Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/11/2004 COW minutes MINUTES COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MAY 11, 2004 I. CAll TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m., in the Mt. Prospect Park District Community Center, 1000 West Central Road, by Mayor Gerald Farley. Present at the meeting were: Trustees Timothy Corcoran, Paul Hoefert, Richard Lohrstorfer, Michaele Skowron, Irvana Wilks and Michael lade!. Staff members present included: Village Manager Michael Janonis, Assistant Village Manager David Strahl, Public Community Development Director William Cooney and Deputy Community Development Director Michael Jacobs. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of Minutes from April 27,2004. Motion made by Trustee Zadel and Seconded by Trustee Lohrstorfer. Minutes were approved. UI. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD None. IV. DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT AD HOC COMMITTEE - PHASE II ~ RECOMMENDATION This is a continuation of the discussion from the April 27, 2004 Committee of the Whole meeting. Community Development Director Bill Cooney suggesting completing discussion of Sub- Area One and then move on to discussions on Sub-Areas Four and Five. Sub-Area One This is constituted by the small-triangle and the Committee recommended demolition of the buildings on the south side of Busse, however, TIF finances are such that there is some limitation about available funds to complete the recommendations of the Committee. He stated there is a difference between the plan of 1998 and 2004. The most recent plan included a pedestrian pass-through only along Busse with retail and condominiums compared to the first plan from 1998 that just discussed retail. He also pointed out that the Trapani plan, as presented at the previous meeting, takes the property on the north side of Busse. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: 1 There was concern about closing Busse to traffic and only allowing pedestrian traffic through. There was also some concern about the use of Village funds for renovation and whether there was enough in terms of historical value worth preserving. It was also noted that whatever occurs in terms of improvements, rents would undoubtedly increase thereby impacting existing tenants and/or owners. It was noted that there is a need to retain the character and offer opportunity for start-up businesses and this is a likely starting point. It was felt that this unique shopping experience could be capitalized on if the TIF threat was removed and the owners may possibly improve the buildings' appearance on their own. It was also noted that it would be more valuable for staff time to be devoted in other areas of the downtown at this time. Tom Zander, 208 North Forest, spoke. He stated he is a member of the Economic Development Commission and the EDC position is to encourage development but there is a concern about pedestrian-only access on Busse and the entire triangle should be redeveloped. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: Board members suggested that there be additional financial pro-forma analysis completed for the area. There is also a need to discuss the possibilities of TiF adjustments with other taxing bodies and unless interest exists, there would be very little need to continue the discussion regarding this Sub-Area. Consensus of the Village Board was to direct staff to complete a financial pro forma and approach other taxing bodies about extension of the TIF for this area of redevelopment. Sub-Area Four - Bank One Block The previous Committee did not review this area because it was not in the TIF. Bill Cooney stated that Bank One has considered selling the property in the past and may consider it in the future. There is a desire to continue retail on the first floor at the Emerson side with condominiums above and row homes on the east side of the block. In addition, the Bank wants to retain some presence on the site with a drive-thru facility. General comments from Village Board members included the following items: It was noted that there is a need to coordinate whatever change and appearance with the current new development sites, however, until there is some control over the property, there are few things the Village can do. Consensus of the Village Board was to discuss options available for the future once the site becomes available and/or under control of the Vïllage. Sub-Area Five - Central Plaza This area is currently not in the TIF area and is ripe for redevelopment. Community Development Director Bill Cooney stated the Committee recommended the building be taken down and the interests moved west with parking behind any structure. 2 The Committee suggested possible TiF extension to include this site for redevelopment with a similar configuration as the Lofts and Shops development. Jim Uszler, Nine South Elm, Executive Director of the Mount Prospect Chamber of Commerce, spoke. He stated the Chamber's position is for the small triangle to be redeveloped initially and this is a critical parcel to focus on. The Chamber is also supportive of redevelopment of Central Plaza. Consensus of the Village Board was to approach other taxing bodies to determine interest in TIF extension and inclusion of the Central Plaza area in addition to putting together some general plans for redevelopment within the existing configuration. V. TEXT AMENDMENT DISCUSSION Flaas and Flaqpoles Bill Cooney stated that the staff proposal recommends to limit residential flagpoles to one within residential districts and commercial districts to three flagpoles. General discussion among Village Board members included the following items: There was concern raised regarding the limit of two flags per pole in residential areas and the number of flags per pole in commercial districts. Consensus of the Village Board was to allow up to three flags for residential areas on one pole and six flags on commercial areas up to three flagpoles. Staff was also instructed to review the Schaumburg flag Ordinance to determine whether there are any limitations that should be considered for the width of frontage on various property districts within the community in relation to flags. Merrill Cotton, 2710 Briarwood Drive West, spoke. He is concerned about the height of the flagpoles proposed at the new ViUage Hail and wanted to ensure that the approval of this Text Amendment does not cause the Village to have to obtain a Variation for the Village Hall flagpoles. Driveway Width Discussion Staff has proposed to include adjacent sidewalks as part of the width calculation and limit the overall calculation to 45% lot coverage which would allow design options. Staff would consider the percentage of front lot area paved to regulate the maximum widths of 26 feet with a minimum of eight feet. General discussion from Village Board members included the following items: There was a concern regarding parking in the front yard and turning the front yard into a parking pad. Consensus of the Village Board was to direct staff to further refine the percentage of lot coverage with a formula that would be appropriate for various lot sizes and address the need to limit the front yard parking zone. 3 VI. VII. Pavement Separation Staff had recommended a one-foot separation between driveway and patio or sidewalk. Staff feels that this could be addressed through the percentage of lot coverage limitation defined as part of the driveway width. Maximum Size of Attached Garaoes This can be limited by the FAR (floor to area ratio) definition revision and the bulk regulations that will be modified based on the previous discussions. VillAGE MANGER'S REPORT None. ANY OTHER BUSINESS None. CLOSED SESSION VIII. Motion made by Trustee Corcoran and Seconded by Trustee Skowron to move into Closed Session at 9:07 p.m. ADJOURNMENT The Board returned to Open Session at 10:26 p.m. with no further business and adjourned the meeting adjourned at 10:27 p.m. RespeCtf~ilY submitted. {j ~~J $~ DAVID STRAHL Assistant Village Manager 4