAGE: n/a
FJLR.: n/a
Gil Basnik, Chairman Page 2
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
A Special Use Permit as required from Section 14.201.C.2 to allow a game room to occupy
space #2000 (formerly Madigan's) of the Randhurst Shopping Center.
Summary of application:
The applicants are proposing to occupy space #2000 at the Rouse/Randhurst Shopping
Center with a 6,430 square foot space which was formerly occupied by Madigan's Clothing
Store.
The applicants hope to operate a Party Zone family amusement center. The Party Zone
will consist of a grill and snack area, rooms for private parties, indoor playground equipment
and 45 coin-operated games, and 17 redemption games.
The initial allocation of floor area is:
-Party Room
650
sq. ft.
-Soft Play
1,440
sq. ft.
-Amusement Games
1,880
sq. ft.
-Food Preparation
130
sq. ft.
-Support
370
sq. ft.
The applicants have indicated a typical game assortment is:
-4 Kiddie Rides
-45 Video and/or Pinball Games
-17 Redemption Games
Impact on Surrounding Properties:
The Zoning Ordinance Section 14.2001.C.2 allows a game room in a "B-3" Business Retail
and Service District with a Special Use Permit.
The narrative and site plan that has been submitted by the petitioner indicate that there
will be an exterior entrance as well as an entrance from the interior of the mall. There will
be two attendants at all times and three during peak periods. The information indicates that
at least one attendant will be an adult. In addition, there will be a Store Manager who
works 40 hours a week.
There is also mention that they would like the capability for having up to 90 games. Staff
is concerned that with the capacity for 90 games, and whether other activities would be
phased out to make room for additional games. The Municipal Code, Section 11.705.E.5
requires a minimum of forty (40) square feet of floor area shall be devoted to each
amusement device, and such area shall include each game device and its immediate vicinity
and aisles. The initial allocation of space as indicated on the site plan shows 1,880 square
feet of area for the amusement games. Using this amount of space, the applicants would
be allowed 47 games (45 are shown). Staff feels that the allocated space as shown on the
site plan is sufficient in order to keep a mix of video games, the play structure, redemption
Gil Basnik Chairman Page 3
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
games and party areas. Staff would recommend that this mixture be approved and no
additional area for video games be allowed.
Staff also notes that no mention of bike racks has been made. The petitioners should be
prepared to indicate whether bike racks will be placed near the exterior entrance.
There is a "Jungle Jim's Playland" in the City of Des Plaines (723 West Golf Road) which
is a family-oriented playland. The facility has indoor rides, games, food as well as a limited
number of pinball/video games. While the number of video games is significantly less, the
"family oriented" concept is present.
MER VILEAGE STAFT C!QMMENTS:
The Crime Prevention Unit of the Police Department has reviewed the request and has
expressed concerns relating to security and safety of the center and its effect on the
surrounding neighborhoods. Attached is a memo regarding this request.
The Police Department feels that there are some issues which will need to be addressed
prior to their endorsement of the project. There is a meeting scheduled on June 22 with
the principals of Edison Brothers and Rouse Randhurst, so that all outstanding issues can
be addressed. Staff will present a follow-up report at the Public Hearing on June 25, 1992.
SUMMARXMICOMMENDATIO :
The applicants have indicated, by the information that has been submitted, a desire for a
family oriented facility. Edison Brothers operates similar facilities throughout the United
States as well as other retail stores in Randhurst Shopping Center. A facility such as this
is appropriate for a regional shopping center such as Randhurst. However, there are
concerns for security, operations and loitering. The Planning staff will withhold a
recommendation until after the June 22 meeting with the Police Department and Edison
Brothers.
The Zoning Board of Appeals should expect a complete and thorough presentation by the
petitioner to address the Special Use standards, and to demonstrate the benefits of this use
to the Village and Randhurst.
RPF:hg
Village of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO* CHIEF RONALD PAVLOCK
FROM: OFFICER W. ROSCOP
CRIME PREVENTION UNIT
OFFICER J. WAGNER
CRIME PREVENTION UNITY
SUBJECT: EDISON BROTHERS MALL ENTERTAINMENT, INC.
"PARTY ZONE" - SPECIAL USE PERMIT
DATE: 10 JUNE 92
After reviewing the plans for the planned Party Family Entertainment
Center for Randhurst Mall, the Crime Prevention Unit has several
concerns relating to security and safety of the Center and its
effect on the surrounding neighborhoods.
1 The description of security personnel is rather vague. it
appears that the "security person" will have several duties,
general supervision, making change, coupon redemption, etc.
we feel that the duty of supervising the patrons of the Party
Zone will be a full time job that will be handled by a "police
type" uniformed person who is twenty-one years of age or older,
and will be on the premise during all operating hours.
They propose to have 45 video games, with the possibility of
expanding this number to at least 90 video games. we feel this
number of video games takes away from the "family concept" and
makes this no different than any other arcade.
No plans for the security of bicycles outside of the arcade was
discussed.
It is the overall concern of the Crime Prevention Unit that the
potential for little or no security exists. We feel that because
of the nature of the Party Zone, over time, the family concept will
fade and the aspects of the Party Zone catering to the young
children and families will be replaced by video games for teenagers
who will be virtually unsupervised. This would cause an
overwhelming burden for the Mount Prospect Police, and more
importantly, the patrons of Randhurst Mall and neighboring homes.
WR/JW: lb
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Village Manager
FROM: David M. Clements, Director of Planning
DATE: July 1, 1992
SUBJECT: ZBA-40-V-92
LOCATION: 1001 East Cardinal Lane
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation on
variation requests filed by Ryzard Kazibut in order to allow a garage to remain. The
applicant is requesting the following:
1. A variation to Section 14.1302 to allow a zero foot side yard instead of 5 feet.
2. Variation to Section 14.115 to allow a driveway with a maximum width of 34 feet.
3. A variation to Section 21.601 to allow a 6'8" fence instead of 5 feet.
The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the request at their meeting of June 25, 2992. At
the meeting, Robert Kazibut, the son of the petitioner, indicated that the structure had
been built two years ago to store the family boat. Mr. Kazibut indicated that the fence had
been put up because a new subdivision was being built at the time and the noise and dust
was penetrating their bedroom windows. Later, a roof structure was erected from the top
of the fence to the existing garage. Mr. Kazibut also indicated that the addition was
screened from view on the street by two mature evergreen trees.
Ray Forsythe, Planner, indicated that the property was zoned "R-2" Duplex and that a 3 -
car garage is allowed. However, the structure had been build on an easement and the
needed 5' setback had not been maintained. Several staff members had objected to the
addition because the storm water and natural drainage pattern had been altered and there
are utility lines under the structure. Also, staff felt the 6'8" fence is excessive for the
property.
The Zoning Board members generally discussed the request and the following votes were
taken:
1. A variation to allow a zero foot side yard instead of 5 foot. This variation was
denied by a 7-0 vote. This vote would result in the removal of the roof structure
from the fence to the garage.
2. A variation to allow a driveway with a maximum width of 34 feet. This vote was
approved by a vote of 5-2.
3. A variation to allow a 6'8" fence instead of 5 feet. This variation was denied by a
3-4 vote.
DMC:cl
R.W. STANLEY & ASSOCIAlr4
Ii I mnl% RI (;I%l 1411) Uk'0 SUIM TOES
PLAT OF SURVEY
division of oart ,r thl. Northe,�!;'
1`17 a sun
"';c 't Q"a r 10, r of Sect ,n I,, To�jne;h ip 42 North, I°anqn 1 1 Fan! 'f .'h
COMB Cnunly" Il l,nens.
Eb""T <00 0
I Vroki S*tfl(
est'.'
ur—
F;Ujl
Teo. -of
�QDIWAL LANE
alC I Inch equal. i0 ret
dined b. n21009., W Fe y LID.
do numbs 61 -Ion••
d --pt— - In,, pill dh — dvtd +I,A— I.
cNl...i al.. .+ .. 11 —., Watt, b.,Id,.g
.—aw
,tract dwd (ar.tlact
111 ' 7 AllKJ." l 11, 111 U —, 11111)
E: I , T " ""7
I Rmald W Staftift ls—bv cm-tv "ll the "o"
m* -P'—t'M
d— 0-i P- vwM hat been --y'd u -`IO
04 -.1 carver
fC And dec-A Da"t ttwmt
.d lotw• b PWMIWO 0162- Falts-It'll
Onto ii %7
Des lsl&,�, III, iq
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO: 40-V-92
PETITIONER.
PUBLICATION DATE:
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
ZBA MEMBERS PRESENT:
HEARING DATE: June 25, 1992
Ryszard Kazibut
June 9, 1992
1001 East Cardinal Lane
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ron Cassidy
Peter Lannon
Richard Pratt
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
ABSENT: None
OBJECTORS/INTERESTEDTARTIES: None
Mr. Robert Kazibut introduced himself to the Zoning Board of Appeals as the son of the
petitioner.. Mr. Kazibut stated that the application for variation was filed in order to keep
a structure in place that was constructed approximately one year ago. Mr. Kazibut stated
that the fence was installed in 1987 and that approximately one year ago a roof line was
added from the top of the fence to the existing garage wall in order to provide covered
storage for the family's boat. He stated that there are two units in this building and the
residence has a total of six cars and it is necessary to place the boat in a side yard to allow
sufficient parking for the automobiles. Mr. Kazibut stated that two large evergreen trees
block visibility of the boat enclosure from the road and that this reduces the visual impact
of the structure. He also made reference to a comment in my staff report that the enclosure
is placed on an easement but he stated that the boat is parked on a pea -gravel surface and
not concrete and as such the Public Works Department could easily gain access to the
easement area through the pea -gravel. He also pointed out that the existing evergreen trees
would be more of an impediment to work on the easement than the boat enclosure.
Mr. Forsythe then summarized the staff report for the Zoning Board of Appeals. He
explained that the variations were necessary to allow an existing structure to remain and that
by placing the roof from the garage to the fence, the petitioner had created a zero foot side
yard for the boat enclosure. He also stated that the driveway width was necessary to gain
access to the boat parking area. Mr. Forsythe stated that the main objection to this request
was the fact that this work is all being done on top of a IW utility and drainage easement
and that there is presently a water main in this area. He stated that local ordinances
prohibit construction on an easement and that there were concerns about the access to this
ZBA40-V-92
Page Two
easement area for maintenance and concerns about appearance of the structure as
constructed.
Mr. Lannon asked if the petitioner could remove the roof from above the fence line and
leave the fence. Mr. Kazibut stated that it is more of an awning to protect the boat than
an entire roof structure and that he believed it was necessary to provide protection for the
boat. Mr. Lannon believed that if the roof structure was removed that the fence variation
might be reasonable and that the boat could be left in the side yard.
Mr. Brettrager stated that the present roof structure allows storm water drainage directly
on the neighbor's property and that this is a concern.
Mrs. Skowron asked if the existing gate in front of the boat enclosure could remain and Mr.
Lannon stated that with his thinking, the gate could remain to screen the boat from the
street and that the gate could easily be opened if there was ever a need to gain access to
the easement.
Mr. Brettrager questioned the actual height of the fence and the reasons for the grade
change from the properties to the east. Mr. Kazibut stated that the grade changes resulted
from the subdivision design for Harvest Heights.
Mr. Saviano asked why no permit was requested to build the roof structure and believed the
petitioners had created the difficulty on their own.
Mrs. Skowron questioned the need for the 34' driveway and Mr. Kazibut stated that the
driveway is presently 34' but that the area in front of the boat storage is just concrete paver
blocks and that these could be removed. Mrs. Skowron stated that her main concern was
the appearance of the roof structure and the fact that it directs storm water onto the
neighboring property.
Mr. Basnik stated that he could not support the application because the structure blocks
access to an easement and that there would be reasonable use of the property without these
variations. With that the Chairman read and summarized the variation standards for Mount
Prospect's Zoning Ordinance and there was a general discussion from the Zoning Board of
Appeals about meeting these variation standards. The Zoning Board determined that the
case did not meet the variation standards and that a zero foot side yard was not appropriate
in this area of newer homes and that the 341 driveway might not be necessary for the boat
storage.
Mr. Saviano, asked the staffs opinion on simply removing the roof structure from the fence
to the garage and Mr. Forsythe stated that this would eliminate the zero foot side yard
requirement, taking care of the most significant variation.
Mr. Lannon suggested that the Zoning Board of Appeals vote on each request individually.
ZBA-40-V-92
Page Three
Chairman Basnik then proceeded to ask for motions on the individual variations. Mr.
Basnik asked for a motion on a zero foot side yard setback requirement instead of the
required 5'. Mr. Brettrager moved that this variation be approved. Motion was seconded
by Mr. Lannon.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Basnik, Brettrager, Cassidy, Lannon, Pratt, Saviano,
Skowron
NAYS: None
Chairman Basnik then asked for a motion on a request to allow a maximum 34' driveway
width rather than 24'. Mr. Lannon moved that the Zoning Board of Appeals recommend
approval of the 34' driveway. The motion was seconded by Mr. Brettrager.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Brettrager, Lannon, Pratt, Saviano, Skowron
NAYS: Basnik, Cassidy
Chairman Basnik then asked for a motion to allow a 6' fence in a side yard rather than 5'.
Mr. Pratt moved that the 6' fence be approved. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Skowron.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Lannon, Pratt, Skowron
NAYS: Basnik, Brettrager, Cassidy, Saviano
The petitioner pointed out that he objected to the denial of the 6' fence, noting that other
6' fences are routinely approved in the Village.
Mr. Basnik stated that the existing retaining wall helps provide a fence height and screening
and Mr. Brettrager pointed out that the grade change does not warrant a 6' fence height.
Respectfully submitted,
David M. Clements, AICP
Director of Planning
DMC:cI
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAIRMAN
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENT7,C61RECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: JUNE 17, 1992
CASE NO.: ZBA-40-V-92
APPLICANT: RYSZARD KAZIBUT
ADDRESS: 1001 CARDINAL LANE
LOCATION MAP:
ZONING BOARD -MEMBERS MUST VIS11,1HIS f!R!2PERn
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION.
ZONING: R-2 Residential
LOT SIZE: 8,001 Sq. Ft.
% COVERAGE: 32% (34% proposed)
F.k R. : .29
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2
The petitioners are requesting the following variations in order to allow an existing garage
addition to remain;
1. Variation to Section 14.1302 to allow a zero foot side yard instead of 5 feet.
2. Variation to Section 14.115 to allow a driveway with a maximum width of 34
feet.
3. Section 21.601 to allow a 6'-8" fence instead of 5 feet.
Summary of application; The application indicates that the addition has been added to
house a boat as well as lawn chairs. The applicants state that there are 7 vehicles in
addition to the boat and the driveway space is needed for automobiles.
Impact on Surrounding Properties: The subject property is zoned "R-2 Duplex Residence
District". There is currently a two family house on the lot. A variation was granted in 1987
which allowed the driveway to be widened to 24 feet from the maximum allowed 21 feet.
The applicants have placed a 6 foot fence on top of a retaining wall and attached a roof to
the side of the garage wall from the fence. This has been done on top of a 10 foot utility
and drainage easement. The Zoning Ordinance allows a three -car garage on an "R-2"
zoned lot, however, the ordinance prohibits construction on an easement. The ordinance
allows a 5 foot fence along the side yard property line.
OTHER DEPA TEEM , COMMENTS
Engine rine:
a. Drainage has been altered by construction of shed and patio block drive.
b. The shed is constructed in a drainage and utility easement. A sign -off is needed from
all utilities. A watermain is located within the easement. Recommend that the shed
not be placed in easement.
C. The adjacent property to the west is 2 feet lower than the subject property. The 6
foot fence on a 2 foot retaining wall makes it look like an 8 foot wall. Recommend
denial of the 6 foot fence.
d. If there is a slab and the roof is attached, there may be structural failure due to frost
heave.
11_ Vit:
There is a 6 foot watermain located in the 10 foot utility easement along the west
property line. No structure can be built on this easement.
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
N-Ir-UM126"
Page 3
Objection by Public Works. There is a watermain and easement on the west side of
the lot.
Due to the drainage and utility easement located along the west property line with a
watermain located within the easement, staff cannot recommend approval of the addition
of the roof. The 6'-8" fence seems excessive to staff especially because it is located on top
of a retaining wall. A five foot fence should be sufficient. The driveway width variation is
also excessive and, with the removal of the structure, will not be necessary. Also, staff notes
that design and appearance of this structure is not compatible with the house, and believes
the "makeshift" nature of the arrangement has a detrimental impact on the neighborhood.
Staff would recommend that the application be denied. A legal parking pad and/or a
storage shed could be constructed elsewhere on the property which would not interfere with
the drainage and utility easement, and help meet the petitioner's needs.
DMC:hg
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER V°_
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS��,�� �DI��"RECI'OR OF PLANNING
DATE: JUNE 22, 1992
SUBJECT: RICHARD SCRIMA, 1110 WEST CENTRAL ROAD
DEVELOPMENT CODE MODIFICATION - DRIVEWAY APRON WIDTH
The applicant is requesting this Development Code modification in order to provide
adequate access to his existing driveway. The driveway serves as an access point to a two -
car garage and a driveway pad to the side of the garage. The owner intends to replace the
driveway and would like to have an adequate driveway apron to serve the entire width of
his driveway. Staff noted that, during our review of the driveway the sidewalk from the
driveway apron north to the property line has raised sections and needs to be replaced.
The Plan Commission met on Wednesday, June 17, 1992, and voted 7-0 in favor of
recommending approval of the Development Code modification for a driveway width not
to exceed 32 feet. This approval was made subject to the applicant also removing and
replacing the curb and gutter in front of the driveway apron according to Village Code, and
replacing the sidewalk in front of the driveway and extending north to the property line.
MES:hg
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MIL,
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: JUNE 24, 1992
SUBJECT: ELIZABETH A. KORN RESUBDIVISION
145 ANITA (ONE BLOCK SOUTH OF KENSINGTON ROAD,
BETWEEN BURNING BUSH LANE AND THE WISCONSIN RR)
The applicant appeared before the Plan Commission to request that his three -lot subdivision
be resubdivided into four single family lots of record. Even though the site is not within the
municipal boundaries of Mount Prospect, State Statutes and Mount Prospect's Development
Code, under Section 16.107, requires plats within 1 and 1/2 miles of the municipal
boundaries to be approved by the Village. The Development Code does not give the
Village any jurisdiction over the actual development of the public or private improvements
on the site.
The Plan Commission met on Wednesday, June 17, 1992 and voted 7-0 in favor of
recommending approval of this resubdivision. The Plan Commission noted that the
proposed lot sizes meet the standards of the Zoning Ordinance and Development Code.
Staff recommended approval.
MES:hg
ELIZABETH A. KORN
,tun #1 w RESUBDIVISION
917ri. a «. s ww a " si: ..�., �.
in
.pa'
,r •xos•
?Sea'
R�
�
iiiii
✓
4
i, ftt.i rf PJ (
n) fd, 9 of y.rJ
xi.::` j�
9� tt, */t. s>.
14
�W
s
�
e
ar.00
=00.,
e
�
h
u
+
�W
r
� r , r. 3 a o. o o• , .. .,,,,• r-. sro e
I
— ¢ .9 NI 7,4
h kl MT , I P lily
t
,: .\tit, + HAYS
A.N[ISLAC?lyl!!EN �1ti Slit!e': !tN ,ui- PIA'' 11FRY(M 11KAF`+.
.t! yi�.0 aY =1 ; ..• -til-�N 3 : 1ks . .. i.i Huu,.!
Village of Mount Prospect
-Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM: PERSONNEL COORDINATOR
DATE: JUNE 16, 1992
SUBJECT: COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER ORDINANCE REVISIONS
The Community Service Officer position has been updated to comply with current
practices and legal requirements based on the Americans with Disabilities Act.
DONNA L RUSSELL
DLR/rcc
attachments
CAF/
6/8/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE VIII OF CHAPTER 4
OF THE. VILLAGE CODE OF M09YT PR05PECT
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SECTION ONE: That Article 8 entitled "Department of Police" of
Chapter 4 of the Village Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, by
deleting Sections 8.403, 8.404, 8.405, 8.406, 8.407, 8.408, 8.409,
8.410, 8.411, 8.412, 8.413, 8.414, and 8.415, in their entirety and
substituting therefor the following:
Sec. 4.803. Mutual Aid and Intergovernmental Police
Agreements. The Chief of Police is hereby
authorized and empowered to enter into, from time to time,
contracts and agreements with other police departments
regarding mutual police assistance, and to enter into
intergovernmental police service agreements with park
districts having areas within the corporate boundaries of the
Village of Mount Prospect; provided that where any such mutual
aid or intergovernmental police service agreement provides for
or otherwise involves an appropriation or expenditure of
public funds, such agreement shall be first submitted to the
President and Board of Trustees for approval.
See. 4.804.1. Community service officer, creation;
Limitations on Personnel; Duties. There is
hereby created a Community Service officer program within the
Department of Police. A Community Service Officer is a
uniformed, unarmed, civilian member of the Police Department
engaged in local Ordinance enforcement and administrative
duties within the Police Department. The objective of this
position is to relieve sworn personnel to perform duties that
require a higher level of training and expertise, as well as
to provide jobs for persons who wish to pursue a career in law
enforcement. The Chief of Police, in coordination with the
Personnel Officer and the Village Manager, may appoint
Community Service Officers in such manner as the Village Board
shall from time to time deem necessary. Such Community
Service Officers shall be members of the Police Department of
the Village but not subject to Board of Fire and Police
Commission rules and regulations. Such Community Service
Officers shall supplement members of the Police Department in
the performance of their assigned and normal duties, only as
provided herein.
Sec. 4.804.2. Application Required. Each applicant to
be a Community Service officer shall submit an
application to the Personnel Officer.
See. 4.804.3. Qualifications of Applicants; Requirements.
No applicant may be appointed as a Community
Service Officer if he or she has been convicted of a felony,
criminal misdemeanor or other crime involving moral turpitude.
An applicant for the Community Service Officer program shall:
A. Be a United States citizen or authorized to be employed
in the United States.
B. Be at least eighteen (18) years of age.
Chapter 4
CSO
Page 2 of
C. offer of employment
successful completion
examination to ensure
required duties.
shall be contingent upon the
of a physical and mental
sufficient fitness to perform
D. Never have been convicted of a felony or a criminal
misdemeanor.
E. Possess good moral character.
Sec. 4.804.4. Training Required. Community Service Officers
shall receive a course of training in the use
of such necessary materials, equipment and other police
procedures as shall be appropriate in the exercise of the
powers conferred upon them under this Article. Said course
of training shall be developed and provided by the Chief of
Police.
See. 4.804.5. Duties. Community Service officers shall be
assigned to perform the duties in the Police
Department in accordance with current job descriptions.
See. 4.804.6. Power to Enforce Ordinances. Community Service
Officers shall have the power and duty to
enforce the terms and provisions of the Village Code of Mount
Prospect. This power shall be exercised in conformity with
the rules and regulations of the Police Department promulgated
by the Chief of Police governing the functions of Community
Service Officers.
See. 4.804.7. Promulgation of Rules and Regulations. The
Chief of Police shall promulgate rules and
regulations of the Police Department governing functions of
Community Service officers. Said rules and regulations shall
establish specific guidelines and procedures with respect to
the enforcement of the Village Code of Mount Prospect by
Community Service Officers, the performance of those duties
as set forth in Section 4.804.5, the exercise of discretion
by the Watch Commander or supervisor in the assignment of
duties pursuant to Section 4.804.5 and such matters as may be
appropriate.
See. 4.804.8. Duty of Community Service Officers to Appear
as Witnesses. All Community Service Officers
issuing citations for the violation of an Ordinance of the
Village shall attend as witnesses before the courts where the
trial may be had, shall procure all necessary evidence in
their power, and furnish a list of witnesses to the court and
the Prosecuting Attorney. No Community Service Officer shall
be entitled to any witness fees to be taxed against the
Village in any action for the violation of an Ordinance where
the Village is Plaintiff.
Sec. 4.804.9. Uniforms. Community Service Officers shall
wear the uniform designated by Police
Department rules, regulations, and general orders. A uniform
allowance, as determined by the Village Board through fiscal
budget appropriation, may be provided.
Chapter 4
CSO
Page 3 of
Sec. 4.804.10. Obedience to Police Regulations. Community
Service Officers shall be, in addition to
Village rules and regulations, subject to the rules and
regulations of the Police Department in the same manner as
sworn members of the Police Department.
Sec. 4.804.11. Compensation and Benefits. The President and
Board of Trustees of the Village shall
determine, through its annual budget, the compensation for
Community Service officers. Benefits for Community Service
Officers are determined by the sections set forth in the
Personnel Policy Manual. 11
SECTION TWO: 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:
ABSENT:
PASSED and APPROVED this day of , 1992.
Gerald L. Farley
Village President
ATTEST:
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
caf/
6/29/92
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION TO INCLUDE COMPENSATION PAID UNDER AN
INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 125 AS
ILLINOIS JUNICIPAL RETIREMENT EARNINGS
WHEREAS, standard member earnings reportable to the Illinois
Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF) do not include compensation paid
under an Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.) section 125 plan or
compensation directed into a premium conversion plan or flexible
spending account; and
WHEREAS, an Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund participating unit
of government may elect to include IMRF earnings compensation paid
under an I.R.C. section 125 plan or compensation directed into a
premium conversion plan or flexible spending account by action of
the governing body; and
WHEREAS, the Village of Mount Prospect is authorized to include
section 125 plan and premium conversion and flexible spending
account compensation as earnings reportable to IMRF and it is
desirable that it do so; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SECTION ONE: That the Village of Mount Prospect does hereby elect
to include as earnings reportable to IMRF compensation paid under
an I.R.C. section 125 and/or compensation directed into a premium
conversation plan or flexible spending account effective February
1, 1986.
SECTION TWO: That the Village Clerk is authorized and directed to
file a duly certified copy of this Resolution with the Illinois
Municipal Retirement Fund.
SECTION THREE: 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 this day of
Gerald L. Farley
Mayor
ATTEST:
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
, 1992.
. :5
CAF/
6/24/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING THE REPRESENTATIVE TO
THE NORTHWEST SUBURBAN MUNICIPAL JOINT WATER ACTION AGENCY
FOR THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
WHEREAS, the Village of Mount Prospect is a member of the Northwest
Suburban Municipal Joint Action Water Agency, as authorized by
Ordinance No. 3081; and
WHEREAS, the Joint Action Water Agency Agreement and By -Laws
require designated representation on the Executive Committee of
said Agency.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF
TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SECTION ONE: That the appointment of John Fulton Dixon, Village
Manager, is hereby deleted as Representative on the Executive
Committee of the Joint Action Water Agency and substituting
therefor Michael E. Janonis, Village manager, as designated
representative of the Executive Committee of said Agency.
SECTION : 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:
ABSENT:
PASSED and APPROVED this day of 1992.
Gerald L. Farley
Village President
ATTEST:
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Village Manager MCI
FROM: David M. Clements, Director of Planning
;DATE: June 17, 1992
SUBJECT: Boxwood Advocacy Program
For the past five years, the Village of Mount Prospect has contracted with the Illinois
Prairie Girl Scout Council to provide a Boxwood Advocacy Program for the residents and
children in the Boxwood neighborhood. Funding for this project has been provided from
the Village's Community Development Block Grant (C.D.B.G.) Program. The primary
objective of the C.D.B.G. Program, as stated in Title One of the Housing and Community
Development Act, is the development of viable urban communities by providing decent
housing in a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities, principally
for persons of low and moderate income. In order to achieve this objective, funds may be
used for both physical improvements and providing public services to low and moderate
income areas.
The attached Illinois Prairie Girl Scout Council, Inc. contract is designed to provide needed
recreational and neighborhood services in the Boxwood community. In particular, the
Boxwood Advocacy Program provides recreational and learning experiences to Boxwood
children during the school year and five weeks during the summer, as well as neighborhood
organization assistance to homeowner associations and apartment complexes in Boxwood.
Each year, approximately 50 children have participated in each of these special programs
using the facilities at Euclid School. This program was also the driving force to the recently
Boxwood and Dogwood Street Improvements, as well as encouraging and supporting the
PACA neighborhood organization.
The fiscal year 1992 Boxwood Advocacy work program can be found on Exhibit A of the
attached contract. It is modeled after the Girl Scout's Summer Safari and Afternoon
Odyssey Programs. Both are well designed, balanced, and provide their children with an
excellent learning and value orientation that is important to their development, It also
provides organizational assistance to the entire Boxwood community.
DMC:cl
attachment
"
s
Ls I�sela red�e�iclyd � ��. �
DONDEk
.,� 1„,�. rJ �',?� i• � �� ,�”' �""", V„w#d°�` W r�'�� k„�N"J" �, �„�r. nu re�3r
elT.,ti[lyS tt 1N�a D'!,s� ffi�
Im
TOTAL CSS • $5. 00 each child�g
,�IIChda byG;rance, riQnspR?"uutDll, pA"{qgTAxiO Sdi�uj
r n ti ass sir ce is avwlab%
PR13CIO: $5.00 cada nifio(a) lumdns elgrata, tri ,
���co��`
'+ Jtll—
MUM�M
t
Z
To kEi,.A i
IS Ek Mvrriver el p
w ,
w.
ILL
wr j
,"'
�IM�°
,�
'ry� r�n/y �}g,,�.,,
6.�,F.[V�i r X`iCi.41e
PREGLWTAS:Por fa�6 r a
ro
r
3�+u.9'' a, i.
Actividades restringidas
Sr, X
Number ofpersons in househoLd
:Z
xo
CM&SCOUM
Yearn Dueamp
ATO Ya
AsamYee
NO
Annual Income: Below $24,300
Edam dd Corazda
V No M
1hal.urn s
yea
A/krSW
Satuio, anual: $27,750—$31,250
Didledoo NO
re A6
Ya
Akrxim
Imeel SAW
Damula No
pkads do Wed"
NO
con"ddom Ab
Yet
Pair. by, 0* aar.
M
%AWATURMUNIM NO a Plaft qW "adese TWAGO
Rhewmark, fewer IIsYayqmestabs piss
FktMM remnatka NO x Ocher I Otral
fetto
ARY AWWR &fewl 4#�Wjion or hearing? 9m GeA*= do dekyjaw U04d"
I give Per-ime-for nq d4ughzrrlsoft;__
to ParftcOwe in the Szonmer Safari Program and to partk4wre in all ac%6iries,
vwb&dmg the Fteki Trips, to receive emergency medical owomw if necessary
and to appear ba pic--fir pub& -Uy p-7--. I certify s- -y d-gjaerls-
it in good heahk and has no: been erpatedw any contagious Ammer. 1have
read all the program information and agree ;o abide by any reguladow. I on
"arng AD have my daughter be a Gid SCONt.
Day p—&o pars quo zi bQ~.� """ ' . "wf
partWpe an el Progrun Safari de Veratra, y as Was Us actividades
hdoyeado W paseas; pm recur b*amiento a6&w de anaZeada 6
fft- --rio; Y. P— ap— - fdograf— — prep6sfto p*Sck*rja.
Ye oar66co que w4 b"o odd as bow estado de salad y que so baa Ade
ftPWAt% a astenuadada Weclars, He kW* " d &nMaUjjq
de k(watacida dd programa y aboy do acm* an ateptw tww'b x
ragatod— Zday &Vmmft a qw mi b4a sat wo Chi Scout.
Fin" ad
T,
. .
+.,....»......,.: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . .
ee enclosed $5. 00
kegiamdon fl aura interested %n FrarcP�°
ode registmcim lido$5.00 Me
Troop I (if registered Girl Scow) Cuadfflh Tropa # (si es GWScout)
The following informadon is required by our funding sources and is coq tea
Esta infomacion es necessaria por nuestra organizacion y es estrictamente confx1mcial
Number ofpersons in househoLd
CM&SCOUM
Numeros de personas en
Annual Income: Below $24,300
$31,250—$34,700
$39,0
(check one) $24,300—$27,750
$34,700—$36,850
$41,250=$43,400
Satuio, anual: $27,750—$31,250
$36 850—$39 050
Above 443,400,1-,',,,%
(indicar uno)7'
7777�,�
ame of rgency
emprg $
x nr t
Numbea'
xB,.hrth.^d�s
a ryi^�rW"a/YdiMe ".
V�����,W"rK'•G"
In�F5f'af�,
Fecha de Naciiniento
f
Grado en otoi"io
.
M
.d
Mother's Phone
WorkMother's ,
°i°eldfcno a casa de U amdr ,
Telff6no �,�
Father's Horne Phone
Work P"'r,"
Telefono a casa dei padre
Te
OIL'
ame of rgency
emprg $
S.ivonppQV
ReWonship to child
Relaci3n con el nino(a)
Family Physician
Phone I / Telono
t ^
n
A
OIL'
•. � �
a'{i4if.I
„
GNriF
JiieNumber *met
�
,,,1V
u4mry Calle
Ciudad L
Birthday Grade in Fall
�.MA���
School
Fecha de Nacirniento Grado en S tofio Escuela ' a c M jy,'4
Parent's name
0
��" „
Nombre de niadre dre
TeWono del dia
Name of emergency contact
Gontacto para wnergencias.,,'�-
y
Emergency'sme daytip de =tactopana eTn"
"(Teifono
p rd��
�
_, —'OUS or9a11J441au,,a .- ,.
PlCCh
0- ?
o0
rr
ee
�1 iml
naamm
cf
To Make
Yids 'Peer-Pro o
ppo
Ctvercoming the occasional negative influ
with posidvc, assertive behavior is an im encs °f e"ern
Pr of, co rs the children enrolled in Camp r snti'm Peer
44UAA4
Proof" course.
The course, sponsored by the Metropolitan Chicago
Council of Camp Fire, offers self-reliance training to
fourth through sixth graders, both girls and boys,
"The purpose of the course is to build the self-reliance of
Children involved in positive and negative peer relation-
ships, We°rc [caching them the behavior that makes them a
good friend and helps them to be a good friend„” said Pro-
gram Administrator Linnea Pioro,
She added, "healing with peer pressure has been chal-
1 3mP re isyoun ddrs and worrying parents for a long time.
Camp Fire is addressing that issue with positive, reinforce-
able home both the ehild and parent can learn and use
at home and school,"
There will be a twoMweek mini-course available at Euclid
School in Mt, Prospect on Apr, 22 and 29 from 3:30.5
P.m. Any youth interested in signing
should call Pioro at (312) 263-6218, up for this course
Informa tic>nOregistration sheets are available at Euclid
School, Band-outs were distributed at Euclid and ;River
Trails Middle School. The registration deadline is Apr: 17,
Cnp Fire, Inc. is a national youth organisation serving
;iris and boys of school age in 30,000 communities across
�.mer4ea.
Exhibit B
1-8 POPULATION BENEFITTING FROM ACTIVITIES UNDERWAY OR COMPLETED — SERVICES OR ASSISTANCE
AGEWY NII?
OATS
Ptw+ON WHO CAN #SST ANtWtw oUSSTIONS ASOUT
THIS FORM
I KNI&?ING
AC-
rdPULATI*N SSNSP/TT/NG
- MINORTIT POPULATION SSNSrITTINa
vow"ry
to
00".
Stl!
!�
Female
Head
If Host
/i1
TOTAL.
l„!
MALS
!k/
rSMALS
!1✓/
LOWSw
INCOMi
(�/
SLACK
SPANISH-
AMtwiCAN
AMtwICAN
INDIAN
QA/SNTAL
All othscs (ifiits)
MALS
liy
raMALt
1161
MALS
flsl
'PSMALS
fid/
MALS
1101
ISMAii
on
MALS
ill/
♦#MALS
liki
MALS
►SMA"
i
<t E
* ILLISOIs #WX419 ail Ni, ac"
Pormiaelam Form ter a'emmor MfrN Adv"tere Progras . X �i 1 b i L C
Peraise especial pars 0 pr"rams 'Summer Safsri
rho parent's specific permission ie, required for torr child to to on a Field trip. This additional
Jn[ormrtion weld be needed In Cass of an emergency.
Se ro quiere ei persiso especifico do les padres part quo so sillo(a) pueds aslstlr a los passos.
Esta informacion as necesaris to cases de emergencia.
Mother's some Phone
wort Phone
Teldfono a use de To padre
Teldfono trobajo Padre
rather's saw* phone
work Phone
Teldfono a Casa dei padre
Tsldfono trabijo padre
scar* of Emergency contact
Contacto para ecxrgencias
Relationship to child
Relation con el niilo(s)
Emergency's some Phone
Mork Phone
Teldfono contacto eatergenclas Casa
TelEfono trabajo
Family Physician
MEAico de Familia Ram* /Nombre
city /Ciudad
Phone /
TelEfono
Is your child taking medication) No
Y*s
Toms nedicinos at WOW? No
SI
If so, what
Si toms. qud?
Amt* of last tetanus shots 1. J. 3», (include child's naso)
Fechs de la Ultima vacuna de titanos (incluye nombre de nibo)
Allergic tot
Atergias
Restricted activities arae
Actividades restringidas
1 give permission for my daught*r(s)/son(s)r
I ,
to prrticipats in the Summer Safari Program and to
participate in all activities, including the Field
Tripsi to receive emergency medical treatment if nocos-
sary and to appear in pictures for publicity purposes.
1 certify that my daughters)/sons(s) are in good
health and has/havo not been exposed to any contagious
diseases. 1 have read all the program information and
agree to &bid* by any regulations. 1 As willing to
have my daught*r(s) be a Girl Scout(s).
Doy peratso para que Pi hljo(hija)/s: ,
participe enel Program Safari de Merano. y on
todas las PCtividides incluyendo los prices; para
recibir tratamiento midico de emergencia sl fuera
necesario; y. para aparecer an fotograflas con propdsito
publicitario. ro certifico que ai hijo(hlja)/s Win en
buen estado de salud y que no han lido expuestos a
enfermedades infecto-contagiosis. He leldo todo el
formularlo de infortu,cion del programs y estoy de
acuerdo en aceptar todas las regulaciones. Estoy
dispuesta a que ■i hija(s) sea una Girl Scout.
Signature of Parent/Guardian Amt*
Firma del Padre/Madre/Guardian Fecha
pARENTs ARE MELCOJW TO VISIT war PROGRAM AT ANY TINt.
PREFERENCE art4vt
LOS PADRES SERAN BIEflVEN1DOS PARA ASISTIR AL PROGRAMA
itARQUE SU PREFERENCIA:
chaperone a Field Trip
Cuidador Postos
aelp with an activity (such as crafts)
Ayudar on cuilquier actividad (ranualidades)
sOwrvtR, IF YOU VOVLA Pr MILLING TO SELP, CRECE YOUR
EN CUALQUiER MOMEKTO. SIN EMBARGO, S1 QUISIERAM ATUDAR
Share a bobby or career with the children
Compartir, ensehar una habilld&d o hobble Con los
ninos(ss)
staff Position
Ser parte del personal on el programa
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT AND
ILLINOIS PRAIRIE GIRL SCOUT COUNCIL INC.
BOXWOOD ADVOCACY PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Village of Mount Prospect is a recipient of funds under the Community
Development Block Grant Program; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined by the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of
Mount Prospect that Illinois Prairie Girl Scout Council Inc. shall provide an Advocacy
Program and Special Summer Program for the residents of Boxwood in the corporate
boundaries of the Village of Mount Prospect; and
WHEREAS, the program proposed by the Girl Scout Council and approved herein, complies
with the requirements of the Department of Housing and Urban Development with respect
to benefitting low- and moderate -income persons.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SECTION QNE,- That the Village President of the Village of Mount Prospect and the
Village Clerk are hereby authorized to execute a contract for Community Development
Block Grant implementation, which contract is between the Village of Mount Prospect and
Illinois Prairie Girl Scout Council, Inc. a not-for-profit corporation, said contract is attached
to this Resolution.
SECTION TWO: 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 this day of , 1992.
ATTEST:
Village Clerk
MR
Mayor
This Agreement is entered into this day of , 1992, by and
between the Village of Mount Prospect, a body politic of the State of Illinois (hereinafter
referred to as the "VILLAGE" and Illinois Prairie Girl Scout Council Inc., a not-for-profit
corporation of the State of Illinois (hereinafter referred to as the "COUNCIL,").
As a grantee of Community Development Block Grant funds (hereinafter referred to
as CDBG funds) by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (hereinafter
referred to as HUD), the VILLAGE elects to contract for services with the COUNCIL for
operation of -a special Summer program for the children of Boxwood and a Boxwood
Advocacy Program as outlined in the Scope of Services attached herewith as Exhibit "K.
Aingunt of the Grant
The VILLAGE does hereby contract for services with the COUNCIL up to a maximum
of $23,000.00 and the COUNCIL agrees to abide by the provisions and regulations of the
1974 Housing and Community Development Act, as amended under which said contract is
made, and to use said contract funds for the purposes set forth in Section I hereof and as
conditioned by the provisions of Section III next.
The VILLAGE's contractual obligation as identified in Section I shall be limited to
the maximum amount specified in Section 11, to the actual amount invoiced by the
COUNCIL, and only to the extent such amount is received from HUD for such purposes.
Conditions of Contract
A. Indemnification. The COUNCIL agrees to indemnify and save and hold harmless
the VILLAGE and each and everyone of its officers, agents, employees, servants, attorneys,
insurers and successors from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, expenses,
injuries, losses or damages of whatever kind, character of description the VILLAGE may
suffer as a result of any cause, matter, act, or omission arising out of the failure of the
COUNCIL, or those acting under it, to conform to the statues, ordinances or other
regulations or requirements of any governmental authority, in connection with the
COUNCIUs performance under this Agreement. The COUNCIL agrees to defend against
- 1 -
any claims brought or actions filed against the VILLAGE with respect to the subject of the
indemnity contained herein, whether such claims or actions are rightfully or wrongfully
brought or filed. In case of such a claim brought or such an action filed, the COUNCIL
agrees that the VILLAGE may employ attorneys of its own selection to appear and defend
the claim or action on behalf of the VILLAGE at the expense of the COUNCIL The
VILLAGE, at its option, shall have the sole authority for the direction of the defense, and
shall be the sole judge of the acceptability of any compromise or settlement of any claims
or actions against the VILLAGE.
B. Non- iscn-mIna tion , The COUNCIL, performing under this Agreement, shall not
discriminate against any worker, employee, or applicant or any member of the public,
because of race, creed, color, sex, age or national origin. Such affirmative action shall
include, but not be limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer,
termination, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination rates of pay, other
forms of compensation, selection for training including apprenticeship. The COUNCIL
agrees to post in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment,
notices setting forth the provisions of this non-discriminatory clause. This policy of non-
discrimination and affirmative action shall be applicable with regard to both COUNCIL's
internal personnel practices and its actions in the performance of this Agreement. The
COUNCIL agrees and authorizes the VILLAGE and HUD to conduct compliance reviews
or any other procedures to assure compliance with these provisions.
C. Examination of ReQQrds. The COUNCIL will, at all times, give HUD, the
Comptroller General of the United States, and the VILLAGE, through any authorized
representative, access to, and the right to examine all records, books, papers or documents
related to the contract, in accordance with state and federal law.
D. Filing of Records, The COUNCIL shall file with the VILLAGE such duplicates
of records covering such activities to be performed in whole or in part, as specified in
Exhibit "A".
E. Availability of Law, Regulations and Orders. The VILLAGE shall, upon the
request of the COUNCIL, provide it with copies of all laws, regulations and orders,
including those cited in this contract, which regulate the operation of the Block Grant
funded programs, or which might otherwise affect the performance of this Agreement.
-2-
19'rur—UMM I "111ir—M
The COUNCIL shall, at all times, observe and comply with all laws,, ordinances or
regulations of the Federal, State, County and local government which may in any manner
affect the performance of this Agreement, and the COUNCIL shall be required to perform
all acts under this Agreement in the same manner as the VILLAGE, as a contractor of the
Federal Government, is or would be required to perform such acts.
Subsequent to the execution of this Agreement, the VILLAGE shall forthwith file
all necessary documents with HUD and shall comply with all applicable rules and
regulations necessary to facilitate acquisition of funds approved for this program by HUD.
The COUNCIL shall not file any lawsuit against the VILLAGE or any of its officers or
employees as a result of this contract, except that this Section shall not act as a bar to any
lawsuits arising from the negligent acts of the VILLAGE or any of its officers or employees.
Pursuant to this Agreement, the VILLAGE will disburse CDBG funds to the
COUNCIL on the following basis:
1. The VILLAGE shall allocate the $23,000.00 contract amount for the services
stipulated in this Agreement. The COUNCIL shall submit monthly invoices to
the VILLAGE with a bi-monthly performance report. This report shall include:
a. Number of children participating in program for the reporting period;
b. Number of hours of activity for children for the reporting period;
c. Types of activities provided to children for the reporting period;
d. Number of trips taken and number of children on each for the reporting
period;
-3-
2. A completed Exhibit B shall be submitted with the last monthly invoice along
with a summary of actual cost incurred over the entire year for the operation of
this program. The actual cost should be broken out by:
a. Total salaries;
b. Cost of transporatation;
c. Cost of office supplies, program supplies, food and drinks, registration,
insurance, admission fees, custodial fees and memberships;
d. Miscellaneous. Identify each.
3. The COUNCIL shall also have completed by the parents or guardians of each
child the Certification Form, Exhibit C. This form may be part of the child's
application for participating in the program. Said Exhibit C shall indicate to the
satisfaction of the Village, each participating child's household annual income
as being below or above current HUD Section 8 Limits. Failure to submit a
completed Exhibit C for each participating child's household will violate the
terms of this Agreement and cancel any pending and future payments due the
COUNCIL from the VILLAGE.
All exhibits, reports and invoices must be completed and sent to the Village of Mount
Prospect no later than May 10, 1993.
Length of Contrgct
This Agreement shall be valid until April 30, 1993 and may be terminated by either
party upon thirty (30) days written notice. All costs associated with the noted tasks in
Exhibit A shall be billed to the Village and reimbursed upon presentation of all
documentation required under Section VI.
The COUNCIL shall not assign this Agreement or any part thereof and the
COUNCIL shall not transfer or assign any funds or claims due or to become due hereunder
without the prior written approval of the Village Manager. Any transfer or assignment of
funds pursuant to this Agreement, either in whole or in part, or any interest therein which
shall be due to the COUNCIL shall be deemed of no force or effect and shall not be
binding upon the VILLAGE.
-4-
nmaNjx
NoticeLAnd Communicallons
Notices and communications under this Agreement shall be sent registered or certified
mail, postage prepared, to the respective parties as follows:
to the VILLAGE:
Mr. David M. Clements
Director of Planning and Zoning
Village of Mount Prospect
100 South Emerson Street
Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
to the COUNCIL:
Ms. Reta Wilcox
Executive Director
Illinois Prairie Girl Scout Council, Inc.
570 East Higgins Road
Elk Grove Village, Illinois 60007
This Agreement is entered into this _day of 1992.
I ATTEST:
Village Clerk
ATTEST:
NotaryPublic
THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
BY:
President of the Village Board
ILLINOIS PRAIRIE GIRL SCOUT
COUNCIL, INC. an Illinois
not-for-profit corporation
Executive �irector
-5-
Exhibit A
Illinois Prairie Girl Scouts
BOXWOOD PLANS FOR 1992-1993
1. Develop programs/projects with a senior citizen's home where the Boxwood Odyssey
program could do several intra -generational activities.
Use Randhurst Shopping Center as a resource and start up good relations between the
shopping center and the children/teens in the Boxwood and Prospect Commons area.
Ideas: Tour behind the scenes, work on career development, discuss hygiene, learn about
dressing for success, and work on a community project/display.
3. Contact officials in the Village of Mount Prospect and see what community projects we
could do with them over the year. The children could write the letters, propose ideas,
develop projects, and help publicize events.
4. Focus on math/science as careers and build interest by doing some fun, hands-on
activities. One idea is to contact banks in the area and have them help the children with
the concept of money, savings accounts, checking accounts, etc. Creating legos and
buildings were another idea.
5. Review staying safe procedures with CPR, First Aid, and 911.
6. Work on ecology and environmental projects for school grounds like a wildlife sanctuary
or habitat boxes, put plants in, create a watering area. Also, contact the park district b
discuss planting bulbs in the Fall or helping with any of their planting projects.
7. Continue popular themes from the past: birthday day, holiday parties, special art
activities, science day, and reading.
Start on some geography projects like creating maps and how to read them.
Help out at area food banks.
10. Continue to recruit and use Mount Prospect social service programs and businesses to
enhance the Odyssey program.
ART ACTIVITIES
1. Design puppets and put on a play.
Do one large art activity a month.
3. Bake a snack a least once a month.
4. Help with homework at least once a month.
Need to recruit guest speakers.
2. Need to recruit area youths ages 12-15 as counselor/helpers with the younger children
at the Boxwood Odyssey program. They would have the opportunity to go on special
field trips and outings.
1:1•
The Boxwood Summer Safari will be a six week, 3 days a week informal, recreational program
offered on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, June 23 to July 30, 1992 at Euclid School.
Children will be in attendance at the program from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Tuesdays and
Wednesdays. One morning a week the children will go swimming and one day a week the
children will go on special field trips. A unique program will be offered to the Boxwood
children at the Summer Safari. A collaboration with the Camp Fire Group has been established.
The Camp Fire Group will present their program entitled "Peer Proof". This program will is
designed to build self-reliance of children to better deal with peer pressure. More information
about the program is attached. Also, the Summer Safari flier is attached.
PACA and the River Trails Park District discussed summer opportunities for older boys in the
Boxwood and Prospect Commons area at the last PACA activities meeting but nothing has been
set up specifically for the older girls in the area. A couple of fun and educational field trips for
older girls have been identified as a need by Boxwood residents and girls on PACA's student
committee. Illinois Prairie Girl Scouts could set up those field trips with chaperones over the
summer to meet that need.
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
. Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER W—
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE; JUNE 17, 1992
SUBJECT: PRIMARY HEALTH CARE PROGRAM
For the last three years, the Village of Mount Prospect has contracted with the Suburban
Primary Health Care Council to provide needed medical services to the working poor in
Mount Prospect. Funding for this project has been provided from the Village's Community
Development Block Grant (C.D.B.G.) Program. The primary objective of the C.D.B.G.
Program, as stated in Title One of the Housing and Community Development Act, is the
development of viable urban communities by providing decent housing in a suitable living
environment and expanding economic opportunities, principally for persons of low and
moderate income. In order to achieve this objective, funds may be used for both physical
improvements and providing public services to low and moderate income areas.
The attached Suburban Primary Health Care Council, Inc. contract is for providing needed
health care services to lower income Mount Prospect residents. Eligible residents and
households are those who do not have health insurance from their employer, cannot afford
to pay for health insurance themselves, and are not on a federal or state financial assistance
program. They are normally the working poor.
The attached Suburban Primary Health Care Council contract will enable low income
Mount Prospect residents to receive basic health care services. In particular, the Primary
Health Care Program will provide physician office visits, radiology, lab work and
prescriptions. Residents interested in receiving services under this program can complete
applications at the Wheeling Township Office, Elk Grove Township Office, or our Senior
Center. Last year 190 Mount Prospect citizens received direct services from this program.
In fiscal year 1992, the Primary Health Care Program will continue providing medical
services to our lower income residents. Exhibit A of the attached contract explains in
greater detail the work to be performed.
DMC:hg
Attachment
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT AND
SUBURBAN PRIMARY HEALTH CARE COUNCIL INC.
PRIMARY HEALTH CARE PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Village of Mount Prospect is a recipient of funds under the Community
Development Block Grant Program; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined by the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of
Mount Prospect that Suburban Primary Health Care Council Inc. shall provide a program
to facilitate access to primary health care in the corporate boundaries of the Village of
Mount Prospect; and
WHEREAS, the program proposed by the Suburban Primary Health Care Council Inc. and
approved herein, complies with the requirements of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development with respect to benefitting low- and moderate -income persons.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SECTION ONE: That the Village President of the Village of Mount Prospect and the
Village Clerk are hereby authorized to execute a contract for Community Development
Block Grant implementation, which contract is between the Village of Mount Prospect and
Suburban Primary Health Care Council Inc. a not-for-profit corporation, said contract is
attached to this Resolution.
SEC" ON TWO: 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 this day of 1992.
ATTEST:
Village Clerk_
M
Mayor
This Agreement is entered into this day of , 1992, by and
between the Village of Mount Prospect, a bodypoliticOf the 7State —o-F—Illinois (hereinafter
referred to as the ""VILLAGE" and the Suburban Primary Health Care Council (hereinafter
referred to as the "COUNCIL"), an Illinois Not -for -Profit Corporation.
As a grantee of Community Development Block Grant funds (hereinafter referred to
as CDBG funds) by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (hereinafter
referred to as HUD), the VILLAGE elects to contract for services with the COUNCIL for
operation of a program to facilitate access to primary health care for low- and moderate -
income residents of the Village of Mount Prospect as outlined in the Scope of Services
attached herewith as Exhibit "A".
The VILLAGE does hereby contract for services with the COUNCIL up to a maximum
of $16,000.00 and the COUNCIL agrees to abide by the provisions and regulations of the
1974 Housing and Community Development Act, as amended under which said contract is
made, and to use said contract funds for the purposes set forth in Section I hereof and as
conditioned by the provisions of Section III next.
The VILLAGE's contractual obligation as identified in Section I shall be limited to
the maximum amount specified in Section H, to the actual amount invoiced by the
COUNCIL, and only to the extent such amount is received from HUD for such purposes.
A. IndcMnification. The COUNCIL agrees to indemnify and save and hold harmless
the VILLAGE and each and everyone of its officers, agents, employees, servants, attorneys,
insurers and successors from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, expenses,
injuries, losses or damages of whatever kind, character of description the VILLAGE may
ME
suffer as a result of any cause, matter, act, or omission arising out of the failure of the
COUNCIL, or those acting under it, to conform to the statues, ordinances or other
regulations or requirements of any governmental authority, in connection with the
COUNCIL's performance under this Agreement. The COUNCIL agrees to defend against
any claims brought or actions filed against the VILLAGE with respect to the subject of the
indemnity contained herein, whether such claims or actions are rightfully or wrongfully
brought or filed. In case of such a claim brought or such an action filed, the VILLAGE
agrees that the COUNCIL may employ attorneys of its own selection to appear and defend
the claim or action on behalf of the VILLAGE, subject to reasonable approval by the
VILLAGE, at the expense of the COUNCIL The COUNCIT-, at its option, shall have the
sole authority for the direction of the defense.
B. Non-diagdmination. The COUNCIL, performing under this Agreement, shall not
discriminate against any worker, employee, or applicant or any member of the public,
because of race, creed, color, sex, age or national origin. Such affirmative action shall
include, but not be limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer,
termination, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination rates of pay, other
forms of compensation, selection for training including apprenticeship. The COUNCIL
agrees to post in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment,
notices setting forth the provisions of this non-discriminatory clause. This policy of non-
discrimination and affirmative action shall be applicable with regard to both COUNC112s
internal personnel practices and its actions in the performance of this Agreement. The
COUNCIL hereby certifies that 1-9 forms are current and employment verification has been
completed regarding all employees. The COUNCIL agrees and authorizes the VILLAGE
and HUD to conduct compliance reviews or any other procedures to assure compliance with
these provisions, subject to applicable laws and regulations concerning privacy with
reasonable notice to the COUNCIL
C. Examination gf Btojd& The COUNCIL will, at all times, give HUD, the
Comptroller General of the United States, and the VILLAGE, through any authorized
representative, access to, and the right to examine all records, books, papers or documents
related to the contract, in accordance with state and federal law. Said records shall include
verification of household income and information on race or national origin. Eligible
households for this program must have incomes below those noted in Exhibit C. The
COUNCIL may establish program income criteria below that noted in Exhibit C.
D. Eiline Qf Rgcigds. The COUNCIL shall file with the VILLAGE such duplicates
of records covering such activities to be performed in whole or in part, as specified in
Exhibit "A".
E. Av
ailability of La . Rggglations and_Qld= The VILLAGE shall, upon the
request of the, COUNCIL, provide it with copies of all laws, regulations and orders,
including those cited in this contract, which regulate the operation of the Block Grant
funded programs, or which might otherwise affect the performance of this Agreement.
The COUNCIL shall, at all times, observe and comply with all laws, ordinances or
regulations of the Federal, State, County and local government which may in any manner
affect the performance of this Agreement, and the COUNCIL shall be required to perform
..all acts under this Agreement in the same manner as the VILLAGE, as a contractor of the
Federal Government, is or would be required to perform such acts.
Subsequent to the execution of this Agreement, the VILLAGE shall forthwith file all
necessary documents with HUD and shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations
necessary,to facilitate acquisition of funds approved for this program by HUD. The
COUNCIL shall not file any lawsuit against the VILLAGE or any of its officers or
employees as a result of this contract, except that this Section shall not act as a bar to any
lawsuits arising from the negligent or willfully wrongful acts of the VILLAGE or any of its
officers or employees.
Billing and Rewrtinz Arrangementj
Pursuant to this Agreement, the VILLAGE will disburse CDBG funds to the
COUNCIL on the following basis:
1. The VILLAGE shall allocate the $16,000.00 contract amount for the services
stipulated in this Agreement. The COUNCIL shall submit no more than one
invoice per month for an amount equal to one -twelfth of the contract amount.
Every month, the COUNCIL shall submit to the VILLAGE a Monthly
Performance Report. Said report shall include available information on:
-3-
a. Each Mount Prospect client served during the month, showing the client's
COUNCIL number, address, and type(s) of service rendered. Services may
also include number of applications received and the number of applicants
approved for the program.
The first report shall be due on June 10, 1992. All others shall be submitted no
later than the 10th of the month.
2. A final report shall accompany the COUNCIUs final billing and regular monthly
report in May of 1993. This report will highlight the accomplishments of the
program over the past year, summarize for the fiscal year, from May 1, 1992 to
April 30, 1993, the number of Mount Prospect residents served by type of
assistances, and include the completion of Exhibit B herein attached.
.!x!_11.1►
This Agreement shall be valid from the date it is entered into thru April 30, 1993 and
may be terminated by either party upon thirty (30) days written notice. All costs associated
with the completed tasks shall be billed to the VILLAGE and reimbursed upon presentation
of all documentation required under Section VI.
The COUNCIL shall not assign this Agreement br any part thereof and the COUNCIL
shall not transfer or assign any funds or claims due or to become due hereunder without
the prior written approval of the Village Manager. Any transfer or assignment of funds
pursuant to this Agreement, either in whole or in part, or any interest therein which shall
be due to the COUNCIL shall be deemed of no force or effect and shall not be binding
upon the VILLAGE.
-4-
Notices and " ommuniSations
Notices and communications under this Agreement shall be sent registered or certified
mail, postage prepared, to the respective parties as follows:
to the VILLAGE:
Mr. David M. Clements
Director of Planning and Zoning
Village of Mount Prospect
100 South Emerson Street
Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
to the COUNCIL:
Mrs. Victoria Bigelow
President
Suburban Primary Health Care Council
2235 Enterprize Drive #3501
West Chester, Illinois 60154
This Agreement is entered into this —day of 1992.
ATTEST:
Village Clerk
THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
BY:
President o the Vi age
Board
SUBURBAN PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
COUNCIL
ST: BY:
Executive * —ectoror
otary lic
110�
P,
NOTRy P 8,1C, ST -5-
My OM lliss�7' TE OF •
JLLY!io,S
irp,S 111.26/94
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Access to care Program
In Illinois, 1.5 million persons are without public or private
health insurance coverage. In suburban Cook County it is estimated
that nearly 100,000 individuals are uninsured and unable to afford
even basic health care services.
The Access to Care program provides access to primary health care
for uninsured suburban Cook County residents with low income.
Eligibility is limited to residents with a family income less than
twice the federal poverty level who are uninsured for ' primary
health care and ineligible for public programs such as Medicaid and
Medicare.
The Council contracts with local providers throughout the area and
pays them a discounted rate to provide services to persons enrolled
in Access to Care. Services include office visits to a primary
care physician, routine laboratory and, x-ray services and
prescription drugs.
In the northwest suburbs screening for eligibility and enrollment
occur at township offices, the Villages of Mt. Prospect, Schaumburg
and Des Plaines; CEDA Northwest; Meadows Community Services; and
Cook County Department of Public Health. Enrollment is for a one-
year period, and there is no charge to enroll. Clients pay a small
co -payment ($3.00 or $5.00) directly to providers for each visit,
lab test, x-ray or prescription drug.
Preventive services which are already available in the community
at low cost are not duplicated by Access to Care. All clients
receive a bookldt listing preventive services available in the area
which are free or low cost. The Council has coordination
agreements with the agencies providing these services.
I
Exhibit B
1-9 POPULATION BENEFITTING FROM ACTIVITIES UNDERWAY OR COMPLETED — SERVICES OR ASSISTANCE
ACRNC'f NdMR OAT[ TNwv k Im o CAN it#T ANsw#N ou#sT10N• ASOUT RV{ilti=
NG
A!-
I*Pw#.AnoM ownur,TT#No MINO##T/T •0►YLAT/0N o#N#IITTINo
T#wTT 1•awal
iw SLACK orANI#N• AM#!#/GAN OAI;MTAL All others (YI#lt#)
MVM• Head T+wTA1 MAL# Low#K AM#A1t AN INOtAN
##w i now Isrwt# #NCO.#
MAL* I#MALI MALI 'rlLMAL# MAti •iMAL# MALI ItMAL# MAL# IaMAM
IJ /�#1 / j /kl / J /kJ /:U /►a! /j./ lir! o-j fit) ljl/ Ishl 00 Wl
Exhibit C
SECTION 8 INCOME LIMITS
`- ** - * Ro 0 r * 1Z
1 ...................... $27,000
2 ........:............. $30,900
3 ...................... $34,750
4 ...................... $38,600
5 ...................... $41,700
6 ...................... $44,800
7 ...................... $47,850
8 ...................... $50,950
VILLAGE BOARD ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
AND/OR
PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT APPROVAL
•EaWN70919TWO :w •
F!OCATION:—WOLF ROAD FROM THAYERTO • r•
DATE: _ JUNE 16,,1992
NO
ENGINEERING DRAWINGS APPROVED:
PLAT OF SUBDIVISION RECEIVED:
PLAT OF SUBDIVISION RECORDED:
AS BUILT PLANS REVIEWED AND APPROVED: _
ZONING CRITERIA MET(LANDSCAPE PLANTING
APPROVAL:
PUBLIC WORKS APPROVAL
INSPECTION SERVICES APPROVAL
FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
AC!2EPTAN9B
BY VILLAGE
WATER MAIN
SANITARY SEWER
STORM SEWER
ROADWAYS
SIDEWALKS
STREET REGULATORY SIGNS
STREET LIGHTS # 9
PARKWAY TREES #
PARKWAY LANDSCAPING RESTORATION
COMPLETE
RETENTION/DETENTION AREAS
PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS APPROVED
WATER MAIN
SANITARY SEWER
STORM SEWER
ROADWAY
PARKING LOTS
LANDSCAPING
RETENTION/DETENTION AREAS
ENGINEER
CLERK
CLERK
ENGINEER
PLANNING &
ZONING
PUB.WKS.DIR.
INSP.SERV.DIR.
FIRE PREVENTION
APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK
COUNTY, ILLINOIS, THIS DAY OF , 19
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 6OD56
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Village Manager
Village Clerk
FROM: Jeff Wulbecker, Engineering Coordinatori
DATE: June 23, 1992
SUBJECT: Kylemore Subdivision Street Lights
Attached please find the Village Board Acceptance form for the subject project. The
contractor has satisfactorily performed the required work and I recommend approval of this
project. Please place this in line for inclusion at the next Village Board Meeting. -
JAW/m
RICHARD J. PHELAN, President
Board of County Commissioner*
June 17, 1992
The Honorable Gerald L.
Village of Mount Prospect
100 South Emerson Street
Mount Prospect, Illinois
Dear President Farley:
COUNTY OF COOK
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
COUNTY BUILDING
118 NORTH CLARK STREET
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60602
OFFICE of the SUPERINTENDENT
"Skip" Farley, President
MARCODOMICO, Chairman
Commit I as on Roads and Bridges
60056 RE: HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT
The Permit Division of the Cook County Highway Department presently has a HOLD
HARMLESS AGREEMENT on file for the Village of Mount Prospect, which was approved by
the Village Board of Trustees for the purpose of obtaining permits located in the Cook County
Right of Way.
We have recently updated our HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT to include in, Paragraph (la),
Line (11), "any contractor I nt
ProsMt"; and changed, Paragraph (6) Line (3), from work to new construction.
We are attaching, herewith, an updated copy for review and approval by the Village Board of
Trustees. Please return an executed copy of this revised HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT
to our office.
If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Gabriel Ditore, Permit Engineer, 443-5988.
Very y yours,
7
z
Glenn W. Frede 'chs
Superintendent of Highways
Cook County, Illinois
ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING AN
INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT WITH
THE COUNTY OF COOK IN LIEU OF
INSURANCE AND SURETY BOND REQUIREMENTS
WHEREAS, the Vilgg of Mount Prosy cr needs to perform construction,
maintenance, repair, or activities including, but not limited to, parades, direction of or
stoppage of traffic to, or on, Village of Mount Prospect property lying in, or upon, Rights of
Way of the County of Cook within the corporate limits of the Village ofMount Proms;,moi,
and
WHEREAS, the County of Cook with regard to the issuance of permits for
disturbance of County Right of Way requires that insurance protecting the County of Cook
from any and all claims that may arise during the course of or in consequence of such work
be secured, and further, that a surety bond be posted to guarantee restoration of the County
Right of Way following completion of any construction, maintenance, repair or activity; and
WHEREAS, the County of Cook will waive surety bond and insurance requirements
in favor of the Villaag of. Moutpt Pros ct and, will accept from the Vi
Pros= in lieu of such insurance, a Hold Harmless Agreement.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED
By the Vila off", Mg nit ProspNt ;
1, That for and in consideration of waiver by the County of Cook of the insurance and
surety bond requirements as foresaid for projects or activities which may be
undertaken by the V"lel ge of Mount ar t involving a disturbance of any right of
way of the County of Cook within the corporate limits of the Village;Mount
Prospect that we do hereby agree that;
N
a. The Village ofMount Troa= t, or its successors, or assigns, shall
indemnify and save harmless the County of Cook, its officers,
agents, employees and servants against all loss, damage or expense that
it or they may sustain as a result of any suit, actions or claims of any
character brought on account of property damage, injury to or death of
any person, or persons including persons performing any work or
activity under a permit issued by the Cook County Highway
Department which may arise in connection with the work or activities
to be performed under all permits arising in any manner from the
negligence or wrongful acts or failure to act by the Village of Mount
Pros=t and its employees in the performance of the work or activity,
or any contractor doing emergency work or maintenance for the V"lllage
of Mount rost; and
b.. The Village of Mount Pros= shall, at its own expense, appear,
defend and pay all charges of attorneys, costs and other expenses
arising therefrom or incurred in connection therewith; and, if any
judgement shall be rendered against the County in any such action, the
Villggg of ;Mount Prost shall, at its own expense, satisfy and the
Villagg of Mount ProsMt shall discharge the same.
2. The shall also indemnify and save harmless the County of
Cook from any claims against or liabilities incurred by the Village of Mount Prosoect
of any type or nature, to any person, firm or corporation arising from the Vim' ;"
Mount Pros x- wrongful or negligent performance of the work or activity.
3. No amendment or repealer of this ordinance shall become effective until thirty (30)
days next following written notice to the County of Cook of such proposed
modification repealer. Said notice shall be served upon the County of Cook at the
office of the Superintendent of Highways, 118 North Clark Street, Chicago, Illinois
60602.
4. The clerk of the Village of MountProspect is hereby authorized and directed to
forward to the County of Cook, Department of Highways, Permit Division; a certified
copy of this ordinance upon its passage and approval.
5. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and
publication as required by law. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with
the terms and provisions hereof are hereby abolished.
6. Nothing in this Ordinance negates the necessity of obtaining a permit, where such
permit is otherwise required. This Hold Harmless Agreement does not negate bond
and insurance from private contractors doing new construction for the municipalities.
r
this,—day of l9._._
AYES APPROVED by me this
NAYS _day of 19_
ABSENT
J
Village of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Village Manager
FROM: Engineering Coordinator
DATE: July 1, 1992
SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION FOR COOK COUNTY BUS COMPANY WATER
MAIN
On June 30, 1992 at 10:00 A.M., sealed bids were received for the Cook County Bus;
Company Water Main. At this time, the sealed bids were publicly opened and read aloud.
Five Contractors received Contract Bid Documents. A total of 5 Contractors submitted
bids. The bids range from a low of $10,885.60 by Down Under Construction Co. of St.
Charles , IL to a high of $26t230.00 by Mancini Construction Co. of Palatine, IL. The
Engineer's Estimate for the project was $13,200.00.
ANALYSIS- OF BID
All Bidders submitted Bid Bonds in the amount of 5% of their total bid as required by the
Contract Documents. All Bidders correctly signed their bids and bid bonds.
BIDDEWS TOA
Down Under Construction, St. Charles, IL
$10,885.60
Suburban Construction, Countryside, IL
$12,785.00
Bari Construction, Elmhurst, IL
$16,000.00
Vian Construction, Elk Grove Village, IL
$18,682.00
Mancini Construction, Palatine, IL
$26,230.00
Page 2
Recommendation:
COOK COUNTY BUS COMPANY WATER MAIN
19HUNZWWO100
The low bidder Down Under Construction, Co., has successfully completed projects for the
City of Elmhurst and the Village of Bensenville and Hinsdale. This will be their first project
constructed in the Village of Mount Prospect.
RECOMMENDATION
Therefore, the Engineering Division recommends awarding a Contract to Down Under
Construction of St. Charles, IL., with a Bid price of $10,885.60.
Funding for this project is shown on Page 165 of this year's budget under Account Code No.
41-072-10-8726.
J'ev Vullbecker,
Englneirrifng Coordinator
I concur with the above recommendation
Charles Bencic,
Director of Inspection Services
I concur with the above recommendation
Herbert L Weeks,
Director of Public Works
JAW:CB/m
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
ILLINOIS
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER JOHN FULTON DIXON
FROM: FIRE CHIEF EDWARD M. CAVELLO
DATE: JUNE 24, 1992
SUBJECT: BID WAIVER FOR PURCHASE OF FIRE DEPARTMENT STAFF CAR
The 92-93 Fire Department Budget includes the purchase of a staff
vehicle for the Fire Chief. Five regional Chevrolet dealers were
contacted for price quotes. The two dealers who responded with
available vehicles were Hoskins Chevrolet and Celozzi-Ettleson
Chevrolet. Hoskins Chevrolet quoted the Caprice package at
$18,625.45. Only Cellozi-Ettleson was able to match availability
with the State bid price of $15,032.76. The dealer has immediate
access to these vehicles and can provide delivery as soon as
authorization is made.
Funds are available in Account No. 48-077-93-8445. The cost of
this vehicle represents a greater amount than appears in the 92/93
Budget. This is based on the cost of vehicles increasing greater
than projected.
As you are aware, vehicles used by the Fire Department are passed
down from Chiefs to the Fire Prevention Bureau. The car being
replaced is a Fire Prevention Bureau 1985 Chevrolet Impala. The
vehicle has 70,384 miles and has been experiencing numerous
mechanical problems during the past year.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact
me or my staff.
Edward M. Cavello
Fire Chief
EMC/mah
Mount Prospect Public Works Department
'dryINTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Village Manager
FROM: Director of Public Works
DATE: June 19, 1992
SUBJ: Soils and Materials Testing
Public Safety Building
Last fall prior to construction starting on the Police & Fire
Headquarters building, the consulting engineer sought quotes
from soil and material testing firms for the new building. At
their recommendation a separate contract/agreement was entered
into with Trow Mirza for this service.
The original proposal was on a per them basis with the estimated
Cost Of $11,000. During the ensuing months our consulting engi-
neers SEC Donohue felt that additional soil/material testing
services were required which were not anticipated in the origi-
nal proposal. There were layers of unsuitable soils that had to
be tested and retested to assure proper Compaction. Because of
the underground garage and basement our architect/engineer felt
that extra tests were warranted so that the village would re-
ceive a quality product. Bac'kfill around the foundation has
always been a problem which has required additional testing so
that we could be confident that the settlage would be very minor
and within specifications.
Our billings of January, February and March from Trow Mirza, were
$6193.50. For the months of April, May and June I have addition-
al billings amounting to $11,614.80. On our original purchase
order we estimated $11,000.00. 'This estimate will now have to
be raised to a minimum of $21,000.00 as there will be additional
testing services required before all the underground and con-
crete work is completed. Your concurrence is requested on this
matter.
Herbert L. Weeks
RLW/eh
CC: Dave Jepson
SOILTEST/FILES/BUILDING
///I\SECDNHn
Environment & Infrastructure
May 22, 1992
Mr. Herbert L Weeks
Village of Mount Prospect
Department of Public Works
1700 W. Central Road
Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
Dear Mr. Weeks:
Attached please find invoices for Testing Services performed by Trow Mirza on the Mount
Prospect Public Safety Building for the months of April and May. We have reviewed the
figures with the testing reports received, and are recommending approval for payment.
Please process these invoices thru your normal channels.
Also attached is an explanation of additional services required as a result of the wet
weather conditions in Maxch and April and also the unsuitable soils encountered during
excavation.
It has become apparent that the scope of the testing services required on this project is
significantly greater than originally anticipated. The reasons are outlined in the attached
correspondence from Trow Mirza. Please note that their original proposal was on a per
them basis with an estimated, not maximum, cost of s11,000.00.
We will work with Trow Mirza and A. J. Maggio to streamline the process wherever
possible, but these testing services are absolutely required to insure the'structaral integrity
of the facility.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at any time.
Very truly yours,
SEC DONOHUE INC.
Paul Schulte
PS:dk
cc: Naras Statkus
Bill Mirza
JUN 2 2199
1501 Woodfield Road - Suite 200 East - Schaumburg, Illinois 60173 - (708) 605-8800 - Fax: (708) 605-8914 10
T/L/Miq
7221 W. Touhv Avenue
Chicago, 111inciis 60648
Phone: (3121775-5353
Trow Mirza Consulting Engineers Fax: (3121 775-5955
May 26, 1992
Mr. Paul Schulte
Donohue and Associates, Inc.
Suite 200E
1501 East Woodfield Road
Schaumburg, Illinois 60173
Dear Mr. Schulte:
Re: Public Safety Facility
Mount Prospect, --llinois
Job No TM161
R TEO CEAV I ED
0*7
MAY 2 9 19Q&
DONOHUE & ASSOCIAT'ES
Enginot's, A"Chiteds & selwr=%
S.h.-ixrg, IL
As previously discussed with Mr. William Mirza, the original
estimated budget for inspection and testing services at the
Village of Mount Prospect's new Public Safety Facility Lnas been
exceeded.
As of the period ending may 2, 1992, a total amount of
$13,365.40 has been invoiced, versus the estimated budget of
$11,000; resulting in an excess of $2,365.40. Primary factors
contributing to the cost of these services greater than initially
estimated can be attributed to:
a) Excess time required for inspection of foundation
excavations and the need for undercutting due to marginal to
poor soil conditions within the southeast area of the site,
b) Excess time required to test relatively deep foundation wall
backfill (and undercuts) placed and compacted in individual
lifts,
c) Relatively numerous but small concrete pours, and
d) More "full-time" services required due to the above factors,
versus "part-time" services originally thought necessary.
Remaining work requiring inspection and testing services
consists primarily of completion of all backfill to grade,
concrete, masonry mortar, and structural steel.
Page TWO
May 26,'1992
Mr. Paul Schulte
S4001
=IM
Trow Mira
Assuming that this work will be completed by no later than
June 26, 1992, and that no overtime will be required, we have
estimated that an additional $10,000 should be sufficient to
cover the cost of inspection and testing services subsequent to
May 3, 1992. This amount also includes the $2,365.40 over -budget
cost previously billed.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if there are any
questions in regard to this matter.
Very truly yours,
Trow Mirza
WDL/rb\161-526.B
7221 W. TouhW Avenue
Chicago, Illinois 60648
Phone: (312) 775-5353
Trow Mirza ConSulting Engineers Fax: (312) 775-5955
April 10, 1992 Re: Public Safety Facility
Mount Prospect, r-Ilinois
Job No TM161
Mr. Naras Statkus
Donohue and Associates, Inc.
Suite 200E
1501 East Woodfield Drive
Schaumburg, Illinois 60173
Dear Mr. Statkus:
Enclosed is our invoice for the Mount Prospect Public
Safety Facility for the month of April, 1992.
Please review and forward to the Village for payment:.
Very truly yours,
Trow Mirza
William Mirz��
WM/rb
Encl.
7221 W. Touhy Avenue
SAOOO Chicago, Illinois 60648
Phone: (312) 775-5353
JrZa Consulting Engineers Fax: (312) 775-5955
Trow M"
cH^pGssTo PROJECT
Mt, Prospect Public Works Dept.Public Safety Facility
l7OU West Central Road Mount Prospect, Illinois
mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
�
Attn: mc. Herbert L. Weeks
�
Director of Public works
In_ No 172
D^rs. April IO, 1992 TERMS: NET CASH
ITEM
%>
3)
4>
oDESCRIPTIONw
Field Technician
overtime
Windsor Probe Tests <3 shots)
CLIENT'S ORDER wO
Concrete Cylinder Tests
(Reports No 7 tbro 16)
Concrete Cylinder Pick-ups
Grain Size Analysis
Modified Proctor Density (6" Mold)
MatIls Engineer
Principal
Direct ExDenses
Nuclear Density Meter
R/T Travel Expense
This invoice covers the period of in-
spection and testing between March I
and April 4, 1992, covered in Daily
Inspection Reports No 31 tbru 42.
OUANTITY
76
21
9
l
l
4
I
JOB NO. TM161-4
UNIT COST
*35.UU/br
35.00/hr
190.00/set
5.50 ea
20.00 ea
50.00 ea
I]0.0O ea
4V.UO/br
85.00/hr
Total Due =
IOO,OC
50.0c
130. OC
160.00
85.00
|
160.00
� 67.2C
$3"O72.7V
7221 W. Touhy Avenue
"S100 Chicago, Illinois 60648
Phone: (312) 775-5353
11 Phone: Consulting Engineers Fax: (312) 775-5955
May 8, 1992
Mr. Naras Statkus
Donohue and Associates, Inc.
Suite 200E
1501 East Woodfield Drive
Schaumburg, Illinois 60173
Dear Mr. Statkus:
Re: Public Safety Facility
Mount Prospect, Illinois
Job No TM161
Enclosed is our invoice for the Mount Prospect Public
Safety,Facility for the month of May, 1992.
Please review for approval and forward to the Village for
payment.
Very truly yours,
Trow Mirza
William MirzaQ"-",'
WM/rb/161-5.b RECEIVED
Encl.
MAY 11 1992
DONOHUE & ASSOCIATES
Enginwz, Architeds & ScieMiSIS
kh"nburg, L
7221 W. Touhy Avenue
Chicago, Illinois 60648
Phone: (312) 7755353
Trow Map Consulting Engineers Fax: (312) 7755955
CHARGES TO PROJECT
Mt Prospect Public Works Dept. Public Safety Facility
1760 West Central Road Mount Prospect, Illinois
Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
Attn: Mr. Herbert L. weeks
Director of Public Works
Inv. No. 181
DATE: May 8, 1992 TERMS: NET CASH CLIENT'S ORDER NO, JOB NO, TM161-5
ITEM
1 )
2)
3),
4)
DESCRIPTION
Field Engineering services
Field Technician
Overtime
Labgratory Testing
Concrete Cylinder Tests
(Reports No 17 thru 20)
Concrete Cylinder Pick-ups
Grain Size Analysis
Modified Proctor Density (6m Hold)
Mat'ls Engineer
Direct Exoenses
Nuclear Density Meter
R/T Travel Expense
This invoice covers the period of in-
spection and testing between April 5
and may 2, 1992, covered in Daily
Inspection Reports No 43 thru 59.
QUANTITY
UNIT COST
AMOUNT
115
$25. 00/hr
$2,875.0(
8
35.00/hr
280.0(
8
5.50 ea
44.0(
4
20.00 ea
80.0(
1
50.00 ea
50.0(
1
130.00 ea
130.0(
3 1 40.00/hr 1 120.0(
85
272
5. 00/hr
0.35/mi
Total Due =
425.0(
95.2(
$4,099.2C
7221 W. Touhy Avenue
S1000 Chicago, Illinois 60648
MW Phone: (312? 775-5353
Trow Mirza Consulting Engineers Fax: (312) 775-5955
June 5, 1992
Mr. Naras Statkus
Donohue and Associates, Inc.
Suite 200E
1501 East Woodfield Drive
Schaumburg, Illinois 60173
Dear Mr. Statkus:
Re: Public Safety Facility
Mount Prospect, Illinois
Job No TMI61
Enclosed is our invoice for the Mount Prospect Public
Safety Facility for the month of June, 1992.
Please review for approval and forward to the Village for
payment. -
Very truly yours,
Trow Mirza
William Mirza QZ
0
WM/rb/161-6.b
Encl.
. .... . .... . .......... . ...w......._..
7221 W. Touhy Avenue
S100 Chicago, Illinois 60648
Phone: (312) 775-5353
Trow Mirza Consulting Engineers Fax: (312) 775-5955
..........
CHARGESTO PROJECT
Mt. Prospect Public works Dept. Public safety Facility
1700 West Central Road Mount Prospect, Illinois
Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
Attn: Mr. Herbert L. weeks
Director of Public Works
Inv. No. 190
DATE, June 5, 1992 TERMS: NET CASH CLIENT'S ORDER NO, JOB NO. TM161-6
ITEM
I )
2)
3)
4)
DESCRIPTION
Field gng qqjj0q__gqLyiceg
Field Technician
Overtime
Materials Engineer
Laboratory Testing
Concrete Cylinder Tests
(Reports No 21 thru 25)
Mortar Cylinder Tests
(Report No 1)
Concrete & Mortar Cylinder Pick-ups
Mat"Is Engineer
Principal
Direct Expenses
Nuclear Density Meter
R/T Travel Expense
0 - I -
•` 0 1 1 0
QUANTITY
UNIT COST
132
$25.00/hr
2.5
35. 00/hr
2
40. 00/hr
10 5.50 ea
3 5.50 ea
5 20.00 ea
1.5
1.5
102
304
40.00/hr
85.00/hr
5.00/hr
0.35/mile
Total Due =
AMOUNT
$3,300.00
87.50
80.00
55.00
16.50
100.00
60.00
127.50
510.00
106.40
$4,442.90
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Village Manger W—
FROM: David M. Clements, Director of Planning
DATE: July 1, 1992
SUBJECT. Field Change - KitchenCraft
The owners of Rogers Corporate Park have requested a field change in order to allow
KitchenCraft to offer limited retailing at 1056 Elmhurst Road. KitchenCraft is a distributor
of kitchen fixtures, and would like to offer retail sales in 1,100 square feet of their 1,200
square feet facility.
The request meets all standards for limited retailing in the industrial park:
1. The retailing is no more than 10% of the total floor area.
2. The retailing has been approved by the property owner.
3. No new signs are proposed.
In order to allow this retailing, a field change must be approved by the Village Board. Staff
recommends approval, as this request meets all the standards of the PUD.
DMC:cl
Arthur). Rogers & Co.
Realtors - Sales - Management - Leasing - Construction
June 9, 1992
Mr. Dave Clemitz
Director of Planning and Zoning
Mount Prospect Planning and Zoning
100 S. Emerson Street
Mount Prospect, IL 60056
Dear Dave:
Re: ROGERS CORPORATE PARK
KitchenCraft
1856-58 Elmhurst Road
JUN i's 191,
KitchenCraft is an existing tenant, who has would like to do
retail sales out of their space. They are distributors of
cabinets. They were operating out of 1864 Elmhurst (the end
of this same building) for about 9 months. They have now
leased 1856 and 1868 with the intention of starting to do
some retail sales on certain days.
The area of the showroom is approximately 1,100 square feet,
with the total leased space at approximately 12,000. They
handle sales, warehousing, distribution and assembly of
cabinets.
A layout is attached with the showroom highlighted. Please
let me know if you need any other information. I hope this
meets with your approval. If you have any questions, please
do not hesitate to call. Thank you for your continued
cooperation.
sincerely,
Kathi Rogers
Vice President
M
LO
REALTOR* 3170 Des Plaines Ave. (River Road at Devon) - Des Plaines, IL 60018-4211 - (708) 297-2200 * FAX (708) 699-9048
Phone: 70e / 392-6000
Fax: 706 / 392-6022
June 19, 1992
Ms, Kathi Rogers
Arthur J. Rogers and Company
3170 Des Plaines Avenue
Des Plaines, Illinois 600184211
Dear Ms. Rogers:
In regards to your inquiry of the possible addition of retail sales at KitchenCraft, I
have researched the approved Planned Unit Development for Rogers Corporate Park.
There are four criteria which need to be met in order to allow retail uses.
1. Retailing shall be limited to no more than 10% of the total floor area of an 1-1 use.
2. Limited retailing shall be approved in writing by the property owner and property
manager.
3. No additional signs shall be'allowed for retail uses.
4. Limited retailing shall only be allowed with field change approval by the Village
Manager and concurrence by the Village Board.
Items 1-3 have been satisfied and Item 4 will be scheduled before the Village Board
at their regular meeting on July 7, 1992. Please plan to attend this meeting in case the
Board members have any questions.
Please contact me should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Ray P. Forsythe,
Planner
RPF:hg
GERALD L FAR LEY
MARK W BUSSE
GEORGE A, CLOWES
TIMOTHY J. CORCORAN
LED FLOWS
PAUL WM, HOEFERT
AVANA K. WILKS
Village of Mount Prospect
VILLA" MANAGMA
JOHN FULTON DIXON
VILLAGETAK
CAROL A FIELDS
100 S. Emerson Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
Phone: 70e / 392-6000
Fax: 706 / 392-6022
June 19, 1992
Ms, Kathi Rogers
Arthur J. Rogers and Company
3170 Des Plaines Avenue
Des Plaines, Illinois 600184211
Dear Ms. Rogers:
In regards to your inquiry of the possible addition of retail sales at KitchenCraft, I
have researched the approved Planned Unit Development for Rogers Corporate Park.
There are four criteria which need to be met in order to allow retail uses.
1. Retailing shall be limited to no more than 10% of the total floor area of an 1-1 use.
2. Limited retailing shall be approved in writing by the property owner and property
manager.
3. No additional signs shall be'allowed for retail uses.
4. Limited retailing shall only be allowed with field change approval by the Village
Manager and concurrence by the Village Board.
Items 1-3 have been satisfied and Item 4 will be scheduled before the Village Board
at their regular meeting on July 7, 1992. Please plan to attend this meeting in case the
Board members have any questions.
Please contact me should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Ray P. Forsythe,
Planner
RPF:hg