HomeMy WebLinkAbout0309_001MINUTES
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MAY 14, 1991
I. ROLL CAL
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. Present at the meeting were:
Mayor Gerald L. Farley; Trustees Mark Busse, George Clowes, Timothy Corcoran,
Leo Floros, Paul Hoefert and Irvana Wilks. Also present at the meeting were:
Village Manager John Fulton Dixon, Assistant Village Manager John Burg, Fire
Chief- Edward Cavello, Police Chief Ronald Pavlock, Deputy Police Chief Tom
Daley, Deputy Police Chief Ron Richardson, Finance Director Dave Jepson,
Inspection Services Director Chuck Bencic, Engineering Coordinator Jeff
Wulbecker; two persons in the audience and three members of the press.
IL MI=5
A request was made to correct line 20 on page 4, to indicate that the cost is
$13,000 per year. With this change, the Minutes of the Committee of the Whole
meeting of April 9, 1991 were accepted and filed.
111. CITIZENS, M BE HEARD
There were no citizens to be heard.
Inspection Services Director Chuck Bencic introduced the topic on stormwater
detention requirements. Engineering Coordinator Jeff Wulbecker then gave the
presentation on this subject. He recommended that the Village Code be amended
to base the detention requirements on updated data found in the Illinois Water
Survey Bulletin 70 published in 1989.
Mayor Farley asked if there is a down side to this change. Mr. Bencic said no
and indicated that more detention would be required.
Trustee Hoefert asked how often this data would change, thus requiring a change
in the standards. Mr. Wulbecker said changes are not very frequent. The current.
requirements are based on U. S. Weather Bureau data published in 1961..Trustee
Hoefert asked if the Village would lower the requirements if the data indicated
this. It was noted that the way the recommended change is written, the standards
would have to be changed any time they are updated.
Trustee Corcoran asked for an explanation of the storm data. Mr. Bencic
responded to this request. Trustee Corcoran asked how much more detention
would be required. Mr. Wulbecker indicated there would be a 30% increase.
Trustee Corcoran felt that was very good.
Trustee Clowes asked why the MWRD uses older data. Mr. Bencic indicated that
apparently MWRD has not yet updated their requirements. Trustee Clowes asked
what impact the proposed change would have on the 25 year storm protection
offered by the projects outlined by RJN. Mr. Bencic and Village Manager Dixon
said there would be no impact because RJN used this newer data. Trustee
Clowes asked if the proposed changes would lead to problems with developers.
Mr. Bencic said these standards are not changed that often and most consultants
are aware of any such changes. Village Manager Dixon said that once plans are
submitted, the date the 'plans are submitted is the date that is used. Mr. Dixon
suggested changing the requirement to reflect the 1989 data.
Trustee Wilks asked how a developer would be able to accommodate larger
detention areas. Mr. Bencic indicated that a developer, for example, could dig the
detention pond a little deeper. Smaller commercial lots could probably store extra
water on parking lots.
Mayor Farley questioned why there is a five acre requirement for detention. Mr.
Bencic agreed that detention on smaller parcels would definitely be desirable for
multi -family development.
It was the consensus of the Committee to draft the Ordinance to update the 100
year storm data in the Village Code and to study the need for detention
requirements for multi -family based on density rather than acreage.
Finance Director Dave Jepson outlined the proposed Flood Proofing Incentive
Program. He indicated this program mirrors the Des Maines program. He said
the proposed program would not apply to new construction but would be an
encouragement for existing properties. The program would provide a rebate of
20% of the cost of flood mitigation/prevention projects for residential property up
to a maximum of $1,000. Mr. Jepson suggested that rebates for non-residential
property would be looked at by the Board on a case -lay -case basis.
6
Trustee Floros said he did not feel the Board should have to consider the validity
of individual projects. He suggested a limit for staff.
Trustee Clowes was concerned that individual projects might transfer problems
elsewhere. He based his concern on information received from RJN. Trustee
Clowes was concerned that the Village would take on liability for transferring a
problem. Mr. Jepson said he is not aware of the Village ever taking on a liability
for sewers.
Trustee Busse asked if homeowners would try to change the grade of their
property. Mr. Dixon said the Village would be very careful about approving any
drainage projects. He said that as long as there is no effect on neighbors, a
rebate might be approved, Trustee Busse asked how long it would take to be
paid the rebate. Mr. Jepson said about four weeks after getting the proper
documentation.
Village Manager Dixon recommended a maximum of $1,000 rebate per unit for
multi -family complexes.
Trustee Busse felt this is a great program. He felt the program could be
expanded up to $20,000, meaning a rebate up to $4,000, for non-residential
property. He suggested that the program be retroactive to December 1989.
Trustee Hoefert felt that it would get difficult to administer a retroactive program.
For instance, some people may not have documentation.
Trustee Wilks asked if this would be a Village -wide program. Mr. Jepson said
yes. Trustee Wilks asked how many permits for this type of work have been
issued in the last several years. Mr. Bencic said he would have to go through the
files. Trustee Wilks asked how much a typical overhead sewer project with
ejector pumps would cost. Mr. Bencic said from $2,500 to $10,000.
Trustee Corcoran said that with a $200,000 investment, the Village would get
$1,000,000 in protection. He would like to review the program after a year, noting
that the Village may need to increase the program. Trustee Corcoran asked about
the downspout disconnection program. Mr. Jepson said this should not be a part
of the rebate program because it is required by Ordinance. Trustee Corcoran said
he is against a retroactive program and suggested beginning the program the date
of the Ordinance.
Trustee Floros agreed with making the program effective from the date of the
Ordinance.
Trustee Clowes felt January 1, 1991 would be appropriate.
Trustee Hoefert agreed with making the program effective the date of the
Ordinance.
-3-
Trustee Wilks also leaned toward a retroactive date.
After discussion, it was the consensus of the Committee to make the program
effective the date of the Ordinance. There was also a consensus to allow staff to
approve projects for non-residential property up to a maximum $20,000 project
with a maximum rebate of up to $4,000.
;IMMUST41
Assistant Village Manager John Burg gave a presentation on the Fire and Police
Station schedule. He noted that a decision must be made regarding the
demolition of the old building, which he recommended should be taken down in
September. If this demolition is approved, then a decision must be made promptly
as to the exact location of temporary quarters to allow adequate time for
installation of phones and other communications. Mr. Burg said staff has explored
a number of alternatives for temporary quarters. However, the most cost-effective
option appears to be a program in which the Village would purchase 11 trailers
with a guaranteed buy-back by the seller. A 50% buy-back would be realistic but,
of course, the Village could hope for more, The Village would have to spend
approximately $146,000 up -front but the out-of-pocket for this scenario would be
an estimated $83,000 after the rebate.
In response to questions, Chief Pavlock and Chief Cavello indicated that this
proposed plan would meet their needs.
The Committee asked many questions about different alternatives such as office
space. However, after a careful discussion, it was the consensus of the Committee
to proceed with bids for 11 trailers and to designate the old Public Works site as
the location for 9 trailers and the Fire Station at Golf and Busse as the location
for 2 trailers. Mr. Burg indicated that the trailers would be bid out for a
purchase sell -back option as well as rental. A suggestion was made that staff
should continue to consider office space alternatives if an appropriate proposal
should be received in the very near future.
VII. MANAGER'S REPORT
1. Village Manager Dixon reported on the recommendations made by Stanley
Consultants for a berm at Prospect High School.
2. Manager Dixon offered to prepare the letter for interested Trustees on behalf
of SWANCC to Congressmen and Senators urging them to encourage the Army
Corps of Engineers to seek a solution to allow the Balefill to move forward.
-4-
Trustee Floros asked if the utility poles in the V&G parking lot will be removed.
Manager Dixon said yes, they will be removed soon.
Trustee Hoefert indicated an interest in discussing the 60 channel versus the 120
channel cable system at a future Committee of the Whole meeting.
Trustee Wilks thanked Village Attorney Everette Hill and Village Manager John
Dixon for the excellent update this past Saturday. She recommended a planning
meeting to discuss the needs of all Departments for the next one to five years.
Trustee Wilks also indicated that she was taking a tour of the Streamwood Police
Station and asked if other Trustees would like to attend.
IX ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
JPB/rcw
Respectfully submitted,
JOHN P. BURG
Assistant Village Manager
me
Village of Mount Prospect
Mount Prospect, Illinoisrf
,
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR GERALD L. FARLEY AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
FROM: VILLAGE MANAGER
DATE: MAY 24, 1991
SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE RECYCLING COMMISSION
Staff has had an opportunity to review the request of the Recycling Commission and
strongly urges the Board to concur with the recommendation of adding mixed paper as
opposed to corrugated cardboard as an additional item of collection for recycling
purposes beginning with the new contract on August 1. We feel that the percentage in
the reduction of the waste stream would be significant with mixed paper as opposed to
corrugated cardboard plus there is already in place a drop off point for corrugated
cardboard at the Arc Recycling Center on South Busse.
Staffing Request: The Board had reviewed at the time of the budget and also at the
time that the new Refuse Disposal Contract was reviewed the possibility of adding a staff
member who would be responsible for coordination and education of the new Solid
Waste Programs of the Village. I strongly urge the Board to allow staff to move ahead
and add this individual so that the education process, which will be lengthy and very
time-consuming particularly with multi -family, can start immediately. Attached is a
recommended Job Description which includes many duties that we should be starting to
intensify in the very near future. I also have attached information which shows that over
the last year, the present members of the Department of Public Works have spent over
one man year doing solid waste or recycling items, however, with the education process
coming forward, they expect meetings with each and every multi -family unit will take up
even more time.
I recommend that the Board authorize the adding of one staff member to this
Department immediately.
Recommended Name Change for Recycling Commission: As a courtesy, because of the
impact of recycling on the waste collection, staff brought the Contract and bid proposals
before the Recycling Commission. They became very much aware of and involved in
that process. While there are a number of extremely intelligent and diversified
individuals on the Commission who have a wide range of interest, I believe the Board
needs to be careful in having a Commission that is involved in too many items. There
are still a large number of recycling issues that the Commission can address. Most of
the items having to do with solid waste; that is, either the SWANCC items are handled
by representatives of the Board and items within the community as far as collection is
concerned hopefully will be handled by an individual as well as the rest of the Public
Works staff in the Village. The monitoring of contracts, etc., should be done by staff
and not by way of a Commission and I would recommend that the Board consider the
amount of recycling options that the Recycling Commission can still explore and not
expand their duties at this time.
JOHN FULTON DIX N
JFD/rcw
6 ,
Mai 4, 1911
Mayor Gerald Fzrle,,y
oMount Frex,,,UcL
100 S. Emerson Struec
1", 6 ak r- t Fr- o s p z�c t � I 1 1 i. I -, LD
Z, �a z: r 11 a ,, (:J I- F ti, 1, 3, tz "', ,
: "U,ld like to Cynna; V010';_��I, �' �� :- _, -, : .
Rocycling Commission on some pepdirl i�Etw� , Lrz�j-g no
del 3 berations over the nuN, � 1 -cc )'c.l 1 , .. i
Thnewly apPrOved cu!_� A77 DIPPOSI! 7
collection of nPospapar, aluminum Oamz
,& steel and bi -mut.1 Eons and
(namely clear and colored ti -PE and olear a d
also an allowance in .I` I.: ccao a; `i_ Y
already approved fur Lka dA;L.cn
in r a c y c I i n g "':'c4 - u P
After a 10thy discussion over the w0ylti 1 W
a ardboard or wi n ad p apar , L1_L. i- 1Z or—! a L Y Q
A i n e d p a p e r �-, D w 1 d' i n � et
l 2 n 9 j t 0 m I � _ e " _ , � '.., �.. ,
high gradw oiiice paper, kraFt grucvrY WS, �IPVQO" I e' 1
care,d boxes) . Mimed papor conm 'wOh 2�r;o 14"" 04 LI
a grEaLer waste volume rsd"ni ` ""n r"
We are recommending deferral on the ponnible :Ui Lim, sga"'
cardboard -t this time, becouse of Lhe collunLlc- Ao"A"01"s th"
bulky commodity presents, and because rewilanl:2 YK: w. .!]a L,,:
rucycla it if they chodsa at tha ARC drOP-04" "n"s- VU Eusa�_,
f,cmud T h s, Cc m,i,u4j sl�,iOjl t1 8L the Trostaa� 1: 51
rnCyCling Cajjj�f,ldlt)/
L2,t af -Y i n r,
TheCommission belies,— UK the eAisting
(DQ . y)jst;KF has done an outstanding job thua +Or in
Vistin&solid waste cantraU and implementing our rocycling
,nd campy ting programs. This staff effOrt, sr( arh"" L,
Depyty! Diructor Glen Andler and Ad, nist"Ki o Pd cn Li w Pngal I , hm.
involJdApIproKimately one person -ypar of labor. Thin . Palujwt-
Ifrquentlevening meetings, after -hour speaking engageTvPLS, and other
off-qcloch-hours, in addition to extensive !ac," in Uiz a -we duyi"L.1
'the nokmal 'business day. These solid Nasta ef TO -M ;oK 1 a snorbed
to
e :',,,by . thea DPW withOUt FW) I'icrueae of Pmraw"nl "we 'K co'
WiLhOUL . �Dwt. 00on ' ;Gj - n�p <r U L i , - -, " ,
nacnossril/ let !Emu alL , Liar in i-der to r-_.L
Salij WnStD 11suaL,
As we move to implaTurt �nonsu 3nd loaa �'no L.00 n
innovative and cnntrovarni.] 1h,
time nweded to �Dn_gn L�u
incrussa signilicanUn. a F..ni �,i I I
J, TraqsltAon Lutiv:Hns w.Ln "unt oc"Lr.wLur��
2) Purnhasa and distributinp n? 2quip(Uant and
additional rncj&i:,g b�ns, sLickernH
3) DinvolopmenL and wKvcutisn DT od,;
recyclablu MSU�Sals, U:H-ViMily racyci0q, in �J
risc Vs 1 i ing, waGto reduat; ah, ai L,,j �' � �_' '�� g
oducs L i on on ex i sti ng rui una, r ecys 1 j °"i t" j _, .,_: I I _" --
and Christmas trEe Pi"7uY PrOir-:0s, This kill
spoaki ng Events be! or a a, E orgam a a t: an L q
schDols.
4), Liaison wiLh the acavionger and irmsAWnLo oH
and complaints (such as missed pick-up,, bu:k pjan,
Preparatihn requirowants, and Kai kwLn for 2W I'T",
be aware, calls and !wtters ncincerning oulij naw Lho nos,
prevalent type of Hkizion inquiry receiawd by T"ill or>''
i ncrease as our, prcj, r,rffj�,' grOw rrjors, uomp� Lm
5) Data Cal 1 octj an vind an,il YZI n UD ?�!Cm: �z
policy, portizu1srly on tho m�
r ecycl in pay-bV-SUHtai Mr, Ond NIQU rod "nU
programs i n diver H ng waste from 1 1W i 3 1 Vol
compliance will alyu reud Lo Ke _-':; - .'!
TrustaEs with appropri to Z n Formati on -s-r..r pzl
6) ongoing "a"agemont in" icy-ongar cDntrauit, inalwdj_,
performLany Monitoring, nj j�. C::' I 0"nCaLl"k i 0 n/- ah�w
7) On g o i r U 1 j a i son ,.2. t h t k L F : 1
County, noighboring cLimmunitwo, and Uhur !ovalw of 0Lvw-rmLnt,
including the application ?or and mwnagemenL ul nwjiO Kort2
&ants. In addition, DPW providEs KaOG nun�
Commission.
All of these factors butiross the Commission" s
the Trustees establish a full-time profensional uolld N_.w0_�
coordinator position within thn DPW. 1,4u b C� 1 i ov r� _', L _- 1 ;,,L u I .J 'U ad
with someone who has knowledge and expeirionce in Unis cnolw,;,
dynamic field, or related disciplines. While we aglaud the nAmnce
that the Village Board brings to its deliberations whenEver
tional ng a. d,, we uz��,a
pos���qn e,�is�s a/.0 w�zz grow more acute �n ti`e wooL hs
a posi�ion �s �ecom2.ng more commonpzace in o��`cr comaun���es o+ our
size. ��recver, dcs�i�e the treman�ous conu'iuu��on nau� �y
voluevilza�e, we do not Lel ieve it ispractica1 1 o re�y
a,n voIunteers to carr/ �u� �he wiue range o+ duties lc- c] ai- wo
ne�d �ho m�nageoen� ccntJLnu�anu pro+essIonaI e,per-
t a+f posion virovde. The Recyclnors
�o e:pcct, �owev�r, �o oxpard o�r role �hrough our spu�i'ers' 5uroau
anu by respc:dirg to consL�L, r- to assE.sc vilz�gs �ta+f
implemen� �xe new programs,
'
pecau�� �|`e sc�pe o+ ��e n�crcz�ng Comm�ssion �as growp ��yonu
recvcz�no �o enco�pass was�e reC�uon, y�r� was�e compcs��:g, an�
re�us� cozzec��o� �ssues, w� +eez our curren� name no �ongor
auoquatI t t.road, oU,r responsE. in�����e�' T��rz+ore,
�oe eecycz�ng Comm1ss�071 reco/.,ne:us to t ie
name ue chz,.naeu 1-o lt»e noun -L-- Prospect Soz1.0 uaste oc�n�cs��n.
ow -up the Bto �ard �e1ibera�ions on �h� new refu=a cootract
s a o ,
I have �axen the Iibertr a unI eg s�a�es Env�rcnm�n�az
Protection Agency brocxure' ''unL iFricing,^ which ouLzinos L h�
Fe�sral Govs enJcrseoent of this �oncopL as a pro�=n,
workab, le methud to encourage the puuzic to reduce u`ou' was�e �xrough
consumer uehavj.or an -d �ncreased recycling.
I+ yov have any quest ions regarm no the recommenclat�cns conta�neu �n
L��s le�tor, p�ease +eez free �o contacL �e ����-o�zo> or mv +e�zow
commi-- sioners.
�incerely yo�rs,
Kenoe�h �. �es�la�'e
c�a�rmcr, �o�nt Prospec� �o�rczin� zc mms1 0n
cvizzage TruS teeS (w » Cr, czosurC-
D epar',,,nenof public works
Rec'cling Commission
Mount .ospect Public Works 0 —artment
71M Crn LS4
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: APRIL 19, 1991
RE: RESPONSIBILITIES RELATED TO MOUNT PROSPECT'S SOLID WASTE/
RECYCLING SERVICES
At the recent Village Board meeting a request was made to create a new
position for a Solid Waste/Recycling Coordinator. Great strides have
been made in our community on the startup of the recycling program and
related environmental issues. These efforts have placed a severe
strain on our existing administrative staff and we envision the'next
phase of education and monitoring will require additional staff
commitment.
Outlined below are detailed activities, we feel are critical to
successful implementation of our new solid waste/recycling contract, as
well as, long term tasks associated with effective and efficient
municipal solid waste management.
1) Accurate account of all multifamily units
number of units
number of dumpsters needed/location (according to formula)
establish contact with management of property to monitor
volumes/recycling efforts
Work with ARC and management to determine collection days
Assist management with transition to new hauler to ensure
positive relationship from the start
2) Procurement and Distribution of Equipment and Materials
stickers for bags
recycling bins - single family
recycling containers - multifamily
3) Education and Promotion of New Contract for Single/Multifamily
Units
Extensive educational campaign through mailings, media and
presentations, schools,civicorgainizations, groups, etc.:
new schedule for collection days f materials/
addition of recyclables to program; preparation o
placement of materials in bin(s)
purchase and use of stickers
why reduce
how residents can realize reductions in refuse costs
modifying disposal habits
becoming informed consumers
what materials refuse collectors will not take, ie, hazardous
materials, motor oil, etc.
developing network to keep residents informed of their progress
schools/churches/civic organizations
information on recycling expansion at Public Works open House
4) Data Collection and Analysis of Volume/Revenues
identify volumes and revenue ARC must provide to Village on a
monthly basis including refuse taken to landfill, percent of
basic. service fee paid for tipping fees and volume diverted
design and implement solid waste tracking program
from May 1 - July 31 - identify control group and track
weekly refuse/recycling volumes
August*l - January 31 - track weekly refuse/recycling volumes
of control group
research and analysis of residential solid waste, on-going
develop and maintain market contacts so Village is aware of
market activities, ie, saturation, revenue, direction of
industry on recycling
5) Village Representation - Public/Private Sectors
work with the Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC)
toward a safe and healthy environment for all communities
including active support of balefill and related issues
monthly SWANCC meetings for community solid waste coordinators
work with SWANCC toward individual goals of Mount Prospect, ie,
utilize their incentive program for reduced balefill rates
monthly Recycling Commission meetings
facilitate information to Village staff and residents at needed
research available funding and support services at state and
federal levels, as well as, private industry; make application
when appropriate
contacts with county and state representatives to encourage state
wide efforts on waste reduction, ie, packaging
6) Liason between scavenger and resident
respond to resident's questions, concerns and complaints;
on-site interaction when needed; single/multifamily
track complaints and work toward positive resolve
work with scavenger company and drivers to allow for smooth
transition in service and collection days
establish system to communicate any problems on collection
day(s) in an effort to allow for resolution the same day
obtain feedback from residents to ascertain service quality and
satisfaction
solid waste correspondence, ie, speak outs
research and make resources available to residents who
want to do more
develop and implement new resident informational packet regarding
Village services and resources for solid waste, recycling,. and
environmental programs
7) Other
develop and monitor recycling program for all commercial
establishments within Village
contract administration
monitor monthly billing counts for single family units
monitor monthly billing counts and possible fee reductions
for recycling efforts in multifamily complexes
administration of desktop recycling program (research ARC's
program)
research and recommend procurement of recycled products used by
the Village (Mayors Conference recommends local ordinance
requiring purchasing of recycled/recyclable products when
available by local governments)
Christmas Tree Recycling
research special disposal needs, ie, trees, hazardous materials,
motor fuel, antifreeze, etc.
research -and recommend policies requiring recycling efforts by
organizations holding community events, ie, Lions Club, Jaycees,
etc.
research Model Community requirements
In closing, I would like to state that solid waste is a very dynamic
field which will continue to affect public policy. A growing number of
issues associated with solid waste, ie, diminishing landfill space,
source reduction, recycling, reuse of resources, environmental
effects, disposal alternatives must now be addressed at the local
level. They are not short term problems nor can they be temporarily
resolved. To suggest short-term intervention through community
education will be adequate to successfully implement and administer
Mount Prospect's solid waste management program may be short-sighted.
Several times over the past years voluntary recycling programs were
initiated and all have failed. The voluntary recycling programs and
refuse contracts were administered by the Health Department, which
consisted of a Director, two (2) sanitarians, part-time interns, in the
summer, a secretary and volunteers. At times the Public Works
Department was even called upon to assist with clean up and separation
of materials.
Efforts directed to recycling, reduction in the solid waste stream and,
and other related environmental issues must not be allowed to fail.
Solid waste management is a matter of state and national importance,
requiring high priority commitment. A suggestion was recently made
that a part-time employee could adequately monitor and administer this
vital service. Per Board direction we have made inquiries through the
Network 50 program for candidates. However, I do not believe a
part-time individual would be able to meet program needs as I envision
them. We need a full-time, dedicated employee who can make an all
inclusive commitment to the success of programs. We recognize there
would still be a need for clerical and administrative personnel as
backup resources. However, in this regard we are not requesting
additional personnel to assist the proposed recycling/environmental
coordinator, as we anticiapte making the necessary adjustments to
absorb the additional workload. our main concern is we need to free up
our key personnel for other diverse priorities within the Public Works
Department and be able to have a single person follow through on the
numerous aspects of the Villages recycling, solid waste and
environmental services. Your favorable consideration would be
appreciated.
Herbert L. Weeks
cc: Kenneth Westlake, Chairman
Mount Prospect Recycling Commission
Mount prospect Public Works Department
TM MY (54
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Village Manager
FROM: Director Public Works
DATE: March 22, 1991
SUBJECT: Employment of Solid waste/
Environmental Services Coordinator
Since the fall of 1988, the staff at Public Works has been ac-
tively engaged in working with an ad hoc recycling committee
and, later, a recycling commission. Progressively, the hours
committed have escalated to include recycling, yard waste, and
solid waste issues. During this past calendar year, we estimate
administrative staff time spent at 2,859 hours. In addition,
our maintenance personnel spent 562 hours on the Christmas tree
collection program, delivery of yard waste bags and recycling
bins, plus other solid waste activities performed after normal
working hours.
Only with the dedication of loyal employees, such as our Deputy
Director and Administrative Aide, who have worked long hours on
start-up of the recycling program and refuse contract, have all
previous challenges been met. Sixty to 70 -hour work weeks have
not been uncommon with their trying to accommodate all commit-
ments with which we are charged. Our priorities had to be re-
evaluated and our goals redefined.
With a new refuse contract being considered for implementation,
I am asking for relief and am recommending that an additional
person be hired to administer all issues on solid waste, recy-
cling, and related environmental concerns. The proposed refuse
contract will require extensive education throughout the communi-
ty plus promoting recycling contributions and environmental
concerns, such as potential odors from improperly designed com-
post projects, collection of hazardous materials, etc. This
person would also research the availability of grant funding and
process all required documentation for same, plus have a height-
ened awareness of new ideas related to refuse, recycling and
environmental problems.
Existing administrative staff would still be involved in all
programs, but with a major shift of hours relegated to the new
coordinator. This would allow my staff to redirect their ef-
forts to the infrastructure and compliance with regulations
being imposed on us by state and federal agencies. Our mainte-
nance staff would still be involved in the chipping of Christmas
trees and occasional pickup and delivery of materials. No addi-
tional clerical staff would be required.
I recommend that this additional position be filled as soon as
possible and that it be reviewed on an annual basis for effec-
tive utilization of time and need. This would be a salaried
position with a pay scale between $30,000 and $35,000 per year.
On their March 21, 1991 meeting, the Recycling Commission unani-
mously favored this recommended action.
LAP
ftI F4 NE
-_O14VIT0—"3�. _W_ -X
E
W
HLW/td
SLDWSTCO.ORD/FILES/ADMIN
SOLID WASTE SERVICES
PUBLIC WORKS LABOR HOURS
March 1990 February 1991
ADMINISTRATIVE
OFFICE
DIRECTOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR AD. AIDE SECRETARY
ACCT. CLK.
1990
March 15 61 100
31
April 15 72 130
65
20
May 15 64 124
40
20
June is 61 8 (acting AA)
20
10
July 15 86 32
61
10
August 15 81 97
46
10
Sept. 15 74 98
44
10
Oct. 15 74 100
55
10
Nov. 15 88 118
62
10
Dec. 15 78 120
40
io
1991
Jan. i5 104 76
39
Feb. 15 57 70
43
TOTALS
180 900 1,123
546
110 2,859
In addition the following hours were expended by Public Works
Maintenance
personnel:
1990 Yard Material Program
Bag Delivery/Yard Bag Collections - 221
hours
1990/1991 Christmas Tree Collection/Chipping - 231
hours
Bin Deiivery/Collec-tion of Recyclables - 60
hours
Solid Waste Activities Performed After
Normal Work Hours - 50
hours
TOTALS
562
hours
March 1991
RECLABOR.91/FILES/WASTE
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
JOB TITLE
CLASSIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION
Classification: Administrative
Position: Solid Waste/Environmental Services Coordinator
TITLE: SOLID WASTE/ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COORDINATOR
JOB DESCRIPTION:
NATURE OF WORK*
To manage, direct and coordinate the activities of the Village's Solid
Waste/Recycling/Yard Material delivery service including contract
administration, public education and promotion, citizen liason, Village
representative to local and state environmental agencies/organizations,
administration of public policy affecting solid waste and environmental
programs and program analysis.
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: Duties may include, but are not limited
to,'the following:
Oversees and manages the Village's solid waste/recycling management
system including solid waste contract, public policy and procedures.
Recommends and assists in the implemenatation of goals and objectives;
recommends and administers policies and procedures.
Provides responsible, professional and technical assistance relative to
the Village's solid waste/recycling program; conducts studies, makes
programmatic recommendations and reports.
Develops and administers Enviromental Policy for the Village.
Identifies, environmentally safe practices and products for Village
operations, when appropriate.
Researches and interprets policies affecting the environment; use and
application of hazardous/nonhazardous materials, disposal of
hazardous/nonhazardous materials.
Develops and facilitates educational and promotional programs for public
presentations; schools, profit/nonprofit organizations, citizen forums,
etc. Educational programming to include, but not limited to recycling,
source reduction, composting, hazardous/nonhazardous household materials
and other environmental issues affecting the community.
Data collection, analysis and presentation of participation rates,
diversion rates and revenue generated from refuse/recycling/yard
material programs.
1 of 3
Citizen liason - respond to inquiries and complaints regarding refuse,
recycling, yard material, household hazardous materials and
environmental policies and procedures.
Arbitrate disputes betweens residents and contract scavenger in the
event of property damage.
Prepare submittals for Village Newsletter and other formal media
releases.
Prepare grant applications for program funding and other revenue
sources.
Prepare applications to state and/or federally sponsored resource
recovery programs; tire collections, hazardous waste collections,
battery collection.
Village representative to the Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook
County and Mount Prospect Recycling Commission.
Coordinate the Village Desk Top Recycling Program.
Research pending state and/or federal environmental policies.
Attend professional seminars and conferences to broaden knowledge
and/or skills, which may be used to increase program effectiveness.
DESIRABLE KNOWLEDGE, ABILITIES AND SKILLS:
Knowledge of:
Principles and practices of solid waste management including methods
and techniques used for program implementation, contract
administration, public education and grant applications.
Applicable Federal, State and local laws, regulations and ordinances
and policies of governing agencies affecting municipal solid waste
activities.
Principles and practices of organization, administration, and budget.
Organizational and management practices as applied to the analysis and
evaluation of programs, policies and operational needs.
Ability to:
Plan, organize and manage the activities of a municipal solid waste
system.
Handle controversial situations in a tactful and diplomatic manner.
2 of 3
Analyze problems, identify alternative solutions and implement
recommendations in support of goals.
Communicate effectively, both orally and in writing.
RE221REMENTS:
Positiontualifications for
Any combination of experience and training that would likely provide
the required knowledge and abilities.
Experience•
Two years experience in the field of municipal solid waste management.
Training:
Bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university with major
course work in public administration, environmental sciences or a
related field.
PERTINENT INFORMATION:
Must Possess a Valid Class "D" Drivers License
3 of 3
March 20, 1991
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM: KENNETH H. FRITZ, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: MAY 23, 1991
SUBJECT: BUSINESS VISITATION PROGRAM
BACKGROUND:
As a follow-up to earlier discussions between Mayor Gerald Farley and Janet Hansen, I met
with Janet Hansen to develop a Business Visitation Program which would involve the
Village, Chamber and selected businesses and industries in Mount Prospect. This meeting,
which Janet Hansen and I attended, was an outgrowth of an earlier meeting sponsored by
the Golden Corridor focusing on business expansion and retention opportunities. Last
year, Arlington Heights Economic and Community Development Department, in
cooperation with the Arlington Heights Chamber of Commerce, the Golden Corridor
Council, and the Illinois Department of Commerce and Community Affairs designed a
program that included business visitation.
The principal objective of such a program is, I believe, to improve communication between
local government, the Chamber, and the individual businesses and industries. Such a
program should be tied into an overall economic development program and marketing
strategy for the community. The objectives of a business visitation program in Mount
Prospect should be part of a larger economic development strategy for Mount Prospect. In
order to enhance the Village's economic development efforts, there should be a serious
effort made to involve the private sector in the broad development activities of the
community. Those communities successful in economic development have achieved success
after a strong public/private partnership has been established. This requires involvement
of both business and government leaders.
Business Retention Program
The Mount Prospect Chamber is currently seeking to update their inventory of business and
industry existing in the community through means of a telephone survey and update. The
internal image of Mount Prospect can be strengthened through the close cooperation
between private business and local government sectors. The use of this business and
industry survey will help gain insight into the problems and areas for cooperation between
business and government.
John Fulton Dixon - Page 2
May 23, 1991
Recommgnded Action
The Village of Mount Prospect should institute a program to facilitate the retention and
expansion of business firms located in the Village.
The WHY of It
Programs to facilitate business retention and expansion serve at least two important
functions. First, they convey to local business that the Village is concerned about their
welfare in continued presence and growth within the community. This type of attention can
often lead to increased employment through expansion of local firms. It can also lead to
improvements in the Village's internal image.
Such business programs are also important from a second perspective. A satisfied local
businessman/industrialist is an important asset in terms of selling the community to
prospects considering locating in the Village. Most prospective companies looking at Mount
Prospect as a potential location will want to meet with local business leaders to discuss
operating conditions in the area. Nothing is more discouraging to prospects than
unfavorable impressions of an area conveyed by existing employers. Existing firms can face
a variety of problems that might affect their decision to remain or expand within the
community. A list of potential problem areas could include property taxes and Cook
County's method of assessment, licensing fees, zoning regulations, fire and police protection,
traffic congestion, parking and sources of finance among other factors. Any one or a
combination of such issues could restrict the operation of a particular firm to such an extent
that the business fails or moves elsewhere. Fortunately, most of these issues can be
addressed by local action.
The HOW of It
The Village economic development staff will play an important role in identifying and
helping to resolve operational problems of local firms. The key elements of the program
are visitation, communication, and follow-up. Businesses should be visited to:
A. Communicate that the community cares about business in Mount Prospect and
appreciates their contribution to local economy.
B. Discuss the type of economic development assistance available through state and local
program.
C. Obtain an early warning of future needs or potential problems and coordinate with
the appropriate organization to solve these problems.
Business Visitation Program De5cril2tion
1. Companies to be Visited
A team made up of a Village local government and Chamber representative to visit
twelve businesses in the Mount Prospect area. The initial selection should be based
on a broad geographic range and also a representation of small to large firms.
Business firms in growth or in change should be given priority.
�11 1
John Fulton Dixon - Page 3
May 23, 1991
2. Visitation Team Makeup
The team would be made up of the following:
a. A management level executive in the industry or a related industry similar to
the firm being visited.
b. The Village of Mount Prospect Economic Development Director.
C. The Mount Prospect Chamber Executive Director.
The specific objectives of the teams would be to:
a. Reinforce Village and Chamber commitment to business stability and growth.
b. Interview business owners on aspects of the local business climate as they see
it and as it impacts their particular business operation.
C. Identify critical short- and long-term issues to be addressed by either the Village
or corporate community to assist the target business directly.
d. Provide references to and financial assistance for other consulting services as
may be needed.
3. Implementation
The four key components to the implementation of the business visitation program
are:
a. Identification of target companies.
b. Team development and orientation.
C. Interviews.
d. Follow-up.
Identification of Target Cgmaanj:�*
The first step in the process requires identification of twelve Mount Prospect
companies meeting the criteria for target companies discussed above.
Information will be gathered from local Chamber files, Illinois Manufacturer's
Directory and public tax data from the Finance Department of the Village.
Team Development and Orientation
The success of the project, to a large extent, depends upon the make-up of the
team and the orientation. Since twelve businesses will be targeted for visitation,
several different teams will be identified. The teams would visit these companies
over a period of six months beginning as soon as possible.
John Fulton Dixon - Page 4
May 23, 1991
Orientation would be kept very simple in form in order to improve the chances
for success. The Chamber Executive Director would provide orientation to
include the following areas:
a. Background of the project.
b. Interview format.
c. Specifics of the companies being visited.
Interviews
The object of the interview is to make the business owner recognize that their
business is considered significant to the economic future of the Village of Mount
Prospect. The businesses were selected because they are representative of the
best in Mount Prospect and can assist the Village and Chamber promote business
retention and attraction in the future.
Fallow -cap
Notes will be taken during each interview (see attached form drafted by the
Mount Prospect Chamber), These notes would be written up as an individual
report for each business. A final report would be prepared compiling the
information on all companies visited. The report would provide a sample of the
needs of the business community and provide some insights into the advantage
of continuing the Business Visitation Program. The overall results would be
presented to the Village, Chamber and Boards and copies sent to the Golden
Corridor Council.
4. Program Mann
The program would be managed jointly by the Mount Prospect Economic
Development Director and the Mount Prospect Chamber Executive Director. The
initial program would take approximately six months in duration to complete once the
team visits had begun.
5. The Euture
The Mount Prospect Village Board and Chamber, and the Golden Corridor Council
would receive a final report. The Business Visitation Program would enable the staffs
of the Village and Chamber to then explore the structuring of a full-fledged business
inventory and retention program. The successful components of the program would
be carefully documented and weaknesses would be identified for correction. A fully
expanded program would be an ongoing effort. A program of this nature would be
computerized so that the data base could be kept current at regular intervals.
John Fulton Dixon - Page 5
May 23, 1991
Other Potential Prpiects as a ResgIt of the Business Visitation Program
There has been discussion in the past among the Chamber and Village officials about the
need for a handbook that might be developed jointly by the Chamber and Economic
Development staff to highlight Village and Chamber programs that would assist the
businessman. This handbook could be distributed through the Village offices and the
Chamber and could become an important tool in encouraging more accurate information
about expanding businesses in the community and their need for Village and Chamber
assistance.
KHF:hg
Attach.
cc: David A Clements
Janet Hansen, Executive Director, Mount Prospect Chamber
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER A' ��, �,
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE: MAY 24, 1991
SUBJECT: HOME OCCUPATION ORDINANCE
The May 28 Committee -of -the -Whole Agenda will include discussion on the proposed
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to allow home occupations. For background, the
recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals is attached.
As a summary, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommendation is for a "performance
standards" approach to regulate home businesses. This approach sets up standards for all
home businesses based on their intensity and impact on the neighborhood. For example,
a home occupation can display no sign, shall not maintain any inventory, nor have any
outside storage. Any type of home business that meets all standards would be allowed, as
it would not have any adverse impact on the neighborhood.
Also attached are several recommended revisions to the ordinance suggested by Trustee
Corcoran. His suggestions are noted in capital letters. Trustee Corcoran is modifying the
"standards" approach somewhat by including wording that limits home occupations to the
less intense commercial uses, with specific prohibitions on certain businesses. This approach
is reasonable in setting up an understanding of what types of businesses are allowed and
prohibited. However, there will always be the possibility that a proposed home business
would not fit neatly into either category, and still be able to meet the performance standards
of not having any impact on the neighborhood.
The standards approach as recommended by the Zoning Board of Appeals would adequately
regulate the uses suggested as permitted and prohibited by Trustee Corcoran.
Lastly, Tim suggests that home business complaints be reviewed by the Village Manager,
with an appeal to the Village Board. I would recommend that any home occupation
complaint be enforced as any other zoning matter, with a review by staff, and any citations
being processed through Cook County Housing Count.
DMC:hg
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
GIL BASNIK, CHAIR -MAN I l _
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE: DECEMBER 5, 1990
SUBJECT: ZBA-96-A-90, VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE
This application for amendments to the Zoning Ordinance was filed by the Village of Mount
Prospect. Three amendments are proposed as follows:
1. Amend Section 14.503.B. to change the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting time from
8:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
2. Amend the existing regulations for home occupations in all residential districts, and
add standards to allow home occupations in residential districts subject to certain
performance standards, and appropriate definition in Section 14.2602.
3. Amend Section 14,101.G to clarify the interpretation of lot consolidations, and add
a definition of "zoning lot" to Section 14.2602.
These amendments will be discussed individually.
The Zoning Ordinance establishes the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting time as 8:00
p.m. In August of 1990, the Zoning Board determined that the meeting time should
be changed to 7:30 p.m., to perhaps handle more business at the regular meetings,
in hopes of avoiding special meetings every month during the busy spring and
summer season. This amendment merely changes the meeting time as stated in the
Zoning Ordinance.
amendment
The Chamber has suggested that the Village consider adopting standards that would
allow home occupations. On August 28, 1990 Janet Hansen, Chamber Executive
Director, preliminarily discussed home occupations at a Conintittee-of-the -Whole
meeting. At that time, the Village Board determined it would be appropriate to refer
the matter to the Zoning Board of Appeals for a public hearing.
Gil Basaik. Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
Page 2
At the present time, Mount Prospect Zoning Ordinance prohibits home occupations,
and offices in homes, "except that a surgeon, physician, dentist, lawyer, clergyman,
or other professional person using his residence for consultation, emergency
treatment or the performance of religious rites only, and ngt for the_g _n rat practice
of the p—rQfmign."
However, what we find in the community is a wide range of inconspicuous home
based businesses, many of which have Illinois revenue numbers. Home based
businesses vary from contractor's offices, part-time caterers, artist studios, to
computer consultants. Staff typically becomes aware of home occupation if it is one
that disturbs neighbors. These matters are investigated on a complaint basis.
The difficulty with the present requirements is that well-meaning residents call the
Village Hall and inquire about opening a home business, and are advised that the
Zoning Ordinance does not allow home occupations. In many cases, these residents
are aware of other home occupations in the Village, and do not understand why they
cannot gain approval.
It would be appropriate to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow home occupations,
if the home-based business met certain standards. For example, a home occupation
should have no employees, display no sign, nor have any retail sales on premise.
Also, no home occupation should include storage of supplies or inventory.
Many communities regulate home occupations based on such performance standards,
and this would be a reasonable approach for Mount Prospect to consider. A survey
of members of the Northwest Municipal Conference indicates that virtually every
municipality has provisions to allow home occupations.
It is recommended that the following Sections be amended:
Amendment to ADD Home Occupations, as defined herein, to the following
Sections as permitted uses:
R -X 14.1001A R-2 14.1301-k
R-1 14.1101A R-3 14.1401.k
R -A 14.1201A R4 14.1501A
Amendment to DELETE Home Occupations from the following Sections, as
specifically excluded uses:
R -X 14.1001.B.5 R-2 14.1301.B.4
R-1 14. 11013.5 R-3 14.1401.13.5
R -A 14.12013.5 R-4 14.1501.B.5
ADD to Section 14.2602 the following definition:
Home QgCullation - Home Occupations to be permitted in all
residential zoning districts, subject to the following definition and
performance standards:
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
Page 3
biome _QVjj2jdQn is an accessory use conducted completely within a
dwelling unit, carried on by any member of the immediate family
residing on the premises, clearly incidental and secondary to the use
of the dwelling for residential purposes. The following standards shall
govern the operation of a home occupation:
1. Tbere should be no sign, display or alteration that will indicate
from the exterior that the home is being utilized in whole or in
part for any purpose other than that of a dwelling.
2. No substantial amount of stock in trade shall be kept or
commodities sold.
3. No mechanical or electrical equipment shall be used or stored
except such as permissible for domestic or household purposes.
4. No offensive noise, vibration, smoke fumes, odor, heat or glare
or electrical interference shall be noticeable at or beyond the
property line.
5. No explosive or combustible materials shall be used.
6. No person shall be employed other than a member of the
immediate family residing on the premises.
7. No outside storage of any kind related to the home occupation
shall be permitted.
S. The home occupation shall not generate traffic or parking in
excess of what is normal in a residential neighborhood.
9. The home occupation shall not utilize more than 25 percent of
the gross floor area of the dwelling unit
io. A professional person may use his residence for infrequent
consultation, emergency treatment, or performance of religious
rites, but not for the general practice of his profession.
Staff believes it is best to regulate home occupations based on such performance
standards, because this provides a measurement of impact on a neighborhood. This
is considered preferable to creating a lengthy list of permitted home occupations,
which might not be able to list every reasonable home business.
AmLnjmall
The Scope of Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance, Section 14.101.G, states that it
is unlawful "to construct one building on more than one lot, or to occupy more than
one lot by more than one main use.' This is being interpreted to mean that a
principal building, such as a house, cannot be on more than I lot, or the portion of
any lot. For example, there are many homes built on two 25 foot lots. If a resident,
Gil Basnik, Chairman
Mount prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
Page 4
in such an example, hopes to add a room addition, current policy requires that the
two 25 foot lots be consolidated or combined into a 50 foot lot. In consolidating the
two 25 foot lots into one 50 foot lot, the resident then has only one building on one
lot, meeting the intent of the current requirement. This is an expensive and
unnecessary burden for a property owner. If a home has existed for years on two 25
foot lots, or some similar example, and it is being properly assessed, there is no
public benefit to having the property owner consolidate the parcel, in order to get
a building permit for a room addition or other improvement.
The Plan Commission has reviewed a number of such lot consolidations over the
years, and does not believe such a requirement is necessary. However, the Plan
Commission notes that consolidation plats should be done if there is the need for
easements or street dedications. The Plan Commission recommends that the Zoning
Board take appropriate action to amend Section 14.101 to eliminate the lot
consolidation requirement.
Staff recommends that Section 14.2602, Definitions, be amended to add a definition
of "zoning lot", as follows:
J&L_Z&qjU is a single tract of land located within a single block which (at the
time of filing for a building permit) is designated by its owner or developer
as a tract to be used, developed, or built upon as a unit, under single
ownership or control. Therefore, a "zoning lot or lots" may or may not
coincide with a lot of record.
With this definition, a tract of land is designated a buildable unit for zoning purposes,
thus not having to coincide exactly with one lot of record.
In researching this matter, staff found that a number of other suburban municipalities
utilize a zoning lot definition for similar purposes.
Further, staff recommends that the statement found in 14.101.G be deleted.
DMC:hg
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
ZBA CASE NO. 96-A-90 Hearing Date: December 13, 1990
PETITIONER: Village of Mount Prospect
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 100 South Emerson
PUBLICATION DATE: November 27, 1990
REQUEST: Amend Section 14.503.B. to
change the Zoning Board of
Appeals meeting time from 8:00
p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Amend the
existing regulations for home
occupations in all residential
districts, and add standards to
allow home occupations in
residential districts subject to
certain performance standards,
and appropriate definition in
Section 14.2602. Amend Section
14.101.G to clarify the
interpretation of lot
consolidations, and add a
definition of "zoning lot" to
Section 14.2602.
ZBA MEMBERS PRESENT: Gilbert Basnik, Chairman
Peter Lannon
Richard Pratt
Ronald Cassidy
Robert Brettrager
ABSENT: Lois Brothers
Micheale Skowron
OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: Margaret Gaweke, 416 S. Mt.
Prospect Road. Janet Hansen, Chamber of Commerce.
Chairman Basnik introduced this case stating that the
petitioner is requesting amendments to the Zoning Ordinance.
1. Amend Section 14.503.B to change the Zoning Board of
Appeals meeting time from 8:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
2. Amend the existing regulations for home occupations
in all residential districts, and add standards to
allow home occupations in residential districts
subject to certain performance standards, and
appropriate definition in Section 14.2602.2
3. Amend Section 14.10I.G to clarify the interpretation
of lot consolidations, and add a definition of
"zoning lot" to Section 14.2602.
ZBA-96-A-90
December 13, 1990
Page 2 of 3
The petitioner, David Clements, Director of Planning and
Zoning, presented the case stating that the first request has
to be formally changed in the Zoning ordinance* to reflect
the current meeting time.
Mr. Clements stated that the second request is to allow home
businesses in certain situations, noting that the Planning
and Zoning department receives many calls regarding this and
they must tell them this is not allowed. He noted that in the
community a wide range of inconspicuous home businesses
exist, many of which have Illinois revenue numbers. Home
based businesses vary from contractor's offices, part-time
caterers, artist studios, to computer consultants Staff
typically becomes aware of home occupation if it is one that
disturbs neighbors. Theses matters are investigated on a
complaint basis. It would be appropriate to amend the Zoning
Ordinance to allow home occupations, if the home-based
business met certain standards. For example, a home
occupation should have no employees, display no sign, nor
have any retail sales on premise. Also, no home occupation
should include storage of supplies or inventory. Many
communities regulate home occupations based on such
performance standards, and this would be a reasonable
approach for Mount Prospect to consider.
Mr. Clements then introduced Mrs Janet Hansen, executive
director with the Chamber of Mount Prospect. Mrs. Hansen
stated that the Chamber of commerce had voted in favor of
allowing home businesses in the Village of Mount Prospect and
presented the Board with facts founded by the Chamber of
Commerce. The Board then reviewed the comments made by the
Chamber of Commerce. They also separately considered the
standards presented in the staff memo.
Mr. Clements stated that amendment # 3 and the definition of
"zoninglot" would allow existing properties consisting of
more than one lot, under single ownership, to be considered
as a single buildable unit for zoning and building permit
purposes. Under current regulations, when physical
improvements, such as a room addition, are proposed on
property consisting of more than one lot, but under single
ownership, the owner must consolidate the lots in order to
get a building permit. This situation usually occurs when two
older, narrow lots have been developed as a single unit.
Staff does not feel that there is a public benefit to
requiring lot consolidations in many of theses situations.
Tom McGovern of the Mount Prospect Plan Commission stated
that the Plan Commission agrees with staffs proposal and
feels that many lot consolidations are unnecessary except in
ZBA-96-A-90
December 13, 1990
Page 3 of 3
cases where easements or street dedications are required.
The Board then generally discussed the Amendments noting that
for amendment number 2 they make the following changes to the
standards listed in the memo from staff:
1. Delete item #3 pertaining to mechanical and
electrical equipment. They felt item * 4 would
cover any problems associated with the use of such
equipment.
2. Change item * 6 to allow on non -family member
employee at one time rather than no non -family
employees as suggested by staff.
Chairman Basnik then entertained
ained a motion to grant the
petitioners request with the changes to Amendment 2 as
discussed.
Mr. Cassidy moved. Mr. Lannon seconded.
UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Lannon,. Pratt, Cassidy, Brettrager,
Basnik
NAYS: None
Motion carried by a vote of 5-0.
This case must still be heard before the Village Board.
Michelle Thompson
Recording Secretary
r r-11
*�,,,_,,AGE OF MOUNT PROS[.,(,-,--)
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
Mount Prospect, Illinois
TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER (nb
FROM: DAVID M. CLEMENTS, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING
DATE: DECEMBER 18, 1990
SUBJECT: ZBA-96-A-90, VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE
The Zoning Board of Appeals transmits, for your consideration, their recommendation on
three amendments to the Zoning Ordinance as follows:
1. Amend Section 14,503.B. to change the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting time from
8:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
2. Amend the existing regulations for home occupations in all residential districts, and
add standards to allow home occupations in residential districts subject to certain
performance standards, and appropriate definition in Section 14.2602.
3. Amend Section 14.101.G to clarify the interpretation of lot consolidations, and add
a definition of "zoning lot" to Section 14.2602.
the
r meeting, avid Clements, Aj_e-�.
the proposed amendments as follows:
I .
An earlier meeting time would allow the Zoning Board to handle more business at
the regular meetings and potentially avoid special meetings during busy months. It
would also reflect recent practice of the Zoning Board.
Amendment 2
This would establish performance standards to regulate home occupations that
currently occur inconspicuously since the Mount Prospect Zoning Ordinance does not
allow them outright. Stafffeels that many home-based businesses are compatible in
residential zoning districts provided they meet certain performance -standards -dative
to number of employees; signage display; noise; outside storage; traffic generation,
and other factors which could impact the neighborhood. Staff feels that measuring
the appropriateness of a business based on its impact is preferable to developing an
exhaustive list of permitted/excluded home occupations.
John Fulton Dixon
Page 2
Amendment 3
Under current regulations, when physical improvements, such as a room addition, are
proposed on property consisting of more than one lot, but under single ownership,
the owner must consolidate the lots in order to get a building permit. This situation
usually occurs when two older, narrow lots have been developed as a single unit.
Staff does not feel that there is a public benefit to requiring lot consolidation in many
of these situations. The Plan Commission agrees that many lot consolidations are
unnecessary except in cases where easements or street dedications are required.
The proposed definition of "zoning lot" would recognize single tracts of land as
buildable units for zoning purposes (setbacks, number of buildings on a lot, etc.). A
zoning lot would not necessarily cpindde exactly with one lot of record.
Also at the meeting, Janet Hansen of the Mount Prospect Chamber of Commerce, stated
support for Amendment 2 but suggested that one employee (non -family) be allowed for each
home occupation, rather than staff's suggestion that no, non -family members be employed
in home occupations. Tom McGovern of the Mount Prospect Plan Commission presented
testimony in favor of Amendment 3.
The Zoning Board discussed each amendment separately. They generally agreed that the
amendments, as proposed, should be approved, but suggested some changes to the home
occupation performance standards listed in the staff memo.
Accordingly, by a 5-0 vote the Zoning Board of Appeals recommends that the Village Board
approved the three proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to include the following
changes to the performance standards for home occupations as proposed by. staff:
1. Delete Item #3: "No mechanical or electrical equipment shall be used or stored
except such as permissible for domestic or household purposes."
2. To allow one non -family employee at a time, rather than a prohibition on any
employees.
DMC:hg
Gil Basnikj Chairmaill— Page 3
Mount Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals
I
Home OccqpAtjon i.s an accessory use conducted
completely within a dwelling unit, carried on by
any member of the immediate family residing on the
premises, clearly incidental and secondary to the
use of the dwelling for residential purposes. The
following standards shall govern the operation of a
home occupation:
1.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS ORDINANCE IS TO ALLOW THOSE
COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES THAT WILL NOT INTERFERE
IN A DETRIMENTAL WAY WITH THE ENVIRONMENT OF A
RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. HOME OCCUPATIONS
SHALL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO THOSE
BUSINESSES RUN FOR PROFIT, THAT IS OF A
SUBSTANTIAL COMMERCIAL NATURE AND SUBCONTRACTOR
STATUS TO ANOTHER EMPLOYER.
There should be no sign, display or alteration
that will indicate from the exterior that the
home is bei ng utilized in whole or in part for
-
any purpose other than that of a dwelling.
2.
No substantial amount of stock in trade shall
be kept or commodities sold.
STOCK SHALL BE LIMITED To THOSE A14OUNTS NEEDED
FOR SAMPLES, INVENTORY NECESSARY To SHIP FROM
A RESIDENTIAL LOCATION Is NOT ACCEPTABLE.
3.
No mechanical or electrical equipment shall be
used or stored except such as permissible for
domestic or household purposes.
4,
No offensive noise, vibration, smoke fumes,
odor, heat or glare or electrical interference
shall be noticeable at or beyond the property
line.
5.
110 explosive or combustible materials shall be
used.
6.
No person shall be employed other than a
member of the jr-nediate family residing on the
premises.
7.
No outside storage of any kind related to the
home occupation shall be permitted.
a.
The home occupation shall not generate traffic
or parking in excess of what is normal in a
residential neighborhood.
9.
The home occupation shall not utilize more
than 25 percent of the gross floor area of the
dwelling unit.
Gil Basnik, Chairn
Mount Prozpect Zon...,j Board of Appeals Page 4
10. A Professional Person may use his residence
for infrequent consultation, emergency
treatment, Or PerfOrmanco of religious rites,
but not for the general practice of
profession. his
11. ONLY THOSE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES THAT FALL
WITHIN THE JURISUICTION OF A B1 ZONING SHALL
BE ALLOWED 19 A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. ALL B2,
B3 k4D B4 ZONING,14 AND SPECIAL USES AS A PART
OF SHALL L;E'PROHTBTTrO IN THE HOME OCCUPATION
UNDER THE HOME OCCUPATION ORDINANCE.
IF A COMPLAINT IS MADE TO A BUSINESS THAT A
HEARING WILL BE SCHEDULED 'WITH THE VILLAGE
Ml-NAGER, THE DECISION OF THE VILLAGE MANAGER
SHALL BE SUBJECT TO FINAL APPEAL OF THE
VILLAGE BOARD. IT 15 THE INTENT OF THE
VILLACE BOARD TO ONLY ALLOW THOSE COMXERCIAL
ACTIVITIES THAT DO NOT INTERFERE WITH THE
CHAIRACTEP OF T
ORDINANCE HE t;FT,0HBORH0OD- INTENT OF THIS
IS TO PROVIDE GUIDELINES OF THAT
INTENT, THE ACTUAL ZMPLEMENTATION WILL BE
SUBJECT TO FINAL DECISION It; AN INDIVIDUAL
CASE.
13. ALL HOME OCCUPATICNS THAT HAVE A COMMERCIAL
ACTIVITY ASSOCIATED WITH THEM, SHALL BE
SUBJECT TO THE HOME OCCUPATION FEE OF $ 25 PER
YEAR, PAYABLE AT THE
YEAR. BEGINNING OF EACH FISCAL
14. SUCH BUSINESSES AS LANDSCAPTNG, HOME BEAUTY
SALONS, AUTO REPAIR AND RETAIL SALES FROM
STOCK SHALL BE PROHTBITED IN A RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT.
Staff belieT7es
on it is best to regulate home Occupations based
such performance standards, because this provides a
measurement Of inpact On a neighborhood. This is considered
preferable to creating a lengthy list Of permitted hone
Occupation, which might not be able to list every reasonable
home business.
A4M.enA,jekt__3
The Scop,r Of Regul.1tions of the Zoning Ordinance, nce, Section
:101 -GI states that it is unlawful. "to construct one
building on more than one lot,than one lot
. use.,, This is being interpreted to mean
by more than one main �)r to Occupy more
that a principal building,
than I lot or the portion such as a house, cannot be on more
of any lot. For example, there are
many homes built or, two 25 foot lots.
an example, If a resident, in such
, hopes to add -% room addition, Oorrent policy
requires that tte to 25
into a 50 foot lot.wfoot lots be C011solidated or combined
FINANCE COMMISSION
AGENDA
Thursday, May 30, 1991
7:30 p.m.
Trustees Room
Village Hall
100 South Emerson Street
I Call to Order
11 Accept Minutes of March 21, 1991
III Discussion of Premium Gasoline
IV Village Credit Report
V 90/91 Year End Budget Report
VI Other Business
V11 Adjournment
Director
Herbert L. Weeks
DepotYDirector
mn R. Andler
Water Superintendent
Jerry W. 7intosh
Street Superintendent
Melvyn L. Both
Forestry Superintendent
Sandra M. Clark
Equipment Superintendent
Jim Guenther Mount Prospect Public Works Department
Administrative Aide
M. Lisa Angell 1700 W. Central Road, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056-2229
Rhone 70e/870-5640
FAX 708/253-9377
AGENDA
SPECIAL MEETING
MOUNT PROSPECT RECYCLING COMMISSION
May 30, 1991
Conference Room B, Public Works Facility
1700 West Central'Road
7:30 PM
rd 10 11150- AT 4 111 W Eel K01301D U
II. CITIZENS FORUM
III. CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF NEW SOLID WASTE CONTRACT
A. Implementation/Schedule
1. Single
2. Multifamily
B. Public Education - Written Material
. Final Review/Editing
IV. OTHER