HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/26/2000 COW minutes MINUTES
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
SEPTEMBER 26, 2000
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:33 p.m. by Mayor Gerald Farley. Present at
the meeting were: Trustees Timothy Corcoran, Paul Hoefert, Dennis Prikkel and
Irvana Wilks. Absent from the meeting were: Trustees Richard Lohrstorfer and
Michaele Skowren. Staff members present included Village Manager Michael
Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Community Development
Director William Cooney and Deputy Community Development Director Michael
Blue.
I1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approval of Minutes from August 22, 2000 was deferred.
Approval of Minutes from September 12, 2000 was deferred.
Both sets of Minutes were deferred due to the limited number of Board members
present.
III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
None.
IV. MISCELLANEOUS ZONING ISSUE DISCUSSION
Community Development Director Bill Cooney introduced the topic by stating
this is a follow-up discussion from several weeks ago in which floor area ratio,
minor administrative variation considerations, garage size and single-family
home tear-down criteria was discussed.
Floor Aree Ratio Discussion
He stated the floor area ratio example would be based on the lot coverage and
stated that the garage size and pavement area has a significant impact on the
percentage of coverage ratio which is typical depending on lot size of anywhere
from .63 to .75. Staff recommends a floor area ratio amount of .50.
General discussion from the Village Board members included the following items:
There was a discussion regarding the maximum height of a structure and the
impact of height on the structure's mass. There was also discussion regarding
the definition of a hardship and the need to better define a hardship for use by
the ZB^ members. There was also some discussion regarding whether the
redefinition of a hardship would limit people's ability to maximize the use of their
property.
Arlene Juracek, Chairperson of the ZBA, spoke. She stated the more
subjective a hardship is defined, the more difficult it is for the members to
determine whether a hardship actually exists. She would suggest the
consideration of a Conditional Use and the ZBA has considered economic
hardships in the past including protection of mature trees.
Keith Youngquist, member of the ZBA, spoke. He felt that the definition of a
hardship could be refined to help in the decision process.
Consensus of the Village Board was to retain the hardship definition as is
but monitor the requests for variations due to hardships to determine
whether unique circumstances are present. The Board also recommended
the floor area ration to be altered .50.
Discussion on Minor Administrative Variations
Community Development Director William Cooney is suggesting
administrative authority to allow residents to replace non-conforming structures if
they are limited to only a 10% variance. He stated there still would be the intent
to have the necessary Hearings but they would be administrative hearings and
appropriate back-up material would be provided to the Village Board.
General comments of the Village Board members included the following items:
There was a recommendation that a trial period be considered regarding this
administrative variation option. There was also a question regarding a piecemeal
approach that would possibly compromise the administrative variation and how
that would be controlled. It was also pointed out that there is a need to allow
neighbor input to variation changes.
Consensus of the Village Board was to establish a reasonable trial period
and allow administrative variations of a minor nature primarily regarding
driveway, patio and garage replacements on existing footprints,
ZBA Chair Arlene Juracek spoke. She stated the hardship cannot be of the
petitioner's making and would feel that the minor variance being limited to
specific items is worthwhile and would support the change.
Garage Size Discussion
Community Development Director Cooney stated that staff has reseamhed
the option of creating a sliding scale for garage sizes based on lot size, home
size and rear yard setback requirements. However, after the analysis, staff feels
it is unrealistic to create a sliding scale. Therefore, staff is recommending a
standard size as the permitted use and requests variations for a larger size
beyond that. He is recommending the Board consider a 672 or a 720 square foot
garage as a permitted use. Obviously, it is expected that in order for a garage of
this size, it would still have to meet the necessary requirements on the property
and if there were variations necessary, appropriate Public Hearings would be
undertaken.
General comments from Village Board members included the following items:
Severel Board members felt that a 672 square foot garage would be acceptable
but there were also concerns regarding the mass of the structure upon the lot
and the limitations the lot size contributes to the structure itself.
Consensus of the Village Board was to alter the Zoning Code to allow 672
square foot garages as permitted uses.
Single-Family Tear-Down and Design Review
Community Development Director Cooney stated that other towns have dealt
with this issue in different manners and has summarized those options in the
back-up material provided.
Generel comments from the Village Board members included the following items:
Some Board members do not see this issue as a major problem in Mount
Prospect and saw this as a good option for redevelopment and shows that Mount
Prospect is a very desireble community if people are willing to invest in the
property.
ZBA Chair Arlene Juracek spoke. She personally welcomes the
redevelopment and feels that the current restrictions in place are effective and
there would not be a need to alter them at this time.
Consensus of the Village Board was to monitor the number of tear-downs
and rebuilds to determine whether this issue starts to reduce the number of
homes overall throughout the community.
3
Mayor Farley suggested that staff look at whether the Village can require vacant
property to be planted in grass instead of maintained in gravel awaiting
redevelopment.
Mr. Cooney stated that he would research the option of putting the property in
grass and determine whether the Village could require it.
Mayor Farley also suggested some staff review regarding specific yard
landscaping that retains water runoff to supplement storm water management.
V. VILLAGE MANAGER'S REPORT
Village Manager Michael Janonis stated the 2001 Budget will be available
starting October 6 and the review sessions will be starting soon thereafter.
VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
Mayor Farley suggested the Village consider one COW meeting per month in
order to maximize the available staff and Village Board time.
The Closed Session for Personnel was cancelled.
VII. ~[~
Since there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:14 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
DAVID STRAHL
Assistant Village Manager
DS/rcc
H:\GEN~Cow~Minutes\092600 COW Minutes.doc