Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW Agenda Packet 02/22/2000 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA Meeting Location Meeting Date and Time Mount Prospect Semor Center Tuesday, February 22, 2000 50 South Emerson Street 7.30 p m I. CALl. TO ORDER - ROLL CALL Mayor Gerald L Farley Trustee Timothy Corcoran Trustee Dennis Prikkel Trustee Paul Hoefert Trustee Michaele Skowron Trustee Richard Lohmtorfer Trustee Irvana Wilks I1. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 8, 2000 III. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD IV. SOLID ,WASTE SERVICES In August of 1994 the Village of Mount Prospect entered ~nto an exclusive residential sohd waste contract with ARC Disposal Company The five (5) year and nine (9) month contract will expire Apn130, 2000, As you are aware, major changes ~n the sohd waste industry have s~gmficantly altered municipal solid waste programs Curbs~de recychng, automated collections, vOlume-based and user fee systems have enhanced muni~pal collection systems and reduced the amount of residential waste going to landfills. The Village's 34% diversion rate is one of the h~ghest m th~s area, and ~s attributed to ~ts modified volume-based approach to effective solid waste management At this time staff are prepared to present the results of their on-going d~scuss[ons w~th ARC Disposal to provide cost-effective and efficient serwces to the residents of Mount Prospect under a new residential solid waste contract. A summary of sohd waste services including proposed program additmns and enhancements and cost analysis of the proposed rates ~s provided for your review It Is appropriate at th~s t~me to d~scuss and respond to the ARC proposal for residential solid waste services Solid Waste Coordinator Lisa Angell, along with other appropriate staff and ARC representatives, will be available to provide background and answer questions on this topic V. VILLAGE HALL TAsK FORCE DISCUSSION At the Committee of the Whole meeting on February 8 the Village Board requested some suggestions from the staff regarding a possible task force group to d~scuss the possibility of a new V~llage Hall and input ~nto the community needs for a new famhty If such a task force were to be created, a specific charge should be considered at the outset so that any volunteer member of the group ~s fam~har with the goal of the enbre group The Vdlage Board should further conmder outl~mng the elements that may be critical ~n the dehberat~ons regarding the future of the V~llage Hall Staff has provided a bamc outline of possible ~tems to conmder as part of the conmderat~on for the creation of a task force and the possible charge to such a group Apprcpnate staff w~ll be present to famhtate the discussion VI. ANY OTHER BUSINESS VII. ADJOURNMENT CLOSED SESSION LITIGATION: - 5 ILCS 120/2 (c) (11)-'~/Vhen an action against, affecting or on behalf of the particular public body has been filed and ~s pending before a court or adm~mstratlve tnbunal, or when the public body finds that an action is probable or imm~nent, ~n which case the barns for the finding shall be recorded and entered into the m~nutes of the closed meeting" - · MINUTES ~ COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE , , ' FEBRUARY 8, 2000 I. CALL TO ORDER The meebng was called to order at 7.31 p m by Mayor Gerald Farley Present at the meeting were. Trustees Timothy Corcoran, Paul Hoefert, R~chard Lohrstorfer, Denms Pnkkel, M~chaele Skowron and Irvana Wdks Staff members present included Vdlage Manager M~chael E. Janoms, Assistant V~llage Manager Dawd Strahl, Pubhc Works D~rector Glen Andler, Finance Director Doug EIIsworth, Community Development Director William Cooney, Human Services Director Nancy ~ ' Morgan and Pubhc Information Officer Maura Jandns II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of M~nutes from January 25, 2000 Mobon made by Trustee Lohrstorfer and Seconded by Trustee Skowron to approve the Minutes' M~nutes were approved unanimously· III.CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None IV. VII-LAGE HALL DISCUSSION Vdlage Manager Janonis stated th~s is the beg~nmng of numerous d~scussions over the next several months to d~scuss the possible opbons regarding the V~llage Hall. He stated that in the 1980s, the commumty focused on building a new Public Works facihty. In the 1980s, the new Police and F~re building was constructed and most recently in the 1990s up unbl this point, there has been s~gmficant effort made , toward addressing flood control and street reconstruction needs The V~llage Hall is the last pubhc facihty and there has been some peripheral d~scuss~on regarding the Vdlage Hall for the last '15 years. The budding has basically reached the end of its useful I~fe and the staff has physically outgrown the facility Any decision on the ~status of the Village Hall wdl d~rectly ~mpact the momentum of the downtown redevelopment and the possible reuse of the property. Assistant Village Manager Strahl provided a summary of the reports that Vdlage staff has prowded to date He stated the Vdlage Hall is a commumty landmark to provide community needs and the basic quesbon is whether the facd~ty ~s fulfilhng the exisbng and projected future service needs of the community. 1 He h~ghhghted numerous c~t~zen service ~ssues w~thin the Vdlage Hall ~nclud~ng poor c~t~zen flow and no waiting areas and the ~nab~hty to group hke off~ce functions together to minimize the need to send residents to other departments for service He also h~ghhghted the fact there is very hm~ted meeting space for the pubhc and staff and there was no designated computer training room He stated electncal w~nng has gone beyond ~ts useful hfe and dunng some.recent office reconfigurat~ons, it was determined that extensive rew~nng wdl soon be cnt~cal The current electncal demand in the budding does not match the electrical service that was built into the budding some 38+ years ago He also stated there are a number of Code ~ssues relating to the budding including a lack of a spnnkler system, inadequate generator to supply emergency hght~ng and the mechamcal systems are ,no longer supported by vendors thus making replacement parts v~rtually impossible to come by The'.Semor Center has additional issues relating to ~nsuffic~ent meeting space and no ~ntake areas for providing service to chents ~ ,J " ..... Part of,the discussion in the past has been whether the Village Hall should be _moved to an alternate site In the downtown or moved out of the downtown or rehabihtate the existing site Based on just a general overview, it would seem that redeveloping the existing Village Hall s~te and combining the Vdlage Hall and Sen~or Center into one location would be the best option for the h~ghest and best use of the s~te The value of the ex~st~ng property that the Village Hall ~s currently located could generate an additional $200,000 the first year in Property Taxes for all taxing bodies and would allow the downtown redevelopment theme that will soon be under construction at Northwest H~ghway to extend down Emerson The projected cost for a Vdlage Hall/Semor Center ~s estimated at approximately $125 per. square foot w~th a total of 35,000 or 45,000 square feet or $5 6 m~lhon Th~s figure is only provided for d~scuss~on purposes only and ~t ~s not a firm figure and very httle research has been dedicated to ~t , . , In order to maximize the use of a new s~te, there would be the need for the ,construction of a parking structure,to prowde desperately needed downtown parking, commuter parking and additional parking for the Library ~tself. Such a parking structure would cost approximately $15,000 per parking space and ~t ~s ~ estimated that approximately 400 spaces would need to be constructed The estimated price for the parking garage ~s approximately $6 3 mdhon 2 Staff ~s suggesting that the V~llage Board determine whether the V~llage Hall (1) should be replaced, (2) evaluate whether the current Village Hall s~te should be redeveloped, (3) determine whether the V~llage Hall should be combined w~th the Semor Center and (4) determine community needs for the use of a new fac~hty It was suggested that the V~llage Board sohc~t ~nput from an Ad Hoc Community of community volunteers to formulate recommendations for the pubhc use aspect of "the V~llage Hall/Sen~or Center fac~hty, There obwously would have to be a clear charge to th~s committee for d~scuss[on so any recommendations would be dearly valuable in the V~llage Board dehberat~ons for a new structure Village Manager Janonis stated that staff has attempted to identify possible ' stakeholders ~n the discussion for d~scuss~on purposes and could further hone that list for the V~llage Board to consider Alicen Prikkel, 1731 West Pheasant Trail, Chairperson of the Youth Commission, spoke, She wanted to thank the Village Board for the inwtat~on to 'consider youth-activities as part of any fac~hty that may be considered for construction, She provided a hst of suggestions for the V~llage Board to consider 'to make a port~on of the fac[hty a teen center,~ John Korn, 301 North William Street, Chairman of the Finance Commission, spoke He stated that h~s concern is that the fac~hty must be built to accommodate current needs and all future space needs He does not personally prefer building above three stones and would encourage a review of other V~llage Hall s~tes in other towns m order to formulate recommendations for th~s s~te, b Jackie Hinaber, President of the Mount Prospect Library Board, spoke She stated that the LIbrary staff and the V~llage staff have had some general d~scuss~ons and talked about space needs and parking relationships between the two structures She would hke to propose the inclusion of a L~brary representative ~n the Ad Hoc Task Force ' ' Mike Zadel, 800 NaWaTa, Chairman of the Plan Commission, spoke He feels the current building is inadequate for current uses and has outhved its design hfe He would volunteer t(~ participate as a member of the Plan Commission on any Ad Hoc Committee to discuss the future of the building George Clowes, 604 South Elm, Chairman of TAP Mount Prospect, spoke He stated the Village Boardroom has value to the community because of its size and the variety of uses that it can incorporated He stated that TAP has d~scussed the use of a Teen Center in the past, however, through their discussions, it was found · that teens would most likely not use a Teen Center Club RecPlex was created to try to address the need for a Teen Center and thathas worked relatively well pnmadly through the use of professional staff when it was determined that volunteer staff did not work well, 3 He stated there ~s a s~gn~ficant expense to operate such a fac~hty and there should be some determination whether there is a need to duphcate services that may already be provided by the Park D~stncts He also suggested that a member of the , Park District be ~ncluded m the Task Force , General comments from V~llage Board members included the following ~tems There was a d~scuss~on whether the Village Hall should remain m the downtown There was also a discussion regarding the need to consider rehabd~tabon of the ex~sbng fac~hty There was also comments made regarding the consohdabon of the Village Hall and Senior Center to the same block that the Library currently resides on A comment was made recommending that the Task Force, ~f created, should look at the opbon of rehabd~tabon as part of their charge for~recommendabon to the Vdlage Board ~ ? ,~, ~ ? . ~- ~, Trustee Hoefert stated that th~s d~scuss~on has been deferred and work has been deferred much too long He stated the studies all say the same that the budding is currently deficient. He would feel that ~t is critical ~n h~s mind that the Vdlage Board consider going to a Referendum to decide whether to budd a new facd~ty or not He has personally made th~s commitment m the past and would recommend such action '~ .Other comments by Vdlage Board members included the follow~ng ~tems There was a discussion if the current Vdlage Hall was to be expanded w~th~n its current footpn~ nt, it would ubhze or, reduce currently valuable parking space and stop ,,. any add~tlo, nal development at the V~llage Hall property border. Some Trustees felt that ~t was time that the Vdlage Trustees themselves made the decision on whether to budd a new Vdlage Hall and do not feel a Referendum was necessary A comment was made at some point the value of rehabd~tabon costs,meet or exceed the cost of new construcbon Such costs should be considered in the discussion If rehab[htabon ~s considered, there would be significant relocabon costs whde the building was under rehablhtabon The community should prowde ~nput on what the ~ community desires for services to be built into the structure ~ ,,, ~, Trustee Wdks felt that It ~s ~mportant to ask the people through a Referendum to determine whether a new budding should be constructed~.~ ~ ~ ~ General consensus of~the Village Board was to consider creating a Task Force to make recommendations to the Village Board for~the future of the Village Hall. The charge of the Task Force would be ,considered at the February 22 Committee of the Whole~meeting at.which time staff recommendations for the charge of the Committee would be considered. The Village Board did feel that the Committee should look at co-location opportunibes and the public size or use of the building along w,th various funding options. There should also be some est,mate of rehabilitation costs included in the d,scussion by the Task Force even though the Task Force is not charged or may not be charged w~th the task of considering rehabil,tabon as an option instead of new construction. Committee or Task Force should be of a manageable size for valuable ,nteraction. Village Manager Janonis stated that he would bnng back any staff recommendabons to the February 22 Committee of the Whole meebng for the V,Ilage Board to consider pnor to creabng a Task Force. ~f desired V. MANAGER'S REPORT Village Manager Janonis stated that a meebng has been scheduled for February10 w~th the bus~ness representatives to d~scuss the Route 83 reconstruction He stated that Coffee w~th Council ,s scheduled for February 12 from 9 00 a m unbl 11.00 a m at the V~llage Hall He also stated that a c~bzens' meeting is ~n the process of being organized for early March to d~scuss the Route 83 reconstrucbon for all c~bzens to attend VI. ~,NY OTHER BUSINESS Trustee Hoefert wanted to thank all the parbc~pants ~n the Celestial Celebrabon and congratulated all the Award w~nners CLOSED SESSION Mobon made by Trustee Hoefert and Seconded by Trustee Skowron to move into Closed Session to d,scuss Litigation. Mobon was approved Meebng moved ,nto Closed Session at 8 52 p.m Meeting reconvened into Open Session at 12 42 a m VII. ADJOURNMENT No other business was transacted and the meeting was adjourned at 12.43 am. cffully submitted. DAVID STRAHL Assistant V,Ilage Manager DS/rcc H ~GEN~C~inutes\020800 COW Minutes doc 5 MAYOR ~ ~ Gera~d L Farley ~..~ TRUSTEES T~mothy J Corcoran Phone (847) 392-6000 Paul Wm Hoefert Fax (847) 392-6022 Richard U Lohrstorfer TDD (847) 392-6064 Dennis G Prlkkel Irvana K Wilks VILLAGE MANAGER M,chaelE Janon,$ Village of.Mount Prospect VILLAGE CLERK VelmaW Lowe 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Ill~no~s 60056 ~ To Assistant ~Vfllage Manager David Strahl ~ From Ahcen Pnkkel, Chair, Mount Prospect Youth Comnuss~on Re Mount Prospect Teen Center February I0, 2000 Here is a readable copy ~ofthe presentation I made to the Village Board on February 8, 2000 We suggest to the Village Board as they are in the process of ~ufldmg a new Village Hall that they consider all the opportumfies they have to serve the Youth of flus commumty We feel that It is ttme for the Board to build a Mount Prospect Teen Center At our meeting last mght we discussed some functions and needed eqmpment for the facility *We hope that the Teen Center will be a place for Teens to come and hang- out after school, chat with friends, and do thetr mounds of homework they get firom those pesky teachers *We would also like to see it become a drop-m help wth homework or a mentonng center *It would be a good place to hold small comnuttee for the Youth Conumsslon and d~scuss~on and support groups *We believe that many rhfferent programs can be held at the Center *We recommend that the Teen Center be open after school and on Saturday afternoons *The Youth Conumssion would be more than wfllmg to oversee the safekeeping of the Center : *Some equipment we would hke to have ~s -space for a job board, for merchants to post help wanted ads and teens to see where jobs were avmlable -we would hke a pool table, smhe~couches, and tables and chatrs -a pop maclune, a small refrigerator, and cabinets to hold ~ti~phes such as napkins, cups, and cleaning eqmpment ~ ' -we would hke a bulletin board, a wlute board, and a telephone for' the Youth Conumss~on's voice mml ' ' ~ vCould hk~ a sink'affd for heating food ' · '~ ~' and ldstly ~' - - a nucrowave and popping popcorn considerat~on and we look ,, ' We'hop~e that you will take our ideas into ' w~th you on fins issue m~ the future forward to working · ,-vu~,~es~'ecm'm' submltt~ ;~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Allcen Pnkkel Chaff, Mount Prospect Youth Conmusslon ,~ · ~ Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Ilhnois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E JANONIS FROM ASSISTANT VILLAGE MANAGER DATE FEBRUARY 18, 2000 SUBJECT VILLAGE HALL TASK FORCE OPTIONS The task force should be a representabve cross section of the commumty ~ncludlng c~t~zens who would hkely participate ~n actlwt~es or events at a new facd~ty A c~bzen task force group should focus their efforts on the commumty-related aspects of a new fac~hty, wh~le a separate group of V~llage staff review available options for admlmstrat~ve purposes in a new faclhty Both groups w~ll present recommendabons to the V~llage Board for consideration in a single report Commumty/C~tlzen Committee Suggestions (L~mlt the group to no more than 15 participants) · Representabve of Village Board - no more than 2 members · Representahve of the Semor Advisory Councd · Member of F~nance Commission · Member of the Plan Commission · Member of the EDC · Representabve of the Mount Prospect Pubhc Library · Representabve of School D~stnct 57 · Chamber Representative · Residential Representabve - no more than 2 persons · Youth Commission/TAP Mount Prospect Representabve - no more than 2 persons · Representative of Mount Prospect Park D~stnct · V~llage Staff halson Charge of the Group · V~s~t other V~llage Halls and commumty centers to gather ~nformat~on from other communities · Recommend commumty needs and space for projected acbwbes ILLAGE HALL TASK FORCE OPTIONS February 18, 2000 Page 2 · Recommend general or preferred location of community spaces in the facihty · Recommend height and floor areas for generat pubhc use · Architectural recommendations to foster a community landmark · Recommend Village green space s~ze and location · Parking lot recommendations regarding appearance enhancements · Co-location options (MPPL, SD 57) 1 would also suggest a parallel group of Vdlage staff be formed to draft recommendations specific to the adm~nlstrat~ve needs of the facihty Among the ~tems to be recommended wdl be how the community needs will be incorporated w~th the adm~mstrabve needs · Visit other V~llage Halls to gather ~nformabon on what works and ~,hat does not · Recommend office layout and relabonsh~p service functions to various departments · Recommend storage and meeting space needs · Recommend future staff space needs · Recommend technology enhancements and how enhancements can be built in for the future · Recommended staff/pubhc Interaction space needs · Security recommendations · Recommend pubhc broadcast needs · Consideration of green space and landscaping opbons ~, · Architectural recommendations to foster a community landmark Obwously the Wllage Board would need to determine what informabonal elements are ~mportant so that a full discussion and ulbmately a decision of the future of the Wllage Hall Is made The ~nformat~on presented ~n this memorandum ~s only ~ntended to garner d~rect~on and ~s not intended to be an exhaustive list of ~nformat~onal elements that the Wllage Board should consider in the deliberations regarding the future of the Village Hall DAVID STRAHL H \GEN\Village Hall\Task Force Opbons Memo doc INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM (2(..ou,,) ~"~ ,2-ZZ-oo TO VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E JANONIS FROM SOLID WASTE COORDINATOR DATE FEBRUARY 17, 2000 SUBJECT SOLID WASTE CONTRACT PROPOSAL/RECOMMENDATIONS RESIDENTIAL SERVICES COMMERCIAL SERVICES BACKGROUND In August of 1994 the V~llage of Mount Prospect entered ~nto an exclusive residenbal sohd waste contract w~th ARC D~sposal Company The five (5) year and nlne (9) month contract expire Apnl 30, 2000 As you are aware, major changes ~n the sohd waste ~ndustry have s~gmficantly altered municipal sol~d waste programs Curbside recychng, automated collecbons, volume-based and user fee systems have enhanced mumc~pal collection systems and reduced the amount of residential waste going to landfills The Wllage's 34% d~vers~on rate ~s one of the h~ghest m th~s area, and ~s attnbuted to Its modified volume-based approach to effecbve sol~d waste management While ~t appears most mumc~pal programs have stabilized, the soI~d waste haul~ng ~ndustry remains fluid An ~ndustry that at one time offered a compebbve market of small independent and major haulers has been drastically downs~zed through buy-outs and acqu~s~bons (The Wllage's sohd waste hauler, ARC D~sposal was purchased by Republic Services m the fall of 1998 ) Although not as chaobc, the effects of "over-buying and under-producing" conbnue_to plague the industry Compebt~ve market conditions beneficial to mumc~pal programs are rfc longer the norm In many cases reorgamzat~on at local offices has ~mpacted the servme quahty of municipal programs A recent survey of commumt~es w~th new sohd waste contracts ~ndmated that seven (7) out of the rune (9) commumbes e~ther negobated or extended their ex~sbng contract and two (2) went out for b~d Of the b~dd~ng commumbes, one ended up w~th h~gher rates than were proposed dunng negobabons w~th their waste hauler, and the other community received three (3) compebt~ve b~ds but due to poor performance d~d not accept the Iow b~d of their ex~stmg (Additional contract ~nformat~on ~s prowded on Attachment D, SWANCC Municipal Collecbon Rate survey ) At the April 14, 1999 Committee of the Whole Meeting Public Works staff were d~rected to engage ~n negobatlons w~th the Wllage's sofld waste hauler, ARC D~sposal Company for a new resldenbal sohd waste contract DISCUSSION/NEGOTIATIONS As you may recall, m August of 1991 the Vdlage s~multaneously entered ~nto ~ts first residential sohd waste contract w~th ARC D~sposal and adopted a modified volume-based sohd waste management system The comprehensive sohd waste program prowdes residents an opportunity to practice both economically and enwronmentally sound waste generation and d~sposal habits The success of the Vdlage's sohd waste program clearly hes w~th a un~ted community effort to reduce the residential waste stream and control sohd waste costs Attachment A outhnes current residential services Prior to the April 14, 1999 COW Meeting the Sohd Waste Comm~sslon conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the ex~st~ng program ~ncluding contract language The Sohd Waste Commission beheves the V~llage's modified volume-based refuse collection program ~s an effectwe approach for management of residential waste, and that ~t ~s well accepted ~n the community Therefore, the Commission's only recommendation was to include an option for subscription service for the collecbon of containerized/bagged yard material At th~s t~me staff ~s prepared to present the results of our on-going d~scuss~ons w~th ARC Disposal to provide cost-effectwe and efficient services to the residents of Mount Prospect under a new residential sohd waste contract A brief narratwe of res=dent~al services w~th proposed program additions and enhancements ~s h~ghhghted below Curb~ide S~ngle Famdy Refuse and Recychng Services Basic Services (no changes) · Modified Volume-Based Refuse Collection · Unhm~ted Recychng · Unhm[ted Collection of Bulk Items · Three Cleanup Weeks per year · Unhm~ted Collection of Brush · Christmas Tree Collection · Curbs~de coIlect~on of loose leaves (d~sposal) User Fee Programs (no changes) · Yard Material Collection · Excess Refuse · Sticker (Refuse/Yard Matenal) · Residential apphances Pro~3osed Enhancements/Additions · Corrugated cardboard mod~hcations of preparation reqmrements. Cardboard can be bundled or bagged next to the bin · The s~ze of acceptable corrugated w,II be increased to 3' x 3'; ARC ~s m the process of purchasing new recychng trucks · Scrap metal: dr(~p-off for scrap metal at ARC facd[ty; 2101 South Busse Road · Subscription Service for Yard Materfal Coilecbon Flat rate paid to ARC by user. 90-gallon toter Once a week collection (April through November) · Extended leaf program is included w~th the unhmlted brush collection fee. · Household Hazardous Waste Collecbon - Optional Servfce ARC will subcontract for a one (1) day household hazardous waste drop-off program each contract year. Fee based on contractual rates; approximately $50,000 per event. Mult~fam~ly Refuse and Recychng Services Centrahzed collection of res~denbal waste · Fee structure based on s~ze/number of refuse containers and service frequency. Centrahzed collecbon of recyclables · All matenals collected In curbslde collecbon · Fee structure based on number of 90 - gallon toters and frequency of s?rv~ce ARC D~sposal's Proposed Contractual Rates A detaded overview of ARC's proposed rates for s~ngle family and mulbfamdy refuse and recychng services are provided on Attachments B and C Attachments B and C also compare the proposed rates w~th the current fees for sohd waste services Results and Recommendations ' ' · Although proven to be a cost-effectwe solid waste management system the Vdlage's modified volume-based program remains fairly unique ~n the northwest suburbs, The Vdlage of Morton Grove ~s the only SWANCC community w~th a s~mdarly structured program Morton Grove recently negotiated a five (5) year extension of their ex~stmg sohd waste contract w~th Groot Waste Industnes The table below provides a companson of Groot's rates for s~ngle family refuse and recychng services with the ARC proposed rates for Mount Prospect single famdy refuse and recychng services It should be noted however, that whde the Morton Grove program closely parallels the Mount Prospect program there are vanances ~n services pro,~ded Residential Refuse and Recychng Cost Companson Combined Rate - Per un~tJPer month) Mount Prospect Morton Grove (proposed rates) Single Famdy Basic Serwce ~, Refuse/Recychng Year 1 $6 17 $8 31 Year 2 $6 42 $8 31 Year 3 $6 68 $8 46. Year 4 $6 95 $8 61 Year 5 $7 23 $8 76 For further analys~s Public Works staff compared the proposed 4% ~ncrease w~th the rate ~ncreases over the term of the current contract, August 1, 1994 through April 30, 2000 S~ngle Family Mulbfamdy Year 1 (August 1994 - July 1995) 5% ~ncrease 7.5% increase Year 2 (August 1995 - ,July 1996) 5% ~ncrease 7 5% ~ncrease Year 3 (August 1996 - July 1997) 5% ~ncrease 7 5% ~ncrease ·, Year4 (August 1997 - July 1998) , .4 5% ~ncrease 4 5% ~ncrease Year 5 (August 1998 - July 1999), 4 5% increase ,4 5 increase (August 1999 - April 30, 2000) ' No ~ncrease No increase The ARC proposal holds all rate ~ncreases to 4% per year, over the term of a new five (5) year contract, May 1, 2000 through December 31,2004 Finally, staff rewewed records and d~scussed ARC's Disposal serwce performance Wh~le staff regards ARC's overall performance as h~ghly satisfactory their commitment to resident sabsfacbon ~s of great value In addition to the daily on-site contacts w~th an ARC route supervisor, ARC customer servme staff are accessible to both staff and residents ARC d~rect service staff also assist w~th the Wllage's commun~lty educabon program by "tagging" unacceptable or ~mprol~erly prepared waste Collecbvely, the criteria presented demonstrate the favorable pricing and performance prowded by ARC D~sposal Company Therefore, ~t is the recommendabon of the Pubhc Works Department that the Wllage of Mount Prospect accept the ARC D~sposal proposal for res~d~nbal sol~d waste services Commercial Sohd Waste Services At the April 14, 1999 Committee of the Whole meeting Pubhc Works staff were dtrected to request a proposal from ARC D~sposal Company for commercial sohd waste services for Mount Prospect businesses ARC D~sposal d~d submit a proposal for commercial sohd waste services along w~th a modified proposal for commercial recycI~ng However, as franchise agreements for commercial sohd waste services are primarily at the research stage, the Village was again I~m[ted ~n ~ts efforts to conduct a comprehensive cost analys~s of ARC's proposed rates Wh~le staff d~d conduct a cost companson of the rates from the newly ~mplemented commercial sol~d waste contract in the Wllage of Skok~e th~s proved of I~ttle value as the Skok~e rates ~ncluded a blue bag recycling program which was not included ~n ARC's rate proposal As staff cannot prowde, w~th confidence, any data that substanbates that the ARC proposal for commercial sohd waste services ~nclud~ng recychng, ~s economically beneficial to the bus~ness community staff recommends rejecbon of the ARC bid As ~t ~s also staff's recommendabon' that the commercial sol~d waste bid proposal be let for compebt~ve b~dd~ng, and as a professional courtesy to ARC Disposal, staff request that ARC's proposal remain closed Refuse/Yard Mater~al Sbcker Cost Analvs~s Included w~th the ARC proposal ~s a 4% ~ncrease per year for user fee services If approved the sbcker fee for excess refuse and yard material would climb from $1 39 to $1 45 dunng the irst year As any Increase may ~mpact the selling price of the Vdlage-lmpnnted st~cker an analys~s of the current/projected costs versus the selling pnce was prepared A summary of the analys~s ~s prowded ~n the attached memo, Refuse/Yard Matenal, for ~nformat~onal purposes only Staff recogmzes th~s may be a subject more appropriate for d~scuss~on dunng the 2001 budget process but felt th~s was a t~mely opportumty to provide an update M L~sa Angell I concur w~th these recommendations--/ ~'"/¢ '~ ~'/~ Glen R Ahdler D~rector of Public Works cc Finance D~rector Doug Ellsworth Attachment A VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT CURRENT RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTE SERVICES Residential Units Waste Landfilled (tons) 1999 Single Famdy Curbslde Collection 13,540 12,562 Mult~famdy Centralized Collection 8.220 ~ Total 21,760 20,226 Exclusive Contract August 1, 1994 -Apn130, 2000 Contractor ARC D~sposal Company · Basic Serwce Level (Once a week curbs,de collection paid through properly taxes) 2 -32 gallon refuse contmners or bags Unhmlted collection of recyclables Unlimited collection of brush Unlimited collection of bulk ~tems Three (3) clean-up weeks per year Christmas tree collection Curbs~de collection of loose leaves, Wllage crews - OctobedNovember Extended leaf collection (bagged), ARC Disposal - NovembedDecember · User Fee System (Prepaid Vlllage-lmpnnted st~cker) Refuse ~n excess of two (2) containers, $1 75 st~cker per addmonal unit of refuse · Recycling Program Over one (1) mlll~on pounds of matenal are collected monthly Materials collected include newspaper, mixed paper, ferrous metals, aluminum, glass, plastics (#'s 1,2,3,5,6 &7), chlpboard and corrugated cardboard Residents w~th curbs~de pickup are provided 2 -18 gallon recycling bins at no cost Mult~famdy propert*es utdlze 90-gallon toters at centralized locations Recycling services are also prowded at no cost to schools, churches, non-profit agencies and the Park D~stnct · Yard Material Qollect~on Containerized yard matenal and bundled brush are collected from April 1 through December 15 on res,dents designated collection day The matenal ~s collected separately from the refuse truck_ and transported to a compost facility CoIIect~on of containerized yard material ng~d container or b~odegradable bag Is a use fee system, $1.75 per st~cker Properly prepared brush bundles are collected in unlimited quantities at no addmonal cost The leaves from the loose leaf collection program conducted by Public Works staff are transported and disposed of at a compost s~te by ARC Disposal The cost for th~s service is included m the per unit basic service fee The extended leaf collection program ~s conducted by ARC D~sposal At the end of the loose leaf collection residents can set out an unlimited number of bagged leaves at no cost The Village pays ARC D~sposal the contractual rate of a $1 39 per bag for this service In 1998 15,439 leaf bags were collected for a totaI cost of $21,460 21 In 1999 the Village negotiated a fiat rate of $15,000 00 for the unlimited coIlect~on and d~sposal of bagged leaves In 1999 over 9,000 tons of yard matenal were composted through the Village's yard material programs Attachment B SOLID WASTE BID PROPOSAL ARC DISPOSAL COMPANY MAY 1, 2000 - December 31, 2004" Current Fees Proposed Fees (Year 1) Proposed Fees (Years 2 -5) per umtJper month per umt/per month Single Family Basic Service $3 70 $3 85 4% Increase each year Corle ct~on/Tra nsportat[on 2-32 cans/bags refuse Unlimited bulk ~tems 3 Cleanup weeks Unhm~ted brush collecbon Recycling $2 23 $2 32 4% increase each year Unlimited collection Scrap metal drop-off Brush CoIlecbon $0 69 $0 76 4% ~ncrease each year Extended Leaf Collecbon User Fee Programs (Sbckers) Excess refuse $1 39 $1 45 4% ~ncrease each year Yard Material Collection (CollectJTrans/D~sposal $1 39 $1 45 4% ~ncrease each year Yard Matenal (Subscription) not ava~lable $180 00 4% increase each year Toter rentallcollect~on April - November Resldenbal Appliances $16 45 SWANCC FEE SWANCC FEE $25 per appliance gate rate Back door service $20 00 $20 80 4% increase each year Payment D~scount 1% 1% 1% Mulbfamlly Basic Service Container fees 4% increase 4% increase each year Collect~on/Tran sportabon Household Hazardous Waste Collection Opbonal Esbmated contractual fee $50.000 4% increase each year Year I May 1, 2000 - December 31, 2000 Year 2 January 1, 2001 - December 31, 2001 Year 3 January 1, 2002 - December 31, 2002 Year 4 January 1, 2003 - December 31, 2003 Year 5 January 1, 2004 - December 31, 2004 swcostproposalarc2000 xts Attachment C Current ARC Fees Frequency' of Se~a ice Container &ze Ix/u eek 2x/week 3x/week 4'x/~ eek 5~.lweek lcubicyard $ 6.64 13.28 $33.20 ]Scubicya, d I$ 9.96 I F$19.92 1529.88 S39.84 $49.80 2cubzcyards ~13.28 $26.55 $39.84 S53.12 $66.40 4cublcyardx S26.581553.161579.72 S106.32 S132.90 ~cubicyard$ $39.86 IS79.72 15119.58 S159.44 I $199.29 ecuaicyatd~ S53.16 $106.32 1S159,48 $ 212.64 $265.80 [ Recyclxng Toters $6.00 per month Recycling Bins $2.23 per month Arc's Proposed Rates 2000 - 4% Increase Frequency of Se~a ice Container &ze lx./u eek 2,v'week 3x/u eek 4x/u eek 5~.& eek lcublcyard [$ 7.85 $ 15.71 ]$23.57 $ 31.42 5;39.28 ].$ cubic yard [S11.78 $ 23.57 [$35.35,, $ 47.32 [$58.92 Recycling Toters $6.24 per month Recycling Bins $2.32 per month INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 'r~ c~ u~ TO VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL E JANONIS FROM: SOLID WASTE COORDINATOR DATE FEBRUARY 17, 2000 SUBJECT REFUSE/YARD MATERIAL STICKER ANALYSIS CURRENT/PROJECTED COSTS VS SELLING PRICE Both the current and proposed new contract with Arc Disposal includes a combtned sticker fee for all bags/cans of yard material and refuse. The yard matenal portion of the fee includes d~sposal costs for the material collected, whereas the refuse portion of the fee does not include d~sposal Arc transports all refuse to the SWANCC transfer site and the Vtllage pays the appropriate tip/debt service fee, pet ton, d~rect to SWANCC. The following is a current breakdown of all costs associated with the Vdlage's tmpnnted yard material/refuse st~cker fee Also tncluded is a breakdown for year one(l) of the proposed new Arc contract beginning May 1, 2000 Yard Material Collection/Disposal , Current Year 1 Fee to hauler for collection and disposal $1 39 $1.45 Fee to vendor .05 .05 Admmistrat~ve fee 25 25 Total $1 69 $1.75 Refuse Collection/Disposal : Fee to hauler for collection $1 39 $1.45 Ttp/Debt service fee per sticker* 1.20 1.20 Fee to vendor .05 .05 Administrative fee .25 25 Total $2 89 $2.95 *Based on SWANCC fee effective May I, 1999 of $70 00 per ton; $44 00 per ton t~p fee and $26 00 per ton debt servtce fee Tlus equates to $1.20 per unit based on 40 lbs at 3.5 cents per lb Page Two Refuse/Yard Material Sticker Analysis February 17, 2000 Currently our combined total annual sticker sales are approximately 180,000 stickers, conslstlngof 45,000 for refuse and 135,000 for yard matenal Usmgthisratioofyard material to refuse, the current average stroker cost ~s $1 99 and for proposed year one(l) would be $2 05 Thecurrent stlckerselhngpnceis$1.75 This price was e~tabhshed at the March S, 1996 Village Board meeting and was to be for years 1996 and 1997. Included m the same approved motion the price was to ~ncrease to $2 00 for years 1998 and 1999. This increase never occurred If the refuse/yard material sticker program ~s g~lng to continue to function as a tree stand alone user fee program, the Village Board needs to discuss and decide on whether or not the sticker selling price should be increased to accurately reflect the actual cost associated with the sticker. Lisa Angell -- LA/eh C D~rector of Public Works Glen R Andler F~nance Director Doug Ellsworth X FI LES~FRONTOFF~AD~,flN~SWFEES2000 MAYOR VILLAGE MANAGER Gerald L Farley Michael E Janoms TRUSTEES VILLAGE CLERK TunothyJC~-- Viii g f M p p VelmaLowe P.u, wm.oc,~ a e o ount ros ect lhehard M Lobrs~orf~ ~n~sO ~.k~e~ Community Development Department Pho~ M~¢haele W Skowron Fax 847/818-5329 ~n~ ~ w~s 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Ilhno~s 60056 TDD 847/392-6064 BUSINESS DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION CANCELLATION NOTICE THE MEETING SCHEDULED FOR WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2000 HAS BEEN CANCELLED. AN AGENDA WILL BE SENT PRIOR TO THE NEXT MEETING. Dated flus 17th day of February, 2000 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FINANCE COMMISSION CANCELLATION NOTICE ~ FINANCE COMMISSION MEETING SCUEDUI,ED FOR FEBRUARY 24, 2000 HAS BEEN CANCELLED The November 2:~, 2000 and December 28, 2000 have ~dso been mm:elled. A specie! meeting h,~s been tentatively scheduled for December 7 For a 2001 Budget Wrap-up Session. MAYOR VILLAGE MANAGER Gerald L FarIey Michael E Janoms TRUSTEES ~ ~ , , VILLAGE CLERK Tlmothy,PauiWm CorcoranHocfertVillageof MountProSpect,, V¢lmaLowe R~¢hard M Lohrstorfer nl ity' Co mun Development Department Phone847/818-5328 M~cha¢le W Skowron Fax 847/818-5329 Irvana K Wdks 100 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Ilhno~s 60056 TDD 847/392-6064 MINUTES COFFEE WITH COUNCIL Saturday, February 12, 2000 9.00 a.m. 2nd Floor Conference Room, Village Hall ~ The meeting was convened at 9 00 a m Those present were Trustees Timothy Corcoran, Dennis Prikkel, Mlchaele Skowron and Irvana Wdks Representing staff were Vdlage Manager Michael Janoms~ and Commu.mty Development Director Wdham Cooney Residents in Attendance: Jim Corman 13448 Indigo Yngve Bloomqutst 1909 Connie Lane David Scheln 700 Ivanhoe, #3B Carol Tortorello '223 S. Elmhurst Hal Ettinger '415 Maple Sarah Corcoran 524 E. Itfll Leo and Lil Floras 111 N. Emerson Jim Corman, 1348 Indigo, indmated that he was concerned w~th recent activity that was taking place behind his home along the W~sconsm Central Railroad right-of-way He stated that workers were placing flags on the property delineating the location of a buried pipeline He requested a status update on the project Mr Janoms stated that the installation of the second rail within this right-of-way was still scheduled to begin this summer and that he has had continual contact with Wisconsin Central to ensure that the Village's concerns are addressed throughout the project Mr Janoms provided a general overview of the project's status and welcomed Mr Corman to stop by the Village Hall to review the most recent plans if be was interested Yngve Bloomquist, 1909 Connie Lane, stated that he was a long time resident and that he was present to witness how the Coffee with Council meetings functioned He stated that he had meant to attend these meetings in the past, but that he had never actually made it to one. He mentioned that there was an IDOT construction sign on Central Road, east of Melas Park, that should be removed now that the project is complete David Schein, 700 Ivanho6, g3B, m~ide a few brief remarks related to the ongoing lawsuit against the Pohee Department He smd that he believed that the Village needed to make every effort to reach out to the Hispanic population in the Village and work at improving communication with them He stated that he fully supports the Police Department and that, prior to this recent eyent, he had never heard any type of allegations offee W~th Council February 12, 2000 Meeting Minutes Page 2 hke those being postulated in the current lawsmt On a separate matter, Mr Schein hndieated his support for a new Vdlage Hall and his behefthat it is critical that we "do ~t right" by not cutting back on costs There was general d~scusslon by those ~n attendance regarding the concept of constructing a new Vdlage Hall Carol Tortoreilo, 223 S. EImhurst, also supported the construction of a new Village Hall and ~nd~eated that she felt that it would be a mistake to go for a referendum to approve the project The merits ofgomg with a referendum were discussed by all and it was agreed that further d~seuss~on would be forthcoming at future Vdlage Board meetings Ms Tortorello also stated that she felt that the new Vdlage Newsletter was very professional Ioohng and that she would like to see ~t further expanded to allow for special features She believes that the newsletter could have arttcles directed at youth groups, senior groups, ere and that the newsletter could be utlhzed to garner more involvement from these groups ~ Mr. Sche~n agreed that the newsletter was ~mproved and suggested that a three-hole punch format would be deal for record keeping Mr Janoms indicated that the newsletter was already over budget and that there ~s httle room for expanded articles Several Trustees stated that they would rather increase the budget than to limit the scope of the newsletter and suggested that this topic be raised at the mid-year budget rewew Hal Ettinger, 415 N. Maple, ~nqmred about the commltte.e that the V~llage Board was going to create to rewew the new Village Hall project He ~nd~eated that he was very ~nterested ~n participating on the comrmttee and that he was involved w~th the School D~stnct 57 group that worked on the Fa~mew and Lions Park schools Trustee Skowron recommended that he send a letter to the Mayor explalnmg his ~nterest m participating She stated that the subject would be discussed briefly at the 2/22/00 Committee of the Whole meeting so Mr Ettmger should submit hs letter early xn the week Mr Ett~nger also had several questmns about the Pohce Department lawsmt, which were answered by the Trustees / ,' ~ ' , Leo Floros, 111 N. Emerson, stated that he was glad to see that the Village Board dec~ded not to consder the rehahlltat~on of the Village Hall as an option . He also stated that he felt that the V~llage Board should not go to a referendum to obtain c~t~zen approval The Vxllage Board Is elected to make these types of dects~ons and should do so accordingly. He also stated that he beheves that the expansion of the L~brary should be undertaken at the same time as the Vdlage Hall project He stated that ~t would be a big mistake to construct a new Vdlage Hall and associated parking on the Lthrary block and not address the hbrary's needs at the same tune ~The meeting was adjourned at 11 00 a m ~ ~ ~ ~ Respectfully subuntted, ~ · , W~lllam J Cooney, Jr ~ ~ ,, Director of Community Development ,. MAYOR ~[ Gerald L Farley VILLAGE MANAGER TRUSTEES Michael E lanonls T,mothy, Corcoranpaul Wm HoefertVillageof MountProspect VILLAGE CLERKveima Lowe R~chard M Lohrstorfer D ..,sG Pr,kke Community Development Department Phone 847/818-5328 M~¢ha¢l¢ W Skowron Fax 847/818-5329 Irvana K Wflks I00 South Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 TDD 847/392-6064 AGENDA MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING LOCATION: MEETING DATE & TIME. Senior Center Thursday 50 South Emerson Street February 24, 2000 Mount Prospect, IL 60056 7 30 p m I CALL TO ORDER II ROLL CALL III APPROVAL OF MINUTES A M,nutes of January 27, 2000 ZBA-26-99 / Taco Twins / 820 E Rand Rd 2 ZBA-35-99 / Klatka Residence / 1712 Martha Lane 3 ZBA-36-99 / Weglarz Residence / 1108 Robert Drive IV OLD BUSINESS V NEW BUSINESS tA ZBA-37-99 / Downtown Redevelopment Phase lB / Condlt,onal Use approval for a mixed-use development consisting of 22,700 square feet of commercial space and 34 ~ condominium umts NOTE: This Case is Vdlage Board Final ~ B ZBA 02-2000 / Metzger Residence / 120 Yates Lane ! Variation to allow construction of a wood deck encroaching 3 feet Into a required side yard setback NOTE: This Case is ~ Village Board Final C ZBA-04-2000 / Kensington Restaurant / 305 Kensington Road / Conditional Use for the establishment of a fast food r~staurant with a drive-through NOTE: This Case has been postponed until the March 23, 2000 meeting at the applicant's request. D ZBA-05-2000 / VOMP / Text Amendments to modify requirements of the CR Conservation Recreation Zoning District NOTE: This Case is Village Board Final VI QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS VII ADJOURNMENT Any individual who would like to attend this meeting, but because of a disability needs some accommodation to participate, should contact the Community Development Department at I00 S. Emerson, Mount Prospect, IL 60056, 847-392-6000, Ext. 5328, TDD #847-392-6064. H \OEN~PLN(]~ZBA~ZBA 2000~Agendas~2-24-2000.doc MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO. ZBA-26-99 Hearing Date January 27, 2000 PETITIONER: ~ , Taco Twins ~ 2275 Half Day Road, Suite 300 Bannockburn, IL 60015 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 820 E Rand Road PUBLICATION DATE: August'l 1, 1999 MOIJNT PROSPECT JOURNAL REQUEST: Conditional Use and Variations to establish a fast food restaurant with a drive-through window- reconsideration of an item from the 10/28/99 meeting MEMBERS PRESENT: Merrill Cotten Leo Flores · ~-, ~ Elizabeth Luxem Richard Rogers, Acting Chairperson ,, Keith Youngqmst IVIEMBERS ABSENT: A~lene Juracek, Chairperson STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: ~ Michael Blue, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development Jeffery Perkins, Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: Thomas V. Scesnlak Aetmg Chairperson Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:35 p m Mmutas of the October 25 and November 11 meetings were approved,'wtth one abstentJon by Memll Cotton Mr Rogers announced the withdrawal of Case No ZBA-01-2000. At ,7:39 pm., under Old Business, Mr. Rogers reopened Case No ZBAo26-99, a request for a Conditional Use and Vafiahons to estabhsh a fast food restaurant with a dnye-through wind~ow Seffery Perkins, Planner, then introduced the staff memoranffum for the item, reconsideration of an item that the ZBA originally considered at its meeting of October 28, 1999. He reminded the ZBA that they recommended approval of the Conditional Use and VariatJons with a number of eondltions at that time. He added that among the conditions of approval was a requirement that the applicant must provide cross access agreements between the subject property, Thunderbird Lanes and Menard's. Mr. Perkins stated that, in order to fulfill that requirement, the applicant needs the cooperatmn'of the adjacent property owners. He added that, in order to address concerns raised by the owner of Thunderbird Lanes regarding possible eonfli~ts with the shared access for the two sites and ?tacking vehicles from the Taco Bell drive-through, the applicant modified the site to allow for more stacking Mr. Perkins stated that Staff presanted the revised plans for the item to the Village Board at its meeting of January 18, 2000 and the Board voted to remand the item back to the ZBA. Mr. Perkins then described the revised plan, which provides for stacking for 13 vehicles at the drive-through by shifting the building location to the north and relocating parking spaces. He added that the Site Plan previously considered by the Z13A required three Variations; to reduce the number of required stacking spaces from eight to seven, to reduce the parking requirement from 40 to 37 spaces, and to reducing the front parking setback from 30' to 10'., He stated that the revised plan would require only two Variations; to reduce the parking requirement from 40 to 35 spaces and to reduce th~ front parking setback to 10'. Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-26-99/January 27, 2000 Hearing Arlene Juracek, Cha,rperson .. P, age 2 Mr. Perkins stated that the owner of Thunderb,rd lanes had also requested that the entrance to the Taco Bell s~te be widened to 3 lanes to allow (or separate r,ght-tum and lef~-tum lanes exiting the s~te He added that the turn lanes would help the Vdlage to prowde the overall c,reulatton pattern m the area Mentffied ~n the Rand Road Corndor Plan, so the ZBA should include th,s item as a cond,tmn of approval Based on ,ts analys~s of the proposal w,th respect to Zoning Code standards for Cond~aonal.Uses and Vanatmns. Mr Perkins gave staff's recommendahon .that the ZBA recommend to the Vdlage Board approval of 'the requested Condtt,onal Use and Vanatlons for a fast food restaurant and drive-through w~th the cond,tmns included ,n the staff report / [,~ ~ ' Richard Rogers asked Mr Perkins if Thunderbird Lanes and Manards approved of th,s plan and had agreed to provMe the required cross-access agreements Mr Perkins responded that officials from Menards had g~ven verbal approval to prowdmg cross-access, but had not yet provided signed doeumentatmn He stated that representat,ves of Thunderbird Lanes had reviewed the rewsed plans and that their only comments ~vere that they would prefer the three-lane ex,t He added that a cross-access agreement between the subject property and Thunderbird was already m place Thomas V Sccsmak, 1754 W Wise Road, Sehaumburg, was sworn m He said the comments generated by staff' were discussed at a prelunmary meeting and the statement that the appheant refused to w,den the driveway Is not true He stated tha{they took it under advisement and had no'objections to doing that He asserted that the driveway has been there s~ncc 1962 in its current form and should remain in that form He added that the property owner has agreed to provide an easement for the part of their property to be used as a cross accass He reformed the ZBA the current plan was proposed to address the concerns rained by the owners of Thunderbird Lanes regarding stanktng Mr. Scesmak, presented corrected site calculatmns of 6 72% budding coverage, 47.1% greenspaee, and 46 15% lot %overage. He stated that the proposed three-lane exit lane wouldn't enhance or mhlb,t the movement through the'area He added that the driveway at the southern end of property, which is not owned by the petitioner, might be s,gnahzed in the future He Indicated the apphcant's willingness to increase the wMth of the driveway to provide for right-out and let,-out lanes, and an ingress, but added that he feels that it is a waste of greenspa~ and wall require support from IDOT/Mr. S~sniak stated that, due to a reduction of the footprint, Taco Bell no longer needs 39 parking spaces and that reducing the parking count to 35 will leav~ enough spa~es to support the fa¢lhty He asked the Board to approve so they can go before the ydlage Board and start construct/off soon Richard Rogers asked about the stucoo shown in the original plans Mr. Seesmak said the stucco is gone and the will be. ~all,masonry structure ~ Merrill Cotton asked ~lf there is a problem In getting Thunderbird Lanes,, Menards,, ~nd iDO.Ps permisslon in wr,t~ng or are we be,ng asked to approve without written approval in hand. ~ . : ' Ivir. Scosniak responded that they have an access/regress easement with Thunderbird Lanes in place today/There are two ways into the bowling alley property The agreement will be draited to allow_~287 squ~re foot easement adjacent to the Manards property. Planning staff must get Thunderb,rd to agree He stated Monarchs Is wdlmg, Taco Bell willing, Thunderbird Lanes is the one need?g to agree . Riohard Rogers asked if we have agreement from the other property owners Jeff Perkins said discussions with Mr. Weber, who owns Thunderbird, have taken place. Ho has been difficult to pin down They have asked for a three-lane entrance and we are attempting to fa. clhtate this request.~ There is an existing agre?ment between the. former Cno.?dano and Thunderbird Lanes allowing for cross-access between driveways. Men'ill Cotton asked if we are in a situation without signed agreements and sending thin to the Village Board without omng Board of Appeals ZBA-26-99/January 27, 2000 Hear,ng Arlene Juracek, Chairperson ~ Page 3 Mr. Perkins said the physical connecttons are m place, and that staff tf working w~th the several property owners to get stgned agreements before presenttng to the Village Board He stated Menards has agreed to provide an easement to adjacent properties, but had not net finahzed the easement and that the agreement between Thunderbird and the sub. leer property ~s pre-existing Ehzabeth Luxem said if tbere ts an agreement ex~stmg between Taco Bell and Thunderbird Lanes we should not have to worry about the agreement with Menards It does not affect the petition before us Mtchael Blue, Deputy D~rector of Commumty Development, said Ms Luxem is correct and there ts access to each of the properties, what ¢ompheates tt ts the concern that thts development would affect the future cross-connect that we have been worktng on As the prnject stts before us now, tt does not do that The petttloner has agreed to prowde an easement along the edge of thetr property that wtll keep the area free and clear. In terms of that longer-term project, that ~s something staff ts still working on Leo Floros asked tf Jtffy Lube was revolved Mr Blue sa~d tt was not Acting Chairperson Rogers closed the pubhc hearing at 7 55 p m Leo Florns made a motton to approve the request for a Condmonal Use and Vanattons to estabhsh a fast food restaurant with a drive-through window. Ehzabeth Luxem seconded the motion, vertfying w~th Mr Florns that his mntton was subject to the nme conthttons imposed by staff Mr Rogers asked for confirmatmn that all stucco originally planned would be masonry and is part of the agreement Mr. Perkins stated that brtek construetmn was included as a eonthtion of approval UPON ROLL CALL' AYES Cotton, Florns, Luxem, Youngqu~st and Rogers NAYS None Motton was approved 5-0 The ZBA heard two more cases At 8 45 p m, Keith Youngquist made morton to adjourn, seconded by Ehzabeth Luxem. Meettng was adjourned Barbara Swiatek, Planmng Secretary MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO. ZBA~-35-99 Heanng Date. January 27, 2000 PETITIONER: ~ Marion and Lisa Klatka - ~' SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1712 Martha Lane ' ~ ' PUBLICATION DATE: January 10, 2000 DAILY HERALD REQUEST: Conditional Use and Variation to allow construction of a 720 square foot, three- ' car, detached garage MEMBERS PRESENT: Merrdl Cotten Leo Flores · Elizabeth Luxem ' ' Pdchard Rogers, Aetmg Chairperson Keith Youngqulst MEMBERS ABSENT: Arlene Juracek, Chmrperson STAFF MEMEERS PRESENT: M~chael Blue, AICP, Deputy D~rector of Commun:ty Development Jeffery Perkms Planner ' ' INTERESTED PARTIES: . .Mar~on & Lisa Klatka Calvtn Hebenstre~t ' Acting Chairperson Richard Rogers called the meeting to to order at 7:35 p m Minutes of the October 28 and November 11 meetings were approved, wtth one abstention by Merrill Cotton Mr Rogers announced the withdrawal of Case ZBA- 01-2000. At 7.58 p m, after hearing one ease under Old Business, Mr Rogers opened Case ZBA-35-99, a request for a Conditional Use and Varlat~ous to allow construction ora 720 square foot, three-car, detached garage Jeffery Perkins, Planner, introduced the staff memorandum for the item, a proposed 720 square foot three-ear garage to replace an existing single-car attached garage, which the app_h?nt proposes to convert into a faintly room. He stated that the Zoning Code lists garages designed to house more than tw~ motor vehicles as a Condo:tonal Use in the R1 &strict and sets the maxlmum size for detached garages at 600 square feet. Thus, the proposal would require approval of a Cond~ttonal Use to permit a three-car garage and a Variation to allow the garage to exceed the 600 square foot maximum size requu'ement Mr. Perkins then stated that the proposed garage is located to the rear of the extst~ng slngle-famdy residence and meets all setback, height, and lot coverage requirements and that the garage would, therefore, have hmxted impact on the adjacent neighborhood, utihty provision or public streets. He added that the proposed eondttlonal use would be in comphance will the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance requirements, except with respect to the proposed Variauon Mr. Perkins stated that the reason for the proposed Variatton ~s for the convenience of the peri:toner, rather than financml gmn and that the petitioner proposes the garage to accommodate vehicles and storage area. He stated that, although the garage is oversized, the Venatmn would not negntavely affect neighborhood character or have a significant effect on pubho welfare Mr. Perkins said that, regardless of those findings, no partiealar condition of the lot creates a hardship that justifies the proposed Variatmn. The petitioner simply would like to have a larger garage than permitted by code. Based on mudysis of the proposal with respect to Zoning Code standards for Conditional Uses and Venations, Mr. Perktns gave staff's recommendation that tho ZI~A recommend to the Village Board denial of the proposed Conditional Usc and Variation. Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA-35-99 Arlene Juraeek, Chairperson 5.~ ' ~ ' ~ ' ~ ~ ~. ' [ Page 2 Marion and Lisa KIatka, 1712 Martha Lane, were sworn in Mr Klatka explained they had been hvmg'm their house'for seven years Their existing garage Is 24~ x lff, affording space for one car Mr Klatka sa~d they have three cars and would like to build a detached garage large enough for the ears, miscellaneous garden and snow removal equipment, and bmy¢les and other toys for their two children He said they feel ,t would be an improvement to the neighborhood to have cars kept In a detached garage rather than m the drlvewliy m front of the house Mr Klatka pointed out that two neighbors m the area have large garages, one 900 s f and one over 600 s f Mr. Klatka said those garages were no burden to the . neighborhood and both of those neighbors support him In his endeavor to build the garage he wants He said they have no desire to move, they want to remain In, and enhance, their present neighborhood Mr Rogers asked if there were any questions from the Board Mr Flores asked Mr. Klatka If they would need to ehminate the large pine tree to build the garage Mr Klatka said they would, but they have four other large p~ne trees that would remain. He also said that particular pine tree is a nuisance to his neighbor because the pmecones drop onto the neighbors driveway Ms Luxem asked the size of their home Mr Perkins smd the house ~s approximately 1300 s f, mclu&ng the exist,ng attached garage. Ms Luxem asked Mr Klatka if he planned to convert the existing garage to a family room and he answered yes . Calvin Hebenstrelt, 1714 Mamn Lane, was sworn m He was concerned that the planned construction would add to water problems he has with his property He said additional paved area would affect his property, especially smee the lots on Martha are a foot h~gher than on Martin Lane After further discussion, it'was detenmfied that Mr'Hebenstre~t had a different property ~n mind than the one At 8 10, Bachard Rogers closed the Public Hearing and asked for diseusslon from the B6al-d Board members stated that the large size of the planned garage, especially m relation to the s~ze of the small home on the site, would cause an adverse effect on the neighborhood After much discussion, Mr Flo~os asked if the petitioner would consider scahng down his request to a 30' x 22' garage Mr. Klatka said he would ,accept that size Ms Luxem pointed out that a 30' x 22' garage would still be half the size of the house ., At 8 25, Ehzabeth Luxem made a motion to approve the request for a Conditional Use and Variation to allow construction of a 720 s f. detached garage. Kelth Youngquist seconded-the motion Leo Flores asked to amend the~motion to read %60 s f detached 3-ear garage" but the amendment was not allbwed UPON ROLL CALL' .- ~, ..... : .... ~ AYES Cotton ~ ~ -:., , ~ NAYS' Flores, LuxembYoungqmst and Rogers Morton was demed 4-1 ~ Mr Florns made a motton to gra~t a Conditional Use to the petmoner to penmt a 660 square foot detached garage but there was no second to the motion ~ The ZBA heard one adddsonal case At 8:45 p.m, Keith Youngqmst made motion to adjourn, seconded by Ehzabeth Luxem. Meeting was adjourned. Barbara Swiatek, Planning Secretary MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO. ZBA-36-99 Hearing Date January 27, 2000 PETITIONER: Stanley Weglarz SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1108 Robert Drive PUBLICATION DATE: January 10, 2000 DAILY HERALD REQUEST: , ~ Variation to allow an addition to a single-family ?sidence to encroach 4' into , ,. the front yard setback ~ MEMBERS PRESENT: Merrill Cotten Leo Flores Elizabeth Luxem Rmhard Rogers Keith Youngquist .MEMBERS ABSENT: Arlene Juracek, Chairperson, STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Blue, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development Jeffery Perkins, Planner INT'ERESTED PARTIES: ~ Stanley Weglarz Tom and Angle Samp Acting Chairperson Rmhard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7 35 p m' M~nutes of the October 28 and November 11 meetings were approved, with one abstention by Merrill Co~ton Mr Rogers announced the withdrawal of Case ZBA-01-2000. At 8.30 pm., aider Hearings for two other cases, Mr Rogers opened Case ZBA-36-99, a request for a Variation to allow an addition to a single-family residence to encroach 4' into a front yard setback Jeffery Perkins, Planner, introduced the staff memorandum~for the item, a proposal to construct a 1,2.16 square foot second story addition and front porch to an exlstmg single-~ory house that would encroach by 4 feet mt? the 30 foot minimum front yard setback required by the R1 district Mr. Perkins stated that the apphcaut's reasons for the variation are aesthetic and for the petitioner's convenience, rather than financial. The applicant proposes the encwachraent to provide for the larger master suite and to allow for an aesthetically pleasing front elevation. He added that the proposed addition could possibly enhance the character of the existing single-family res~dantial area and would not have a negative effect on the public welfare Notwithstan&ng the above, no particular condition of the lot, makes the proposed encroachment ~ecessary The petition?r could achieve the same size addition by adding to the rear of the exlstmg siructore. Based on analysis of the proposal with respect to Zoning Code standards for Variations, Mr. Perkins gave staff's recommendation of denud of the request to the ZBA and reminded the Board their dec,sion was final for this Case Richard Rogers asked if Board members had any questions fo, r Jeff. He then asked if the petitioner wante~ to ,speak. Stanley Weglarz, was sworn in. Mr. Weglarz stated he wanted to put a 2'~ story addition on his home. He stated it not tree that he wants the addition only to enlarge his master suite. He presented the ZBA with the first version of the plans for the addition and pointed out that the elevations were less attractive than the current proposal and that the fomth bedroom is smaller than his existing bedrooms. He stated that adding four feet to the rear of the house is Zoning Board &Appeals ZBA-36-99 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson ~ ~ , _ <~.~ Page 2 complicated by the location of existlng bathrooms and their associated plumbing and that such an addmon would need a lot of pier support Mr Flores asked Mr Weglarz If he was a builder Mr Weglarz smd he was not a broider but had been m home remodeling years ago He smd he is just a homeowner who would do some of the work he could and h~re people to do the rest He said when he purchased the home he asked the Village ffbe could add to It and was told yes Mr Flores asked the approximate cost of the planned addmon Mr Weglarz said it would cost abo~ut $130,000, as much as he paid for the house three years ago, but that that cost estimate included an addmonal bathroom that had since been ehm[nated from the plans Ms Luxem asked if the drawings he had just presented to the ZBA were the current drawings Mr Weglarz smd no, they were an earlier version of the design Ms Luxem asked if bedrooms four and five extend out Mr Perkins responded that the four-foot encroachment In question consmts entirely of the master bedroom, bedroom four encroaches two feet beyond the front building line, and the front wall of bedroom three ~s the existing wall of the house Ms Luxem said they had approved open porches extending into the front setback but this would be second floor living area Mr Perkins said this request was for a Varlatlon rather than a Conditional Use because this would be living area encroaching into the setback and by virtue of granting this Variation the front porch could later be enclosed to use as hying area, too ~ , ' ~ ' ' Mr. Weglarz said he has no intention of enclosing the front porch Ms Luxem noted, that future owners could Ms Luxem asked about going further m back with the addmon but Mr Weglarz said it would be~ difficult because the beams would interfere with stairs to the second floor , ~ ' ~ "~ Mr. Rogers said the !evised plans are better than the original but extending over' the front setback ~c'ould set an ~unw~an!ed~preced. en, t .~ . ~ '~, , Mr, Weglarz re}ponded other houses have overhangs and front porches, he mentioned a house on Fern that was granted a Variation last year. Mr. Perkms said the Vdlage Board approved a Conditional Use for a home on Birch Drive to permit the front porch to encroach into the front setback, the house was setback 32' and the overhang went to the front setback llne and the porch encroached into the front setback Ms Luxem said she did not remember a Case where the ZBA ipl~roved a Variation to permit living space to encroach into the front setback ~ Elizabeth Luxem made a motion to grant approval for a Varlatlon to allow an add,t, on to a smgle-fam,ly residence to encroach 4' mto a front yard setback ,LcoFlorossecondedthemotiun At840, Actmg Chairperson Richard Rogers closed the Public He,lng and asked for discussion from the Board.. ~ . ~ Keith Youngqu,st .~aid the architect for the proposed addition had done a marvelous job but front setbacks were a very sensitive issue in Mount Prospect He said he would not be able to support this plan, as the encroachment into the front setback would affect the ne,ghborhood. He suggested that the areh,teet work on a plan to put the addition to the Mr Floros said he would echdMr. Youngqmst~s s~atement He stated that, although he is ~.sually supportive of most such requests, he agreed that this request would have a negatlye effect on the neighborhood and encouraged the petltxoner to work w~th the architect to modify the plan Mr. Rogers also agreed that the architect l~ad done an excellent job with the plans but noted that front setbacks wer~ ' sacrosanct in Mount Pwspeot~ ,He urged the owner to come back with revised plans. Ms Luxem suggested shifhng the master bedroom. , ~ ,UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: None NAYS: Cotton. Floras I~om V,.,...-,;~- ..-.-' oning Board of Appeals ZBA-36-99 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 3 Motion was denied 5-0 At 8 45 p m, Keith Youngqmst made motion to adjourn, seconded by Elizabeth Luxem Meeting was adjourned Barbara Swlatek, Planning Secretary