Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW Meeting Packet 06/29/1993Minutes COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE May 25, 1993 1. ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Mayor Gerald L. Farley. Present at the meeting were: Trustees George Clowes, Timothy Corcoran, Richard Hendricks, Paul Hoefert, Michaels Skowron and Irvana Wilks. Also present at the meeting were: Village Manager Michael Janonis, Village Attorney Everette Hill, Police Chief Ronald Pavlock, and Human Services Director Nancy Morgan. In addition, three members of the media were in attendance. 11. MINUTES OF MAY 11, 1993 The minutes of May 11, 1993, were accepted and filed. 111. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD No citizens to be heard. IV. CONTINUATION OF REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF DRAFT PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY/KEG TAGGING ORDINANCES Mayor Farley stated that the proposed Parental Responsibility/Keg Tagging Ordinance discussion had been continued from the last Committee of the Whole meeting to invite public reaction. At that last meeting there were two suggestions for revising the ordinance which Trustee Clowes described. 1. NEGLIGENCE STANDARD APPLIED TO CONTROL OF PREMISES Paragraph 123.3 Section E-2 was revised to respond, to the concerns raised by the previous Board. It should read as follows: Any person in control of a premises, who knowingly or negligently fails to maintain supervision to such an extent that an alcoholic beverage is consumed on the premises by an underage person. 2. PENALTY FOR ALCOHOL IMPAIRED UNDERAGE DRIVER The change now provides for the situation where an alcohol impaired underage drinker who is operating a motor vehicle but not transporting alcohol is subject to car impoundment and penalties. 1 Trustee Clowes updated the Board on the Keg Tagging ordinance. His group thought the number on the keg was a serial number, but it was actually a number indicating the type of beer and an expiration date. Therefore the number could not be used for tracking purposes. He would like to work with the Illinois Retail Merchants Association and the State to have bar code ID tags attached to kegs on a state wide level to enable proper tracking. His group will need more time to develop this aspect of the ordinance. TAP -Mount Prospect's subcommittee, Youth Organizations of Mount Prospect, has put together a youth calendar, and will work with TCI to produce a show about the subcommittee's activities. The Mount Prospect Park District has developed "Club Rec Plex" which will offer special activities for ' youth during the summers. A discussion ensued regarding out -of -district youth attending "Club Rec Plex" for the listed price. Village Manager Jannis reminded the public about the Memorial Day Parade to be held on May 31, 1993, at 9:30 a.m., and the Jaycee's Carnival this weekend. He requested that the Board cancel the Committee of the Whole meeting on the fourth Tuesday in June and reschedule it for the fifth Tuesday in June when discussion will be held on capital equipment replacement. The Police and Fire Departments will be moving and the extra week will allow them time for the discussion preparation. VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS Trustee Hoefert asked about the speed enforcement on Central Road. Police Chief Pavlock reported 'that we have worked with Des Plaines and they are helping us run radar at St. Emily's. Both communities have issued many tickets. Mount Prospect has run radar at Public Works and we have issued many tickets. Trustee Wilks remarked that she had attended a D.A.R.E. graduation and was very impressed with the entire program. VII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 P.M. R sp full submitted, )ancygan y Human ices Director I COMMITTEE OFTHE WHOLE June 8, 1993 Due to a thunderstorm which occurred, electric power was lost at the Senior Center building. The Committee of the Whole Meeting was cancelled and rescheduled for 7:00 P.M. June 29th, 1993' Items listed on the Committee of the Whole Agenda for Tuesday—, June 8, 7993 will be discussed at that time. An informal discussion was held with members of the Village Board present - Trustees George C]uwes, Timothy Corcoran, Paul Hoefert^ Michaele 5kowron° Irvana Wilks and Mayor Gerald L. Farley, along with Manager Michael Janonis" concerning purchase of two Public Works vehicles. Due to the fact the time limit on the bid price for the vehicles was to expire on June JO, 1993, the consensus of the parties present was to allow the Public Works Director to give a verbal approval to the bidder for the purchase of the vehicles. Formal discussions and consideration of approval of the purchase of the vehicles will be on the Village Board Agenda June 16, 1093. Respectfully Submitted Inspection Services Director C@:rm cc: file Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois ' INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR GERALD L. FARLEY AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM: VILLAGE MANAGER DATE: JUNE 7, 1993 SUBJECT: ST. EMILY'S SCHOOL CROSSING FACTS, DISCUSSION POINTS, POLICY ISSUES Tuesday evening's discussion regarding alternatives for the St. Emily's school crossing at Central Road and Horner Lane will likely be difficult because any time the topic of discussion is child safety emotions take center stage while other legitimate and important factors might be relegated to secondary status. You are likely to hear the phrase "What is a child's life worth" several times during the course of the evening. Discussion regarding cost, benefit, cost-sharing, and responsibility may be met with claims of non -caring, or putting dollars before safety. Yet they are legitimate factors which should be considered in arriving at a conclusion. Conditions do warrant some kind of response. Safety for children and the Crossing Guard is a legitimate concern. The question is what is the appropriate response given all of the various factors. I can appreciate the dificulty in trying to reconcile the safety issue with the other extremely legitimate concerns surrounding this topic. In an effort to assist you in your deliberations 1 offer the following Facts, Discussion Points, and Policy Issues: STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: (How did we get here) Traffic conditions along this stretch of Central Road warrant some change from the current school crossing arrangement. " Safety concerns apply not only to the children but also to the Crossing Guard. • The problem exists primarily during the school year (approximately 9 months) for about one (1) hour each morning and one (1) hour each afternoon that the children are in school. * Due to safety concerns, the Police Chief made a recommendation to remove the Crossing Guard from the Central/Homer Intersection. * That recommendation was communicated to St. Emily's and precipitated the request for the stop light. * Staff has reviewed the situation in an effort to identify cptions which 1) reduce the safety hazard; 2) in a cost effective manner; and 3) apportions the cost. If any, equitably based on benefit. FACTS: (Numbers are approximate and are based on observation, discussion, and the results of a 1992 Police Department Survey", 8-9 Elementary School children cross at this intersection on a daily basis. ± 60 other children who live south of Central Road get to school by other means. All but one of the 8-9 children using this intersection live in Des Plaines. One child lives in the Boxwood area; is driven to school; is dropped off on the south side of Central Road and crosses back north to school. * Approximately 250 students are bussed to and from St. Emily's - mainly through contractual arrangements with School District 26. * Apparently there is no bus service available for St. Emily children who live south of Central Road. It is unknown why bus service is unavailable. * There is a State reimbursement program which underwrtes part of the cost for bus service. I believe the reimbursement is directly to the parents and it does not matter if the school is public, private, or parochial. DISCUSSION POINTS: (Additional information from others that would be helpful in arriving at a conclusion) * What discussion has taken place among the St. Emily's School Board and the parents of school children. What options have they explored. * What is the status of bus service for children south of Central Road. What options have been pursued. What are the costs of those options. * How is bus service provided for children who live north of Central Road. Who pays for it. Does St. Emily's subsidize the service. Can the contract be extended to cover the area in question. * Have the parents been made part of the discussion. Are there special circumstances involved with the 8-9 children who walk so that their parents are unable to get them to school like the other t 60 children who live south of Central Road. * Has the St. Emily's School Board approached the City of Des Plaines and sought its assistance. What was the response. * What is the City of Des Plaines' position regarding this matter. * Has the school surveyed the neighbors to get their reaction to the request. POLICY ESTION : * Who is responsible for getting the children to school safely: Parents, school, Des Plaines, Mount Prospect. • What precedent does this set for future requests. * No funds budgeted for this project in F.Y. 93/94. • What cost/benefit is this project compared to other Mount Prospect needs. * Mount Prospect is facing deficit conditions in F.Y. 94/95; continuing weak economy does not help situation. * If a stop light is installed, should there be cost sharing due to direct benefit to St. Emily's and Des Plaines and limited benefit to Mount Prospect. MISCELLANEOUS: * There is likely to be discussion regarding traffic concerns separate from the school crossing issue, i.e., Sunday worship services, after school activities, parent pick-up and drop-off. As with the crossing issues, these other problems are time specific and limited in frequency. * The current Central Road lane profile provides for a center tum lane that assists with ingress and egress at the site. * Many of the alternative options will require the continued presence of a crossing guard, including the stop light option. * The presence of the stop light will likely give rise to more after hours use by children who will still be at some risk without a crossing guard present. * Besides the traffice control options outlined in the Engineering Division memo, the following alternatives should also be considered: - Discontinue Crossing Guard; parents to transport children - School to make provision for bus service. - Des Plaines assume responsibility for crossing children. This would likely require presence of a patrol officer in order to provide an adequate measure of protection for crossing guard and children. I anticipate a spirited discussion regarding this item. If you require further information or clarification please contact me, MICI, N NI S MEJfjbb M Chief Pavlock Walter Douthwaite, Des Plaines City Manager Sister Danielle, St. Emily's Principal A-1607MGR.MEM CENTRAL ROAD TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT DETAIL MAY 26, 1993 - JUNE 7, 1993 TIMES OF THE TRAFFIC DETAIL' 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM 3:00 PM -5:00 PM THE TRAFFIC DETAIL WAS IN EFFECT MONDAY THRU FRIDAY EXCLUDING MEMORIAL DAY. 34.5 HOURS WERE DEDICATED TO THIS DETAIL FROM 5/6 TIL 617 17�5H(JURS SPENT IN THE AREA OF CENTRAL AND CATHY 17.0 HOURS WERE SPENT IN THE AREA OF ST. EMILY'S SCHOOL 14 TICKETS WERE ISSUED AT!aAIHY AND,LENIML 3 WARNINGS WERE ISSUED 24 TICKETS WERE ISSUED NEAR $I-EMLYaaQB0-QL 4 WARNINGS WERE ISSUED JS M.P.H.raid -THF -SPEED -LIMU WAS THE AVERAGE SPEED FOR TICKETS ISSUED THE 3-11 SHIFT SUPERVISOR REPORTED THAT HIS OFFICERS HAD A DIFFICULT TIME ISSUING TICKETS DURING THEIR SHIFT DUE TO THE HEAVY TRAFFIC FLOW� VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 60056 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Mike Janonis, Village Manager FROM: Jeff Wulbecker, Engineering Coordinator] DATE: June 4, 1993 SUBJECT: Student/Pedestrian Crossing Central Road and Homer Lane As you requested the Engineering Division has analyzed the subject intersection concerning student/pedestrian crossings. Studies have been performed to determine if traffic controls are warranted at this intersection. In conjunction with the 1989 improvements to Central Road, the Illinois Department of Transportation completed counts of pedestrian movements, traffic volumes and accident data. The project development report stated that warrants for traffic control were not met. On May 26, 1993 new pedestrian counts were taken to determine if conditions had changed and warrants were now met. The peak hourly count of pedestrian/students crossing the west leg of the Central and Homer intersection was 8 (all students). A peak hourly pedestrian count of 150 or more is considered to warrant traffic control. On June 2, 1993, a traffic gap study was performed to determine if adequate gaps in traffic are available for safe pedestrian crossing of Central Road. Fifteen seconds was determined to be the necessary safe crossing time. An average of 20 gaps per hour were found available for pedestrians to cross during the peak pedestrian hours. This translates to an average of 1 gap per every three minutes. While it is recommended that the gaps occur one per minute at a school crossing, due to the extremely low volume of pedestrians, traffic control does not seem warranted. The Engineering Division also reviewed five alternate traffic control applications for the Central and Homer intersection to facilitate safe pedestrian crossing. 1.) The Village considered installation of traffic signals in conjunction with the 1989 improvements to Central Road by the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT). Pedestrian movements, traffic volumes and accident data were evaluated for traffic and/or pedestrian signal warrants. The project development report stated that warrants for signals were not met. The construction cost for signals would be $120,000. The maintenance cost would be $100 per month. 2.) STOP SIG'y While a stop sign would allow gaps in traffic to permit pedestrian crossings, it would cause a significant in erruption in the smooth flow of traffic on Central Road. A stop sign or,. Central Road would be unprecedented in Mount Prospect. As a matter of fact, no stop sign exists on Central for the lengths of Arlington Heights, Mount Prospect and Des Plaines. The cost of the stop sign would be minimal, consisting of the cost for 4 stop signs with posts, 2 stop ahead signs with posts and the necessary stop bar pavement markings, approximately $1,000. 4VIVOMMONIEWIts 010;8M ` This item is no longer a standard item for traffic control and should not be considered at this location. I believe a blinking overhead light would give pedestrians a false sense of security about crossing Central Road. Pedestrians would anticipate that all traffic will stop to allow safe crossing of the street. However, the blinking light would create an unexpected stop for the motorists, possibly causing confusion and becoming a source of accidents. A pedestrian light, activated by a pedestrian, pushing a button to stop traffic and allow passage across Central Road world present an unexpected interruption in the smooth flow of traffic on Central Road. Since this signal would be used so infrequently, it would catch motorists by surprise, possible causing accidents and providing pedestrians with a sense of safe crossing which may not exist. * .. g 1 _ r "!Ill. + The section of Central Road between Busse Road and Wolf Road which includes the segment in front of St. Emily's School has the lowest existing speed limit of any 4 lane section of Central Road in Rolling Meadows, Arlington Heights, Mount Prospect or Des Plaines. The speed limit is 35 miles per hour as opposed to 40 and 45 miles per hour in all other sections. In addition the section between Marcella and Horner is posted as a 20 mile per hour school speed zone. A reduction in the speed limit would cause two problems concerning pedestrian crossings of Central Road. First, while the average speed on Central Road would be reduced, the disparity or difference in range of speeds would increase. With motorias travelling at a wider range of speeds, this tends to reduce the number of safe crossing gaps available for pedestrians. The more cars that travel at similar speeds and remain bunched together, the more safe crossing ;daps are created. Secondly a reduction in the speed limit without continuous enforcement will, create a false perception of safety and could lead to an increase in pedestrian accidents. JAW/m Vitlage of Mount ProspectCu@ Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM Df) TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: RONALD W. PAVLOCK, CHIEF OF POLICE SUBJECT: ST. EMILY SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD - HORNER & CENTRAL RECOMMENDATION TO ELIMINATE DATE: 12 OCTOBER 92 Last winter Deputy Chief Richardson was advised by the Crossing Guard Coordinator that it was her opinion and the opinion of the current crossing guard that the crossing at Horner & Central (St. Emily's) was not safe. This concern was reviewed and Deputy Chief Richardson asked that the Chief's office contact the school and discuss alternatives to a crossing guard. On February 7, 1992 police department staff, working with school staff, sent forty-seven surveys to the families affected by this crossing. The survey results indicated that only nine families use the crossing and the other thirty-eight (only 27 responded) apparently car pool. Sister Luke, Principal of St. Emily's, and I reviewed the surveys and came up with the attached recommendation. On May 12, 1992 we presented these facts to the school PTA. The decision reached by the school board was to study the problem and contact Des Plaines officials for their input and assistance. our police department worked in conjunction with the Des Plaines Police Department and set up strict enforcement on Central during the remainder of the 1991-92 school year. This intense enforcement apparently helped to ease the tensions felt by crossing guard staff and parents. Over the summer the school changed principals and due to a busy schedule and no complaints about the safety of the intersection, the issue seemed to be resolved. However, before school started in September 1992 my staff and I again reviewed the intersection and are of the opinion that the location could not safely operate with a crossing guard. We discussed eliminating our guard, but our Crime Prevention Unit was having so much success with programs supported by St. Emily's that were enhancing our PACA efforts in Boxwood, we decided to upgrade patrol and work with Des Plaines Police Department to slow traffic down and hopefully create a safer environment. Unfortunately, this approach has not worked. October 12, 1992 Page -2- After discussions with my staff and Des Plaines staff, we concluded the marked squads can only accomplish random selective enforcement of this area and due to demands on personnel to respond to emergencies and high priority calls for service, neither agency could promise a marked unit at this location unless they bring someone in on overtime. The children cross at: this location twice a day, 7:30 -8:30 a.m. and 2:15 - 3:00 p.m., high activity times for both police departments. Last Friday I received a call from the new Principal, Sister Danielle Jacob, stating she wits gravely concerned for the children's safety and asked what we could do. I gave her a historical background on the problem as outlined here and discussed earlier: 1) February 1992 survey. 2) Discussion regarding meeting with the PTA last spring. 3) Committee formation to meet with Des Plaines. 4) Additional enforcement. 5) Reasons for our concerns and recommending elimination of the guard: a. High traffic volume. b. No traffic gaps to allow the crossing guard to safely cross children. Children must be held in the road center waiting to cross the second two Lanes while vehicles travel by at excessive speeds unless a squad is present. C. Sun blinding motorists. d. High speeds of vehicles. e. Enforcement not working. f. Wide roadway. g. Small number of families actually using it due to concern for safety. (9 of 47 families - 2/92 - use crossing) Sister Danielle indicated that she would continue to pursue the continued cooperation of the Des Plaines Police Chief. During the conversation she was advised to confirm certain information with Public Works Director Herb Weeks. That is, the fact that the Village of Mount Prospect had approached Des Plaines regarding their sharing in the cost of a light installation at this intersection along with the Illinois Department of Transportation, but Des Plaines refused. Furthermore, Sister Daniel was advised that it took Herb Weeks consideralole effort to get them to put in a sidewalk and maintain it. In fact, we had to install the street lighting without consideration from Des Plaines. October 12, 1992 Page -3- The current cost of a crossing guard is $2,730 a year or $248 a year per child using the crossing for forty-one (41) weeks. If the school contracted for buses and followed the same formula used by District 59, it would cost $147 a year per student or $3.60 a week per child. There are subsidy monies available through IDOT and the scale is reduced, depending on the number of students riding the bus. If all current forty-seven (47) families who would cross at this intersection were to agree to use a bus, the rates could be even lower. Also attached is our current crossing guard schedule. Please note that inclusive of the Horner/Central location, four (4) crossings operate without stoplights. The other three (3) have been studied and the following conclusions were found: 1. Lancaster & Central - traffic gaps O.K. plus visibility is safe. 2. Wheeling Road - residential, no dangerous problems. 3. Burr Oak & Burning Bush - residential area, no problems. Finally, unlike Horner and Central, all these locations have at least twenty to sixty children crossing and the speeds are within reason. Therefore, because of the alternatives such as busing, the dangers at this intersection as indicated by the crossing guard, police staff, the families themselves - only nine (9) of the forty-seven (47) eligible families using the crossing - and the availability of contract busing, I recommend we eliminate the crossing. This decision should be sent to the school with a copy of this memo and include a warning period of one (1) month. We cannot in good conscience allow this dangerous situation to continue into the winter months. Please review my recommendation and if you concur, I will forward a letter to St. Emily's, however, advise your counterpart in Des Plaines or have the Mayor call the Des Plaines Mayor as I am sure it will be a subject for discussion by both communities. RWP:jd Attachments HORNER & CENTRAL CROSSING OBJECTIVE: MAXIMUM SAFETY FOR SCHOOL CHILDREN CROSSING 1415001M 1. Maintain current program - crossing guard - enforcement 2. Maintain current program, plus flashing- lights that are activated at school opening and ending for 20 m.p.h. (cost unknown - legality unknown). 3. Maintain current program, plus install lights at $100,000 one time cost. 4. Bus everyone at school cost/shared cost. (Estimate $147 per student/$3.60 a week per child) District #59 charges $175 yr. - one student/family 250 yr. - two students/family 300 yr. - three or more students/family (families can apply for a subsidy) M � Elaine Tu*ell952-|742 1407 Willow Ron Richardson 870-5556 or ~ . Mt' p—t- IL 60056 5UOS8 Marilyn Kanel 870-5678 ^ l9Q2-l9Q3 CROSSING GUARD SCHEDULE TIME TIME LOCATION—�—==�- MORNING AFTERNOON SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD ONEM 8 0/ CENTRAL 7:JO-8�15 J�OO-J�.0 �t Paul ' Ma 8 �-- Mary Brown � gnO W. Milburn 255-95l6 KT. 14 & ` , /^ 7:3O-8�3V 2'5O-3�43 Lincoln Al T auc p St. Raymond 812 Dresser 392-3l§V & Peter Baron l S. Busse � 43B-3439 LANCASTER & �7:45-8:45 _NT__ 3:00-4:00 Westbrook Greg 4thas , �. Lincoln 13 N. Lancaster St. Raymond 259-7053 LINCOLN &BUSS< 8:00-9:00 3:15-4:00 Lincoln Evelyn Carter ^ � Westbrook 1728 Verde Drive 593-7D7S WE3TBROOK & ���' 8USSE 4 8�OO-9�0] J�l5-4�OO Westbrook Sam Mi7 azzo 311 N. Russell 392-3O3l LINCOLN & S 7:30-8:45 2:40-3:46 Lincoln ChuckELMHURST Wesch e � St. Raymond 395 Wilkins Dr. Westbrook OP 824-5905 ELMHVRST & ^0_� ' 8:00-9:00 2:45-3:55 Lincoln Daryl Boyd cVVmClL Lions Park 1488 W. Busse St. Raymond 577-3575 RT, 83 & °, 7�3O-8JS 2:45-3:45 Lincoln John O'Connor RT l4 . , , (Unless needed as , a back-up) S� Raymond ' 42) Nl N. Elm 253-5U37 EUCLID 8 BURNING 8-00-9:00 3�l5-4�O� Indian Grove Carol rm Gauger BUSHO p 305 E. [amp McDonald 394-0547 Rd' HORNER &�u ^*�/ 7:30-8:30 2:15-3:00 St, Emily Mari Stilke CENTRAL v\ 1838 Magnolia 439-J]26 WHEELING ROAD 8:OO'9:00 3:15-4:00 Euclid John O'Connor ��. (Back-up) BURR OAK �8�00-9:00 BURNING BUSH 3:15-4:00 Indian Grove margaret Le*andowski 191| Tuno Lane - 827'OS20 '-- VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FINANCE DEPARTMENT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Michael E. Janonis, Village Manager FROM: David C. Jepson, Finance Directo DATE: June 4, 1993 SUBJECT: Police and Fire Building Project Costs Attached is a revised schedule of the Police and Fire Building Project costs including Commander Kolanowski's change order requests dated June 3, 1993. In addition to the $32,703 addition to the Maggio contract and $1,562 for Other Construction costs included in Commander Kolanowski's memo, I have added $1,440 for additional soil testing charges, $6,500 for moving costs under Temporary Facilities, $14,550 for the telephone system, and $25,990 for radio equipment that was approved April 6, 1993. The total amount of these change orders is $82,715. These changes will reduce the contingency to $97,631. With the changes mentioned above, the total expected project cost is $6,672,480 including an unallocated contingency amount of $97,631. The expected Project Cost of $6,672,480 is $319,520 less than the referendum estimate of $6,992,000. DCJ/sm Enc VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT Police and Fire Building Project Costs June 8, 1993 (1) Included in Board -approved Change Orders #1 - $19,424; #2 - $223,495; #3 - $62,000; and #4 - $43,797. (2) Included in Board -approved Change Orders #2 - $40,138; #3 - $16,780; and #4 - $30,000. (3) Board Approval July 7, 1992 of $10,000 and Change Order #3 - $8,000. (4) Included in Board -approved Change Order #3. (5) Included in 92/93 Budget. (6) Approved by the Village Board December 17, 1991. (7) Reductions in Change Orders #1, #2, #3, and #4. Prior Change Contract or Approved Orders Revised Referendum Estimated Changes 6/8,'93 Total Estimate5 Construction Costs Maggio Contract $4,673,000 $322,373 (1) $32,703 $5,015,938 $5,568,700 (12,14:3) (7) Other 1,562 1,562 Engineering Costs Donohue 431,000 86,913 (2) 517,918 465,700 Trow Mirza 11,000 18,00) (3) 1,4-10 30,410 - Furniture 295,000 90,00) (4) 385,000 295,000 Police and Fire Equipment - 150,00) (4) 25,990 175,990 - Telephone Equipment - 75,000 (5) 14,550 89,550 - Demolition and Cleanup Demolition Costs 42,500 42,500 95,800 Tank Removal - 89,651.) (6) 89,650 - Temporary Facilities 191,500 - 6,`00 198,000 150,000 Other Costs Bond Sale Costs - 24,402 24,402 - Miscellaneous Costs 3,929 3,929 Contingencies 416,8 (236,45 W.7 -5) 97,631 416.800 L§,§Z2,,4 2 992 (QQ (1) Included in Board -approved Change Orders #1 - $19,424; #2 - $223,495; #3 - $62,000; and #4 - $43,797. (2) Included in Board -approved Change Orders #2 - $40,138; #3 - $16,780; and #4 - $30,000. (3) Board Approval July 7, 1992 of $10,000 and Change Order #3 - $8,000. (4) Included in Board -approved Change Order #3. (5) Included in 92/93 Budget. (6) Approved by the Village Board December 17, 1991. (7) Reductions in Change Orders #1, #2, #3, and #4. li Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL JANONIS FROM: COMMANDER JOSEPH KOLANOWSKI 6W DATE: JUNE 3, 1993 SUBJECT: POLICE AND FIRE HEADQUARTERS - CHANGE ORDER The following items will be on the next Change Order. Items 1-17 relate to the Village's contract with A. J. Maggio, the general contractor. Item 18 relates to the Village's contract with an independent vender. Do 0 MMMErmomm.-Teno N The Fire Department repelling training area adjacent to the Hose Tower was under -engineered. In order to ensure structural integrity of this area during training exercises, it was necessary to double the number of roof joists. Cost $ 759 2. Panic Bar for Electrical Room Change in door hardware and function requested by Inspection Services to ensure that employees will have free egress from the generator/electrical room in case of an emergency. Cost 847 3. Elevator Shunt Trip Revisions required by Elevator Code. The presence of a sprinkler in elevator room requires specialized safety equipment that will protect electrical components if sprinkler is activated. Cost 2,221 4. Revise Elevator Room Add ceiling; relocate sprinkler head; ralocate, ceiling light and relocate ventilation ducting. Changes are required in conjunction with item 3 above. Cost 741 5. Attic Access Stairway Revisions to attic access stairway requested by Public Works Department to ensure safe working conditions for Public Works' personnel. Cost 2,721 6. Hold Down Clips in Room 146 Change required by Inspection Services to properly seal off the floor to floor duct shaft. Cost 207 7. Light Fixtures - Roll Call Room Add three light fixtures to Police Roll Call Room. Revision required to ensure proper illumination. Cost 691 8. Outlets in Deputy Police Chiefs Office Original office design had only one outlet. Additional outlets required to ensure proper functionality of office. Cost 418 9. Conference and Training Room Ligh tng_�Qhanges Ceiling fixtures in conflict with cabinets. Revision necessary to resolve conflict. Cost 383 10. Rate of Rise Heat Detectors in Attic The addition of attic detectors was requested by the Fire Department and Inspection Services. Installation of this type ofdetector will provide an early warning when dangerous conditions exist inthe attic. Cost 4.477 11. Revise Refuse Area Gates Revision necessary to ensure proper operation of gates and to reduce future maintenance costs. Coat 072 12� Add Vanities in Fire Deoartment Residential Area Four bathroom vanities were omitted from the original construction documents. Coat 1,953 13. Tint Ceiling in Fire Department in Avoaratus Bay Change requested byFire Department, The black tint will enhance appearance of area and reduce long-term maintenance coats. Cost 2,220 14. Revisions in Attic to Mechanical Equipment Well Stairs Three attic ladders needed bzberedesigned bofit conditions es they actually exist. Cost 2,631 15. End Panel in Fire Deoartment Locker Room Change in layout of locker room required the purchase and installation of an end panel. Coot 162 It has been determined that the UPS (Uninterrupted 3ower System) unit requires anenvironment that imtemperature and humidity nont,o|ed. Providing cooling unit will ensure manufacturers warranty coverage, will ensure proper functioning of the unit and will reduce frequency ofbattery replacement. (Cost ofthis UPS unit ia approximately $100,000.) Cost 10,9M Electrical changes required bofacilitate handicapped access. These charges are in conjunction with the handicapped activator listed in 18. Total Amount of Maggio Construction Change Order $32,703 Contractor: Stanley Door Company. Toensure that the facility complies with the latest revisions of the ADA, a handicapped door opener was added to the mein lobby employee entrance. Cost 1,562 Total Additional Project Costs Not tmExceed: »34,266 VilUa,ge of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL JANONIS FROM: COMMANDER JOSEPH KOLANOW8KI� � DATE: JUNE 3.1QQ3 SUBJECT POLICE AND FIRE HEADQUARTERS PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS 'RECONCILIATION ra The following items had been previously approved bythe Village Board. Final coots came in less than originally anticipated naou|Ung in slight reductions in "not to exceed" amounts. A. Addition of conduit necessary to provide protection for Village communications and computer cables, Conduit also necessary to allow floor -to -floor cabling of nadio, he|ephone, cable television and communications equipment. B. Revision ofemergency distribution cable system and ducting hocomply with Village Code requirements. The estimate for the above items was *8.788. When the Village was presented with a cost larger than the eoUmabs, these items were deferred and additional written documentation and records were requested. After extensive review and negotiations between the General Contractor, the Village and the Architect, a cost of $6,248 was set as being a hair price for the work provided. Final cost to the Village for Change Order 2 will be $2.538 less than the "not to exceed" figure approved bythe Village Board. In this Change Order, the Village received a "not to exceed" estimate for revision ofthe heating and cooling controls inthe amount of$2.3O0. The actual cost to the Village for this revision was $1,010. Therefor, the final cost hothe Village for Change Order 4ks$1.28Uless than the "not toexceed" figure approved bythe Village Board. A Mount Prospect Public Works Department 9 TM CM USA INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Director of Public Works FROM: Administrative Aid4 DATE: December 30, 1992 SUBJ: Equipment/Vehicle Maintenance Division Staffing Allocation. Per your request, I have assembled information presenting a comparative view of the staffing allocation for the Public Works Department Equipment & Vehicle Maintenance Division. This information was acquired from two recent surveys we circulated to garner insights to the staffing practices and service offerings of Chicagoland area municipal public works organizations. I have attached copies of both of these surveys for your review and consideration. These surveys were not intended to facilitate comparisons or form a statistical base for the development of a hierarchical ranking of public works organizations. Rather, the purpose of the surveys was to identify and promote program innovations and organizational efficiencies. This point should be emphasized because considerable differences do exist between public works organizations. These differences tend to cloud direct comparisons. Ostensibly, most differences are rooted in the program preferences of local communities. For example, the citizens of Mount Prospect have expressed support for the continuation of the popular annual Leaf Pick-up Program. This program is particularly labor-intensive and requires the purchase, use, and maintenance of specialized equipment. Unavoidably, such a program also requires specialized mechanical maintenance support and an exorbitant allocation of mechanics' time. The Village of Arlington Heights, however, does not offer it's residents a leaf removal program and thereby avoids these considerable labor and equipment costs. Unfortunately, a direct comparison of equipment/vehicle maintenance division survey responses between the Mount Prospect Public Works Department and the Arlington Heights Public Works Department does not make this significant discrepancy in service levels obvious. To underscore this important point, I would like to draw your attention to Table 1 below. This table was developed from a telephone survey recently conducted among ten (10) area communities. The Village of Arlington Heights reported that they maintain and repair approximately 395 pieces of equipment with 10 full-time equipment/vehicle maintenance employees. This level of staffing suggests an employee/equipment ratio of 1:40. That is, Arlington Heights has one "mechanic" for every 40 pieces of equipment. Similarly, we have determined that Mount Prospect also has an employee/equipment ratio of 1:40. At first glance, it appears that the two organizations are equally staffed. However, if the additional labor and training requirements of the Leaf Pick-up Program are considered, it becomes obvious that the Mount Prospect Public Works Department is a more efficient organization. Because of our higher level of service, (i.e., w� offer a leaf pick-up program and they don't) we make more intensive use of our equipment and personnel. Table 1: Equipment to Maintenance Personnel Ratios Community Total Pieces of Equipment Maintained Total Full -Time Maintenance Employes Employee to Equipment Ratio Northbrook 200 5 1:40 Arlington Heights 395 10 1:40 Rolling Meadows 151 7 1:22 Des Plaines 375 7 1:54 Hoffman Estates 225 8 1:28 Schaumburg 365 14 1:26 Mount Prospect 327 8 1:40 Palatine 220 6 1:36 Skokie 225 14 1:16 Elk Grove Village 250 10 1:25 With this thought in mind, some basic assumptions about t"Ie purpose, objectives, and scope of public works organizations can be made. For example, it can be assumed that all surveyed public works organizations exist io take care of a similar "basket of infrastructure" and that all surveyed public works organizations are exposed to a similar set of economic conditions. Guided by equalizing factors such as the number of employees per capita or the number of employees per pieces of equipment maintained, these assumptions can allow us to rrake some general comparisons between public works organizations. To begin With, I would like to revisit Table 1. The towns surveyed to compose this table were selected because of their proximity to Mount Prospect and/or because they were similarly sized communities. Hopefully, these search parameters will allow us to compare ourselves to towns that are most like us. A quick review of this table suggests that the City of Des Plaines Public Works Department has the best employee/equipment ratio at 1:54 and the Village of Skokie Public Works Department has the worst ratio at 1:16. The average ratio appears to be 1:30. Six of the ten communities surveyed had ratios that were below average. More importantly, (at least from our perspective) Mount Prospect has one of the top employee/equipment ratios at 1:40. In fact, when it is considered that Des Plaines performs only minor body repair or paint work and completely avoids the demanding preventive maintenance schedule required by high -wear police sedans (see Attachment B), it can be suggested that the Mount Prospect Public Works Department may actually have the most efficient equipment/vehicle maintenance operation. To digress, the time commitment required by police vehicles is significant. Table 2 below denotes the hours spent on police vehicle maintenance in 1992. The hours noted represent the actual time spent working on police cars. The total, 1,650 hours, are enough hours to completely account for the activity of a full-time mechanic, not including vacation, sick, or personal time. Unfortunately, these hours do not account for any time spent chauffeuring police vehicles to and from contracted service or any time spent by the parts room attendant ordering and inventorying spare parts for police vehicles. In addition, none of the 1,650 -hour total includes time spent in training to keep current with the automakers' technological advancements. While these hours are not independently tracked and it is difficult to precisely determine the total time commitment, it may be safely surmised that police vehicles require the attention of at least 1.5 full-time equipment/vehicle maintenance employees. This means that 9% of the equipment/vehicle inventory requires 18+% of the Equipment/Vehicle Maintenance Division's labor resources. Again, the point to be made is that even though Mount Prospect compares very favorably with other communities, the numbers still belie the intensity of work performed because of the overall higher level of service this department provides. Table 2: 1992 Mechanics' Accountable Time Spent on Police Vehicles Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total Total Mechanics' Hours Spent on 152 149 120 138 109 129 172 175 144 120 82 160 1,650 Police Vehicles Furthermore, when the entire range of equipment and vehicle maintenance services offered by public works organizations is considered, I belie -e Mount Prospect is in a comparatively superior position. Attachment B is a copy o1 survey we conducted in November of 1991. It is a more encompassing survey that attempts to incorporate as many facets of the public works function as possible. I suggest that these survey results be reviewed with an eye cast towards visualizing wht re Mount Prospect stands in relation to other communities in terms of the level of services provided. It is my impression that Mount Prospect offers it's citizens one of the most comprehensive "baskets" of public works services in this area. Accordingly, the role of equipment and vehicle maintenance cannot be underestimated. Service cannot be delivered effectively without equipment and vehicles functioning properly. Upon review of the attached surveys, I bell, -we you will agree that the Mount Prospect Public Works Department, and the Equipment/Vehicle Maintenance Division in particular, compares extremely well with other communities. We provide a wide range of popular services while minimizing labor and associated overhead costs. In fact, because of the department's comparatively high efficiency, it may be suggested that any further increases in efficiency achieved via labor reductions will necessarily involve a decrease in the overall level of services provided. Attachment A Table 1: Equipment to Maintenance Personnel Ratios Total Total 5 Pieces Full -Time Employee of Equipment Maintenance to Equipment Community Maintained Employees Ratio Northbrook 200 5 1:40 Arlington Heights 395 10 1:40 Rolling Meadows 151 7 1:22 Des Plaines 375 7 1:54 Hoffman Estates 225 8 1:28 Schaumburg 365 14 1:26 Mount Prospect 327 8 1:40 Palatine 220 6 1:36 Skokie 225 14 1:16 Elk Grove Village 250 10 1:25 Attachment B Mount Prospect Public Works Manpower and Services Survey General Information - Part 1 Arlington Heights.._._.__._ .._._. nw75 500.._......_ -101 6 -' 12 _....... __. __..-------- 2 Barrington _....._ m__............ __.. 10,000 31 3 1 3 Buffalo Grove 37,000 _......___............... 41 _..___ _. 2 _.,._.......__. _ .........._ Plaines ____...__..-_... 53,223 _................_ 84 3 ...... 12 0 Elk Grove Village ............................ 33,429' _.... S9 2 - _ - ... 13 7 Evanston _.,.,. 73,400 _ 180 _ .................4._ _ 9 _ _ _ 24 _............ 1 Franklin Park ......._._ .......................__.._.... 1.8/ ..._................. ._................ .......wwW 1 �.. 5 __ _........w. 5 2 Hanover Park33,50 - . ............... _...... _..__.._ Estates Hoffman E ..........._ _._wwwww.w 46,500 60 ........w,.._ -____.......... 3 ______....._. 10 _.... 4 Mount Prospect 56000 58 3 118 _.- Naperville (DOT) _.................. ....... 89,000 127 ____..._................_.__... 7 26 0 Naperville (Water) 73 8 19 3 Northbrook 33,000 53 2 9 4 Oak Brook ......... 9,150 18 _...w 1 4 0 Oak Lawn _.._.._......_..-_ 56,182 _.__._ _... _ 103 _._..........._.... _,. 4 _ 14 ........... 1 Palatine - - ... ...._............. 42 000 __w_..............,__. _.. 54 � ,,.... 3 _ _... ___.._............___ 1 ....�.._.............._ __. 0 Park Ridge 37,800 49 3 4 ......_..._.._._ 1 Rollin Meadows __... 22,591 ...._ - 44 w...._v__...... _ Schaumbu _._..v_v_v.._._ .e 68,586' _ _._ . 111 _..... _.___... 7 13 10 Skokie __......._....... -60,000 _._....___----- 121 www. ................... __ � . 8 ........................._._.,._...w _ 10 3 Wheaton _..........._...... .. 53,000 _.._.... ...86 --------- 4 � ....�. 17 1 Wheeling 29,7351 35 2 _............... _ 3 _..__._............... 0 Mount Prospect Public Works Manpower and Services Survey Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance Information - Part I November, 1991 IUMEM». .. _....._ _ _w_ ...........mm.._._ ...................._....... Arlington Heights _.._......... ................._____ 10 ._.. __ m T_ 6 No AgAnment 1 Yes Barrington ........ _..................... _........__.... 3 _ 2 ......... � .. �..rv_......,.............. ..Yes. ...__m Buffalo Grove 4 4 _.__.............._.. _._2.' Yes Des Plaines 7 6 __ 0 1 -Yes ........._... _...._._ 5 .............__....Yes . _. ..............._e.^. _2 Evanston Elk Grove Village 15.5 9 2 3 .__. Yes Franklin Park 3 3 00 No Hanover Park 4 3 0 1 - Yes Hoffman Estates6 __.,_ 4 _._..___..__....._ 1 2 Yes Mount Prospect_............._ -._ _ ............................... _ .. ............. _._ 2 ' Yes..... 10 0 3 ' Yes._... Northbrook _ .._. ......__ _.. 5' 4 ._�......._..... 0 1 No Oak Brook_ 1 1 . 0 0 Yes Oak Lawn...._. �........... ................._ 2p 9' ................... p Palatine _.._..—.......M...................................... __ ........................6. _ ............__4 ...... 4 1 Yes Park Ride _. 5 5 _ _..._ 1 _._ _ _....__. _._. Yes.. Rolling Meo_dows _.......�..._....._. b d. ..__.........__.1 Yes. Schaumburg-.....__..,..._.._._ ...1.4..1 __. m...._.. . ........ 10 _.1 1_ _ Yes Skokie__ . °......_.. 14 _Y.........9. __w 7.. ......................._ ,_M.......................� 0 2 _ Yes Wheaton _ _T....._ w.......... __. 5...... ?,... _-...__2 .......___... Yes ........... Wheeling 5.5 3 _ . 0 0.51 Yes Mount Prospect Public Works Manpower and Services Survey Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance Information - Part 11 November, 1991 . 0 1 : Owil . 0 4" 1110111 MEMO Mount Prospect Public Works Manpower and Services Survey Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance Information - Part III November, 1941 Vehicles 1 Work? . .-. s Village of Mount Prospect .09.9@ Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: RONALD W. PAVLOCK, CHIEF OF POLICE (.m SUBJECT: POLICE FLEET ASSIGNMENT AND REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE DATE: JUNE 23, 1993 There are thirty-two (32) vehicles in the police department fleet. These vehicles are assigned and replaced according to the following schedule: PATROL FLEET The patrol fleet is comprised of sixteen (16) marked patrol squad cars, three (3) marked community service officer vehicles, and one (1) marked crime prevention squad car. The sixteen patrol squads are 1991 Chevrolet Caprice 4 -door sedans built to high performance police pursuit vehicle specifications. Of these squads, two are assigned to patrol supervisors and fourteen are assigned to patrol officers. These vehicles are used for routine and emergency police patrol operations. They are full size vehicles because they are used to transport prisoners, they must serve as the officers' offices for their eight hour duty tours, they are safer than smaller cars, and they are cost effective to purchase when available under the state bid award. The marked patrol squad cars are replaced every two years. The best of the vehicles being replaced are retained two additional years in non -patrol assignments. Two of the marked community service officer (CSO) vehicles are 1992 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer 4 -door 4 -wheel drive utility vehicles. These vehicles are used for field CSO activities such as animal control, parking enforcement, lock -out and motorist assists, accident investigation and traffic control. The Blazers were purchased because they offer increased visibility, they are distinctive from the squad cars driven by sworn officers, and they provide the department with two four-wheel drive vehicles for use in heavy snow or flood conditions. These vehicles are replaced on a three year rotation. The third CSO vehicle is a used squad car that is converted for the use of the administrative CSO for two years. This vehicle is replaced when it is four years old. The current vehicle is a 1989 Chevrolet Caprice that will be replaced this summer by one of the used 1991 Chevrolet Caprice sedans. The crime prevention vehicle is a marked patrol squad car. The current car is a 1991 Chevrolet Caprice 4 -door sedan. This car is used by the crime prevention officers at Officer Friendly school visits, to attend Neighborhood Watch meetings, for crime prevention shows, and for travel to regional and sta,ze crime prevention meetings. This vehicle is replaced every three years. INVESTIGATIVE CARS There are six (6) unmarked cars assigned to the Investigative Section. Of these cars five are 1989 Chevrolet Caprice 4 door sedans and one is a 1985 Chevrolet Impala 4 door sedan. All of these cars either are used patrol squad cars or used staff cars. The used patrol squad cars are obtained when two years old and are replaced after an additional two years of investigative service (four years total vehicle service life). The used staff cars are obtained when four years old and either will remain as investigative cars for four additional years, or will be used as investigative cars for two additional years and then replaced by newer used squad cars. The six year old staff cars then would be assigned for pool car use for an additional two years (eight years total vehicle service life) . Investigative cars are used for follow-up field investigations, surveillance activities, and travel to court. STAFF AND POOL CARS The department's three (3) unmarked staff carr are assigned to the Chief of Police and the two deputy chiefs for use in fulfilling the duties and responsibilities of their respective offices. These vehicles are 1991 Chevrolet Caprice 4 door sedans built to high performance police pursuit vehicle specifications and purchased under the state bid award. These vehicles are maintained for eight years, four years as staff cars and four years as either investigative or pool cars. These vehicles are purchased to squad car specifications so they may be used as replacement cars for wrecked squad cars when necessary and to take advantage of state bid award pricing. Two of the department's three unmarked pool cars are used by officers for off duty travel to remote court and school locations, and as back-up investigative and CSO cars. These two vehicles are 1985 Chevrolet Impala 4 -door sedans. The t.'aird pool car is an used, unmarked 1989 Chevrolet Caprice squad car. This vehicle primarily is used by the Auxiliary Services Officer for taking case files to court (2-3 times per week) and for taking evidence to the crime lab (1-2 times per week). This vehicle is replaced after four years of service. CONCLUSION The police fleet assignment and replacement schedule is based on the replacement of the marked patrol fleet every two years, the replacement of the crime prevention squad car and the CSO utility vehicles every three years, and the replacement of the staff cars every four years. This allows the replacement schedule for all other department cars to be flexible in that the service life of an individual vehicle may be shortened or extended depending upon the condition of the vehicle and the replacement options available at the time. This provides for an efficient, cost effective approach to vehicle replacement and fleet management. cc: D/C Daley D/C Richardson Jim Guenther J Mount Prospect Public Works Department 9 IM MY USA INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Village Manager FROM: Director Public Works DATE: June 24, 1993 SUBJECT: Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance/Replacement Program The selection of a Public Works Department vehicle starts with the design specifications, vehicle's purpose and/or use, the latest in technology, training needed to maintain and operate, parts availability, and what has performed well in past histo- ry. The vehicle and/or equipment is then bid, purchased and delivered. Upon delivery, the vehicle maintenance staff begins to equip it with the necessary equipment needed to perform its duties. The staff installs equipment such as snow plows, salt spreaders, emergency lighting, hydraulic systems, tool boxes, leaf boxes, two-way radios, etc. The staff also preps, primes, and paints the equipment as needed. When the vehicle is completed, it is put into service. The vehicle maintenance history is then tracked by means of a vehi- cle maintenance software package the village has had in place for over seven years. The computer program generates an aggres- sive preventative maintenance program. With this PM program, the staff is able to minimize down time, minimize breakdowns, and on many occasions prevent major component failures. Due to the success of this preventative maintenance program and an experienced vehicle maintenance staff, vehicles are well main- tained, safer to operate, more reliable and, in some cases, their useful life has been extended. The current vehicle replacement schedule is as follows: Cars - 8 yrs. Small dumps - 10 yrs. Aerials - 8 yrs. Special-purpose trucks - 10 yrs. Pickups/vans - 7 to 9 yrs. Tractors - 12 yrs. Sweepers - 10 to 12 yrs. Leaf machines - 15 yrs. Trailers - 8 yrs. Other equipment - 6 to 15 yrs., Large dumps - 11 to 13 yrs. depending on usage This replacement schedule is used as a guide and starting point for determining when to replace a vehicle. other considerations are also explored before staff recommends replacement of the vehicle. Some of these considerations are as follows: Mileage and/or hours Years of service Cost of maintenance Usage Hours of maintenance Short-term usage by another department (to replace a vehicle in worse condition) * Major repairs needed Minor repairs needed Budget. considerations; the amount of monies available for replacement vehicles Needs of other departments * There have been many occasions in the pas-_ when, rather than trading off one of our vehicles at a certain time, another de- partment (with a vehicle in worse condition) has used our vehi- cle for an additional period of time. As another means to improving on our method of determining when to replace a vehicle, we have investigated the availability of a forecasting software package, but to date have found none. we have been told that there are too many variables that make it impossible to project. As we continue to track our vehicles' maintenance records on the computer, we also continue to develop our data base of vehicle history. This data base will become a major tool in helping design specifications of major components and, in the near fu- ture, to help with justification to replace or continue service of the vehicle. Public Works staff vehicles are as follows: 2711, 1993 Chevrolet Caprice, Director Public Works 2713, 1987 Chevrolet Caprice, Admimistrat'-ve Aide and Solid Waste Coordinator 2745, 1989 Ford Bronco, Deputy Director Public Works 2758, 1988 Chevrolet Cavalier Wagon, Engineer/Draftsman Herbert L, Weeks /td MAINT—PR.GRM/FILES/EQUIP Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TM My UIA TO: File FROM: Equipment/Maintenance Superintendent DATE: June 22, 1993 SUBJECT: State of Illinois vehicle Replacement I talked with Jack Ryder of the State of Illinois St. Charles Yard Division I maintenance facility. I asked him what criteria they used to replace vehicles. He stated that there are many areas they look at to replace vehicles. Some of these areas are as follows: Mileage Years of service Cost of Maintenance Budget Considerations - the amount of monies available for replacement vehicles Department ratings of each vehicle - best to the worst Mr. Ryder also stated that, to evenly distribute the mileage of the larger trucks, they have trucks parked at any given time, and each month they rotate the trucks. \ �— JG/td Jim �rher VEHREP-I.DOT/FILES/EQUIP PARTIAL LISTING OF VARIABLES IMPACTING LIFE CYCLE DETERMINATION Maintenance Oporating expenses (fuol,'add oil, fluids) Downtime Depreciation (Amortization) Utilization efficiencies Parts Intrentory Purt.b avails billLy Availability of capital funds Alternate use of capital funds Shop overhead Shop manning Gosmet,ic appearance Technological improvements in ney equipment Driver/operator satisfaction Driver/operator productivity Replacement vehicle/equipment costs Resale/trade-in value Future major maintenance expenses Future general increase in maintenance expenses Projected maintenance/fuel expenses for repLacemant vehicle Pool -it" t>rand fax transmittal mama 7n�a OP. Ftom h.. V4 YAW W 2 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT ILLINOIS 0 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Village Manager Michael E. Janonis FROM: Captain Steven DumovA DATE: June 23, 1993 SUBJECT: FIRE DEPARTMENT VEHICLE RECOMMENDATIONS Upon your request we have undertaken a study of the future of our staff vehicles. As directed, we looked into several factors that impact our selection process. As a result, we determined that in order to "right -size" our fleet, we would indeed have to assess the needs of each specific user. Again, I wish to stress the concept of safety for all future purchases of Fire Department vehicles. Considering the number of vehicles currently available with proven safety features, such as: air -bags, automatic seat belts and anti- lock brakes, the selection process should be restricted to vehicles with these features. Attached to this report is a booklet titled: "DRIVER FATALITIES IN FRONTAL IMPACTS: COMPARISONS BETWEEN CARS WITH AIR BAGS AND MANUAL BELTS", by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. There are also several articles attached regarding anti-lock brakes and seat belts. The information supports the benefit of using automatic seat belts and choosing vehicles with air bags and anti-lock brakes. This information was provided to us by the National Safety Council. In the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) Report, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimates a reduction of 20-40% in fatalities with air bags alone, and up to 55% with air bags and automatic lap/shoulder belts. Large cars proved even more effective than mid-size or compact cars with air bags. It is reasonable to assume that if fatalities can be significantly reduced by the use of air bags, injuries would be reduced even further and this directly reflects on our insurance. The attached article: "These Are The Brakes", anti-lock brakes are rated as a top-ranked safety feature in cars and trucks. They rate as high as air bags and seat belts. ABS (Anti-lock Brake System) is a system that is on all the time and is applied as needed. It provides significantly improved control when emergency stopping on wet or icy pavement, increasing the ability to avoid accidents. The combination of safety systems is proven to reduce accidents and injuries in automobiles. The attached report and articles support these claims. Our fleet currently consists of eight cars, two command vehicles, and one repair/service truck. I would like to point out that it has been the practice of the Fire Department to pass down and extend the useful life of ' vehicles from other departments who no longer have a need for the vehicles. (See Table 1) We have done this successfully with some cars, pick-up trucks, utility vans and in a somewhat different application with our ambulances. It is our recommendation that we plan our purchases as outlined below: STAFF CARS: Mid-sized, 4 -dr. sedans. These vehicles should have all currently available safety features, five passenger capacity, heavy duty police package option and similarly equipped to our previously purchased vehicles. INSPECTION VEHICLE: A variety of needs have to be met. Inspectors use their vehicles for several functions in addition to inspections. These range frcm public education to investigations and light transportation of fire department equipment. It is not inconceivable to request a mid-sized station wagon for inspectors or a mini -van for public education (see vehicle memos attached). COMMAND VEHICLE: As discussed in budget meetings for the current fiscal year, a new Command Vehicle was recommended. The Command Vehicle is a special use emergency vehicle. It is used by the Shift Commander as a field incident command center. The vehicle must be large enough to carry up to two persons and an assortment of command items and files. In addition, it has to have a tactical work center that is protected from the elements. REPAIR TRUCK: This vehicle is used by the vehicle maintenance division. With three fire stations, it is not always possible to bring apparatus to the maintenance station for service or repair and from time to time vehicles break down on the road. Quite often the mechanics are called upon to make field repairs or travel some distance to pick up large truck and auto parts. Our practice of using a pick-up truck for vehicle maintenance has worked well for us over the years. The current repair/service vehicle is a 1979 pick-up truck that was acquired from the Public Works Forestry Department. In the course of our research, we have attempted to determine the cost of maintaining and operating fleet vehicles similar to our use. We contacted Hertz and Avis, along with several leasing companies. None of them were able to supply this data because most fleet operators do not keep vehicles past the warranty or 50,000 miles. In conclusion, our position is that any vehicle that is selected by this department should certainly be cost effective and right -sized for the user. However, safety is, and always will be very important to us and all our personnel. cc: Chief Cavello D/C Ulreich D/C Jackson file Attachments I ra *0 1it 500-1992 CHEVROLET CAPRICE - CHIEF CAVELLO Purchased new. Vehicle equipped with air bag and anti-lock brakes. 500 has been in Fire Department service I year. LLA�_�A JV�IENT ,12,269 505-1991 CHEVROLET CAPRICE - DEPUTY CHIEF JACKSON Purchased new. Vehicle equipped with air bag and anti-lock brakes. 505 has been in Fire Department service 2 years. LEASE PAYMENT 52,073 501-1989 CHEVROLET CAPRICE - DEPUTY CHIEF ULREICH Purchased new. 501 has been in Fire Department service 4 years. LEASE PAYMENT 52,028 504-1989 CHEVROLET CAPRICE - CAPTAIN DUMOVICH Purchased new. 504 has been in Fire Department service 4 years. LEASE PAYMENT52,1�7 507-1989 CHEVROLET CAPRICE - INSPECTOR KUEKING Recycled police unit. 507 has been in Fire Department service 2 years. LEA-$ k A _YMENT ------ 53,963 508-1989 CHEVROLET CAPRICE - 114SPECTOR/PUBLIC EDUCATION OFFICER HART Recycled police unit. 508 has been in Fire Department service 2 years. LEASE PAYMENT slim 502-1987 CHEVROLET CAPRICE - FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER WILKIE ESCONDO Recycled police unit. 502 has been in Fire Department service 4 years. LEAU PAYMF_N_TS3,9j6 503-1987 CHEVROLET CAPRICE - FIREFIGHTER/ INSPECTOR IPSEN Recycled police unit. 503 has been in Fire Department service 3 years. LEASE PAYMENT $4,084 509-1987 CHEVROLET SUBURBAN - FIRE DEPARTMENT SHIFT COMMANDER Purchased new. 509 has been in Fire Depa-tment service 6 years. LEASE PAYMENT $2,019 506-1979 CHEVROLET SUBURBAN -RESERVE FIRE DEPARTMENT SHIFT COMMANDER Purchased new. 506 has been in Fire Department service 14 years. LEASE PAYMENT 51 548-1979 CHEVROLET 3/4 TON PICK-UP -MECHANICS SERVICE UNIT Recycled Public Works forestry truck. 548 has been in Fire Department service 4 years. LEASE PAYMENT S1 , 790 5 Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois 2 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Michael Janonis, Village Manager FROM: Chuck Bencic, Inspection Services Director DATE: June 16, 1993 RE: POOL CAR USE Following is the list of pool cars and their use by the Inspection Services Department. A) Building Division and Health Division 1) #301 - 1989 Cavalier - Bob Roels Normal Road Driving 2) #302 - 1985 Cavalier Les Hanneman Mostly normal road driving plus some construction sites. NOTE: This vehicle is being replaced with a 1993 Cavalier. 3) #303 - 1985 Cavalier - Bill Amundsen Mostly normal road driving plus some construction sites. NOTE: This vehicle is being sold at the auction and has been replaced by a 1966 Celebrity. 4) #307 - 1990 Cavalier - Mike Frontzak Mostly normal road driving plus some construction sites. 5) #310 - 1988 Cavalier - Frank Krupa Normal road driving. TO: Michael Janonis, Village Manager FROM: Chuck Bencic, Inspection Services Director DATE: June 16, 1993 RE: POOL CAR USE Page 2 6) #313 - 1991 Cavalier - Chuck Bencic/Dan Jakes Normal road driving - very seldom construction sites. This vehicle is also used on occasion by the Planning Department, Engineering and by the Manager's Office. B) Engineering Division 1) #306 - 1986 Cavalier - Greg Graham Normal road driving and construction sites. 2) #308 - 1990 Cavalier - Fred Tennyson/Chris van Dornick Normal road driving. 3) #309 - 1992 Cavalier - Jeff Wulbecker Normal road driving. 4) #312 - 1988 Cavalier - Rod Erb Normal road driving and construction sites. C) other Departments 1) #304 1986 Cavalier - Planning Normal road driving. 2) #305 1982 Dodge Van - Cable 3) #311 1968 GMC Van - Hunan Services Cars 309 and 313 are also used by Building and Engineering Inspectors when their cars are in for repair. TO: Michael Janonis, Village Manager FROM: Chuck Bencic, Inspection Services Director DATE- June 16, 1993 RE: POOL CAR USE Page 2 All pool cars are used when necessary by police cadets and ESDA personnel for traffic control. All pool cars are kept outside and are subject to weather conditions year round. The most common complaint from inspectors is the amount of time it takes to scrape ice off windows and frozen locks in the winter. The Cavalier wagon appears to be "right sized" for the inspectors although several inspectors have indicated they would prefer a Blazer type vehicle for access to construction sites and for easier access to vehicle. For inspectors, the ease of access is important because of the number of times they must enter and exit the vehicle each day. Chuck Bencic CB: rm cc: File VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FINANCE DEPARTMENT TAU INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Michael E. Janonis, Village Manager FROM: David C. Jepson, Finance Director;t DATE: June 21, 1993 SUBJECT: Motor Equipment Pool Fund As of May 1, 1990, the Village established the Motor Equipment Pool Fund (MEPF) to finance the acquisition of Village vehicles. The MEPF is an Internal Service Fund and works in the following manner: 1. The depreciated value of all motor equipment was transferred from the General Fixed Asset Account Group to the MEPF as of May 1, 1990. s 2. A lease rate has been established for each vehicle and is charged as an operating expense to each department. 3. The MEPF receives the lease payments, the proceeds from the sale of vehicles, and investment income and holds these funds until needed to purchase replacement vehicles. 4. Motor vehicle equipment replacements are budgeted and purchased from the MEPF. The primary reasons for setting up the MEPF were to eliminate the fluctuations in departmental vehicle replacement needs from one year to the next and to be able to accumulate funds to meet the replacement schedules. Wide swings from year-to-year made it difficult to compare budget amounts from one year to the next and previous budgeting practices did not provide for accumulating funds in a department to meet future replacement needs. Other advantages of this type of financing system are: 1) Each department is charged an amount based upon the actual vehicles being used and not on the amount expended when a vehicle is replaced: 2) Funds are being set aside on a current basis to be available when a vehicle is replaced in the future; and 3) The replacement of a vehicle becomes more of a business decision rather than strictly a function of the funds available in a specific budget year. The major difficulty in implementing a system like this is that the MEPF was established with the depreciated value (remaining life) of existing equipment and replacement funds may not always be available in the early years of the program. Accordingly, additional financing may be necessary from other sources until the fund is fully established. Michael E. Janonis June 21, 1993 Motor Equipment Pool Fund - Page 2 The principle of this type of financing system is that the department is charged a lease payment which would then be accumulated and be available to finance a replacement vehicle at the end of the useful life of the vehicle. To arrive at a lease rate that would provide the necessary funds on the expected replacement date, we have used the straight-line depreciation rate increased by a 5% factor compounded annually. For example, an 8 cubic yard dump truck purchased in 1987 for $40,361 would produce the following funds: Cost (1987) $30,361 Salvage Value 1.00 Balance $39,361 Annual Depreciation: 10 Year Life $ 3,936 Estimated Replacement Cost (1997) Lease Rate $165,000 Human Services Year 1 $3,936 Year 6 $ 5,023 Year 2 4,133 Year 7 5,275 Year 3 4,330 Year 8 5,538 Year 4 4,556 Year 9 5,815 Year 5 4,784 Year 10 6,10 Total Lease Payments Ic $49,505 Interest @ 6.0% 18,000 Sale Proceeds 1.000 Funds available 68 505 The above method charges a lease rate that recognizes a reasonable nflation factor and which should provide the necessary funds for replacement when the useful life is over. I should point out that if the equipment in the above example would be retained for 11 or 12 years, the funds generated would eventually provide for some new equipment as well as the replacement equipment. The Village currently has 191 pieces of equipment that are included in the Motor Equipment Pool Fund. Based upon a lease charge calculated by the method described above, the following departmental charges are included in the 1993/94 budget: Police $165,000 Human Services $ 1,750 Fire 160,000 Streets 225,000 Inspection Services 17,000 Water 142,500 Planning 1,600 Parking 11.000 Total In addition, it is expected that sales of vehicles will provide $35,000 in 93/94 and investment income of $45,000 will be earned for total revenues in 93/94 of $803,850. Michael E. Janonis June 21, 1993 Motor Equipment Pool Fund - Page 3 Over the last three fiscal years, the MEPF has accumulated working capital of $587,507 and is expected to realize $22,740 in 93/94, for a total of about $610,300. The following schedule from the 93/94 budget shows the expected replacements for each department for the next five years: From the above schedule, it appears that the 94/95 budget will be "tight" and outside financing may be needed for 95/96. However, the program has leveled out budget amounts and has started building up replacement funds. Within seven or eight years, the MEPF should be established to the point where it should be able to finance all current acquisitions. DCJ/sm Police Fire Public Works Year Departmentx�e p�7e AgML t To 93/94 $242,610 $ 46,500 $ 492,000 $ 781,110 94/95 28,000 525,200 588,000 1,141,200 95/96 294,000 527,100 718,000 1,539,100 96/97 30,870 120,900 504,000 655,770 97/98 307,930 30,000 486,000 823,930 From the above schedule, it appears that the 94/95 budget will be "tight" and outside financing may be needed for 95/96. However, the program has leveled out budget amounts and has started building up replacement funds. Within seven or eight years, the MEPF should be established to the point where it should be able to finance all current acquisitions. DCJ/sm VILLAGE CLERK'S OFFICE MAYOR GERALD L FARLEY ALL TRUSTEES 4* GEORGE A. CLOWES TIMOTHY J. CORCORAN RICHARD N. HENDRICKS PAUL WM. HOEFERT MICHAELE W, SKOWRON Village of Mount Prospect IRVANA K. WILKS VILLAGE MAX"XR MICHAEL E. JANONIS 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect. Illinois 60056 VILLAGE CLERK CAROL A. FIELDS NOTICE OF CANCELLATION Phone: 708 / 392-6000 Fax: 708 / 392-6022 TDD: 708 / 392-6064 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the regular Committee of the Whole meeting of the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect for Tuesday, June 22, 1993 (4th Tuesday) has been cancelled. Notice is also given that the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect will meet as a Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, June 29, 1993 (the 5th Tuesday of the month). An agenda for this meeting will be issued prior to the meeting date. Carol A. Fields Village Clerk Dated this 17th day of June, 1993. MINUTES COPPER WITH COUNCIL Saturday, June 12, 1993 10:00 a.m. Trustees Room, Village Hall Trustee Corcoran convened the monthly Coffee With Council meeting at 10:00 a.m. Those present were: Trustees George A. Clowes, Timothy J. Corcoran, Richard N. Hendricks, Paul W. Hoefert and Michaele W. Skowron, Village Manager Michael E. Janonis and Police Chief Ronald Pavlock. Residents in attendance were: Ms. Elaine Costello, Mr. David Schein, Ms. Patti Walpole and Colonel Ralph Arthur. Ms. Costello expressed a concern about the graffiti on the sides of the buildings at 1050 to 1130 Wheeling Road, and requested that a plan for faster removal be looked into by the Village. A discussion among the Trustees ensued and the resident was advised of the normal enforcement procedures which include a courtesy call for voluntary removal followed by a citation by the Village if removal is not completed within 10 days. The Trustees did discuss the possibility of looking at a program whereby the Village would remove the graffiti and the cost would be assessed on the homeowner or property owner. It was pointed out to Ms. Costello and the Trustees by Chief Pavlock that for the most part property owners remove the graffiti as soon as possible after the criminal damage takes place. Ms. Costello also suggested that we involve the elementary schools in our recycling program because she has noticed that the school dumpster is overflowing with recycling materials mixed in with garbage. This information will be passed on to Public Works for their review. Colonel Arthur expressed a concern about petitioners who were attempting to obtain signatures in his neighborhood for a project far south of his area. This led to a general discussion by the Trustees and the Village Manager about condo association maintenance agreements and how they apply to various maintenance codes, etc. There was also a general discussion about the future of recycling and the cost effectiveness of various programs. The meeting was adjourned at 11:50 a.m. Rectfu itted Ro a (?Mld dWP a v oak Chief of Police AGEND SIGN REVIEW BOARD Monday, June 21, 1993 Trustees' Room, 2nd Floor, Village Hall 100 South Emerson Street 7:30 P. M. Phone: 708 / 392-6000 Fax: 708 / 392-6022 TDD: 708 / 392-6064 Petitioner seeks special use equity option (Section 7.330.D) in order to place a wall sign on an area which permits a maximum wall sign area of 131.5 square feet. The proposed wall sign is 150 square feet in area. Excess side wall area is proposed to be traded off for this request. SIGN -7-93, TeEa Fredlani. (Spot--N-Qj). $00 Nollh Riysr Rgad Petitioner requests a special use equity option (Sec. 7.330.D) in order to modify approval granted under SIGN -4-91 by adding a two line reader board (containing 10.4 sq. ft.) to the existing freestanding sip (48.4 sq. ft.). 5IGN-8-9,3. 51, John LEpiNgopalChurch, ZOO, N -rth Main Street 0 Petitioner requests a special use equity option (Section 7.330.D) in order to increase the number of lines of changeable copy from two (2) to three (3) and the area of changeable copy from 50% to 60% of the total sign area. SIGN -2-9-3, -Pgr-rjrio ftrcay .. -Q..(Taqueria Morelos Restagrant), 1449 N, River Rd, Petitioner requests a special use equity option in order to install a 12 foot high freestanding sign with a sideyard setback of 15 feet instead of the required 60 feet and a front yard setback of zero feet instead of the required 5 feet. Available wall sign area and approximate 20 sq. ft. of freestanding sign area are being traded in exchange for the freestanding and setback modification. MAYOR L FARLEY GERALD TRUSTEES GEORGE A. CLOWES TIMOTHY J. CORCORAN RICHARD N, HENDRICKS PAUL WM HOFFERT Village of Mount Prospect MICHAELEW SKOWRON IRVANA K. WILKS VILLAGEMANAGER 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 MICHAEL E, JANONIS VILLAGE CLERK CAROL A. FIELDS AGEND SIGN REVIEW BOARD Monday, June 21, 1993 Trustees' Room, 2nd Floor, Village Hall 100 South Emerson Street 7:30 P. M. Phone: 708 / 392-6000 Fax: 708 / 392-6022 TDD: 708 / 392-6064 Petitioner seeks special use equity option (Section 7.330.D) in order to place a wall sign on an area which permits a maximum wall sign area of 131.5 square feet. The proposed wall sign is 150 square feet in area. Excess side wall area is proposed to be traded off for this request. SIGN -7-93, TeEa Fredlani. (Spot--N-Qj). $00 Nollh Riysr Rgad Petitioner requests a special use equity option (Sec. 7.330.D) in order to modify approval granted under SIGN -4-91 by adding a two line reader board (containing 10.4 sq. ft.) to the existing freestanding sip (48.4 sq. ft.). 5IGN-8-9,3. 51, John LEpiNgopalChurch, ZOO, N -rth Main Street 0 Petitioner requests a special use equity option (Section 7.330.D) in order to increase the number of lines of changeable copy from two (2) to three (3) and the area of changeable copy from 50% to 60% of the total sign area. SIGN -2-9-3, -Pgr-rjrio ftrcay .. -Q..(Taqueria Morelos Restagrant), 1449 N, River Rd, Petitioner requests a special use equity option in order to install a 12 foot high freestanding sign with a sideyard setback of 15 feet instead of the required 60 feet and a front yard setback of zero feet instead of the required 5 feet. Available wall sign area and approximate 20 sq. ft. of freestanding sign area are being traded in exchange for the freestanding and setback modification. I. CALL TO ORDER Ii. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Downtown Redevelopment - Update on Project Status: 1. Overview of Pine/Wille Redevelopment Plan 2. Discussion of Revised Site Plan - Broadacre Management 3. Future Steps in Approval Process V. ADJOURNMENT MAYOR GERALD L. FARLEY TRUSTEES GEORGE A CLOWES TIMOTHY J CORCORAN RICHARD N HENDRICKS PAUL WM, HOEFERT Village of Mount Prospect MICHAELE W SKOMIRON IRVANAK , WILKS VILLAGE MANAGER 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 MICHAEL E JANONIS VILLAGE CLERK CAROL A FIELDS Phone: 708 / 392-6000 Fax: 708 / 392-6022 TOO: 708 / 392-6064 AGENDA BUSINESS DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Regular Meeting Wednesday, June 23, 1993 Village Hall 100 South Emerson Street 7:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Ii. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Downtown Redevelopment - Update on Project Status: 1. Overview of Pine/Wille Redevelopment Plan 2. Discussion of Revised Site Plan - Broadacre Management 3. Future Steps in Approval Process V. ADJOURNMENT MAYOR GERALD L. FARLEY TRUSTEES GEORGE A. CLOWES TIMOTHY J CORCORAN RICHARD N. HENDRICKS PAUL WM. HOEFERT MICHAELE W, SKOWRON IRVANA K WILKS VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E. JANONIS VILLAGE CLERK CAROL A. FIELDS Village of Mount Prospect 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 AGENDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Thursday. June 24, 1993 Trappani Construction Company 1800 East Northwest Highway Arlington Heights, Illinois 8:00 A.M. Ii. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES IV. NEW BUSINESS Phone: 708 / 392-6000 Fax: 708 / 392-6022 TOO: 708 / 392-6064 A. Development Rc)dew Process - Michael JanonisVillage Manager B. Bu5ing ,ss Vii lalipa - Jim Ebbinghaus D. Committee Rep - Action Plan, Demographics V. ADJOURNMENT NOTE: JUST WEST OF LAUTERBURG & OEHLER FUNERAL HOME. FINANCE COMMISSION The Finance Commission meeting scheduled for June 24, 1993 has been rescheduled for July 8, 1991 Phone: 708 / 392-6000 Fax: 708 / 392-6022 TOO: 708 / 392-6064 The petitioners are seeking variations to Section 14.1102.13.1 to allow interior side yards of T-10" on the west and 6" on the east in order to construct handicap ramps onto a deck. Upon completion of the public hearing, Village Board action will be required for this case at their meeting of July 6, 1993. ZBA41-V-93, Lester A. and Laurel R. Fleming. 105 South Wa-Pella The petitioners are seeking a variation to Section 14.102.B.2 to allow an interior sideyard setback of 2 feet instead of the minimum required 5 feet in order to construct a detached garage. The Zoning Board of Appeals is final in this case. (SEE NOTE) ZBA42-V.93. Timothy J, O'Brien. 200 South Edward StrMt The petitioner is seeking a variation to Section 21.601.A to allow a 6 foot fence along the rear building line, exterior sideyard and rear yard instead of the maximum allowed 5 foot. The Zoning Board of Appeals is final in this case. (SEE NOTE) ZBA-.4.3.-V-93, nrman L Tay-1Qr, 500 South Emerson St met The petitioner is seeking a variation to Section 14.3016 to allow a driveway with a width of 17 feet instead of the maximum 15 feet. The Zoning Board of Appeals is final in this case. (SEE NOTE) MAYOR GERALD L PARLEY TRUSTEES GEORGE A CLOWES n MOTHY J CORCORAN RICHARD N HENDRICKS PAUL WM HOFFERT Village of Mount Prospect MICHAELE W SKOWRON iRVANA K WILKS VILLAGE MANAGER 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 MICHAEL E JANONIs VILLAGE CLEAR CAROL A FIELDS AGENDA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Regular Meeting Thursday, June 24, 1993 7:30 P.M. Senior Citizen Center 50 South Emerson Street Phone: 708 / 392-6000 Fax: 708 / 392-6022 TOO: 708 / 392-6064 The petitioners are seeking variations to Section 14.1102.13.1 to allow interior side yards of T-10" on the west and 6" on the east in order to construct handicap ramps onto a deck. Upon completion of the public hearing, Village Board action will be required for this case at their meeting of July 6, 1993. ZBA41-V-93, Lester A. and Laurel R. Fleming. 105 South Wa-Pella The petitioners are seeking a variation to Section 14.102.B.2 to allow an interior sideyard setback of 2 feet instead of the minimum required 5 feet in order to construct a detached garage. The Zoning Board of Appeals is final in this case. (SEE NOTE) ZBA42-V.93. Timothy J, O'Brien. 200 South Edward StrMt The petitioner is seeking a variation to Section 21.601.A to allow a 6 foot fence along the rear building line, exterior sideyard and rear yard instead of the maximum allowed 5 foot. The Zoning Board of Appeals is final in this case. (SEE NOTE) ZBA-.4.3.-V-93, nrman L Tay-1Qr, 500 South Emerson St met The petitioner is seeking a variation to Section 14.3016 to allow a driveway with a width of 17 feet instead of the maximum 15 feet. The Zoning Board of Appeals is final in this case. (SEE NOTE) Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Page 2 ZBA44-V-93, Joseph C. Garelli, 628 li •1Link The petitioner is seeking a variation to Section 14.1102 to allow a front yard setback of 20 feet instead of the minimum required 30 feet in order to allow an existing porch to remain; also the petitioner is requesting a variation to Section 14.115.A to allow a second driveway to be added to Forest Avenue. Upon completion of the public hearing, Village Board action will be required for this case at their meeting of July 6, 1993. M-4 wZ-93, ZBA!46"3. Mariusz & Margaret Hauer 1022 Linneman The petitioner is requesting the following in order to complete a two -lot subdivision: 1. Rezoning from R -X, Single Family to R-1 Single Family as allowed in Article VIII. 2. Variations to allow minimum lot widths of 63.23 feet instead of the current minimum of 65 feet as required in Section 14.1101.D.1. Upon completion of the public hearing, Village Board action will be required for this case at their meeting of July 6, 1993. ZBA-47-V.23, flrjan J. & Deborah L Robgrt,,�,,,qv. 19 &uth Mmmrd Street The petitioners are seeking the following in order to construct a detached garage, a second story with room addition and a deck: 1. A variation to Section 14.1103 to allow a Floor Area Ratio of .39 instead of the maximum allowed .35. 2. A variation to Section 14.1102 to allow a total lot coverage of 50% instead of the maximum allowed 45%. 3. A variation to Section 14.102.B.2 to allow a sideyard setback of 3 feet instead of the minimum required 5 feet for a detached garage. The Zoning Board of Appeals is final in this case. (SEE NOTE) ZHA4"-93, La William & Dgana L Risobite, 511 South Alain Street The petitioner is seeking the following in order to widen the driveway: 1. A variation to Section 14.3016 to allow a driveway width of 18 feet instead of the maximum allowed 15 feet. Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Page 3 2. A variation to Section 14.1102 to allow a front yard lot coverage of 38% instead of the maximum allowed 35%. The Zoning Board of Appeals is final in this case. (SEE NOTE) ZBA49-V-93, Dan T. Pappas, 1026 Grace Delve The petitioner is seeking a variation to Section 21.601.A.3 to allow a fence in front of the rear building line along the exterior sideyard. The Zoning Board of Appeals is final in this case. (SEE NOTE) -V-92, I)ave R. HughHughel, 2 4and 6 North The petitioner is seeking the following in order to construct an attached two -car garage: 1. A variation to Section 14.1402.A to allow a 20 foot front yard setback instead of the minimum required 30 feet. 2. A variation to Section 14.1402.0 to allow a rear yard setback of 8 feet instead of the minimum required 25 feet. Upon completion of the public hearing, Village Board action will be required for this case at their meeting of July 6, 1993. ZBA.51.V.93, Steve420 South, PineStreet The petitioners are seeking a variation to Section 21.601 to allow a fence in front of the rear building line along an exterior sideyard. The Zoning Board of Appeals is final in this case. (SEE NOTE) NOTE: In all cases where the Zoning Board of Appeals is final, a fifteen (15) day period is provided for anyone wishing to appeal their decision. No permit will be issued until this period has elapsed. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ZBA CASE NO. ZBA-39-A-93, PETITIONER: SUBJECT PROPERTY: PUBLICATION DATE: REQUEST: zu:fflflm��' � Iii Hearing Date: June 10, 1993 Village of Mount Prospect N/A May 25, 1993, (Herald) To amend in its entirety Chapter 14, Zoning, of Mount Prospect Municipal Code. Gilbert Basnik, Chairman Robert Brettrager Ronald Cassidy Lao Floros Peter Lannon Elizabeth Luxem Richard Pratt, OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: 3 Residents 2 Reporters Chairman Basnik introduced the only agenda item of the evening being a request by the Village of Mount Prospect to amend Chapter 14, Zoning, in its entirety. David Clements, Director of Planning, summarized the process that the Zoning Board of Appeals and staff have undertaken in order to get to this Public Hearing. He indicated that the 1990 proposed budget included a consultant to complete the Ordinance update. However, it was taken out due to resource constraints. At this point, staff decided to undertake the project and in 1991 the process of gathering information and drafting language began. In February of 1992, staff began holding workshops with the Zoning Board of Appeals in order to discuss the draft ordinance. The workshops were held on the second Thursday of the month and continued through October of 1992. In November and December, staff compiled all of the prepared sections and presented a draft ordinance in January to the Zoning Board of Appeals and in February, March, and April reviewed the draft with the Zoning Board of Appeals and Village Board. Mr. Clements then gave a brief history of the current Zoning Ordinance. He indicated that some of the Articles date to 1968. He further stated that the current format was designed in 1979 and has been amended many times to keep the ordinance current, however, it has created conflicts and inconsistencies. Mr. Clements also stated that the ordinance could be described as a typical suburban ordinance geared toward a growth community. This type of ordinance does not address mature communities with redevelopment as it's most common form of expansion. ZBA-38-V-93 Page 2 It was then indicated that the goal of the Zoning Board of Appeals and staff was to streamline the regulations and process. To accomplish thi,; goal, the draft language incorporates a number of changes to the text and map. The members then proceeded to discuss the proposed ordinance on a chapter by chapter basis. the Village Board shall convene an annual meeting with the Zoning Board of Appeals to review the effectiveness of this Zoning Ordinance. Page 6: Item 6 indicates that the Zoning Board of Appeals is final on variations which receive four concurring votes either for or against. Without four concurring votes, the request will go before the Village Board for their review and decision. The members discussed this item. Chairman.. Basnik indicated that he has previously stated- his tatedhis view on this item as being the Village Board should have final authority for variations. However, he stated that perhaps a variation could be Final with. the Zoning Board of Appeals with a unanimous vote. T -9: There are new standards for map amendments and text amendments. Currently there is one set of standards which are used for both. Pgae 11: The term Conditional Use is introduced. This term replaces Special Use Permits. The term change is requested as it better °reflects what the item is and to indicate that reasonable conditions can be applied. Pagg 13: Item 10, indicates new standards for resubmitting a request after a denial. The general provisions section now incorporates the fence regulations which was previously located in the Building Code. There is a change in the exterior side setback to 10 ft, from the current 1 foot. Paize 20: Satellite antennas are proposed to be accessory uses rather than special uses with the same standards being used. Pagg 23; Introduces new standards for 50 foot lots. A 3 foot setback for interior sideyards for accessory structures is proposed. This will eliminate many variations for garages in older areas of the Village. Page 4 Contains the swimming pool standards from the Building Code. Page 3Begins the revised Planned Unit Development (PUTT) Section.' This section has been rewritten in its entirety to better reflect steps needed to goo through. New requirements include landscaping plans and engineering plans, ZBA-38-V-93 Page 3 Ron Cassidy indicated his concerns with a minimum lot requirement of 30,000 square feet instead of the current 60,000 square foot requirement. Mr. Clements indicated that the proposed ordinance sets no minimum lot size. Mr. Cassidy suggested that this would create over -building on small lots. Mr. Clements indicated that many communities have a minimum lot size of 60,000 sq. ft. in their PUD Ordinance, however, this may not reflect Mount Prospect. He further indicated that redevelopment can occur on less than 1-1/2 acres. He gave examples of zero lot line homes or creative setbacks. He stated that there were protections to over -development throughout the ordinance. He indicated that the standards in the underlying zoning district still apply, and that if greater than a 10% bonus density were requested, a rezoning would have to be requested. The members discussed the revised section. Gil Basnik questioned if the density would increase in a typical PUD. Mr. Floros, suggested it would most likely increase. Mr. Clements stated that it could but would not automatically do so. Mr. Basnik questioned if a PUD was feasible on small lots and stated that he does not want to reward small lot development. Mr. Clements indicated that a PUD on small lots ensures review by the Zoning Board of Appeals and Village Board. Mr. Clements indicated that without the PUD, a good review tool would be lost at staff level. Mr. Cassidy discussed the origin of the PUD Ordinance. He stated that it began in the 1970's with a 4-5 acre minimum. It was then reduced to 60,000 square feet and he stated he has strong reservations in reducing it further. Bob Brettrager indicated that he doesn't see any number as important. He feels that the standards in the underlying district will regulate and any modifications will be requested in the PUD. He further stated that on small lots, the 10% bonus is mathematically impossible or very small. Pete Lannon indicated that the PUD requires a public hearing which will give the Board a chance to review and the neighbors a notice of possible development. The consensus of Zoning Board members was to establishnominimum PUD lot size. Page 43, A and B: This is a new district C-R Conservation Recreation. This replaces the "G" Golf District and has been expanded to include parks and playgrounds, as well as municipal facilities and recreational complexes. Mr. Clements indicated that the Park District has reviewed the prepared language. Mr. Clements then discussed the Residential Districts., He indicated that attached three - car garages have been included in the permitted uses. Mr. Clements indicated that the R -A Single Family District has been reformatted to reflect the older established area of Mount Prospect which is primarily 50 ft. wide lots. He stated It 0 toot tot.: r BA, -38-V- 3 Page 4 _ rients indicated that he , e5' suggested that it is he is concemed with be eliminated entirely. 1 sial Apartments. He stat �r; it would be allowed Mr. Clements then introduce the "B" Commercial 'Districts, He stated that the B-1 Office Distrix is likethe current B- ; District. [fie stated that the transitional setback is included in all the commercial districts. Page 72: Begins the Neighborhood Shopping District. Mr, Clements indicated that this is an area for basic needs and compared it to the Brentwood Shopping Center. ZBA-38-V-93 Page 5 Page 75: Begins the B-3 Community Shopping District. Mr. Clements indicated that this is for centers such as Randhurst, Golf Plaza, and Mount Prospect Commons. Page 81: B4 Corridor Commercial District addresses the automobile oriented uses. Page 85: This is the new Central Commercial District. The; goal of this district is to recognize the fully developed commercial area designated as downtown. Mr. Clements indicated that the proposed area extends along Route 14 to the limits of Mount Prospect. He indicated that there is a "Core" area as designated an the Comprehensive Plan. He indicated that the "Core" area allows a higher density and height regulations. He stated that the transitional setback also is included in this district, however, it is increased as the height of a building is increased. Peter Lannon stated his concern with tying the "Core" to the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals has no control on the Comprehensive Plan and the boundaries could be changed. He felt it should be tied to the zoning map. The other members agreed to this suggestion. Page 87; Starts the O -R Office Research District. The proposed is similar to the current district which was developed with Lake Center Plaza. Pate 90: I-1 Limited Industrial is similar to the current Light Industrial. The prohibited use list has been eliminated as it was in the commercial districts. Mr. Clements indicated that the performance standards are similar to those used by most municipalities. Page 9_8: Off -Street Parking and Loading is similar to the existing standards. All ADA Standards have been added. Pa eg 101: Discusses driveway widths. The language regulates width by lot coverage rather than a figure related to garage size. This is proposed to better meet demand and reduce the number of variations requested. The Central Area parking regulations on Page 103 and 104 was developed after a great amount of study and research. Dave Clements indicated that the proposal has been reviewed by the Business District Development and Redevelopment Commission. The members recommended the proposal with an increase to 1.5 spaces per unit for two-bedroom multi -family. The Landscape Ordinance has been incorporated into the ordinance. Mr. Clements indicated that it was adopted two years ago into the Municipal Code. This concluded the overview by staff. Mr. Basnik then opened up the discussion to the audience. No one addressed the Board. Mr. Basnik then opened up discussion to the Board members. Peter Lannon questioned the language to be used on Page 8 and 12, "Action by Village Board." Mr. Clements indicated that on May 4, 1993, the Village Board adopted standards for voting. ZBA-38-V-93 Page 6 Mr. Clements recommended that the same language be used. Mr. Lannon recommends that if the Village Board denies a case, then the super majority would be required. He does not feel that the Zoning Board of Appeals should define what a super majority is. Mr. Lannon then discussed the current ordinance Section 14.806.0 which gives residents the right to petition for amendments to be approved with a 3/4 vote. He suggested that this language be added to the proposedordinance. The members agreed to this. Ron Cassidy then brought up the language regarding the Zoning Board being final on variations. He stated that at previous workshops he and Chairman Basnik have indicated that they would prefer that 1 or 2 no votes would require Village Board approval. Mr. Basnik indicated that he feels that the Village Board is the ultimate authority. He stated that the Village Board must answer to residents and that the Zoning Board of Appeals is appointed. Mr. Basnik feels that there should be a way for the Village Board to review decisions made by; the Zoning Board of Appeals . Ms. Luxem questioned if the Village Board could request a .review of'a case. Mr. Basnik stated that in a discussion with the Mayor, the, possibility of,providing tapes of the meetings to the Village Board members was addressed. Mr. Basnik stated that the minutes are not transcripts,' and only the final result is indicated' and much of the deliberations are not included. Mr. Florins indicated that be could support two or more negative votes to require Village Board review. Messrs. Lannon and Brettrager indicated that they appeals process will be made easier and don't feel that people will be afraid to file an appeal. Mr. Lannon stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals would' only be final on variations and that all other requests would have Village Board review. Mr. Clements stated that the important thing is that the Zoning Board of Appeals has final authority with built-in checks and balances. The members decided to proceed with the draft language wirh the understanding that the minutes reflect the opinions of the minority. Mr. Clements then referred to the proposed Ironing map. He indicated that the proposed map reflects the existing land uses in relation to the new clmsifications. Peter Lannon questioned the proposals to designate current 13-4 gas stations to B-3 with a Conditional Use. The Zoning Board had no concerns about designating service stations with a B-3 Conditional Use, as it provides the Village with more control. However, members believed all property owners should be advised. ZBA-38-V-93 Page 7 In summary, the members felt comfortable with the proposed amendments. Mr. Basnik noted that he supports the ordinance with the exception of the Zoning Board being final for variations with four concurring votes and noted Mr. Cassidy's feelings being the same. Mr. Cassidy stated he also agreed that the ordinance was acceptable but noted he was uncomfortable with the elimination of a minimum lot size on Planned Unit Developments. Chairman Basnik then asked for a motion on the request, and Mr. Lannon moved that the Zoning Board of Appeals recommend approval on Case ZBA-39-A-93 to amend in its entirety Chapter 14, Zoning, with the amendments discussed at this public hearing being added by staff. The motion was seconded by Bob Brettrager. Upon Roll Call: AYES: Brettrager, Floros, Luxem, Lannon, Cassidy and Basnik NAYS: None The motion was approved by a vote of 6-0. This recommendation will be forwarded to the Village Board for their consideration. Respectfully submitted, 7 NA --- Ray %. FForsythe Planner Approved: & /4 COG 901d— M. Clements, Director R Planning COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE PLEASE NOTE EARLY START TIME Meeting Location: Meeting Date and Time: Mount Prospect Senior Center Tuesday, June 29. 1993 5OSouth Emerson Street 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL UL ACCEPTANCE OFMINUTES OF MAY 25,1993 Ui CITIZENS TQBEHEARD Items yVand Vwere originally scheduled for discussion aithe June 8 Committee wfthe Whole meeting. Due b»a storm -related power failure, that meeting was cancelled and the itemewemedeferredb»dhhommewtimg- Approxmabely GO days ago, the \0Uoge was formally approached by representatives from SL Emily's Elementary School requesting that the Village install a stoplight etthe intersection of Central Rood and Horner Lane for the purpose of assisting with the crossing of school children in the mornings and afternoons during the school year. Based upon Police Department surveys and a recent study performed by the Engineering Oivision, e total ofeight (8) children cross from the south aide of Central Road in order to reach Gi Emily's School. To the best of our knowledge all but one of those children live in Des Plaines. The request was based onthe belief that traffic volumes and automobile speeds made the crossing ofCentral Road asomewhat dangerous proposition. Currently, the Village provides a Crossing Guard toassist school children inmaking their way to the School. A study conducted by the Mount Prospect p#|icm Deportment during calendar year 1992 indicated that there was ajuoUfieb|e safety concern. The question ofsafety involves not only the school children but also extends tothe Crossing Guard. The initial Police Department conclusion was that these safety concerns warranted the discontinuation of a Crossing Guard and implementation ofalternate modes oftransporting the children to school. While the safety cf these school children iswithout question a vital oonoenn, it is also appropriate to |##k at the cost of providing the required measure of safety; how that cost should be distributed and identify less costly alternatives that would provide atleast the same level ofsafety asthe proposed stoplight. The estimated cost oythe stoplight is*12O.O00. Monthly maintenance would run *100. Even with the stoplight, aCrossing Guard would still berequired tomonitor Village Board members directed staff to study the situation further and present a range of options. The information attached hereto will help to facilitate that discussion. In addition to appropriate Village staff, Sister Danielle, Principal of St. Emily's School, has been invited to attend along with the City Manager of Des Plaines Walter Douthwaite. V. POLICE AND FIRE HEAD QIJART9RS UPDATE Since June 8, Police and Fire operations have moved to the new building. Staff is busy settling in and becoming acclimated to the facility. Cut -over to the new Village phone system was completed on June 22 with fine tuning continuing as needed. Presented here for your review and approval is a Change Order in a not -to -exceed amount of $34,265. The vast majority, of the items address safety concerns. Over half of the cost is attributable to three areas: The elevator, uninterrupted power supply (UPS) and an attic smoke and fire detection system. All of the changes are essential to the efficient long-term maintenance and operation of the building. Your information package also contains final reconciliation costs associated with previously approved Change Orders. Final costs were approximately $3,800 less than the established "not-lo-exceed"amounts. The attached Project Budget recap continues to show the entire project to be substantially under the original Referendum estimate. Appropriate staff will be in attendance to answer your questions. VI. PHASE III FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT UPDATE This fiscal year, four major flood control projects were, scheduled for construction: (1) Des Plaines River Backwater Valves, (2) Prospect, Manor/North Main sanitary, (3) Hatlen Heights sanitary and (4) Fairview Gardens sanitary. All projects have been under way since late March. The Des Plaines River and Fairview Gardens projects have been substantially completed. It appears that the Fairview Gardens Project will come in under budget while the Des Plaines River project will be completed at a cost slightly above the original estimate. A final Change Order on this latter project will be presented to the Village Board at an upcoming meeting. Design errors on the Hatlen Heights project have been previously reviewed by the Village Board and staff is currently working on remedial plans per Board direction. The Prospect Manor/North Main Project had been progressing smoothly until the recent discovery of a 1,350 foot section of extremely deteriorated existing combined sewer pipe in the 400 and 500 blocks of North Emerson Street. This line currently serves the neighborhood and was not scheduled for replacement or abandonment as part of the Prospect Manor project. Due to its location relative to excavation for the new relief line,, serious concern exists that this pipe will collapse during construction. Regardless, the pipe is in such bad condition that it would be prudent to replace it now while the streets open. The estimated cost for said repairs is approximately $115,000 plus engineering fees. Staff is researching whether the costs will be eligible under the IEPA Loan Program. The information package contains a detailed description of the problem along with staff recommendations. Herb Weeks and appropriate staff will be in attendance to facilitate discussion. ` VUL DISCUSSION REGARDING POOL CAR FLEET MAINTENANCE During the 1093-1804 Budged Heahngs, the Board expressed an interest in reviewing the Village's current Fleet Maintenance and Replacement Program. Staff has conducted e preliminary review and several hours ofdiscussion have token place. At this time, my conclusion iathat the Program is adequately sewing the needs ofthe Village. However, |feel that discussion atthe Board level will be helpful in creating abette understanding of the Program including its design, review criteria and subjective components. The discussion will also allow Board members hmpursue specific onaae of interest. Discussion is limited to that portion of the Program covering automobiles; ie, squads, staff cars and pool osna. Future discussion regarding specialized vehicles and equipment will bediscussed aapart cfindividual Department reviews. Your information package should provide a broad overview of the Program and appropriate staff will beinattendance tofacilitate discussion. VUi MANAGER'S REPORT IX. ANY OTHER BUSINESS X. ADJOURNMENT