HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/27/1964 VB minutes MEETING OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES HELD
OCTOBER 27~ 1964~
President Schlaver opened the meeting at 8:10 P~M.
with the following members present: roll call
Busse Bruhl Casterline
· Ekren Phillips
Absent: Bergen
T~ustee Bruhl~ seconded by Trustee Phillips, moved
for passage of the following bills: bills
General $ 4,237.64
Parking System Revenue 12~9.~3
Library 2,870.54
Motor Fuel Tax f5,261.53
Fire Station Const. '64 225.00
Waterworks & Sewerage 1~.,757.10
$34,481.54
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse Bruhl Casterline
Ekren Phillips
Absent: Bergen
Motion carried.
~-~ Trustee Phillips, seconded by T~ustee Ek~en, moved
for approval as submitted ~ ~he minutes of October 20th. minutes
Upon roll call: Ayes: Busse Br~hl CastePline
Ek~en Phillips
' Absent:' Bergen
Motion carried.
Trustee Bruhl, seconded by T~ustee Cas~erline, moved
that Warrant C1819 dated August 19, 1964 issued ~o Mt.' Prospect Finance
Auto Parts in the amount of $4.89 and drawn on ~he Waterworks
& Sewerage Fund be cancelled~ as it has been lost, and that the
Village T~easurer be authorized to issue another warrant to
replace this cancellation.'
Upon roll call: Ayes: Bruhl Busse Casterline
Ekren Phillips
Absent: Bergen
Motion ca~ied.
President Schlaver reported that the State Highway Highway Div.
officials will allow placing of hand-actuated controls as a temp- traffic
orary measure, for a period not ovem 6 months, at Gregory and Gregory $ 83
Main. Estimates of cost are about $1~000.00
President Schlaver also reported that the Highway offi-
cials are willing to re-survey traffic at Lonnquist and 83 for
foot traffic.
October 27, 1964
1d Orchard President Schlaver announced that the Board meet-
Country Club lng this evening incorporated a public hearing on pre-
annexation agreements with 01d Orchard Country Club, intro-
ducing Attorney Hofert, who explained that the issue is
whether or not to enter into a pre-annexation agreement with
the owners of Old Orchard Country Club. Attorney Hofert
.outlined the terms and also mentioned issuance of liquor li-
censer, one to take the place of that already held in the
County, allowing entertainment and 2 o'clock closing hour on
Saturday night and others to serve the complex of motel
operations. Re dedication of Schoenbeck Road, Mr. Aldrich
repeated that if it is necessary to dedicate this road they
would be happy to work with the County and Village for its
dedication. Mr. Hofert pointed out that tract of land
(Exhibit C & F) is also being deed~4dto the Village to be used
only as open space, its dedication for the purpose of enforcing
the protective covenants reserving open space.
Mr. E..F. Gegenwarth, 4 North Schoenbeck Road,
Prospect Heights, and Mr. Blayne Carlson, 510 S. Albert, Mount
Prospect, asked ~questions about the high rise and types of
buildings, and possible forfeiture if plan is not completed -
respectively. Dayid Chuboff, 3 Oxford Place, asked about
water, how the lines would ~un, who would pay assessments.
The reply to that was that there are mains running along 83
and around Old Orchard~ any abutting lot on Elmhurst and Camp
McDonald Road might be served. Properties on Etmhurst Road
(83) would pay a connection fee but no other properties in
Wedgewood Terrace~ future water brought to Wedgewood Terrace
would not be supplied from this trunk.
Mr. Charles Kimball: Why has the ~oard of Trustees not gone
along with the advioes of the Zoning Board, who recommended --
denial of this plan? Attorney Mofert replied that this is
really a policy question before it is a zoning question~ Pres-
ident Schlaver explained that the Board of Trustees is the
final responsible authority~ taking into account other factors
besides the zoning. George Sandford, 510 N. Emerson and his
brother, Don Sandford, il0 S, Mt. Prospect Road, expressed
opposition. Fir. Ray Johnston spoke in favor of this develop-
ment, also Mr. Bell of l0 Glenbrook Drive, Prospect Heights;
Walter Griffith, 510 Garwood~ Mr. William Paley~ who runs
Memory Gardens Cemetery, and Mr. John Czereohowics of 309 Golf
Lane. All the immediately foregoing gentlemen are close
neighbors of 01d Orchard Country Club. Their consensus was
that this development will ease the tax burden and be consi-
derably more welcome than many sir~le family h~mes with
children to send to school. Mr. Harold Ross of the Zoning
Board expressed himself in opposition.
Trustee Busse read the following opinion:
My reasons for voting for the 01d Orchard Open Space Develop-
ment:
1. From the reading I have do~e on the project and the
meetings I have attended concerning it, I am convinced
that it is a well-planned development designed for the ~-'
future which maintains open space on extremely high
cost land by the use of vertical buildings.
2. Safeguards and restrictions wmitten into the ordinances,
even ~hough new and untried in Court, appear well
thought out and sincere in their attempt to protect
the Village's interest as to the preservation of the
o~en space, as to density and ~ype of land use, and as
to building setbacks.
October 27, 1964
3. I am convinced that the Old Orchard Development will Old Orchard
be built even if the Mt. Prospect Village Trustees Country Club
turned it down.
~. Since I feel that the eventual construction of a part
or the whole of the project is a certainty, I believe
it should be in the Village of Mt. Prospect for the
following reasons:
A. IT will broaden the Real Estate Tax Base of the
Village.
B. Additional sales Tax, vehicle license fees~ and
construction p~mits and fees will accrue to the
Village.
C. Local village control of liquor licenses and
closing hours.
D. Mt. Prospect police would havejurisdiction.
E. Construction of all buildings will fall under our
building codes, and would be directly enforced by
our own building department.
F. The Mt. Prospect Fire Department would be able to
enforce fire prevention regulations and would be
in command at all fires and not just called in to
assist in case of a fire un'er existing mutual
aid agreements be=ween suzm~ounding villages.
5. Finally, it is my personal opinion that the Old Orchard
Open Space Development will complement the Randhurst
Shopping Center due to its adjoining location and anti-
cipated activities, uses and design. Only the future
will Tell, but in the yeara to come, I believe that the
citizens of Mt. Prospect w~ll take pride in these two
quality developments.
T~ustee Bruhl stated That he and some helpers took a small
poll of 147 people regarding this .proposed development and
found no one in opposition.
Trustee Ek~en ~ead repomt and memo from the Zoning Eases 84-24 and
Board as follows:~ . · 64-25
Old Orchard
R E P O R T - October 24~ 1964 Country Club
Re:Cases 64=24 and 64-25, 01d O~chard Country Club
Heard June 8 and June 11, t964
This is a request to rezone from R-1 to the Open
Space Zoning District known as ord. 992, contingent upon annex-
ation.
The vote was 5-1 to deny.
M E M 0 R A N D U M - October 2~. ~g~4
As of August 25~ we have been requested to apply the
Open Space Zoning District to the 61d Orchard property. As a
result of trustee action on October 6, 19B4 the study was ac-
celerated, and a directive for a report was asked for by October
24th. Accordingly, the Chairman of the Board of Appeals called
for a meeting for October 21 for the stated purpose, and a vote.
October 27, 1964
ld Orchard CC
· The vote was $ not to recommend~ and t vote 'to
Zoning recommend. Both actions refer to O~d. 992 as applied to the
Old Orchard property and to the B-3 zoning of the out-lot.
In the 2-hr. discussion, a continuing effort was exerted~
not entirely satisfactory~ to limit the discussion to The
announced subject.
E. F. Martin, Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
An attorney named Samuel Lawton appeared on behalf
of Dan Congreve, who lives at Gregory and MacArthur~ listing
certain objections to the legal set-up of the notice of
hearing, contract, covenants, etc. Attorney Hofert said that
each point would be replied to.
Trustee Ekren, seconded by T~ustee Phillips~ moved
to direct the Attorney to prepare The necessary documents for
annexation of the Old Orchard tract in accordance with plans
therein submitted.
Upon ~oll call: Ayes: Busse Bruhl C~sterline
Ekren Phillips
President Schlavem
Absent: Bergen
Motion carried.
It was now 10:45 P.M.
Trustee Phillips, seconded by TI'ustee Ekren, moved
Elk Grove Rural
not to accept proposed contract from Elk Grove Rural Fire
Fire Distr.
P~otection Distmiot, as he did not think it a fair proposal,
and moved further that the Village Manager be directed to so
inforln the attorney representing the Fire Distmict.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Bruhl Busse Phillips
Ek~en Casterline
Absent: Bergen
Motion carried.
T~ustee Phillips, seconded by Trustee Bruhl, moved
to purchase from Gmeat Lakes Fire & Equipment Company brass
Fire Dept. goods and 4000 feet of hose for $8,521.50.
Upon ~oll call: Ayes: B~uhl Busse Phillips
Ekren Casterline
Absent: Bergen
Motion carried.
T~ustee Ekren, seconded by Trustee Bruhi, moved for
Ord. 1003
Annexation the passage of OPd. 1003:
Linneman property ANNEXING PROPERTY TO THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF CYPRESS DRIVE ACROSS
FROM THE ROBERT FROST SCHOOL AND 533 ft.WEST OF
LINNEMAN ROAD.
This property is vacant, petitioners Arthum and Emma Linneman.
Upon roll call: Ayes: Bruhl Busse Phillips
Ekren Casterline Pres. Schlaver
Absent: Bergen
Motion carried.
October 27~ 1964
Trustee Ekren read report re Zoning Case 64-16: Zoning Case
64-16
October 27, 1964
· Planned Manufacturing District
- Scheduled fo~ hearing April 24, 1964, continued
· On 'agenda for May 22, continued
On agenda for June 26, continued
On agenda for July 15, heard
This case involves a proposal to create a planned
industrial zoning district, identifying numbers or letters
not having been made. The Board of Appeals acting as a
Zoning Commission voted 4-0 to recommend its adoption as
revised by general agreement.
E. F. Martin, Chairman
This report was referred to the Judiciary Committee.
Trustee Casterline informed the Board that a Street Dept.
leaf-collecting device is available on the market for about Leaf truck
$3600-$3700, which will use a vacuum system to remove the
leaves from wherever they might have settled, shreds them
fine and blows them into a tmuck which holds quite a large
amount of this compacted material.
Trustee Bruhl, seconded by Tmustee Phillips, Village-owned
moved to authorize 'purchasing of a glass case to preserve property
historical items of interest to the Village. This motion
carried by acclamation.
It was thought that this case might be kept in the lobby,
wired with a burglar alarm~in case of vandalism.
Trustee Bruhl read the following letter from Insurance for
R. E. Swenson~ Chairman of Citizens Advisory Committee on Village
zn*urance:
August 3, 1964
Mr. Harry Bruht, Trustee
Dear Sir:
With the Village authority, we have solicited
quotations for an appraisal Of the Village of Mt. Prospect
properties for the determination of current values and
insurance purposes.
-Our bid specifications to the bidders were as
follows:
The field portion of the appraisal Work must
consist of an inspection and a detailed inven~
tory of the properties by thoroughly experienced
appraisers, who shall make an investigation and
a record of the extent, quality, character, con-
diti°n and the Utility of each item or classifi-
cation of building, showing reproduction or
replacement value new, rate and amount of accrued
depreciation, sound value, insurable value, and
value of pmopertyexCluded from insurance cover-
-age. The appraisers must not use anysquare foot
or cubic foot or short form lump estimates in
establishing values,
This completed meport is to be ~typew~itten in detail and bound
in suitable binders.
October 27, 1964
Insurance
We invited three reputable appraisal companies
to bid this work and submit their proposals.
1. Coats ~ Burchard Company, Chicago, Ill. $1,875.00
2. Industrial Appraisal Company, Chicago,Ill. 1,440.00
8. Marshall and Stevens, Chicago, Ill. 1,050.00 --
We have reviewed all three proposals and feel that
the low bid by Marshall and Stevens Company should receive
youm serious consideration. Ail three appraisal firms have
excellent reputations in the industry, and as each are pro-
posing to do the same type of work, we feel in our opinion
~hat the job should be awarded to the 'low bidder, Marshall and
Stevens Company.
It is our further suggestion that no payment is to
be made for this appraisal until the field notes have been
approved by the Village Board or its duly appointed representa-
tives.
Respectfully submitted,
R. E. Swenson, Citizens Advisory Committee
Trustee Bruhl~ seconded ~y Tr-astee Phillips, moved that the
Village authorize an appraisal by Marshall & Stevens in ac-
cordance with recommendations made by R. E. Swenson.
Upon ~oll call: Ayes: Bruhl Busse Casterline
Ek~en Phillips
Absent: Bergen
Motion carried.
Finance Trustee Bruhl repo~ted that auditoms Ernst & Ernst
Auditors had given thei~ report to him and to the Board of Trustees,
that requirements had been complied with. Following is a
letter f~om E~nst & Ernst addressed to the Board of Tmustees:
June 22, 1964
Attention~ Chaircnan of Finance Committee:
Du~ing our examination of the financial statements
of the Village of Mount Pmospect, Illinois fo~ the year ended
April 30, 1964, we found the internal controls and accounting
procedures to be generally well conceived, and the accounting
records to be kept current in a proficient manner. The oper-
ation of the Finance Department appear to serve the Village
very creditably.
We believe the volume of documents and invoices
processed by the Village warrants the purchase of a document
pemforator to cancel an enti~e sheaf of documents rather than
using a paid stamp on invoices. Such $ machine would lessen
the possibility of inadvertent or intentional reuse of in-
voices and/or other related documents and could be used to
mutilate any other documents which the Village has occasion
to cancel such as paid bonds and interest coupons.
Due to the recent c~ange in the court system, Vil-
lage personnel are unable to verify that traffic fines are
collected for all arrest tickets ~ssued and that all fines
October 27, 1964
mposed are remitted by the Circuit Court of Cook County.
This situation is caused by the absence of adequate detail
in the reports of the Circuit Court as to which specific
fines are being remitted. While we understand that the
reporting function will be Lmproved in the near future, the
Village should follow up to urge that the situation be cor-
rected. Once coz~eoted, procedures should be adopted to as-
sure that the Village is certain of the disposition of all
arrest tickets issued. These procedures should also encom-
pass follow-up on parking meter violation tickets.
Purely as a matter of information we wish to point
out that the control over signature plates continues to be
as outlined in our letter of July 25, 1963.
Our comments and suggestions are made solely in
the interest of improvement of Village operations and inter-
nal controls and are not intended to zeflect on the honesty
or integrity of any officer or employee. We received full
courtesy and co-operation from the employees in all depart-
ments during the conduct of our examination.
Ernst & Ernst
Trustee Bruhl gave report from the Finance Com- Payroll
mittee regarding possible hiring of personnel consultants
to set pay rates. This report has been reproduced separately.
Trustee Bruhl gave motion to authorize the Village Manager
with assistance of department heads to draft specifications
and give recommendations, presenting same to Village board for
approval, then securing price quotations from auditors and
other consultants for their performance. This motion was not
seconded, but was withdrawn after the Village Manager
quested meeting with the members of the Board first to see
exactly what would be required. The Board members gave favor-
able indication of this idea and agreed to discuss the question
among themselves and with the Manager.
Trustee Bruhl read the following letter from engi-
neering firm of Greeley & Hanson: Bluett Sub.
October 22, 1964 water
Gentlemen:
In accordance with instructions from Mr. King, we
are proceeding with an appraisal study of the Fairview Water
Company properties located approximately at Central Road and
Wolf Road east of Mount Prospect. We suggest the compensation
for this work at rates similar to those set for the previous
appraisal studies, which are as follows:
For Time of Partners - - - $200 per working day.
For Time of Engineering
Assistants - - - Actual salary x 2.
Expenses - - - Actual cost to us.
We understand that this work is to be completed by
November 4, 1964. Please advise if our understanding of the
proposed work is incorrect.
Yours very truly,
Carl W. Reh, Greeley & Hanson
T~ustee Bruhl, seconded by Trustee Ekren, moved to accept
terms shown in preceding offer.
October 27, 1964
Upon mo%l.¢all: .Ayes: Bruhl Busse Casterline
Ekren Phillips
Absent:~ Bergen
Motion ca~ried
The B°amd agreed'to hg!d nO me,tin~ for thefoi. .--~
lowing Tuesday be~auseit falls o. e~e¢.tion day. .. :!
Adjournment by acclamation at 11:32 P.M.
.'.. Respectfully submitted,
October 27, 1964