HomeMy WebLinkAbout4522_001VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE
Next Ordinance No. 4449
Next Resolution No. 23-92
ALL
A G E D A
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
0 R D E R 0 7 B U 8 1 N E 8 S
REGULAR MEETING
Meeting Location:
Meeting Room, 1st Floor
Senior citizen center
SO South Emerson Street
Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056
I. CALL TO ORDER
11. ROLL CALL
Meeting Date and Time:
Tuesday
July 21, 1992
7:30 P. M.
Mayor Gerald @$Skip$$ Parley
Trustee mark Busse Trustee Leo Ploros
Trustee George Cloves Trustee Paul Hoefert
Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Irvana Wilke
111. INVOCATION - Trustee Corcoran
IV. APPROVE MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, July 7, 1992
V. APPROVAL OF BILLS AND FINANCIAL REPORT
V1. COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS - CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
A. PRESENTATION: Annual July 4th Parade Trophy to
Fairview School Scout Pack 151
VII. MAYOR'S REPORT
A. 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13
OF THE VILLAGE CODE
This Ordinance increases the number of Class 11R11
liquor licenses to include Wonderful Restaurant,
1839 W. Algonquin Road.
B. Request of the new owners of Pete's Sandwich
Palace, 712 East Northwest Highway, to
continue doing business under the existing
Class 11W11 liquor license.
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
A. ZBA 28 -SU -92, 1500 South Elmhurst Road
2nd 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. Two Ordinances are presented for
consideration, Exhibit B-1 requires screening and
Exhibit B-2 waives the screening requirement.
(Exhibit A)
(Exhibit B)
B. ZBA 32-V-92, 1000 East Central Road
2nd 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 C)
C. ZBA 35 -SU -92, Randhurst Shopping Center
2nd 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 7,540 square feet.
The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended
granting this request by a vote of 6-0. (Exhibit D)
D. ZBA 26-A-92, Text Amendment
2nd 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 E)
E. ZBA 37-V-92, 430 Lakeview Court
1st reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A
VARIATION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN
THE KENSINGTON CENTER SUBDIVISION NO. 29
This Ordinance grants 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. (Exhibit F)
F. ZBA 39 -SU -92, Randhurst Shopping Center
1st reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A
SPECIAL USE TO ALLOW A GAME ROOM WITHIN
THE RANDHURST SHOPPING CENTER
This Ordinance grants a Special Use to
allow a Game Room/Party Zone. The Zoning
Board of Appeals recommended granting this
request by a vote of 6-1. `(Exhibit G)
G. 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.
H. 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 H)
IX. NEW BUSINESS
A. 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.
B. Request to grant a modification to allow
a 321 wide driveway apron in the parking
at property located at 1110 West Central
Road. The Plan Commission recommended
granting this request by a vote of 7-0.
C. ZBA 38 -V -r92, 13 South Maple Street
The Petitioner requested a variation to
permit a 61 high fence. The Zoning Board
of Appeals, which is final in this instance,
voted 4-3 to grant the request. As provided
in the Code, an appeal from the decision of
the Zoning Board of Appeals has been filed
which is forwarded to the Village Board for
final determination.
X. VILLAGE MANAGERIS REPORT
A. Bid results:
1. Bittersweet Lane Reconstruction
B. Can Dota Storm Sewer Improvement
1. Request to amend contract with National Sewer
and Water, Inc. to increase the contract by
an additional amount not to exceed $47,000
for the replacement of water service lines
in conjunction with the Can Dota storm
sewer improvement.
2. Request to amend contract with SEC Donohue
to increase the contract by an additional
amount not to exceed $2,000 for inspection
services of the installation of water service
lines in conjunction with the Can Dota storm
sewer improvement.
C. Request to re -authorize purchase of staff
vehicle for the Fire Department, previously
approved and the July 7th meeting of the
Village Board.
D. Status Report
XI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
XII- EXECUTIVE SESSION - Land Acquisition & Litigation
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
11
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
JULY 7, 1992
CALL TO ORDER CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Farley called the meeting to order at 8:00 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present upon roll call: Mayor Gerald Farley
Trustee Mark Busse
Trustee George Clowes
Trustee Leo Floros
Trustee Paul Hoefert
Trustee Irvana Wilks
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Trustee Wilks. INVOCATION
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, APPROVE
moved to approve the minutes of the regular MINUTES"
meeting of the Mayor and Board of Trustees
held June 16, 1992.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert
Nays: None
Pass: Busse
Present: Wilks
Motion carried.
APPROVAL OF BILLS
Trustee Floros, seconded by Trustee Busse, APPROVE
moved to approve the following list of bills: BILLS
General Fund
$ 631,738
Refusal Disposal Fund
209,558
Motor Fuel Tax Fund
241,828
Community Development Block Grant Fund
17,817
Illinois Municipal Retirement
Fund
82,002
Water & Sewer Fund
123,587
Parking System Revenue Fund
1,684
Risk Management Fund
126,129
Vehicle Replacement Fund
10,898
Motor Equipment Pool Fund
-
Capital Improvement, Repl. or
Rep.
27,358
Downtown Redev. Const. Fund
7,765
Fire & Police Building Const.
3,260
Flood Control Revenue Fund
46,463
Corporate Purpose Improvement
1990
-
Debt Service Funds
139,026
Flexcomp Trust Fund
-
Escrow Deposit Fund
28,337
Police Pension Fund
41,472
Firemen's Pension Fund
50,685
Benefit Trust Fund
$1,789,607
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse,
Clowes, Corcoran,
-. Floros,
Hoefert,
Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Trustee Floros, seconded by Trustee Corcoran, moved FINANCIAL
to accept the financial report for the period REPORT
May 1, 1992 through May 31, 1992, subject to audit.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITION'S, CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
COMPLIMENTS Patrick Breen, 212 North Prospect Manor, complimented
the Village, especially the Public Works Department,
on the fine clean up job .performed following the
recent severe storms. It was noted that many trees
and/or branches were down because of the high winds
and •the Public; Works Department picked up all the
debris.
Mr. Breen complimented the 75th Anniversary Committee`
on the many activities being held throughout the year
and all those involved with the duly 4th parade.
MAYOR'S REPORT'
NTN SIGN Mayor Farley asked the Board to consider a proposed
resolution to the problem�of the NTN sign located on
the berm along Kensington Road. It,was 'noted that a
field change was requested to allow this sign, which
exceeds the overall size permitted. The request for
a field change was denied by the Village Board.
Mayor Farley stated that representatives of NTN have
proposed a solution to this dispute which provides for
the existing sign be reduced from the 12 foot height
to 7.8 feet and the brick base will be constructed to
match the building.
Members of the Board stated that they could approve
the proposal provided that ifNTNwere to vacate the
building, it would be understood that this sign would
have to be removed. Representatives of NTN stated
that the company expects to be doing business in Mount
Prospect for many years, however, they would agree to
the stipulation that the sign be removed if and when
NTN vacates the building.
Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Clowes, moved to
accept the settlement of the dispute between the
Village and NTN relative to the sign in the rear of
the property, along Kensington Road, •and approve the
7.8 height with a brick base constructed to match the
brick of the building.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
CLASS "R" A request was presented to authorize a Class°R""'
LIQUOR liquor for a new restaurant, known as Wonderful
LICENSE: Restaurant to be located at 1839 West Algonquin Road.
WONDERFUL
RESTAURANT, There was discussion as to the requirements of issuing
1839 ALGONQUIN liquor license relative to citizenship and hours. If
the Village Board gives preliminary approval for an
Ordinance to be drafted increasing the number of Class
"R'" liquor licenses, additional information will be
provided to the Board relative to the questions
raised.
Trustee Busse, seconded;; by Trustee Floros, moved to
authorize an •Ordinance to be drafted creating one
Page 2 - July 7, 1992
additional Class 11R11 liquor license for the
Wonderful Restaurant, 1839 West Algonquin Road.
Upon,roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Hays: None
Motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS
An Ordinance was presented for first reading that
would amend Ordinance No. 4388 relative to the
AMEND ORD 4388
SIGN REVIEW
membership on the Sign Review Board. This Ordinance
CH. 5
incorporates the requirement that at no time will
the Sign Review Board consist of less than 5
residents of the Village.
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved
to waive the rule requiring two readings of an
Ordinance.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Ho6fert, Wilks
Hays: None
Motion carried.
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Hoefert,
ORD -NO. 4444
moved for passage of Ordinance No. 4444
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 PROSPECT"
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Hays: None
Motion carried.
ZBA 28 -SU -92, 1500 S. Elmhurst Road
An Ordinance was presented for first reading
that would grant 4 Special Use o. the
installation of a tOOf-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.
Members Of the Village Board had questions
relative to the stability of the proposed
antenna, since it would not be anchored to the
�roof. David Clements, Director of Planning,
stated that the proposed satellite antenna
would 'meet the requirements of the Village.
It was also noted that screening would cost
approximately
The Petitioner has asked that the screening
of the satellite antenna not be required since
the building is not within close proximity to
residential properties.
This Ordinance will be presented July 21st for
second reading.
Page 3 - July 7, 1992
ZBA 28 -SU -92
1500 S.ELMHURST 13
ZBA 31-V-92
ZBA 31-V-92, 202 South See Gwun
202 SEE GWUN
An ordinance was presented for first reading t h a t
would grant a variation to allow a five foot side yard
setback, rather than the required 7.15 feet, in order
to construct a concrete patio. The Zoning Board of
Appeals recommended denying the original request for
a zero foot setback by a vote of 2-4.`
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Clowes, moved to
waive the rule requiring two readings of an ordinance.
Upon roll 'call. Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert,Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ORD.NO. 4445
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by 'Trustee Clowes, moved
for passage of Ordinance No. 4445
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION FOR
PROPERTY KNOWN AS 202 SOUTH SEE GWUN
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ZBA 32 -SU -92
ZBA 32 -SU -92, 1000 East Central Road
1000 E.CENTRAL
An ordinance was presented for first reading that
would grant a'Specal Use to allow a wall -mounted
satellite dish. The Zoning Board of Appeals
recommended approval of a roof -mounted, rather than
wall -mounted, satellite antenna by a vote of 5-1.
It was noted that the satellite antenna was mounted on
the wall without benefit of a permit. It was
suggested that the proposed Ordinance be amended to
include a provision that would allow the petitioner 60
days to remove the antenna from the wall and mount it
on the roof.
This Ordinance, as amended, will be presented for
second reading on July 21st.
ZBA 34-V-92
ZBA 34-V-92, 302 South Lancaster
302 S.LANCASTER
An Ordinance was presented for first reading that
would grant 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 Busse,' seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved to
waive the rule' requiring' two readings of an 'Ordinance.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran, Floros,
Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried,
Page 4•- July 7 1992
Trustee Busse, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved ORD.NO. 4446
for passage of Ordinance No. 4446.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION FOR
PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 302 S. LANCASTER
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ZBA 35 -SU -92, Randhurst Shopping Center ZBA 35 -SU -92
An Ordinance was presented for first reading that RANDBURST
would amend the existing Planned Unit Development SHOPPING CENTER
to allow expansion of an approved 5,000 square
foot restaurant to 7,540 square feet. The zoning
Board of Appeals recommended granting this Special
Use by a vote of 6-0.
The Petitioner explained that of the 7,540 square
feet proposed, 6,000 square feet will be under
roof and 1,400 square feet will be a veranda for
outdoor dining when the weather permits. The
Petitioner will be requesting a Class "W" liquor
license, if this request is granted. No alcoholic
beverages will be served without the customer
purchasing food.
Trustee Floros expressed his opposition to the
request based on the proposed use by Hooters
Restaurant. Others Trustees asked additional
questions relative to Hooters Restaurant which
will be answered prior to the second reading
of this Ordinance at the July 21st meeting of
the Village Board.
ZBA 26-A-92, Text Amendment
An Ordinance was presented for first reading
that would amend the text of Chapter 14 (Zoning)
to allow commercial vehicles over 8,000 lbs.
to park in residential garages as a Special Use.
The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended granting
this,request by a vote of 5-1.
Members of the Village Board expressed concern
that under the proposal, garage doors would exceed
the average height. It was proposed that a 9 foot
height limitation be included with the proposed
text amendment, however, the overall height of the
garage would not be changed.
Mr. Schwartz, who has commercial vehicles that
are presently parked in the driveway of his
single family home, stated that the process of
amending the parking requirements was due to his
vehicles and that if a 9 foot height limitation
were to be imposed, he could not park his
vehicles in the garage since he would need a
10 foot garage door height.
Additional information will be provided to the
Board members on this matter in time for the
second reading of this Ordinance on July 21st.
Page 5 - July 7, 1992
ZBA 26-A-92
TEXT
AMENDMENT:
COMMERCIAL
VEHICLES IN
RESIDENTIAL
GARAGES
NEW BUSINESS
SIGN REVIEW CASE Sign Review Board Case No. 24-92
NO. 24-92 The Petitioner, Charlie Club, is requesting
CHARLIE CLUB a text amendment to the Sign Ordinance to create a
Special Use category which would permit off -premise
signs. The Sign Review Board recommended denying this
request by a vote of 4-1.
At the request of the attorney for the Petitioner,
this case is continued to the July 21st meeting of the
Village Board.
ZBA 37-V-92- ZBA 37-V-92, 430 Lakeview Court
430 LAKEVIEW CT The Petitioner is requesting a' variation to allow a
lot size of approximately 3.`16 acres,' rather than the
required4 acres. The 'Zoning Board of Apipeals
recommended granting this request by a vote of 7-0.
It was noted that the Plan Commission had reviewed the
proposed subdivision and had recommended approval.
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Wilks, moved to
concur with the recommendation of the Zoning Board of
Appeals and grant the variation requested in ZBA 37-V-
92.
Upon 'roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floras, Wilks
Nays: None
Abstain: Hoefert
Motion' carried',
An Ordinance will be presented for first reading at the
next meeting of the Village Board on July 21st.
ZBA 39 -SU -92 ZBA 39 -SU -92, Randhurst Shopping Center
RANDHURST: The Petitioner is requesting a Special Use to allow a
EDISON BROTHERS Game Room within the Randhurst Shopping Center. The
PARTY ZONE Zoning' Board of Appeals' recommended" granting this
request by a vote of 6-1.
The attorney for the Petitioner explained that the
proposed use for this space in Randhurst would be a
"Party Zone" including a game room, party area for all
age groups and would include a 2 story play area. The
"Party Zone" would be supervised at all times.
Trustee Wilks, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved to
concur with the recommendation of the Zoning Board of
Appeals and grant the Special Use requested in ZBA 39 -
SU -92.
Upon roll call:' Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays': None
Motion carried."
ZBA 40-V-92 ZBA 40-V-92, 1001 East Cardinal Lane
1001 CARDINAL IN The Petitioner is requesting variations to allow an
existing structure with the following variations: to
allow a zero foot'sdeyard setback,` instead of the
Page 6 - July 7, 1992
required 5 feet; to allow a driveway with a maximum
ELIZABETH
width of 34 feet, instead of 24 feet. The Zoning
KORN
Board of Appeals recommended denying these requests.
Due to the fact that the Petitioner was not in
attendance at the meeting to answer questions,
consideration of this case was continued to July 21st.
A request was presented for a modification from the
MODIFICATION
Development Code (Chapter 16) to allow a 32 feet
FROM
wide driveway apron for property located at
DEVELOPMENT
1110 West Central Road. The Plan Commission
CODE:
recommended granting this request by a vote
1110 W.CENTRAL
of 7-0.
Due to the fact that the Petitioner was not in
attendance at the meeting, this request was
continued to the July 21st meeting of the Village
Board.
Elizabeth Korn Plat of Subdivision
ELIZABETH
The property being the subject of the subdivision
KORN
is located on Kensington Road in unincorporated
Cook County, however, State Statutes require approval
of any municipality within 1-1/2 miles of property
being subdivided. The proposed subdivision will
divide 3 single family lots into 4 lots of record.
The Plan Commission considered this subdivision and
recommended approval.
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Wilks, moved
to authorize the Mayor to sign and Clerk to attest
his signature on the Elizabeth Korn Plat of
Subdivision.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Cloves, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
An Ordinance was presented for first reading that
AMEND CH. 4
would amend Article VIII (Police Department) of
Chapter 4 to bring local regulations governing
the position of Community Service officer (CSO)
into conformance with State Statutes.
Trustee Wilks, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved
to waive the rule requiring two readings of an
Ordinance.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Cloves, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Trustee Wilks, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved
ORD.NO. 4447
for passage of Ordinance No. 4447
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE VIII OF
CHAPTER 4 OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Cloves, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Page 7 - July 7, 1992
IRS/IMRF
A Resolution was presented that would ratify the
EARNINGS policy of the Village that
includes deferred compensation in
the annual earnings of an
employee for Illinois Municipal
Retirement Fund (IMRF) benefits.
RES.NO. 21-92
Trustee Floros, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved for
passage of Resolution No. 21-92
A RESOLUTION TO INCLUDE COMPENSATION PAID
UNDER AN INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 125
PLAN AS ILLINOIS MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT FUND
EARNINGS
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
DESIGNATED
An Ordinance was presented for first reading that would
REPRESENTATIVE
designate Michael E. Janonis, village Manager, as
JAWA:
representative for the Village of Mount Prospect to
MICHAEL JANONIS
the Joint Action Water Agency.
Trustee Clowes, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved to
waive the rule requiring two readings of an Ordinance.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ORD.NO. 4448
Trustee Clowes, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved for
passage of Ordinance No. 4448
AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING MICHAEL E. JANONIS
AS REPRESENTATIVE TO THE JOINT ACTION
WATER AGENCY FOR THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Fl6ros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
ADVOCACY
A Resolution was presented that would authorize an
PROGRAM:
agreement between the Village and the Prairie Girl
BOXWOOD
Scout Council to,provide various summer programs for
young people in the Boxwood area.
RES.NO.22-92
Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Corcoran, moved
for passage of Resolution No. 22-92
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
AND ILLINOIS PRAIRIE GIRL SCOUT COUNCIL
BOXWOOD ADVOCACY PROGRAM
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Notion carried.
Page 8 -`July 7, 1992
A Resolution was presented that would authorize an
SUBURBAN
agreement for primary health care for residents unable
HEALTH
to obtain health insurance.
CARE
Trustee Clowes asked questions about this program,
such as what the income limit was for those
qualifying for these benefits.
In order to provide the answers to questions, this
item was continued to the July 21st meeting of the
Village Board.
A recommendation was presented from the Village
ACCEPT PUBLIC
Engineer to accept the street lights installed
IMPROVEMENTS:
on Wolf Road in conjunction with the Kylemore.
KYLEMORE '
Subdivision. It was noted that while this
SUBDIVISION
subdivision is located in Des Plaines, the
Village of Mount Prospect has jurisdiction
over Wolf Road therefore the public improvements
are dedicated to Mount Prospect.
Trustee Wilks, seconded by Trustee Clowes, moved
to accept the public improvements installed in
conjunction with the development of Kylemore
Subdivision east of Wolf Road.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
An Ordinance was presented for first reading
COOK COUNTY
that would implement an indemnification
HIGHWAYS:
and hold harmless agreement between the Village
HOLD HARMLESS
and the Cook County Highway Department. This
agreement will eliminate the need to obtain a
surety bond formerly required whenever the
Village performed any project on Cook County
highways.
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee clowes,,
moved to waive the rule requiring two readings
of an Ordinance.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Clowes,
ORD.NO. 4449
moved for passage of Ordinance NO. 4449
AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING AN
INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT WITH THE
COUNTY OF COOK IN LIEU OF INSURANCE
AND SURETY BOND REQUIREMENTS
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Page 9 - July 7, 1992
WATER MAIN:
COOK COUNTY
BUS COMPANY
DOWN UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
PURCHASE
VEHICLE
VILLAGE KANAGERIS REPORT
Village Manager Michael E. Janonis presented the
the following bids for the Cook County Bus
company water main:
Bidder Amount
Down Under Construction $ 10,885.60
Suburban Construction 12,785.00
Bari construction 16,000.00
Vian Construction 18,682.00
Mancini Construction 26,230.00
Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Cloves, moved to
concur with the recommendation of the administration
and accept the low qualified bid submitted by Down
Under Construction from St. Charles, Illinois, the
amount of $10,885.60 for the water main project behind
the Cook County Bus Company.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Cloves, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
A request was presented to authorize the purchase of
a vehicle, to be used by the Fire Department staff.
Proposals were obtained from various automobile
dealers and it is the recommendation of the
administration that the bidding procedure be waived
and the vehicle be purchased through the state
purchase program, which is the best price.
It was noted that this vehicle will be driven by the
Fire Chief with the existing vehicles handed down to
other members of the Department. A 1985 Impala with
high mileage and maintenance costs will be put up for
auction.
Members of the Board questioned the need to purchase
this type of vehicle, noting that a aid -size vehicle
could be purchased for the Fire Prevention Bureau,
rather than the existing policy of purchasing this
type of vehicle and passing the existing vehicles down
to the Deputy Chief, staff and Fire Prevention Bureau.
Trustee Cloves, seconded by Trustee Wilks, moved to
concur with the recommendation of the administration
and waive the bidding procedure relative to the
purchase of a vehicle.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Cloves, Floros,
Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: Corcoran
Motion carried.
Trustee Cloves, seconded by Trustee Wilks, moved to
authorize the purchase of a Caprice in the amount Of
$15,032.76 from Cell Oz4-EttlQsOn tMevrO.Ler-, wUJ-f.;"- S
the state bid price.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Cloves, Floros,
noexery-, Wilks
Nays: Corcoran
Motion carried.
Page 10 - July 7, 1992
A request was presented to authorize an amendment
SOIL TESTING
to the contract with Trow Mirza for the soil and
POLICE & FIRE
materials testing at the site of the new Police &
BUILDING
Fire Headquarters Building under construction. It
was noted that several problems exist with the soil
affecting the construction and these tests exceed
the previously approved amount of approximately
$11,000-00. It was reported that the amount for
this work will amount to $21,000.00
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved
TROW MIRZA
to amend the contract with Trow Mirza for the soil
POLICE &
testing at the construction site for the Police &
FIRE BLDG.
Fire Headquarters Building by increasing the total
amount from $11,000-00 to $21,000.00.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carriedi
Trustee Hoefert, seconded by Trustee Wilks, moved
to authorize payment in the amount of $21,000.00
to Trow Mirza for work performed in soil and
materials testing for the Police & Fire Headquarters
Building construction.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
A request for a field change was presented
FIELD CHANGE
from the Rogers Corporate Park to allow
ROGERS PARK
limited retail sales for KitchenCraft, which is.
KITCHENCRAFT
located within the corporate park at 1056
South Elmhurst Road.
Trustee Wilks, seconded by Trustee Corcoran, moved
to grant a field change for the Rogers Corporate
Park to allow limited retail sales for KitchenCraft.
Upon roll call: Ayes:, Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Village Manager Janonis asked that the Village Board STORM
consider an item not listed on the agenda, CLEAN UP
specifically a review of the costs incurred due to COSTS
the two recent severe wind and rain storms.
Trustee Wilks, seconded by Trustee Hoefert, moved
to consider an item not listed on the agenda.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: None
Motion carried.
Page 11 - July 1, 1992
Mr. Janonis stated that downed trees and/or branches
were picked up by both Village owned and rented
equipment.. Approximately 95 trees were blown down and
the costs involved with the clean up will total
approximately $105,785.0.0. Due to the fact that this
emergency action was :not included in the budget, Mr.
Janonis stated the he would advise the Village Board
what fund would be ;charged with this expense during
the 6 month budget review process.:
Trustee Corcoran, seconded by Trustee Wilks, moved to
concur with the recommendation of the Village Manager
and authorize the expenditure of $105,785.00 for storm
clean up costs, the appropriate fund to be determined
by administration.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse, Clowes, Corcoran,
Floros, Hoefert, Wilks
Nays: Nona
Motion carried.
STATE SURCHARGE Mr. Janonis stated that he was pleased to announce
that the State of Illinois will be sending the
surcharge tax to municipalities.. The VillageofMount
Prospect will receive approximately $1,100`,000.00 in
2 installments
JULY 4TH PARADE Members of the Village Board expressed their
congratulations to all those involved with the very
successful July 4th parade.
ADJOURN ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business tocome before the
Village Board, Mayor -Farley declared the meeting
adjourned.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:55 P.M.
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
Page 12 - July 7, 1992
VHAAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
CASH POSITION
July 16, 1992
Cash & Invest
Receipts
Disbursements
Cash & Invest
Balance
7/01/92 through
Per Attached
Journal
Balance
7/01/92
7/16192
List of Bills
Entry
7/16/92
General & Special Revenue Funds
General Fund
$ 3,127,670
$ 625,413
$ 898,969
<170,000>
$ 2,684,114
Refuse Disposal Fund
4,536
45,028
216,309
170,000
3,255
Motor Fuel Tax
386,961
215,407
63,422
538,946
Community Development Block Grant Fund
8,841
-
5,360
3,481
Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund
185
51,092
15,175
36,102
Enterprise Funds
Water & Sewer Fund
3,185,213
214,366
484,568
2,915,011
Parking System Revenue
173,547
6,568
4,856
175,259
Internal Service Funds
Risk Management Fund
1,072,797
16,480
54,600
1,034,677
Vehicle Replacement Fund
1,009,500
272
8,903
1,000,869
Capital Projects
Capital Improvement Fund
1,355,660
16,603
1,842
1,370,421
Downtown Redev Const Funds
543,544
2,292
349
545,487
Police & Fire Building Construction
4,570,503
-
119,280
4,451,223
Flood Control Construction Fund
4,662,451
95,574
-
4,758,025
Debt Service Funds
888,310
3,097
475
890,932
'frust & Aged Funds
Flexcomp Trust Fund
6,404
4,354
7,152
3,606
Escrow Deposit Fund
1,423,473
15,347
91,395
1,347,425
Police Pension Fund
17,589,756
55,880
-
17,645,636
Firemen's Pension Fund
19,470,273
73,607
-
19,543,880
Benefit Trust Funds
242,925
138
2,167
240,8%
X59 72 549
11441,518
11,974,8122
-0-
$5_9.18%245
kli Dialis)1.3
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
A.L.L. EARTHMOVING
AABY BUILDERS
AAH-HA WEIDNER
ABC PLUMBING
AMERICAN COMFORT GROUP, INC.
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION
ARROW ROAD CONSTRUCTION
ASSOCIATED HTG. GROUP INC.
MARK BABICZ
ARTHUR R. BANDEMER
MARK D. BERENS
BLUE JAY CORP.
BOB'S MARATHON INC.
BRENTWOOD SQUARE CORP.
BRUST PLUMBING
JOHN CAGLE SEWER
STEVE CALI
CAROLAN BUILDERS
V.J. CENTRACCHIO & SON INC.
CENTRAL PLUMBING CO.
CRAIG CHAMBERLIN
CHAPPLE CORP.
CITIBANK, N.A.
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
CONCEPT CONSTRUCTION CORP
CYPRESS BUILDERS
THOMAS DATTILO
DC TANK & PUMP CO.
DESIGNERS & BUILDERS
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 1
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7%16/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
C10611
ALL EARTHMOVING
$2,000.00
$2,000.00
C9408
AABY BUILDERS
$425.00
920122
AABY BUILDERS
$7,370.00
$7,795.00
C10587
AAH-HA WEIDNER
$100.00
010689
AAH-HA WEIDNER
$100.00
$200.00-
C11150
ABC PLBG
$100.00
$100.00
C11129
AMERICAN COMFORT
$70.00
$70.00
CONFERENCE REGISTER FEE
$375.00
$375.00
STREETS RECONSTRUCTION
$13,278.87
$13,278.87
C11224
ASSC%PJ HTG
$100.00
$100.00
C10093
BABICZ
$25.00
$25.00
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$2.50
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$.25
$2.75
09537
BERENS
$75.00
$75.00
900726
1228 BLUEJAY
$250.00
$250.00
REFUND
FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$.25
REFUND
FINAL BILL OVERPMT
$2.50
$2.75
C11020
BRENTWOOD SQ CORP
$100.00
100.00
C11262
BRUST PLBG
$100.00
100.00
C10761
JOHN CAGLE SEWER
$50.00
$50.00
C11006
STEVE CALI
$100.00
$100.00
C9997
CAROLAN BLDRS
$425.00
REFUND
DUP TR TAX STAMP
$300.00
$725.00
C11137
VJ CENTRACCHIO
$100.00
$100.00
C10814
CENTRAL PLBG
$100.00
$100.00
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$.50
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$5.00
$5.50
C10407
CHAPPLE CORP
$475.00
$475.00
PMT INSURANCE CLAIMS -GAB
$151.00
PMT INSURANCE CLAIMS -GAB
$4,605.23
$4,756.23*
PMT P/R 7/9
$224.25
$224.25*
C10584
CONCEPT CONST
$100.00
$100.00
C10568
CYPRESS BLDRS
$100.00
$100.00
C11070
THOMAS DATTILO
$100.00
$100.00
C11032
DC TANK & PUMP
$2,000.00
$2,000.00
C10189
DESIGNERS & BLDRS
$25.00
$25.00
VENDOR
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
DISBURSEMENT ACCT
DOOR SYSTEMS, INC.
LINDA DRESDEN
JAMES DUEVER
EDISON BROS. MALL ENTER. INC.
NANCY FEYS
FIRECOM
FLEXCOMP DISBURSEMENTS
FLOLO CORP.
GAETANO CONST. INC.
MARIO GAMBINO LANDSCAPING INC
CARMEN HETREA
WILLIAM C. HOELTJE
ROBERT L. HOLMES
HOLY FAMILY HOSPITAL
RICH HUBER
GREGORY IBBOTSON
J.R.C. CONSTRUCTION
ANDREA JUSZCZYK
A. D. KANOON
KATHCON PROPERTIES
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 2
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
PAYROLL PERIOD ENDING 7/9/92
$473,939.87
PAYROLL PERIOD ENDING 7/9/92
$1,166.05
PAYROLL PERIOD ENDING 7/9/92
$748.20
PAYROLL PERIOD ENDING 7/9/92
$43,132.93
PAYROLL PERIOD ENDING 749792
$1,713.04
$520,700.09*
C10379 DO IT RIGHT ROOT
$100.00
010543 DO IT RIGHT ROOTER
$100.00
C10557 DO IT RIGHT ROOTER
$100.00
010579 DO IT RIGHT ROOTER
$100.00
C10580 DO IT RIGHT ROOTER
$100.00
C10877 DO IT RIGHT ROOTER
$100.00
$600.00
2 DOOR OPENERS/REPAIRS
$1,100.00
$1,100.00
C11121 DRESDEN LINDA
$35.00
$35.00
REFUND STICKER OVERPMT
$28.00
$28.00
RETURN GAMES LICENSE
$150.00
$150.00
RESIDENT RE TR TAX REBATE
$192.00
$192.00
INTERCOM SYSTEM
$1,745.00
$1,745.00
JUNE MED BENEFIT REIMB
$3,995.73
JUNE DEF CARE REIMB
$3,156.56
$7,152.29*
010726 FLOLO CORP
$100.00
$100.00
C10842 GAETANO CONST
$500.00
$500.00
C10794 GAMBINO LAND
$75.00
C10903 GAMBINO LAND
$100.00
C10908 GAMBINO LAND
$100.00
C10956 GAMBINO LAND
$100.00
$375.00
C11066 HETREA CARMEN
$100.00
$100.00
RESIDENT RE TR TAX REBATE
$216.00
$216.00
C11059 HOLMES ROBERT
$35.00
$35.00
920605 SHOTS 7024664
$840.00
$840.00
C10209 HUBER RICH
100.00
$100.00
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
8101.90
$101.90
C5533 JRC CONST
$50.00
$50.00
PAYMENT PJR 7/9
$254.00
$254.00*
REFUND FI AL WWATER BILL
$5.63
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$55.93
$61.56
C9349 KATHCON PROP
$350.00
$350.00
VENDOR
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
CHANG H. KIM
KOVE MECHANICAL INC.
LAKE -COOK FARM SUPPLY COMPANY
J. LIM
JAMES LYMAN
M & H ROOFING
MAECORP
MARTEK PLUMBING
JEANNE MCCALL
JAMES B. MCCARTE
KAREN L. MCQUILLEN
MEERSMAN & MEERSMAN
J. J. MEZZANO
MOUNT PROSPECT PUBLIC LIBRARY
MUELLERMIST IRRIGATION
EDWIN E. MUNIZ -
NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL
NBD BANK MOUNT PROSPECT, N.A.
OLD ORCHARD C. C. VILLAGE
LEONARD PACHOLSKI
PALATINE OIL CO.
HELEN LYNN PATE
DAVE PATE & SONS
RICHARD T. PAWELKO
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 3
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
C9933 CHANG KIM
$100.00
$100.00
REFUND LICENSE OVERPMT
$17.50
$17.50
GASOLINE
$7,528.17
$7,528.17
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$6.57
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$65.34
$71.91
RESIDENT RE TR TAX REBATE
$368.00
$368.00
C11189 M&H ROOFING
$35.00
$35.00
C11125 MAECORP
$500.00
$500.00
C11093 MARTEK PLBG
$100.00
$100.00
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$28.42
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$2.88
$31.30
C9968 MCCARTE JAMES
$100.00
$100.00
RESIDENT RE TR TAX REBATE
$338.00
$338.00
1558 MEERSMAN & MEERSMAN
$75.00
$75.00
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$.25
REFUND FINAL WATER BILL
$2.50
$2.75
PPRT-5TH ALLOCATION
$5,167.31
$5,167.31*
C9708 MUELLERMIST
$100.00
$100.00
C10929 MUNIZ EDWIN
$20.00
$20.00
TRAINING TAPE RENTAL
$270.00
$270.00
SAVINGS BONDS PR 74/9
$480.00
SAVINGS BONDS P/R f9
$70.00
DUE TO FED DEP R 7f9
$15,174.96
DUE TO FED DEF PR 7f9
$3,271.18
DUE TO FED DEP PR 7f9
$56.87
DUE TO FED DEP PR 7f9
$88.16
DUE TO FED DEF PR 7f9
$1,439.77
DUE TO FED DEP PR 7/9
$115.11
$20,696.05*
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BILL
$2.38
L
REFUND OVERPMT FINAL BIL2.62
C11063 PACHOLSKI
$35.00
$3$ 5.00
C10807 PALATINE OIL
$100.00
$100.00
DEV GUARANTEE REFUND
$39,432.50
$39,432.50
C10259 DAVE PATE
$100.00
C10259 DAVE PATE
$10.00
$110.00
RESIDENT RE TR TAX REBATE
$464.00
$464.00
VENDOR
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
PERMA SEAL
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
ELLEN PLATE
ANTHONY PONTARELLI
POSTAGE BY PHONE SYSTEM
ELMER 0. REETZ
ARTHUR J. ROGERS & CO.
MARY ALICE ROGERS
JAMES RUDDY
FRANK SALERNO
A. SCHOENEMAN & CO.
DONALD SCHROEDER
SKILTEC BUILDERS
SUN ELECTRIC CORPORATION
SURE LIGHT SIGNS
THIRD DISTRICT CIRCUIT COURT
TRI -CON CORPORATION
VIKING FIRE PROTECTION
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
C11086
PERMASEAL
$100.00
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$30.00
PMT P/R 7/9
REFUND
$225.00
FINNAL WATER BILL
$.19
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$1.91
POSTAGE METER ADV DEPOSIT
$3,000.00
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$2.50
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$25.00
1522
AJ ROGERS
$100.00
C10988
ROGERS MARY A
$100.00
911230
KATHCON%RUDDY
$2,152.00
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$4.19
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$47.50
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$4.75
C10881
A SCHOENEMAN
$100.00
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$35.00
REFUND
FINAL WATER BILL
$3.50
C10858
SKILTEC BLDRS
$100.00
MOBILE
RECYCLING CENTER
$3,417.00
1472
SURE LIGHT
$50.00
1473
SURE LIGHT
$50.00
920706
BOND MONEY
$3,055.00
920708
BOND MONEY
$1,400.00
920710
BOND MONEY
$650.00
920716
BOND MONEY
$1,250.00
PUMP MODIFICATIONS
$37,000.00
C10714
VIKING FIRE
$100.00
TR TO POLICE PENSION FUND
$124.75
TR TO WATER FUND
$3,457.50
C10093
BABICZ
$75.00
C10189
DESIGNERS & BLDRS
$75.00
C10407
CHAPPLE CORP
$25.00
C10761
JOHN CAGLE SEWER
$50.00
C10794
GAMBINO
$25.00
010929
MUNIZ
$15.00
C11167
VILLAGE PLBG
$25.00
PAGE 4
TOTAL
$100.00
$30.00*
$225.00*
$2.10
$3,000.00*
$27.50
$100.00
$100.00
$2,152.00*
$56.44
$100.00
$38.50
$100.00
$3,417.00
$100.00
*
*
*
$6,355.00*
$37,000.00
$100.00
$124.75
$3,457.50
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 5
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7%16192
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
05533 JRC CONST
$50.00
C9168 WISZ CONST
$25.00
C9349 KATHCON PROP
$150.00
C9408 AABY BLDRS INC
$75.00
C9537 BERENS
$25.00
C9997 CAROLAN BLDRS
$75.00
P1558 MEERSMAN & MEERSMAN
$25.00
$715.00
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
TR TO CAPITAL IMRP FUND
$10,284.75
TR TO RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
$500.00
TR TO RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
$26,750.00
TR TO RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
$174,160.00
TR TO RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
$490.00
TR TO GENERAL FUND
$26,709.03
TR TO GENERAL FUND
$2,000.00
TR TO GENERAL FUND
$11,695.04
TR TO GENERAL FUND
$4.00
TRANSFER TO MFT FUND
$100,000.00
$352,592.82*
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
TR TO IMRF FUND
$764.89
TR TO IMRF FUND
$339.16
TR TO IMRF FUND
$8,375.60
TR TO IMRF FUND
$168.94
TR TO IMRF FUND
$264.24
$9,912.83
VILLAGE OF MT PROSPECT FIRE PE
TR TO FIRE PENSION FUND
$48.24
$48.24
VILLAGE PLUMBING
011167 VILLAGE PLBG
75.00
$75.00
VITAL RECORD BANC, INC.
MICROFILMINGISUPPLIES
$ 60.92
$660.92
WAL-MART STORES, INC.
CLOTHING
$145.38
$145.38
WISZ CONSTRUCTION
C9168 WISZ CONST
$75.00
$75.00
CLEARING ACCOUNTS
***TOTAL**
$1,064,597.28
GENERAL FUND
$788,115.79 REFUSE DISPOSAL
FUND
$2,657.31
COMMUNITY.DEVLPMT BLOCK GRANT
$1,522.45 ILL. MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT FUND
$15,174.96
WATER & SEWER FUND
$145,646.32 PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND
$3,474.01
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND
$3,457.50 RISK MANAGEMENT
FUND
$4,756.23
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 6
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND $1,245.38 FLEXCOMP ESCROW FUND $7,152.29
ESCROW DEPOSIT FUND $91,395.04
********************************************************************************************************
VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
CENTRAL CONTINENTAL BAKERY
MEETING SWEET ROLLS
$487.40
$487.40*
CHICAGO SUBURBAN TIMES NEWSPAP
AD
$49.00
$99.00
JOURNAL & TOPICS NEWSPAPERS
AD
$170.00
$170.00
MR. PETER'S BANQUETS
DINNER FOR JOHN DIXON
$646.18
$646.18
NORTHWEST MUNICIPAL CONFERENCE
REGISTER GOLF/DINNER
$300.00
$300.00*
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$49.51
$553.10
NORTHWEST STATIONERS INC.
MISC EXPENSES
$101.83
$151.34*
V & G PRINTERS INC.
VILLAGE LETTERHEAD
$720.00
$720.00
VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES ***TOTAL** $2,093.00
GENERAL FUND $2,093.00
********************************************************************************************************
VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE
BEST IMPRESSIONS
AWARDS
$487.40
$487.40*
HOLIDAY INN
ADMINISTRATORS LUNCHEON
$200.00
$200.00*
HOLY FAMILY HOSPITAL
PHYSICAL-SEMERGALSKI
$114.00
$114.00
INTERNATIONAL PERSONNEL MGMT.
MEMBER DUES -RUSSELL
$342.00
$342.00
DAVID C. JEPSON
STAFF LUNCHEON
$90.69
$90.69
KNIGHT,HOPPE,FANNING&KNIGHT,LT
LEGAL SERVICES
$553.10
$553.10
NORTHWEST STATIONERS INC.
SUPPLIES
$146.40
$146.40
O'HARE REPORTING SERVICE
SERVICES RENDERED
$94.30*
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$113.43
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$24.59
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$4.29
********************************************************************************************************
COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION
AVID PUBLICATIONS
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
$36.00
PAGE. 7
CORTEZ DIXON
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
$25.00
$25.00
HEWLETT PACKARD
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
$92.00
$92.00
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE
SERVICE
$2,268.13
$2,318.13
MARISHA JASON
MISC EXPENSES
$27.72
MISC-EXPENSES
$83.33
$253.36*
PETTY CASH - POLICE DEPT.
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$10.00
$10.00*
BARRY A. SPRINGER
JUNE LEGAL SERVICES
$3,037.50
$3,037.50
VILLAGE OF ELK GROVE VILLAGE
1 DINNER TICKET-DIXON
$25.00
$25.00*
VILLAGE OF ELK GROVE VILLAGE
DINNER TICKETS-JANONIS
$50.00
$50.00
VON BRIESEN AND PURTELL, S.C.
MAY LEGAL SERVICES
$3,845.69
$3,845.69
JEFFREY WULBECKER
BASKETBALL REFEREES
$100.00
REIMB-MIN. GOLF
$44.00
$144.00
XEROX CORPORATION
FUSER LUBRICANT
$27.00
$27.00
VILLAGE MANAGER'S OFFICE
***TOTAL**
$9,420.44
GENERAL FUND
$9,420.44
********************************************************************************************************
COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION
AVID PUBLICATIONS
SUBSCRIPTION
$36.00
$36.00
CORTEZ DIXON
COMM ASST COW MTG
$25.00
$25.00
HEWLETT PACKARD
SERVICE CALL
$92.00
$92.00
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO.
SERVICE
$50.00
SERVICE
$2,268.13
$2,318.13
MARISHA JASON
COMM ASST ZNG BD MTG
$25.00
COMM ASST 4TH PARADE
$25.00
$50.00
JOHN KEANE
COMM ASST 4TH PARADE
$25.00
$25.00
N.E. ILLINOIS N.F.L.C.P.
142 YR MEMBERSHIPS
$15.00
$15.00
NORTHWEST STATIONERS INC.
StUJPPLIES
$10.10
$10.10
OFFICE MAX
1 TONER CARTRIDGE
$64.80
$64.80*
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$4.01
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$10.14
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$1.52
$15.67*
TASCHO SAEMS
COMM ASST COW MTG
$25.00
$25.00
VENDOR
COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION
JONNA SHOUB
FRANK SMITH
ROBERT TOBA
COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION
CEiw I ptal, m a a Il,
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
FINANCIAL AND ECON. STRAT.CORP
I.B.M. CORPORATION
ILLINOIS GMIS CHAPTER
KIPLINGER WASHINGTON LETTER
METRO EXPRESS, INC.
PEDERSEN & HOUPT
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
PITNEY BOWES INC.
PUBLIX OFFICE SUPPLIES INC.
SECRETARY OF STATE
TRACS
WALLACE COMPUTER SERVICES, INC
XEROX CORPORATION
XL/DATACOMP INC.
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7116%92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
COMM ASST -PARADE
COMM ASST ZNG BD MTG
COMM ASST BD MTG
$2,751.70
PAGE 8
INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
$25.00
$25.00
$25.00
$25.00
$25.00
$25.00
***TOTAL**
$2,751.70
FINANCIAL CONSULTING SVCS
$750.00
$750.00
CREDIT MTCE
$11.37 -
SUPPORT SERVICES
$520.00
JULY MTCE
$194.00
JULY MTCE
$21.00
ANNUAL KEYBOARDS MTCE
$140.00
$863.63
GMIS 92/93 DUES
$25.00
$25.00
60056JPSD0001 SUBSCRIPTION
$63.00
$63.00
DELIVERY
$18.90
DELIVERY
$17.15
136.05
JUN 92 RE TR TAX TRANS
$450.00
$450.00
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$4.60
$4.60*
POSTAGE BY PHONE CHGS
$225.00
$225.00
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$59.94
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$14.34
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$17.40
OFFICE SUPPLIES
$44.87
$136.55
VEHICLE REGISTRATION TAPES
$500.00
$500.00*
JULY CONNECT FEE
$50.00
$50.00
COMPUTER SUPPLIES
$49.06
$49.06
FUSER LUBRICANT
$27.00
$27.00
JULY MTCE SERVICE
$13.04
$13.04
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 9
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16%92
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
FINANCE DEPARTMENT ***TOTAL** $3,192.93
GENERAL FUND
$3,192.93
********************************************************************************************************
VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE
DARTNELL CORPORATION, B/R -200
NINE TO FIVE BULLETIN
$98.15
$98.15
THE DRAWING BOARD INC.
TYVEK ENVELOPES
$200.79
200.79
NATIONWIDE PAPERS
PAPER
$227.85
227.85*
NORTHWEST STATIONERS INC.
SUPPLIES
$102.16
$102.16
ON TIME MESSENGER SERVICE
DELIVERY
$17.00
DELIVERY
$19.00
$36.00
PADDOCK PUBLICATIONS INC
LEGAL PAGE
$72.79
LEGAL PAGE
$21.10
LEGAL PAGE
$23.73
$117.62
WEST PUBLISHING CO.
IL REVISED STATUTES
$373.00
$373.00
WORLD PUBLISHERS
DICTIONARY SET
$44.95
$44.95
VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE
***TOTAL**
$1,200.52
GENERAL FUND
$1,200.52
********************************************************************************************************
RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
CHARLES BENCIC, REIMB ACCIDENT CHGS $81.50 $81.50
MARTIN BOROWIAK FINAL SETTLEMENT $278.52 $278.52
BROOKFIELD MED CLAIMS THRU 7/10 $45,062.03 $45,062.03*
COASTAL VIDEO COMMUNIC. CORP. HANDBOOKS $39.00 $39.00
********************************************************************************************************
INSPECTION SERVICES
A -B -C HUMANE WILDLIFE RESCUE
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
$65.00
PAGE 10
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
$65.00
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
$65.00
$195.00
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
SERVICES RENDERED
$40.00
$300.00
CORPORATE POLICYHOLDERS COUNS.
RISK MGMT SVCS
$500.00
$500.00
GAB BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.
JULY SERVICE FEES
$886.00
$886.00
HOBBS GROUP, INC.
ALL RISK PREMIUM
$804.44
$804.44
THOMAS F. MCGUIRE AND ASSOC.LT
LEGAL FEES
$848.79
$848.79
NORTHWEST COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
9002054750-X
$37.00
$70.00
NORTHWEST STATIONERS INC.
9002062591-X
896.00
$11.36
PEEK TRAFFIC INC.
9002052072-X
$144.65
$152.50
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
9002062507-X
$221.00
$4.60*
SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS
9002045017-X
$319.00
$817.65
JOYCE O'BRIEN
FINAL SETTLEMENT
$426.00
$426.00
JEFFREY WULBECKER
SS VOLLEYBALL REFEREES
$100.00
$100.00
RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
***TOTAL**
$49,843.93
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
$49,843.93
********************************************************************************************************
INSPECTION SERVICES
A -B -C HUMANE WILDLIFE RESCUE
SERVICES RENDERED
$65.00
SERVICE RENDERED
$65.00
SERVICES RENDERED
$65.00
$195.00
ANDERSON PEST CONTROL
SERVICES RENDERED
$26o.aa
SERVICES RENDERED
$40.00
$300.00
BOCA INTERNATIONAL INC.
ASSOCIATE MEMBERSHIP
$35.00
$35.00
CE DESIGN, LTD.
SERVICES RENDERED
$237.40
$237.40
FAIRVIEW PRINTING SERVICE
BUILDING PEMIT FORMS
$542.00
$542.00
GREGORY G. GRAHAM
CLOTHING ALLOWANCE
$13.30
$13.30
I.B.M. CORPORATION
ANNUAL KEYBOARDS MTCE
$70.00
$70.00
NORTHWEST STATIONERS INC.
SUPPLIES
$11.36
$11.36
PEEK TRAFFIC INC.
INK CARTRIDGE ASSY
$152.50
$152.50
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$4.60
$4.60*
SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS
SUBSCRIPTION RENEWAL
$5.00
$5.00
GENERAL FUND
POLICE DEPARTMENT
AETNA TRUCK PARTS
AMERITECH MOBILE COMMUNICATION
CHICAGO SUBURBAN TIMES NEWSPAP
COMPUTERLAND
DESIGN DATA, INC.
FREDRIKSEN & SONS
GALL'S, INC.
GOODYEAR SERVICE STORES
H R HART PHOTO
HELM, INC.
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO.
LATTOF CHEVROLET, INC.
$1,746.37
PARTS
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 11
$64.29
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PARTS
$83.16
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
$28.35
$274.38
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
INSPECTION SERVICES
$50.76
COMPUTER
$1,535.00
XEROX CORPORATION
MAINTENEANCE CONTRACT
$140.17
$589.00
SVCE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS
FUSER LUBRICANT
$27.00
$167.17
XL/DATACOMP INC.
JULY MICE SERVICE
$13.04
$13.04
INSPECTION SERVICES
FRONT END ALIGNMENT
***TOTAL**
$1,746.37
GENERAL FUND
POLICE DEPARTMENT
AETNA TRUCK PARTS
AMERITECH MOBILE COMMUNICATION
CHICAGO SUBURBAN TIMES NEWSPAP
COMPUTERLAND
DESIGN DATA, INC.
FREDRIKSEN & SONS
GALL'S, INC.
GOODYEAR SERVICE STORES
H R HART PHOTO
HELM, INC.
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO.
LATTOF CHEVROLET, INC.
$1,746.37
PARTS
$98.58
PARTS
$64.29
PARTS
$83.16
PARTS
$28.35
$274.38
SERVICE
$149.73
$149.73
SUBSCRIPTION
$50.76
$50.76
COMPUTER
$1,535.00
$1,535.00
SOFTWARE & MODEM
$589.00
$589.00
SVCE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS
$157.05
$157.05
2 WILDFIRE HELMETS
$45.48
$45.48
FRONT END ALIGNMENT
$39.00
FRONT END ALIGNMENT
$39.00
TIRES
$1,053.00
$1,131.00
FILM PROCESSING
$44.26
$44.26
SERVICE MANUAL
$46.50
$46.50
SERVICE
$27.80
SERVICE
$100.00
SERVICE
$300.00
SERVICE
$19.55
SERVICE
$24.84
$472.19
PARTS
$100.00
PARTS
$77.19
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 12
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
POLICE DEPARTMENT
PARTS
$24.94
PARTS
$72.84
PARTS
$101.25
PARTS
$8.76
$384.98
LOKL BUSINESS PRODUCTS & OFFIC
SUPPLIES
$71.21
SUPPLIES
$83.20
SUPPLIES
$6.76
SUPPLIES
$14.95
SUPPLIES
$109.35
$285.47
LUND INDUSTRIES, INC.
P-16 CONVERSION COSTS
$99.99
P-16 CONVERSION COSTS
$75.00
P-13 CONVERSION COSTS
$99.99
P-13 CONVERSION COSTS
$45.90
$320.88
JOE MITCHELL BUICK, INC.
TACTICAL UNIT CAR RENTAL
$200.00
$200.00
MORTON GROVE AUTOMOTIVE WEST
PARTS
$95.00
PARTS
$95.00
$190.00
PETTY CASH - POLICE DEPT.
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$4.85
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$137.60
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$49.16
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$13.91
$205.52*
ERIC E. PIEE
RADIO REPAIRS
$59.00
$59.00
PROSPECT BOARDING KENNEL
MAY 92 STRAYS
$513.00
$513.00
PUBLIX OFFICE SUPPLIES INC.
SUPPLIES
$62.15
SUPPLIES
$62.15
SUPPLIES
$62.15
SUPPLIES
$62.13
$248.58
QUALITY DISCOUNT AUTO PARTS
PARTS
$25.32
$25.32
RAPP'S
MICE SUPPLIES
$55.38
MTCE SUPPLIES
$161.16
$216.54
RONALD RICHARDSON
ADVANCE EXPENSES
$759.50
$759.50
WILLIAM ROSCOP
EXPENSES
$481.02
$481.02
ROBERT RZEPECKI
EXPENSES
$34.00
$34.00
SAYE -A -PET
MAY 92 STRAYS
$105.00
$105.00
SHAW-BARTON
MCGRUFF CALENDARS
$177.00
$177.00
VHF COMMUNICATIONS INC.
RADIO REPAIRS
$45.00
$45.00
JOHN R. WAGNER
EXPENSES
$88.64
$88.64
********************************************************************************************************
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
ADDISON BUILDING MATERIAL CO
AMOCO OIL COMPANY
ARATEX AND MEANS SERVICES, INC
CENTRAL TELEPHONE OF ILLINOIS
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
CONNECT INC.
DATA PREFERENCE
DOUGLAS TRUCK PARTS
FIRECOM
FIRETAC SYSTEMS
GALL'S, INC.
ROSS GOLDSTEIN
GOODYEAR SERVICE STORES
GREAT LAKES FIRE EQUIPMENT
HAGEN AUTO PAINT & SUPPLY
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO.
SUPPLIES
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 13
$28.45
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
TOOLS
$252.32
PAYMENT DATE 7/16192
$11.70
$315.82
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
POLICE DEPARTMENT
LINEN SERVICE
$71.71
WOLF CAMERA AND VIDEO
FILM
$210.56
$188.29
070 0057060 0
NIKON 28MM AF LENS
$173.95
$384.51
POLICE DEPARTMENT
$9.03
***TOTAL**
$9,219.31
GENERAL FUND
$9,219.31
$494.00
$ 94.00
********************************************************************************************************
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
ADDISON BUILDING MATERIAL CO
AMOCO OIL COMPANY
ARATEX AND MEANS SERVICES, INC
CENTRAL TELEPHONE OF ILLINOIS
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
CONNECT INC.
DATA PREFERENCE
DOUGLAS TRUCK PARTS
FIRECOM
FIRETAC SYSTEMS
GALL'S, INC.
ROSS GOLDSTEIN
GOODYEAR SERVICE STORES
GREAT LAKES FIRE EQUIPMENT
HAGEN AUTO PAINT & SUPPLY
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO.
SUPPLIES
$23.35
SUPPLIES
$28.45
TOOLS
$252.32
SUPPLIES'
$11.70
$315.82
GASOLINE
$21.12
$21.12
LINEN SERVICE
$74.47
LINEN SERVICE
$71.71
LINEN SERVICE
$42.11
$188.29
070 0057060 0
$207.49
$207.49
BA77-JT-2404-A
$9.03
$9.03
SERVICE
$41.61
41.61
COMPUTER RENTAL
$494.00
$ 94.00
REPAIR PARTS
$41.55
$41.55
INTERCOM SYSTEM
$.85-
$.85
4 LOCKER NAME PLATES
$16.00
$16.00
SMOKE CUTTER 502829001010
$161.39
$161.39
COMPUTER MTCE
$225.00
$225.00
TIRES
$200.18
$200.18
FIRE HELMETS
$449.20
SUPPLIES
$194.08
HELMETS
$252.74
$896.02
SUPPLIES.
$178.71
$178.71
SERVICE
$400.00
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 14
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
SERVICE
$82.29
$482.29
ILLINOIS FIRE INSPECTORS ASSN.
20 MANAGING THE INCIDENT
$450.00
SURVIVE ALIVE HOUSE RENTAL
$100.00
$550.00
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
REGISTER-CAVELLO
$180.00
$180.00
ISFSI
CLASS A FOAM VIDEOTAPE
$47.95
$47.95
J AND N ENTERPRISES, INC.
SENSOR HEADS
$117.08
$117.08
JUSTEX SYSTEMS, INC.
SUBSCRIPTION
$89.00
$89.00
ALAN LABBE
EXPENSES
$20.00
$20.00
LATTOF CHEVROLET, INC.
PARTS
$59.66
$59.66
LIQUID AIR CORPORATION
CYLINDER RENTAL
$20.00
$20.00
MABAS DIVISION 1
ANNUAL DUES
$250.00
$250.00
MACWAREHOUSE
SOFTWARE UPGRADE
$102.00
$102.00
MEDICAL PRODUCTS
MEDICAL SUPPLIES
$53.60
$53.60
MID -AMERICA SAFETY EQUIP., INC
REPAIR PARTS
$153.03
$153.03
MORTON GROVE AUTOMOTIVE WEST
REBUILD SIREN MOTOR
$55.00
$55.00
NAPA -HEIGHTS AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY
PARTS
$20.00
PARTS
$74.14
PARTS
$59.39
PARTS
$169.90
PARTS
$169.90
CREDIT PARTS
$169.90 -
PARTS
$11.17
PARTS
$141.56
PARTS
$5.62
CREDIT PARTS
$5.62 -
PARTS
$99.22
PARTS
$49.92
PARTS
$66.42
PARTS
$237.77
PARTS
$24.00
CREDIT PARTS
$6.50 -
PARTS
$27.33
$974.32
NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL
TRAINING TAPE RENTAL
$331.50
$331.50
NORTHWEST COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
ADMIN IN STATION FEE
$2,264.00
$2,264.00
NORTHWEST COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
3 VISITS IN -STATION
$330.00
$330.00
NORTHWEST STATIONERS INC.
SUPPLIES
$81.64
********************************************************************************************************
HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION
LEONARD W. BAZAN
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
REIMB
PAGE 15
$12.00
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
SERVICE
$400.00
PAYMENT DATE 7116192
SERVICE
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
REIMB
$9.00
$9.00
RAY LUNDIN
SUPPLIES
$44.60
$126.24
OERGEL'S BAKERY & CAFE, INC.
DONUTS`DANISH
$108.30
$108.30
ORDER FROM HORDER
SUPPLI$S
$68.82
$68.82
POLLARD MOTOR COMPANY
REAR WHEEL COVER KIT
$157.09
$157.09
JEFF RICKER
EXPENSES
$15.98
$15.98
ROBOTRONICS INC.
BATTERIES
$108.00
$108.00
SAFETY KLEEN CORPORATION
SERVICE PARTS
$119.10
$119.10
SCHMERLER FORD INC.
BRAKE HOSE
$16.00
$16.00
WAL-MART STORES, INC.
2 CAMERAS%FILM
$77.89
$77.89
XEROX CORPORATION
SUPPLIES
$23.45
$23.45
FIRE & EMERGENCY PROTECTION DEPT.
$15.00
***TOTAL**
$9,895.66
GENERAL FUND
$9,526.26 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
FUND
$369.40
********************************************************************************************************
HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION
LEONARD W. BAZAN
JUNE DRIVER
REIMB
$12.00
$12.00
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO.
SERVICE
$400.00
SERVICE
$35.04
$435.04
LISA LEVIN
JUNE DRIVER
REIMB
$9.00
$9.00
RAY LUNDIN
JUNE DRIVER
REIMB
$36.00
$36.00
LINDA MARKAY
JUNE DRIVER
REIMB
$9.00
$9.00
NORTHWEST STATIONERS INC.
SUPPLIES
$24.00
$24.00
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
65.35
$65.35*
THE SALVATION ARMY
BUDGET ALLOCATION
$ 37.50
$937.50
OTTO SCHERR
JUNE DRIVER
REIMB
$12.00
$12.00
JEANNE SHERMAN
JUNE DRIVER
REIMB
$15.00
$15.00
BERTHA STEIL
JUNE DRIVER
REIMB
$12.00
$12.00
KATHI WESLEY
JUNE DRIVER
REIMB
$15.00
$15.00
HELEN WHITLOCK
JUNE DRIVER
REIMB
$9.00
$9.00
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 16
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION
VIRGINIA ZITO JUNE DRIVER REIMB $12.00 $12.00
HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION ***TOTAL** $1,602.89
GENERAL FUND $1,602.89
********************************************************************************************************
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
IBBOTSON HEATING CO.
50% HOME WEATHERIZATION
$1,162.50
$1,162.50
MICHAEL J. MORAN
RELEASE DEED
$75.00
$75.00
MT. PROSPECT HTG. & A.C. CO.
CDBG 315 S MAIN
$2,449.75
$2,449.75
PETTY CASH - FINANCE DEPT.
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$14.61
$14.61*
REI TITLE SERVICES
2 TITLE SEARCH
$150.00
$150.00
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
***TOTAL**
$3,851.86
GENERAL FUND
$14.61 COMMUNITY
DEVLPMT BLOCK GRANT
$3,837.25
********************************************************************************************************
STREET DIVISION
ADDISON BUILDING MATERIAL CO. SUPPLIES $11.32
SUPPLIES $46.62
SUPPLIES $4.21
SUPPLIES $8.91
SUPPLIES $4.79
SUPPLIES $12.60
SUPPLIES $29.11 $117.56
VENDOR
STREET DIVISION
AETNA TRUCK PARTS
ALDRIDGE ELECTRIC, INC.
AM -LIN PRODUCTS, INC.
ANDERSON ELEVATOR CO.
ANDERSON LOCK COMPANY
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS FORD
ARROW ROAD CONSTRUCTION
AUTO CLUTCH
AUTUMN LANDSCAPING & MTCE.INC.
BILL'S LAWN & POWER
MELVYN BOTH
CADE INDUSTRIES
CENTRAL CONTINENTAL BAKERY
CITY OF DES PLAINES
COMMODORE MAINTENANCE SYSTEMS
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
CONRAD AND SON
COOK COUNTY TREASURER
DEALERS TRANSMISSION EXCHANGE
DOOR SYSTEMS, INC.
DREISILKER ELECTRIC MOTORS, IN
EARNIES TIRE REPAIR SERV. INC.
ENGINEMASTERS, INC.
FINISHMASTER, INC.
FIRE AND SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC
G & K SERVICES
OTTO GOEBBERT & SONS FARM MARK
GRABBER CHICAGO
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE .17
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7116192
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
PARTS
$74.25
PARTS
$34.72
PARTS
$11.94
$120.91
1 SERVICE TRUCK
$136.00
$136.00
CLEANING SUPPLIES
$713.46
MUFFLER
$85.91
$799.37
JULY MICE
$147.00
$147.00
SERVICES RENDERED
$398.20
$398.20
PARTS
$57.67
$57.67
RESURFACING PROGRAM
$52,640.54
$52,640.54
PARTS
$672.29
$672.29
TURF MOWING
$4,910.00
TURF MOWING
$475.00
$5,385.00
MICE SUPPLIES
$13.88
$13.88
CLOTHING ALLOWANCE
$46.65
$46.65
CLEANING SUPPLIES
$246.50
CLEANING SUPPLIES
$278.00
$524.50
DONUTS
$77.76
$77.76
STORM CLEAN UP
$2,755.19
$2,755.19
JULY 92 JANITORIAL SERVICES
$3,592.00
$3,592.00
SERVICE
$9,248.15
SERVICE
$6,260.90
$15 509.05
RED BINS
$204.00
204.00
MTCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS
$1,423.76
$1,423.76
REBUILD TANSMISSION
$1,817.00
$1,817.00
REPAIRS
$104.50
$104.50
VARIABLE PITCH SHEAVE
$12.24
$12.24
TIRE SERVICE
$57.44
$57.44
PARTS
$75.75
$75.75
SUPPLIES
$44.32
SUPPLIES
$78.40
$122.72
ALARM SERVICES
$99.00
$99.00
UNIFORM SERVICE
$151.70
UNIFORM SERVICE
$151.69
$303.39
3 FLATS AGERATUM
$40.95
$40.95
PARTS & SERVICE
$42.35
$42.35
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 18
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
STREET DIVISION
W. W. GRAINGER INC.
SUPPLIES
$152.38
$152.38
H & H ELECTRIC CO.
DETECTOR LOOP
$572.80
$572.80
B. HANEY AND SONS, INC.
DISPOSAL LO%STORM
$2,565.00
$2,565.00
HELLER LUMBER CO.
JUNE 92 SUPPLIES
$217.41
JUNE,92 SUPPLIES
$67.80
JUNE 92 SUPPLIES
$250.76
JUNE 92 SUPPLIES
$8.64
$544.61
HOSKINS CHEVROLET, INC.
PARTS
$21.39
$21.39
JOHN HUFFMAN
REIMB SAFETY SHOES
$50.00
$50.00
ITEC
PARTS
$23.73
PARTS
$29.32
AERIAL BUCKET TRUCK RENTAL
$900.00
RENTAL AERIAL BUCKET TRUCK
$900.00
RENTAL AERIAL BUCKET TRUCK
$1,000.00
$2,853.05
RAYMOND L. JENKS
SjC SIDEWALK
$168.00
$168.00
LAND AND LAKES CO
STTORM DEBRIS DUMPED
$3,300.00
$3,300.00
LATTOF CHEVROLET, INC.
PARTS
$15.34
PARTS
22.80
PARTS
32.48
PARTS
$39.00
PARTS
$65.00
PARTS
$39.00
PARTS
$26.00
$239.62
J.C. LICHT COMPANY
SUPPLIES
$200.06
SUPPLIES
$8.50
SUPPLIES
$12.35
SUPPLIES
$18.94
$239.85
LYONS EQUIPMENT CO.
PARTS
$579.51
$579.51
MCGINTY BROS., INC.
TREE SPRAYING
$10.00
TREE SPRAYING
$10.00
TREE SPRAYING
$10.00
TREE SPRAYING
$10.00
TREE SPRAYING
$10.00
TREE SPRAYING
$30.00
$80.00
MEYER MATERIAL CO.
MATERIALS
$398.11
$398.11
ROGER MEYER
MATERIAL & HAULING
$1,886.00
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 19
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
STREET DIVISION
STORM DEBRIS HAULING
$12,201.50
$14,087.50
MIDWAY TRUCK PARTS
2 FILTERS
$37.20
$37.20
MORAN EQUIPMENT CORP.
2 JACKS
$76.63
$76.63
MORTON GROVE AUTOMOTIVE WEST
PARTS
$150.00
$150.00
NATIONAL HEAT AND POWER CORPOR
REPAIR WATER FLOAT CONTROL
$93.00
$93.00
NORTHERN ILLINOIS GAS CO.
1700 W CENTRAL
$695.57
$695.57
NORTHWEST STATIONERS INC.
SUPPLIES
$31.69
$31.69
P & W INDUSTRIAL SALES, INC.
MICE SUPPLIES
$75.29
MICE SUPPLIES
$94.80
$170.09
LOU PETRICCA
S/C SIDEWALK
$56.00
$56.00
PETTY CASH - PUBLIC WORKS
TRAVEL AND SUPPLIES
$91.47
$91.47*
POLLARD MOTOR COMPANY
PARTS
$173.24
PARTS
$164.88
CREDIT 405257
$146.94-
$191.18
PROSAFETY
GLASSES
$87.00
SUPPLIES
$120.40
$207.40
QUALITY DISCOUNT AUTO PARTS
PARTS
$12.26
PARTS
$69.50
PARTS
$7.72
PARTS
$23.42
PARTS
$129.60
PARTS
$12.25
PARTS
$14.56
$269.31
RIC MAR INDUSTRIES, INC.
QUIK WASH
$238.00
$238.00
ROUTE 12 RENTAL CO., INC.
EQUIPMENT RENTAL
$4,655.00
EQUIPMENT RENTAL
$960.00
$5,615.00
RTP - SUBURBAN
QUARTERLY MTCE CHGS
$575.25
QUARTERLY MTCE CHGS
$231.00
$806.25
RUNNION EQUIPMENT COMPANY
MTCE SUPPLIES
$9.45
$9.45
SAFETY KLEEN CORPORATION
SERVICE PARTS CLEANERS
$336.50
$336.50
SNAP-ON TOOLS CORPORATION
SCREW DRIVER SET
$19.16
$19.16
STANDARD PIPE & SUPPLY INC.
PLUMBING SUPPLIES
$30.00
$30.00
STATE TREASURER
MTCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS
$130.73
MTCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS
$242.96
MTCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS
$381.18
MTCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS
$529.11
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
STREET DIVISION
TECH SYN CORPORATION
TERRACE SUPPLY COMPANY
VERMEER-ILLINOIS
VHF COMMUNICATIONS ING.
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE
VILLAGE OF HOFFMAN ESTATES
VULCAN SIGN
WAY -KEN CONTRACTORS SUPPLY CO.
WEST SIDE TRACTOR SALES
WINKELMANS RADIATOR CO.
STREET DIVISION
GENERAL FUND
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
MTCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS
MTCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS
MTCE TRAFFIC SIGNALS
MTCE SUPPLIES
MTCE SUPPLIES
MTCE SUPPLIES
MTCE SUPPLIES
MONTHLY TANK RENTAL
MTCE SUPPLIES
MTCE SUPPLIES
MTCE SUPPLIES
LACQUER THINNER
BRUSHCHIPPER RENTAL
BRUSHCHIPPER RENTAL
MTCE SUPPLIES
MTCE SUPPLIES
REPAIRS
REPAIRS
STORM CLEAN UP
BRUSH CHIPPING -STORM
SUPPLIES
DRAIN PLUG
PARTS
PARTS
REPAIR RADIATOR
REPAIR RADIATOR
$68,117.56 MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND
$104.50
INVOICE AMOUNT
$475.92
$362.98
$265.29
$2.56
$53.74
$101.78
$94.71
$4.08
$140.23
$25.60
$63.50
$39.55
$850.00
$850.00
$33.70
$33.62
$19.50
$33.15
$764.92
$2,533.44
$586.50
$7.50
$517.90
$79.44
$73.25
$75.00
***TOTAL**
PAGE . 20
TOTAL
$2,388.17
$252.79
$272.96
$1,767.32
$52.65
$764.92
$2,533.44
$586.50
$7.50
$597.34
$148.25
$131,644.23
$63,422.17
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 21
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
ADDISON BUILDING MATERIAL CO.
SUPPLIES
$21.06
SUPPLIES
$1.98
SUPPLIES
$15.78
SUPPLIES
$1.48
SUPPLIES
$17.40
SUPPLIES
$19.70
SUPPLIES
$37.40
$114.80
AETNA TRUCK PARTS
PARTS
$74.24
PARTS
$71.55
CREDIT PARTS
$4.03 -
PARTS
$4.00
PARTS
$22.95
$168.71
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS FORD
PARTS
$127.52
PARTS
$112.58
PARTS
$55.00
$295.10
BADGER METER INC.
METERS
$3,048.00
$3,048.00
ERIC BARANCHIK
REIMB CDL
$30.00
$30.00
THE BRAKE ALIGN COMPANY
MTCE SUPPLIES
$145.00
MTCE SUPPLIES
$106.74
MTCE SUPPLIES
$115.00
$366.74
BUREAU OF BUSINESS PRACTICE
SUBSCRIPTION RENEWAL
$92.64
$92.64
CADE INDUSTRIES
CLEANING SUPPLIES
$672.00
$672.00
SAL CASTELLANOS
REIMB CDL
$30.00
$30.00
COMARK, INC.
MTCE AGREEMENT
$120.00
MTCE AGREEMENT
$120.00-
MTCE AGREEMENT
$120.00
SOFTWARE
$887.00
MTCE AGREEMENT
$120.00
$1,127.00
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
BB72-JT-5608-D
$71.07
BB72-JT-8548-A
$11.99
$83.06
COMP USA
COMPUTER SUPPLIES
$56.46
$56.46
CONTINENTAL ILLINOIS NAT'L BK
VILLAGE SHARE FIXED COSTS-JAWA
$104,946.00
OPER.%MAINT.COSTS-JAWA
$10,660.00
LAKE WATER PURCHASE-JAWA
$175,752.00
POWER COSTS-JAWA
$15,178.00
$306,536.00
COURTESY HOME CENTER
STORAGE BASKET
$11.98
$11.98
VENDOR
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
DOUGLAS TRUCK PARTS
DUPAGE WATER COMMISSION
EARNIES TIRE REPAIR SERV. INC.
FINISHMASTER, INC.
G & K SERVICES
MARIO GAMBINO LANDSCAPING INC
W. W. GRAINGER INC.
H -B -K WATER METER SERVICE
HOSKINS CHEVROLET, INC.
HOWELL TRACTOR & EQUIPMENT CO.
TIMOTHY HRUBAN
I.B.M. CORPORATION
ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE CO
ILLINOIS SAFETY COUNCIL
ITEC
INMAC
MATTHEW JORDAN
JULIE, INC.
LATTOF CHEVROLET, INC.
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
MICE SUPPLIES
PARTS
REGISTER MCINTOSH
TIRE SERVICE
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
UNIFORM SERVICE
UNIFORM SERVICE
ISLAND SODDING
FLOAT VALVES
WATER METER LABOR
WATER METER LABOR
PARTS
MTCE SUPPLIES
REIMB CDL
CREDIT MTCE
JULY MTCE
JULY MTCE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
REGISTER -BOTH
PARTS
PARTS
COMPUTER SUPPLIES
REIMB CDL
SERVICES
SERVICES
PARTS
PARTS
PARTS
PARTS
PARTS
INVOICE AMOUNT
$118.50
$337.22
$30.00
$21.27
$46.62
$67.79
$151.69
$151.70
$1,128.00
$13.03
$1 260.87
$333.06
$17.18
$71.70
$30.00
$11.36-
$194.00
$21.00
$111.63
$17.86
$300.00
$17.39
$23.06
$55.06
$25.00
$23.73
$29.32
$715.19
$30.00
$279.39
$23.34
$11.70
$18.34
$60.79
$13.00
$65.00
PAGE 22
TOTAL
$455.72
$30.00
$21.27
$114.41
$303.39
$1,128.00
$13.03
$1,593.93
$17.18
$71.70
$30.00
$203.64
$525.00
$25.00
$53.05
$715.19
$30.00
$302.73
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 23
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
PARTS
$65.00
$233.83
J.C. LICHT COMPANY
SUPPLIES
$53.50
SUPPLIES
$6.32
SUPPLIES
$55.50
SUPPLIES
$69.48
$184.80
ROGER MEYER
MATERIAL & HAULING
$492.b6
MATERIAL & HAULING
$351.90
MATERIAL & HAULING
$2,082.55
MATERIAL & HAULING
$1,490.97
$4,418.08
MID -WEST METER COMPANY, INC.
MTCE SUPPLIES
$221.76
$221.76
MISCO
COMPUTER CABLES
$68.02
$68.02
MJB TOOLS
TOOLS
$500.02
$500.02
MORTON GROVE AUTOMOTIVE WEST
PARTS
$55.00
PARTS
$40.00
PARTS
$185.00
$280.00
NEENAH FOUNDRY CO.
SUPPLIES
$1,962.00
$1,962.00
NET MIDWEST, INC.
WATER SAMPLES TESTED
$80.00
$80.00
WALTER NORRIS COMPANY
SUPPLIES
$46.79
$46.79
NORTHERN ILLINOIS GAS CO.
SS GOLF 1W WAPELLA
$24.69
117 N WAVERLY
$10.21
1700 W CENTRAL
$695.57
$730.47
NORTHWEST STATIONERS INC.
SUPPLIES
$279.00
$279.00
P/F MATERIALS, INC.
CEMENT
$125.00
$125.00
ROBERT PEABODY
REIMB CDL
$30.00
$30.00
PETTY CASH - PUBLIC WORKS
TRAVEL AND SUPPLIES
$12.23
$12.23*
POSTMASTER
POSTAGE FOR WATER BILLS
POSTAGE FOR WATER BILLS
$579.07
$1,134.04*
PROSAFETY
GLASSES
$87.00
SUPPLIES
$120.40
$207.40
QUALITY DISCOUNT AUTO PARTS
PARTS
57.41
58.66
PARTS
$15.02
PARTS
$41.98
PARTS
$4.14
PARTS
$129.60
$306.81
RAINBOW 1 HR PHOTO EXP.
FILM & PROCESSING
$69.93
$69.93
WATER & SEWER FUND $338,921.95
********************************************************************************************************
PARKING SYSTEM DIVISION
CHICAGO & NORTHWESTERN TRANS C JUNE LAND LEASE $1,347.04 $1,347.04
NORTHERN ILLINOIS GAS CO. 19 NORTHWEST HWY $34.58 $34.58
PARKING SYSTEM DIVISION ***TOTAL** $1,381.62
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAGE 24
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7116%92
VENDOR
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
INVOICE AMOUNT
TOTAL
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
ROSEMONT BUILDING & SUPPLY CO.
SOLID BLOCK
$75.90
$75.90
LAURA SCHULTZ
FIRE HYDRANTS PAINTED
$288.00
$288.00
SIDENER SUPPLY COMPANY
REPAIR CLAMPS
$726.68
REPAIR CLAMPS
$109.27
SUPPLIES
$144.04
SUPPLIES
$64.20
$1,044.19
STANDARD PIPE & SUPPLY INC.
PLUMBING SUPPLIES
$15.12
$15.12
STEINER ELECTRIC COMPANY
SUPPLIES
$787.20
$787.20
TECH SYN CORPORATION
SUPPLIES
$367.71
$367.71
TRI -CON CORPORATION
PUMP MODIFICATIONS
$4,939.10
$4,939.10
V & G PRINTERS INC.
SERVICE TAGS
$275.00
WATER SHUT OFF TAGS
$240.00
$515.00
VHF COMMUNICATIONS INC.
REPAIRS
$122.85
REPAIR PAGER
$39.00
RADIO
$651.00
$812.85
WATER PRO SUPPLIES INC.
MTCE SUPPLIES
$295.02
MTCE SUPPLIES
$128.28
MTCE SUPPLIES
$44.70
$468.00
ZIEBELL WATER SERVICE PRODUCTS
CLAMPS
$452.97
$452.97
WATER AND SEWER DIVISION
***TOTAL**
$338,921.95
WATER & SEWER FUND $338,921.95
********************************************************************************************************
PARKING SYSTEM DIVISION
CHICAGO & NORTHWESTERN TRANS C JUNE LAND LEASE $1,347.04 $1,347.04
NORTHERN ILLINOIS GAS CO. 19 NORTHWEST HWY $34.58 $34.58
PARKING SYSTEM DIVISION ***TOTAL** $1,381.62
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 25
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/1692
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND $1,381.62
********************************************************************************************************
REFUSE DISPOSAL DIVISION
ARC DISPOSAL COMPANY
REFUSE DISPOSAL DIVISION
REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
BOURBONNAIS SUPPLY INC.
COURTESY HOME CENTER
DOOR SYSTEMS, INC.
GOODYEAR COMMERCIAL TIRE & SER
LUND INDUSTRIES, INC.
A. J. MAGGIO CO.
NORTHERN ILLINOIS GAS CO.
BARRY A. SPRINGER
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
JUNE COLLECTION
JUNE COLLECTION
JUNE COLLECTION
JUNE COLLECTION
$213,651.51
$37,937.67
$24,925.18
$105,771.20
$45,017.46
***TOTAL**
$213,651.51
$213,651.51
ROOT F-5 SCRAPER
$2,666.38
$2,666.38
STORM DOOR
$78.95
$78.95
2 DOOR OPENERS/REPAIRS
$90.00
$90.00
TIRES%RIMS
$323.99
TIRESJRIMS
$323.99
$647.98
P-16 CONVERSION COSTS
$1,048.59
P-13 CONVERSION COSTS
$1,082.54
$2,131.13
CONSTRUCTION
$119,280.00
$119,280.00
100 W NORTHWEST HWY
$33.00
$33.00
JUNE LEGAL SERVICES
$270.00
$270.00
***TOTAL** $125,197.44
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND $5,445.49 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND $123.00
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 26
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16192
VENDOR PURCHASE DESCRIPTION INVOICE AMOUNT TOTAL
POLICE & FIRE BOND PROCEEDS $119,280.00 DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1991 $348.95
********************************************************************************************************
COMMUNITY AND CIVIC SERVICES
CENTURY TILE SUPPLY COMPANY
CARPET
231.25
$231.25
FOLDERS FLAG & DECORATING, INC
FLAG INSTALLATION
525.00
$525.00
HELLER LUMBER CO.
JUNE 92 SUPPLIES
$83.58
JUNE 92 SUPPLIES
$209.02
$292.60
J.C. LICHT COMPANY
SUPPLIES
$20.25
$20.25
PETTY CASH - POLICE DEPT.
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
$15.38
$15.38*
COMMUNITY AND CIVIC SERVICES
***TOTAL**
$1,084.48
GENERAL FUND $1,084.48
DEBT SERVICE
FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CHICAGO SERVICES RENDERED $475.42 $475.42
DEBT SERVICE ***TOTAL** $475.42
CORPORATE PURPOSES B & I 1973 $475.42
PENSIONS
NBD BANK MOUNT PROSPECT, N.A. WITHHOLDING TAX $200.00 $200.00
VENDOR
PENSIONS
CHARLES W. NICK
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PAUL H. WATKINS
PENSIONS
GENERAL FUND
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL REPORT
PAYMENT DATE 7/16/92
PURCHASE DESCRIPTION
JULY 92 PENSION
AUGUST MEDICAL INSURANCE
JULY DISABILITY BENEFIT
$883.22 BENEFIT TRUST #2
INVOICE AMOUNT
$883.22
$510.00
$1,456.83
***TOTAL**
PAGE • 2 7
0tokct0
$883.22
$510.00
$1,456.83
$3,050.05
$2,166.83
ALL DEPARTMENTS TOTAL $1,974,822.59
DATE RUN 7/16/92
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PAGE 28
TIME RUN 11.56.53
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE APPROVAL
LISTING ID-APPBAR
SUMMARY BY FUND 7/16/92
NO.
FUND NAME
AMOUNT
1
GENERAL FUND
$898,969.08
21
REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND
$216,308.82
22
MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND
$63,422.17
23
COMMUNITY DEVLPMT BLOCK GRANT
$5,359.70
24
ILL. MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT FUND
$15,174.96
31
BENEFIT TRUST #2
$2,166.83
41
WATER & SEWER FUND
$484,568.27
46
PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND
$4,855.63
48
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND
$8,902.99
49
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
$54,600.16
51
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
$1,842.28
53
POLICE & FIRE BOND PROCEEDS
$119,280.00
56
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1991
$348.95
60
CORPORATE PURPOSES B & I 1973
$475.42
73
FLEXCOMP ESCROW FUND
$7,152.29
74
ESCROW DEPOSIT FUND
$91,395.04
TOTAL ALL FUNDS $1,974,822.59
VILILAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
FINANCIAL REPORT
June 1, 1992 - June 30, 1992
Fund
Revenues
Expenses
Fund
Balance
for
for
Balance
Mav 31 1992
June 1992
June 1992
June 30 1992
General and Special Revenue Funds
General Fund
$ 3,050,880
$ 550,282
$1,255,459
$ 2,345,703
Motor Fuel Tax Fund
516,410
86,013
193,954
408,469
Community Development Block Grant
9,928
2,796
19,689
<6,965>
Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund
8,299
1,277
55,404
<45,828>
Refuse Disposal Fund
35,254
67,163
213,061
<110,644>
Enterprise Funds
Water & Sewer Fund
3,450,016
454,710
562,692
3,342,034
Parking System Revenue Fund
172,505
15,985
16,088
172,402
Internal Service Funds
Risk Management Fund
917,516
241,630
178,100
981,046
Vehicle Replacement Fund
1,057,660
4,311
45,207
1,016,764
Capital Protects
Capital Improvement Fund
1,224,873
107,496
25,509
1,306,860
Downtown Redev. Const. Funds
535,980
3,911
755
539,136
Police & Fire Building Construction
4,652,709
25,361
29,264
4,648,806
Flood Control Const. Fund
4,587,617
14,593
46,463
4,555,747
Debt Service Funds
1,062,973
4,659
141,957
925,675
Trust & Agenc Funds
unds
Flexcomp Trust
-
-
-
-
Escrow Deposit Fund
-
-
-
-
Police Pension Fund
17,605,446
148,352
74,822
17,678,976
Firemen's Pension Fund
19,475,049
178,501
91,686
19,561,864
Benefit Trust Funds
247,102
1,449
2,167
246.384
58 610 217
1903489
2 952 27757
566 429
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 - 6/30/92
REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND
BUDGET
CUR NO
Y-T-D
BUDGET
PERCENT
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
RECEIVED
RECEIVED
BALANCE
BALANCE
TAX REVENUE
10,671,550.00
106,829.07
234,796.38
10,436,753.62
97.79
FEE REVENUE
1,833,000.00
85,184.02
904,354.40
928,645.60
50.66
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE
2,570,700.00
266,310.16
266,367.23
2,304,332.77
89.63
SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE
376,500.00
41,003.82
43,465.41
333,034,59
88.45
FINES AND FORFEITS
325,700.00
14,051.85
27,702.92
297,997.08
91.49
OTHER REVENUE
565.550.0036,901�89
94,304.98
471,7,45.02
83.32
FUND TOTALS
16 34� �3,�000,00
55�
1,570.991,32
14,772,po,68_
90.38 %
REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND
TAX REVENUE
1,852,650.00
2,968.96 14,201.67
1,838,448.33 99.23
SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE
717,250.00
64,120.00 122,160.39
595,089.61 82.96
OTHER REVENUE
2,500.00
74.00 295.97
x.20„4;03 88,16
FUND TOTALS 2,572.400,00 67,1 .9 136,658.03 2.435 741.97 94.68 %
MOTOR FUEL TAX FUND
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE 1,047,500.00 81,774.77 81,774.77 965,725.23 92.19
OTHER REVENUE 50.100.00 4 3 6.660.30 470 86.70
FUND TOTALS 1,,097.600.00 86,013.59 88.435.07 1,009,164.93 91.94 %
COMMUNITY DFVLPMT BLOCK GRANT
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE 250,900.00 00 .00 250,900.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 25�OWOO 15,770;05 9,229.95 36.91
FUND TOTALS 275,900.00 2,796.00 15370.05 2§Q.129.95 94.28 %
MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT F N
TAX REVENUE 760,950.00 1,199.22 5,736.34 755,213.66 99.24
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE 55,000.00 .00 .00 55,000.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 2,500.00 77.87 354.31 2.145.69 85.82
FUND TOTALS1�R18,4-550,00 1.277.09 6.090.65 812,359.335 99.25 %
V I L L A G E 0 F M 0 U N T P R 0 S P E C T
S U D G E T R E V E N U E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 6/30/92
BUDGET CUR No Y -T -D BUDGET PERCENT
BENEFIT TRUST #9. AMOUNT RECEIVED RECEIVED BALANCE BALANC
OTHER REVENUE 18,500,00 1,439.48 2,919.6215,580.38 84.21
FUND TOTALS 18„ 500.00 1,439.48 2,919.62 15,580.38 84.21 %
BENEFIT TRUST #3
OTHER REVENUE 00 10.24 21.12 21.12- .00
FUND TOTALS .00 10,24 21.12 21.12- .00 %
LJSRARX FUNQ
TAX REVENUE 2,220,425.00 .00 .00 2,220,425.00 100.00
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE 75,370.00 .00 .00 75,370.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 574,630.00 00 .00 574,630.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 2,870,425.00 .00 2,870,425,00 100.00 %
WATER 9 SEWER FUND
TAX REVENUE
1,357,900.00
2,260.39
11,715.58
1,346,184.42
99.13
FEE REVENUE
17,500.00
855,00
855.00
16,645.00
95.11
SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE
4,437,500.00
431,227.10
761,472.67
3,676,027.33
82.84
OTHER REVENUE
652,750.00
20J66,62,
42.639A2
610,110.58
93.46
FUND TOTALS 6,05 07,33 87.36 %
,,, ,650.00 --- ka -709. 11 816,682.67 5,6j§,9
PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE FUND
FEE REVENUE
2,880.00
240.00
480.00
2,400.00
83.33
PARKING REVENUE
177,500.00
14,828.47
28,236.72
149,263.28
84.09
FINES AND FORFEITS
.00
82.50
$2.50
82.50-
.00
OTHER REVENUE
12,000-00
833,0
1,753.24
---- !Q,?Akd§-
85.38
FUND TOTALS 192,380-00 15,984.63 30,552,46 161,827,54 84.11 %
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 R E V E N U E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 6/30/92
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE 2,092,000.00 208,484.42 215,461.12 1,876,538.88 $9.70
OTHER REVENUE 426,500,00 33,144,94 $9,214,28 337,285.72 79.08
FUND TOTALS 2 5518,5,x_ 241,629J6 304,075.40 24.60 87.90 %
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
BUDGET
CUR MO
Y -T -D
BUDGET
PERCENT
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND
AMOUNT
RECEIVED
RECEIVED
BALANCE
BALANCE
SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE
627,600.00
.00
627,600.00
.00
.00
OTHER REVENUE
47,500=
4,310,97
7,956,27
39,543,73
83.24
FUND TOTALS
675,100.00
4,310,97
635,556,27
39,543.73
5.85 %
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE 2,092,000.00 208,484.42 215,461.12 1,876,538.88 $9.70
OTHER REVENUE 426,500,00 33,144,94 $9,214,28 337,285.72 79.08
FUND TOTALS 2 5518,5,x_ 241,629J6 304,075.40 24.60 87.90 %
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
TAX REVENUE
293,300.00
665.31
3,182.44
290,117.56
98.91
FEE REVENUE
120,000.00
8,461.67
16,785.34
T03,214.66
86.01
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE
990,000.00
69,732.71
69,732.71
920,267.29
92.95
INTERFUND TRANSFERS
425,000.00
.00
.00
425,000.00
100.00
OTHER REVENUE
266,500.00
28,636.17
44,900J3
221,599,47
83.15
FUND TOTALS 2,094,800M 107,495,86 134,601,02 1,960,198.98 93.57 %
POLICE & FIRE BLDG CONST FUND
OTHER REVENUE 100,000,00 1�
_397 05 25,293.27 74,706.73 74.70
FUND TOTALS 1001000.00 12397.05 25,293.27 74,706,73 74.70 %
POLICE & FIRE BOND PROCEEDS
OTHER REVENUE 75,000.00 12,963,79 27314.34 47,685,66 63.58
FUND TOTALS 75,000.00, 12,963,79 27,31434 47,685.66 63.58 %
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1985
FEE REVENUE 16,500.00 1,500.00 3,000.00 13,500.00 81.81
OTHER REVENUE 2.600.00 597,32 1,219.11 1,380.89 53.11
FUND TOTALS 19,100.00 2,097.3? 4.219,11 14,8W.89 77.91 %
V I L L A G 5 0 F M 0 U N T P R 0 S P 5 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 - 6/30/92
BUDGET CUR mo Y -T -D BUDGET PERCENT
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1991 AMOUNT RECEIVED RECEIVED BALANCE BALANCE
OTHER REVENUE M000.00 1J05.12 2,262.76 7,737.24 77.37
FUND TOTALS 10,000.00 1,105.12 2,262.76 7,737.g4 77.37 %
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1992
OTHER REVENUE 10,000.00 708.90 1,464.40 8,535.60 85.35
FUND TOTALS 10,000.00 708e90e 1,464.40 8,535.60 85.35 %
FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND 1991
TAX REVENUE 800,000.00 83.98 83.98 799,916.02 99.98
OTHER REVENUE 90,000.00 __5 _57266..57 15,618.75 74,381.25 82.64
FUND TOTALS 890,000.00 5,610.55 15,702.73 874,297.27 98.23 x
FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND 1992
OTHER REVENUE 50=0.00 81982.31 18,213.81 31,786.19 63.57
FUND TOTALS 501000,00 8,982.31 18,213.81 31.786.19 63.57 %
CORPORATE PURPOSES B & 1 1973
TAX REVENUE 136,650.00 239.09 1,143.63 135,506.37 99.16
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE 4,100.00 .00 .00 4,100.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 7.500.00 726.89 1,493.28 6,006.72 80.08
FUND TOTALS 148.250M 965.98 2,636-91 145,613-09 98.22 %
CORPORATE PURPOSES I & 1 1974
TAX REVENUE 192,000.00 336.58 1,610.01 190,389.99 99.16
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE 5,700.00 .00 .00 5,700.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 10O00.00 938.52 1,920.29
8,079.71 80.79
FUND TOTALS 207,700 00 1,275.10 3,530.30 204,169-70 98.30 %
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 R E V E N U E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 6/30/92
SSA #2 BLACKHAWK 8 &1
TAX REVENUE 16,850.00 10.69 206.53 16,643.47 98.77
OTHER REVENUE 21250.00 147,98 311& 1�938_14 86.13
FUND TOTALS 19,10().00 IWO 518.3918,581.61 97.28 %
POLICE & FIRE BLDG 8 & 11991A
TAX REVENUE 342,600.00 .00 .00 342,600.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 900-99 54 333.84 566.16 62.90
FUND TOTALS - 343,5Q0,OO 54 333.84 343., 10, 16 99.90 %
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT 8 & 1 19918
IMTERFUND TRANSFERS 32,750.00 .00 15,868.7516,881.25 51.54
FUND TOTALS 32,750.00 .00 15,0U.75 16,881.25 51.54 %
INSURANCE RESERVE 8 & 1 1987
FUND TOTALS 0 .
_0 Do M .00 .00 %
FLOOD CONTROL 8 & I 1991A
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 375�500.00 .00$7,260.00 288.240.00 76.76
FUND TOTALS 375,500.00 .OQ87�260.00 2SS,240.00 76.76 %
Q_OWNTOWN RT 8 & 1 19870
TAX REVENUE 146,500.00 .00 Do 146,500.00 100.00
BUDGET
CUR NO
Y -T -D
BUDGET
PERCENT
S A #1 PROSPECT NDWS @ S, I
AMOUNT
RECEIVED
RECEIVE 2
BALANCE
BALANCE,
TAX REVENUE
19,750.00
9.51
66.07
19,683.93
99.66
OTHER REVENUE
2.250.00
150.54
311.93
1,9WO7
86.13
FUND TOTALS
221000.00
160,05
378,OD
21,622�00
98.28 x
SSA #2 BLACKHAWK 8 &1
TAX REVENUE 16,850.00 10.69 206.53 16,643.47 98.77
OTHER REVENUE 21250.00 147,98 311& 1�938_14 86.13
FUND TOTALS 19,10().00 IWO 518.3918,581.61 97.28 %
POLICE & FIRE BLDG 8 & 11991A
TAX REVENUE 342,600.00 .00 .00 342,600.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 900-99 54 333.84 566.16 62.90
FUND TOTALS - 343,5Q0,OO 54 333.84 343., 10, 16 99.90 %
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT 8 & 1 19918
IMTERFUND TRANSFERS 32,750.00 .00 15,868.7516,881.25 51.54
FUND TOTALS 32,750.00 .00 15,0U.75 16,881.25 51.54 %
INSURANCE RESERVE 8 & 1 1987
FUND TOTALS 0 .
_0 Do M .00 .00 %
FLOOD CONTROL 8 & I 1991A
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 375�500.00 .00$7,260.00 288.240.00 76.76
FUND TOTALS 375,500.00 .OQ87�260.00 2SS,240.00 76.76 %
Q_OWNTOWN RT 8 & 1 19870
TAX REVENUE 146,500.00 .00 Do 146,500.00 100.00
V I L L A G E 0 F N 0 U N T P R 0 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 - 6/30/92
BUDGET CUR NO Y -T -D BUDGET PERCENT
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT 8& 1987 AMOUNT RECEIVED RECEIVED BALANCE SAIMCE
OTHER REVENUE 10,000.00 _L42.49873.46 9 �126.54 91.26
FUND TOTALS 156,500.00 342.49 873.46 155,626.54 99.44 %
P W FACILITY 8 & 11987B
TAX REVENUE 362,250.00 593.45 2,838.72 359,411.28 99.21
OTHER REVENUE 15,wQ.00 1,059.69 2,892.1812,107.82 80.71
FUND TOTALS X77.250.00 1 653.14 5,750,90 371,519.10 98.48 %
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT 8 & 11987C
TAX REVENUE 78,500.00 .00 .00 78,500.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 115,gg .00 .00 115.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 78,615.00 .00 78,615.00 100.00 %
POLICE PENSION FUND
TAX REVENUE 89,000.00 124.75 596.73 88,403.27 99.32
OTHER REVENUE 2-05C500.00 148,226.47 Z69.Z44.02 1,787,255.98 86.90
FUND TOTALS 2,145,500.00 148,351.22 269-840.75 1,8M659.g§ 87.42 %
FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND
TAX REVENUE 38,000.00 48.24 230.73 37,769.27 99.39
OTHER REVENUE 2.272,000,00 178,452.28 318,915.39 1,953,084,61 85.96
FUND TOTALS 2,310.000.OQ 178,500,52 319.146, 2- 1,990,853.88 86.18 %
SSA #3 SUSSE-WILLE 8 & I
FUND TOTALS M .00 ,00 M .00 %
V I L L A G E 0 F M 0 U N T P R 0 5 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 - 6/30/92
D BUDGET PERCENT
'ET CUR "0 YiT BALANCE
BUD'
SSA #4 BUSSE-WILLE 8 & I MOUNT RE RECEIVED BALANCE
FUND TOTALS .00 .00 J)o 00 M %
CaPTTAL IMPROMENT 8 & 11992A
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 64,500.00 .00 .00 64,500.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 100.00 12.48 26.02 73.98 73.98
FUND TOTALS 64�600M 12,48 26.02 64,573.98 99.95 %
FLOOD CONTROL 8 & I 1992A
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 110,300.00 .00 .00 110,300.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE 200,00 .21.06 43.71 156..29 78.14
FUND TOTALS 110500.00 21,06 43.71 110,456.29 99.96 %
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT 8 & 1 19928
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 9,650.00 .00 .00 9,650.00 100.00
OTHER REVENUE .00 1.80 3.69 3.69- .00
FUND TOTALS 9.650.00 1.80 3.69 9,646.31 99.96 %
$$A #6 GEORGE/ALBERT 8 & I
TAX REVENUE
32,300.00
14.84 203.98
32,096.02
99.36
OTHER REVENUE
100,,
51.25 136.28
863.72
86.37
FUND TOTALS
33,300.00
66,09 340.26
32,95934
98.97 %
TOTALS ALL FUNDS 43,531,520.00 1,908,484.28 4,543,955.20 38,987,564.80 89.56 %
LESS TRANSFERS 1,017,700.00- M 103,128.75- 914,571.25- 89.86 %
TOTAL REVENUES 42,513,820.00 1,908,484.28 4,440,826.45 38,072,993.55 89.55 %
V I L L A 6 E O F M 0 U N T P R O S P E C T
8 U D 6 E T E X P E N D I T U R E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 6/30/92
REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND
BUDGET
CUR NO
Y -T -D
BUDGET
PERCENT
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
EXPENDED
EXPENDED
BALANCE
BALANCE
PERSONAL SERVICES
11,553,510.00
813,589.61
1,691,470.56
9,862,039.44
85.35
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,862,325.00
376,626.72
577,199.84
3,285,125.16
85.05
COMMODITIES
796,415.00
56,785.54
81,981.37
714,433.63
89.70
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
229,855.00
7,561.67
8,326.67
221,528.33
96.37
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE
21,795.00
.00
21,280.60
514.40
2.36
PENSION EXPENSE�Q
6�,,
83,22
1,700,44
8,$31.50
83.33
FUND TOTALS
16,474,500.00
1 25�
2.38?,025A8
14 .474,,52
85.54 X
REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND
PERSONAL SERVICES
56,930.00
3,969.75 8,045.55
48,884.45 85.86
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,469,700.00
208,568.42 209,384.69
2,260,315.31 91.52
COMMODITIES
- 17,500,00_
521.61 536.30
16,963,70 %.93
FUND TOTALS ,?,,544,130,00 213.059,78 217,966.54 ?,,.326,163,46 91.43 %
TOR FUEL TAX FUND
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 66,000.00 1,296.OD 2,528.00 63,472.00 96.16
COMMODITIES 75,000.00 .00 .00 75,000.00 100.00
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 1.007,500,00 192.657,95 24� 7614156,42 75.54
FUND TOTALS 1,148.500,00 _ 193.953,95 248,871.58 M621142 78.33 X
COMMUNITY DEV P T BLOCK GRANT
PERSONAL SERVICES
46,750.00
3,112.62
6,001.78
40,748.22
87.16
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
42,850.00
137.00
137.00
42,713.00
99.68
COMMODITIES
1,200.00
.00
7.99
1,192.01
99.33
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
185.100.00
16,440=
16,588.00
168,512.00
91.03
FUND TOTALS 275.2W. 9919.68 22.734.7T 253,165,23 91.75 X
. MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT FUN
PERSONAL SERVICES _ Z82,,835.0055,403.20 112.092.47 670.742.53 85.68
FUND TOTALS 782,835.00 55,403.20 112,092.47_ 670.742.53 85.68 %
V I L L A 6 E OF MOUNT PROSPECT
0 U D 6 E T E X P E N D I T U R E S U M M A R Y
5/01/92 - 6/30/92
BUDGET CUR 140 Y -T -D BUDGET PERCENT
JENEFIT TRVST,#2 6MOUNT EXPENDED EXPEN060 BALANCE 0ALANCI
PENSION EXPENSE 26.000.00 2.166.83 4,333.66 �21666.34 83.33
FUND TOTALS ff _000- 00 2166.83 4,333.66 21,666.34 83.33 %
LIBRARY FUND
LIBRAPY OPERATIONS 2,870,425-00 DO .00, 2,870,425.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 2,870,425,.M_ DO-- QO 2,870,425.00 100.00 %
WATER & SEWER FUND
PERSONAL SERVICES
1,250,230.00
96,960.77
182,205.56
1,068,024.44
85.42
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,045,700.00
362,237.88
595,044.50
3,450,655.50
85.29
COMMODITIES
351,200.00
34,032.87
46,496.32
304,703.68
86.76
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
396,800.00
24,000.00
38,141.59
358,658.41
90.38
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE
601,925.00
45,456.84
66,094.34,
535,830.66
89.01
FUND TOTALS X5,855.00 562,688.36 927,982.31 5,717,872.69 86.03 %
PARKIN SYS TF" REVENUE FUND
PERSONAL SERVICES
24,110.00
1,778.84
3,557.78
20,552.22
$5.24
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
62,900.00
3,839.77
15,206.71
47,693.29
75.82
COMMODITIES
5,800.00
555.78
751.50
5,048.50
87.04
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
9,913.QQ
9,913.Q0
1 , Q§7. DO
9.88
FUND TOTALS103,810-00 16,087.39 29A28.99 74,381.01 71.65 %
VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FUND
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 583,415.00 45,207,42 79.442.02 503,972�98 86.38
FUND TOTALS 583,415.00 45,207,42 79,442.02 503,972.98 86.38 %
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2.512 QQQ.00 178,100.89 357,770.98 2,154,229.02 85.75
FUND TOTALS 2,512, WQ,OO 178,100.89 357,770,2§ 2,154,229.02 85.75 %
V I L L A G E O F M O U N T P R O S P E C T
8 U D G E T E X P E N D I T U R E S U N N A R Y
5/01/92 - 6/30/92
MICE S FIRE BLDG CON$T FUND
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 1,830,285.00 .00 .00 1,830,285.00 100.00
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 425,000.00 00 OU425,JODD.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS255.2$5 _Q0 .00 ,00 2.255,285.00 100.00 X
POLICE S FIRE BOND PROCEEDS
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES ,'x..122,215.00 29,264.00 583.116.97 1,15391098.03 72.52
FUND TOTALS 2,122,,215.00 29,264.00 583.116.97 1.539,098.03 72.52 X
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1991
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 250,000.00 754.69 1,053.02 248,946.98 99.57
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 32„750.00 15,868.75 16,881.25 51.54
FUND TOTALS 282,750.00 754.69 16„921,77 265.828.23 94.01 X
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1992
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 91650.00 .00 ,009_650.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 9.650,00 00 .00 M50�0 100.00 X
FLOOD CONTR2L CONST FUND 1991
BUDGET
CUR NO
Y -T -D
BUDGET
PERCENT
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
AMOUNT
EXPENDED
EXPENDED
BALANCE
BALANCE
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
498,500.00
3,101.07
484,913.15
13,586.85
2.72
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
1,310,960.00
22,408.02
22,607.02
1,288,352.98
98.27
INTERFUND TRANSFERS
64.500.00
00
2033,,894.5]_
�QO.QA
100.00
FUND TOTALS
1,873,960.00
251509 09
507,520,17
1.366,439,83
72.91 X
MICE S FIRE BLDG CON$T FUND
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 1,830,285.00 .00 .00 1,830,285.00 100.00
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 425,000.00 00 OU425,JODD.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS255.2$5 _Q0 .00 ,00 2.255,285.00 100.00 X
POLICE S FIRE BOND PROCEEDS
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES ,'x..122,215.00 29,264.00 583.116.97 1,15391098.03 72.52
FUND TOTALS 2,122,,215.00 29,264.00 583.116.97 1.539,098.03 72.52 X
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1991
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 250,000.00 754.69 1,053.02 248,946.98 99.57
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 32„750.00 15,868.75 16,881.25 51.54
FUND TOTALS 282,750.00 754.69 16„921,77 265.828.23 94.01 X
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT CONST 1992
INTERFUND TRANSFERS 91650.00 .00 ,009_650.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 9.650,00 00 .00 M50�0 100.00 X
FLOOD CONTR2L CONST FUND 1991
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
80,000.00
.00
600.00
79,400.00
99.25
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
390,000.00
46,462.82
116,034.51
273,965.49
70.24
INTERFUND TRANSFERS
485 MJX)
.00
87,260.00
398,540.00
82.03
FUND TOTALS
955 800.00
46,462.82
2033,,894.5]_
751,905.49
78.66 X
VILLAGE OF N 0 U N T PROSPECT
BUDGET EXPENDITURE SUNNARY
5/01/92 - 6/30/92
BUDGET CUR NO Y -T -D BUDGET PERCENT
FLOOD CONTROL CONST FUND 1222- AM _QEp
OUNT EXPENDED eXpEN BALAK E
_ I MLA
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 00 ------------- & 3,850,000.00 100.00
FUND TOTALS 3,850,000.00 DD . . . . . . . 3,850,000.00 100.00
CORPORATE PURPOSES. 0 A 1 1973 -
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 1661500-00 10,375.00 10,375.00., 156,125.00 93.76
FUND TOTALS 166,500.00,10,375.00,, 10,375.00 156,12500 93.76 %
CORPORATE PURPOSES 8 & 1 1974
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 245
,400.0() 22 600 00 90.79
FUND TOTALS 245,400.00 22,600.00 22.O00,.,00-222, SM. 00 90.79 %
SSA #1 PRO$PECT MEADOWS B 9 1
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 22,470.00 4,235.00 4.235,00 180235.00 81.15
FUND TOTALS 22,470.00 4,235.OD 4,235.00 18,235.00 81.15 %
$$A #2 OLACKHAWX 8 & I
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 30,800.00 Do 2. 900. 00 27,%0.00 90.58
FUND TOTALS 30, §w - 00 2,900-00 27,900,00 90.58 %
POLICE & FIRE BLDG 0 & 11991A
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 244,455.00 90,65 122,016.90 122.438.10 50.08
FUND TOTALS 244,455= 290,65 122.016.90 122,438,10 50.08 %
MNTOWN RSOE
, , YLPHT 0 & 1 19918
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 32,750.00 500.00 _,,,,16,x_ 16,�81.25 50.01
FUND TOTALS 32,750.00 500.00. 16,. .,_75 16,381.25 50.01 %
V I L L A G E 0 F H 0 U N T P R 0 S P E C T
B U D 6 E T E X P E N 0 1 T U R 6 S U 9 N A R Y
5/01/92 - 6/30/92
BUDGET CUR NO Y -T -D BUDGET PERCENT
FLOOD CONTROL 8 9 1 1991A AMOUNT EXPENDED EXPENDED BALANCE BALANCE
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 3751500M 209.35 879 288,030.65 76.70
FUND TOTALS 375,E ;M.-, 35 ?8_8, OAQ � 65 76.70 X
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT 8 & I 1987D
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 114,375.00 500.00 57,436.25 56,938.75 49.78
FUND TOTALS 114,375= 500$00 .. 57,436 .25 M 9A8,7.L 49.78 %
EP_W FACILITY 0 & 1 19878
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 434,130,0089,507.54 89,507.54 344,622.46 79.38
FUND TOTALS 434,130.90 09.507,54 89,$07J4 344,622,46 79.38 %
DOWNTOWN REDEVLPMT 8 & I 1987C
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 78,615,00 11,807,50 11 807.50 66,$07.50 84.98
FUND TOTALS 78,615M 11,807.50 11,807.50 66,807JO 84.98 %
POLICE PENSION FUND
PERSONAL SERVICES 333,500.00 33,350.00 33,350.00 300,150.00 90.00
PENSION EXPENSE 568,000.00 41,471.80 94,818.44 483,181.56 85.06
FUND TOTALS 901,500.00 74,821.80 118,16$.44 783,331.56 86.89 %
MEMO'S PENSION FUND
PERSONAL SERVICES 410,000.00 41,000.00 41,000.00 369,000.00 90.00
PENSION EXPENSE 605,000.00 50,685.13 98,034�46 506,965.54 83.79
FUND TOTALS 1,015,000,00 91, w '13 139,034,46 X5,5,4_ -5.54 86.30 %
CAPITAL IMPROVMENT 8 & 11992A
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 68500.00 506,12 506,12 67,99388 99.26
FUND TOTALS- 68,5MOO 506.12 506J2 67,993.88 99.26 %
V I L L A 6 E O F M O U N T P R O S P E C T
B U D 6 E T EXPENDITURE S U N N A R Y
5/01/92 - 6/30/92
BUDGET CUR NO Y -T -D BUDGET PERCENT
FLOW Q
199
653.95 99.2$
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE 114.500.09 $46.05 $46.05 117.
FUND TOTALS _118,500.00 " i17R¢53M— 99.28 X
MT : 99
DEBT 5ERYICE EXPENSE
10.250.00 578.9 $78 9^4 - _ Q� 94.35
FUND TOTALS
10.250.00 578.92 558,22, 9,671,,Q$ 94.35 %
ssA #6 ol0 VALBERT
DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE SO.00 '00 -- 11,823jS 21 826 25 �+ SQ
FUND TOTALS 33,650.00 .00 11'823'75 -- 21,^826 95 64.86 %
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 49.209.425.00 959,25L 8b ¢,: 776 42.819.648.75 87.01 %
Ff
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 am. 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 XON
JFD/rcc
attachment
WEV SMIMM
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 fortheperiod 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 - consumptio- 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:
ME
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,(a::c�or�poration, co -partnership or an association? (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
il, ( t- I4-. (992 -
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
Date of Birth
11-1-41 Social Security # 354-78-4353
OFFICE AND/OR
PERCENT OF
STOCK HELD
PRESIDENT -50%
Phone # 708) 437-0699
SANG SOOK KIM 4300 LAKE, GLENVIEW, ILL. SECRETARY - 50%
Date of Birth: 10-14-48 Social Security # 348-78-4667 Phone # 708) 437-0699
Date of Birth: Social Security #
Phone #
Objects for which organization is formed: To engage Qoerat, inn nf—a rest-laurant
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? - NC) 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?
Local address:
Telephone no.
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 nNLY - 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, list
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. FYes," 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
wppoe)fu(,
is
SIGNATURE OFAPPLICANTl-7.,17-f/:,—� ,/Z/�.�-,-.., -PLC 3:1Pr?-5T
Corporate Seal —ilk
(If applicant is corporation)
Who, first being duly sworn, under oath deposes and says that ibeq Kare the
applicant(s) for the license requested in the foregoing application; thzii_±HeL )Vare 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 r(7f day of het, A.D., 10----
NotNbIle
OFFICIAL SEAL
PETER �K.LEE
NOTARY PUBLIC. STATE OF ILLINOIS
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 6/19/95
APPLICATION APPROVED;
Local Liquor Control Commissioner
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13 OF THE
VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS:
SECTION ONE: That Subsection A of Section 13, 107 of Chapter 13 of the Village
Code of Mount Prospect, as amended, be and the same is hereby further amended by
increasing the number of Class "R" liquor licenses by one (1) (Wonderful Restaurant,
1839 West Algonquin Road), so that hereafter said Subsection A of Section 13.107 of
Chapter 13 shall be and read as follows:
Sgction 1.3.107, Numha Qf Licenses:
Two (2)
Class A Licenses
Two (2)
Class B Licenses
Ten (10)
Class C Licenses
One (1)
Class D License
Two (2)
Class E Licenses
One (1)
Class G License
One (1)
Class H License
One (1)
Class M license
One (1)
Class P License
Twenty-two (22)
Class R licenses
Eight (8)
Class S Licenses
One (1)
Class T License
Six (6)
Class W Licenses
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:
ABSENT:
PASSED and APPROVED this
ATTEST:
Village Clerk
day of , 1992.
Village President
4
Qm
A
B
C
I
G
H
M
P
R
S
T
W
Establishme Number
Midwest Liquors; Mrs. P & Me 2
Dumas Walker's: Ye Olde Town Inn 2
Alvee's liquors; Bolzano Liquors; Dominicks
(83 & Golf); Gold Eagle liquors; Jay liquors;
Mt. Prospect liquors; Osco Drugs; Phar -Mor;
Walgreens (83 and Golf); Walgreens
(Mt. Prospect Plaza)
Prospect Moose Lodge
Bristol Court Banquet Hall; Mr. Peter's
Banquet Hall
Mount Prospect Park District -Golf Course
Zanie's
Holiday Inn
Shimada Shoten
Artemis; Boo M; DJB Brunetti; Chungkiwa Restaurant;
Dragon City; Edwardo's; Fellini; Giordano's
(Rand Road); Giordano's (Elmhurst Road);
House of Szechwan; Izakaya Sankyu; little America;
Magic Dragon Restaurant; Nina Restaurant; Pepe's;
Sakura; Shin Jung; Sunrise; Tedino's; Torishin;
Wonderful: Yasuke
El Sombrero; Emerson House; Jake's Pizza;
JamesoWs Charhouse; Kampai; Old Orchard Country
Club Restaurant; Sam's Place; Wild Stallions Cafe
Thunderbird Lanes
Mr. Beef & Pizza; Pete's Sandwich Palace;
Photo's Hot Dogs; Pizza Hut; Rosati's Pizza;
10
1
2
9
8
1
Taqueria Fiesta 6
58
Village of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois
.;
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR GERALD L. FARLEY AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
FROM: VILLAGE MANAGER
DATE: JULY 16, 1992
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR CONTINUATION OF CLASS W' LIQUOR LICENSE,
PETE'S SANDWICH PALACE, 710 EAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY
On Wednesday, July 15, the Village Manager met with George Polymenakos and Pete
Kondiles regarding Mr. Polymenakos' request to continue the Class W Liquor License
currently issued to Pete's Sandwich Palace. The Class W liquor designation provides for
consumption of beer and wine only and only at dining tables.
Mr. Polymenakos indicated that he was purchasing the business from Mr. Kondiles and
that he planned to continue operations without material change and under the same
name. The business will be operated as a corporation with Mr. Polymenakos and his
partner, Athanasios Konstantopoulos, as equal stockholders. Incorporation papers are on
file with the Village and all fees have been paid.
The property is currently owned by Mr. Nick Kondiles (Pete's father). Mr. Polymenakos
has entered into a long-term lease for the continued operation of the business.
While Mr. Polymenakos and his partner have had no prior experience with operating an
establishment with a Liquor License, they do have approximately 20 years of experience
in the restaurant business. They are currently co-owners of two restaurants located in
Chicago. Mr. Polymenakos has had part ownership in the Apollo Restaurant for
approximately 19 years which is a sit down breakfast, lunch and dinner cafe. They have
also been owners of Sammy's, a fast-food restaurant which is a hot dog/hamburger style
restaurant.
Upon questioning, Mr. Polymenakos indicated that he and his partner are familiar with
the requirements of the Liquor Code and that they understand the Village Board's
philosophy regarding the sale and consumption of liquor in Village establishments. At
this point, Mr. -Polymenakos and his partner have submitted to finger printing and
standard background checks. Mr. Polymenakos has indicated that his partner will manage
this location.
As stated before, the new owners plan no major remodeling and intend to maintain the
present style of the establishment. They did indicate that at some future date, they
might consider extending hours of operation from the present Monday -Friday, 10:00 a.m.
to 8:00 p.m. hours to 10:00 am. to 10:00 p.m. and extending the hours of operation on
Saturday from 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Mr. Polymenakos has indicated that he would be in a position to assume ownership
immediately after receiving the Village Board's approval. If it is the Board's pleasure,
a Motion to approve the continuation of the existing Class W License would be
appropriate. No new Ordinance is required. The License will be issued when proof of
insurance and other documentation is on file with the Village.
MICI�iAE . ,I OIS
M1J/rcc
attachment
RENEWAL
NEW DAIE._7— 13— 4Z2_
___t4 Non -Refundable Application Fee for issuance of
.,_(3150
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,) , <1 1-
'
hereby makes application Jorr a Class 114"1 dealer' s license for the _pe�'od —ending
April 30, 19_S and tenders the sum
forth in the following: 0 the prescribed fee as set
SCHEDULE OF ANNUAL FEES FOR THE VARIOUS CLASSES OF
RETAIL LIQUOR DEALERS' LICENSES (SECTION 13.106):
AuM1W_F&&
CLASS A: Retail package and consumption on premises
S 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
CLASS E: Caterer's license
750.00
2,000.00
CLASS G: Park District Golf Course; beer and wine;
limited number of special events to include
hill service bar facilities; consumption on
premises only w00.00
CLASS H: Supper Club; offering live entertainment
CLASS M: Hotels, motels, motor inns, motor lodges;
retail package and consumption on premises
2,000.00
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: Ret I ail package - wine only
1,500.00
CLASS W: Restaurant - Consumption of beer or wine only
and at dining tables only
SURETY BOND REQUIRED
EACH LICENSE TERMINATES ON THE 30TH DAY OF APRIL
1,500.00
1,000.00
Your petitioner,
, doing
y respectfully
permission lo operate 7aretWail retail business at
Mount Prospect, Illinois.
business as
requests
Description and name of premises: SAM
kucscnpuon must oe comptete as to floor area, front
A/ r— K, etc.)
IS applicant owner of premises: 1 9"A&6 -Is
If not owner, does applicant have a lease? State State date applicant's lease expires:
:2ty2 If not owner, attach copy bfease hereto.
Does applicant have a management contract with another person or entity for the
operation or management of the licensed premises? ilo
If so, state the name and address of the manager or management company. -&Z24
,F
11 —
Al . (The manager or management company must complete
FN same app cation as the owner).
Is applicant an individual,Q �ratio a co -partnership or an association? (Circle one)
If an individual, state your name, date of birth, address, telephone number and Social
Security Number
IeAg
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:
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.
OFFICE AND/OR
PERCENT OF
NAME ADDITZ MCK HELD
C6061t ft-11yft1ePAV14s q7x2- ,V kcj,5.,, cpftq6-0
Date of Birth:C, q- Social Security # tlel- Phone #.:2,r4--10rX
2- Ablsw,
Date of Birth: -7— I
4--q Phone #
Social Security #3
Date of Birth: Social Security # Phone #
(Additional information to be included on a separate listing.)
Objects for which organization is formed: �p Opl go
U 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? If so, explain:
If applicant is an individual, state age:�Marital status: �,
Is applicant a citizen of the United States?L,(,4—s 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? "A1
/4
Local address: Telephone no.
State character or type of business of applicant heretofore:
State amount of goods, wares and merchandise on hand at this time:
How long has applicant been in this business?
Is the applicant an elected public official?_,41a If so, state the particulars thereof:
Is any other person directly or indirectly in applicant's place of business an elected public
official? p
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
hereofDoes the applicant hold any law enforcement office?
a_ If so, designate title:
Does the applicant possess a current Federal Wagering or Gambling Device Stamp?
If so, state the reasons therefor. a
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 1%1" as heretofore or hereafter amended? Wl!�;, if so, list
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? �(/
application: r If so, state disposition of such
Is applicant ualifie to receive State and Federal license to operate an alcoholic liquor
busixtess? as applicant ever had a previous license revoked by the Federal
governme r any state or subdivision thereof? � 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? t e
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? \J 14S
Does applicant currently carry Dram Shop Insurance coverage?/If "Yes," attach
copy. z
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,"
e
no license shall 1�
Does Surety Bond required by Ordinance accompany this application at the time of
filing?
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:
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT
Corporate Seal
(If applicant is corporation)
Who, first being duly sworn, under oath deposes and says that - ar the
t he e of
aPPlicant(s) for the license requested in the foregoing application; th�
good repute, character and standing and that answers to the quesuon� �aseis ien the
foregoing application are true and correct in every detail.
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Ss.
COUNTY OF COOK
Subscribed and Sworn to before me this LI—day of AD., 19
APPLICATION APPROVED;
jNOtary rubliC
L O
F FICIA
L
SEA
L
ROBER7A C. WIN7ERCO
RN
NOTARY PUBLIC. STATE OF ILLINOIS
My COMMISSION EXPIRES 911319
2
Ga-Dquo—r—Co—nt—rol —Commissioner
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON,W G MANAGER
- V
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.
I 03's a a .111
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.C3 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
required to allow the installation of a roof-mounted antenna.. Mr. Forsythe stated that this
is similar 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 couldproperly 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.
UponRollCall: 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.
David M. Clements,
n1raptnr of pinlininn
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CRAIRM
FROM:
DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE:
MAY 21, 1992
CASE NO.:
ZBA-28-SU-92
APPLICANT:
PAYLESS SHOE SOURCE
ADDRESS:
1500 SOUTH ELMRURST ROAD
LOCATION MAP:
141u" �
__1 E.-- 1400
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: B4 Planned Unit Development
LOT SIZE: N/A
% COVERAGE: N/A
F.A.R.: N/A
P
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
ntenna
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 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,
OTHER DEPARTMENTAL
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
,25,32 1*,;i+a8 2S 40444964:25 Ras 1NSOH Assoc F.92
ROBINSON ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
4126 Pleasantdale road Telephone
Sulte 210 404 448.6627
Atlanta, Georgle Telecopler
30340 404 4413.8602
May 30, 1992
Mr. Mike Law
AT&T Tridom
840 rranklin Court
Marietta, Georgia 30067
RE: 1.8M Prodelin NPRM
PS8004
Mt. Prospect, 111.
Dear Mr. Law
Robinson Associates Consulting Engineers has evaluated the
non -penetrating roof mount for the above referenced project.
The mount along with 1033 pounds of ballast should be
centered above the column located at the intersection of
column lines "E" and 11411 as shown on the attached "Partial
Plan" (sheet 9-1). This combination of mount, ballast, and
location will provide a safety factor of 1.5 against
overturning and 1.25 against sliding for a wind load of 90
miles per hour at a height of 30 feet above ground per ANSI
A58.1-1982, Exposure nCn,
We have further reviewed the existing roof for support of
the NPRM and roof screen as detailed on the attached sheet
S-1. This review found the existing roof capable of
supporting these items while maintaining all required
factors of safety.
If you have any questions regarding this matter or are in
need of further assistance please contact us at
(404)448-6627.
Sincerely,
ROBINSON ASSOCIATES
CONSULTINGENGINEERS
J. H, Robinson Jr.., P. .
d].h
92058
�i tee- �StiE_ —
`~l Fy TOF S `re T,.
.11- SCREEN `.
I t *i0 SELF T4FFINIG
SCREWS - 12" OC
I ! I I R
EXISTING: FRAMING € I
STD FIFE _-
- I i OST TYF.
L i -1 TKO
BEAR�N6 CF
ONE—'REST BCTTO.
CHORD PANEL POINT
TYFICAL SCREEN WALL SECTION
Z v
O h
W O U
0 to w
0 to a
� a
a O
� a
FARTIAL
?LAN
-
I NEW SCREENL
i
NEW ANTENVA
i I MOUNT I
ai
C -3x41 CHANNEL
I-
I DIAG- TOP 4 E07TOM i
2'-6" TYPICAL ��y'j� � _
I
H rAC ih'�7 -
x z -
f
N0 S_ LE
L i -1 TKO
BEAR�N6 CF
ONE—'REST BCTTO.
CHORD PANEL POINT
TYFICAL SCREEN WALL SECTION
Z v
O h
W O U
0 to w
0 to a
� a
a O
� a
FARTIAL
?LAN
1 .06/30/92 15:33 $404 426 0159 AT&T TRIDOM
—ML
Memorandum 10AUT Tridom
From the desk of.• Kevin Godleski
TO: BERNARD J. TOUSSAINT
DATE: June 25, 1992
RE: Mt. Prospect, ELL
Per your request, I have developed an estimate on the materials and installation
costs of the proposed screening.
Materials
Raw materials
2000
Installation Labor and Equipment
Metal Erectors
1500
Roofing contractor
2000
Welding Contractor
1100
Crane
500
Satellite Technician
800
7900
General Contractor
Plus 20%
Total
$9480.00
Z006
CAF/
6/23/92
7/14/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE FOR PROPERTY
COMMONLY KNOWN AS PAYLESS SHOESOURCE
LOCATED AT 1500 SOUTH ELMWMT 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 Her sIld 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, with required
screening to be provided.
SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect
M
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.
CAF/
6/23/92
7/14/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE FOR PROPERTY
COMMONLY KNOWN AS PAYLESS SHOESOURCE
I,QMED AT 1509 SOUTH ELMHURST ROA
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.
SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect
a -z
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 ID, IRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE:
JUNE 4, 1992
SUBJECT:
ZBA-32-SU-92, T. J. MAXX
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
oqi oi polwol on sjuatuimdV p!uuojuoD 11eqj pairls oqjAsjoq *.IW vieduii sl! aznuiuicu of
idwaille ue ui lllvtA quou oqj jo 'Ifem mol oqj of pm Isom aqj tuoij tuuoluu aEll al lax
01 Sulsodoid si mon -IvAoiddic jodoid oEp Wuur jrtotpyA gut llnq
nod OTTI 110111 PIMS OH
oqi jo Imm isom otp uo pollmsui uaoq prq mmolur stql jrqj pue uolivaol pi3joumoo
le ui qst fl TupodS v 110111 ino palulod oqlAsiol
p ail.qlPirs v joj pojlnbol si ipwaj as
-jW -sIvaddV jo pnog SumoZ ogi joj ijodoi jpjs aqi pazpvwwns uoqj oqlAsjoj
voillepisui oqi jo jandw junstA aqi ozrwmrai of uojja im ui RuTP llnq
oqi se joloo aures oqi slioddns OJT110it's Qqj jum d 01 SuIllyA oq p1nom Xoql 110111 pus loiolS
.
mmW "f 'I oqi it, qsi ojT
.11alus polunoui-Iltm oqi pollmsM puq Xmdwoa siq ilaqi paum dxo
.P . I
OH*qsT.P ou .1low s aqj jo jollvisut oqj lurdwoo o4uad *tA -A jo OAT mos A j
It, a a L, ST
oq IrEp palins pus speoddV jo pmog 2uTu0Z aqj ol jlosm poonpogui soumf pnpi -jW
.11 M
-qsip oiqlams v mope of lsonboi osfl fepodS r Butaq 1p-aoH 1wittoo jsRg 0001 It,
OJOIS mmW 'f ',L Oql 10i Z6-fjS-Z£-vEjz On:) wou otp poonponul uaqj 31!usgg ulouijmqD
ouoN :sauuva aura? gim/sHoi-oafoo
uouuwl.iolod :jNgsgv
uoimo3lS ojoleqoiW
OUVIAL's STUuQ(
11'eja piepi-
'.P!SsRD preuou
joBvilloig uoqoU
umuum qD Ilpseq jjoqjjq
•snip10x ui looj (OT) um si
gar
gm IqSfp 01!UO1161S 72 JO 1101 3TUISU00 Oqj M0111?
op D*T00Z,Vj uolpooS japun pajinboi se 1!uuoj
osfl MpodS v Sui
.Isanbo.i si jouot
.Iqod oU
Z661 'ZI AlOW
pro'd 19-11110D 198H 0001
XXUW 'f *1
Z661 '8Z AM :0110(I SULMOH
UNMUCI suaffwaw
:IsElfloau
:aLvu NOUVDIIencl
:,U'd3clOUd LMMIS
:2I3NOITIT3a
Z6-flS-Z£ *ON 3SVD VEIZ
SWaddV AO CXV099NINOZ 133dSONd IKa0W
3HJL AO ONLIMN 2 Ylfl'93'd 3HJL JO SMaKIN
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
Tor -'.: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 storeto
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 of a 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-32-5U-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 Appeali 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.
A.M. c4m&15-
David M. Clements,
Director of Planning
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
KANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAIRMAN
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: MAY 21, 1"2
CASE NO.: ZBA-32-SU-92
APPLICANT: T. J. MAXX
ADDRESS: 1000 EAST CENTRAL ROAD
LOCATION MAP: C4 a C4 'V 0 202
0 0 a 0 0 0
��` �_J� "_ 200
f AROYCE 4. A/
9 C4
— — — — — — — log
0 'a 0
710 M imab N 110
4-90-07 CNIT
NNIAL
10,9
' 1010
2 11050 IE6, 0>
10
010 211050
= ,- Z3
'T W. PROSPECT PLAZA
SHOPPING CDM
1200-1220
E. CENTRAL- Ph.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: B-3 Business Sales & Service
LOT SIZE: N/A
% COVERAGE: N/A
F.A.R. : N/A
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 he 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 antenna 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.
The other staff members indicated that some sort of screening should be developed.
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
9 W
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
CAF/
6/23/92
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE FOR PROPERTY
COMMONLY KNOWN AS T J MAXX
LOCATED AT 1000 EAST CENTRAL ROAD
WHEREAS, R. W. Renfrom, 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 1 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 Prospegt 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, subject to relocating the existing wall -mounted antenna
to the roof within sixty (60) days following the passage of this
Ordinance.
This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect
C
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:
IMV&F
ABSENT:
PASSED and APPROVED this day of
Gerald L. Farley
Village President
ATTEST:
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
1992.
Village of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
FROM: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER
DATE: JULY 17, 1992
The Chamber of Commerce asked that the attached letter be
distributed for your consideration.
Michael E. Janonis
Village Manager
MEJ/caf
Att.
MOUNT PROSPECT CHAMBER 111 F. Busse Avenue, Suite 601 0 Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 0 (708) 398 - 6616
July 17, 1992
Mayor Gerald Farley
and Village Trustees
Village of Mount Prospect
100 S. Emerson Street
Mount Prospect, IL 60056
Dear Mayor Farley and Village Trustees:
One of the beliefs of the Mount Prospect Chamber is that free enterprise is essential to the health of our
democracy as well as the economy. We strongly support any opportunity for an individual business or
development to grow and prosper providing, of course, that the business endeavor is legal.
Following our beliefs, the Mount Prospect Board of Directors strongly encourages you to accept the Rouse-
Ranclhurst's request to increase the size of the designated restaurant lot on Kensington Road just west of Bell
Federal as proposed. A larger restaurant will provide an opportunity to attract more people to the area which will
have a positive affect on the businesses in and around Randhurst. This will result in additional sales for these
businesses and increased sales tax revenue for the Village.
It is also the belief of the Chamber that a property owner has the right to lease their property to the tenant of their
choice, again providing the business is legal in nature, The Village has not interfered in the past when Ranclhurst
has brought in J. C. Penney's, Kohl's, and a multitude of tenants who have increased the Village's economic
base. We trust that this policy will continue in the future. -
Ed Sroczynski
President
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER
(KI -1
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 Bermigans, 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:
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
3. 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
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPI= -.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.
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 Hooter's 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 Hootees
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
Randhurst .to upgrade the Center by including a full service restaurant; something that is
presently lacking at the property.
Mr. Rielley concluded by stating that Hooter's would provide employment opportunities for
the community and additional tax revenues to help the Village. He briefly made reference
to comments in the staff report concerning the landscape plan and the rear building
elevation, and stated that Rouse-Randhurst agreed to work with staff on these items and
that he would submit a revised plan to the Village Board if the Zoning Board chose to
make a recommendation on the request this evening. Mr. Rielley also introduced Mr. Scott
Ball, the Manager of Randhurst Shopping Center and Mr. Sal Melilli, Director of
Operations for Hooters, in case there were questions.
Ray Forsythe then summarized the staff report for the Zoning 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 menu 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 concerned about the lack of detail; on the rear
elevation of the building facing the shopping center, and that staff would recommend that
the rear elevation be designed to provide a more attractive building facade facing the
shopping center. He also stated staff had concerns with the landscape plan and the concrete
block wall at the delivery area. Mr. Forsythe also pointed out that the restaurant would
have a positive economic impact on the Village and complement the larger retail center of
Randhurst, and that staff recommends approval of the expanded restaurant at Randhurst
subject to the four conditions in the staff report about landscaping, the rear elevation,
signage details, and other issues to be determined by Village Departments.
Chairman Basnik asked Mr. Rielleyif all lease approvals had been completed for this
restaurant, and Mr. Rielley stated that Hooter's is committed and ready to go and is only
awaiting the final P.U.D. approval by the Village Board.
Mr. Cassidy asked why the company is proposing to build anew 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 5Ws 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 Randburst
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 7,500 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.
Drx ��
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
(-DIRECTOR
FROM:
DAVID M. CLEMEN 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:
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING:
LOT SIZE:
% COVERAGE:
F.A.R.:
RANDHURST'
SHOPPING
CENTER
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.
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 comer
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 petitioners should be prepared to discuss the exact location of the deck on the proposed
building. Staff would 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, Randhurst. 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 Krocb'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.
OTHER DEEARDENTAL COMMENTS
1.In=ciion Services: 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 there 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 Deparimenl: Fire lanes must be dedicated and signed - hydrants on engineering
plans.
SUMMAULRECOMMENDATIQN
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 Sign 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
Rfl
A AVAlI.AMSABtE TO GOT
LOOK DEEPLY INTO
MY EYES AND
CONSIDER THIS
NEW ENGLAND STYLE CLAM CHOWDER mw) .........................
HOOTERS GUMBO OR CHIL 1 _ _ ._ _,_.,,......._.a...,...._...,
HOOTER SHOOTER joyst« __ ....._.._ ,._ .... . __
f, HOOTER SALAD._.�._._...._........._.-..............................................
OYSTERS
FRED — not he% bul i1 you
STEVAD (or roasted, N you pmW A ROA,STERRX ____,__ % A ROiASTERFUL
NUDE (orrawan0wIwAd Q ONTHEHAIFSHEL{. DOZEN- A DOZEN_
SAMPLER PLATTER EXPENSIVE BUT WORTH IT.. ---
A LITTLE BIT OF TMS ANDA LITTLE BIT OF THAT SOME STEAMED SHRIMP AND
SOME BOILED CRAB LEGS THAT WONT MAKE YOU FAT ITS SEAFOOD SALAD
AND SOME FAMOUS WI NGS. ITS A LITRE BIT OF EvmvyMNG so ORDER ONE
NOW AND GIVE ITA TRY, YOU CAN TRUST US. Wt= NEVER LE
STEAMED
Wm Cocida1 Sauce a Drawn Butler sauce (BY OUR SCALE)
SHRIMP SERVED NOT 3 READY TO PEEL
FIELD TESTED /N RURAL IOWA — $O YOU KNOW THEY'RE GOOD.
SEAFOOD SALAD _,®,______._,.-_,7 OZ
A CONGLOMERATE Of SHRIMP AND CRABMEAT THAT, WHEN WATER
IS ADDED, DOUBLES ASA HIGH OUALITY CONCRETE AND STUCCO
PATCHING MATERIAL (— .IUST KIDDING. HOOTEAS' 6J)
GROUPER'S COUSIN SANDWICH..._ -__,-_-,-
Served with Cole Slew, ftk* Lettuce, Tomato and Tarter Sauce)
'WE FOUND A COUSIN OF THE GROUPER AND DECIDED IT WAS BETIFli THAN
PLAIN OLD QROUFFR BECAUSE IT HLr►+IG OUT AT THE FINEST SCHOO(S"
CRAB LEGS--.--.-_____
25 OUNCES OF JUMBO CRAB LEGS Served with Drawn Butler Sauce.
THESE BABIES ARE REALLY GOOD)
STEAMED CLAMS - HOOTERS STYLE -
Samed with Drawn Butler Sauco,
MADE SEMH-FAMOUS RIGHT HERE AT HOOTEAS .._....._-_._._.._...... __........-•--
**********T4**Tk*****TIT****iricTtrTkTAr*Tk kTi�
:1100TIERSONEARLY VOORLD FAMOUS
CHICKEN WINGS OFIWA. M1TATED
HARDLY is , 1 DUPL)CAT>:D
{SERVED MILD, MEDIUM, HOT
* OR 3 MILE ISLAND) THE HOT ONES 10 PCs.._.... _..._. .
* MnUL DEFINITELY 20 PCs...,
.A GET YOUR ATTENTION 50 PCs...... ............ _.
GOURMET CHICKEN WING OMER ....,_........ ...... .e- ...,... _,.....
* 20 WINGS t A BOTTLE OF DOM¢PER6NLw
* A MEAL OR A SNACK)))
* aw"aw wimp w" Mum cbs"e i
* Extra Ma Cto"" t Ex" Same
THE ULTIMATE HAM & CHEESE SANDWICH --
THE PIGGY CAME FROM A MARKET THE CHEESE CAME FROM A COW.
WE ADDED SOME SECRET SAUCE AND THEY'RE ON A ROLL NOW.
CHICKEN SANDWICH. ,-._--.-.---_ _ -____--
AFTER THE WINGS WERE GONE WHAT ELSE COULD WE DO BUT
SAVE THE BREAST. Bar-B-Oue Sauce on Request.
HOOTERS (MORE THAN A MOUTHFUL) BURGER -_---_—
IT HELPS IF YOU LET LIS KNOW WHAT YOU WANT ON ff... Mustard,
Maio or Bar-S-Quc W)b Bapce Add -----•---._—_._._.__---_--
PHILLY CHEESE STEM ----------
A __
A FAVORITE,M TONG THE YGERS FLYERS PNILLES EAGLES AND YES
EVEN TH>tELIBERTY BELL T) WLYSLICED STEAK COVERED W►TH
MUSHROOMS, PEPPERS S CHEESE
HOOTER SALAD
OUR ORIGINAL SALAD M4TN ADDED NMR CNEESE BACON AND EGGS —
A DELIGHTFUL EXPENENCE MAY ANY RABBIT WOULD ENVOY,
GOURMET HOT DOG PLATTER_
A tRAOUE LITTLE ITEM... WM GMAT AdCL__--.—__
CURLEY 0 FRIES __.__.._._------_TiEG . LARGE _
FRENCH FRES ARE FM AGAIN, PEELED AND CURLED ENTIRELY BY COMPUTER A
PR MED BY AN IDAHO REFUGEE VA#OM WE HAVE CHAO" TO THE ANLL AN
THE BACK ROOM — TOWIS ON REQUEST — PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE EMPLOYEES
COLE SLAW, BEANS OR POTATO SALAD _
BEFORE DURING, OR AFTER YOUR FEEDING FRENZY
WASH IT DOWN WITH ONE OF THESE BEVERAGES
GO AHEAD, BE DARAV43L YOUR MOMS NOT WATCHING,
COKE, SPRITE, DIET COKE, ORANGE, MILK OR ICED TEA
The Obhgakxy STEAK SANDWICH 6 oz. Choice Ribeye ..... "YOUR VERY OWN" HOOTERS CI.P REGULAR..., JUMBO. --
"WE THINK YOU'LL LIKE IT — BUT THEN... WE THINK THAT THE CHICAGO ((SOON TO BE A CO( I ECTOR'S ITEM A=,<wNO THE WORLD ................... ..... ...... _... E.AA
�..�i
BEARS ARE SECRETtYA ROVING BAIV0 OF KAN FtIR `I t �AF�? ., , .. •a..un r. ;. -� sQ����
Village of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
�b.
TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER 112,1
FROM: RONALD W. PAVLOCK, CHIEF OF POLICE�QtOL�k
SUBJECT: IMPACT STUDY — LIQUOR LICENSE — "HOOTERS"
DATE: 15 JULY 92
At your direction, my staff and I did a review of the proposal for
a new restaurant on the north side of town in the Randhurst area
by the name of "Hooters." My traffic officers and crime prevention
officers assessed the plans for the restaurant for traffic purposes
and also security issues. At this time, other than our normal
process of working with the contractors, we can 'see no impact on
the area in either traffic or enforcement.
The Crime Prevention Unit used the Wild Stallion, located a short
distance away from the site, as a comparable example, and our
records show minimal problems with patrons at this location. In
past years there was, however, a restaurant and bar in Randhurst
on the east side that had considerable problems with fights and
other nuisance calls. My staff reported, however, that
establishment had its main problems in the bar area.
Investigative staff is working with the Mayor's office on the
background information, but at this point we can find nothing in
the above areas that would indicate a problem with this
establishment.
RWP: j d
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
RANDHURST 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 1 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 Prospect 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-Hause 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
Gerald L. Farley
Village President
ATTEST:
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
1992.
Village of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois.
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
Mfor, KX 0010eJ0110ill a►` �1i7di7_�:7iZ���1�: iLYIr
FROM: VILLAGE MANAGER
DATE: JULY 17, 1992
SUBJECT: GARAGE DOOR HEIGHT L MITATIONS
After further review, staff has determined that the issue of appropriate garage door
height is best separated from the issue of allowing commercial vehicles to be housed in
garages in Residential Zoning Districts.
Currently, there are no height limitations for garage door openings in the Building Code.
Door height, however, is somewhat self-regulating based upon the height limits for
garages generally along with structural factors. Additionally, research indicates that
residential garage doors come in standard heights of 6'6"; YO" and 8'0". Standard
commercial door sizes begin at 9'0". A local installer indicated that most new
construction includes the 8'0" door height.
Based upon the request before the Board and the likelihood of similar future requests,
staff recommends that the height of garage door openings be regulated. The appropriate
place for such restriction is in the Building Code. An 8'0" or 9'0" limit would be
appropriate. This change could be incorporated into the current BOCA review process.
With a height limitation in place, the Special Use Amendment being considered here
would become an effective tool in dealing with the original issue of housing commercial
vehicles in residential garages.
If so directed, staff will include the appropriate height limitation as part of the Building
Code update.
Also, please note that if the Special Use Amendment being requested here is adopted
and Mr. Schwartz desires to proceed, he will need to file for a Special Use under the
newly created Section of the Code.
MICONIS
MEJ/rcc
c: Director of Planning David Clements
Director of Inspection Services Chuck Bencic
Mr. Michael Janonis, Manager
Village of Mt. Prospect
Re: Amendment for Residential Garages
Dear Mr. Janonis:
We read about the amendment for residential garages which
would allow commercial vehicles to be parked in them and
the maximum opening would be set at 9 feet. Mr. Steven
Schwartz wants the amendment to be changed to 10 feet.
We strongly disagree with his request. Residential
communities should be kept RESIDENTIAL. Other neighboring
communities such as Arlington Heights have strong codes,
which are rigorously enforced, to protect property values,
but Mt. Prospect seems to be going in the opposite
direction.
We have resided in Mt. Prospect for over 30 years and we
urge you not to reduce code requirements any further.
Sincerely,
Frank and Valerie Alexander
501 W. Lincoln
Mt. Prospect, IL 60056
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
On Friday, July 17, the petitioner in this request notified staff that he would like to withdraw
the matter from the July 21 Village Board Agenda.
Mr. Kazibut stated that he would remove the roof structure that was involved with this
request, and modify the fence as necessary to meet height requirements. These steps would
eliminate the need for any variations.
Please advise the Village Board of this request to withdraw the variation application.
NEW
0-c- 44,04,4.
lflle�
TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: JULY 20, 1992
SUBJECT: ZBA-40-V-92, 1001 EAST CARDINAL LANE
On Friday, July 17, the petitioner in this request notified staff that he would like to withdraw
the matter from the July 21 Village Board Agenda.
Mr. Kazibut stated that he would remove the roof structure that was involved with this
request, and modify the fence as necessary to meet height requirements. These steps would
eliminate the need for any variations.
Please advise the Village Board of this request to withdraw the variation application.
NEW
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS VILLAGE MANAGER L
f�
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: JULY 16, 1992
SUBJECT: ZBA-26-A-92 - AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE
As we recently discussed, attached please find a revised ordinance for Village Board review,
setting up a Special Use category for garages designed to house commercial vehicles larger
than 8,000 pounds.
The first draft of this ordinance stated that the garage door opening should be no more than
9 feet in height. After discussion, we determined that this restriction should be removed
from the ordinance for second reading. We believed that an increase in garage door height
to accommodate a truck should be part of the overall Special Use review, done on a case-
by-case basis. For a Special Use public hearing, staff can require building elevations
showing details of any increased garage door height, and such a modification can be
evaluated based on the petitioner's need, impact on surrounding properties, and comments
from adjoining property owners.
Staff recommends the 9 foot door height be eliminated from the ordinance, as this height
may not be the best way to regulate the parking of larger commercial vehicles.
DMC:hg
Attachment
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMEIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: JUNE 5, 1992
SUBJECT: ZBA-26-A-92, VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits for your consideration their recommendation on
an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. The amendment pertains to all residential
districts, off-street parking requirements, home occupation provisions and the definition of
a garage. The amendment proposes to allow commercial vehicles in residential areas
provided they are parked in a standard residential garage.
Dave Clements, Planning Director, indicated that the request was initiated by a resident,
Steve Schwartz, because of his commercial vehicle. Mr. Schwartz has a commercial vehicle
with a weight in excess of the maximum 8,000 pounds. Mr. Schwartz believes with a few
minor alterations to his garage, he can park his vehicle in the garage. Therefore, Mr.
Schwartz is suggesting an amendment which would allow vehicles of an unspecified weight
to park in residential garages.
Mr. Clements indicated that by allowing only the standard size garage the larger vehicles
would not be allowed. He felt that smaller vehicles which weighed in excess of 8,00 pounds
are not obtrusive to neighbors if parked in the garage.
The Zoning Board members generally discussed the proposed changes. A majority of the
members felt that the request was a good idea and may solve some existing problems in the
Village. The amendment is appropriate, because the 12 foot garage height would regulate
the size of truck that could be parked.
Accordingly, by a 5-1 vote, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommends approval of the
amendment for commercial vehicles in residential areas, subject to the vehicles being parked
in a typical size residential garage.
DMC:hg
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 26-A-92
Hearing Date: May 28, 1992
PETITIONER:
Village of Mount Prospect
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
N/A
PUBLICATTON DATE:
May 12, 1992
REQUEST:
Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance which will
include the deletion of the following Sections:
14.1001.B.4; 14.1101.8.4; 14.1201.B.4;
14.1301.B.3; 14.1401.B.4; and 14.1501.B.4. Also,
an amendment to Section 14.3009, Parking of
Vehicles in Residential Districts, Section
14.2602, Rules and Definitions, and Section
14.1161 all to provide standards to allow the
parking of commercial vehicles in residential
garages.
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 for a text
amendment filed by the Village of Mount Prospect to provide standards to allow the parking
of commercial vehicles in residential garages.
Director of Planning, David Clements summarized the staff report for the Zoning Board of
Appeals. Mr. Clements explained that while the application was filed by the Village, it was
done so on behalf of Steve Schwartz of 1216 Crabtree Lane. Mr. Schwartz operates Bel
Aire Plumbing from his home and the Village received a complaint concerning truck parking
at his residence. Staff advised Mr. Schwartz that the truck exceeded the limitations of the
Zoning Ordinance and Mr. Schwartz addressed the Village Board on this truck parking
matter. Mr. Schwartz suggested that truck parking be allowed if the truck could be parked
in a garage regardless of the size of the truck. Mr. Schwartz suggested an amendment to
the Zoning Ordinance, and the Village Board directed Mr. Schwartz to process that
amendment through the staff.
Mr. Clements then summarized the existing zoning regulations pertaining to truck parking.
He stated that each residential zoning district prohibits trucks more than 8,000 lbs. and
ZBA-26-A-92
Page 2
trucks of less - must be parked, in garages. He also stated that truck parking
provisions are found in the off-street parking requirements, the Home Occupation
Provisions, and the definition of a private garage. Mr. Clements further stated that Mount
Prospect Zoning Ordinance generally allows commercial vehicles of 8,000 lbs. to be parked
in a garage, but that commercial vehicles of more than 8,000 lbs. are prohibited from being
parked in a residential area.
Mr. Clements continued and stated that Mr. Schwartz has asked that the Zoning Board of
Appeals consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance that would allow commercial
truck parking in a typical residential garage without a limitation on size or capacity of the
vehicle. He stated that Mr. Schwartz has determined that he could modify his garage to stay
within the 12 foot height limitation so that he could park his truck with a capacity of more
than 8,000 lbs.
Mr. Clements then summarized a survey that the staff did of other municipalities concerning
truck parking. Mr. Clements stated that most municipalities regulate commercial vehicles
by weight or by location, and that as a general rule, commercial vehicles are regulated by
parking in garages, but that some communities do not allow trucks of more than 8,000 lbs.
to be parked in residential areas. Mr. Clements stated that he believed that the proposed
amendment is to some extent self-regulating, in that a typical residential garage with a 12
foot height would not allow an extremely large truck, and that this may be the best way to
consider the amendment. However, Mr. Clements stated that there would be occasions
where trucks are not parked in a garage and that he expected complaints would be received
if an owner does not put his truck in a garage, or if the owner should park the truck in a
driveway at different times during the day.
The Zoning Board then discussed the request and Mr. Basnik stated that he -has difficulty
with the Village enforcing items on a complaint basis and that this matter originally came
about from a complaint being filed against Mr. Schwartz. Mr. Saviano complimented Mr.
Schwartz on working through the Village Board on this matter' and asked if there would be
storage of materials in the garage along with the truck. Mr. Schwartz stated that if
commercial trucks are parked in garages that would eliminate any potential for storage of
materials and supplies,and that the goal would be to try to keep the truck parked in a
garage and out of sight. Mr. Schwartz agreed with the Chairman and stated that
enforcement of the OrdinanGe on a complaint basis is not consistent and not fair to other
persons in the community who may be subject to enforcement of the same violation.
Mr. Basnik stated that this is a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance and that this
would affect the entire' Village. He believed that it was not appropriate to amend the
Zoning Ordinance to solve the problem of one homeowner.
Mrs. Skowron stated she believed the proposed' amendment was a reasonable idea and that
it recognizes the current conditions in the community, and Mr. Brettrager stated he supports
the request and noted that he agreed that a typical' 12 foot high garage would regulate the
size of a vehicle that could be parked inside.
Mr. Cassidy asked if there would be any upper limit by weight of trucks, and stated he did
not want to see any variations for larger garages.
ZBA-26-A-92
Page 3
Mated he believed it's reasonable to control truck parking by garage size and
Mrs. Skowron concurred.
Mr. Basnik asked why Mr. Schwartz could not park his vehicle at a remote location instead
of at his home, and stated he is aware of other contractors that park their vehicles in
commercial areas and not in residential areas. Mr. Schwartz stated that he is not a
commercial contractor and that his large truck carries a substantial amount of inventory
similar to a hardware store. He believed that if he parked the truck in a commercial area
that it would be subject to theft or vandalism. He stated that his operation as a plumber
is much different than a plumbing contractor doing work at a construction site.
Mr. Basnik stated that he did not see a hardship in this request and believed that the
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance was not the best approach to take. Mr. Basnik stated
that changing the Ordinance to solve one person's problem is inappropriate and that it's
important that residents get along with their neighbors to eliminate difficult situations such
as this.
Mr. Cassidy again stated that he would prefer to see an upper weight limit for truck parking
in garages, and Mr. Brettrager indicated that this was not necessary, because the garage size
would regulate the ultimate size of a truck.
Mr. Basnik stated that he believed that this was partly a problem of the Home Occupation
Ordinance, and Mr. Clements pointed out that this is a truck parking problem and not
necessarily a home occupation problem, and that the truck parking standards had been in
the Zoning Ordinance for many years.
The Zoning Board of Appeals generally discussed the request and it was determined that
the best feature of the amendment was that the size of a typical residential garage would
regulate the type of truck that could be parked in a single-family neighborhood.
Accordingly, Chairman Basnik asked for a motion on the request. Mrs. Skowron moved that
the Village Board amend the Zoning Ordinance as necessary to provide standards to allow
the parking of commercial vehicles in residential garages. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Brettrager.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Pratt, Cassidy, Brettrager, Skowron and Saviano
NAYS: Chairman Basnik
Chairman Basnik voted in opposition to the motion and stated he did not believe it was
appropriate to amend the Zoning Ordinance in this particular case.
This recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for their consideration.
a, M, DUM&�
David M. Clements,
Director of Planning
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
MANNING AND ZONING DEPAWMENT
. Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAIRMAN
FROM:
DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE:
MAY 21, 1992
SUBJECT:
ZBA-26-A-92, VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
This application for an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance was filed by the Village of
Mount Prospect. The applicatidh was filed to amend appropriate sections of the Zoning
Ordinance as it pertains to the parking of trucks and commercial vehicles in residential
zoning districts.
r al
Summary of application: While this application was filed by the Village, it was done so on
the behalf of Mr. Steve Schwartz of 1216 Crabtree Lane. Mr. Schwartz operates Bel -Air
Plumbing from his home, and the Village received a complaint concerning truck parking at
the residence. Staff advised Mr. Schwartz that the truck exceeded the limitations of the
Zoning Ordinance, and Mr. Schwartz addressed the Village Board on this matter. Mr.
Schwartz suggested that truck parking should be allowed if the truck could be parked in a
garage, regardless of the size of the truck. Mr. Schwartz suggested an amendment to the
Zoning Ordinance, and the Board directed Mr. Schwartz to process an amendment, to
obtain input from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
However, Mr. Schwartz objected to the $500.00 filing fee for an amendment. The Manager
and Mayor directed staff to initiate the amendment so Mr. Schwartz would not have to pay
the filing fee.
Existing Zoning Reguirements:
The Zoning Ordinance includes the following provisions:
1. Fxcluded fr
-om all six residential distric15:
'The housing of trucks, commercial vehicles or trailers with license plates
indicating a gross weight or licensed weight less than eight thousand (8,000)
pounds shall be allowed in garages. Personal use vehicles, such as, pickups
and vans are not subject to this restriction."
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
Page 2
"No truck, commercial vehicle with license plates indicating a gross weight or
licensed weight in excess of eight thousand one (8,001) pounds, or trailers,
shad be parked or stored on any residential premises except when making
delivery, rendering a service at sucu premises. Personal use vehicles such as
pickups and vans, are not subject to this restriction."
MEW MIT _,- * All + " •
"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,
but shall be parked in a garage. No garage shall exceed the accessory building
standards of Section 14.1023 of this Chapter 14. Trucks with a licensed
weight of more than eight thousand one (8,041) pounds are prohibited from
being parked at the residence."
�.'0 M MIX
"A private garage is an accessory building, or an accessory portion of the
principal building, which is intended and used to store motor vehicles. Such
a garage may be used for the storage of motor vehicles designed to carry not
more than ten (10) passengers and not more than one pickup truck having a
load capacity of one and one-half (1=,) tons or less."
As a summary of these existing provisions, regulations on truck parking are found in a
number of sections of the Zoning Ordinance. The ordinance generally allows commercial
vehicles of less than 8,000 pounds to be parked in a garage. Commercial vehicles of more
than 8,000 pounds are prohibited from being parked in a residential zoning district.
U=- i x •� a
Mr. Schwartz has asked that the Zoning Board of Appeals consider an amendment to the
Zoning Ordinance that would allow commercial truck parking in a typical residential garage,
without a limitation on size or capacity of the vehicle. Mr. Schwartz has determined that
he can modify his garage to stay within the 12 foot height limitation so he can park his truck
with a capacity of more than 8,000 pounds.
As to the form of the amendment, staff believes the wording on excluding commercial trucks
from all residential districts should be deleted. There is no need to list the exclusion in
each district. Regulations on truck parking in residential areas should remain in the off-
street parking provisions and the Home Occupation regulations. Suggested wording to
implement Mr. Schwartz" proposal is as follows:
1. Any contracting or service business truck used as part of a home occupation shall be
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospecf Zoning Board of Appeals
Page 3
permitted, but such vehicle shall be p.- -: , .-:age. No garage shall exceed the
accessory building standards of Section i4. ii1L:8 of this Chapter 14.
The parking of trucks, commercial vehicles or commercial trailers shall be permitted
in residential zoning districts, but such vehicle shall be parked in a garage. No
garage shall exceed the accessory building standards of Section 14.102.B.
14.2a, Rules and Definitim
GARAGE, A private garage is an accessory building, or an accessory
PRIVATE portion of the principal building, which is intended and used to
store motor vehicles.
Truck
In evaluating this request, staff believed that it was important to review truck parking
regulations in other communities. That information is as follows:
1. Arlington Heights. Purpose of requirements is to restrict parking in residential areas
to private passenger vehicles. However, "vehicles such as pick-up trucks or panel
trucks may qualify as private passenger vehicles only when used exclusively as
passenger vehicles or for hauling property of the owner. Vehicles with the
identification of the owner or operator affixed by name or logo shall qualify as a
private passenger vehicle provided such identification is no larger than 25% of the
area of the front door....."
2. Emma &bt�, "Vans, trucks and commercial vehicles over 8,000 pounds and up
to 12,000 pounds may be parked in the open on the front driveway or in the
buildable area behind the front building line or in the rear yard...." However only
one truck is allowed, it must be five feet from a lot line, and screened by landscaping.
3. mak_;_" "no more than one truck of not more than 8,000 pounds...."
4. Des Plaines. Commercial truck parking in residential districts is prohibited.
5. Hiehlgnd Park, No more than one commercial vehicle of not more than three (3)
tons capacity which are the property of and for the private use of the occupants of
the parcel may be located in a private garage.
6. Skokie, No more than 1/3 of the vehicles stored in a private garage may be
commercial vehicles and provided that they do not exceed 6,000 lbs. empty weight.
(A maximum of a three -car garage is allowed.)
?. Wilmette, No more than one vehicle in excess of 11/2 tons capacity may be stored
in a private garage.
Gil Basnik, Chair n
Mount Prospect'— ..ing Board of Appeals Page 4
8. m No vehicles in excess of 8,001 lbs -e allowed in residential districts.
Of the eight municipalities surveyed, two allow commercial vehicles of any weight to park
is residential areas, Five municipalities r4M"ow commercial vehicles up to a maximum weight
to park in residential areas. This weigh: ?nit ranges from 3,000 pounds to 12,040 pounds.
And one municipality allows no commer-al vehicles to park in residential areas.
OTHER DEPARTMENTALCOMM-ND
All Village departments have reviewed the proposed amendment. Inspection Services
cautions that the proposed amendment could lead to requests for garage height variations
to accommodate larger vehicles.
1
The proposed amendment would allow commercial vehicles in excess of 8,044 lbs. to park
in a standard size garage as defined in the current Ordinance. Staff believes that by limiting
the garage size to the current standards, large vehicles will be eliminated from parking in
residential districts. However, it would be difficult to enforce the garage parking
requirement, and there would be occasions where a truck is parked in a driveway prior to
being stored in the garage for the night. Staff believes the proposal by Mr. Schwartz is
reasonable, as garage size would effectively limit the size of trucks that could be parked.
DMC:hg
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CERTAIN ARTICLES OF
CHAPTER 14, ZONING ORDINANCE, OF
THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
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
R -X District
14.1501
R-4 District
14.1101
R-1 District
14.3009
Off-street parking
14.1201
R -A District
14.2602
Rules & Definitions
14.1301
R-2 District
14.116
Home Occupations
14.1401
R-3 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, 1992, pursuant to due and proper notice thereof published in the Mount Prospect
Herald on April 7, 1991
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 ONE: 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 TWO: That Sections 14.1001.13.4, 14.1101.B.4, 14.1201.8.4, 14.1301.B.3,
14.1401.B.4, 14.1501.13.4 are hereby deleted in their entirety and replaced with 14.1001.0.7,
14.1101.C.8, 14.1201.D.7, by adding wording to the Special Use category as follows:
"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 14.102.B."
And adding the following wording as a Special Use to Sections 14.1301.C.6, 14.1401.0.4,
14.1501.C.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,"
SECTION THREE: That Section 14.3009 is hereby amended by adding the following
wording:
"No truck, commercial vehicle or commerdal trailer with license plates
indicating a gross weight or licensed weight in excess of 8,001 pounds shall be
parked or stored in any r�Lsidential gara e without a &g&ial Use Permil,
except when making a delivery, rendering a service at such - premises.
Personal use vehicles, such as pickups and vans, are not subject to this
restriction."
SEC
MN FO: 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 FIVE: 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 14.1023 of this Chapter 14. Trucks with a licensed weight of more than
eight thousand one (8,001) pounds are subject to a,.Spegial Usg,.Permit as spgdfied
in each residential. zoping gJassificatiom
SEMON SIX: 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.
ATTEST:
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
-2-
Gerald L. Farley
Village President
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-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
I
��� � �----• ,.- Pnortw0 s.w ta#El rRwwcA
aaaEo J
ftS to hE
Ed ,'
a �
l
as
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:
ax,
65 r 'a
.20
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-1"
Light Industry lot approximately 3.16 acres instead of the minimum four acres in conjunction
with a two lot subdivision.
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 H 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.
The petitioners are requesting a variation to allow an I-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 I-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:
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ron Cassidy
Peter Lannon
Richard Pratt
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
arty at.r
None
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: Mrs. Lorraine Triptoe, 1418 Loudon Lane
Chairman Basnik 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 staff report for the Zoning Board of Appeals. He
pointed out that a resubdivision plat is currently being processed through the Plan
Commission and that Zoning Board action is necessary in order to reduce the 4 acre lot size
as requested. Mr. Forsythestated that the plan prepared by Opus North for NBD meets
all zoning setbacks and parking. And Mr. Forsythe stated that the original annexation
agreement for the office industrial park provided for a 2.7 acre average minimum lot size.
Mr. Forsythe stated that the proposed lot size is larger than the average size as required in
the annexation agreement and that this 3.16 acre size is larger than many existing lots in the
park. Mr. Forsythe concluded and stated that the proposed lot size could support a typical
industrial building in Kensington Center, meeting all setback requirements.
Mrs. Lorraine Triptoe, 1418 Loudon 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 displayed 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.
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, Brettrager, Cassidy, Lannon, Pratt, Saviano,
Skowron
NAYS: None
Respectfully submitted,
6 M. ctpm�
David M. Clements, AICP
Director of Planning
DMC:cl
CAF
7/14/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION OF LOT SIZE FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED WITHIN KENSINGTON CENTER RESUBDIVISION N. 29
WHEREAS, Opus North Corporation (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
located within the Kensington Center Resubdivision No. 29 generally
located on Lakeview Court (hereinafter referred to as Subject
Property), legally described as:
Lot 509 in Kensington Center -Resubdivision Twenty -Seven,
being a resubdivision of Lots 505 and 507 in Kensington
Center -Resubdivision Twenty -Six, a resubdivision in part
of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 35, Township 42 North,
Range 11, East of the Third Principal Meridian, according
to the plat of said Kensington Center -Resubdivision
Twenty -Seven filed in the Registrar of Titles on January
10, 1990 as Document IR 38 52 829, in Cook County,
Illinois;
WHEREAS, Petitioner seeks a variation from Section 14.2203 to allow
an I-1 (Light Industrial) District lot size of 3.16 acres, instead
of the required 4 acre minimum; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the variation requested being
the subject of ZBA Case No. 37-V-92 before the Zoning Board of
Appeals of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 25th day of June,
1992, pursuant to due and proper notice thereof published in the
Mount Prospect Herald on the 9th day of June, 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 37-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 14.2203 to allow an I-1 (Light Industrial) District
lot size of 3.16 acres.
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 FIVE: In accordance with the provisions of section 14.604
of Chapter 14 of the Village Code, the variation granted herein
ZBA 37-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 SIX: 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
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 Randburst 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 mail. 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.
El
13i�dr
iTr.FAcr, m
s
(r`''tjt`- 3
loss o.l. � f IIi
1k
•s-.� s ` YIDEd 6MhK.
.�-... PLAY Q tL&
t4 X r.
EH I -A-
{
g
L1tMjb. t{„/�,Mttjl
(+
I r n• ' •
�..• r- (Mfl�tc Trtrt}way( `�
k
�
�
i
�I
k3'•C r �
;n:°• 1 iu n" �
3n'•�"
'•i'�n� � ; 2•'O�
a;;t�,.
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 Mall Entertainment
PUBLICATION DATE: June 9, 1992
SUBJECT PROPERTY: Space #2000 (formerly Madigans) of the
Randhurst Shopping Center
REQUEST: Special Use Pernuit as required under Section
14.2001.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 room,
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 mail.
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 and his 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'
be beneficial to the shopping center. As ba
the company has been in operation for over
types of specialty retail stores. He explain
entertainment field in recent years and Edisoi
are good compatible uses in retail shopping 4
He stated that the company has a good reputi
types of facilities and that they are sought on
bring their uses to the centers. He explaine
children and family entertainment and that
arcade and game room that the Village may
Mr. McAuliffe distributed a informational br,
and' described an organizational chart of ma
understanding that the company has in maw
would include several party rooms and that tha
uses, such as churches, athletic teams, and irs
Mr. McAuliffe thendescribed a floor
showing the location of the party roor
smaller children, and the video games.
Department and that the company was
Chief of Police and he also pointed`(
PAC:A, a community organization to w
adjoining neighborhood.
Mr. McAuliffe stated that wbile the compare
they are looking at the Randburst site as be
entertainment with the indoor play structure
Basnik asked how many of Edison, Brother
McAuliffe stated that 85% of their stores ar
that the company has a ten-year lease with!:
an indication that they are committed for a
will be successful.
ZBA-39-SU-92
Page Two
�ound for Edison Brothers, he stated that
my years and that they operate seventeen
hat the company has diversified into the
others believes that entertainment centers
wrs where they do have their retail stores.
i and they are excellent operators of these
shopping center owners and managers to
at the Randhurst location would provide
is a distinction from the typical pinball
e experienced in the past.
.*e on the company and the proposed use
vent that illustrated the experience and
game room. He stated that the facility
ould be available for community oriented
i provide an overview of the activities,
ssion area an indoor play structure for
iliiffe stated he had met with the Police
nt'with conditions recommended, by the
had met with, the local chairperson of
,oposed use to this representative of the
160 game rooms across the country,
)type, meant to attract more family
on machines, and party rooms. Mr.
arms are in malls of this type. Mr.
al malls. Mr. McAuliffe also stated
idhurst and that they believe this is
operation that helps guarantee they
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 operattion andMr. McAuliffe stated that they would
like to be open one hour past the mall closingµ
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
ZBA-39-SU-92
Pap Four
pending opening. Mr. Ball also stated that the Rouse Company is very particular about
game rooms and carefully evaluated Edison Brothers before reaching a lease agreement
with them.
Mr. Robert Bush, 1112 Heritage Drive, stated that the video games seem to be predominant
on the floor plan. He has concerns about this type of activity abutting the residential
properties on the east. He believes that the entertainment center will adversely affect the
shopping center and discourage shoppers from coming to Randhurst and that the use will
be a burden for the Police Department in terms of extra staff time necessary to enforce
loitering problems.
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 Brothers stated that the lease with Randburst is
contingent upon all Village approvals and Mr. Ball stated that Rouse could terminate the
lease if circumstances warranted such action.
Marsha Jason, 673 Pickwick, stated that she supported the application and that teenagers
need a controlled environment with supervision in order to have a place to go. She stated
that many parents would feel comfortable with this and she believed it was important that
young people in the Village have a place to go.
Peg Combs, 107 Stratford, stated that she
she thought that the business should close
concerned about spillover into the Wedgei
leaving the entertainment center.
Mr. Basnik confirmed if the conditions in the
reasonable to Edison Brothers, and Mr. Mc
appropriate.
Mr. Cassidy stated that this use is primarily,
a good history with such activities. He stat,
party room and the indoor play structures, b
the mall should be retail oriented and not
Mr. Brettrager stated that this is the best p
regional mall provides a number of functior
for a variety of reasons.
red this was a reasonable request but that
e same time as the mall. She was also
Terrace neighborhood from young people
staff report and Police Chief's memo were
liffe stated that those conditions were
me room and that the Village does not have
hat this is a new approach by including the
e stated that it is the same business and that
up with amusement or entertainment uses.
� for an entertainment center and that a
lost 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 in space 2,000 at the Randhurst 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,
b, /A, NftpK;�-.—
David M. Clements, AICD
Director of Planning
DMC:cl
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: 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-
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: B-3 Planned Unit Development
LOT SIZE:
% COVERAGE: n/a
F.A-R.: n/a
CENTE�
q.
AY
4r
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: B-3 Planned Unit Development
LOT SIZE:
% COVERAGE: n/a
F.A-R.: 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.
OTHER VILLA
GE STAFF COMMEM:
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.
5121MARYIRECOMMENDATIQN;
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 T-GUO
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO- CHIEF RONALD PAVLOCK
FROM: OFFICER W. ROSCOP
CRIME PREVENTION UNIT64 WN I
OFFICER J. WAGNER
CRIME PREVENTION UNIT�'
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.
3. 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.
4. 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
CAF/
7/14/92
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE FOR
SPACE NO. 2000 LOCATED WITHIN THE
RANDRURST SHOPPING CENTER TO PERMIT A GAME ROOM
WHEREAS, Rouse-Randhurst Shopping Center, Inc. and Edison Brothers
Mall Entertainment, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as Petitioners)
have filed a petition for a Special Use with respect to property
located within the Randhurst Shopping Center (hereinafter referred
to as the Subject Property); and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is legally described as follows:
Space #2000 located within the Randhurst Shopping Center,
being Lots 1, 2 and 3 in Randhurst Shopping Center
Resubdivision No. 1, being a resubdivision of Lot 1 in
Randhurst Center, being a subdivision of part of the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 27, Township 42 North, Range 11
East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County,
Illinois;
WHEREAS, Petitioners seek a Special Use to permit the operation of
a Party Zone game room within the Randhurst Shopping Center; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the request for Special Use,
being the subject of ZBA Case No. 39 -SU -92, before the Zoning Board
of Appeals of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 25th day of
June, 1992, pursuant to proper legal notice having been published
in the Mount Prospect Herald on the 9th day of June, 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 requests being the subject of ZBA 39 -SU -92; and
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 operate a Party Zone game room subject to the following
conditions:
1. security personnel in police type uniforms shall be on duty
from 6:00 P.M. on Friday through Sunday closing, as well as
those times determined necessary by the Mount Prospect Police
Chief.
2. The layout of the Party Zone shall conform substantially in
the same manner as indicated on the Site Plan dated May 19,
1992 with any modifications from the Site Plan shall be
subject to the approval of the Village Manager.
3. Personnel shall be presented in the facility at all times and
at least one member of the Party Zone staff shall be a minimum
of 21 years of age.
ZBA 39 -SU -92
Page 2 of 2
4. If at any time the Police Department and/or Village Manager
determines the Party Zone does not meet the original intent
as outlined by the Petitioner, the Special Use granted herein
shall be brought before the Village Board for review.
SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect
from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet
form in the manner provided by law.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
PASSED and APPROVED this day of
Gerald L. Farley
Village President
ATTEST:
Carol A. Fields
Village Clerk
1992.
viLLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPL--*T
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: ADELAIDE THULIN, SIGN REVIEW BOARD CRA—IRPIERgo—N,
FROM: KENNETH H. FRITZ, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORO
DATE: APRIL 15, 1992
SUBJECT: SIGN -24-92, CHARLES VAVRUS
LOCATION: 501 MIDWAY DRIVE
I: UES
The petitioner seeks a text amendment to Section 7.330 and Section 7.701 to create a
.special use for off -premise signs.
PLANNING AND ZONING CONMMENT
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.
--COMMENDATION
The petitioner earlier filed a request for an appeal of the staffs 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 sign 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 sign 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 Thulin - 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
MUV 14 "91 44:4(4 w-" 6rE1N i l EW 0<sO
K M RAIiDVM
P. 414
TO: Ken Frit:
FROM; Everette M. Hill, 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 Hoard 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?
00.2/4
No, it ie not. even 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 C::ub 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
2
tvOV 12 '91 04: 4ePM 14" 1 E 114 5 LE CliGO P, 3/4
areas. The Charlie Club situation does not fall within that
category.
2r you have further questions, please contact me.
ME
EMH/kml
//CAC/EMH11-12
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT SIGN REVIEW BOARD
May 4,
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, Illinois.
ROLL CALL:-
Members
ALL:
Members of the SRB present: Richard Rogers, Thomas Borrelli, Warren % ostak, Hal
Predovich and Chairperson Adelaide Thulin. Also present were Mr. Robert Doig representing
Charlie Club; Donald Anderson, President of Park National w Sue Elliot, Legal Counsel
for Park National Bank; Dennis and Tom Reindl, representing Northwe t 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 sign
at Northwest Electric Supply parking lot adjacent to Wide Street.
Mr. Everette Hili, the Village's legal counsel stated that the Sign. Ordinance is silent with
respect to the authority of the Sign Review Board to grant exrensions of time for sign
compliance. He stated, however, in light of extensions of time granted to Firestone Tore and
Convenient Food Store by the Sign Review Board that the matter before the Sign Review
Board with Northwest Electric Supply freestanding sign could be considered. He stated that
his opinion was based upon the proposed redevelopment activity in the immediate area which
includes the Northwest Electric Supply property in downtown Mount prospecL It was Mr.
Hill's opinion, that the extension not exceed one year and that the sip would either be made
to comply with the Ordinance by lowering the sign or by ren#.oving the sign. altogether.
In addition to the freestandingsip adjacent to Wille Street, a request was made for a special
F5f6t
*tyoptionto approve the con " d ttse of a nd sign adjacent to Main Street.
ignis ptesentof the north warehouse bud " being a part
e Northwest Electric Supply businessTice petitioner's demonstrated that they are using
quare feet of will sign area as.co ed with the maximum allowed 282 square feet.
It was the general feeling of Mr. Predovich that bei of the downtown redevelopment
an extension of time be considered for the freestanding sign adjacent to Wille 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, 1997- Others felt that the extension should
be granted from a date nearest the public hearing meeting.
Sign Review Board Minutes
Page 2
Motio
A motion was made by Mr.;P"redo+yich, seconded by Mr. Kostak'to grant -an extension for
the 18 foot freestanding sign adjacent to Will; Street untilApril 301,1993 on the basis of past
considerations for Firestone Lire Company " 'Convenient Food Stores wherein extensions
of time were granted due'to time for fabrication and economic considerations. T'he motion
to approve passed, 4 ayes, 1 nay (Mr. Rogers).
Motion
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 themaximuntwall sign area adnot'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, 01 nays:
Yam
'This case was continued by the Sign ReviewBoard to allow an opportunity for all of the
members to be present to discuss the caft fully. It is recogaized that this is an unusual
situation and the Sign Review Board's opinion required the full attention of five members.
The request presentee) initially on April 201 by Mr. Doig on behalf of the ,Charlie Club was
to seek a text amendment to Section 7.3301 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 of prem signs as in amendment to the special use section of the
ordinance 73301, thereby petting off-promise"signs as a text amendment requiring a special
l
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 basement legally
conveyed to Charles "avruus at the tirw of the development of Charlie Club in 1980.
Discussio
Mr. IOKostak read from the minutes of April ill and indicated that it was significant that Mr.
Vavrus owner of Charlie Club owned the parcel of subsequently purchased Park
National Bank 1985. He agreed with lir. Donald Anderson, president of Park National
ional
Bank, who contended that: Mr. Vavrus hand the option of seeking a change in the Sign
Ordinance that would provide a more permanent 'solution for the Charlie Clubwsi �e
adjacent to Elmhurst
Other members of the Sign:.; Review Board commented, upon the request for the text
amendment for a modification to the spectral use'section of the Ordinance to allow off-
premise
ff-
pre . sips 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.
Sign Review Board minutes
Page 3
2. That to amend the ordinance to provide for a special use for off -premise
signs would open up the opportunity for other off -premise signs 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 Sign 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 sign
easement adjacent to Elmhurst Road, but was rejected by the Bank's Board of Directors.
Motion
A motion was made by Mr. Kostak, seconded by Mr. Rogers, to recommend denial for the
request for a tent amendment under Section 7.3301 and Section 7,701 to create a special use
for Waif -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 Tulin).
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.
to 'gn
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 Coda~ that they felt needed some revision. There were six
items that the Sign Review Board was not in general agreement on that were identified.
These were items 14, 22, 2, 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 Sign
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 Sign Review Board, needed additional discussion .after ak refinement
in language by staff or legal counsel.
Sign Review Hoard Minutes
Page 4
A scheduled public hearing to consider the proposed changes to the Sign Ordinance was
distressed. Mr. Fritz indicated that the earliest possible date for a public hearing would be
May 18 and that would depend upon the Mount Prospect Chamber's readiness to present
changes on behalf of the business persons in the community and also to report the findings
of their sign survey among business people in the community.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Resile submitted,
Economic Development oor • ,or .
ILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPo-'T
PLQ4NM DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM: KENNETH K FRITZ, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR
DATE: MAY 14, 1992
SUBJECT: SIGN -24.92, TEXT AMENDMENT
The Sign Review Board transmits their recommendation on a proposed amendment to the
Sign Ordinance filed by Charles Vavrus by Attorney Robert Doig. The application was filed
to create a Special Use category to allow off -premise signs.
This application for a text amendment was filed as a result of the sip amortization program
which requires the removal of the existing off -premise 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 signs. Mr.
Doig believes that the Special Use procedure would allow the Village to review off -premise
signs 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 Sign Ordinance more permissive. Off -
premise signs would adversely effect the purpose of the Sip Ordinance.
KHF:hg
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER rAVL,
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: JULY 10, 1992
SUBJECT: SUBURBAN PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
At the July 7 Village Board meeting, Trustee Clowes had several questions about client
eligibility for the Suburban Primary Health Care Program.
The actual income levels for eligibility are on the attached program guideline. Incomes for
family size must be above public aid/medicaid levels, and below levels established by
Suburban Primary Health Care. Please note that this range is substantially less than the
Section 8 income levels that are attached as an exhibit to the agreement. The Section 8
income levels are shown as this is maximum income that the planning staff must use for
annual reporting requirements to HUD. I am sorry that this information was not available
at the July 7 Village Board meeting.
DMC:hg
Attachment
miw
W
"ACCESS TO CARE" PROGRAM
Annual Gross Income Guidelines
1992
For Families with For ALL Singles azid Families
Children 18 Or Younger Regardless of Children's Ages
Income Income
MUST BE ABOVE This MUST BE BELOW This
Public Aid/Medicaid Level Access to Care Level
Family Size Family Size
1 -
$
3,396
1
- $13,620
2 -
$
4,296
2
- $18,380
3 -
$
5,904
3
- $23,140
4 -
$
6,696
4
- $27,900
5 -
$
7,800
5
- $32,660
6 -
$
8,796
6
- $37,420
7 -
$
9,204
7
- $42,180
8 -
$
9,696
8
- $46,940
9 -
10 -
$
$
10,200
10,800
(Based
on Yearly Income -
Before Taxes)
Add $600 for each
additional
Add $4,760 for each
additional
If Family Income is too Low for Access to Care, Refer to Public Aid
for a Medical Card (Pregnant women should also be referred, to
Public Aid rather than enrolled in Access to Care. The amount of
income Public Aid allows during pregnancy is almost twice the
amount shown here in the left hand column, and illegal aliens are
also eligible).
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER V
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
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 the Suburban Primary Health Care Council (hereinafter
referred to as the "COUNCIL"), an Illinois Not -for -Profit Corporation.
Statement of Pqrpog
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 'W'.
SECTION 11
Amount of the Grant
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.
SECTION III
Conditions 9TCotract
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
- 1 -
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 COUNCIL, at its option, shall have the
sole authority for the direction of the defense.
B. Non-discrimination 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 of Regord& 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. 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 "X.
-2-
E. Ayyaiw,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.
A-0 M C0XI ►i]
ompliange With Laws
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.
Submission to HUD
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.
SECTION VI
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 COUNCIL's 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.
Leneth ofCot
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 VILI AGE 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.
MEIMM, Kul
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
ATTEST:
0
Village Clerk
Notary Public
AL
^T rye P')P'Yc
rA
11"kAM��rr.rd.m."..J1!2619'1
1992.
THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
BY:
President of the Village'
Board
SUBURBAN PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
COUNCIL
BY:
Executive Di -recto
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; CERA 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 $5.00) directly to providers for each visit,
lab test, x-ray or prescription drug.
Preventive services which are already available in the community
at low cost are not duplicated by Access to Care. All clients
receive a bookldt listing preventive services available in the area
which are free or low cost. The Council has coordination
agreements with the agencies providing these services.
I
Exhibit B
1•8 POPULATION BENEFITTING FROM ACTIVITIES UNDERWAY OR COMPLETED — SERVICES OR ASSISTANCE
OAT&
•&RSON WHO CAN *K*T AN&w&R OU90TIONS AOOUT
TNI& FORM
RRN&TIWI
AC.
Mb►VLATIOM #&N&IITT/NO
MINORTIT POPULATION AAN&•ITTINO
"V$TT
to
NVN•
O&O
lIt
Peal
Head
[ Ii(.
lyl
TOTAL
-
ful
MAL\
I N/ •
I*MAL&
l'vl
LOWER
INCOM&
1701
*LACK
SPANIAN•
AM&R/CAN
AMAR/CAN
INDIAN
-
ORIGNTAL
All oth*ro (White)
-
MALI
1141
P&MAL&
ON
MALA
flel
' P&MAL&
lid)
MAL■
fjtl
IAMAL&
1V
MALS
091
PAMAL6
Ishl
MAL&
11+1
ISNAbi
pt1
."�TiTi�lllII�]
Exhibit C
SECTION 8 INCOME LIMITS
Persons In Household Income Umits
1 ................... $27,000
2 .... ....:...... ....... $30,900
3 ...................... $34,750
4 ...................... $38,600
5 ...................... $41,700
6 ....................... $44,800
7 ...................... $47,850
8 ...................... $50,950
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:
SECOON 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.
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
i
Mayor
AGREEME
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 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 HM), 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".
SECTION 11
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 II, to the actual amount invoiced by the
COUNCIL, and only to the extent such amount is received from HUD for such purposes.
CQnditions of!Qontract
A. Indemiflotion. 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
- I -
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 COUNCIL at its option, shall have the
sole authority for the direction of the defense.
B. Non-di5crimination, 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 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 of Records, 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. Filing of Records, The COUNCIL shall file with the VILJ AGE such duplicates
of records covering such activities to be performed in whole or in part, as specified in
Exhibit "A!'.
-2-
E. Availabill ly 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.
Compliangg, With Laws
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 rile 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
officersor employees.
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 COUNCIL's 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.
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 VT.
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 is 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 CommunigadQns
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 of the Village
Board
SUBURBAN PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
COUNCIL
BY:
Executive -Derector
Notary Public
S _4L
Elrif
EA L aw
;OrAR'e PU8,1C -5-
�j y '� . I STAIEOFILUN01,
.' "iss
�'Iy C.
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 C
SECTION 8 INCOME LIMITS
• • * • . , c.
1 .................... $27,000
2 ...................... $30,900
3 ...................... $34,750
4 ...................... $38,600
5 ...................... $41,700
6 ...................... $44,800
7 ...................... $47,850
8 ...................... $50,950
Exhibit B
1-E POPULATION DENEFITT1140 FROM ACTIVITIES UNDERWAY OR COMPLETED — SERVICES OR ASSISTANCE
..i �7 ..!
►60f0o1 WNO CAN SCOT AnAWAK OU40TION• ASOUT
TNt• IOKM
M•
M*PVLATION OSNSItTT#NO
- M/MONT/T •O/ULATSON 09MSFiTTtMO
To1HTT
ra"'
AM;RICAN
All others (U%ICO�
Hsad
LOW*R
SLACK
.C.,SPANISH.
wMtw$CAM
IN01AM
OAIAMTAL
NVM,
TOTAL
MALS
iAMALS
tMCOMS-
MAL!
PSMALA
MALS
'/#MALit
MALS
"tMALS
MALI
•AMALi
MALA
-•#
OsN
Pf H
18/
1201
!fN
IN)
ixl
fkl
/.1101
1J6)
1 -fel
1 -rd/
1J+i
1 1JA
1111
I ON
00
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER fVT
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR 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. "Phis 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
f-
7, p.'m P,rroG•�
rE
+e
or ,'
Y ,
ti $ - --W ,,( :. a.1 r %F -
.✓+r., �+� ida +.!%'� �M } ! t „{.. Ott t ii NlL�Ah;-,i'� •^ ' x �`� ; `! �rl w. l
N
- 4 Nye jjtjJ
X''= is r � � ✓j. O �� � �\ 1
O -
•
r
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE: JULY 14, 1992
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF ZBA DECISION - CASE # ZBA-38-V-92
13 SOUTH MAPLE STREET
At a public hearing on June 25, 1992, the Zoning Board of Appeals approved, by a 4-3 vote,
a variation request for a 6 foot fence at 13 South Maple. The Zoning Board of Appeals has
final administrative approval for such a variation.
Several adjoining property owners objected to the 6 foot fence variation. These neighbors
believed that the 6 foot fence would have an adverse impact on the area.
The Zoning Ordinance provides that any person may appeal a decision of the Zoning Board
of Appeals. Such an appeal must be filed within 15 days of the public hearing.
On July 6, 1992, Rod Mobus of 15 South Maple filed an appeal of the Zoning Board of
Appeals decision. The Zoning Ordinance requires that this appeal be forwarded to the
Village Board for their review of the Zoning Board of Appeals decision. The Village Board
should review the petitioner's request for a 6 foot fence, the Zoning Board of Appeals
decision, and the appeal of Mr. Mobus, and make a final determination on this matter,
DMC:hg
Attachments
OLEASE PRINT OR TYPE CASE NO.:ZBA- - APP-
BLAM INT-
V.B.HEARING DATE
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
APPLICATION FOR ZBA APPEAL
1. Applicant Rod Mobus
2. Address 15 South Maple Street Mt. Prospect IL 60056
Street City State Zip Code
3. Phone Number (During 9 a.m.- 5 p.m. Mon. thru Fri.) 870-1135
4. Property Owner same
(Name and Address - If ditterent than above)
5.LOCATIONOR ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY:
13 South Maple Street, Mt. Prospect, IL 60056
7. Give a statement listing your reasons and justification for your
appeal:
The resident at 13 South Maple Street stated it was her right to have a
61 fence because she is 51101, tall. The fence ordinance says 51 height
limit for residential neighborhoods. It is my right and the right of my
fellow neighbors to keep the fence at the 51 limit. There is no hardship
shown in this case, nor there any reason why a fence erected at 51 would
disrupt her privacy. The resident at 13 South Maple also stated that the
fact she does not have kids is her reason for such privacy. The children
at 15 South Maple are 4 and 7 years of age. There are over 30 other children
on our block under the age of 10. There is no reason to grant a 61 fence for
this residence when a 51 fence as the ordinance states will keep the children
of the neighborhood off her property. In thesp times we are blessed with a
very close and caring neighborhood. To divide this block in half would not
only be a crime, but it would also go against what Mt. Prospect stands for
and that is where friendliness is a way of life.
8. List by section number and brief description the section(s) of the
Mount Prospect Ordinance that are in contention.
:i
Sec. 1*. '-1 0:0)
Sec. 14.
If applicant is not the
owner of the property, then NNER, PMZTNER IN TITLE, CUMM—E
the owner MUST co-sign the OFFICER, BENEFICIARY OF TRUST (Strike
application out all but applicable designation)
Date: 4,
-OPLICANT (It different than ab -o -v -e -T—*
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 38-V-92 Hearing Date: June 25, 1992
PETITIONER: Deborah Callister
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 13 South Maple Street
PUBLICATION DATE: June 9, 1992
REQUEST: A variation to Section 21.601 of the Mount
Prospect Building Code to allow a 6 foot fence
instead of the maximum 5 foot along the side
yard.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
ABSENT:
Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Robert Brettrager
Ronald Cassidy
Peter Lannon
Richard Pratt
Dennis Saviano
Michaele Skowron
None
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: Tom Nietzke, 17 South Maple Street
David Alexander, 9 South Maple Street
Rod Mobis, 15 South Maple Street
Chairman Basnik introduced this case as a request for a variation to allow a 6 foot fence
instead of the maximum 5 foot fence, along the side yard at 13 South Maple Street. "
Deborah Callister introduced herself to the Zoning Board of Appeals as a petitioner, and
stated that she would like to construct a 6 foot fence on the south side of her lot from the
rear line of the house to the rear lot line. She stated that the 6 foot fence is necessary for
security and privacy, and that as a taller individual she felt that a 6 foot fence is necessary
for her personal needs.
Mr. Basnik asked Ms. Callister if she had received any comments from her neighbors about
the pending public hearing. The petitioner stated that she had not received any comments
from neighbors.
Mr. Ray Forsythe then summarized the
staff report for the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr.
Forsythe stated that the petitioner would like a variation to construct a 6 foot fence, and
described the location of the fence along the south property line. He indicated that the
application states that the fence is necessary for privacy. Mr. Forsythe stated that, as to
impact onw-sur oundin8 properties, he noted
along the common lot line, and that there is,
line. Mr. Forsythe stated that the fence nt
tanto the petitioner's property. Mr. p"orsytt
uncommon request.
Mr. Basnik asked if the fence is to be cons
across the rear, and Ms. Callister stated tha
fence is not necessary at other locations on
from the audience.
Mr. Tom Niet ke at 17 South. Maple object
the fence height should be limited to 5 f
neighbors wanted to make comments at thi
arriving until later.'Mr. Nietzke asked that
discussion on this item until later on the age
Chairman Basnik asked for a consensus, for
on this request until eater in the everting. I
Zoning Board to wait until other neighbors ate
Mr. Lannon indicated that he believed the
those other residents could not be available
David Alexander, 9 South Maple Street, intra
and apologized for be n2 lista. He gtntod f
M: II A a
r-Tagamg
ZBA38-V-92
Page 2
at the property to the south has the driveway
tasketball standard very close to this pro
perty
It help serve to stop basketballs from going
also indicated that a 6 foot fence is not an
on the north line of the property and
areas have a primacy hedge and that a
Mr. Basnik then asked for comments
e ®
Mar. Rod Mobis 15 South Maple Street, stated he was next door to the subject property and
objected to the +6 foot fence height. He stated that the 6 foot fence would reduce the impact
of open space in rear yards of these houses,and that he believes that it is necessary for his,
children's safety that he be abbe to look from his rear yard to the north and be able to see
his children in rear yards of other homes. He believed the 6 foot fence would block this
visibility of Itis children playing in neighbor's yards further down the block. He stated that
the basketball goal been removed.
Ms. Mister stated that she had not received any objections from neighbors and pointed
out that residences on the west side of Maple Street have b'foot fences along the rear lot
line. She stated that she was entitled to construct a h -foot fence to protect her property, and
that this was not an unseasonable request.
Mr. Pratt asked, the type of fence that was pr sed, and Ms Callister stated this would be
a solid type fence withboard-on-board construction
ZBA-38-V-92
Page 3
Mr. Saviano-stated that he believed there was some type of neighborhood dispute involved
with this request and he suggested that perhaps the neighbors could get together to work
out a compromise. He believed that he has seen this type of action result in neighbors
resolving difficulties before the Zoning Board of Appeals makes decisions on requests.
Mr. Cassidy indicated he believed that the Zoning Board should make a decision based on
the petitioner's request, and Mr. Basnik pointed out that both the petitioner and the
neighbors could each file an appeal of the Zoning Board decision if they disagreed with the
final vote on the request.
lVlr. Lantaon pointed out that, while there may be objections to this 6 foot fence, he stated
that they appeared to be a result caf a neighborhood dispute. He indicated that the ZoBoard caf Appeals routinely apiaroved 6 foot fences, and ning
at the request really is only to
look at the incremental difference of 1 foot between the S and 6 foot fence heights. He
believed it was important that the Zoning Board demonstrate consistency with past decisions
and that this request is in line with tnaray other variation applications. He stated it is
important for the Zoning Board of Appeals to took at the substance of objections, and to
consider haw important opinions of adjoining property owners might be in items more of
a routine nature.
There being no further discussion, Chairman Basnik asked for a motion.. Mr. Lannon
moved that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve a 6 foot fence at 13 South Maple Street.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Brettrager.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Pratt, Lannon, Skowron, and Saviano
NAYS: Brettrager, Cassidy and Basnik
Messrs. Brettrager, Cassidy and Chairman Basnik voted in opposition to the motion.
Chairman Basnik then asked for a motion to approve Resolution Z-38-92. Mr. Cassidy
moved that the Resolution be approved; the motion was ,seconded by Mr. Lannon.
Upon Roll Call: AYES: Pratt, Lannon, Skowron, Saviano, Brettrager, Cassidy and Basnik
NAYS: None
�'/A C)'ha�
David M. Clements,
Director of Planning
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO:
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
2 1
GIL BASNIK, CHAIRMAN
FROM:
DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
DATE:
JUNE 17, 1992
CASE NO.:
ZBA-38-V-92
APPLICANT:
DEBORAH J. CALLISTER
ADDRESS:
13 SOUTH MAPLE STREET
LOCATION MAP:
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: R -I Single Family Residential
LOT SIZE: 7,856.25 sq. ft.
% COVERAGE: N/A
FAR.: N/A
1
2 1
1
1 2 1
1
2 1
4 1
3
4 1
UIBRARY
5
6
5
6
7
8
7
8
10
9
10
13
11
12
11
14
15
15
15
160
15
16
50 W
17
17
18
19
20
19
2018
21
22
21
22
BUSSE AVE
wx
101
100
TV
101
0
111
10.3
—10—
CHUR04
105
104
103
107
106
7-05
100
109
108
9-4=
----7
ill
..
110
io�
110
115
4
4
1'3
— 113
112
2
117
112
11"
115
114
11 4
117
114
114
1;
117
00
EVERGREEN
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
ZONING: R -I Single Family Residential
LOT SIZE: 7,856.25 sq. ft.
% COVERAGE: N/A
FAR.: N/A
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2
A variation to Section 21.60 of the Mount Prospect Building Code to allow a 6 -foot fence
instead of the maximum 5 foot along the side yard.
-3QW1W- RK
Summary of application: The applicant would like to construct a 6 foot fence to run along
the south side yard property line and attaches to the rear of the house. The application
indicates that the fence is requested for privacy.
Impact on Surrounding Properties: The property to the south has their driveway along the
north property line which is adjacent to the proposed fence. There is a basketball standard
which is very close to the property line. A 6 foot fence is not an uncommon request.
[A_l?g 4134103di
There were no objections by other departments. Engineering and Inspection Services would
like to remind the petitioner that all drainage requirements must be met, and building
permits must be obtained prior to construction.
Ste. MAII' CItPaCOMMEI►ti ATION
Given the proximity of the neighbor's driveway and basketball standard, staff has no
objection to the proposed 6 foot fence as requested.
DMC:hg
� I �
� ^•ally �/* &S
mus �uu.e�.
fir, iysa—
,�,,
-740
'Village.of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinois
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Michael Janonis, Village Manager
FROM: Chuck Bencic, Inspection Services Director
DATE: July 16, 1992
RE: BITTERSWEET LANE RECONSTRUCTION BID
Attached find a memo from the Engineering Division recommending
acceptance of the bids for Reconstruction of Bittersweet Lane. The
two bids were in excess of the Engineer's Estimate. The main reason
for the bid prices to be above the Engineers Estimate was in the bid
item for Special Excavation. It appears the lack of local disposal
sites and higher disposal fees increased the cost of this bid item.
Arrow Road Construction Company has done several projects for the
village. We have had some problems with them mainly due to coordination
of subcontractors and meeting completion dates. Overall their work
has been satisfactory. Therefore I concur with the rea°ommendation
to accept the low bid from Arrow Road.
1
Chuck Bencic
CB:rm
Attach.
CC: Engineering
File
w
Village of MountProspect
Mount Prospect, Illinois
k
bq, �
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Chuck Bencic, D rector of Inspection Services
FROM: Fred Tennyson, Project Engineer
DATE: July 13, 1992
SUBJECT: - RECOMMENDATION
i
JUL 141992
VILLACL Li 1�iuuli NnUSrECT
INSPECTION SERVICES
On July 13, 1992 at 10:00 A.M., sealed bids were received for the Bittersweet Lane
Reconstruction, 92 -00113 -00 -FP. At this time, the sealed bids were publicly opened and:
read aloud.
Nine Contractors received Contract Bid Documents. A total of 2 Contractors submitted
bids. The bids range from a low of $159,228.00 by Arrow Road Construction Co. to a high
to a high of $184,468.25 by Johnson Paving Co. The Engineer's Estimate for the project. was
$142,462.50.
All Bidders submitted Bid Bonds in the amount of 10% of their total bid as required by the
Contract Documents. All Bidders correctly signed their bids and bid bonds.
E'S " . ALBD
Arrow Road Construction Co. $159,228.00
J.A. Johnson Paving Co. $184,468.75
The low bidder Arrow Road Construction has performed this type of work many times in
the Village. Their quality of work has ranged from very good to marginal.
Page Two
Recommendation - Bittersweet Lane Construction
Because the Village is familiar with the services provided by Arrow Road Construction
Co.,the Engineering Division recommends awarding them a Contract.
Funding for this project is shown on Page 139 of this year's budget under Account Code No.
22-071-04-8510 which currently has $350,000.00.
Fred Tennyson, 117
Project Engineer
I concur with the above recommendation
ky. , "0, 1, , MM-im...
raw,
Ig Coordinator
I concur with the above recommendation
�A X (A )
Herbert L. Weeks
Director of Public Works
FT/m.
Village of Mount Prospect
Bittersweet Lane Reconstruction
92 -00113 -00 -FP
July 13, 1992
10:00 A.M.
Arrow Road Construction
Mount Prospect III
J.A. Johnson Paving
Arlington Hts Ill
Estimated
47,235.00
No.
Items
(entity
Units
1.
SPECIAL EXCAVATION
2820
CY
2.
AGGREGATE BASE COURSE TYPE B
4135
TON
3.
BIT. MATERIALS (PRIME COAT)
1975
GAL
4.
BIT. CONCRETE BINDER CRSE. MIX B, TYPE 2
570
TON
S.
BIT. CONCRETE SURFACE CRSE. MIX C, CL I, T
535
TON
6.
COMBINATION CURB AND GUTTER REMOVAL
2950
LF
7.
COMB. CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER TYPE B 4.1
2950
LF
8.
STR TO BE ADJ/w NEW TYPE 1 FRAME,OPEN LI
6
EA
9.
BIT. DRIVEWAY REMOVAL & REPLACEMENT 3"
75
SY
10.
PCC SIDEWALK REMOVAL & REPLACEMENT 5"
700
SF
11.
PARKWAY RESTORATION
985
SY
12.
TRAFFIC CONTROL & PROTECTION
1
L SUM
13.
24 -MONTH MAINTENANCE BOND (NON MFT)
1
L SUM
Arrow Road Construction
Mount Prospect III
J.A. Johnson Paving
Arlington Hts Ill
16.75
47,235.00
16.00
45,120.00
9.50
39,282.50
11.00
45,485.00
0.62
1,224.50
0.90
1,777.50
27.10
15,447.00
35.00
19,950.00
31.20
16,692.00
37.00
19,795.00
1.70
5,015.00
3.50
10,325.00
7.15
21,092.50
9.75
28,762.50
224.00
1,344.00
290.00
1,740.00
24.75
1,856.25
14.00
1,050.00
2.85
1,995.00
4.00
2,800.00
7.05
6,944.25
5.75
5,663.75
800.00
800.00
1,000.00
1,000.00
300.00
300.00
L1,000.00
1,000.00
Total
159,228.00
Total _
184,468.75
Engineer's Estimate
11.00
31,020.00
9.50
39,282.50
1.00
1,975.00
24.00
13,680.00
27.00
14,445.00
1.50
4,425.00
8.00
23,600.00
275.00
1,650.00
25.00
1,875.00
3.00
2,100.00
6.00
5,910.00
2,000.00
2,000.00
500.00
500.00
Total
142,462.50
Mount Prospect Public Works Department
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM Imaryustt
TO: Village Manager
FROM: Director Public Works
DATE: July 17, 1992
SUBJECT: Project Change Order - Can -Dots Storm Sewer Project
Recently, a contract was awarded to National Sewer and Water
Inc. to install a new storm sewer from Weller Creek, north on
Can-Dota to Central Road. This new sewer will be laid down the
center of the street the entire distance and, upon completion, a
complete new roadway will be installed. The area through which
this work will be done dates back to pre -World War II; most of
the water and sewer services are quite old and were constructed
with materials which were the standard at that time. In the
contract, there are funds set aside for relocation and replace-
ment of some of the existing combined sewer, but nothing on
water services.
Typically, when subdivisions are developed, the developer in-
stalls the water mains in the parkway and runs individual ser-
vice lines to all lots along the route. On Can -Dots, the water
main is on the east side of the street, and the lots on the west
side of the street had the line run under the street with a
shut-off in the parkway. The shut-off is the connecting point
for homes on that side of the street.
These "long" service lines are typically 40' in length and in
this area are predominately 3/4" lead lines with lead "sweated"
connections to the mains and at the "B -box" connections leading
to the homes. The EPA is concerned about lead contamination in
water supplies and has required sampling of water supplies by
all communities. We were required to submit 60 samples of water
and received a clean bill of health from the EPA. Many other
communities were not so fortunate and may have to resample or
take remedial action.
Even though there is no requirement for us to replace these lead
service lines, I believe it would be in our best interests to do
it at this time, while the street is torn up. When replacing
the line up to the resident's shut-off box in the parkway it is
recommended that the size line be increased from 3/4" to 1" to
conform with existing codes. It is estimated that 40 homes on
the west side of the street would be affected by this upgrad-
ing. The contractor has furnished us with a proposal for this
additional work.on a per -foot basis.
1 recommend that the Village accept the proposal from National
Sewer & Water to replace all lead water service lines which
cross the street along the route of the new sewer, at an estimat-
ed cost of $47,000. There will be additional inspection servic-
es required for this work, so I also recommend that the SEC
Donohue contract be increased by $2000 for their added work.
Funds are available for this proposed work.
HLW/td
CANDOTA.CO/FILES/SEWERS
y�r� National Sewer & Water, Inc.
U 1698 W. Cortland Court . Addison, IL 60101
(708) 620-2505 • 620-2506 • 620-2507 • FAX (708) 620-2509
July 15, 1992
Mr. Herbert Weeks
Public Works Director
Village of Mount Prospect
1700 West Central Road
Mount Prospect, IL 60056
RE: Extra Work
Can-dota Avenue Sewer Improvements
Dear Mr. Weeks:
We are pleased to quote you to replace the lead services which
maybe encountered on Candota Avenue from Council Trails to Central
Road.
Per your request here are the prices for the necessary work.
a) 1" copper tubing installed with trench backfill
as necessary $15.00 per foot
b) 1" corporation with Mueller H16000 double strap
all brass saddles $225.00 each
c) roundway & 95 E box, installed $180.00 each
d) roundway and Minniapolis pattern H10302 box
installed $200.00 each
e) locate and shut off old corps - amount for
each $150.00
f) locate and re -use old corps with new copper
pipe at $160.00 per each
Respectfully submitted by:
President
DN/nd
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
ILLINOIS
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONISI�
FROM: FIRE CHIEF EDWARD M. CAVELLO -712-1
DATE: JULY 17, 1992
SUBJECT: WAIVER ON FIRE DEPARTMENT STAFF CAR
On July 17, 1992, the Fire Department requested the waiver of the
bid process for the purpose of purchasing a staff car under the
state bid pricing schedule. Cellozi-Ettleson was identified as
the vendor where we would make the purchase. From the time of our
initial price investigation until the purchase was approved,
Cellozi-Ettleson sold all but one of the state bid vehicles. As
you might imagine the least desirable remaining vehicle had the
basic equipment package.
Following the Village Board meeting of July 7, 1992, the Fire
Department reviewed a subsequent price quotation from Miles
Chevrolet for the amount of $14,919.87. The equipment package on
this vehicle far exceeded what was available on the Cellozi-
Ettleson vehicle and came closer to what fire and police
departments specify for staff cars and was roughly $100.00 less.
As stated in my memo of June 24, 1992, funds for this purchase are
available in Account No. 48-077-9-8445. I recommend the purchase
of the Miles Chevrolet vehicle with an upgraded AM/FM stereo radio
for a total price of $15,127.87. We feel this vehicle will have
an enhanced resale value with the improved equipment package.
Edward M. Cavello
Fire Chief
EMC/mah
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Michael E. Janonis, Village Manager C'eTylk4a
FROM: David C. Jepson, Finance Direct
DATE: July 17, 1992
SUBJECT: Purchase from Midwest Decal
Attached is a copy of a purchase order to Midwest Decal for 5,500 Yard Material decals.
These are the stickers that Village residents put on refuse containers so they do not need
to purchase yard waste bags. In the past we have purchased these decals in quantities of
3,000 at a unit cost of $1.18 each. When Lisa Angell placed this order she was quoted a
price of $.91 each if the quantity was 5,000 or more. Because of the savings, Lisa ordered
5,000. We actually received 5,500 which represents a 10% overrun. This is normal for
custom printing jobs.
Lisa was not aware of the need to bid purchases of $4,000 or more, and accordingly I am
requesting that the Village Board waive the bidding procedure and authorize the purchase
from Midwest Decal.
DCJ/sm
Enc
c: Lisa Angell, Refuse Coordinator
0
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
Requisition Information
DEPARTM Public Works
REOUIS IONED BY,
DEPARTMENT HEAD OR AUTHORIZED AGENT
APPROVED FOR PURCHASE BY:
VILLAGE MANAGER
ACCOUNT N FUNDS INITIALS
CHECKE AVAILABLE r�
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILL.
100 S. EMERSON ST.
MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 60056-3266
Phone: (708) 392-6000
OTHER VENDORS:
47435
DATE INITIATED June 2, 1992
NAME
PRICE
PRICE
NAME
REASON ORDER PLACED WITH SUCCESSFUL BIDDER
Lowest Price
Quality
Best Del'y Service
Only Source
Beat Design
0
1:1
1'& 1:1
11
OTHER REASONS
PURCHASE ORDER
F4� I
m
mM, t'Nfmat.a. � A+.mn ilrnv�rnn� ;i
DATE June 2, 1992
THIS ORDER NUMBER MUST APPEAR ON ALL
INVOICES. PACKING LISTS AND CARTONS.
ORDER NO. 47435 7/I35
REQ. NO. A-229
F
Midwest Decal s
H
0 1407 Barclay Boulevard P
Buffalo Grove, I1. 60089 T
0
1992/1993 L
ALL INVOICES ASND STATEMENTS MUST BEJTHIS PURCHASE IS NOT SUBJECT_ TO SALES TAX
UNTS
MAILED TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS ATTN: EXEMPTILE ON
NUMBER
475-01
ACCOUNT CODE � QTY. � DESCRIPTION OF SUPPLIES OR SERVICES
Village of Mount Prospect
Public Works Department
1700 W. Central Road
Mount Prospect, I1. 60056
THIS PURCHASE ORDER IS SUBJECT TO THE
CONDITIONS STATED ON THE REVERSE
SIDE THEREOF.
21-075-02-7025 5500 PS Vinyl Recycling YW - Yard Material on green
vinyl .
Shipping
Total
Invoice# 002832
UNI TOTAL
PRICE
.91 ea. $5,005.00
38.54
$5,043.54
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PACKING SLIP: To Accompany Shipment or _ww
Mailed Same Day Shipment Is Made. FINANCE DIRECTOR