Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW Meeting Packet 02/09/1993Minutes OXXITT83 OF TR3 WHOLE January 26, 1993 Roll Call The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Gerald Farley. Trustees present were Mark Busse, Timothy Corcoran, Leo Floros, Paul Hoefert and Irvana Wilks. Also present were Village Manager Michael E. Janonis, Finance Director David Jepson, Inspection Services Director Chuck Bencic, Village Engineer Coordinator Jeff Wulbecker, Police Commander Joe Kolanowski, Police Chief Ronald Pavlock, Deputy Police Chief Ronald Richardson, Fire Chief Edward Cavello and Human Services Administrator Nancy Morgan. In addition, Finance Commission Chairman Richard Bachhuber, General Contractor Bud DeVries of A. J. Maggio and Architects Fred Borich and Naras Statkus of S.E.C. Donohue, and four members of the media were in attendance. II Xinutes of January 12, 1993 The minutes of January 12, 1993, were accepted and filed with the clarification that the comments about the Community Auditorium attributed to Trustee Hoefert had actually been made by Trustee Corcoran. Trustee Busse made the motion and Trustee Hoefert seconded. III Citizens to be Hoard Katherine Murphy, 8 South Louis, raised the concern about crime,, and questioned if Mount Prospect employs enough police to handle the increasing crime in our community. She compared our population and the number of officers with neighboring communities. Residents and especially senior citizens need to be alerted of crime, and form Neighborhood Watch groups. Mayor Parley directed her concerns about Fairview School to District 57. He agreed that crime is too high and encouraged the formation of Neighborhood Watch groups. There are many factors to consider when comparing the composite of communities and the numbers on their police force is. business, industry, residential, etc. The board continually reviews the level of staff. Village Manager Janoni• added that we have an active Crime Prevention Bureau with Neighborhood Watch being the first line of defense against crime. There is no correlation between the number of police and the crime rate. We will review these issues during budget times. TV Lineman Road Reconatruction--Status Report Mayor Parley gave a brief introduction of this issue stating that the Village feels that there is need for action on this issue. village Manager Jannis set the tone of the meeting as informational, to give a status report of the road conditions: encourage discussion but not seek recommendations or have the Board make a final decision. The road was built by the Township. Standards of roadway strength, and size and weight of vehicles are different today. The structural strength of the road is not acceptable today. The result is a declining road. Our efforts to maintain the road are not cost effective due to poor sub surface conditions. Jeff Wulbecker, Engineer Coordinator, stated that Linneman Road is classified as a "Residential Collector Street." Drainage does not exist, there are three inadequate catch basins, no ditches, and no defined drainage area. The water sits on the pavement and deteriorates the road. Any new drainage system installed must not burden the existing systems. A new road could store water on pavement is. gutters to crown of road during heavy rains. Potential new road options include: A) 21' back to back pavement, no sidewalk or parking. S) 41' back to back pavement with two lanes of traffic, parking, curb and gutters, and storm sewers which fit the Village standards for "Collector Street." A 41' wide road requires right of way acquisition. Final roadway width could be a function of identified need and citizen input. Mayor Parley asked if the Village would have access to formal drainage to the Huntington Commons pond. Mr. Wulbecker said legally there is access, but we would have to do research of where and how we could tie into the ponds. Mayor Parley asked about the need for parking. Mr. Wulbecker replied that 41' back to back is the 'Village standard for a "Collector Street," however this warrants further discussion. Trustee Roofert asked about the width of a normal residential street. Mr. Wulbecker replied 31' back to back with parking allowed on bath sides, however, emergency vehicles have trouble negotiating this situation. Trustee Roefart asked if there is a happy medium between 20' and 30' roads. Mr. Wulbecker stated roads are normally built in 12' wide sections plus 3' for gutters to equal 27' with no parking. Trustee Roefert sees no need to provide parking on Linneman Road. The Park District should provide off street parking. Develop a less wide street with sidewalks. Mayor Farley asked about financing of the proposed improvements and called for Mr. Jepson's presentation. Mr. Jepson said it is the policy of the Village not to borrow money for street resurfacing projects, however, the cost saving of doing this roadway reconstruction at one time would warrant borrowing money. The Village would be looking to start this project in 1994 and have a ton. year bond 'issue with a 9% interest for funding. If the total project cost $1,1$0,000, the annual payment would be $165,000 per year for ten years. If the cast was $1,500,000, the annual payment would be $215,000 per year for ten years. Other than through property taxes, financing the principal and interest payments could came from one of two sources. 1) State Income Tax Surcharge if renewed by the State. This is expected to expire June 30, 1993. or 2) Increased Vehicle License Fees May 1, 1994, from $20.00 to $30.00 would generate $350,000. Trustee Milks asked about forming a special service area and how that relates to a Collector Street. Mr. Jepson felt special assessment would not support the debt service of the project and agreed Residential Street vs. Collector Street is more appropriate; for a special service area. Village Manager Jannis concurred. Trustee Milks asked about the construction time line, -to which village Manager Jannis outlined a preliminary time line:- Follow-up meetings with residents, bring opinions back to board at the end of budget and ''iformulate the plan for the roadway. The road needs to be reconstructed, and have curb and gutter and storm sewer system. The width of road, sidewalks, etc. are up for discussion. All discussions with Park District, utilities, property owners, right of_ways and certain engineering and surveying work will need to be completed and ready for the 1994-95 budget, with construction beginning in 1994. Seed money may be included in the 1993- 94 budget to start preliminary work. Mayor Farley asked Mr. Bencic if good roadway bids were still available. Mr. Bencic felt in the early 1994 construction season we could still get favorable bids. Trustee Hoof art supports reconstruction, but questioned the cost of simply fixing the existing road. Mr. Wulbecker replied $100,000 to install leveling binder, surface course of asphalt, and shoulder and driveway adjustments. These repairs would provide an anticipated 3-5 year life with signs of deterioration within the first year. This does not address the drainage issue. Trustee Busse raised concerns about residents knowledge,of project, how wide, how much use of residents front yards, etc. Mr. Ken Koeppen, 1040 South Lineman Road raised concerns with width of roadway and drainage. Drainage problems mostly south from Cottonwood to Dempster. Citizens Utility has a storage tank that overflows onto the roadway. He is unaware of standing water by his house except by the retention pond after heavy, quick rain. Traffic does not necessitate a four land roadway. Two lane with curb and gutters would be fine. He understands United Air Lines would like to close Lineman Road between Algonquin and Dempster Roads. Nick Diakoumis, 1103 South Church, questioned Linneman Road's status as a Collector Street. Many motorists use it to cut through town and he feels the Village should restrict this use. Phasing project is a good idea. Condition of roadway by Golf Road is in good condition, however the area by Dempster to Church is in very bad condition. Could sign be installed "Residential Road only." Mayor Parley explained that it is the Village's responsibility to allow travel on through streets. Trustee Roefest asked how wide he would like the roadway. Mr. Diakoumis described the 21 foot, no parking, roadway. Colonel Ralph Arthur, 1137 Linneman Road, believes Linneman Road should be widened to the standard 41' with curbs and gutters and parking on the road. Users of the park will park on the road because it is close. Do project at one time. He volunteered to be on the Lineman Road Committee. Trustee !"locos wondered what would be an example of a 41' roadway. Mr. Wulbecker said Lincoln is 41' wide. xayor Parley asked residents to sign up for community input meetings. Trusts* Floras stated that all members of Board present at this meeting are in favor of moving on with this project. V. Police and Piro gasdquarters Update Village xaaager Janonis gave status update on the building. Commander Kolanowski, the Village's Project Coordinator, would give an overview of construction and ,discuss the change orders. Mr. Jepson would give a recap on the budget of the building. Xr. Jannis stated that it was important to clear up some misinformation on the building's approved costs. 1. Building is substantially under budget. Referendum $6,992,000 Project cost 5.CQ.Q,= Under Budget $ 300,000 2. Change orders being brought before the Board reflect needed adjustments to the building, In July 1992, change orders were approved to various sub -budgets not related to the building construction. This has been, a controlled process, and it is anticipated that the building will come in well under budget. Commander Kolanowski said he coordinates the team made up of Village departments, General Contractor A. J. Maggio represented by Bud DeVries, Architect S.E.C. Donohue represented by Fred Borich and Naras Statkus, furniture contractor and Soil Material Testing Trow Mirza. The need for the schedule extension developed before construction began, due to the under ground tank and substandard soil. This caused substantial delay in the beginning of project during which the contractor was ready to work. These delays have never been addressed with the Board until this point. The contractor had certain fixed costs associated with this project which include, insurance, project supervision, etc. of the 82 days, 62 are attributed to this initial situation. The additional 15 are due to continual soil problems. The extension huts the completion date at June 7, 1993, which is on schedule from the revised project schedule. The other requests are well within the realm of adjustments needing to be made. Other than that, the cost adds and credits come to less than to $1,000. A request was made to amend the Trow Mirza contract by $8,000. Mr. Jepson reported that the total cost is now projected to be $6,672,480 or $319,520 less than the referendum estimate of $6,992,000. If the contingency amount of $177,000 is not expended, the total projected estimate would be $6,500,000 or $500,1300 less than the approved referendum. The previous change orders have been negotiated down by $8,786, so the $43,797 being requested this evening is a *not to exceed" figure. Mayor Yarl*y asked about the continual need for soil inspection. Commander 'Kolanowski explained that there are several very wide driveways that need concrete pored on properly compacted soil. Commander Kolanowski said running sand is like quick sand, and expansive clay expands when wet, which could push in a wall. Both need to be removed and replaced with fill that is properly compacted. Trustee Wilks asked about the radio equipment, Village Saaagor explained this is a separate issue from the construction and the telephone equipment item." Trusts* Wilke asked about the deleted gutters in the underground parking garage. Commander Kolanowski explained the this cut was a maintenance as well as a costsaving measure. The gutters are catch basins under caulked expansion joints. When they begin to leak, you can not see where re -caulking is needed with the gutters in place. The Village Xaa gar added that Mr. Borich has advised against the gutter removal. 3[ayor Parlay polled the Board and stated that there was concurrence for the Maggio Construction change order and for the Trow Mirza amended contract of $8,000. village Manager Jannis stated he will bring the amendment to the Trow Mirza contract and the Maggio Construction change order not to exceed amounts for official Board approval. VI Manages Report No report. VII Any other Business None. VIII Adjournment Mayor karley said there is need for a brief executive session on land acquisition. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m» to executive session. The meeting reconvened at 9:44 p.m. and adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Rqp , ' ally submitted Nancy Morgan uman Nervi akzit` s Administrator Village of Mount Prospect �- Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: PERSONNEL COORDINATOR DATE: FEBRUARY 5, 1993 SUBJECT: UPDATE SELF-EVALUATION: AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT COMPLIANCE I. INTRODUCTION The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was adopted as law in 1990 and prohibits discrimination against disabled persons in all areas of employment and in the provision of public services. Title II of the ADA prohibits a public entity from denying qualified individuals with disabilities participation in the benefits of a program or activity it offers because its facilities are inaccessible. A public entity must operate its programs, activities and services so that each program, activity or service, when viewed as a whole, is readily accessible and usable by persons with disabilities, as defined by the Act. On January 26, 1992 a self-evaluation process began. In July 1992, a transition plan including a self-evaluation done to that date, was presented to the Village Board which addressed issues of compliance and identified facilities adjustments and service adjustments. Highlights of the plan included a grievance procedure for resident complaints and changes to: PERS2jNEL POLICIES Reaso i&1i_AKo_m_m__Qd_a_Wo_n_am The Village of Mount Prospect will make reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified individual unless such a provision would impose an undue hardship on the Village as outlined by the ADA- The Village Manager shall make all decisions regarding reasonable accommodations. The Village Manager's decision may be appealed to the Village Mayor and Board of Trustees. Job Descriptions: Job descriptions will be reviewed by an outside consulting firm as a result of the comprehensive pay classification study and in cooperation with the Village Personnel Coordinator. The study is scheduled for completion in fall 1993. Employgs AwaLtn�=: As part of the cultural diversity training administered under the direction of the Personnel Coordinator all employees will have and will continue to be trained in meeting the needs of and providing services to indi,,iduals with disabilities. All employees will receive on-going training as necessary. Current Em � : Current employees, who become disabled as defined by the Act, will have continued employment if the essential functions of the job can still be performed with reasonable accommodation. An employee who becomes disabled due to an on-the-job injury will be medically assessed and returned to work unless s/he: (1) cannot perform the essential functions of the job s/he held prior to the disability even with reasonable accommodation; or (2) would pose a significant risk of substantial harm that could not be reduced to an acceptable level with reasonable accommodation. Such a disabled employee will be evaluated at four month intervals for a period of one year. If after twelve months the employee is still unable to meet the above requirements, the Village shall have the right to fill all vacant positions with other qualified individuals to maintain the level of services it provides to the community. Effective immediately under 'he direction of the Personnel Coordinator, supervisors will be instructed: *not to ask questions regarding an applicant's disability or previous Workers' Compensation claims. *that applicants who request accommodations for the application and/or interviewing process; i.e., requests an interpreter, requests that the job application be read to them, etc... must have the request met. *to ask applicants if they can perform all of the job functions. If accommodations are necessary for the applicant to perform the job, the supervisor shall request that the applicant list the accommodation(s) that are necessary in order for him/her to perform the job. *that applicants will not be required to have a pre-employment physical prior to the offer of employment. A conditional offer of employment based on the successful completion of a pre-employment physical may be made. III. SERVICES Meeting Notice: Effective immediately public meetings for the Village Board and its boards and Commissions will be specially noticed. The notification will allow individuals with disabilities to inform the Village prior to the meeting of any special needs. Examples would include providing an interpreter for the hearing impaired. Service Desk Qperatioon ,: If requested the service desk personnel or a designee will read the Village Newsletter, special mailing, water/sewer bills, meeting minutes, etc., to individuals who are visually impaired. If requested and if the disability requires, the service desk personnel or designee will go to the disabled residents home for items that require a witnessed signature; i.e., voter registration. Audio tapes may be made available for some resident information. These are available in the Communications Division. IV. COMMUNICATIONS The Village has installed four TDD telephones. This will allow hearing impaired individuals with questions regarding construction projects, inspections, special events, etc., to receive answers in a similar manner as hearing individuals. Staff has been trained to handle these calls. A talking message board has been added to the Village communications channel 63. The Board allows those with visual disabilities to hear important Village information. To date two telephones in the Village Hall and the Senior Center have been lowered and amplified to meet ADA requirements. The Village operates a discount taxi cab service available to the disabled and senior residents over the age of 65. The taxi drivers have been instructed by the Village to accept all persons with the required disability card or doctor's form and must try to accommodate wheelchairs, canes, seeing eye dogs, etc. Village programs and services are available equally to non -disabled and disabled residents. Individuals who inform the Village of any special needs, such as hydraulic lift buses will be reasonably accommodated and will not be charged a rate above non -disabled persons for the service due to the accommodations. Social Worker and our visiting nurses have offered their assistance to the homebound disabled. Disabled residents can take out:, for up to six month loan, assistive medical devices from the Nurses Lending Closet. Human Services facilitates applications for talking books and CRIS radios, which are available to those disabled residents who would like current newspapers, magazines read to them via audio devices. The self-evaluation process consisted of a complete review of programs, practices and facilities. On January 26, 1993, the self-evaluation process was completed. However, ADA accommodations can occur anytime depending on requests and program changes. The self-evaluation was accomplished by a committee of Village staff members headed by the Village Manager, the ADA Compliance Officer, Director of Inspection Services, Director of Public Works, Director of Planning, the Personnel Coordinator, the Communications Administrator and the Human Services Administrator. The staff was assisted in this effort by the Illinois Department of Rehabilitation Services, Architectural and Transportation Compliance Board, the Department of Justice, the Northwest Municipal Conference and the Wheeling Township Committee on ADA. The transition plan has been available for public inspection. Since July 1992 other changes have been accomplished. Costing of several open items have also been obtained. Several disabled residents have also called with suggestions for improvements. Vill g Hall .Two additional handicapped parking spaces added. .Elimination of the divider grab bar from the parking lot Village Hall entrance to allow for wheel chair maneuverability. .Addition of cup dispensers near water fountains. .Elevator now has audio indicator for floor designation. Costed items: .Strobe alarms to be added to fire alarms during 1993 $ 400 .Universal braille signs during 1993 300 .Mens and women second floor washrooms during 1993 See attached Exhibit A&B 20,000-25,000 Sgnlor Center .Widening of handicapped parking spaces. Costed items: .Mens and womens washroom adjustments during 1993 - Estimate 1,000 !Golf/&nsIngJon .Two parking spaces added at Golf station. d items: .Doorbells will be added to buildings for access accommodation with appropriate signage during 1993 300 A policy decision has been made to limit outside use of the Golf/Kensington fire station. Fire Prevention will be moving to the new Public Safety Building. Curb Tt $30,000 has been allocated from CDBG for supplementing the Village resurfacing program. 150 intersection need tactile warnings only. 600 intersection do not have curb ramps. Priority is given to walkways servicing state and local government buildings and facilities, transportation and places of public accommodation. A policy decision was made to do all curb modifications in conjunction with the Village resurfacing program. JMT 1�* C A total of $100,000 will be used from Community Development Block Grant funds (CDBG) for years 1993, 1994, 1995 as projects will be completed. If additional accommodations arise that will require funding other than CDBG, the Village Board has asked for information concerning big item accommodations. For example, hiring of a qualified disabled employee as a secretary, which requires office modifications or the purchase of new equipment or equipment modifications. A current employee's need for accommodation based on a disability acquired during his employment whether on or off work. Requests by residents for other assistive devices to access programs. The curb ramp project may also require additional funds to complete all necessary or requested modifications. Since miis list can be ongoing, the administration of the Village should recognize the need to revisit ADA not only during the next three years but as needed. , Donna L. Russell DLR/rcc "TTI.Mur M, 165' VAI F 410 liwlil�,-1 ff _--n 1125 1/15/83 WOM ExHIFS17" 13 r 0 16 ar • FAkt 'M r An M New toilet M 1 132" 30" New plumbing for toilet New sink & mixing valve 1/1s/93 Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Village Manager FROM: Director Public Works DATE: January 27, 1993 SUBJECT: Rehabilitation Elevated Tank (P. 7= an USA Sealed bids were received on January 19, 1993 for complete clean- ing, repainting, and rehabilitation of our one -million -gallon elevated water storage tank at Maple and Northwest Highway. Due to the complexities involved with this project, an engineering firm, Tank Industry Consultants, Inc., was awarded a contract to prepare the specifications, which also included a prebid confer- ence and a review of bids submitted, along with their recommenda- tion for award. Bid results on all items, except hazardous materials disposal, as follows: Security Painting co. $467,340.00 Jetco Ltd. 492,400.00 Neumann Co. Contractor Inc. 622,900.00 G & M Painting Enterprises 699,975.00 J.L. Manta Painting 814,242.50 Our consultant has specified a particular brand of abrasive for blasting the paint off the tank which the manufacturer guaran- tees will render the debris nonhazardous. If the debris is deemed hazardous, our costs for an estimated 150 cu.yds. could increase by an additional $105,000. I have inserted a page from the specifications which describes the tank and offers a broad statement on the scope of work. Other items specified are modifications required for safety and to conform with OSHA standards. The existing cathodic protec- tion system was installed in 1955 and at that time was consid- ered good equipment. It consists of a series of magnesium rods suspended from the top of the tank. These rods are replaced once every year. The problem with them is that, during the winter, a ring of ice forms in the tank and, with the rise and fall of the water level, the rods are torn loose. This leaves the tank unprotected from corrosion for a period of time each year. The system being recommended to replace these rods has floats which rise and fall with the water level and provide continuous protection to the tank. We are using this newer system in other tanks, and the results are very satisfactory. Another major problem with the work this time is protecting adja- cent properties and the highway from paint drops and dust from blasting. In all probability, the tank will be draped with a protective fabric. This drapery will have to be raised and lowered each day in case winds were to increase in velocity resulting in this fabric acting as a sail. Not included in the bid is burying of the Commonwealth Edison electric lines on the east side of the tank. This will be re- quired as a safety measure to protect the workers and is already scheduled for February or March of 1993. We will also have to remove/relocate the trees and shrubs at the base of the tank so the drapery can be hung properly and to eliminate branches rub- bing against the columns. Upon completion of the painting, we need to regrade the turf under the tank to eliminate ponding water in contact with the steel. Another factor to be considered is awarding a contract for resi- dent. inspection of the rehab work as it progresses. We have a proposal from our present consultant to perform this work for $37,800. The rehabilitation/painting contract, if accepted, would start early this spring and would have to be completed within 100 days. It's projected that the coatings that are to be applied should give a minimum of ten years of life. Repaint- ing costs would still ' involve some of the costs we will be expe- riencing this time due to the location of the tank. However, the type of paint we are using should not require complete remov- al. Some time ago, the Village Board discussed the possible reloca- tion of this tank. I have updated the relocation figures for comparison means. Estimates are as follows: Cost of new tank $1.2 - 1.3 million Removal of old tank $50 - 55,000 Design costs for new tank 12 - 15,000 Inspection/observation costs 30 - 37,000 Land costs/piping $120,000 Estimated total, $1,387,000 - $1,497,000 Consideration for award of this contract should be determined as soon as possible so we can get on an early spring schedule. I agree with the recommendation of our consultant and recommend awarding the contract to Security Painting Co. for $467,340. Approval will also be necessary for an additional $105,000 if they are required to haul away any hazardous debris from the site. I further recommend that our consultant, Tank Industry Consul- tants, be awarded a contract of $37,800 for inspection. RwrtIva HLW/td attach. EL—TNKRE.RES/FILES/BIDS DETAILED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS Copyright 0 1992.TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. All rights reserved Repairing and Repainting the Interior and Exterior of One 1,000,000 Gallon Steel Elevated Tank Mount Prospect, Illinois A. Description of Tank The 1,000,000 gallon steel elevated tank is located in Mount Pros- pect, Illinois adjacent to Northwest Highway, Evergreen Street, and Maple Street. The tank is approximately 132 ft 6 in. to high water level. It is an 10 column tan of welded steel construction erected by Chicago Bridge and Iron No-rTO is US= FO's C -0 B. Scope of Work ONSTpUCT',ON Bids will be solicited for the complete cleaning and repainting of the tank on the interior surfaces, and the complete cleaning and repainting of the exterior surfaces with enclosure. Additional Work items include overflow pipe modifications, new freeze - resistant aluminum vent/manhole, addition of a 30 in. diameter riser manhole, replacement of exterior ladders, installation of safe -climbing devices, modification of balcony safety rail, chains for tower ladder platform, installation of a new riser safety grate, installation of a new cathodic protection system, installa- tion of a hinge for the riser manhole, removal of spider rods, re- moval of drain valve, and protective covers for drain pipe and in- let/outlet pipe including other miscellaneous repairs. This synopsis is not intended to be a complete list of Work items. The Bidder is referred to the following Detailed Technical Specifica- tions for the complete scope of Work. C. Definition of Parties The term ENGINEER in this specification shall mean TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. - Headquarters: P.O. Box 24359, 4912 West 16th Street, Speedway, Indiana 46224, telephone 317/244-3221, FAX 317/486-4708. The term FIELD OBSERVER in this specification shall mean TANK IN- DUSTRY CONSULTANTS - Headquarters: P.O. Box 24359, 4912 West 16th Street, Speedway, Indiana 46224, telephone 317/244-3221, FAX 317/486-4708 or another designated representative of the OWNER. The term OWNER in this specification shall mean the Mount Prospect Public Works Department, 1700 West Central Road, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056-2229, telephone 708/870-5840, FAX 708/258-9377. page DTS-1 TIC 92 -IL -960-V 10-23-92 A 4912 West 16th Street January 25, 1993 Mr. Herbert L. Weeks Mount Prospect Public 1700 W. Central Road Mt. Prospect, Illinois P.O. Box 24359 Speedway, Indiana 46224 Works Department 60056 Telephone: 317 / 244-3221 FAX: 317 / 486-4708 RE: Repairing & Repainting the 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Water Tank. TIC Project 92 -IL -960 Dear Herb, We have reviewed the five bid packages sent to us by the Village of Mt. Prospect. These bids were received for the referenced project January 19, 1993, at 10 a.m. local time by the Village of Mount Prospect. We have reviewed this information and prepared a bid tabulation (copy attached), and find that Security Painting Company, Inc. located in Indianapolis, Indiana, has the lowest bid of $467,340 items 1 thru 7 inclusive. The second lowest bid was Jetco Ltd. located in Prospect Heights, Illinois, of $492,450 for bid items 1 thru 7 inclusive. In the unlikely event that the blast debris is found to be haz- ardous, we find it difficult to believe that Jetco could dispose of it legally for the amount he has included ($220 per cu.yd.) We find that this cost usually runs $400 to $500 per cu.yd. The specifications have been written to use a Blastox blend of abra- sive which the manufacturer guarantees to render the debris non- hazardous. This guarantee, however, only covers the cost of the Blastox material. During the review of these bids we find that Jetco, Ltd. has taken exception to the contract time to complete this work (copy attached for reference). We feel that this exception should dis- qualify Jetco's bid, however, this is at the discretion of the Village of Mt. Prospect. Based on all the above, we recommend this contract be awarded to Security Painting Company, Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana, for bid items one thru seven in the amount of $467,340. We have worked with this contractor on numerous projects of this size and find that they have the equipment, experience, and personnel to com- plete the project within the 100 day contract time. Laurel, MD 41018804004 • Houston, 7X 7131789-0989 • Hauppauge, NY 5161864-2507 0 Orlando, FL 4071851-5745 Mr. Herbert L. Weeks Page 2 As you may recall during the pre-bid meeting at the tank, the owner of Security Painting, Harry Zondurlilis, was measuring and checking the condo's and storage areas so that he could allow for the cost to protect the neighbors from property damage during the cleaning and painting operation. We will appreciate your early advice accepting our recommendation so that we may proceed with contract signing, bond, and insurance procurement. This project should be started as early as possible in the spring of 1993. If you have any questions or need any additional information in order to agree to make an award, please contact this office. Yours very truly, TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. W. H. "Doc" Reed Operations Manager BID TABULATION 1,000,000 GALLON STEEL ELEVATED TANK TIC 92-11, 960 11T1 1---- January 19, 1993 ur Iviliv"Ni rmul!)t'LI.'l MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS TANK IN TRY I "I NTS, INC. ONSL (T -'------Ts - - .,D ------ SEC,Rll G &M ,1IJT�NC13 N - - eNAME OF CONTRACTOR J.L. MANTA JETCO, LTD, PAINTING PAINT ML '":N'AC'I"OR OMPANs ENT INC. FORMS/S!GNA TURE - ------ B Lc F RLk J R �El'� 0 AFFIDAVIT '3IUFjPLIqR'S LIST 0 xxx 0 0 . . . ...... LAPiJLAYf)lJfiLk.XP �ECORD _ L_ • X 0 . ... .... _LLIANCAL 0 0 d z 'SURCONTRAC"TOR LIST • XX 0 • 2 FLEANING/PAINTING VE7HQD 0 .. ..... . .... .......... . ..... V[TiOD OF CONTAJNVENT 0 - ............. . . - ---- ---- ....... .... - 0 BASE BID W11"H ENCLOSURE 795,500 466,800 449,840 67y A7h 51 9 9 0 2 F'I 6 GA-LONS 1,320 3,600 2,400 1800) 6O - PIT WELDING ------ . .... - -- ------ 150 501N. 1,072.50 3,000 600 1'!500 900 4 --- - SEAM WELDING - ---------- --- - - ----- 400 LINEAL FT 10,000 8,000 8.000 8,000 10,000 5 CHIPPING & GRINDING 50 MAN HOURS 2,550 Coo C,O ,950 3,500 5'�L 2 6 BALCONY ORAiN H 0 L ES 50 INCLUCED 750 .......... . . ......... 1,000 �'oo 1,0(00 00 7 . ........ . _. .. ADDITK)TIAL WORK T- "-7 50 MAN --IRS. 3'c 100 5�000 6,000 4,900 4,000 TOTAL AMOUNT BID 814,242 50 492,400 467,340 699,975 622,900 (ITEMS 1--7 INCLUSIVE) 8--1 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL DISPOSAL 150 CU.YD. 52,500 33,000 105,000 120,000 90,000 8-2 1 DEDUCT S70. DISPOSAL OF EXT. DEBRIS 3,000 4,000 4,000 BOG 3,000 DEDUCT STO, DISPOSAL. 2,250 2,000 2,500 800 2,000 -- . I ........ ... . .... .. . ........ ... . . ....... .. . ...... . . ........ - - ----------- - BID TAKES EXCEPTION TO CONTRAC" TIME (ARTICLE .3) . . . ................. NOT COMPLETE NOT NOTARIZED . ............ . ......... . . . . . ..... THE ABOVE BID TABULATION 15 CERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE AND ACCURATE TABULATION OF THE BIDS RECEIVED BY THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS ON JANUARY 19, 1993, FOR THE REPAIRING AND REPAINTING OF ONE 1,000,000 GALLON STEEL ELEVATED TANK IN MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS. SIGNATURE- , ". -- --------------- 5. BIDDER will supply sufficient and detailed information to the following statements and questions on the pages supplied. (a) Explain your plan or layout for performing proposed work. Describe crew size and equipment necessary to complete pro- ject in required time. Our bid does not include Article 3 Contract Time. We propose to perform the work as follows. All interior work and repairs will be completed during the spring of 1993. All welding that will be necessary for the containment system will be completed during the spring of 1993. All exterior work will be completed during the fall of 1993. Note: Our bid does not include Liquidated Damafesµ Item 9 Page IB -4 Our insurance limits are $"2,COO,O0O. Enclosure submittals will not be signed by an Illinois Structural Engineer. BF -5 71C92. Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois t INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM; DAVID E. JEPSON, FINANCE DIRECTOR RE: DOWNTOWN WATER TANK PROJECT FINANCING DATE: FEBRUARY 5, 1993 Because of the magnitude of the cost of painting and repairing the downtown water tank and because of the additional time it will add to the tank's useful life, I think it is appropriate to borrow funds to finance this project. At the present time, we would be able to borrow the funds over a five year period at a net interest rate of about 4%. We are tentatively planning a bond sale in April, 1993, to finance the North Main/Prospect Manor Flood Project, subject to the availability of EPA loan funds. If the EPA Loan Fund is available for this project, we would then defer the sale until later this year. A bond sale in September or October would be used to cover demolition and public improvements for the Pine/Wille Redevelopment Project. If we defer the bond sale until this fall, we would finance the water tank project out of available funds and then reimburse those funds from the bond sale. The proposed project is a significant amount of money and the annual debt service payment would require an additional water rate increase of about 9 cents per 1,000 gallons over the next five years. As an alternative, I asked David Newman, the Village's attorney for Special Service Area No. 5, if Special Service Area No. 5 funds could be used to pay for this project. His opinion, and the opinion of the bond counsel for the original bond issue, is that it would be appropriate to use Special Service Area No. 5 funds for this project. Special Service Area No. 5 was established in 1982 to provide funding for the initial improvement costs relating to obtaining Lake Michigan water and to cover other operating and maintenance costs pertaining to the water distribution system. The last payment on the original bonds issued in 1982 was made on December 1, 1992. Michael E. Janonis February 5, 1993 Page 2 of 2 The Special Service Area No. 5 tax levy has consisted of two purposes: the 1982 bonds and ongoing fixed costs of the Water Agency. The Special Service Area No. 5 tax rate has been as high as 31.9 cents, but for 1991, it was down to 20.3 cents. If we would add the debt service for these bonds to the Special Service Area No. 5 tax levy, the tax levy would increase from $1,364,750 to $1,431,700 with an estimated 1993 tax rate of 17.0 cents. I think it would be an advantage to most Village residents to use the Special Service Area No. 5 tax levy rather than increase water rates an additional 9 cents to pay for this project. A copy of Mr. Newman's opinion letter is attached. David C. Jepson Finance Director DCJ/caf Att. -Qa,1WW-W Jwm� ATTORNEY AT LAW 3300 SOUTH HARLEM RIVERSIDE, ILLINOIS 60546 PHONE: (708) 442-7600 (706)442.7602 FAX: (708) 442-0466 September 2, 1992 Mr. David C. Jepson Finance Director Village of Mount Prospect 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, IL 60056 Re: Special Service Area No. 5 -- Annual Tax Use Thereof to Maintain Water Distribution system Dear Mr. Jepson: This letter is in response to your letter of August 26, 1992, requesting my opinion regarding the use of Special Service Area No. 5 annual tax revenue for certain proposed repair and repainting work to a Village water tower. It is my understanding that this water tower is located within the boundaries of Special Service Area No. 5 and is a part of the Village water system which was established through funding authorized pursuant to Special Service Area No. 5 procedures. The water tower in question was not included within the municipal improvements (water distribution mains and pumping stations) for which Special Service Area No. 5 General Obligation Bonds were issued. I have reviewed the ordinance establishing Special Service Area No. 5, the Notice of Public Hearing held prior thereto, and the Official Statement used in the sale of bonds to cover the initial improvements costs relating to the transportation and provision of Lake Michigan water to the citizens of the Village of Mount Prospect. These documents clearly state that the purpose of the formation of Special Service Area No. 5, in general, was to provide special municipal services to the Area including, but not limited to, construction and installation of necessary water distribution mains and pumping stations to provide Lake Michigan water to the Area. A part of the cost was to be covered by General Obligation Bonds. The remaining part of the cost of said special services, not covered by the 'General obligation Bonds, was to be paid for pursuant to an annual tax levy, at a rate not exceeding 1.29% over a period not exceeding 35 years. This annual tax is referred to as an operating tax. Mr. David C. Jepson Re: Special Service Area No. 5 -- Annual Tax Use Thereof to Maintain Water Distribution System September 2, 1992 Page 2 The special municipal service to be provided to the property owners within Special Service Area No. 5 is the provision of Lake Michigan water. The General obligation Bonds were issued to pay the capital improvement costs for delivering this water to the Area, and the annual tax is to cover other operating and maintenance costs pertaining to this water distribution system over a period not exceeding 35 years. Since your water tower is a part of this water distribution system, it is my opinion that you may use the funds derived from the annual special service area tax for the purpose of repairing and painting this water tank. Any other repair or maintenance costs to integral elements of this water distribution system could similarly be covered by this annual tax levy. This could include repair and maintenance costs to fire hydrants, water main, pumping stations and water tower structures within the Area. Finally, I discussed this matter with Mr. Dan Johnson of Chapman & Cutler, the bond counsel which issued the original opinion regarding the validity of the General obligation Bonds and annual tax levy within Special Service Area No. 5. Mr. Johnson concurs in my opinion that the purpose of the annual tax levy is to derive funds necessary to meet operation and maintenance costs of the water distribution system, and that it is appropriate to use such funds for maintenance and repair of various elements thereof, such as your proposed water tank repair and repainting project. Very truly yours, hO C � David C. Newman DCN/b VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT PLANNING DEPARTMENT Mount Prospect, Illinois TO: JOHN F. DIXON, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: KENNETH H. FRITZ, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR DATE: JUNE 24, 1992 SUBJECT: MUNICIPAL SIGNAGE IN DOWNTOWN In response to an inquiry by the Village Board, I have made some observations regarding potential signage for the Village Hall. In addition, I have attached two proposals for possible relocation of the Civic Events sign to a location that will get the attention of many more people. .t g A freestanding pylon sign was removed in 1991 which was close to the building at the comer of Busse and Emerson. The pylon sign did not meet the Code in terms of setback or height and was subsequently removed for these reasons. Other signage may be located either on the wall or on a monument -type sign to be placed on Emerson Street and meet the Code requirements. Wall Signage: Wall signage could be accommodated on either the Emerson Street wall or Busse Avenue. Since there is already a wall sign at the entrance off of the parking lot that reads "Mount Prospect Village Hall", the Emerson Street side would appear to have the most opportunity for good exposure for wan signage. There are areas of marble and lannon stone on the Emerson Street elevation that could accommodate raised letters to identify the Village Hall. The exact size of the signage would depend upon the placement of the signage on the lannon stone or marble surface areas. It would not be feasible, in my opinion, to locate wall signage on any of the wall architectural panels between the windows. Monument Sign: In my estimation, the proper scale for a freestanding sign would be in the form of a monument sign not to exceed 5' to 6' above sidewalk elevation that could be located as a single -faced sign near the Emerson Street entrance to the Village Hall. A double-faced sign in this area would require a variation since a distance of 10 feet from the building and 5 feet from the sidewalk are the minimum standards to be maintained from the nearest edge of the sign. Presently, the Village Community Events sign, donated by the Mount Prospect Lions Club, is located at the base of the Village water tower on Northwest Highway near the Fire and Police facility. The evergreens located closed to the sign make it difficult to maintain clear John Fulton Dixon Page 2 June 24, 1992 visibility from both directions and then only for Northwest Highway traffic. The sign is located too close to the Northwest Highway property line. In order to meet the Village sign setback requirements, the sign would have to be reduced in height approximately 3 feet, and setback approximately 4 feet from the sidewalk. These changes would all but obscure the signage from view for passers-by. Therefore, it was suggested that the sign be relocated to the intersection of Northwest Highway and Route 83 on property owned by METRA and maintained by the Village. Its approximate location would be set back 5 to 10 feet from the intersection of the sidewalks at the southeast corner of Main Street (Route 83) and Northwest Highway. This would place the sign westerly of the raised planter -box area maintained by Public Works Forestry Division. By lowering the sign to 12 feet to meet the Code, it would still provide clear visibility for passers-by provided one evergreen is removed near the corner of this intersection. (See attached photograph.) Proposals have been received by two sign companies with regard to the Civic Events sign relocation. The first proposal received .was from Signs of Distinction, Wheeling, Illinois in the amount of $1,950. to remove the existing Civic Events signage and install on new poles and connect the electrical to adjoining service. A second proposal was received by Rainbow Signs to relocate the existing Civic Events sign using the existing poles and trimming the skirting accordingly to result in a new sign height of 12 feet from sidewalk grade and includes the electrical hook-up for a cost of $1,200.00. Since receiving these proposals, it is my opinion that the sign would look more presentable if it was mounted on a single pole with a small pole skirt enclosing the pole at the center of the sign. This suggestion is made since the proportion of the new sign makes the two poles at the extreme edges of the canopy look awkward. It is also recommended that the cabinet be repainted to a color more consistent with the earthtones of other buildings in the immediate area We need to take steps soon on the Civic Event sign, so with this memo I am asking for authorization to proceed with the relocation as proposed. Also, please advise on the wishes of the Village Board for additional Village Hall signage. KHF:hg cc: David M. Clements Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR GERALD L FARLEY AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM: VILLAGE MANAGER DATE: SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 SUBJECT: ELEVATED WATER TANK REHABILITATION PROJECT Attached are a series of memos from Director of Public Works Herbert Weeks regarding his proposal to begin preparation for the scheduled rehabilitation of the one million gallon water storage tank located in the central business district. Also included for your information is a 1991 update evaluation of the tank and a 1989 memo which identified that the work being proposed here was anticipated. Mr. Weeks is recommending that Tank Industry Consultants, Inc., Speedway, Indiana be retained to begin preparation of bid specifications and contract documents, review bid results and conduct miscellaneous laboratory testing and structural analysis in anticipation of proceeding with rehabilitation next fiscal year. The amount of this initial work will total $13,780. While an expenditure of this size would normally warrant that the work be bid, I concur with Mr. Weeks that the firm in question, Tank Industry Consultants (TIC), is a recognized leader in this field and has provided excellent services to the Village in the past. In 1989, the Village hired another firm to analyze the overall condition and life expectancy of the elevated tank. The report issued by that firm was found to be lacking in specificity and overall professionalism. As a result, the Village sought proposals from various consulting firms with expertise in this area. Tank Industry Consultants was retained at that time to provide a detailed report of the tank's condition. It was the consensus of staff and the Board that the report issued by TIC was of superior quality and made a series of recommendations regarding short and long-term repair. At that time, the short-term repairs were undertaken and TIC indicated that the work done at that time would defer major rehabilitation for a period of approximately five years. At this time, it appears that the original report was accurate and that the long-range repairs and painting identified in 1989 are now needed. The estimated cost of + $450,000 is in line with the figure identified in the 1991 update report. The decision to proceed with the actual rehabilitation of the tank will, of course, depend in part upon the Village's financial condition. However, this initial expenditure recommended by Mr. Weeks is money well spent and puts us in a position to proceed with the project if all conditions prove acceptable. If we do not proceed at this time, the specifications and other documentation will remain valid and can be utilized at the point we do decide to go forward. While the actual rehabilitation work will be bid out, I would also at this point concur with Mr. Weeks' recommendation regarding the retention of Tank Industry Consultants for resident inspection services. With regard to funding for this project, staff will be presenting a proposal for an alternate funding source as part of upcoming budget talks. The Village Board may wish to consider this alternative. MEJ/rcc attachments Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 7= MY LSA Tn- Village manager FROM: Director Public works DATE: September 11, 1992 SUBJECT: Elevated Water Tank In 1989 and again in 1991, we contracted with Tank Industry Consultants, Inc. to inspect our elevated tank and to provide us with their recommendations, which would be necessary to bring this tank up to current EPA and OSHA safety standards and recoat- ing. We have, thus far, delayed any major maintenance work on this tank because of the high estimated cost of the maintenance and repair work needed. In this current year's budget, there is money allocated for a consultant to draw up plans and specifica- tions for the repair of this structure, consistent with previous findings. it is my recommendation that a contract award be made to have these plans and specifications done by Tank Industry Consultants and have them available for bidding purposes very early in 1993. My opinion is that, if the Village would agree to include money in the 1993-94 budget for this repair and maintenance, I can schedule this work to start early in the spring of 1993. (Rough estimates to do all the work as contemplated is in excess of $450,000.) 1 received a firm quote from Tank Industry Consul- tants, Inc. for preparation of detailed technical specifications and for testing and observation work required for the bidding phase. The fee to provide specifications and contract docu- ments, including all drawings, plans and designs, is $9230. Additionally, to have Tank Industry Consultants review the bids received and to recommend the lowest responsible bidder would be an additional $750. Additional sampling for lead contaminants in the paint and for structural defects will be required. Lab analysis and administration of this phase would be in an amount not to exceed $3800. It is my recommendation that the Village accept the proposal of Tank Industry Consultants in a total amount not to exceed $13,780. We realize that this is only a singular proposal. However, considering this firm's reputation and knowledge of our structure, it would be beneficial to the Village if this con- tract is awarded to them. In the past they have saved other municipalities thousands of dollars with their unbiased reports and recommendations for cost and repairs. Tank Industry Consul- tants, Inc. is not a contracting firm, nor do they sell paint or 91 other materials. And because they are an independent third party, project representation would be performed without antici- pation to obtain a contract for painting, repair or materials. Herbert L. Weeks HLW/td MGR-ONEL.TNK/FILES/WATER Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 7W arY LU TO: village Manager FROM: Director Public Works DATE: September 11, 1992 SUBJECT: Elevated Tank Maintenance Contract By previous memo, I have requested waiver of bids and award of a con- tract to Tank Industry Consultants, Inc. for preparing specifications and bidding documents for the repair and upgrade of our elevated water storage tank. The following are some of the items which will be addressed: Sandblast off all existing coatings Paint Exterior SP6, Epoxy -Polyurethane Containment of Paint and Sandblast Material Hazardous Disposal Paint Interior SPIO, Epoxy System Install New Cathodic Protection System Overhead Power Line Relocation Misc. Pit Welding and Grinding Seam Sealing Overflow Pipe Modifications Replace Freeze -Resistant Vent/Manhole Replace Exterior Ladders Provide Ladder Safe Climbing Devices Conduit Relocation Modify Balcony Safety Railing Add Tower Ladder Platform Safety Chains Add Balcony Floor Drain Holes Replace Riser Safety Grate Remove Drain Valve Protective Pipe Covers Misc. Repairs Initial estimates are that the work described will cost in excess of $450,000. After the bid award has been made, it is my recommendation that we contract with Tank Industry Consultants, Inc. to provide resi- dent inspection of all phases of the repairs. Tank Industry Consul- tants, Inc. has given me a proposal where they are estimating the job will take 10 to 12 weeks at a cost not to exceed $37,800. Attached is a breakdown of their rate structure for their professional services. HLW/td/attach. MGR—ONEL.TNK/FILES/WATER -4- TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTAINTS, INC. Professional Services - Rate Structure Long Term Resident Observation: Technician (travel and on -job time) $42.00 per hour Overtime Premium (over 40 hrs./week) $11.00 per hour Minimum 32 hours per week Per Diem $65.00 per day Spot Observation: Technician (travel and on -job time) $48.00 per hour Per Diem $65.00 per observation One Hour Senior Engineer time added to each observation for dispatching and report analysis interpretation Mileage: (per vehicle) -$0.30 per mile from Speedway, IN; Houston, TX; Laurel, MD; Hauppauge, NY; or Orlando, FL, whichever is closer. Hourly Rates: Operations Manager $53.00/hour Quality Assurance Manager $53.00/hour Technical Editor $53.00/hour Chief Technician NACE Certified $56.00/hour NACE Level III Certified Coating Inspector (If Requested) $53.00/hour Engineer $50.50/hour Engineer - E.I.T. $57.00/hour Engineer - Registered $65.00/hour Senior Registered Engineer $74.00/hour Principal Engineer $105.00/hour (E. Crone Knoy, P.E.) Clerical Administrative $35.00/hour Clerical $28.00/hour Reimbursable Expenses: - Travel by public transportation at cost, plus 10%. - Photographic documentation mounted and labeled - if requested by Owner - $3.00 per photograph. - All other reimbursable expenses at cost, plus 10%. Subcontract Laboratory Analysis: - Total Lead in Samples by Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy - $75.00/sample - Leachable Lead in Samples by Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure - $325.00/sample 6 Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM Tw ary vu TO: Village Manager FROM: Director Public Works DATE: November 13, 1989 SUBJECT: Tank Rehabilitation Last spring, we hired Dixon Engineering Inc. for a structural inspection and coating analysis of the exterior and interior of our one million gallon elevated water storage tank. After re- viewing their report, there were some discrepancies in it that I felt were serious enough to warrant an objection to their recom- mendation. Following a review by the Finance Commission of my June 8, 1989 report, it was recommended to the Village Board that another consulting engineering report would be helpful. on October 11, 1989, a recommendation ion was made to your office to award a contract to Tank Industry Consultants Inc. for an analy- sis of this tank. Tank Industry Consultants Inc. from Speedway, Indiana made this inspection the latter part of October 1989 and copies of the re- port are now available for review. I feel this report is very comprehensive and deals with all aspects concerning this tank so that a knowledgeable decision can be made. The photographs that they furnished coincide with my knowledge of the interior and exterior maintenance problems in that they clearly depict pit- ting, and the consultant addresses these problems as maintenance issues that can be resolved by welding. After reviewing their report and summary, it is fairly clear that the tank would not need painting in its entirety for four years. However, they do address certain improvements, such as replacing the cathodic protection system and other spot repairs, which should be done earlier. The existing coating has been on the tank for seven years and trying to match the paint on spot repairs may be rather difficult due to fading, and we could be looking at a tank with conceivably different shades of paint. After further consultation with the consulting engineer, I would recommend that the Village of Mount Prospect consider deferring any repainting job for two years; then, at that time, empty the tank for complete rehabilitation covering all aspects of their recommendations to bring it into compliance with today's stan- dards. Tank Industry Consultants feel that this would be a 7 logical conclusion and that, with the improvements made to the tank as they recommended plus an accelerated maintenance pro- gram, this tank could have a 75 -year life. The aesthetic appear- ance of this structure may not be satisfactory to some residents living in its shadow, but it would be structurally sound. If the Village would decide to replace the tank, a proposed loca- tion would be north of the current Public Works facility, and a computer study indicates that that would be an ideal spot. To leave the tank where it is and make the necessary repairs, reha- bilitations and recoating would cost as follows: Paint exterior, alkalide spot paint and top coat $ 65,000— Containment screening around exterior tank during wash -off, spot blasting and repainting 70,000 Paint interior using epoxy coating system 63,000 Replace cathodic system with a relatively ice -free system similar to that supplied by Harco Co. 10,000 On the east side of the tank, Commonwealth Edison has some electric wires overhead that should be placed underground 5,000 - Replace air vent/manhole on top of tank with a new freeze -resistant and larger design 5,000 -- Modify roof ladder to meet OSHA standards 2,500 Install ladder safety climbing devices on exterior 5,000 - Modify tower ladder rung spacing 2,500 - Relocate electrical conduit 3,500' Install tower ladder platform safety chains 500 - Make improvements to the drainage area on the balcony floor 1,500— Modify the anode hand hole covers on the upper 11 section of the tank 1,000 Install a riser safety grate on the interior of the tank 1,000 01 Install a protective pipe cover 750r Miscellaneous repairs such as spot welding, exterior wash -down, etc. 6,000 - Preparation of specifications and contract documents 5,900,. Resident inspection of work, including contract administration 18,500 Total Cost . . . . . . . . . . . $266,650 Tank Industry Consultants took a sample of the interior coating, and preliminary findings are that there may be some lead content present. These reports will not be known for another week or so, but if lead is present in any magnitude, we may have to use other, costlier procedures before recoating the interior. Fur- ther, their recommendation includes regrading the land under- neath the tank to provide for better drainage and to keep the water away from the steel columns. This cost figure is not available at this time. Dollars as stated represent 1989 costs and the actual year of bid solicitation will affect these pric- es. If the Village were to agree with this recommendation, we should have another inspection done in two years' time, prior to prepa- ration of the specifications. It is projected that this type of inspection would cost approximately $2500. If these procedures are followed, we could expect a ten-year life out of the recoat- ing job. I In several sections of the report, the consultant commented that, prior to bidding, an inspection should be made by a struc- tural engineer of certain areas within the tank that are normal- ly used for rigging. It is projected that this type of inspec- tion would cost approximately $3000. If replacement/relocation of the tank were considered, the con- sultant estimates $200,000 for removal and $1,100,000 for re- placement. The existing tank is 130 feet high, and a relocated tank at the suggested location would be 120 feet in height due to elevation differential. The report as submitted by Tank Industry Consultants is very clear and concise and appears to be complete. 17". LAMAW I;rz3d*TZ HLW/td attach. c: Finance director 7f y TANK IN'D U S , !OSULTANTS, INC. 4912 West 16th Street P.O. Box 24359 Telephone: 317 244-3221 Sp"dway, Indiana 46224 FAX: 317 4864708 October 4, 1991 Mr. Herbert L. Weeks Director of Public Works Public Works Facility 1700 W. Central Road Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056-2229 RE: Update Evaluation of a 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Water Storage Tank Located at the corner of Northwest Highway and Maple Street in the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois. TIC 91 -IL -960 Dear Mr. Weeks: Please find enclosed three copies of the update evaluation report for the 1,000,000 gallon radial cone tank at the corner of North- west Highway and Maple Street in the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois. Samples of the exterior and interior coating were sent to a labo- ratory for analysis; however, the results will not be in until the week of October 7. 1 will send a copy of the results to you as soon as the results become available. Please note that the economic factors section includes only those work items which would be performed by the Contractor. The fol- lowing costs would be associated with the tank rehabilitation project: Filing FAA form 7460-1.. ..... ...... $ 500 Preparation of Specifications and Contract Documents.. •... 6,500 Resident observation of Work g Contract Administration(est) ...... 39,000 The above costs are estimated and are only included to aid you in making budgetary decisions. In addition, the cost estimate for TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. to file an FAA form 7460-1 to determine the obstruction re- quirements on this tank.was listed separate per your request on Laurel, MD 3011880-4004 * Houston, TX 7131789-0989 0 Hauppauge, NY 5161864-2507 e Orlando, FL 4071851.5745 // Mr. Norbert L. Weeks October 4, 1991 Page 2 September 26, 1991. This cost would be for TANK INDUSTRY CON- SULTANTS, INC. to perform only this task; however, if TANK INDUS- TRY CONSULTANTS, INC. prepares specifications for this project then the cost of filing the FAA form would be included with the specification costs. In addition to the Prebid and Update Evaluation Services offered by TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC., we also prepare specifica- tions for repainting and repair projects, offer contract adminis- tration services, and have a team of highly qualified field tech- nicians who monitor the contractor's work in process. If, based on the recommendations contained in this Update Evaluation Re- port, you decide to undertake a rehabilitation project on this tank, we would appreciate the opportunity to prepare a written quotation for our specification, contract administration, and work in process observation services for you. Since we already are very familiar with the deficiencies observed on your tank, and repainting and repair operations recommended, our firm is confident that our continued involvement with this project will assure an economic, long-lasting, quality rehabilitation project for the Village of Mount Prospect. If you have any questions about the report, or if you would be interested in learning more about other tank -related professional engineering services offered by TIC, please contact me any time. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service to you, and I look forward to working with you and the Village of Mount Prospect again in the future. Sincerely yours, TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. Michael T. Crist, E.I.T Engineer Enclosures I I TANK IVDU Ty q0CLAT TANTS, INC. 4912 West 16th Street P.O. Box 24359 Telephone: 317 / 244-3221 Speedway, Indiana 46224 FAX: 317 / 486-4708 October 4, 1991 Mr. Herbert L. Weeks Director of Public Works Public Works Facility 1700 W. Central.Road Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056-2229 SUBJECT: The subject of this report is the field evaluation of the 1,000,000 gallon elevated water storage tank at the corner of Northwest High- way and Maple Street. in the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois. The field evaluation was performed on September 26, 1991 by Jeffrey A. Cannon, Michael T. Crist, E.I.T., and Victor L. Risch, P.E. of TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. This report will update the condi- tion of the tank from the last evaluation which was performed by TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. on October 27, 1989. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this update evaluation and washout was to determine any changes in the condition of the tank interior, exterior, foun- dations and accessories since the time of the last evaluation. The Purpose of this report is to present the findings of the evaluation and to make recommendations for painting, repairs, corrosion pro- tection, and maintenance. The condition of the items not referred to in the OBSERVATIONS sec- tion of this report appeared to be in approximately the same condi- tion as they were at the time of the last evaluation, which was conducted in 1989. AUTHORIZATION: This update evaluation, washout, disinfection, and report were au- thorized by Village of Mount Prospect Purchase Order Number 42945 dated September 19, 1991. Laurel, MD 3011880-4004 a Houston, TX 7131789-0989 0 Hauppauge, NY 5161864-2507 * Orlando, FL 4071851 45 13 I 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Water Tank Page 2 mount Prospect, Illinois 91 -IL -960 PHOTOGRAPHS: Color photographs were taken of the tank interior and exterior and are included as a part of this report. SUMMARY: The overall condition of this tank had not change significantly since the evaluation performed in 1989. However, changes in indus- try practice, coating technology, and environmental rules and regu- lations have altered some of the original recommendations. These modifications can be found in the RECOMMENDATIONS section of this report. In brief summation, TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. recom- mends that the tank be completely rehabilitated including interior and exterior cleaning and painting, and performance of the safety, sanitary, and operational repairs and modifications which were out- lined in the October 27, .1989 report and restated or updated in this report. I OBSERVATIONS: The condition of the items not referred to in the OBSERVATIONS sec- tion of this report appeared to be in approximately the same condi- tion as they were at the time of the last evaluation. Exterior: The tank appeared to be in nearly the same condition as it was at the time of the last evaluation. However, it was noted during the field evaluation that the police and fire station that was located west of the tank in 1989 has been removed, and the lot is now vacant. Grass clippings were found in most of the anchor bolt chairs. The exterior coating condition was in nearly the same condition as well• however, the areas of coating failure which were observed in 1989 have experienced further deterioration. The top- coat to primer adhesion was poor, but the primer to steel adhesion was good. The overflow pipe discharge was covered with a protec- tive screen; however, the screening has been broken and was not adequate at the time of this evaluation. Standing water was ob- served on the balcony at the time of this evaluation. An increase in chalking and coating streaks was.noted on the shell of the tank. Six cathodic protection handhole covers were misaligned and could allow the ingress of insects and precipitation into the tank. The roof vent screen and roof vent neck were found to be in a much more deteriorated state. Metal loss on the top of the vent neck and on the vent screen had created several gaps in the vent screening. The obstruction light adjacent to the roof vent was on at the time of this evaluation; however, one of the light bulbs was not operat- ing. The obstruction light was equipped with a photoelectric cell which was located near the base of the tower ladder. The cell did 9 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Water Tank Page 3 Mount Prospect, Illinois 91 -IL -960 not face north. Coating thickness measurements were performed on the tank exterior. The results are as follows: 4.5 Coating Thickness: to Columns: 11.0 Spot Blasted: to Other Areas: Riser: 8.0 Bowl: to Balcony: 4.0 Shell: li Roof: 4.0 Coating Failure: 4.5 mils to 6.0 mils 11.0 mils to 14.0 mils 8.0 mils to 9.0 mils 4.0 mils to 6.5 mils 4.0 mils to 6.0 mils 4.5 mils to 7.0 mils 3.0 mils to 6.0 mils Columns: Failure to Primer: negligible Failure to Rust: less than it Riser: Failure to Primer: negligible Failure to Rust: less than it Radial Girders: Failure to Primer: Failure to Rust: Shell: Failure to Primer: Failure to Rust: Roof: Failure to Primer: Failure to Rust: less than it approx. 5% negligible less than it negligible less than 1% Interior: The riser opening in the bowl of the tank was not eguiPPed with a riser safety grate. It is the opinion of TANK IN- DUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. that personnel should not access the inte- rior of the tank unless they are tied off with safety lines. There were isolated areas of significant number of calcium deposits on the tank interior. These deposits typically indicate areas of coating failure where the steel is being cathodically protected. The coating appeared to have undergone more deterioration since the last evaluation; however the deepest new active pitting observed was approximately 1/16 in. Coating thickness measurements were performed on the interior surfaces of the tank. The results are as follows: 15 7! 1 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Water Tank Mount Prospect, Illinois Coating Thickness: IN Roof: 6.0 mils to 10.0 mils, Shell: 6.0 mils to 14.0 mils Bowl: 6.0 mils to 14.0 mils If Riser: 9.0 mils to 14.0 mils Coating Failure: Roof: Failure to Primer: negligible Failure to Rust: less than 1% Shell: Failure to Primer: negligible Failure to Rust: approx. 3% Bowl: Failure to Primer: less than it Failure to Rust: approx. 1% Riser: Failure to Primer: less than 1% Failure to Rust: approx. 3% RECOMMENDATIONS: I Page 4 91 -IL -960 The following recommendations made in the last report remain un- changed and include: 1. foundation and grout repair 2. valve vault should be locked 3. miscellaneous bracket removal and grinding repairs 4. riser manhole gasket replacement 5. diagonal bracing and riser rod repair 6. replace the exterior ladders 7. protective chain installation on the ladder platform 8. modify the balcony safety railing 9. additional balcony drain holes 10. fix the revolving roof ladder ii. installation of a new freeze -resistant roof vent 12. obstruction light verification or removal 13. interior recoating with an epoxy coating system 14. miscellaneous seam welding and pit filling 15. spider rod removal However, the following safety and sanitary repairs need to be ad- dressed immediately: 1. repair or replace the cathodic protection hand hole covers 2. properly screen the roof vent 3. properly screen the overflow pipe discharge 4. install a riser safety grate S. install protective pipe covers. 11 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Water Tank page 5 Mount Prospect, Illinois 91 -IL -960 The recommendations that have changed or been modified since the October 27, 1989 report follow: The first of these pertains to the exterior coating. In the 1989 report, TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. recommended that the ex- terior be spot painted and topcoated. At that time this recom- mendation would have been the best alternative due to the appar- ent presence of lead in the coatings. By topcoating the tank in 1989, the Owner could have delayed the complete removal of the coating until more efficient methods for removing lead-based coatings became available. However, at this time TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. believes that contractors are better equipped to deal with removing lead-based coatings. Therefore, a complete coating removal and repaint with an epoxy -polyurethane coating system is recommended. This type of coating should have a serv- ice life of 15 to 20 years as opposed to an expected life of 5 to 7 for,a topcoat. The Optimum long -life coating system presently available is an epoxy -polyurethane coating system. If the tank is to be repaint- ed, the exterior surfaces should be completely cleaned to the equivalent of an SSPc-SP 6, Commercial Blast Cleaning and an ■ epoxy -polyurethane coating system applied. Care must be taken ■ during the application of this particular coating system because this paint does have poor dry -fall characteristics, and potential damage to the surrounding property must be taken into considera- tion. The polyurethane paints also require close monitoring of temperature and humidity during application. The polyurethanes have excellent color and gloss retention and the longest expected service life of any of the common exterior tank coatings. The polyurethanes also have excellent resistance to condensation, graffiti, and chipping. The typical life of a properly applied epoxy -polyurethane coating system is approximately 15 to 20 years. These coatings are also manufactured to meet current VOC requirements. Prior to preparation of specifications for the cleaning and coat- ing of the exterior of the tank, several samples of the exterior coating system should be subjected to laboratory analysis to test for ingredients which may at that time be subject to regulations concerning their handling and disposal. In addition to the. exterior coating, TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. strongly recommends that the removed coating debris be con- tained and that the containment be used to minimize the exterior coating overspray. The close proximity of the surrounding struc- tures, parking lots, and roadways will cause an increase in reha- bilitation costs. H 17 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Water Tank Mount Prospect, Illinois Page 6 91 -IL -960 Because the exterior coating may contain lead pigments, TANK IN- DUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. has included in the Economic Factors a contingency for the disposal of hazardous material. The Owner should be aware that this cost would only be required if the re- moved coating debris is positively identified as a hazardous ma- terial. The overhead power lines adjacent to the tank site should be relocated underground in order to nrevent potential electrical shock to personnel working on the tank. The relocation of the power lines should be performed in accordance with the National Electric Code (NEC) guidelines. Due to the close proximity of the trees, bushes, and other landscaping, the owner should anticipate a partial clearing of the site to facilitate the tank rehabilitation. It is the opinion of TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. that the clearing of the tank site and landscaping of the site after the tank rehabil- itation could be performed or contracted by the owner in order to save money on the tank rehabilitation. The overflow screen was in need of repair and it is the experi- ence of TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. that this type of screen- ing traditionally requires continual maintenance. Therefore, TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. recommends that the overflow pipe discharge be modified to use either a screened, counterweighted flapgate or a vertically oriented screen. Pertaining to the cathodic protection system, TANK INDUSTRY CON- SULTANTS, INC. still recommends that an ice -resistant, year round cathodic protection system using automatic potential and current control be installed. However, the installation of the cathodic protection system will not need to be performed until at least after the first anniversary evaluation, and could possibly be delayed 3 to 5 years. The reason for delaying the cathodic pro- tection system installation is that the cathodic protection sys- tem will not be required until isolated spot coating failures be- gin to occur. Therefore, the installation of brackets, at the time of the tank rehabilitation, for the future installation of the cathodic protection system is recommended. Information supplied by the owner indicated that the gear and shaft operated drain valve is not used, and instead a valve on the discharge end of the drain line is used to drain the tank. Therefore, TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. recommends that the gear and shaft operated drain valve be removed from the base of the riser, and a protective cover and silt stop be installed on the drain line. It 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Water Tank Page 7 Mount Prospect, Illinois 91 -IL -960 E 0 ECONOMIC FACTORS: Life item cost Years Replacement of tank (1,000,000 gal.) (at a new site) $ 1,275,000 75+ Remaining life of this tank: With recommended maintenance 75+ With no maintenance or repairs 7 The following is a complete list of repairs and estimated costs for their respective recommendations found in the RECOMMENDATION section of this report. IMMEDIATE SANITARY AND SAYETY PAIpfi' SCHEDULED Paint Exterior: MAINTENANgs SP6, Epoxy -Polyurethane...... $ 125,000 Containment .................. Contingency for Hazardous 70,000 Disposal ................... 75,000 Paint Interior: SP10, Epoxy System........... 80,000 Provisions for Future Installation of Cathodic Protection..... 2,000 Overhead Power Line Relocation..... Misc. Pit Welding Grinding..... 5,500 and 3,000 Seam Sealing ....................... Overflow Pipe Modifications........ 3,000 Freeze -Resistant Vent/Manhole ...... 4,500 1,000 Modify Roof Ladder.. ............. 2,500' Replace Exterior Ladders........... 7,000 Ladder Safe Climbing Devices....... Modify 5,500 Tower Ladder Rung Spacing... 2,500' Conduit Relocation..... ....... 3,500 Modify Balcony Safety Railing...... Tower Ladder Platform Safety chains 7,500 Balcony Floor Drain Holes.......... 500 1,500 Anode Hand Hole Cover Repairs...... 1,000— Riser Safety Grate ................. 1,000 Remove Drain Valve ................. 1'000 Protective Pipe Cover .............. 1,000 Misc. Repairs ...................... 2,500 3,500 (Estimates are believed to be a high average of bids which would be received in 1992.) E 0 0 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Water Tank Page a Mount Prospect, Illinois 91 -IL -960 The following economic factors include those work items which the Engineer believes to be the minimum to properly maintain this tank from an operational standpoint. Other items related to safety and risk management should be evaluated by the owner. ITEM COST Paint Exterior: SP6, Epoxy -Polyurethane..... $125,000 Containment .................. 70,000 Contingency for Hazardous Disposal ................... 75,000 Paint Interior: SP10, Epoxy System........... Provisions for Future Installation 80,000 of Cathodic Protection..... 2,000 overhead Power Line Relocation..... 5,500 Misc. Pit Welding and Grinding..... 3,000 Seam Sealing.... .......... 3,000 Overflow Pipe Modifications........ 1,000 Freeze -Resistant Vent/Manhole ...... 4,500'' Replace Exterior Ladders........ 7,000' Ladder Safe Climbing Devices....... 5,500'" Conduit Relocation ................. 3,500 -- Modify Balcony Safety Railing...... 7,500 - Tower Ladder Platform Safety Chains 500' Balcony Floor Drain Holes.......... 1,500'" Riser Safety Grate ................. 1,00a Remove Drain valve ................. 1,000" Protective Pipe Covers ............. 1,000- Misc. Repairs ...................... 5,000 Total Engineer's Recommendations: S 402,500 TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. has no control over the cost of labor, materials, or equipment, or over the contractors' methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding, or the market conditions. opinions of probable cost, as provided for herein, are to be made on the basis of our experience and qualifications and represent our best judgment as design professionals familiar with the design, maintenance, and construction of concrete and steel plate structures. However, TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids, or the con- struction cost will not vary from opinions of probable cost pre- pared for the Owner. '?v 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Water Tank Page 9 Mount Prospect, Illinois 91 -IL -960 CLOSURE: Brief Summation: The Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois has a 1,000,000 gallon welded steel elevated water storage tank which appears to be in fair overall condition. The exterior and inte- rior coating systems are in poor to fair condition and should re- quire repainting within the next 1 to 2 years. The tank can serve the community well for up to 75 years with proper mainte- nance. Proper maintenance would include periodic washouts and evaluations approximately every 2 or 3 years, and maintenance of a new ice -resistant, year round cathodic protection system. Contractor Selection: The work should be performed by a com- petent bonded contractor, chosen from competitive bids taken on complete yet concise specifications. The paints used should be furnished by an experienced water tank paint manufacturer, sup- plying the field service required for application of technical coatings. All work done and coatings applied should be applied in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendation, AWWA D100, AWWA D102, NSF Standard 61 (latest revisions) , and the Steel Structures Painting Council. Observation of Work: Observation of the work in progress by ex- perienced field technicians will offer additional assurance of quality protective coating application. Observations can be per- formed on a continuous basis or spot (critical phase) basis. The actual cost of observation may be less using spot as opposed to full-time resident observation; however, with spot observation it is often necessary for work to be redone to comply with the spec- ifications. This somewhat lowers the quality of the finished product, lengthens the job, and is frequently a cause of conflict between the contractor, owner, and field observer. Resident 'full-time observation minimizes the amount of "rework" required. Warranty and Maintenance Evaluations: A warranty evaluation should be conducted prior to the end of the one year bonded guarantee. Washouts and paint, structural, sanitary, safety, and corrosion evaluations should be conducted approximately every three years. Repair Time Frame: If the work is not performed within the next 12 months, it is recommended that the structure be reevaluated prior to the preparation of specifications and solicitation of bids., specifications and Bidding Documents: The recommendations in this report are not intended to be specifications on which a con- tractor can bid. Complete bidding documents must include general and special conditions, detailed technical specifications, and other information necessary for the competitive bidding process. 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Water Tank Page 10 Mount Prospect, Illinois 91 -IL -960 In order to properly protect the interests of the Owner, Contrac- tor, and Engineer; the initial evaluation, the technical specifi- cations, legal portions of the contract documents, and the field observation should be performed by the same firm or with close coordination of all parties involved. Hazardous Material in Coatings: The coatings on the interior and exterior surfaces of this tank appear to contain lead pigments. It should be taken into consideration that Federal, State, and local environmental agencies have placed stricter controls on the removal of lead-based paints from steel structures by the use of conventional abrasive blasting techniques. The paint and blast residue may be considered to be hazardous waste depending on the concentration of lead or other particles in the residue. Worker health and safety rules should be rigidly adhered to during the prosecution of this work. Limitations of Evaluation: It is believed that the conditions reported herein reflect the condition of the tank as observed on the date of the evaluation, using reasonable care in making the observations, and safety in gaining access to the tank. Should latent defects be discovered during the coating removal and cleaning of the structure, they should be brought to the atten- tion of the Owner and the field observer. No evaluations were made of the original design or the quality of the original con- struction of the tank. Seismic Loadings: This tank is located in a zone 0 (AWWA) earthquake region. This evaluation and the reporting of the con- dition of this tank do not warrant the structural condition of the tank or any of the original design for seismic loadings. Likewise, recommendations for this tank do not include modifica- tions which may be required for compliance with present struc- tural codes. JA 0 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated crater Tank Page 11 0 Mount Prospect, Illinois 91 -IL -960 13 If there are any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact the writers. Respectfully submitted, KNOTTANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. 06.2.039546 _ ! ER'._;?i EER Michael T. Crist, E.I.T. OF Engineer INO E. Crone 210;-"�" .E. Chief Executive Officer Copyright 0 1991 TANK INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. All Rights Reserved MTPR0960.lw9 7 7 ,13 V .1 TAINK I NDUY olS�Lt TANTS, INC. Tq 4911 Wes, 161h 11,ee, P.O. Box 24359 Telephone: 317 2443221 Speedway, Indiana 46224 FAX: 317 4W4708 CLASSIFICATION OF ADHESION TEST RESULTS METHOD A - X -CUT TAPE TEST Description Surface Classification No peeling or removal. X 5 Trace peeling or removal along incisions. X 4 Jagged removal along incisions up to 1/16 in. 3 (1.6mm) on either side. X Jagged removal along most of incisions up to 1/8 in. 2 (3.2mm) on either side. X Removal from most of the area of the X under the I tape. X Removal beyond the area of the X tX 0 The example illustrated shows two cuts approximately 1.5 in. long that intersect near their middle with an angle of between 300 and 45*. I Ifmirpl Mn MIIRRn-d" & Houston. 7X 7131789-0989 * Hauooaupp, NY 5161864-2507 * Orlando. FL 4071851-5745' 0. U LNC. 0 TANK INDTy 40 C 4912 West 16th Street P.O. Box 24359 Telephone: 317 1 244-3221 3 Speedway, Indiana 46224 FAX: 317 / 486-4708 F1 F1 CLASSIFICATION OF ADHESION TEST RESULTS METHOD B - CUT TAPE TEST Description Surface Classification i The edges of the cuts are completely smooth; - No 5 none of the squares of the lattice are detached. Failure Small flakes of the coating are detached at 4 intersections; less than 5% of the lattice is affected. Small flakes of the coating are detached along edges and at intersections of cuts. The area affected is 5% to 15% of the lattice. The coating has flaked along the edges and on 2 parts of the squares. The area affected is 15% to 35% of the lattice. The coating has flaked along the edges of cuts in large ribbons and whole squares have detached. The area affected is 35% to 65% of the lattice. Flaking and detachment worse than grade 1 0 The example illustrated shows six parallel cut lines of 2mm. The Imm cutter will also give six parallel cut lines of Imm spacing. r„,,—/ Un 7/11 1,90A 411,4 . U--- TY 71 417;R9-nQR0 . tj-..-- -- - - -1, - -.- —, - - 1. 1 -1 —1-1 'Ile -2 -5� FEB OT ';3 1105AN RFhSTE!i� ', LEHR ARNSTEIN & LEHR 120 SOLIT, H RIVERSIDE PLAZA - SUITE 1200 , CHICAZQ iLLINOI$ 60606-3913 131;* 878-7100 CARRINOTCh 1IIiNQ4 1AX (3121 378QBE 4VE97 PALM PtAr.q, P nPJnA TELEX Everette M. Hill jr, (312) 875,7B74 M E X 0 R A N D U M TO: Mr. Michael Janonis Village Manager FROM; Everette M. Hill, jr. DATE. February 5, 1993 RE; Follow Z:p on Agenda and Boa::d Procedure Issues You have requested that I provide additional infcrmation on the following issues: 1. TnvocaLian aL Board meet in in S. I have reviewed Loth the Marsh and Weisman cases as you ha requested. Tfte Weisman case stands for the 9:oposiLlon Lh&L a nonsectarian prayer to open a public school graduation exercise violates the First Amendment to the Cunutitutioil- However, in the Marsh case, the Supreme Court took the position that a non-secretarian prayer to convene each session of tile State legisl&Lu-re did not violate the rirst Amendment. There are no cases which discuss Village Board meetings, or Llae issue of an actual elected official rendering the prayer as Is done in Mount Prospect. However, the ruling in the Marsh case seems ei4i'ficient.ly broad so as to validate a local legi-sla—tive body's opening of a meeting with a brief nonsectarian Invocation. 2. Extraordinary Voting RequiremerlLs. The purpose of the voting sche3ule which was attached to my Treviou:i memorandum on this subject was to ldel,,tify 4111 Of those circumstances under both the Illinois Municipal Code and the Mount Prospect Village Code wkiich require an extraordinary vote- one of my objecteves in compiling that schedule a few years ago was -.o indicate the potential variaLions On the extraordinary voting requirement. Some extraordinary votes require a certain fraction of the corporate authorities, some require a fraction of those voting and hQlain!d office, some require a fraction of se=resentr 0= — an affirmative vote which, in turn, ; ears some require ears 6n the issue Of how an -a'V5—LenLion is counted. Because of these variations, it may be difficult to determine whether or not n issue that requ-4ree an extraordinary vote has passed or has been FEB 05 '133 11:e541 Fig `fE1fr Mr. Michael Janonia February 5, 1993 Page 2 dofeated. The mechanical aspects of the vote can sometimes over, shadow the substantive discussion regarding the issue under consideration. A3 a home rule municipality, Mount Prospect hat the abUltY to either eliminate altogether or to standardize the extraordinary vote requirement. zxtraordiftary voting requirements serve an arguably valid purpose. For example, disposing of village real estate may have great ramifications for the future. Also, consideration of legislation in the face of a negative recommendation from a plut)14-ic hearing body perhapa should be.done only by an extraordinary majority of the Board. For this reason, the Board may choose to retain, but standardize, extraordinary voting requirements. As a suggestion only, the Board might consider tine extraordinary ,dc9t1on of a procedural suggestion which provides that where an majority vote is specified, the recpairement would be met by the favorable vote of five of the President and Trustees then holding office. if this were done, the Board would not have to grapple with the issue of whether the extraordinary majority was two-thirds or three- quarters, whether it referred just to trustees as opposed to the Corporate Authorities, or whether it; referred to these present and voting rather than to these elected and holding office. on the other hand, I know of at least one home rule municipality that was so firmly convinced of the efficacy of majority rule that its Board eliminated extraordinary vot_ng requirements altogether. 3. Raising of motions not on the Agenda, The question has arisen as to_wHether or not a Board member may make a motion on an issue that has not been publisiied on 'the Agenda. There is no specific case law or any specific legislation under state law which In dispositive o° this issue. There is an overridLng policy in howevCx, which should be considered in all discussions on this utter. That policy is that the public has the right to prior knowledge of the matters which are going to be considered by its elected officials. While, this policy does not amouat to a prohibition, caution should be used in taking action on any matters of which there has not been prior notice. With respect to special meetings, conventional wisdom and a recent Appellate case hold that matters not on the Agenda may not be considered. At regular FEB 05 '93 11:06AN & LEHR Mr. Michael Janonio February 5, 1993 Page 3 Board meetings, matters not on the Agenda may be considered. However, the Mount Prospect Village Code at Section 2.202(D) speaks directly to this issue: "A waiver of the rules for the purpose of discussing an item not on the written agenda may be rcqucutcd by any two t2) members of the Board and concurrence of a majority of all the President and Board mcmbors present." This would seem to indicate that in Mount Prospect matters not on the Agenda may be raised only at the request of two Board members and then only with the approval of the majority of the President and Board of Trustees. As a point of inforration, Roberts Rules of order, provides that a matter not on the agencla may be added only with the consent of at least two-thirds of those present. 4. Veto Authority of Mayor. Questions have been raised in the past and continue --t—a---BeFraised with respect to the Mayor's veto authority. For the Village of Mount Prospect, this is a complex issue. Typically, the existence of the mayoral veto is tied to whether the municipality has officially adopted the Article V manager form of government and whether trustees art elected by district or at large. The Illinois Municipal Code at Section 5- 3-1 provides the fcllowingr in part: "The mayor or president; of any city or village which adopts this Article v, other than one which at the time of adoption was operating under or adopted the commission form of government as provided in Article IV, or which does not retain the election of alderman by wards or trustees by districts, shall have veto power as provided in Sections 5-3-2 through 5-3-4. An ordinance or measures may be passed over his vett as therein provided. Such mayor or president enall have the power to vote as provided in Section 5-3-5.11 Using only the words which apply to Mount rrospect, the Section reads as follows: "The ... president of any ... village which adopts this Article V ... other than one ... which does not retain the election ... of trustees by districto shall have veto power as provided in Sections 5-3-2 through 5-3-4 ... .11 FER 05 -93 Mr . M1011del J'allonis February 5, 1993 Page 4 Although there have been some technical interpretations to the contrary, this section appears to say traz the mayor of a municipality which has adopted Article V, but elects its trustees at large, does not have veto power. mount Prospect's history with respect to tFhs section is as follows; On April 18, 1967, the Village of Mount Prospect held a referendum on whether or not it would become an Article V (Village Manager) municipality. The referendum passed and on July 18, 1967 an ordinance was adopted recognizing mount Prospect as an Article V municipality. Further, Mount Prospect elects its trustees at large and not Dy.district. if it were left at this, it would appear that the mayor in mount Prospect does not have veto authority. Powever, or. February 19, 1974, Ordinance No. 2490 of the Village of mount Prospect was adopted. This ordinance contained the following language: "Section 2.207, Reconsideration; A. Passage over Veto of President 1. Every reSolutiOP and motion specified by statute and every ordinance which is returned to the Board of Trustees by t e Village President shall be recons-ideria by the said BoarC. 2. After such reconsideration, if two- thirds of all the trustees then holding office on the Board shall agree to pass an ordinance or resolution or a motion, it snail then be effective notwithstandin5 the President's refusal to approve it." This ordinance was adopted subsequent to the 1.9'1U Constitution which invested Mount Prospect with home rule authority. It was also adopted subsequent to when mount erospect became an Article V form of government. As you are aware, unless there has been preemption by the State legislature, a home rule municipality has the authority to adopt laws and rules which are inconsistent with state law. The above quoted language from ordinance NO. 2490 does not appear in the current edition of our Village Code. However, it is my understanding that neither t,,,.e staff nor our codifiers can find any Village Board action authorizing its removal. FEB 05 '93 11:07Arl APHS11EIN & LEHR CHGO Mr. Michael Janoais February 5, 1993 Page 5 Therefore, iL &-ppeacs Lhat the (3roypirig of the language way have been done in error. The language found in Ordinance No. 2490 strongly suggests an Intention on the part of Lhe Mount Prospect Budrd that t1je Village President should possess veto authority. However, the language does not actually create Lhe veto, It is merely implied. Further, in 1976, Mayor Robert TiechevL exefc1sed a veto which was then overruled by the Board In a manner consistent with Ordinance No. 2490. This may provide Further evidence of an intention that the veto be a mayoral prerogative in mount Prospect. Another MaLLei for cunwideKdtiun is that state law has granted the Mayor of certain municipalities the right to vote on any issue coming before the Bo4rJ. In other VLUniC1Pdlitie5, the Mayor votes only in limited. circumstances. The clear intent of the state Legislature is Lhat if the mayor has the right to vote on all issues, then the Mayor will not have veto power. if the Mayor's right, Lo vote is limited by statute, then the Mayor retains the veto authority. There is a logic to this scheme; if Lhe Mayor votes, lie has already influenced the outcome of the measure so the veto authority is not necessary. Pursuant to the Illinois Municipal Code, as an Article V municipality which elects trustees at large, the Mayor should possess the right to vote on all issues. It is my understanding, however, that in Mount Prospect, the Mayor and Lhe Trustees have typically cunducted business as if the mayoral right to vote was limited. This would strongly imply that the vetu power was intended to and did exist. Because of the foregoing, there Is ample reason to conclude that the Mayo: of Mount Prospect possesses veto authority. This is particularly true since the very Board which adopted Ordinance No. 2490 subsequently set a precedent for the exercise and override of the veto. As 11 stated aL the outset, tksis is d complex issue and, although lengthy, this memo still does not exhaust all of the arguments on either side or the issue. I recommend L17tat the President and Board of Trustees come to a determination of whether or not it is desirable in Mount Propbect for ttle veto to exist and then proceed to properly bring that determination into effect. in other words, it is possible to eliminate the ambiguities. FEB 05 '93 11�03Af�l PR IS7EDN & -EHP CHGC Mr. Michael Janonis February 5, 1993 Page 6 If you have Any qUegLiCAIS, pledge contact \\EGX\Ef4H2A-23 Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR GERALD L. FARLEY AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM: VILLAGE MANAGER DATE: DECEMBER 18, 1992 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION REGARDING POTENTIAL CHANGES TO VILLAGE BOARD AGENDA FORMAT Over the past several months, elected officials have expressed a desire to review the Village Board Agenda format in an effort to: (1) Provide all interested adequate opportunity to speak on matters of interest and concern; (2) Reduce the number of times a petitioner (ZBA, Plan Commission, etc.) has to appear before the Village Board while also allowing interested parties to speak to such matters; and (3) To streamline the Agenda so that Village business is conducted in the most expeditious and efficient manner possible while still honoring the goals identified in points 1 and 2. This discussion may also be the right time to address the long Deferred Item of Voting Requirements. With two Trustees expected to be absent from this meeting, I do not anticipate that final consensus will be reached on any of the discussion items, however, the information provided can be reviewed and the discussion process at least begun. There are no time tables as such that we are working against so full discussion should be encouraged. Your information package includes, among other things: 1. Chapter 2 of Village Code. 2. A Memorandum from Everette Hill addressing threshold legal issues. 3. Trustee Clowes' memorandum regarding Proposed Changes to the Agenda. 4. Sample Agendas from other communities. At this time, staff does not make any specific recommendations other than: (1) Consideration should be given to standardizing voting requirements as much as possible; (2) Looking for acceptable ways to streamline the ZBA/Plan Commission approval process and (3) Giving due consideration to the concept of a Consent Agenda as a means of disposing of routine non -controversial matters by way of an omnibus vote. It should also be remembered that any decisions made to change the current format.of the Agenda can always be rethought if, in practice, they do not prove workable. MICHAE E. J �NIS MEJ/rcc Next ordinance No. 4499 Next Resolution No. 33-92 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 0 R D E R OF B U S I N E S S REGULAR MEETING meeting Location: Meeting Room, 1st Floor Senior Citizen Center 50 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Mayor Gerald Trustee Mark Busse Trustee George Clowes Trustee Timothy Corcoran III. INVOCATION - Trustee Floros Meeting Date and Time: Tuesday December 15, 1992 7:30 P. M. ,Skip- Farley Trustee Leo Floros Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Iryana Wilks IV. APPROVE MINU TES OF REGULAR MEETING, December 1, 1992 V. APPROVAL OF BILLS AND FINANCIAL REPORT Vi. COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS - CITIZENS TO BE HEARD VII. MAYOR'S REPORT A. PRESENTATION: Police officer of the Year: Robert Rzepecki Runners -Up: Tony Kotlarz Robert Smith Bill Roscop B. A RESOLUTION FOR THE HOLIDAY SEASON C. Appointments VIII. OLD BUSINESS (Exhibit A) A. ZBA 72 -SU -92, 1716 North Aspen Drive 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1716 NORTH ASPEN DRIVE This Ordinance grants a Special Use Permit to allow the installation of a ground -mounted satellite antenna. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended granting this request by a vote of 5-0. (Exhibit B) B. ZBA 73-V-92, 811 South Edward Street 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 811 S. EDWARD STREET This Ordinance grants a variation to allow a sideyard setback of 4.51, rather than the required 7.21 in order to build a partial second story addition. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended granting this request by a vote of 6-0. (Exhibit C) C. ZBA 74-V-92, 1901 Cholo Lane 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1901 CHOLO LANE This ordinance grants a variation to allow a sideyard setback of 5.751, rather than the required 8.61, in order to construct a garage and room addition to this residence. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended granting a 5.71 foot sideyard setback by a vote of 6-0. (Exhibit D) D. ZBA 75-V-92, 10 East Sunset lst reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 10 EAST SUNSET This Ordinance grants a variation to allow a 71 service walk, encroaching into the sideyard setback, rather than the maximum permitted of 36, walk. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended granting this request by a vote of 6-0. (Exhibit E) E. ZBA 76-V-92, 201 South Edward Street lst reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION FOR PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 201 SOUTH EDWARD STREET This Ordinance grants variations to allow a rear yard setback of 1.571, rather than the required 51; and, a variation to allow an exterior sideyard setback of 17.3', instead of the required 201, in order to construct a 2 -car garage. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended granting these requests by a vote of 6-0. (Exhibit F) F. lst reading of AN ORDINANCE GRANTING MODIFICATIONS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY KNOWN AS DUNN'S SUBDIVISION. This Ordinance provides for modifications from the Development Code relative to: Right-of-way; lot depth; cul de sac requirements; sidewalk; street lighting and pavement width. The Plan Commission recommended granting these modifications by a vote of '7-1. (Exhibit G) G. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY KNOWN AS DUNN'S SUBDIVISION This Resolution guarantees specified improvements' for the subject property at a future date. (Exhibit H) H. Ist reading of AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AMENDMENT #2 TO THE TAX INCREMENT REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR DISTRICT NO. 1 (Exhibit J) I. lst reading of AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING AMENDMF14T #2 TO THE TAX INCREMENT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA FOR DISTRICT NO. 1 (Exhibit K) J. lst reading of AN ORDINANCE CONFIRMING, EXTENDING AND ADOPTING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING FOR THE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TC THE TAX INCREMENT REDEVELOPMENT Pz '3JECT AREA FOR D7zT_RICT NO. 1 IN THE VILLAGE OF MOUPROSPECT (Exhibit L) IX. NEW BUSINESS A. Accept improvements installed in conjunction with the Pate Subdivision. B. 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 21 ENTITLED *BUILDING CODE* OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PROSPECT IN ITS ENTIRETY C. 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE VILLAGE CODE OF MOUNT PROSPECT BY ADOPTING THE FIRE PREVENTION CODE D. 1st reading of AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 25 OF THE VILLAGE CODE This Ordinance increases the cost of purchasing the 3 volume Village Code of mount Prospect. E. Recommendation of the Safety Commission: 1. Request from representatives of St. Raymonds School to prohibit parking on school days on Milburn, between I -Oka and Elmhurst Avenues and on I -Oka from Milburn to a point 180 feet south of Milburn between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:30 AM and establish a 2 hour parking zone in these areas between 8;30 AM and 6:00 PM. The Safety Commission recommended granting these requests by a vote of 8-0. (Exhibit M) (Exhibit N) (Exhibit 0) 2. Request from local merchants to allow parking on Wille Street at Busse Avenue from 8:00 AM to 2:00 AM only and to change the 2 hour parking to 4 hours. The Safety Commission recommended granting these amendments by a vote of 8-0. 3. Request from representatives of the Mount Prospect Public Library to prohibit parking on Emerson Street at their south property line, eliminating one parking space. The Safety Commission recommended granting this request by a vote of 8-0. 4. Request of residents to remove the "No Parking Between 10:00 PM and 6:00 AM' restriction on Highland Avenue, between Maple and Elm Streets. The Safety Commission recommended granting this request by a vote of 8-0. X. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT A. Bid Result: 1. Ventilation/Exhaust System, Golf Road Fire Station B. PUBLIC HEARING This Public Hearing, called pursuant to proper legal notice having been published in the Mount Prospect Journal and Topics on December 4, 1992, is for the purpose of considering the adoption of the annual tax levy for 1992. 1. 2nd reading of AN ORDINANCE TO ABATE A PART OF THE TAXES LEVIED FOR CORPORATE AND MUNICIPAL PURPOSES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING MAY 1, 1992 AND ENDING APRIL 30, 1993 (Exhibit P) 2. 2nd reading of AN ORDINANCE TO ABATE A PART OF THE TAXES LEVI£D FOR UNLIMITED TAX BONDS OF SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NUMBER 1, SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NUMBER 2, AND SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NUMBER 6 OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING MAY 1, 1992 AND ENDING APRIL 30, 1993 (Exhibit Q) 3. 2nd reading of AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF TAXES FOR CORPORATE AND MUNICIPAL PURPOSES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING MAY 1, 1992 AND ENDING APRIL 30, 1993 (Exhibit R) 4. 2nd reading of AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF TAXES FOR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES OF SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NUMBER ONE, SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NUMBER TWO, SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NUMBER FIVE, AND SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NUMBER SIX OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING MAY 1, 1992 AND ENDING APRIL 30, 1993 (Exhibit S) C. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A LEASE BETWEEN LLOYD SEMANS AND THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FOR A COFFEE SHOP IN THE CHICAGO NORTHWESTERN TRAIN STATION (Exhibit T) D. Status Report XI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS XII. EXECUTIVE SESSION - Personnel CHAPTER 2 BOARD OF TRUSTEES Subject Article General Provisions ... ....................... Rules of Order ...... ............. ARTICLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS SECTION: 2.101. Election; Functions 2.102. Oath; Salary 2.103. Meetings of the Board 2.104. President Sec. 2.101. Dection; Functions. The Board of Trustees, consisting of six (6) members, shad be elected to office for a four (4) year term, according to the method provided by statute.' The Board shall be the legislative department of the Village government, and shall perform such duties and have such powers as may be delegated to it by statute. (1957 Code, 2.101) Sec. 2.102. Oath; Salary. A. Any person duly elected or appointed to sit as a member of the Board of Trustees of the Village, as a Trustee, shall take the oath of office prescribed by statute' and shall receive as compensation for the performance of his duties an annual salary of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00), payable in twelve (12)vqual monthly installments. B. Any change in the compensation or fringe benefits provided for Trustees shall be made by ordinance adopted not less than one hundred twenty (120) days nor more than one hundred fifty (150) days prior to the date set for election of Trustees. (Ord. 2886, 4-4-79, Ord. 3070, 11-18-80; Ord. 4002, 11-15-88) Sec. 2.103. Meetings of the Board. A. Regular Meetings, The regular meetings of the Village Board of Trustees shall be held on the first and third Tuesday of each month at the hour of seven thirty o'clock (7:30) P.M.; provided, that if the regular meeting falls on a legal holiday, the meeting shall take place on the next secular day at the same hour. A notice of such regular meetings shall be required, B. Special Meetings. Special meetings may be called by the President of the Village or any three (3) Trustees upon at least twenty four (24) hours' written notice to all members and the President; provided, that if all of the Trustees are present at a special meeting, no notice of such meeting shall be necessary and such notice shall be deemed waived. 1. S.H.A. ch. 24, paragraph 5-2-15. 2. S.H.A. ch. 24, paragraph 5-3-9. 1188 2.103 BOARD OF TRUSTEES 2.104 C. Committee Meetings. The committee meetings of the Village Board of Trustees, sitting as a committee of the whole shall be held on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at the hour of seven thirty o'clock (7:30) P.M.; provided, that, if the committee meeting falls on a legal holiday, the meeting shall take place on the next secular day at the same hour. Committee meetings shall be included in the annual schedule of meetings of the Board of Trustees prepared and posted pursuant to the Open Meetings Act and no further notice of such committee meetings shall be required. D. Meeting Place. All meetings of the Village Board of Trustees shall be held in the Board Room of the Senior Citizen Center, 50 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect, Illinois, unless, pursuant to due notice, another meeting place is selected. (Ord. 1134, 2-1-66; Ord. 3172, 12-15-81; Ord. 3670, 6-17-86; Ord. 4002, 11-15-88) Sec. 2.104. President.' A. The Village President shall be the presiding officer of all regular and special meetings of the Board of Trustees and at all times when the Board meets as a committee of the whole. B. The Village President may be referred to as Mayor of the Village. 1. The term "Village President" as used in any ordinance, resolution, motion or other action of the corporate authorities shall be construdd as meaning the Mayor; and the term "Mayor" wherever so used shall be construed to mean the Village President. 2. The title "Mayor" as used in the minutes of the meetings of the corporate authorities or any other official document shall be construed as meaning "Village President". (Ord. 2327, 12-7-71) 1. See also Chapter 1 of this Code. HN ARTICLE IL RULES OF ORDER SECTION: 2.201, Conduct of Business 2.202. 2.203. Order Of Business; Regular Meetings Only 2.204. Exception to Reading of Minutes of Previous Meeting Committees; Reports 2.205. Other Rules Of Procedure 2.206. Enforcement of Decorum 2.207, Reconsideration Sec. 1-201. Conduct of Business. A. Quonim: A majority of the President and Board Of Trustees shall constitute a quorum to do business at any regular or special meeting, unless otherwise provided in Paragraph B hereunder, B. Ordinances. Resolutions and Motions: I- With respect to Ordinances, the passage of Purpose shall require: all Ordinances for whatever a. Two (2) readings, (except that this provision can be waived by a majority of the Board of Trustees present at such meeting); and b. The concurrence Of a majority of all the President and Board of Trustees then holding office unless otherwise expressly provided by any other ordinance or Statute governing the passage of any specific ordinance. 2. With respect to resolutions and motions, the passage of the following types Of resolutions or motions shall require the concurrence of a majority of all the President and Board of Trustees then holding office, unless otherwise expressly provided by any other ordinance or Statute governing the passage of any such specific resolution or motion: a. Resolutions or motions creating any liability against the Village. b. Resolutions or motions for the expenditure or appropriation of the money of the Village, 3. Proposed ordinances and resolutions shall be circulated amongst the President and Board of Trustees at least three (3) days prior to the meeting at which same are scheduled to be considered by the President and Board of Trustees, except that this Provision may be waived upon the request of any two (2) members of the Board, UN 2.201 BOARD OF TRUSTEES 2.202 B) 4. For purposes of the Article II, a majority shall be more than one-half ('/) of the President and Board of Trustees then holding office. C. When a Board Member is Not Required to Vote. 1. As a general Wile, no member of the Board of Trustees or the President shall vote on a question in which he has a direct, personal or pecuniary interest. In such case, the office of such person casting such "present" or "pass" vote shall be deemed vacant. 2. While it is the duty of every member of the President and Board of Trustees who has an opinion on any question in which he has no direct, personal or pecuniary interest, to express it by his vote, such member cannot be compelled to do so. a. Such member may prefer to abstain from voting. b. In such instances, a vote "present" or "pass" shall be considered a vote on the prevailing side upon announcing the adoption or rejection of a motion on the floor. (Ord. 2490, 2-19-74; Ord. 4216, 8-7-90) Sec. 2.202. Order of Business; Regular Meetings Only. A. Promptly at the hour set by law on the date of each regular meeting, the Village President, Trustees, Village Clerk and Village Manager shall take their places in the Board Room of the Public Safety Building, unless notice for the meeting specifies another place. B. Immediately thereafter the business of the Board of Trustees shall be taken up in the order found in the written agenda circulated amongst the President and Board of Trustees prior to the meeting date. (Ord. 2490, 2-19-74; Ord. 2920, 7-3-79) C. The said written agenda shall set forth the order of business substantially as follows; 1. Call to order. (Ord. 3172, 12-15-81) 2. Roll Call. 3. Invocation. (Ord. 3172, 12-15-81; Ord. 3670, 6-17-86) 4. Approval of minutes of preceding regular meetings and special meetings, if any. 5. Approval of bills.. IMM 2.202 BOARD OF TRUSTEES 2.203 Q 6. Communications and Petitions - Citizens to be heard. 7. Village President's report (may include proclamations). 8. Old Business. 9. New business. 10. Village Manager's report. 11. Other Business (including items for information only). 12. Adjournment. (Ord. 3172, 12-15-81) D. A waiver of the rules for the purpose of discussing an item not on the written agenda may be requested by any two (2) members of the Board and concurrence of a majority of all the President and Board members present. (Ord. 2490, 2-19-74; Ord. 2920, 7-3-79) Sec. 2.203. Exception to Reading of Minutes of Previous Meeting. Unless a reading of the minutes of a previous Board meeting is requested by a member of the Board of Trustees, such minutes may be approved without reading if the Clerk has previously furnished each Board member with a copy thereof.' (Ord. 2490, 2-19-74) 1. See also Section 2.202C3a of this Chapter 682 2.204 BOARD OF TRUSTEES 2.205 Sec. 2.204. Committees; Reports. A. Committee of the Whole: Working sessions and the discussion of Municipal business shall be undertaken by the Village Board of Trustees sitting as a Committee of the Whole. Minutes shall be taken at all committee meetings and the same shall be submitted to the President and Board of Trustees prior to the next regular meeting of said Board. B. Special and Ad Hoc Committees: Special and Ad Hoc Committees may be appointed by the Village President from time to time to fulfill such purpose as the President shall designate and such committees may be comprised of members of the Village Board of Trustees or of citizens of the community. (Ord. 3172, 12-15-81) Sec. 2.205. Other Rules of Procedure. The following rules of procedure shall govern the conduct of all regular, special and committee meetings of the Board of Trustees, although these rules, other than those prescribed by Statute, may be suspended at any time upon proper motion and consent of the majority of the President and Board of Trustees present at any meeting: A. Rule 1: The President shall decide all questions of order. B. Rule 11: 1. Trustees discussing a question shall address the President and no Trustee has the floor until recognized by the President. (see following page for continued 2.205 B) 682 2.205 BOARD OF TRUSTEES 2.205 B) 2. No other person can address the Board unless being given recognition by the President. C. Rule III: A roll call "Yeas" and "Nays" shall be taken and recorded in the journal of proceedings (minutes) for all ordinances, resolutions or propositions which create any liability against or obligation on the part of the Village, or for the expenditure or appropriation of its money, and in all other instances where requests therefor are made by any Trustee. D. Rule IV: Following any hearing of any matter before any other commission or board of the Village, a detailed report of such commission or board including a recommended order or decision shall be forwarded to the President and Board of Trustees by such commission or board. 1. Such report shall include a minority view and recommendation, if there is any. 2. At least one member of his committee or the chairman of the proper standing committee of the Board of Trustees shall be charged with reviewing the transcript of such hearing as well as such report of such commission or board prior to the time the Board of Trustees will ultimately decide the issues involved. 3. Any standing committee chairman may at his own discretion present a matter for vote direct to the President and Board of Trustees prior to the matter being heard before his committee. 4. At the meeting of the President and Board of Trustees, the chairman of a proper committee may request that the report of such commission or board be referred to his committee provided that he makes such request prior to the matter being heard before the Board of Trustees. The same privilege shall be accorded any other two (2) Trustees of the Board; however, in addition, the privilege shall be extended to that time after a hearing before the Board of Trustees but prior to a vote being taken on the matter. 5. The President of the Board of Trustees shall limit oral argument to ten (10) minutes wherein such argument is made on behalf of petitioners appearing before the Board of Trustees with respect to any report of such commission or board. E. Rule V: At any time prior to the matter being heard before the Board of Trustees, any committee chairman can order any item referred to his charge to be taken up in his committee, rather than to have it first considered by the full Board of Trustees for a final determination of the matter. F. Rule VI: Any committee report to the Board can be deferred for final action thereon to the next regular meeting of the Board after the report is made upon the request of any two (2) Trustees present. 2.205 BOARD OF TRUSTEES 2.206 G. Rule VII: 1. When a motion is before the Board, no other motion shall be in order but the following: a. To adjourn. b. To lay on the table. c. To call the question. d. To postpone to a certain time. f. To amend. g. To send to committee. 2. These motions are privileged and have precedence in the order in which they succeed each other in this rule. 3. Motions to adjourn, to lay on the table, and to call the question shall be decided without debate. H. Rule VIII: A motion to adjourn is always in order, except: 1. When a member is in possession of the floor. 2. When the Yeas and Nays are being called. 3. When adjournment was the last preceding motion. 4. When it has been decided to call the question. Rule IX: 1. In all cases where the rules hereinabove are not applicable, the Board shall be governed by parliamentary law as laid down in Robert's Rules of Order, Revised. 2. In all other cases where the rules hereinabove are in conflict with Robert's Rules of Order, Revised, the former shall control the conduct of the meeting. (Ord. 2490, 2-19-74) Sec. 2.206. Enforcement of Decorum. A. The Chief of Police, or such member or members of the Police Department as he may designate, shall be Sergeant at Arms at all regular and special meetings of the President and Board of Trustees when so requested by the Village President or any member of the Board of Trustees. He shall carry out all orders and instructions given by the President for the purpose of maintaining order and decorum at the said meetings. Upon instructions of the President, it shall be the duty of the Sergeant at Arms to place any person who violates the order and decorum of the meeting under arrest and cause him to be prosecuted under the provisions of this Code, the complaint to be signed by the President. 2.206 BOARD OF TRUSTEES 2.207 B. Any person found guilty under this Section shall be fined not less than ten dollars ($10.00) nor more then five hundred dollars ($500.00) for each offense. (Ord. 2490, 2-19-74) Sec. 2.207. Reconsideration. A. The vote upon the adoption of an ordinance, motion or resolution of the Board may be reconsidered at the same meeting at which the vote was taken or at the next regular meeting on motion of any Trustee not present at the time such ordinance, motion or resolution was adopted, or on the motion of any Trustee previously voting on the prevailing side of such ordinance, motion or resolution. However, no ordinance, motion or resolution shall be rescinded except by the same number of votes which were required to pass the matter sought to be reconsidered. B. Rescinded Action; Special Meetings Only: No vote of the President and Board of Trustees shall be reconsidered or referred at a special meeting, unless there are present at that special meeting as many of the President and Board of Trustees as were present when the vote was originally taken. (Ord. 2490, 2-19-74) DEC 1.7 'K 1' 'aP'] E.' -Ev4, Everette M. Hill Jlr, (3"Z 676-7674 ARNSTEIN & LEHR 120 SOUTH FiVERSIDE PLAZA - SUITE 1200 CHICAGO ILLINOIS V605-31913 (3121 876.7'00 -AX !310) 576-D298 'TELEX' 6*221-il-a M E M 0 R A N 0 U M TO: Mr. Mike Janonis Village of Mo -ant Prospect FROMI Everette M. Hill, Jr. DATES December 17, 1992 REi Village Board Agenda and Voting Procedures 1,'AAQTk(Trr,N I I N(11q WF!Y- OALM IIIIIIACH. %QA0A NILAA:, M, VVACCN&N At a recent meeting with the Mayor, he asked that,we explore the possibility of making certain changes in the agenda order for the Village Board meetings. He suggested that the agenda contain a specific designation of Trustee's Report similar to the Mayor's Report. The Trustee's Report would occur on she agenda just prior to the Mayor's Report. He also suggested that Citizen's Comments and Communications be moved to come after the Mayor's Report. In this way, persons appearing before the Board for honors and proclamations would not have to wait for unrelated and often lengthy comments by citizens. At a subsequent meeting between you and me, you 5,A99csted that we should address these matters in the general context of previously discussed modifications to Village Beard i+cwcedures. You then raised certain specific questions. These questions and my comments follow. 1. What are the legal ramifications of adopting the Mayor's recommendations which I previously noted in this Memo? COMMENT; Since the Mount Prospect Village Code provides a sample agenda Eor the order of Village Board meeting, these recommended changes require that the Board adopt an ordinance amending that section of the Village Code. 2. What are the legal ramifications of adopting a plcori:stnt agenda"? COMMZNT: The Illinois Revised Statutes a' Ch. 24, Section 3-11-17 currently provides for a type of consent agenda which ie called an "omnibus vote". In addition, Mount: Prospect, pursuant to its home rule powers, could provide by ordinance ;for a consent. Mr. Mike Janonis December 17, 1992 Page 2 agenda. Under either system, , any Board member must retain Lhe right to remove an item from the consent agenda. 3. What is the status of our previous discussion with respect to the dropping of the step requiring a vote of concurrence or non-occurrence with a ZBA recommendation? COMMENT: Our zoning ordinance requires an extraordinary vote to override certain recommendations of the Zonirig Board of Appeals. The question was recently raised as to whether this requirements applied to the Board's vote on whether or not to concur with the ZBA or whether it applies to the Board's vote on the adoption of the appropriate ordinance or to both. I had suggested that the Board consider eliminating the step requiring a vote on concurrence or non -concurrence with the ZBA recommendation and simply require an extraordinary majority vote on the appropriate ordinance. This would eliminate possible confusion, save time, and in my opinion not deprive a resident of sufficient opportunity to address the issues before the Board. 4. Are there legal problems with our tradition of starting our meetings with an invocation and would we' be less likely to have legal prob:ems if we replace that with the Pledge of Allegiance? COMMENT: As you know, it is Impossible to predict how the courts will vote an separation of church and state issues. Currently, both houses of Congress still begin business with an invocation. Additionally, I know of no cases which have indicated that such a practice violates the Constitution. Nonetheless, it is probably only a matter of time before someone challenges such a practice. If there is an inclination to make such a change, it might be best to do it now, since it is often more difficult for a governmental body to make changes when it feels pressure from outside influences. S. Nay we require that persons wishing to address the Board sign in? COMMENT: Yes, we may have such a requirement. Other municl-p-a =itiea with whom I have been associated require persons addressing the Board to sign in. 6. Are there legal impediments to establishing an 11:00 p.m. curfew on Board meetings if such a curfew may be waived by majority vote of the Board for individual meetings? CORKENT; No there are no such legal impediments. Once againp tF%ls is becoming a fairly common practice among Illinois municipalities. Mr. Mike Janonis December 17, 1992 Page 3 7. What are the legal ramifications of establishing limits on the amount of time that a person may take when addressing the Board? COMMENT: There are no legal impediments to limiting the amount ot time a person may take in addressing the Board. Keep in mind that our Village Code already limits to ten minutes the amount of time that a person may take to address the Board or, most zoning issues. S. Illinois laws are very inconsistent with respect to the number and nature of votes necessary for Board approval of matters before it. This inconsistency leads to practical difficulties and occasionally litigation over whether the proper number of votes were cast by the proper persons. May Mount Prospect as a home rule municipality standardize its voting requirements in order to avoid these problems? COMMENT: I think this is an idea whose time has come. I have IlTa—c7ed to this memo a list which I recently compiled of various voting requirements. Even with these''Icheat sheets" the requirements are confusing. The problem is not so much whether extraordinary majority votes should be required, the problem is in discerning whether that vote must be cast by a majority of those present, a majority of those elected and present, a majority of the trustees, or a majority of the corporate authorities. while there may be a valid reason for requiring extraordinary majority votes in some instances, i.e., sale of Village real estate or dispensing with bid requirements, I think most people would agree that most of these voting distinctions do not make sense. As a home rule municipality, Mount Prospect has the ability to standardize these voting requirements unless, in individual instances, we have been preempted by state law from doing so. At present, I am not' aware of any such individual preemption. 9. May the Board adopt an ordinance which sets forth all voting requirements in one place in the Village Code? COMMENT: Yes, the Board may do this. Further if we proceed with standa dizing voting requirements then putting them in one place in the Code should be a fairly simple project. if you have any questions, please contact me. \\HGM'\EMH2A-19 3 EXTRAORDINARY VOTING REQUIREMENTS Required 5u4�'eet Harter Citation votes ,:o override veto Of Village President 31-11-19 4 trustees To vacate streets and alloys 11-9-1 5 Trustees (Affirmative Vote) :0 approve zoning amendment over 20% 11-13-14 % Trustees kAffirmative Vote) property owner proteQt- To amend coning set -back lines 11-14-3 2/3 Corporate Auth. (Affirmative Vote) To approve Annexation Agreements 11-15.1-3 2/3 Corporate Auth. To increase Street and Bridge tax to 11-81-2 3/4 Corporate Auth. from .068 .108 To establish Street light tax 4 Trustees TO make additional emergency appropriations 8-1-6 2/3 Corporate Auth. To commence needed public worprior to adoption Of Appropriation Ord. 8-1-7 2/3 Corporate Auth. To make interdepartmental transfers of appropriated sums exceeding St after 2/3 Corporate Auth. 6 months 8-2-5.6 (Affirmative Vote) To lease or purchase real or personal property 11-11611-1 2/3 Corporate Auth. (Agfirmative Vote) To exchange real estate 11-76.2-1 2/3 corporate AUth. 11-76.2-3 (Affirmative Vote) To sell or lease away public 3/4 corporate Auth. property 11-76-1 (Affirmative Vote) To lease equipment or machinery 11-76-6 2/3 Corporate AUth. (Affirmative Vote) 2/3 Cnrpofate Authority = 5 Trustees or 4 Trustee$ Village President 3/4 Corporate Authority 6 Trustees or 5 Trustees Village President If affirmative vote is required, abstentions are not counted with majority The Village President must vote when any extraordinary malority is required. Jrt. 54ext Malar _ Citation Reauiftd Votu To override veto of Mayor 3.11.19 4 Trustees To vacate streets or alleys 119.1 5 Trustees (Affirmative vote) To approve zoning amendment over 20% 11-13.14 4 Trustees property owner protest V.C. !4.8W1 C) (Affirmative vote) To amend zoning set -back lines 11-14-3 2/3 Corporate Auth. (Affirmative vote) To approve Annexation Agreements 11-13.1 3 2/3 Corporate Auth. V.C. 8.510(B) To increase Street and Bridge tax from .06%a to .10%n 11-81.2 3/4 Corporate Auth. To establish street light tax 1140.5 4 Trustees To make additional emergency appropriations 8.1.6 213 Corporate Auth. To commence needed public work prior to adoption of Appropriation Ordinance 8-1-7 2/3 Corporate Auth. To make interdepartmental transfers of appropriated suras exceeding 5% after 6 months or to revise the annual 8-2.9 2/3 Corporate Auth. budget officer's budget 8-2-9.6 (Affirmative vote) To lease or purchase real or personal 11.76.1.1 2/3 Corporate Auth. property (Affirtnative vote) To exchange real estate 11.76.2.1 2/3 Corporate Auth. 11-76.2.3 (Affirmative vote) To lease equipment or machinery 11-76-6 2/3 Curpurate Auth. (Affirmative vote) To grant zoning variation over negative V.C. 14.606(C) 2/3 Corporate Auth. ZBA report (Affirmative vote) To grant zoning variation within 6 months of Comprehensive Plan adoption V.C. 14.604(C) 2/3 Corporate Auth. Togrant zoning amendment within 6 months V.C. 14.806(D) 4 Trustees of Comprehensive Plan adoption. (Affirmative vote) To grant special use over negative ZBA report V.C. 14.705(1) 2/3 of quorum Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois 50 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM V TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS FROM: EVERETTE M. HILL, JR DATE: AUGUST 27, 1992 SUBJECT: SUPER MAJORITY VOTE ON VARIATIONS The question has arisen as to whether a super majority vote of the Village Board is required to adopt a Variation Ordinance when the Board has already voted by a super majority to accept an affirmative recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Answer. Yes, a super majority vote by the Village Board is required. Under the Village of Mount Prospect variation system, certain variations may be granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Others may be granted only by the President and Board of Trustees after a hearing before the ZBA- Section 14.606 of the Zoning Ordinance states the following: Alm variation which fails to receive the approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals in the form of a favorable recommendation to the President and Board of Trustees of the Village shall not be granted except by a favorable vote of two- thirds (2/3) of all of the members of the President and Board of Trustees of the Village, present and voting." The super majority vote rule pertains to the Board action that actually grants the variation. The question then becomes whether the variation is granted when the vote is taken on whether or not to concur with the Zoning Board of Appeals or when the Ordinance is adopted. The answer is found in the language of Section 14.606(A): " Within fifteen (15) days after the last public hearing or meeting held on any matter requiring variation by ordinance the recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be forwarded to the President and Board of Trustees of the Village, as well as to the Village Clerk and the Zoning Administrator." (emphasis added) The Section speaks specifically of "Variations by Ordinance." It does not discuss "Variations by the Village Board." Clearly, the actual granting of the Variation does not occur until the Ordinance is adopted. Therefore, the super majority vote rule applies to the final vote on the Ordinance. Recommendation: It is my recommendation that the Village Board consider dispensing with the vote on whether or not to concur with the Zoning Board of Appeals in variation matters. The vote on the Ordinance to grant the variation should also serve as the vote on concurrence. Under current practice, we have two distinct votes by the same deliberative body on the very same issue. This may lead to difficulties. Our practice of not adopting an Ordinance except on second reading gives the public and petitioner ample opportunity to present their views and gives the Board ample opportunity to recommend changes in the Ordinances. The small benefit derived from the additional vote is far outweighed by the disadvantages of additional delay and confusion. If you have any questions, please contact me. Everette M. Hill, Jr. EMH/rcc Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR GERALD L. FARLEY FROM: GEORGE A. CLOWES DATE: OCTOBER 30, 1992 SUBJECT: VILLAGE BOARD AGENDA I plan to bring up the following proposal during 'Any Other Business' at next Tuesday's Board meeting: I propose we add two new items to the standard agenda: 1. 'Recognition of Citizens and Employees' (This would follow 'Approval of Minutes' and precede 'Citizens to be Heard') 2. 'Trustee Requests/ Reports' (This would follow 'Mayor's Report') The first item, 'Recognition of Citizens and Employees,' would permit you to present awards and to recognize citizens and employees without the need for their families, relatives, and young children to sit through prolonged presentations under 'Citizens to be Heard.' The addition of the second item, 'Trustee Requests/ Reports,' is proposed because currently Trustees do not have a formal spot on the Board agenda. Under the present format, a Trustee may raise an issue or a question only as the last priority under 'Any Other Business,' which comes just before the meeting is adjourned, when everyone else has had their say, and when most people are ready to go home. I don't particularly like this setup since it implies (a) that Trustees shouldn't really be raising questions or issues that are not on the agenda; (b) that when Trustees do have issues and questions to raise, these issues and questions are of a lower priority than any other business the Village may conduct at the meeting. For comparison purposes, when I served on the Park Board I always had an opportunity to bring up any issues or questions early on in the agenda of every Board meeting since the Park Board President called for reports from each Committee Chairman (see sample agenda attached). In addition, I've noted from attending meetings of High School District 214 that their agenda always has a specific item on it for 'Board Requests/Reports' (see sample agenda attached). George Clowes CCillage Trustees�``� AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE M'r. PHUSPECT PARK D1Srh1Q* BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DECEMBER 20, 1989 8:00 P. M. Call to Order Roll Call Approval of Agenda Minutes Committee of the Whole Meeting - August 10, 1989 Long Range Planning - September 13, 1969 Golf/Committee of the Whole - October 24, 1969 Finance Committee of the Whole November 15, ly69 Regular Board Meeting - November 15, 1989 Residents to be Heard Committee Chairmen Reports: - Finance - Building and Grounds - Recreation - Go If - Long Range Planning - Policy Approval of Accounts Payable Director's Report Attorney's Report Old Business Nev Business - 1990 Budget and Appropriation - Resolution 260 Directing the Cook County Clerk to add nothing for Losses and Costs to the 1989 Bond and Interest Levy 7 n ]Bids 9 �. I 14, Correspondence Adjournment Executive Session Personnel The Second Regular Meeting for the Month of October of the Board of Education of Township Hip School District 214 will be held on Thursday. October 22, 1992 in the Board Room at the TM FOREST VIEW EDUCATIONAL tIllinoisat s:00 -p.m. 2121 S. Goebbert Rd, Arlingt L CALL T ORDER president Zimmanck II. ROIL CAM M. APPROVAL FRegula�e� of October S. 1992 IV. SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT Student Recognition School Report Card V. CITIZENS REQUESTS VI. BOARD REQUESTS/REPORTS VII. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 92-229 Accounts Payable 92-230 Personnel Transaction Report 92-231 1992-93 School District Assurances for Compliance 92-232 Staff Recognition Programgoof 92-233 FV Educational Center "'A°' Building VIII. DISCUSSION ITEMS Constitutional Amendment for School Funding 92.234 92-233 1993-94 Faiee Improvement Program Education Association 92-236 E with (No Presentation Materials.) 92-237 Meeting Locations 1992-93 (No Presentation Materials) IX. ACTION ITEMS 92-238 Aq, ,dome Use Agreement District Hearing Officer 92-239 Appointment of (No Presentation Material) 92-240 Extennsion sion Presentation Mat rials) X ADJOURNMENT The Board of Education of Township High school District 214 in compliance with the American With Disabilities Act invites per nsith hisiimeatlwho of haeme ques�e accommodatabout dations to allow them to o•serm andJor pa •c+ceasibiliity of the meeting or facilities, contact the Community Relations Coordinator at 384 - Sass Ord. No. 2499 Res. No. 880 AGENDA First Meeting of the Month village Of Hoffman Estates Village Board of Trustees Regular Meeting of November 2, 1992 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. 4, APPROVAL OF AGTrNDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES (Minutes of October 19, 1992) 5. APPROVAL OF BILLS 6, PRESIDENTS REPORT ...Proclamations Telephone Pioneer Month 7. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT 8. VILLAGE CLERKS REPORT 9. KECOGNITION Of AUDIENCE 10. COMMISSION REPORTS A. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS — Chairman Wiwat 1, Request by Ronald Mensch, 1265 West Dexter Lane, for a 7 foot variation from Section 9-3.6-1 to Permit a storage shed to be located 0 feet from the western edge of an txlstlilg dwelling structure, instead of the rninita= required 7 feet, vAth I condition (see packets). Voting: 5 Nays, 2 Absent (Hernandez, Baricza) Motion failed construction rwo Won a requeg (Ir11* I ed) Z. Request by Sandra Puntos, 209 2 Sutherland Place, for a 2 foot variation from Req 7� Section Y -3-6-E-3 to allow an existing deck to emend 17 feet beyond the " 1— dwelling structure instead of the maximum permitted 15 feet, with I condition (see packets). Voting: 5 Ayes, 2 Absent (Hernandez, Baric2a) n MotioMotion tried. 3, equest by Poplar Creek Bowl, 2354 W. Higgins Road, for a variation from internally illuminated wall sip Section 9.3 -8 -N -10-a-(5) to permit an existing with a total surface area of 64 square feet to be altered to read "Officials Out" and "A Sports Grill" and include a reader board, with 2 conditions (sem packets). Voting: 5 Ayes, 2 Absent (Ilernandzz, Baricza) Motion carried. (Imme"e coniftuction resoMon is requeed) 4., Request for text amendments #n Section: 9-2.1 (Definitions). 9-3-3 (fences, �j - -3.9 (Sips) of the Zoning Shrubs, Hedges and Decorative Structures) and 9 `rd�'o cwe as yrvpuavd hi stairs text amendment overview dated October 22, 1992. Voting: 5 Ayes, 2 Absent (Stute, Sonnenberg) Motion carried. November 2, 1992 page 2 10. COMMISSION REPORTS -,, C,9a1iW2d 5. Request reconsideration of request by Daniel Recupido, 3980 Charlenupe Drive, for a 5 foot variation from Section 9.3 -3 -C -2-a to permit an existingV111 picket fence to be located .5 feet from the southern side yard lot line instead of the required I foot. 6. Request reconsideration of request by Daniel Recupido, 3980 Charlemagne Drive, for a variation from Section 9.3 -3 -C -2-a to permit an existing picket fence in a required side yard adjacent to a street to be 39% open instead of the required 50%. 11, ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION (FIRST READING) A. Request Board approval for Ordinance No. an ordinance 0 amending Section 12-4.2-C of the 14offrman-F.vaies ?Tulni-ctp-al Code (late penalty - water bills) - (Finance Committee recommends approval) Rvqucst Board approval for Ordinance No. an ordinance amending Section 4-6-8, Promotions - Merit m Seniority, of e Municipal rp Code of the Village of Hoffman Estates (fire cap ain eligibility list) -- (Request C. Wthw of Firw Rea" Request Boad approval for Ordinance No. an ordinance amending Section 4-6-8, Promotions - Merit - Seniority, of the Municipal ,�Mode of the Village of Hoffman Estates (fire captain eligibility ty list) 12. CONSENT CALENDAR AND SECOND READING Ord. No. 24" Re#- No. $80 Qzdfnancefs) A. Request Board approval for Ordinance No. cZ q -1' -an ordinance granting a deck variation to premises at 860 kxedale ane, o Estates. B. Request Board approval for Ordinance No. ' i -, '0 -an ordinance granting a side yard variation and a fence variation to premises at 3980 Charlemagne Drive, Hoffman Estates. C. Request Board approval for Ordinance No. ;,SO 0/�* an ordinance granting a fence variation to 1490 Nottingham Lane, Ho—an Estates. NEW BUSINESS 1, Xequest Board approval of the request by Robinson Development, Inc (developer) for permit approval for Casey Farms Unit T (lot 99) under Section 11-6-3A of the Hoffman Estates Municipal Code ("subsequent developer ordinance") -- (Pitvirlitig, Building a Zorting CQinrnittee recommends approval) November 2, 1992 NEW BUSINESS .. QvItIpUld Pap 3 2. Request Board approval of the request by Lunn Limitcd Homes (developer) for permit approval for Casey Farms Unit II (lots 31 and 32) under Section 11-6-3A of the Hoffman Estates Municipal Code ("subsequent developer ordinance") and release of open space for proposed duplex units -- (Planning Building & Zoning Committee recommends approval) 3X Request Board authorization to execute Intergovernmental Agreement with the Village of Schaumburg for traffic signal preemption constfucLiull and installation. (Public; Works Commirree recommends approval) 4, Request Board approval of the FY93 proposed budget calendar. (Finance J/ Committee recommends approval) 5. Request Board authorization to: a) award contract for development of traffic hugauL fee program for the Western Area to Gewalt-Hamilton Associates, Inc,, Northbrook, 11, joint venture at a not to exceed amount cf $74,810; b) purchase a computer workstation at a not to exceed amount of 53,00, and C) enter into an agreement with Seam 40 utilize impa­ fee funds for the purpose of developing a traffic impact fee prugram for the Western Area (New Item) /(Planning Area. & Zoning Committee recommends approval of a) and b)) 6, / Request Board authorization to renew agreement for 1992-93 with Illinois Department of Transportation for utilization of Village of Roffman Estates' salt storage facility for storage of up to 100 tons of salt. (Public Works ommirtee recommends approval) 7 Request Board authorization to renew for 1993 calendar year contract janitorial services for: a) 1900 Hassell Road to Totai Facility Maintenance, Wooddalo, II, in amount of $3,554 per month (low alternate bid); b) 1200 Gannoa Drive to Top Performance Operations, Palatine, IL in amount of $1,475 per month (low alternate bid); and c) 2305 Pembroke Avenue to Admiral Maintenance Service Company, Lincolnwood, U- in amount of $900 per month (low alternate bid), (Public Works Committee recommends apptovul) 8. Request Board authorization to award contract for 1992.93 purchase of liquid calcium chloride to Sfcalco Ltd,, Alsip, IL (low bid) in amount not to exceed $3,615. (Public Works Committee recommends approval) 9. Request Burd autborimtion to award contract for installation of water supply cross connection control plumbing improvements in various muilicipul buildings to r-isenhauer Industries, Villa Park, IL (low bid) In amount of $24,000. (Public Works Committee recommends approval) lu. Request Board authorization to award contract for: /a) purchase of one (1) Model 40-400 diagnostic test machine to Bear Automotive Service Equipment Co., Elgin, IL in amount of $20,195; and b) purchase of five (5) years of full warranty coverage and annual software updates at total cost of $12,877. (Public Works Committee recommends approval) November 2. 1992 page 4 M NEW BUSINESS •. contkntt�s! 11. Request Board authorization to: % a) waive formal bidding; and b) award contract for pavement investigation for Bode Road reconstruction project to Soil and Material Consultants, Inc., ,Arlington Heights, IL, (lowest acceptable quote) in the amount of $4,038. (Public Works Committee recommends approval) 12. , Request Board authorization to approve a Supplemental Agreement with Qviltech Engineering, Itasca, 14 to provide engineering services for the emergency vehicle signal pre-emption project . stage two, in a not to exceed fee of $3,948. (Public Works Committee recommends approval) 13. TRUSTEE COMMENTS 14. ADJOURNMENT n 7:30 PM VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING - 8:00 PM COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE (OR IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING) BUSINESS & GOVERNMENT RELATIONS AGENDA VILLAGE OF PALATINE BOARD OF TRUSTEES MONDAY, MAY 13, 1991 I ROLL CALL II PLEDGE TO THE FLAG III PUBLIC HEARING: Rezoning to R-2 After Annexation English Valley Subdivision (DISTRICT 3) Bounded by Dundee to the North; Peppertree to the East; Cunningham Drive to the South; and Smith Street to the West IV APPROVAL OF MINUTES Regular Meeting of April 22, 1991 Special Meeting of April 29, 1991 V RECOGNITION OF AUDIENCE Non Agenda Items VI CONSENT AGENDA *Letters of Credit VII REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES A. Administration Finance & Legislation - Tr. Sherman 1. As submitted B. Business & Government Relations - Tr. Solberg 1. As submitted C. Flood & Water -Tr. Harris 1. As submitted - D. Health Safety & Welfare - Tr. Varroney 1. As submitted continued AGENDA - VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES MONDAY, MAY 13, 1991 - PAGE 2 E. Planning Building & Zoning - Tr, Wilson 1. Consider Letters of Support, Little City Group Homes A. 619 E. Palatine Road DISTRICT 6 B. 1020 N. Ridgewood DISTRICT 3 2. Consider an Ordinance Granting a Special Use for a Cellular C ­ Telephone Installation Facility at 140 E. NW Hwy (Southwestern Bell) DISTRICT 6 3. Consider an Ordinance of Involuntary Annexation 313 and 373 N. Quentin DISTRICT 1 4. As submitted F. Streets & Traffic - Tr. Jack Wagner 1. As submitted VIII REPORTS OF VILLAGE OFFICERS A. VILLAGE PRESIDENT 1. Consider Appointments to Boards and Commissions A. Mary Baker Morris, Zoning Board of Appeals B. Kenneth Marek, Zoning Board of Appeals C. Nancy Masterson, Beautification Committee 2. Proclamation: Lou Richter, Service to Zoning Board of Appeals 3. Proclamation: Capt. Joe Pannhausen, Service to Fire Department 4. Certificates of Appreciation: A. Rosemary Mango, Board of Health B. James Clegg, Zoning Board of Appeals C. Dennis Born, Zoning Board of Appeals 5. Proclamation: Palatine Womens Club - 50th Anniversary 6. Proclamation: Public Works Week - May 19-25 7. Proclamation: Salvation Army "Silver Whistle" Program Village Theater - May 23, 1991 8. Proclamation: Buckle Up America Week - May 20-27 9. As submitted B. VILLAGE MANAGER 1. Consider Acceptance. of Inspection Report - Illinois Department of Corrections 2. Consider a Resolution Ascertaining Prevailing Wages 3. Consider Request for Closed Session: Pending and Potential Litigation 4. As submitted continued AGENDA - VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES MAY 13, 1991 - PAGE 3 C. VILLAGE CLERK 1. As submitted D. VILLAGE ATTORNEY 1, As submitted Ix COMMUNICATIONS & PETITIONS X REPORTS OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES X1 ADJOURNMENT