HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/25/1960 VB minutes MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD
OF TRUSTEE~ HELD IN THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING
OCTOBER 25, 1960
The meeting was called to order by President Lams at 8:02 P.M. roll call
and the following trustees answered Present: Airey, Casterline, Gaw,
Norris and Schlaver. Trustee Ekren arrived later.
Trustee Airey, seconded by Trustee Casterline, moved that the minutes
minutes of' the previous meeting be approved as submitted. The President
put the question, the Clerk called the roll, with the following response:
Ayes, Trustees Airey, Casterline, Gaw and Ekren. Pass, Norris and
Schlaver. Whereupon the President declared the motion carried.
Trustee Gaw, seconded by Trustee Airey, moved that the following
bills for the week of October 25th be approved:
General $4,371.63
Garbage 79.84
Water 3~908.60 bills
$8,380.07
The President put the question, the Clerk called the roll, with the
following response: Ayes, Trustees Airey, Casterline, Gaw, Norris and
Schlaver. Absent, Ekren. Whereupon the President declared the motion
carried.
Trustee Gaw, seconded by Trustee Norris, moved that the Financial
Report for the month of September, 1960 be accepted and placed on file. Financial
The President put the question, the Clerk called the roll, with the Report for
following response: Ayes, Trustees Airey, Casterline, Gaw, Norris September
and Schlaver. Absent, Ekren. Whereupon the President declared the
motion carried.
Trustee.Ekren arrived at 8:08 P.M. and took his seat.
Trustee Airey read again report from the Board of Appeals re
Case 60-19 (K16im, see minutes of Sept. 13th) and then read the following
report from the Judiciary Committee:
Zoning Case
"After having considered'many facets of the proposed rezoning on 60-19 Klein
Case 60-19, it is the unanimous recommendation of the Judiciary
Committee that the petition for reznning to light industrial use be
denied.
"We have reviewed the hisotry of the present zoning and considered the
potentia~ of the petitioned rezoning, together with the current factors
affecting the subject land, the adjoining area and the Village. Under
the circumstances, as we have reviewed them, the Judiciary Committee
has determined that the appropriate use of the site is its present
zoning classification, R-l, single family residences.
"Petitioner has failed to establish in what manner the public health,
safety, morals and welfare of the Village will be enhanced by the
proposed rezoning.
"I therefore move that the Board of Trustees concur in the recommen-
dation of the Board of Appeals that the petition in Case 60-19 be
denied and that the Village Clerk be directed to notify the petitioner."
Trustee Ekren seconded the above motion. The President put the question,
the Clerk called the roll, with the following response: Ayes, Trustees
Airey, Casterline, Ekren, Gaw, Norris and Schlaver. Whereupon the
President declared the motion carried.
M~. Donald Birchler, 810 West Busse, arose from the audience
announcing that he was chairman of the Citizens Committee of West Mount
Prospect and would like to thank the Board for their decision in this
October 25, 1960
oning Trustee Airey read the following memo from the Judiciary
Case 60-~0 Committee re Case 60-20, Di Mucci (see minutes Sept. 13th):
Di Mucci
"Board of Appeals Case 60-20 concerns rezoning to commercial and ~
apartment uses a parcel of land of approximately 15 acres at the
southwest corner of Golf Road and Route BB. This land is adjacent
to the Village of Mount Prospect and also the City of Des Plaines.
"This land has a history, having been the subject of a rezoning
hearing in February of 1968. We find some changes have occurred in --
the vicinity and some changes in the new petition compared to 1968.
The basic issues have remained unchanged.
"The Committee finds that the classifications sought are u~favorable,
that proposed development does not comply with Village ordinances
and that the land and its ~opoaed uses will not be adequately and
properly served with sewer and water facilities. This particular
location, its planning and buffer zoning were again considered as
in the previous hearing. The Judiciary Committee fiuds the proposed
zoning classifications, along with the terms and conditions of the
petition to be injurious and contrary to the Public Welfare.
"Petitioner has failed to establish in what manner the public
health, safety, morals and welfare of the Village will be enhanced
by the proposed rezoning.
"I therefore move that the Board of Trustees concur in the recommen-
dation of the Board of Appeals, that the petition in Case 60-20 be
denied and that the Village Clerk be directed to notify the petitioner."
Discussion followed; Trustee Schlaver then spoke in favor of the
request of Di Mucci, giving the following reasons:
"I favor annexation and rezoning of the area at Golf and Elmhurst
Avenue for business because:
"l. Whether we as a Board or the residents nearby favor it or not,
I feel that this area will most certainly become business, either
in Des Plaines or under county zoning. I would rather see it part
of Mount Prospect and under more stringent regulation, as I feel that
is the only way to provide the protection that the residehts of the
Lonnquist area deserve.
"2. It makes sense from the standpoint of future water development
of Mount Prospect to accept Mr. Di Mucci's offer of a site which can
be used for a medium-size reservoir to provide adequate water pressure
in that area.
"3. From the standpoint of economic gain to Mount Prospect it certa~ly
makes sense to have the sales tax From business ~evelopment used ~or
corporate purposes in this village For the benefit of all the residents.
There will not be a tax load which would accrue if residences are
developed, and they certainly would not be large area residences if
built under county regulations.
"4. Lastly, the annexation of this ~. property I feel is a logical
stoop for Mount Prospect's expansion to the south and ultimately
perhaps to the United Air Lines development which would be a beneficial
tax boon to this Village."
There was some disagreement with certain of Trustee Schlaver's
assumptions, in particular with the last one. Trustee Airey asserted
that Mr~ Di Mucci's request appeared rather speculative. Mr. Di Mucci
indicated that he would be willing to work out an agreeable solution
regarding sewers and zoning. Certain neighboring citizens of the
area asked questions of the Board and Mr. Di Mucci -- Mr. Lewis E.
Schueler, 909 S. Ioka; Mr. James Herrel, 914 S. Ioka; Mr. P. Carponelli,
402 Nest Golf Road and Mr.~ A. C. Fontaine,' 902 S. Ioka.
October 25, 1960
Trustee Airey withdrew his motion for denial with the following Zoning Case
stipulations required of Mr. Di Mucci from the Board: That 60~20
Mr. Di Mucci will contact the Village Engineers, Com~oer, Townsend Di Mucci
& Associates, and work out an agreement cnncerning installation of
storm and sanitary sewer; that Mr. Di Mucci will put h*.s proposals and
amendments in writing; also agreeing to a covenant running with the land
as in the case of. Randhurst and Mt. Prospect Plaza Shopping Centers.
Trustee Casterline discussed the leasing of squad cars, Police Dept.
~-~ stating that such market is narrower than it was and that the bids Souad cars
received for this leasing were not what the Village had hoped for;
that he put forth the following motion in the expectation that there
would be Village-owned garage facilities for all Village vehicles in
the future.
Trustee Casterline, seconded by Trustee Gaw, then moved that the
Village Manager be authorized and directed to advertise for bids for
the p~rchase and future re-sale of four squad cars. The President put
the question, the Clerk called the roll, with the following response:
Ayes: Trustees Airey, Casterline, Ekren, Gaw, Norris and Schlaver.
BO Nays, none. Whereupon the President declared the motion carried.
~ Trustee Casterline also brought up the subject of setting up Traffic -
~ a police reserve system for use ae traffic police at High School Police Dept.
~E~ functions, athletic events, church functions, etc.
Trustee Gaw said that his committee and Mr. Appleby had met Village Hall
with Mr. Meyer (Meyer TV) re amplifications system and had decided Mikes in
against any temporary installation. He suggested that the architect meeting room
who has drawn plans for the Fire Station Addition be asked ~o draw up
a sketch for permanent installation at the front of the meeting room.
Trustee Gaw, seconded by Trustee Schlaver, moved that the Village Plans for
Manager be authorized to engage the services of the architect who is Meeting Room
~'~ planning the Fire Station Addition with the request that he submit
sketches of a plan for the frnnt end of the meeting room showing perma-
nent seating for the Board, with permanent amplifying system included.
The President put the question, the Clerk called the roll, with the
following response: Ayes, Trustees Atrey, Casterline, Ekren, Gaw,
Norris and Schlaver. Whereupon the President declared the motion
carried.
Mr. Appleby stated that the land to be dedicated for park in WeGo Park
We Go Park Subdivision is in fairly good shape as far as grading goes, Sub. park
but needs black dirt; that Randhurst Shopping Center (at Rte. @B and land
Foundry) was willing to sell same to Village for low price, as they are
now turning earth -- 800 yds. @ $1.25 per yard. Mr. Appleby also stated
that the Park Board would probably be willing to take over this area
if it were ~oto-tilled and seeded to grass.
The Board agreed that this was a good opportunity, and Trustee Gaw,
seconded by Trustee Ekren, moved to authorize the Village Manager to
purchase amount of black fill necessary; to hire Milburn Bros. to
spread this fill properly; and to use as funds a portion of the $4,000
allotted for this use by Town WeGo Subdivtd~ra. The President put the
question, the Clerk called the roll, with the following response: Ayes~
Trustees Airey, Casterline, Ekren, Gaw, Norris and Schlaver. Whereupon
the President declared the motion carried.
Trustee Ekren read the following statement:
"The hack wall of the building at 441-9 East Lincoln Avenue settled and J.A.Serafir
cracked badly. It was discovered that this had been constructed above Apts. on
the relief sewer constructed by the Metropolitan Sanitary District of E. Lincoln
Greater Chicago. Serafine Builders, Inc., the builders, hired Haemker &
Sons, Inc. to do some underpinning of the cracked wall. The Architectural
Committee was not convinced that the work done by Haemker was adequate.
After a conference of the builder, the Architec~ral Committee, Building
Committee and Superintendent of Building, it was agreed that Stanley
Engineering Co., Consulting Engineers, structural engineering department,
should make a study and report of the whole matter, and Mr. Serafine
agreed to pay for and abide by the decision of this company. Stanley
October 25, 1980
.A. Serafine Engineering Co. reported on April 21, 1960. A copy of their report
Apartments on is attached. In addition, Mr. Sommerschinld, registered structural
East Lincoln engineer, who made the study and report, verbally Suggested the
following remedial action:
1. Put abeam lengthwiSe under the footing and dig up
and encase all beams in concrete.
2. Dig up main sewer, replace and backfill with sand.
B. Tear the buildingdown.
"If subject building were to collapse, it Would endanger not only
the occupants thereof, but in addition would undoubtedly rupture
the relief sewer and disrupt sewer service for a large segment of the
Village, causing a serious health hazard.
"The Building Committee in the interestsof public health and safety
recommends that the recommendations of Stanley Engineering Company
be carried out before an occupancy permit for the Said building is
issued by the Building Department."
The following is a copy of a letter from Stanley Engineering
Company:
April 21, 1960
Mr. Douglas W. Carney
Superintendent of Building
Village cf Mount Prospect, Ill.
Dear Mr. Carney: Re: Investigation of Town HOuse Underpinning
Lot 5, Judith Ann Serafine Subdivision
The writer has made an inspection of the subject building to witness
its present condition. It was noted that displacement had occurred
since the attempted corrective work was done.
A structural analysis of the various members in the supporting system
was made to establish thecause of this displacement. As a result of
this analysis, iq is reasonable to assume that the settlement which
has taken place is the result of several contributing elements. It
is also reasonable to expect additional settlement to occur subsequently.
The following enumeratesthe various elements which contribute to this
continued settlement:
1. By placing ~the shoring beams as they have been the
foundation wall becomes a beam between these SuPports
carrying the entire weight of the wall and the load
of the contributLng areas of roof and floors. These
walls are not reinforced and are presently cracked.
They have therefore already contributed to the yielding.
Because they are not reinforced additional cracking due
to flexural stresses is to be expected. Such cracking ·
will contribute to a continued settlement.
2. While the method of seating the shoring beams has not
been ascertained it Us t° be expected that normal mortars
were used. Such mortars shrink and would permit incre-
mental settlement when'the loads were induced.
3. The structural steel beam used is adequate to carry the
loads imposed but not without deflection. By virtue of
the assurmptions made by the writer this deflection has
been computed to be about 1/4" and with small differences
in the assumptions could increase t° 3/$" or 1/2". This
is perhaps the greatest single contributing element to the
settlement. It is~possible that this deflection will
increase with time due to creep in the steel. It is
reasonable to assume, hoWever, that most of the deflecthn
in the steel.beamhas now taken Place.
October 28, 1980
4. Analysis indicates an approximate bearing pressure of 4000 J.A. Serafine
pounds per square foot under the caisson. This is a Apartments on
reasonable amount for normal construction. It is con- East Lincoln
ceivable however, that the loads imposed would produce
some settlement of the caisson. Obviously in underpinning
an existing structure any settlement would be objectionable.
5. The bearing pressures under the 4'0" square footing is
indicated to be in the order~oflSO0 lbs. per square foot.
While this is a relatively low bearing pressure, inasmuch
as this load is imposed on soil immediately adjacent to
the sewer excavation backfill, a potential yielding exists.
This yielding could continue until stability between the
sewer fill material and the undisturbed soil is reached.
The foregoing indicates reasons for the settlement which took place
subsequent to the attempted corrective measures. It also indicates the
probability that additional settlement can be expected.
The writer is of the opinion that the condition of this building is
potentially critical and recommends that occupancy be denied. The
attempted corrective measures are not satisfactory for the following
reasons:
1. The anticipated continued settlement would require continual
maintenance of the wall toassure livable quarters within
the building and to iRsure against serious damage due to
frost action.
2. The potential of deviations in wall alignment caused by
settlement may release the support of floor joists and
cause catastrophic structural failure.
3. Another source of trouble is the ultimate corrosion of
the steel beam. T his beam should have been encased in
concrete prior to backfilling around it. The method
employed will not produce serious stress in the sewer
pipe at this time. When the corrosion of the beam has
progressed sufficiently, however, f~ilure of the beam
could induce loads ample to rupture the pipe. Serious
structural failure of the building would'occur simul-
taneously.
It should be stated that the foregoing analysis is predicated upon a
relatively limited amount of recorded information. The magnitude and
imminence of the various factors outlined is therefore relative.
I trust this report of the existing condition and potential danger of
subsequent failure will serve to furnish you with sufficient information
to determine what action should be taken. If there is any way in which
we can be of further service to you, please call upon us.
Yours very truly,
H. F. Sommerschield
STANLEY ENGINEERING CO.
Trustee Ekren, seconded by Trustee Gaw, moved that the Building
Department shall withhold any occupancy permits from Mr. Dan Serafine
until the builder has satisfactorily met the structural requirements of
the Stanley Engineering Company in regard to the building at 441-9 East
Lincoln Avenue. The President put the question, the Clerk called the
roll, with the following response: Ayes, Trustees Airey, Casterline,
Ekren, Gaw, Norris and Schlaver. Whereupon the President declared the
motion carried.
October 25, 1950
Paving - Trustee Norris read the following letter £rom Consoer,
alleys Townsend & Associates re alley paving:
October 14, 1960
Mr. H. G. APpleby, Village Manager
Municipal Building
Mount Prospect, Ill.
Dear Mr. Appleby: Re: Alley Paving by Special Assessment
C..~ ~A. 60-69 --
Per your request we have separated the estimated cost of
the alley pavement project into two portions as follows. These
totals are Special Assessment prices including eng~ineering and
legal fees.
1. Estimated Cost of Alley South of
Prospect Ave -- Pine to Wille $8,031.40
2. Estimated Cost of Alley North of
Northwest Highway -- Mount Prospect
Road to Milburn Avenue $~370.85
If (1) above is detached from the project and done as a
separate sm~ll project the estimated cost would increase somewhat
because of reduction in volume.
Very truly yours,
William J. Cadigan
Consoer, Townsand & Associates.
This matter is to be put on the agenda for the next meeting of the
Board of Local Improvements.
Trustee Schlaver, seconded by Trustee Ekr~n, moved for the
passage of Ord. 732 as follows:
Ord. 732
S.A.#80 AN ORDINANCE WITH REFERENCE TO PAYMENT OF SPECIAL
ASSESSMeNT,BONDS & VOUCHERS ISSUED TO ANTICIPATE
COLLECTION OF S.A. #60 COUNTY COURT OF COOK COUNTY
The President put the question, the Clerk called the roll, with the
followin~ response: Ayes, Trustees Airey, Casterline, Ekren, Gaw,
Norris and Schlaver. Whereupon the President declared the motion
carried.
Fence erection Trustee Schlaver stated that bids had been received from a
at Well #5 and number of firms regarding erection of fence at Pine Street and
Pine St. prop- Well #5. Trustee Schlaver, seconded by Trustee Ekren, moved that
erty of Village the ViSage accept the bid of Semmerling Fence Erectors, who were the
low bidders, which was in the amount of $1,016.50 for the Pine Street
property and $2,023.20 for the property at Well #5, totalling
a sum of $3,039.70.
The President put the question, the Clerk called the roll, with the
following response: Ayes, Trustees Airey, Casterline, Ekren, Gaw,
Norris and Schlaver. Whereupon the President declared the motion
carried.
Trustee Schlaver added that he would be interested in having these
properties landscaped after the fence is erected.
Trustee Schlaver, seconded by~rustee Gaw, moved for the
Ord. 733 passage of Ord. #733:
Fire Station
Add'n bonds AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE SUBMISSION TO THE
VOTERS ~F THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT THE QUESTION
OF ISSUING $195,000 MUNICIPAL BUILDING BONDS AT A
SPECIAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN AND FOR SAID VILI~GE .
ON THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER, 1960.
October 25, 1960
The President put the question, the Clerk called the roll, with the
following response: Ayes, Trustees Airey, Casterline, Ekren, Gaw,
Norris and Schlaver. No nays. None absent. Whereupon the President
declared the motion carried.
Village Manager Appleby read the following portion of a
letter from Village Attorney Downing, dated October 21st:
October 21, 1960
~-~ .H.G. Appleby, Village Manager
Village of Mount Prospect
· County
Dear Mr. Appleby: ~e.? Foundry Road -- Rand Road Rezonin$ Zoning
hearing
On Wednesday, October 1§, 1960 the Cook County Zoning Board
held a hearing with respect to their docket numbers 107 and 108. As
previously directed by the Board of Trustees, I attended on behalf of
the Village of Mount Prospect.
At the commencement of the hearing, upon request of the
petitoners, petitioners' docket No. 108 was changed from B-2 to
in lieu of their Original request to B-4. Consequently, the entire
area of land was petitioned to be change~ to B-B.
At the hearing considerable evidence was offered on behalf of
the petitioners. There was offered on behalf of the Village of Mount
Prospect the testimony of Eugene Baughmann of Evert Kincaid & CompanyJ
Mr. Baughmann testified it was his opinion the highest and best use of
the land was R-4 except for a small area Alon~ Rand Road immediately
north of the present B-4 zoning which he proposed should be extended
northward along the business zoned property on the opposite side of the
road. (Rand Road).
At the hearing the Village of Mount Prospect was granted
days in which to file a form~l ~rotest with the County Clerk in accor-
dancewith the statute. It is recommended that the Village of Mount
Prospect go on record as opposing these petitions on the basis that the
highest and best use of the property is not either B-2 or B-B but
is R-4.
Sincerely,
Robert J. Downing
Trustee Airey, seconded by Trustee Norris, moved that the Village
Clerk be authorized to fi~ a protest with the County Clerk re Zonin~
Cases 107 and 108, on behalf of the Village of Mount Prospect in accor-
dance with the State Statute.
The President put the question, the Clerk called the roll, with the
following response: Ayes, Trustees Airey, Casterline, Ekren, Gaw,
Norris and Schlaver. Whereupon the President declared the motion carried.
Mr. Michael Mokate submitted the following petition from
residents residing in the lO0-block of North Elmhurst Avenue:
Sidewalks
October 17, 1960 No. Elmhurs~
Presida~t & Members of the Board Mokate
~-~ of Trustees, Village of Mt. Prospect
Gentlemen:
The undersigned citizens, all of whom reside on the lO0-block
of North Elmhurst Avenue, declare their mutual concern over the hazards
to the safety of the members of their families caused by the lack of
pedestrian sidewalks on Elmhurst Avenue between Central Road and Henry
Street, and in front of St. Paul Cemetery. Further, these citizens
challenge the statements of those opposed to the construction of side-
walks, street pavements and curbing in the subject area as being incon-
sistent with established Village policy, discriminatory and reflecting
indifference to the welfare and peace of mind of specific citizens.
October 25, 1960
Sidewal~s on The trustees ~re requeste~toinitiate immediate and con-
N. Elmhurst current actions to provide for the construction of suitable and
Mokate adequate sidewalks in the aforenamed area without further or
unnecessary delay.
The above petition was signed by thirteen families.
Mrs. Vavra arose and read letter from Jack McHugh, President
of the Northwest Homeowners League, supporting the above petition. --
401 N. Eastwood Avenue
October 24, 1980
President and Board of Trustees
Village Hall, Mount Prospect
Gentlemen:
In recent weeks, a substantial number of homeowners on
North Elmhurst Avenue have comDlained to the Northwest Home Owners League
regarding the lack of a sidewalk on the east side of N. Elmhurst Ave.
between W. Henry Street and W. Central Road.
Vehicular traffic in and about this point has vastly increased.
This is due to the complete build-up of the Brickman residential area
at the north extremity of the Village; and due to additional traffic
flowing to and from Foundry Road and Central Road, as well as to and
from Prospect High School. Efforts on the part of motorists ~ avoid
the newly-installed arterial lights at the intersection of Foundry
Road and North Main Street (Rte. 83) constitute another reason wh~the
flow of traffic along the full length of ElmhurstAve. from Foundry
Road to Central Road has increased.
This increase in traffic is, then, a natural by-product
of the progress and expansion of the Village of Mount Prospect. It
is an inescapable thing. It follows, then, that arrangements must
be made for the continued safety of pedestrians in this area, parti-
cularly children.
So numerous and vehement have been the co~plaints by resi-
dents in this area to the Northwest Home Owners League, that we take
this opportunity to fully support the residents on this issue. We
..~strongly urge the Village Board of Trustees to take immediate and
effective action on the installation of a concrete sidewalk on the
east side of Elmburst Avenue from Henry Street to Central Road. This,
of course, includes the necessary legal steps making the installation
possible.
Our sincere thanks and appreciation for your co-operation in
this matter, and with best wishes from the Northwest Home Owners
~League, I remain
Very truly yours,
Jack McHugh, President Northwest
. Home Owners League, Mt. Prospect
WeGo Park Sub. Discussion was held re closing of Cathy Lane by Mr. Klein ~-~
Cathy Lane ~of Town WeGo, who claims this is a private street, that his insurance
is up and he does not want to be liable for any accidents. The
Manager's Office and Mr. Downing are looking intothismatter to
see what shall be done.
Trustee Norris, seconded by Trustee Casterline, moved for
adjournment, and the meeting was adJourned byacclamation at lO:B6 P.M.
/E. Robert Reyn~d~ Clerk
October 25, 1960