The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About5. NEW BUSINESS 12/03/02Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MICHAEL E. SANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 27, 2002 PZ-37-02 -CONDITIONAL USE & VARIATION GOLF PLAZA II (GOLF & ELMHURST ROADS) DIMUCCI COMPANIES & DOMINICK'S - APPLICANTS The Planning & Zoning Commission transmits their recommendation to approve Case PZ-37-02, a request for Conditional Use approval for a Planned Unit Development to construct a fuel center and a Variation to construct two enWance features for the Dominiek's entrances, which measure 33.17' from the mid-point. The attached staff report and exhibits provide details about the requests. The Planning & Zoning Commission heard the ease at their November 21, 2002 meeting. The subject property is located at the southwest comer of Golf and Elmhurst Roads, the Golf Plaza II Shopping Center. The proposed fuel center would be located along Elmhurst Road. As part of the fuel center project, the shopping center parking lot will be reconfigured. The site improvements include landscape islands end perimetex landscape screening along Elrahurst and Golf Roads. The request for entrance features taller than 30-feet is specific to the Dominick's entrances only. The petitioner originally proposed EIFS material, but is researching a different material in order to comply with Village ex>des. The Planning & Zoning Commission discussed the site improvements, the impact of the fuel center on the shopping center and its tenants, and the amount of landscaping proposed by the petitioner. The P&Z also discussed the size ofiraffic aisles at Golf Plaza H and compared its parking lot reconfiguration to the Golf Plaza H parking lot. The Planning & Zoning Commission members voted 6-0 to recommend that the Village Board approve a request for a Variation to allow 33.17-foot (mid-point measurement) entrance features for Dominick's subject to using code compliant building materials and 6-0 for a Conditional Use permit for a Planned Unit Development to allow the construction of a fuel center at Gotf Plaza I subject to the following conditions: 1. Revise the landscape plan to reflect an increase in the quantity and density of bushes along the north property line (Golf Road); 2. Revise the plans prepared by Kurtz Associates, the site plan prepared by WC Dolend Engineering, and the Site Landscape Plan prepared by WC Doland Engineering to reflect: · Eliminating the parking stalls on Elmhurst Road between the LaSalle Bank and Boston Market developments to create a 20-foot wide landscape area and a 26-foot wide drive aisle parallel to Elmhurst Road for this section of the parking lot; · Interior landscape islands shown on the Site Landscape Plan prepared by WC Doland Engineering revision date November 6, 2002 and that the islands measure no less than 7-feet in width; and · Landscape islands for the west section of the parking lot instead of the painted islands shown; 3. Construct the fuel center according to Building and Fire Code regulations related to fuel dispensing; and 4. Record a cross access easement agreement between Lots 1, 2, and 3 of the DiMueci Resubdivision. Z-37-02 November 27, 2002 Page 2 Please forward this memorandum and attachments to the Village Board for their review and consideration at their December 3, 2002 meeting. Staff will be present to answer any questions related to this matter. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-37-02 Hearing Date: November 21, 2002 PETITIONER: PROPERTY ADDRESS: W. Thomas Niemira for DiMucci Companies & Dominick's Food Stores Golf Plaza II (Southwest comer of Golf & Elmhurst Roads) PARCEL NUMBER: 08-14-204-023 PUBLICATION DATE: . .~ November 6, 2002 REQUEST: Conditional Use and Variations MEMBERS PRESENT: Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Merrill Cotten Leo Floros Matthew Sledz Keith Youngquist Richard Rogers MEMBERS ABSENT: Joseph Dormelly STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Marisa Wameke, Neighborhood Planner ~TERESTEDPARTIES: W. Thomas Niemira David Hene Stephen Corcoran Pamela Mueller Wes McAllister Jason Doland Vice Chair Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:37 p.m. Keith Youngquist made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 24 meeting, seconded by Leo Flores. Vice Chair Rogers noted that the last vote for PZ-33-02 should be corrected to '5-1'. The October meeting minutes were approved as corrected 5-0. ARer hearing another case, Chairperson Arlene Juracek introduced Case No. PZ~37-02, a request for variations and a conditional use. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, report~ that the subject property is located at the southwest comer of Golf and Elmhurst Roads and contains a retail shopping center. She said that the subject property is zoned B3 Community Shopping and is bordered by commercial, residential, and multi-family zoning disfficts. Ms. Connolly said the petitioner would like to consU'uct a fuel center along the Elmhurst Road frontage, make site improvements to the shopping center parking lot and the Dominick's fagade, in addition to installing two freestanding signs on Elmhurst Road. She said that the six-pump fuel center would be located slightly more than 50-feet from the Elmhurst Road lot line and 60-feet from the Boston Market restaurant, which is a separate lot of record. The fuel center includes a 422 square foot kiosk where people pay for gas and purchase convenience items. She reported that the kiosk would be constructed using brick materials. As part of the fuel center project, the petitioner proposes significant changes to the shopping center parking lot. Ms. Connolly said that driveways into the shopping center would not be changed, but that the interior circulation pattern would be modified. The petitioner's plans show reconfiguring the parking lot to provide 90 degree parking stalls, creating landscape islands in the parking lot, and creating perimeter landscape screening along Elmhurst and Golf Roads. She said that these improvements are m Planning & Zoning Commission PZ-37-02 Arlene Juracelc, Chairperson Page 2 keeping with the Village's corridor design guidelines, which requires redevelopment projects to incorporate landscape improvements along major commercial corridors as well as creating a more efficient parking design and eliminating vehicle conflicts. Ms. Connolly said the petitioner's plans do not adversely impact the adjacent Boston Market and LaSalle Bank developments, which are separate lots of record. She said that although the proposed site improvements reduce the number of parking spaces for the shopping center, the site continues to meet Village parking regulations. Ms. Connolly reported that Dominick's proposes fagade improvements to the existing grocery store. She said that the improvements include modifying the flat roof to include the addition of two 'towers' at the store entrances that create a gabled roofline. Ms. Connolly said that the modified roof is intended to better identify entrances to the store and update the store's facade..The petitioner proposes to use brick materials to construct the columns and archway design, in addition to extending the ElliS facade to meet the metal coping 'towers'. She said that the Village recently adopted an ordinance that prohibits the use of EIFS. In order to comply with Village regulations, the elevations must be revised so the EIFS material is eliminated and substituted with another material that meets Village regulations. In addition, Ms. Connolly said that the height of the 'tower' structures measures 33.17' from the mid-point of the roof, 36-fcet from grade. In order to create the gabled roof so it is in proportion to the entrances and the existing building, the petitioner is seeking relief from code regulations to construct the two 'towers' that are taller than code permits. The zoning ordinance limits the maximum building height to 30-feet from the mid-point of the roof and the existing building height is 26'8" from grade. Ms. Connolly said the petitioner is seeking a variation to allow two freestanding signs for the Elmhurst Road frontage since the sign code allows one sign per street frontage the intent of which is to minimize visual clutter and eliminate traffic hazards. One sign would be used to identify the stores in the Shopping center and the second sign would be used exclusively for the fuel center. The distance between the two proposed signs is more than 300-fect and the signs would be used to identify two separate uses. Ms. Connolly said that the shopping center building would not be modified, with the exception of the two new Dominick's entrance features. She said that the parking lot will be reconfigured and a new 422 square foot kiosk will be constructed as part of the fuel center project. The kiosk location complies with zoning regulations. Ms. Connolly said that some of the existing site conditions do not comply with cun'ent zoning regulations. Although the proposed site improvements will bring the site closer to zoning compliance, the site will not meet current zoning regulations. She said that the parking setbacks and excessive lot coverage are legal non-conformities and allowed to remain because the petitioner is not seeking to increase the mount of the non-conformity. Ms. Connolly explained the standards for Conditional Uses, which are listed in the Zoning Ordinance. She noted that the zoning ordinance permits only one principal building on a zoning lot. Therefore, the ~etifioner's request to install a fuel center requires conditional use approval for a planned unit development because the fuel center constitutes a.' second principal building/use on the zoning lot. She said that the proposed fuel center has been designed so the kiosk structure meets current building material regulations, and the overall fuel center development will meet all building and fire codes related to fuel dispensing. Access to the fuel center has been designed so the shopping center's internal circulation pattern is not adversely impacted. Redesigning the parking lot as proposed by the petitioner allows vehicles to enter the fuel center from Elmhurst Road and from the shopping center parking lot in a safe manner. Ms. Connolly reported that locating the fuel center away from the shopping center building will not have a detrimental impact on the stores within the center and the manner in which the center's parking lot will be reconfigured will not impair the use or value of the other stores and adjacent uses. She said that the fuel center use complies with the Comprehensive Plan and will be constructed according to Village Codes. Therefore, the petitioner's request to construct an outlot fuel center meets the standards for a conditional use. Planning & Zoning Commission PZ-37-02 Arlene Juraeek, Chairperson Page 3 Ms. Connolly explained the standards for a variation as listed in the Village Zoning Ordinance. She said that the petitioner's justification for seeking a variation to construct the new entrance feature 'towers' that exceed the maximum building height is that the existing building height of 26'8" is an existing condition that makes it difficult to update the existing fagade without making significant structural changes to the building. She reported that the proposed gabled roof elements exceed code height limits by less than four-feet and the modifications would not adversely affect the neighborhood character or other surrounding properties. Ms. Counolly summarized the required findings for sign variations as listed in the Sign Code as they related to the petitioner's request for two signs on one lot. She said that the petitioner researched the possibility of using one sign - ~ and found that the gas price information and the tenant panels are difficult to read on one sign. The request to allow two freestanding signs on one lot of record meets the standards for a variation because combining the information from the two signs to one sign would not allow for the reasonable identification of the businesses. Ms. Counolly reported that the two signs would be located more than 300-feet apart, which is similar to two different businesses installing their own signs on each of their properties. The signs have been located according to Sign Code regulations and will not adversely impact adjacent properties, increase traffic problems or alter the character of the area. Based on these findings, Ms. Counolly relayed staff's recommendation that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval of the petitioner's requests for: 1) relief from sign regulations to allow two freestanding signs as shown on their exhibits; 2) maximum building height of 33.17-feet (mid-point) for the two Dominick's entrances subject to the elevations being revised so the building materials comply with Village Codes; and 3) Conditional Use approval for a Planned Unit Development to allow for the construction of a fuel center subject to the following conditions: I. Revise the site plan prepared by Kurtz Associates to reflect the interior parking lot landscape islands; 2. Revise the site plan prepared by W. C. Doland Engineering revision date November 6, 2002 to reflect the landscape islands shown on the Site Landscape Plan prepared by W. C. Doland Engineering revision date November 6, 2002 and to include landscape islands for the west section of the parking lot instead of the painted island shown; 3. Revise the Site Landscape Plan prepared by W. C. Doland Engineering revision date November 6, 2002 to reflect landscape islands for the west section of the parking lot instead of the painted islands shown; 4. Revise the Site Landscape Plan prepared by W. C. Doland Engineering revision date November 6, 2002 to reflect landscape islands that measure no less than 7-feet in width; 5. Construct the fuel center according to Building and Fire Code regulations related to fuel dispensing; 6. Record a cross access easement agreement between Lots 1, 2, and 3 of the DiMueci Resubdivision. Chairperson luraeek asked Ms. Cormolly what would happened to the Conditional Use permit if the applicant, Dominck's, were to be sold in the future. Ms. Co .nnolly said that the Conditional Use l~,,uit is transferable to another owner, but that the owner is required to design' 'and operate the Conditional Use according to the original approval granted. Chairperson Juraeek asked if staff concurred with thc traffic report submitted as part of the application. Ms. Connolly clarified that access into the center would not be modified and that staff worked with the petitioner to modify the internal parking lot configuration to create a safe design and to minimize Vehicl~ c0nfii~ts2 Men'il Cotten asked if IDOT approval was required as part of the project. Ms. Cormolly said that an IDOT permit was not required because the applicant was not modifying the IDOT fight-of-way. Leo Floros asked for clarification on the kiosk use. Ms. Counolly said the building would be the size cfa small garage and people can pay for gas inside and/or purchase convenience items such as pop, chips, etc. Planning & Zoning Commission PZ-37o02 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 4 Richard Rogers said that the parking lot does not meet the requirements for a Planned Unit Development because the applicant was doing less than the minimum amount of work needed to meet the criteria for a Planned Unit Development (PUD). Ms. Connolly said that the manner in which the site was designed, the location of the existing building makes it extremely difficult for the site to meet current zoning regulations. She said that the applicant focused on improving the frontages along the commercial corridors. Mr. Rogers said that the parking lot should include more landscaping. Matt Sledz asked if the applicant would be allowed to conduct seasonal outdoor sales as they had in the past because the fuel center would occupy the area the sales took place. Ms. Connolly said that the outdoor sales could not create a parking deficiency and would have to be located in a manner that did not create traffic conflicts. She said that the permit would have to document code compliance before staff could approve the request for 0u~d0or sales, but it is possible that the outdoor sales would not be permitted. Mr. Sledz asked if the current tenants needed to approve the project. Ms. Connolly said no, just the property owner. Chairperson Juracek clarified that the Village posted two public hearing signs on the property and Ms. Connolly added that the case was published in the newspaper and notices were mailed to property owners as required by State Statues. Keith Youngquist noted a discrepancy on the site plan. One of the driveways on Golf Road allowed for a left turn when there was a raised median in that location that prevents a left turn at this location. He said that the east and west driveway on Golf Road were transposed. Mr. Youngquist inquired if the signage on all sides of the fuel center complied with Village regulations. Ms. Connolly said that the fuel center is a separate use. Therefore, it is allowed to have signage on all four-sides as long as the size of the text meets code regulations. She clarified that the Sign Code did not recognize the red and green 'swirls' or lines as signs bemuse they are not illuminated. Ms. Jumcek asked for the petitioners to be sworn in. Tom Niemira of thc DLMueei Company provided a brief overview of the project and introduced members of the development team, who included David Hene of Dominck's Real Estate Management, Stephen Corcoran of Metro Transportation, Wes McAllister of Kurl:z Associates, and Jason Doland, Doland Engineering. David Hene reviewed aspects of the $3.5 million store improvement and fuel center project. He noted that they were exploring alternative materials for the store entrance features since the Village prohibited the use of EIFS. He described how the fuel center would be used and noted that 70% of the users would be people shopping at Dominick's. He presented marketing information in detail and completed his presentation by stating that they concurred with the StaffReport. Chairperson Juracek asked for details on the existing fuel centers. Mr. Hene said there were eight fuel centers in operation and that this fuel center would be different from the fa'st, early fuel centers opened. He said that the kiosk would mirror the Dominick's store and have more landscaping. Richard Rogers asked Mr. Hene if be agreed with staff's recommendation of having seven-foot wide landscape islands as the minimum size and installing landscape islands in the west parking lot. Mr. Hene said he thought that the DiMueei Company agreed to the changes. Mr. Rogers asked if they would agree to eliminate certain parking spaces to include more landscaping. Mr. Hene said that he would defer the question to Mr. Niemira. Steve Corcorah of the Metro Transportation Group testified that the fuel center was not similar to a typical gas station, that it was tied to Dominick's. He said that the use would create 50-70 'new' trips, people who were not already shopping at Dominick's. Mr. Corcoma answered clarified that an ][DOT permit is not needed because they were not modifying the driveways and that IDOT accepted a Level Sevice D, which was cited in the traffic study, because the project location is in an urban area and that the fuel center would have minimal impact. Planning & Zoning Commission PZ-37-02 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 5 Chairperson Juracek asked if the traffic consultants had input on the internal parking lot circulation pattern changes. Mr. Corcoran said they did not, but that the proposed changes were consistent with current design standards. Mr. Youngquist noted that the traffic report stated there were sections of parking along Elmhurst Road that were not used, which supported Mr. Rogers recommendation that these spaces be eliminated and replaced with landscaping. Mr. Niemira addressed the Commission. He said that he had concerns with eliminating parking spaces because the spaces may be needed for future tenants, such as restaurants, which require more Parking than a retail user. He said that another DiMucci shopping center, Golf Plaza I received a variation for parking, but finds themselves limited as to the types of tenants they can lease the spaces to because ofthe parking deficiency. As an alternative to eliminating the parking spaces, Mr. Niemira said that the mount of landscaping could be increased in the proposed ten-foot landscape areas. He noted that the west parking lot would be used for employee parking and stated that he would make the landscape improvements as recommended in the staff report, but was reluctant to do so because the improvements would not be visible to shoppers or people traveling on Golf or Elmhurst Roads. Mr~ Rogers noted that constructing the fuel center should not limit the center's ability to lease spaces and if that was the case, then they should re-evaluate the project. There was discussion concerning the number of parking spaces needed to meet Village Code and the number needed to ensure the center's viability. Ms. Juracek noted that the parking lot at Golf Plaza I was difficult to maneuver larger vehicles through due to its tight design. There was a suggestion to increase the width of the drive aisle parallel to Elmhurst Road and to eliminate those parking stalls between the bank and the Boston Market restaurant. The modification would allow for easier ingress/egress to the site. It was further noted that eliminating these spaces would not adversely impact the center's viability because the spaces are located at such a distance from the building that the spaces rarely used by shoppers. Mr. Yotmgquist asked if new parking lot lights would be installed. Mr. Niemira stated that new code compliant lights would be installed as part of this project. There was discussion regarding future development within the shopping center, the impact of the fuel eeater on the stores located north of the fuel ennter, and how the kiosk and canopy are not solid structures and therefore will not adversely impact these stores. Chairperson Juracek opened the public hearing to receive comments from the audience. Pamela Mueller, 917 S. I- Oka, addressed the P&Z Commission. She said that she agrees that the project should include more landscaping, but was generally pleased with the design and changes to Golf Plaza I. Ms. Mueller noted that the driveway to enter/exit the shopping center from Golf Road gets obStructed and that traffic accidents occur sometimes~i. She asked how ~y accidents had occurred at this loeatien and if the fuel C~nter wOuld create additional acci~ts. ~. loracek agre~ that it Was a difficult tO make a left On ~0~if Ro~ri ~ ~ ~ay at timts~ She ei~fi~ that the Safety Commission could study the situation and noted that addiiidfil~ lighiiii~ may help to prevent some of the traffic conflicts at this driveway. Ms. Mueller concluded by stating that additional landscaping along Golf Road would help to reduce the amount of trash from GPI tenants from blowing down I-Oka. Ms. Juraeek asked Mr. Niemira if he agrees to increase the landscaping as proposed by the P&Z which includes more bushes along Golf Road and eliminating the parking previously identified along Elmhurst Road to install more landscaping. Mr. Niemira said that he agrees to make the changes. Ms. Juracek closed the public hearing at 9:12pm. Mr. Rogers said that said flxat the fagade improvements would benefit the center and agreed to support the height variation, but only for the Dominick's entrances. Planning & Zoning Coflunission PZ-37-02 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 6 Mr. Rogers moved to approve the petitioner's request to allow two 33.17' (mid-point) entrance features for the Dominick's entrances as shown on the elevations prepared by Kurtz Associates subject to the materials be revised to comply with Village Codes. Matt Sledz seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL:. AYES: Cotten, Floros, Rogers, Youngquist, Sledz and Juracek NAYS: None Motion was approved 6-0. Mr. Rogers moved to approve the Conditional Use request for a Planned Unit Development to construct a fuel center as shown on the plans prepared by Kurtz Associates and Doland Engineering subject to the following conditions: 1. Revise the landscape plan to reflect an increase in the quantity and density of bushes along the north property line (Golf Road); 2. Revise the plans prepared by Kurtz Associates, the site plan prepared by WC Doland Engineering, and the Site Landscape Plan prepared by WC Doland Engineering to reflect: · Eliminating the parking stalls on Elmhurst Road between the LaSalle Bank and Boston Market developments to create a 20-foot wide landscape area and a 26-foot wide drive aisle parallel to Elmhurst Road for this section of the parking lot; · Interior landscape islands shown on the Site Landscape Plan prepared by WC Doland Engineering revision date November 6, 2002 and that the islands measure no less than 7-fcet in width; and · Landscape islands for the west section of the parking lot instead of the painted islands shown; 3. Construct the fuel center according to Building and Fire Code regulations related to fuel dispensing;, and 4. Record a cross access easement agreement between Lots 1, 2, and 3 of the DiMuoci Resubdivision. Merril Cotten seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Floros, Rogers, Youngquist, Sledz and Juracek NAYS: None Motion was approved 6-0. Matt Sledz noted that the 'Dominick's' text on the freestanding fuel center sign was disproportionate to the rest of the sign and stated that the size of the letters should be reduced. Mr. Hene said that the size of the sign was significantly smaller than a standard gas station sign. There was discussion regarding the size of the sign base and letters. It was agreed that the 'Fresh Card' graphic would be relocated to in front of the 'Dominick's' text and that the letter size would be reduced proportionately. It was noted that the reason for granting the variation to allow two freestanding signs was due to the size of the Elmhurst Road frontage and the distinct uses each size would serve. Mr. Rogers moved to approve two freestanding signs for the Elrnhurst Road frontage as shown on the petitioner's plans prepared by Kurtz Associates and Doland Engineering subject to the fuel center sign face being modified to reduce the 'Dominick's' text and relocating the 'Fresh Card' graphic to in front of the text. Merril Cotten seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Floros, Rogers, Youngquist, Sledz and Juracek NAYS: None lanning & Zoning Commission PZ-37-02 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 7 Motion was approved 6-0. At 9:25 p.m., Keith Youngquist moved to adjourn, seconded by Leo Floros. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. '-- Marisa Wameke, Neighborhood Planner ' r~udy Cor~ol~y,/~I~P, Senior ~lanner ~ Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department CASE SUMMARY - PZ- 37 -02 LOCATION: PETITIONERS: OWNER: PARCEL #: LOT SIZE: ZONING: LAND USE: REQUEST: Golf Plaza H (Southwest comer of Golf & Elmhurst Roads) W. Thomas Niemira & Dominick's DiMueci Companies 08-14-204-023 12.8 acres (shopping center parcel only) B3 Community Shopping Shopping Center Conditional Use and Variations LOCATION MAP Golf Road Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: MOUNT PROSPECT PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ARLENE JURACEK, CHAIRPERSON FROM: JUDY CONNOLLY, AICP, SENIOR PLANNER DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2002 HEARING DATE: NOVEMBER 21, 2002 SUBJECT: PZ-37-02 - coNDITIONAL USE AND VARIATIONS GOLF PLAZA II - DIMUCC! COMPANIES & DOMnqlCK'S BACKGROUND A public hearing has been scheduled for the November 21, 2002 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting to review the application by DiMucci Companies and Dominick's (the "Petitioner") regarding the property located at the southwest comer of Golf & Elmhurst Roads, Golf Plaza H Shopping Center (the "Subject Property"). The Petitioner has requested Conditional Use approval for a Planned Uni~ Develgpment to construct an outlot fuel center (gas station), and variations to construct two 33.17' (measured at the mid-point) entrance features on the Dominick's facade and for multiple freestanding signs. The P&Z hearing was properly noticed in the November 6, 2002 edition of the Journal Topics Newspaper. In addition, Staffhas completed the required vaittea notice to property owners within 250-feet and posted a Public Hearing sign on the Subject Property. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Subject-Property is located at the southwest comer of Golf and Elmhurst Roads and contains a retail shopping center. The Subject Property is zoned B3 Community Shopping and is b0rder~d bY the B3~ B.! ~e, R1 Single Family, and R4 Multi*Family E}evelopment dis~cts. 'SU1VIFtARY OF PROPOSAL The attached exhibits show the Petitioner's plans for the proposed fuel center, site improvements to the shopping center, and improvements to the Dominick's facade. Fuel Center The petitioner proposes to construct a six-pump fuel center located slightly more than 50-feet from the east lot line (Elmhurst Road), 60-feet from qbe north lot line (adjacent to the Boston Market Restaurant), and 220-feet from Golf Road. The fuel center includes a kiosk where people pay for gas and purchase convenience items. The kiosk would be constructed using brick materials and measure 422 square feet. The fuel center can be accessed directly from Elmhurst Road or from within the shopping center parking lot. The attached tanker access plan shows that the tankers would be able to access and service the fuel center without negatively impacting the adjacent properties or the existing shopping center tenants. PZ-37-02 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting November 21, 2002 Page 3 Site Improvements As part of the fuel center project, the petitioner proposes significant changes to the shopping center parking lot. Access into the shopping center would not change, but the interior cimulation pattern would be modified to allow for a more efficient parking design and to eliminate vehicle conflicts. The existing design includes angled and 90 degree parking stalls. The petitioner is proposing to reconfignre the parking lot to provide 90 degree parking stalls, create landscape islands in the parking lot, and create perimeter landscape screening along Elmhurst and Golf Roads. These improvements are in keeping with the Village's Corridor Design Guidelines that require redevelopment projects to incorporate landscape improvements along major commercial corridors. The petitioner's plans do not adversely impact the adjacent Boston Market and LaSalle Bank developments, which are separate lots of record. Although the proposed site improvements reduce the number of parking spaces for the shopping center, the s~te continues to meet Village parking regulations. The following chart summarizes parking requirements and shows that the adjacenfuses will continue to meet Village parking regulations. Required # of Spaces Existing i Proposed PARKING Shopping Center 627 770 711 (per landscape plan) Bank 17 18 i No Change Restaurant 30 30 No Change Dominck's Fagade Improvements As part of the new fuel center project, Dominick's proposes fagade improvements.to the existing grocery store. The attached elevations show that the existing flat roof would be modifiod to include the addition of two 'towers' at the store entrances to create a gabled roofline. The modified roof is intended to better identify entrances to the store and update the store's facade. The petitioner proposes to use brick materials to constr, tct the columns and arch~vay design, in addition to extending the EIFS faq:ade to meet the metal coping 'towers'. However, the Village recently adopted an ordinance that prohibits the usc of EIFS. Therefore, in order to comply with Village regulations, the elevations must be revised so-the EIFS material is eliminated and substituted with another material. Also, the height of the 'tower' structures measures 33.17' from the mid-point of the roof. The existing building height is 26'8" from grade. In order t[o create the gabled roof so it is in proportion to the entrances and the existing building, the petitioner is see&lng relief from code regulations to construct two 'towers' that measure 3.17-feet taller than code permits. The Zoning Ordinance limits the rraximum building height to 30-feet. Signage Proposal The petitioner is seeking a Variation to allow two freestanding signs for the Elmhurst Road frontage. One sign would be used to identify the stores in the shopping center and the second sign would be used exclusively for the fuel center. The fuel center sign would contain fuel prices and identify the fuel center as a Dominck's fuel center. The Sign Code allows one sign per street frontage (Sec. 7.305.A)..The intent of this regulation is to minimize visual clutter and eliminate traffic hazards that may result from distractions of multiple signs. The distance bev,veen the two proposed signs is approximately 305-feet and the signs would be used to identify two separate uses. In addition~ the 50-square foot fuel center sign has been redesigned so the sign contains basic information relevant to the fuel center only. The sign measures eight-feet from grade and includes a brick base, which will be PZ-37-02 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting November 21, 2002 Page 4 landscaped as required by the sign Code. The freestanding sign for the shopping center will be used to identify shopping center tenants and its base will also be landscaped according to Sign Code regulations. GENERAL ZONING COMPLIANCE The primary structure (shopping center building) will not be modified, but the parking lot will be reconfigured and a new 422 square foot kiosk will be constructed as part of the fuel center. The kiosk location complies with zoning regulations. However, some of the existing site conditions do not comply with current zoning regulations. Although the proposed site improvements will bring the site closer to zoning compliance, the site will not meet current zoning regulations. The parking set-backs and excessive lot coverage are legal non-conformities (Sec. 14.402.B) and allowed to remain because the petitioner is not seeking to increase the amount of the non- conformity. The following table compares the ,Petitioner's proposal to the B3 Community Shopping district's bulk requirements. 113 Community Shopping Zoning District Existing Proposed Minimum Req~rements BUILDING HEIGHT 30' 26.67' 33.17' (mid-point) BUILDING SETBACKS Front 30' 50' No chanl[e Side 10' 20' No change Corner , 30' 345' 52' (kiosk) Rear 20' 52' lqo chan~[e FARIilNG SETBACKS: Front 10' 0' 8' Interior Side 10' 0' lqo change Corner 10' 0' 10' Rear 10' 0' No change LOT COVERAGE ?5% Maximum 100% 95% CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS The standards for Conditional Uses am listed in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Village Zoning Ordinance and include seven specific timings that must be made in order to approve a Conditional Use. The following list is a summary of these findings: · The Conditional Use will not have a detrimental impact on the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare; · The Conditional Use will not be injurious to the use, enjoyment, or value of other properties in the vicinity or impede the orderly development of those properties; · Adequate -provision of utilities, drainage, and design of access and egress to minimize congestion on Village streets; and · Compliance of the Conditional Use with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and other Village Ordinances. PZ-37-02 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting November 21, 2002 Page 5 The Zoning Ordinance permits only one principal building on a zoning lot. Therefore, the petitioner's request to install a fuel center requires Conditional Use approval for a Planned Unit Development because the fuel center constitutes a second principal building/use on the zoning lot. The proposed fuel center has been designed so the kiosk structure meets current building material regulations, i.e. constructed from brick, and the overall fuel center development will meet all Building and Fire Codes related to fuel dispensing. Access to the fuel center has been designed so the shopping center traffic (internal circulation) is not adversely impacted. Redesigning the parking lot as shown on the attached site plan allows vehicles to enter the fuel center from Elmhurst Road and from the shopping center parking lot in a safe manner. The petitioner's request to construct an outlot fuel center meets the standards for a Conditional Use. Locating the fuel center away from the shopping center building will not have a detrimental impact on the stores within the center and the manner in which the center's parking lot will be reconfigured will not impair the use or value of the other stores and adjacent uses. The fuel center use complies with the Comprehensive Plan and will be constructed according to Village Codes. VARIATION STANDARDS - BUILDING HEIGHT The standards for a Variation are listed in Section 14.203.C.9 of the Village Zoning Ordinance and include seven specific findings that must be made in order to approve a Variation. The following is a summary of these findings: A hardship due to the physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of a specific property not generally applicable to other properties i.n the.same zoning district and not created by any person presently having an interest in the propen'y; · lack of desire to increase financial gain; and · protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character. The petitioner's request to construct new entrance feature 'towers' that exceed the maximum building height requires relief from Sec. 14.1704.B of the Zoning Ordinance. The petitioner's justification for seeking the Variation is that the existing building height of 26'8" is an existing condition that makes it difficult to update the existing fagade without making significant structural changes to the boitding. The proposed gabled roof elements exceed code height limits by less than four-feet and the modifications would not adversely affect the neighborhood character or other surrounding properties. VARIAT-ION STANDARDS - F~- ESTAN-IHNG SIGNS Required findings for sign variations are contained in Section 7.725 of the Village of Mount Prospect Sign Code. The section contains specific findings that must be made in order to approve a variation. These standards relate to: · The sign allowed under code regulations wilt not reasonably identify the business; · The hardship is created by unique circumstances and not serve as convenience to the petitioner, and is not created by the person presently having an interest in the sign or property; ,~ The variation will not be raaterial~y detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood; · The variation will not impair visibility to the adjacent property, increase the danger of traffic problems or endanger the public safety, or alter the essential character' Z-37-02 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting November 21, 2002 Page 6 The request to allow two freestanding signs on one lot of record meets the standards for a variation because combining the information from the two signs to one sign would not allow for the reasonable identification of the businesses. The petitioner researched the possibility of using one sign and found that the gas price information and the tenant panels are difficult to read on one sign. Also, the two signs would be located more than 300-feet apart. The distance between the two signs is similar to two different businesses installing their own signs on each of their properties. The signs have been located according to Sign Code regulations and will not adversely impact adjacent properties, increase traffic problems or alter the character of the area. RECONL%IENDATION Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval of the petitioner's requests for: 1) relief from sign regulations to allow two freestanding signs as hsown on the exhibits prepared by Doyle Signs dated October 30, 2002; 2) maximum building height of 33.17-feet (mid-point) for the two Dominick's entrances as shown on the attached elevations subject to the elevations being revised so the building materials comply with Village Cedes; and 3) Conditional Use approval for a Planned Unit Development to allow for the construction of a fuel center as shown onthe attached site plan and elevations prepared by Kurtz Associated dated November 7, 2002 subject to the following conditions: 1. Revise the site plan prepared by Kurtz Associates to reflect the interior parking lot landscape islands; 2. Revise the site plan prepared by .WC. Doland Engineering revision date November 6, 2002 to reflect the landscape islands shown on the Site Landscape Plan prepared by WC Doland Engineering revision date November 6, 2002 and to include landscape islands for the west section of the parking lot instead of the painted, island shown; 3. Revise the Site Landscape Plan prepared by WC Doland Engineering revision date November 6, 2002 to reflect l~udseape islands for the west section of the parking lot instead of the painted islands shown; 4. Revise the Site Landscape Plan prepared by WC Doland Engineering revision date November 6, 2002 to reflect landscape islands that measure no less than 7-feet in width; 5. Construct the fuel center accordiag to Building and t:ire Code regulations related to fuel dispensing; 6. Record a eross access easement agreement between Lots 1,2, and'3oftheDiMucciResubdivislon. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. concur: William I. ~ooney, AIC~P, Director of Community Development VILLAOg ..Oi~,MO. ,L-.-~T PROSPB...C.T. ', ,.,:~-~--~,~r~' ' 100S. Bmar~onStreet ., '....~ . . ..:.,, MountPmspect, Illinois 60056 ' '.,.,,' . :-~,~...'~,:'~. ' ~. ,,.,¢,~:.:?.: , ,*~..~~ Phone 847.818.5t28 FAX 847,818,5329 " ..... '. ~.. ,-."~I~ Apphcatlorf. for Condmonat Use Approval .: ' ~'""'"~ -.. C~seNumber '" - '."'"':~. ** ' , "F'**. ' %.-~v... P&Z Development Name/Address Date of Submission Hearing Date ', 'Narne,~/~.,,~4.~.~ ' '", ; Telephone(day) ~ Co~orafion Telephone ~evc~g) ~ .~ S~eet Ad.ess Fax ~ Ciw~.~ - S~te Zip Code P~er ProlLgscd Conditional Use (as listed in the Zonin§ district'~ _._... ~, . , , , -- De*on'be m Detail the Buil~i,~ and Acti~aties P~oposed and How th~'Proposcd Use Mee~s the Attached .q~mdards for - Condit Sunllllar~ of Action Requested Dominick's Freer Foods /~ Golf Read mid Elmhurst Road Dominick', re4uest~ a conditional me permit for the Ol~'afion of a fuel center soath of th, existing Bo,mn Market. The fa~ili~ will consi,t ora 41'/,qu~ foot w~dk-in kiosk with six pumps. The kiosk and the fueling pumps will.be under a canopy to protect . "-' cl~stomers from hlclement weather. The kiosk will offer limited convenience items like coffee, soda ~nd sracks. All fuelin§ positions and the kiosk will have video surveillance on monitors b~th i~side the ldosk and Dominick's main store. Furthermore, both the k~osk and thc supermarket w~ll have emergency fuel shut off,witches. Domm~ck s customers who have a "Fresh Values" card will receive discounts on fuel as well as coupons for discotmted or free merchandise inside thl ~rocery store. Approximately, ?0- Hours 80 percent of customers purchasing fucl will also purcBasc groc~-les in Dominiok's store on thc same trip. Rciardlcas, fucl will be for sale to thc iencral public cven if they not have a"Fresh Values" card. The traffic study details anlicipaed number of customers and peak hours lrip Ecneration. Sq. lrt. Devoted t~ {~'~oposed Use Setbacks: C~ Fron, l~ear ,Side Side Buildi~ Height Lot Coverage (%) lqumbe~ of Parld~ Spaces Please note that the application ~ not be ~wlewed until ~ petition has been fully completed and all ~cqulzed.plans an~ other materials have been Satisfactozily submitted to the pJsnnlng Divisio,, Incomplete ~bmlttals willn0t be accepted. It is strongly sure,ted that the petitioner schedule an appointment with the appmpziate Vill~$e staff so that n~te~iais cunbe l'eviswed for ac?racy and completer, ess at the ~ of submittaL In consideration of the information contained in ~ petition as welt as all support'lng documentation, it is requested th~ app~ovalbe ~iven propert~ grant employees of the Village of Mourn Prospect and thek agents permission to enter on the propeg'y duri~ zeasonable hou~ for visual inspection of the subjec~ property. I hereby affirm that ali info~rmatlon~ovided her~in and in all materials submitted in a~sociatiun with this application are tree and accurate to-the best o~-~pwlp~ge. Applicant If applicant is not property ovrncr: I hereby desit-mte the. applicant to aqt as my agent for the purpose of seeking the Varistion(s) descn"oed in this application and the associated supporting ~-'~ Mottut Prospect Depa.nment ofCo'mmu~"~ Developw. ent Phone 100 South Emerson S~eet, Mount Prospect Illinois Fax 847.818.~329 .......... '" ......... '~ TDD ~47392.6064 S~eet Ad~es~ F~: Developer Na~ Tel~hone (~y) Attorney N~ Telephone (~y) ~ch~t Ad~e~s F~x Landseap~ ~r~hi~ect ' Name Telephone (day): Ad.ess Mount Prospect Dep~u-lment of Com~m;ty Development ? Phone 847.818.$328 www. mount~ros~ect.or~ 2 , TDD 847.392.60~ VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT COIVflViUN1TY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT- Pl~nnlng Division 100 S. Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 Phone 847.818.5328 FAX 847.818.5329 Variation Request The Planning & Zoning Commission has final administrative authority for all petitions for fence variations and those variation requests that do not exceed twenty-five (25%) of a requirement stipulated by the Village~s Zoning Ordinance. PETITION FOR PLANNING & ZONING CO1VhWIISSION REVIEW o Village Board Finalo P&Z Final Co~n Address(es) (S~z'e_~t Number, Street) ., ~ '., Legal Description (attach add/t/onal Corporation . ~ : T~lcphone D/,m~, cc: r d25,.7,?.~x;/~ Street Adckess Fax City ,,"F-'5 ,, State Zip Code Pager Interest in Prolmrty Z Name c Telephone (day) Corporation / , ~ . Telephone (evening) ~ Street Address Fax: Ci~ S~te Zip Coda ?agar Developer N~ T~l~hone Ad,ess :~ _ A~o~e~ N~ .. Tel~hone (day) .. ..... ~ ..... Ad,ess ~ S~e~r ~Mtect : N~ T~ne (day):, Ad,ess Lan~cape ~c~t~ct Name Telephone (~y): Ad~ss ~ax Phone 847.818.5328 Fax 847.818.5329 TDD 847392.6064 Mount Prospect Department of Community Development I00 South Eme~on Street, Mount lh'ospecl lq~i,~ols, 60056 2 ode Section(s) for which Variation(s) is (are) Requested Summat'y and lustification for F. equcstcd Variation(s), Relate lusgfication to the Attached Staudards for Variatioas Section 14.1?0,LB (building height -< 30')- The Golf Plaza II is an existing shopping center deveioped in the 1970's. Thc existing building height of the Dominick's is 29'. Dominick's plans to add two tower clements to provide better a~chitectural symmetry as well as better direct customers to both of thc store entrances. These changes are no~ baaed primarily on tlnancial gain. Strict adherence to the 30' maximum building height would create a hardship and not allow this improvement. Dominick's is unable to demolish the front of the store lo achieve the architectural e~hanccmm~ts and thus are unique to this location. Furthermore, Dominick's did not create the hardship. ~ variation will not be dclrimental to the Public welfare or injurious to other property nor alter thc ess~lial chara~er of Ole neighborhood. Also, the proposed vluiatior~ will not impair an ~lequate supply of light and air to adjacent propen~y or 'subst'antially increase congestion in ~he public s~eets, or increase the danger of fire or impair naiural drainage problcm,s on adjacent prope~ies, or e'adanger public safeiy, or substantially diminish or impair propen'y values within the neighborhood. Please note that the application wfllnot be accepted until~ l~tmon has been fully completed and all reqmrccl plans and other materials have been satisfactorily submitted to ~ae Pla,mlng Divisio~ It is strongly suggested that the pefliioner schedule an appointment with app~ptia~¥il~ge staff so that materials can be ~ev~ewed for accuracy and completeneSs prior to submittal In consideration of the information co~!'~;~ed in ~ petition as well as all suppor~i~ do~anentatio~ it is requested that apl~oval be giv~ ~o ~ request The applic~ is the owner or au~her~zed representa~ve of the oWn~ o~ the l~pe~y. Th~ peO.~oue~ m~d the owver of the prepe~ ~'aut employees of t~ Vil~ge of R~uut Prospect and thek agents permission to enter on the p~crty durlng ~e~sonable hours for visu~ inspection of the ~oject p. ~oper~y. I hereby afl, fa that ~r~ '~prov~ded q~ein and in all materials suMtted in association with dfis application are hue and accurate ~o the bus,oily ~l~op~led§e ~ / ' ~, // If applicant is not p~open"y owner:. I hereby designate the applicant to act a~ my agent for the purpose of seeking the Variation(a) described in this application and the associated supporting m~tcr~ ~ ~ Propecty Owner ~ Date Mount Prospect Department of Comrr~t,,ity Development 100 South Emerson Sueet, Mount Prospect _Illinois, 60056 phone 847.818.5328 Fax 84.7.818.5329 TDD 847.392.6064 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT COMA4UNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 100 S. Emerson St~net Mount Prospect, nlinois 60056 Phone 847.818.5328 FAX 847.818.5329 Sign Variation Request Planning & Zoning Cmmfission Final The Planning & Zoning Commission has final administrative authority for all petitions for sign variations. PETITION FOR PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION REVIEW Common Address(es) {Street Number, Street) Tax I.D. Number or Cotmty Assil~ted Pinlq-mb. er(s) Legal Desctlpfion (attach additional sheets if necessary) Z Tel~hone (day),,~ ~ Coition Tel~hone (eve~) Ci~ ~ Sate Zip Code Pager ~ ~terest ~ ~o~ N~me Telephone (ch¥) Telephone (ev~g) ~o~on N~ Telepho~ ( ~~/O Fax Address Ad.ess Fax S~eyor ~ '~ ~. ~.n~ ........ ~ _. w ............... ~ct Ad.ess ~n~cape Ha~ Tel~hone (day): Ad. ess Mount ProspeCt Department of Com~,m!ty Development Phone 847.818.5328 Fax ~47.~ 18.5~29 100 South Emerson Street. Mount Prospect Illinois 9 TDD 847.392.6064 ode Section(s) for which Variation(s) is (are) Requested Summary and Justification for Requested Variation(s) Please note that the application will not be accepted until tiffs petition has been fully completed and all required p!~s and other materials have been satisfactorily submitted to the Plannin§ Division. It is strongly su§gested that the pefilioner schedule an appointment with the apprOpriate Village Staff so that materials can be reviewed for accuracy and completeness prior to submittal. In consideration of the infonmtion contained in this petiti on and all supposing documentation, it is requested that approval be given to this l'eque~t. Tha applicant is the owner or authorizedrepresentative ofthe owner ofthe propen'y. Thcpetitiuner antithe ownsr ofthcproperty ~ent employees of the Village of Mount Prospect and their agunts !oemfissiun to enter on the property during reasonable hours for visual inspection of the subject propen'y. I hereby affirm fl~at all ~'~fion/p~rovided ]~rein and in all materials submitted in associaion with this application are U'ue and If applicant is not property owner:. I hereby designate the applicant to act as my ag$~f~'F~e purpose of seeking the Variation(s) d~scn'bed in this application and the associated suppo:ting n~/'r~al._~ f ] Properly O,,rae~ ,~~--~t~.~, Date Mount Pwspect Department of Community Development 100 South Emerson $1ree~, Mount Prospect Illinois Phone 847.818,5328 Fax 847.818.5329 TDD 847.392.6064 Seetlon ?.305.B.l.a. (1 wall sign per frontage)- Dominick's requests a wall si~n on the east face of thc fuel center canopy. Thc code permits one sil~n per frontage per establishment. Howe¥cr, "the Director may authorize additional wall signs for distinct uses within an establisluncnt, provided there is a separate entrance from the exterior of the building." The fucl center is a distinct use from the IFocery store. Also since the fuel center is on an outer removed from the $rocery store, the kiesk's entrance is separate from that of thc grocery store. Strict adherence.to the code would prevent any identification wall signage to both Golf Road and Routc 83. Canopy signage is common to many fuel facilities flu'ougbout thc Village. In fact the codc contemplates lhese types of situations by permitting an administrative remedy for allowing the signage. The wall sign will further the public convenience by providing a clear and identifiable connection between the fucl center end the grocery store. This request is unique to this properly and was not created by the petitioner. This variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property nor alter the essential character of.thc neighborhood. Also, thc propused variatlon will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent prope~' or substantially increase congestion in the public streets, or increase the danger of fire or impair natural drainage problems on adjacent properties, or endanger public safety, or substantially diminish or impair properly values within the neighborhood. ~ TOTRL pRGE.~2 ~ onnoll¥, Judy From: Sent: To: Subject: Nickipml@aol.com Sunday, November 17, 2002 12:04 AM jconnoll@mountprospect.org Case No. PZ-37-02 If Dominicks stays in business I might not have a problem with them putting gas pumps in the Golf Plaza lot. However, I do have several concerns I wish to share with you, I reside in the Hunt Club On The Lake Condos which are to the south (and slightly west) of the DiMucci Properties at Golf Plaza. Mr. DiMucci and his company are not very considerate neighbors. They allow semi trailer trucks and other vehicles to park at the southwest end the lot often creating an eyesore and many vehicles are left with the engine running all night (this disturbs sleep for the families down at that end of the buildings most especially in the summer or whenever the windows can be left open). This area is aG the far south end and the south rear portion of the property. If Mr. DiMucci and his staff want to allow these people to park their vehicles on the east side of the parking lot, where there is a designated parking area, than so be it. Numerous complaints have been made over the years to the DiMucci company as well as the police department to no avail. Many of the owners, as well as the association board members feel this, as well as the poor care of the rear of the property, brings down our property values. I ~elieve several years ago we were told an 8 or 10 foot solid fence would be put in place, but I am not sure whatever happened to that issue. With all the talk about the potential for Safeway wanting to get out of the Chicago area market, as well the impending strike by Dominick's employees, I feel this issue should be put on hold. If the stores are sold we will then 't%ave an eyesore on Elmburst Rd.! There is not necessarily any other store chain that would move in there and take over the gas pumps as well as a store. I ~reatly appreciate your taking citizens comments under consideration. Sincerely, Nicolette R. Pappas 500 Huntington Cmns. Rd. #161 Mt. Prospect, IL 60056 (847) 439-4766 DiMucci, Not the Best of Neighbors: Their Commercial Lots look terrible There was a notice of 'Variance' posted at the intersection of Golf and Elmhurst Rds. Doing a little research, I discovered that DiMucci is planning on putting in a gas station, I assume along Rt. 83. That being the case, I would ask if they plan on maintaining the surrounding commemial areas. I live at Hunt Club 11 Condominiums, south of the mall. For the past several winters, DiMucci has dumped a huge salt pile on their lot behind (west of) what was once the: Bowling Alley, Pharmor, Trak Auto, and most recently a Halloween store. When they needed to move the salt to other locations, they use a back loader with a scoup in front. As the back loader is backing up, it makes a very high- pitched pieming sound. Needless to say I was awakened from my sleep because of this intense noise. Today, there are a variety of semi-tractor trucks who routinely park there all hours of the day and night. When the residents here complain, DiMucci does nothing to rid the lot of these trucks. (The trucks are not engaged with or doing business with any of the stores in the mall.) The lot there has been neglected for years and looks inviting to these transient truckers who do not seem to have to pay for the privilege to park in the Village. The person or company who owns these trucks has about 6 or 7 tractor truck cabs that they move around to different lots in Mt. Prospect, If you care to, these trucks can be seen parked in the lot East of the Hobby Lobby, the lot North of the Amoco station at Dempster and Elmhurst, the lot behind Dominicks and other parking lots in DesPlaines also. What we would like DiMucci to do is to tow these transient trucks out of his lots and continue to tow them until they stop using these lots as their own personal parking areas. The police state, that if DiMucci tells them to, they can tell the drivers not to park trucks in his lots... In the colder months these trucks will run all night long. We would like the Police to be more pro- active. If they see a truck parked there, they only have to listen for a little while until the truck's engine starts and runs for about 10 minutes. So, if they see a truck parked there, they should know that the noise will start soon after the residents have turned in for the night. Then when the engine does start, I get awakened and try to return to sleep. Only to no avail. If the residents call the police, they say the truck(s) are not running. When they arrive that is true. It is only after they leave that the engines restart and run again. (The residents do get the impression that the police could care less if' our neighborhood tums into and looks like a dump, after all, they don't live here, If they did, the trucks would have been long gone...))) Why is Mt Prospect a haven for transient truckers; is there a mandate in the village charter stating that we must accommodate transient commercial vehicles parking in the village? DiMucci has not done anything about this situation because the residents here have complained about the salt piles and his very loud trucks coming and going all hours of the day and night as needed in winter time. I think the lot should be rezoned for residential, that way some fat real estate developer can put up townhouses so that the residents here can look at residential dwellings instead of a dump. So, I suggest that you ask DiMucci if they intend to improve these circumstances before granting the variation approval... VWL 11/25~2 11/26/02 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE AND VARIATIONS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF GOLF AND ELMHURST ROADS (GOLF PLAZA II) WHEREAS, DiMucci Companies (hereinafter referred to as "Petitioner") has filed a petition for a Conditional Use and Variations with respect to property located at the southwest corner of Golf and Elmhurst Roads, (hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property") and legally described as follows: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 1,2,3 in DiMucci's Resubdivision of Lots 3-7, both inclusive, in Juhnke's Subdivision of part of the NE % of Sec. 14, Township 41 North, Range 11 East of the Third Principal Meridian, according to the plat thereof registered in the Office of the Registrar of Titles of Cook County, IL on February 27, 1979 as DO~ 3077963; in Co01( County IL Also, Lot 1 in Juhnke's Subdivision of Part of the NE % of Sec. 14, Township 41 North, Range 11 East of the Third Principal Meridian, according to the plat thereof registered in the Office of the Registrar of Titles of Cook County, IL on April 16, 1952 as Doc# 1399754, in Cook County, IL. Property Index Number: 08-14-204-023-0000; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner seeks a Conditional Use permit for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for an outlot fuel center, as prOvided in Section 14.203.F.7 of the Village Code; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner seeks Variations from sections of the Zoning Ordinance, as provided in Section 14.203.C;7 of the Village Code, to allow the construction of two (2) 33.17' (mid-point measurement) entrance features on the Dominick's fagade; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on the request for a Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use permit and Variations being the subject of Case No. PZ-37-02 before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 21st day of November, 2002, pursuant to proper legal notice having been pUblished in the Mount Prospect Journal & Topics on the 6th day of NoVember, 2002; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has submitted its findings and a positive recommendation to the President and Board of Trustees in support of the request being the subject of PZ-37-02; and Page 2/3 PZ-37-02 WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have given consideration to the requests herein and have determined that the requests meet the standards of the Village and that the granting of the proposed Conditional Use permit for a Planned Unit Development, and Variation would be in the best interest of the Village. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION ONE: The recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated as findings Of fact by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect. SECTION TWO: The President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect do hereby grant a Conditional Use permit for a Planned Unit Development to allow the construction of an outlot fuel center; and SECTION THREE: The President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect do hereby grant Variations to allow two (2) 33.17' (mid-point measurement) entrance features on the store fa(;ade and for multiple freestanding signs, as provided in Section 14.203.C.7 of the Village Code, all as shown on the Site Plan dated November 26, 2002, a copy of which is attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof. SECTION FOUR: Prior to the issuance of a building permit relative to the Conditional Use permit and Variation, the following conditions and/or wdtten documentation shall be fulfilled: 1. Revise the landscape plan to reflect an increase in the quantity and density of bushes along the north property line (Golf Road); 2. Revise the plans prepared by Kurtz Associates, the site plan prepared by WC Doland Engineering, and the Site Landscape Plan prepared by WC Doland Engineering to reflect: · Eliminating the parking stalls on Elmhurst Road between the LaSalle Bank and Boston Market developments to create a 20-foot wide landscape area and a 26-foot wide drive aisle parallel to Elmhurst Road for this section of the parking lot; · Interior landscape islands shown on the Site Landscape Plan prepared by WC Doland Engineering revision date November 26, 2002 and that the islands measure no less than 7-feet in width; and · Landscape islands for the west section of the parking lot instead of the painted islands shown; 3. Construct the fuel center according to Building and Fire Code regulations related to fuel dispensing; and Page 3/3 PZ-37-02 4, Record a cross access easement agreement between Lots 1, 2, and 3 of the DiMucci Resubdivision, SECTION FIVE: The Village Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to record a certified copy of this Ordinance with the Recorder of Deeds of Cook County. SECTION SIX: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of ,2002. ATTEST: Gerald L. Farley Village President Velma W. Lowe Village Clerk I I TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS For DOMINICK'S FUEL CENTER Mount Prospect, Illinois t I I I I 1 I Prepared for DOMINICK'S FINER FOODS September 2002 Prepared by METRO TRANSPORTATION GROUP, INC. 1300 Greenbrook Boulevard Hanover Park, Illinois Dominick's Fuel Center Mount Prospect, IL September 2002 I. INTRODUCTION Metro Transportation Group, Inc. (Metro) was retained by Dominick's Finer Foods (Dominick's) to evaluate the traffic impact of a proposed Dominick's Fuel Center in Mount Prospect, Illinois. The proposed development will consist of a Dominick's Fuel Center with 12 fueling positions to be situated in the existing Golf Plaza II Shopping Center parking lot, located on the southwest corner of IL Route 83 (IL 83) and Golf Road intersection. The location of the site is shown on Figure 1. This study was conducted to assess the impact the proposed fuel center would have on traffic conditions in the area and to recommend any roadway and access improvements necessary to accommodate the site generated traffic. The scope of this study included the following items: 1. Data Co/lection - A field reconnaissance of the site and adjacent roadway traffic" counts were conducted to determine the physical and operation aspects of the roadway network. Peak hour traffic counts were conducted at the intersection of IL 83 and Golf Road, and at the existing Golf Plaza II Shopping Center access drives located along IL 83 and Golf Road. 4 Analyses -The peak hour trips generated by the fuel center were based on national surveys of the similar type of developments. The peak-hour trips generated by the site were then assigned to the street system based on the estimated travel directions of site traffic. Evaluation and Recommendation - Capacity analyses were conducted at the study intersections to determine the roadways' ability to accommodate future traffic levels. Based on the analyses, recommendations were developed with respect to roadway improvements, and site access. A detailed description of the study findings for the Project is provided herein. ! Metro Transportation Group, Inc Page 2 \ E Oakton St \ W Cen~l R~ W Greg¢7 St Z Unc~ln St E GOLF RD Oempster SRO ~go~u~n Rd W Oakton SI SITE LOCATION E Eucqd Ay E C~nb'al Rd ~ St FIGURE: 1 Dominick's Fuel Center Mount Prospect, IL September 2002 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing roadway and traffic conditions in the vicinity of the site were determined based on field visits and traffic counts. The following provides a description of the physical characteristics of the roadways including geometry and traffic control, adjacent land uses, and daily and peak hour traffic flows along these roadways. Each of these elements is described in detail below. Roadway Conditions IL Route 83 (IL 83) is a major north-south five-lane arterial with a posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour (mph) within the site vicinity. At the signalized intersection of Golf Road and IL 83, IL 83 provides for an exclusive right-turn lane, two through lanes and an exclusive left-turn lane on the north and south approaches. AHhe intersection of tL.83 and Dulles'Road?tL 83 provide,s. -for a shared through/right-turn Iane, one through lane and an exclusiv~ left-turn lane..on the...~---" north and south approaches. Land uses along IL 83 are a mixture of retail, office and residential. IL 83 is under the jurisdiction of the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT). Golf Road is a major east-west five-lane arterial with a posted speed limit of 40 mph within the site vicinity. At the signalized intersection of Golf Road and IL 83, Golf Road provides for an exclusive right-turn lane, two through lanes and an exclusive left-turn lane on the west approach. On the east approach, Golf Road provides for a shared through/right-turn lane, a through Iane and an exclusive left-turn lane. At the intersection of Golf Road and I-Oka Road, Golf Road provides for a shared through/right-turn lane and a shared through/left-turn lane on the west approach. On the east approach, Golf Road provid, es for a shared throu, gh/right-turn lane, a through lane, and an exclusive left-turn lane on the east approach. Land uses along Golf Road are a mixture of retail, office and residential. Golf Road is under jurisdiction of IDOT. Existinq Traffic Volumes In order to gain a better understanding of current traffic patterns in the study area, Metro conducted manual turning-movement counts at the following intersections: · IL 83 / Bank access · IL 83 / Dulles Road / Golf Plaza II full access · IL 83 / Golf Plaza 11 south RIRO access · IL 83 1 Golf Plaza II north RIRO access · IL 83 / Golf Road · Golf Road / Golf Plaza II RIRO access · Golf Road / Golf Plaza II west full access · Golf Road / Golf Plaza II east full access The counts were conducted during the weekday evening commuter peak period from 4:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. and Saturday midday period from I 1:30 A.M. to 1:30 P .M. T he results of the counts indicate that the peak hours along the adjacent roadways occurred from 4:45 P.M. to 5:45 PM during t he weekday e vening peak period a nd f rom I 1:3(:~ 1 2:30 P M d uring t he Saturday midday peak period. The existing peak hour turning movement counts are illustrated on Figure 2. Metro Transportation Group, Inc Page4 Dominick's Fuel Center Mount Prospect, IL September 2002 Existin.q Capacity Analyses Capacity analyses at intersections of IL 83 and Golf Road and at the existing Golf Plaza 11 Shopping Center access drives on IL 83 and Golf Road were conducted for the existing weekday evening and Saturday midday peak hour traffic volumes. These capacity analyses are based o n t he 2 000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology, which assigns a n intersection a Level of Service (LOS) based on the. average control delay experienced by each vehicle passing through that intersection. For unsignalized intersections, the LOS is based on the delay of vehicles on the side street or major street waiting to make their turns during available gaps in the traffic along the major road. Various delay time are given a letter of designation of "A" to "F' with LOS "A" being the best level of operation for an intersection and LOS "F" being the worst. Typically, the minimum LOS accepted by IDOT for design is LOS "D". Table 1 shows a summary of the study intersections LOS and the corresponding sec,onds of delay for the evening and Saturday midday peak hours. TABLE 1 EXISTING LEVEL OF ;ERVICE SUMMARY Weekday Saturday Location PM Peak Hour Midday Peak Hour NB - B (11.3) NB - B (10.3) IL 83 / Bank access EB - C (19.2) EB - B (13.7) I NBL - B (10.3) NBL - B (10.2) SBL - B (10.6) SBL - A (9.5)' IL 83 / Dulles Road / Golf Plaza II full access WB - F (73.8) WB - E (43.7) EB - E (47.8) EB - E (39.7) IL 83 / Golf Plaza Ii south RIRO access EBR - B (11.6) EBR - B (11.8) IL 83 / Golf Plaza Ii north RIRO access EBR - B (11.4) EBR - B (11.5) IL 83 / Golf Road * D (39.7) D (35.2) Golf Road / Golf Plaza Il RIRO access NBR - B (12,9) NBR - B (12.3) EB - B (11.0) EB - B (10.2) WBL - B (11.4) WBL - B (10.7) Golf Road / Golf Plaza II east full access NB - D (26.9) NB - D (26.0) SB - C (23.0) SB - C (20.2) WB - B (11.1) WB - B (10.5) Golf Road / Golf Plaza II west full access NB - C (18.8) NB - C (17.0) * Signalized Intersection NB- northbound SB- southbound EB- eastbound WB-westbound L - left turning movement R - right turning movement As shown in Table 1, currently the intersection of IL 83 and Golf Road operates at a good level of service during the weekday evening and Saturday midday peak hours. The movements at the Golf Plaza II Shopping Center access ddves on IL 83 and Golf Road also operate at acceptable levels of service during the study pedods. Even though the outbound traffic from Dulles Road/Golf Plaza II full access drive on IL 83 operate at LOS "E" and LOS "F", it should be noted that the traffic signal at the intersection of IL 83 and Golf Road does create gaps in traffic for the outbound movements, especially left-turns, to exit the site. Thus, the LOS at this intersection should be better than shown. Metro Transportation Group, Inc Page 6 Dominick's Fuel Center Mount Prospect, IL September 2002 III. SITE TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS The project site traffic characteristics were determined in order to evaluate the resulting impact of the proposed development. These include the site-generated volumes during the weekday evening and Saturday midday peak hours, the directional distribution of site traffic approaching and departing the development, and the .assignment of these volumes to the adjacent roadway and site access system. Also included in this section is the total traffic assignment that consists of combining the site traffic volumes with the existing traffic volumes to determine total traffic conditions. ,Site-Generated Traffic Volumes ,The site-generated traffic volumes of the proposed development were calculated based on, data i compiled by the institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and published in the Trip Generation Manual for similar type uses surveyed through the United States. Because the proposed land use is a Dominick's fuel center, portions of the vehicles using the fuel center will make up of traffic that is currently visiting the Golf Plaza II Shopping Center. It was estimated by Dominick's that 70-80% of the trips generated by the fuel center would come from existing customers at the Golf Plaza II Shopping Center. However, to be conservative, Metro assumed 70% of the site trips are internal trips. The project trip generation summary is shown in Table 2. TABLE 2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY Weekday Saturday P.M. Peak Hour Midday Peak Hour Land Use in Out Total In Out Total Gas Station (12 fueling positions) 90 85 175 115 110 225 Internal Trips~ ,65 -60 .125 ';-80 -75 -155 70% NEW TRIPS ;25 25 ;50 35 35 70 Existing Golf Plaza II Shopping Center customers use the fuel center. It should be noted that trip generation counts were conducted at the Dominick's fuel center in Niles, Illinois along Greenwood Avenue where an existing Dominick's store is located. Counts were done during the weekday evening and Saturday peak hours. The Niles tdp generation data indicated that the Dominick's fuel center generates 55 to 60% less traffic than what would be predicted using the ITE data. Project Trip Distribution The trip distribution of new site-generated traffic is expected to be similar to the existing trip- making patterns along the adjacent roadways surrounding the site. The directional distribution of site traffic approaching and depar[ing the development is also a function of the efficiency of the roadways leading to the site. Table 3 and Figure 3 shows the vehicle trip directional distributions for the proposed development. Metro Transportation Group, Inc Page 7 Dominick's Fuel Center Mount Prospect, IL September 2002 TABLE 3 DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTIONS Traffic Travel To/From ... Percent Distribution North on IL 83 25% South on iL 83 25% East on G0[f Road 25% West on Golf Road 25% Total '100% Site Traffic Assignment The site's traffic and its access locations were reviewed with respect to the existing roadway network. Based on direction of travel and preferred access usage, the site-generated trips were assigned to the external roadway system and the appropriate access!drives. F!gure 4 illustrates the site traffic assignment. Total Traffic Assiqnment In order to determine the total traffic assignment for the external roadways, the site traffic volumes were added to the existing traffic volumes. Figure 5 illustrates the total traffic volumes for the proposed development. 1 ! Metro Transportation Group, Inc Page 8 .I I, I. SHUP iN~ C~. ~ , E, , FULLACCESS BANK ACCESS NOT TO SCALE GOLF RD 25% ~ DULLES RD LEGEND DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION FIGURE: 3 EX~$ThNG GOLF PLAZA SHOPPING CENTEP, FULLACCESS BANK ACCESS NOT TO SCALE GOLF RD DULLES RD LEGEND XX ' Weetday P.M. Peak Hour (4:45-§:45 PM) (XX) - Saturday P.M. Peak Hour ( 11:30-12:30 PM} - - Less ~an 5 Vehicles NEW SITE TRIPS FIGURE: 4 I ! I I I i i I G?~r-:~ F PLAZA SHOPPING CENTL~P~ 30 (50) NOT TO SCALE 825 (680) =~°¢S51 GOLF RD FULL ACCESS TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES (30) 40 .---~ ,IFS(S; DULLES RD LEGEND FIGURE: 5 Dominick's Fuel Center Mount Prospect, IL September 2002 IV. EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Analyses were conducted and recommendations were formulated which should ensure that all site traffic will be accommodated. The analyses include a review of the internal traffic circulation, parking, and capacity analyses conducted at the off-site study area intersection and at the project site drives.. Site Access Access to the fuel center will be provided via the existing Golf Plaza II Shopping Center access drives on IL 83 and Golf Road. Traffic will be directed through the parking aisle to the fuel center. Spacing between the fuel center kiosk and the fuel pumps is adequate for vehicles circulating the site. Parking As previously mentioned, the proposed Dominick's Fuel Center will be constructed at the location of the existing Golf Plaza II Shopping Center parking lot. Currently, the shopping center provides for 836 parking spaces. W~th the fuel center iQ. placer apprpx mately _7'7_4 p~arking spa..~.es will be_pr~)vided. B~sed on~ a ~ey!ew.o;[ the Village of Moun_t..P. rospect Zon_iQg even though the overall parking scheme at the shopping center will be reduced, the future numbers of parking provided for the shopping center will still be sufficient as 80 parking spaces are provided more than required by the village's zoning ordinance. In addition, based on a parking survey conducted by Dominick's at Golf Pla'za II, more than 95% of the parking spaces, where the fuel center will be situated, are vacant on a typical weekday and more than 90% of these spaces are vacant on Saturday. Thus, it is concluded that the loss of parking due to the fuel center would not cause a problem. Capacity Analysis A summary of the future level of service and the corresponding seconds of delay for future total traffic conditions at the off-site study area intersections and the project site drives are summarized in Table 3. Metro Transportation Group, Inc Page 12 Dominick's Fuel Center Mount Prospect, IL September 2002 TABLE 3 FUTURE INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY Weekday Saturday Location PM Peak Hour Midday Peak Hour NB - B (11.3) N e - B (10.4) IL 83 / Bank access EB - C (19.2) EB - B (13.7) NBL - B (10,3) NBL - B (10.3) SBL- B (10.6) SBL - A (9.5) IL 83 / Du[les Road / Golf Plaza Il full access .. WB - F (77~9), WB - E (45.4) ~. EB.~- F (50.2}' ~ EB - E (42.7) IL 83 / Golf Plaza II south R[RO access EBR - B (11.7) EBR - B (12.0) IL 83 / Golf Plaza II north RIRO access EBR - B (11.4) EBR - B (11.6) IL 83 / Golf Road * D (39.8) D (35.3) Golf Road / Golf Plaza II RIRO access NBR - B (13.1) NBR - B (12.4) EB - B (11.0) EB - B (10.2) WBL - B (11.4) WBL - B (10.8) Golf Road / Golf Plaza II east full access NB - D (29.8) NB - D (28.6) SB - C (23.1) SB - C (20.2) WB - B (11.1) WB - B (10.5) Golf Road / Golf Plaza Il west full access NB - C (19.0) NB - C (17.2) * Signalized Intersection NB- northbound SB.- southbound EB- eastbound L - left turning movement R - right turning movement WB - westbound As shown in Table 3, the intersection of IL 83 and Golf Road will continue to operate at a level of service "D" dudng the weekday evening and Saturday midday peak pedod with less than 1 seconds increase in delay. The movements at the Golf Plaza II Shopping Center access drives on IL 83 and Golf Road will also operate at acceptable levels of service during the study periods. The outbound traffic from the Dulfes Road/Golf Plaza II Shopping Center full access drive on IL 83 will still operate at LOS "E" and LOS "F" in the future. However, the impact of the site- generated traffic is negligible since the increase in seconds of delay at this intersection is less than 4..1 seconds. In addition, the traffic signal at the intersection of IL 83 and Golf Road does create gaps in traffic for the outbound movements, especially left-turns, to exit the site. Thus, the LOS and the delay at this intersection should be better than shown. Metro Transportation Group, Inc Page13 Dominick's Fuel Center Mount Prospect, IL September 2002 V. CONCLUSIONS Analyses have been conducted for the Dominick's Fuel Center. The fuel center will be located in the least utilized portion of the parking lot and will not conflict with other tenants in the Golf Plaza II Shopping Center. The proposed numbers of parking provided for the shopping center will exceed the parking requirements set forth in the Village of Mount Prospect Zoning Ordinance. Access to the fuel center will be provided via the existing Golf Plaza II Shopping Center access drives on IL 83 and Golf Road. Traffic will be directed through the parking aisle to the fuel center. Spacing between the fuel center kiosk and the fuel pumps is adequate for vehicles circulating the site. The capacity analyses results indicated that the delay experienced by vehiCles at th'e site access drives would have a minimal effect on the through traffic along IL 83 and Golf Road. It is concluded that no off-site roadway improvements are required. Traffic generated by the Dominick's Fuel Center can efficiently accommodate by the current roadway system. Metro Transportation Group, Inc Page 14 ~t IIIIIIIIIIII~U (ao~ ~8) l/ GOLF I~OAD 804.54' (~o[~'t~ 58) 150.00' ~m m "o 0 0 ,,+ I GOLF ROAD (ROUTE 58) o~cZ~ GOLF ROAD (ROUTE 58) ~'m~o -mm 804.54' 150,00' GOLF ROAD 804.54' (ROUTE 58) 150 GOI, P ROAD I 1 150.00' illage of Mount Prospect Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MICItAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 21, 2002 EXTERIOR INSULATION FINISH SYSTEM (EIFS~ The Village Board recently adopted an ordinance that prohibited the use of EIFS materials on all structures in the Village. This outright ban was adopted in response to the many documented cases of this material failing throughout the country. Staff has recently been approached by representatives of a major retailer who are proposing a project in town and strongly desire to utilize EIFS on a portion of their facade. Therefore, staff is requesting that the Village Board consider modifying our EIFS regulations to allow EIFS to be utilized on up to 30% of non-residential structures. The attached memorandum provides greater detail about the documented problems with EIFS and some of the more recent modifications that the EIFS manufacturers have made to address these problems. As you will recall, staff provided the Village Board with two alternative ordinances to address the EIFS issue both draft ordinances are attached). The previously proposed options included an outright ban of EIYS throughout the Village or an outright ban on residential applications and a limit on non-residential applications to 30% of the fagade. The second option would allow developers of non-residential structures to utilize EIFS for architectural highlights and sign bands. The 30% cap would require that the structure be designed primarily with more traditional materials but would allow a limited use of EIFS. The 30% cap would allow the prospective retailer to construct their prototypical building and would be a reasonable compromise to our existing ordinance. If the Village Board concurs with staff's recommendation, the following regulations should be adopted as part of that amendment to ensure the proper installation of this product: 1. Allow only drainable EIFS systems - the barrier system would be prohibited, 2. Manufacturer's specification would be required for plan review (to insure proper installation), and" 3. Third party inspection by an agency with expertise in EIFS installation would be required (similar to our practice with other specialized inspections, such as structural steel or soil testing). Please forward this memorandum and attachments to the Village Board for their review and consideration at their December 3~d meeting. Staff will be present at that meeting to answer any questions related to this matter. DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE I1 OF CHAPTER2 OF THE MO..UNT PROSPECT VILLAGE CODE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION ONE: Chapter 2, entitled "Building Code", Article II, GeneraE Provisions, of the Village Code, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding a -new Section 21.233, "Use of Stucco or Engineered Stucco Systems" which shall be and read as follows: .233 Use of Stucco or Engineered Stucco Systems. A. Residential Applications The use of stucco or engineered stucco systems, including but not limited to those commonly known as "dryvit" or exterior insulation and finish systems (EIFS), is prohibited for all residential applications, B. Non-Residential Applications Stucco or an engineered stucco system may be used in commercial applications provided subject to the following conditions: (1) not more than 30% of a building's exterior surfaces are covei"ed by such materials; (2) the manufacturer's specification sheets mbst be provided with the permit application; (3) system must be a "water managed system" as that term is generally applied in the industry; (4) the system is installed according to any standards promulgated by the Director of Community Development; and (5) an independent certified inspector of such systems must verify, in writing, that the system, as built, was installed according to all manufacturer's specifications, Director of Community Development standards and that it qualifies as a "water managed system." SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall be in full force an¢ effe~from.and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this , day of ,2002. Gerald L. Farley, Village President ATTEST: Velma W. Lowe, Village Clerk DRAFT ORDINANCE NO,. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE II OF CHAPTER 21 OETHE MOUNT.pROSPECT VlE'EAGE CODE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION ONE: Chapter 21, entitled "Building Code", Article II, Genera! Provisions, of the Village Code, as amended, is hereby further amended by adding a new Section 21.233, "Use of Stucco or Engineered Stucco Systems" which shal] be and read as follows: 21.233 ' Use of Stucco or Engineered Stucco Systems;Prohibited. The use of stucco or engineered stucco systems, including but not limited to those commonly known as dryvit or extedor insulation and finish systems, (EIFS), is prohibited in the Village. If a previously installed stucco or engineered stucco system exterior has deteriorated or is destroyed so that more than 50% of its c9verage of the structure requires repair, then the existing stucco or system must be replaced with materials that are permitted pursuant to Village regulations. SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: ..NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of. ,2002. ATTEST: Gerald L. Fadey, Village President Velma W. Lowe, Village Clerk Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 5, 2002 SUB.CT: EXTERIOR INSULATION FINISH SYSTEM (EIFS) REGULATIONS Attached to this memorandum .are two ordinances that address the use 9f Exterior Insula~ion Finish System (ELMS) on structures in the Village. One ordinance would ban the use bf ElMS on all structures in the Village while the other would allow a limited amount of the product on non-residential s~ruetures. SmiT has attached a survey of'regulations from surrounding communities and some background information on this topi~ to help the Village Board make a final determination on this matter. Background A~ part of the development approval preeess, the Village has established a policy of seeking to reduce or eliminate the use of synthetic stucco construction material o~ n~w commere!al buildings. The concern over this material grows out of local and national problems with ~ durability and potential for creating property maintenance problems. To better determine the Village's options for dealing with this material, the Community Developraant Department has researched it's history, application, and potential problems. The attached information, which was provided ~t a seminar on synthetic stucco attended by Nick Licafi of the Building Division, provides good baakgreund on the material. The issue as it relates to Mount Prospect is summarized below. The generic name office synthetic smeeo material in question is Exterior Insulation Finish System (Ell=S), but it is also known by the name of its mos~ common producer's brand name - Dryvit. As noted on the attached information, ElMS is a low cost insulation/construction material that has faile~, in many places in the United Slates. Two relevant results of these failares are the structural problems that are erea~ed und a reputation for the material as "cheap" - implying both buildings and communities in which it is found are second rate. The construction and construction inspection industries have committed substantial effort to understand the stractural problems created by ELMS. It is widely acknowledged that problems w~th the system resuk from improper installation, rather than the system as a building material. Poor installation allOw~ water to be lrapped behind the material. The trapped moisture results in deterioration of the ElMS system and other par~s of the structure, This is particularly true in the freeze & thaw cycle of our locml climate. Since the problem is literally hidden, the damage is likely to beeeme quite extensive before it is even noticed. Newer versions of the ElMS technology allow for it to be installed with drainage channels that prevent water from getting trapped. These "drainage systems" are found to be far superior tolthe "barrier system" of BIFS. Given its many failures and its relatively iow cost, buildings constrocted with EEFS may be seen as "scound class". Likewise, communities that have many buildings with this matarlal may be concerne~ that tho buildings pass along that same impression of the community. Whether an individual or a community asa whole likes the appesranee of commercial or residential buildings constructed using EHtS is a separate issue from the question of its integrity, but one that exists. The impression that comm~tnitles give ia an important aspect of their character and the reputation of E1FS may play a role in that impression. Since EIFS is an exterior finish (like siding) the Village of Mount Prospect does riot currently reguiatu or inspect its applicatlon. It is most commonly found as a highlight material or sign background on newer con{meruial buildings in town. It is also found on some single-family homes in the Village. To date, we have had no complaints about the material. This dees not assure that the system will not become a problem in the future, since many of its applications are relatively new. In addition, where it is used in new eonstrueti6n, we ar8 inspecting other parts of the structure that help move water away from the-- - building (primarily the roof and its various elements). In general, if properly installed the material should last and serve as a sturdy exterior construction material. Options Thc two options being considered by the Village Board are the outright ban of EIFS on ali structures in the Village or to allow a limited amotmt of the product on non-residantial structures. It has been the Community Development Department's experience that the developers of new commercial projects rece{ving zoning approval arc open to limiting the use of BIFS to architectural highlights and sign bands on buildings. The result has been attractive projects that enh2nca the character of the Village. Should the Village Board concur and choose'to establish this model, the Building Code could be amended to allow EIFS as sign bands and architectural highlights. The following regulations should be adopted as part of that amendment to ensure the proper installation of this product: 1. Allow only dralnable EI2FS systems - the barrier system would be prohibited, 2. Manufacturer's specification would be reqalred for plan review (tu insure proper installation), and 3, Third party inspection by an agency with expertise in EIF8 installation would be required (similar to our practice with other specialized inspections, such as structural steel or soil testing). Please forward this'memorandum and the attached ordinance to the ~(illage Board for their review and consideration at their September 10* Cbmmitte¢ of the Whole meeting.' Staffwill be in attendance at that meeting to answer any questions ?elated to this matter. 2 L~WOFFICE$ THORPE .4ND JE~$, LTD. Suit~ 1660 ~0 North Wack~r Drive MEMORANDUM TO: Dave Strahl, Assistant Village Manager Village of Mount Prospect FROM: DATE: Everette M. Hill, Jr. Apdi 24, 2002 RE: Prohibition of EIFS Systems You have asked for my opinion as to whether the Village may prohibit or restrict ;~he use of Ddvit or EIFS systems for new construction in the Village. It is my opinion that such restrictions are permissible: It is well within the Village's home rule powers to set building code standards and prohibit the use of matedais which are either unsafe or inappropriate for our weather conditions. The City of Chicago has long prohibited the use of PVC piping for any plumbing application. Other communities in the Chicago area and indeed some entire states ban the use of EIFS or Drivit systems. You and I have discussed the possibility of banning such use entirely for residential applications, but of restricting and closely monitoring its use in commercial applications. Such a distinction between commercial and residential is permissible. Please let me know if you want me to proceed with drafting an ordinance to accomplish these objectives. Dryvlt/EIFS Systems August 2002 Arlington Hfs Barrington Bartlett No. Considering prohibition ~f barrie.r, type insta[latione. No, Barrett adopted the International Building Code (2002) which requires a water managed system and inspected Fox River Grove Lake Forest by athird party.. No. No. Lake in the Hi[is Morton Grove Mount Prospect ROiling Meadows $chaumburg Skokie Streamwoed Vernon Hills Yes. No. Yes, No. We have a policy of using minimal amount of drTvit ~sualty permitted as accent mate?iaL There is nothing in'the code that requires this othe~ than a sec~on In the Zoning District that every~lng must be "face bric~ or comparable". Based on a book 96, section 1705.13 & 1705.t4 we require architectural or struc~rel review and approve of all sub-surfaces to which EIFS will be applied. This applied.to existing surfaces only for all buildings. No. No. Would be amendment to building code, requiring drainage ~stem behind face. Adopted May2002 Informally, t~ to discourage use of dryvit for trim. See Attached · ' 'Ordinance. Ou~ght ban on all systems. 1997 No repairs. · . New or total ,,replacement only. Repair & New Construction.. All construction. See Attached Ordinance, Yes. The.policy gu{lined in question t applies to both new and 'repairlrehab construction. For new cons~uction for the driveways plane flashing and air sparks are required based on manof spec's. ThroughouL The entire Village of Ba~'t]ett, Historic District - special review to ensure historically compatible materials. ,, ,'~roughout the community Alt Districts. This restriction only apCes .! within our Business Zoning Districts. In our historic overlay district EiFS is not permitted as this district requires only wood, meta~ or brick materi;~s. On occasion variations have been granted for theuse of E1FS again only as a decorative element. All construction. On May 17, 2000~the city hr'ChiCago passed an ordinance that greatly limits the use of synthetic stucco in Chicago. Why? Below are just two reasons This 3 year old Chicago Home development. All of these homes have al damage, moisture infiltration, mental health hazards~ stor~,,~:~using West t~!d'~,on Kedzie ~ '13 the elderly in Chicago's Prohibits. the use of berrl~type EIFS systems. (-r~e most ~r~common~* used system) ~r~l~;tequir .es that the use of EIFS sy..ste, m must b?. de~ign_e~,_t~o ~[ll~,~m. ve.nt wate.r.a.ccumulaflOn. [Hemrre. d to Dy me ,-u-~ ~naus~ry as a -water managed" ~ystem) Requires that EIFS installations more than two stories high must use mechanical fasteners to affix the EIFS to the su'b- strate. Requires that.the foam insulation used in EIFS. systems must carry a label identifying its tested fire penormanse charactenstica. Updstes the referenced standards which the EIFS mate- rl~ls must comply with. R..equire.s ,that test data ve_rifying t~e fire-resistance m.~ng oT. me p.ro. posed EIFS .~'y~tem be ncluded on plans suDmlttea mr permit review. Cla~es .that. EIFS m.ay be use~ for buildings of other consmJcaon ty~)es aha occupancies if the structural wall behind the EIFS is fire-rated in accordance with building code requirements, and the matefia s used n the E FS meet cited natiOnal standards for fire resistance. "This progressive ordinance protects future consumers of new construction in Chicago and, we hope, will serve as a model for other munlclpalitlea and jurisdictions. This ordinance does not address existing homes and owners who are left vulnerable to the many problems asso- ciated with EIFS. They will have to learn aboUt EIFS the hard way" - Charles Ostrender ExecUtive Director - MAC MASONRY ADVISORY COUNCIL · 1480 Rena~ Drive. Suite 302 · Park Ridge, IL ~ · 847-297-6704 · Fax:. 847-297-8373 www. MacOnline.o~g WHAT? EIFS ( EXterior Insulation and Finish Sytems a.k.a. Synthetic Stucco) clad residences WHERE? Chicago, Illinois ",, & St. Charles, Illinois "' INFO: This 3 year old Chicago Home is part of a very large develop- ment. All of these homes have. potential structural damage, moisture infiltration, and asso- ciated environmental health hazards. Mushroom/fungi growing at window head due to elevated moisture levels -.'-- INFO: St. Charles Home Built 96 occupied April 1996, Home shows severe moisture penetration and saturation. When tested for the wood structure benE has a 42% moisture content. (Much higher than the normal 8% -12%.) This ad is for all the home builders and architects in the Midwest who state that "Problem EIFS jobs are just a localized problem in North Carolina" MASONRYADVISORY COUNCIL · 1480 Renaissance Ddve, Suite 302 · Park Ridge, IL 60068 847-297-67O4 Fax: 847-297-8373 www. MacOnline.org CHF 02-488 Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFI~ICE MEMORANDUM TO: MICHAEL JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: - RICHARD EDDINGTON, CHIEF OF POLICE DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2002 SUBJECT; STATE OF ILLINOIS MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT This is a follow Up to our conversation of November 14th regarding the statewide mutual aid agreement. Please find attached copies of that agreement. It is important for the Mount Prospect Police Department to commit to this agreement as any funding for homeland security is predicated on participation in this agreement. It is anticipated during the course of 2003 that ail' firSt responders, both police and fire, · ~ill receive some level of personnel protective equipment. This will involve a mask, '~rtridges and some type of exterior garme'6t. I would hope that municipal authorities could sign this in the near future so that we can participate in the homeland secUrity Programs. Thank You for your consideration of this request. RE:dr Attachments c:, Deputy Chief R chardson DeputY Chief Condon Commander Semkiu X:\DOCUMENT~Chiers Memos\VMO\Statewide Mutual Aid - CHF 02-488~doc ILLINOIS LAW ENFORCEMENT. ALA~ SYSTEM Mutual Aid Agreement The undersigned law enforcement agencies agree pursuant to the Constitution of the State of Illinois (IlL Const. Art. VII, sec. 10),.the Illinois Intergovernmental COoperation Act (5 ILC8 220/1 et seq.), the Local Govenunental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (745 II.CS 10/7-101 et se~7) and the Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/11-I-2.1), as follows: Section 1 Purpose of Agreement This Agreement is made in recognition ofthe fact that natural or man-made occurrences may result in emergencies that exceed the resources, equipment and/or law enfomement personnel of a law enforcement agency. Each law enforcement agency who signs a copy of this Agreement has and does express its intent to aid and assist the otherparticipating law enforcement agencies during an emergency by assigning some of their resources; equipment and/or law enforcement personnel to the affected law enforcement agency as circumstances permit and in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. The specific intent of this Agreement is to safeguard the lives, people and property of citizens during an emergency by .enabling other law enforcement agencies to provide additional resources, equipment and/or law enfomement personnel as needed. Section 2 Definitions For the purpose of this Agreement, the following terms are defined as follows: Aiding law enforcement agency: A participating law enforcement agency that provides resources, equipment.and/or law enforcement personnel to a stricken law enforcement .agency during an emergency. Disaster: An occurrence Or threat of widespread or severe damage, injury or los. s of life or property resulting from any natural .or 'teChnological cause, .including but not linnted t.o fire, flood, earthquake, winds storm, h~7srdons materials spill or other water contamination requiring emergency action to avert danger or damage; ep~idemic, air contamination, blight, extended pg_ riods of severe and inclement weather, drought, intestafion, critical shortages oI essential fuels and energy, explosiOn, ri0t~ h°gtile military or paramilitary action, or acts of domestic terrorism. Emergency: A natural or man-made situation that threatens or causes loss of life and property and exceeds the physic.al and organizational capabilities of a unit of local, state or federal government. Lmv enforcementpersonnel: An employee of a participating law enforcement agency who is a peace officer (as defined by state law and the Illinois Law Enforcement Training and Standards Board or federal law) and by virtue of his office or public emploYment, is vested by the state or federal law with the primary duty ofmaintaiaing public order and making arrests for violations of state or federal law. Mutual aid: A definite and prearranged written agreement and plan whereby regular response and assistance is provided in the event ora natural or man-made emergency. Participating law enforcement agencies: A law enforcement agency that commits itself to this mutual aid agreement by having an authorized representative sign this Agreement. State: The term state refers exclusively to the State of Illinois. Stricken law enforcement agency: A participating law enforcement agency who has primary jurisdiction over the site of the emergency but due to insufficient resources, equipment and/or law enfomement personnel is unable to provide an adequate response to an emergency without the assistance of others. Section 3 Agreement to Effectuate tile Mutual Aid Plan Each undersigned party agrees that in the event of an emergency, they will respond to requests for assistance by a stricken law enforcement agency with such law enforcement personnel, equipment, facilities, or services as is, in the opinion of the aiding law enforcement agency, available. Provided, however, that each party reserves the right to refuse to render assistance or to recall any or all rendered assistance, whenever it believes that such refusal or recall is necessary to ensure adequate p~'tection of its own jurisdiction or personnel. It is expected that requests for mutual aid under this Agreement will be initiated only when the needs of the stricken agency exceed its resources. Aiding agencies will be released and returned to their own jurisdictions as soon as the situation is restored to the point where the stricken agency is able to satisfactorily handle the situation with its own resources or when an aiding agency decides to recall its assistance. Whenever an emergency is of such magr~de and consequence that it is deemed advisable by the senior officer present, of the stricken law enforcement agency, to request assistance from an aiding law enforcement agency, he is hereby authorized to do so, under the terms of this mutual aid agreement. The senior officer present of the aiding taw enforcement agency is authorized to and shall forthwith take the following actions: - Immediately determine what type of assistance is being requested. - Immediately determine if the requested resources, equipment and/or law enforcement personnel can be committed to the stricken law enforcement agency. - Immediately dispatch the resources, equipment and/or law enforcement pemonnel that are available to the stricken law enforcement agency. 2 At the emergency site, the most: senior officer of the Sfi'ieken law enforcement agency who is present shall assume full responsibility and command for law enforcement operations at the scene. Law enforcement personnel from the aiding agencies shall report to and shall work under the direction and supervision of the stricken ageney. Provided, however, that at all times, the personnel of the aiding agencies shall remain employees of their own agency and shall adhere to the policies and prOcedures of their own employer. While working under the direction of the aiding agency, law enforcement personnel shall only be required to respond to lawful orders. All services performed under this Agreement shall be rendered without reimbursement, regardless of the possibility of reimbursement from the requesting agency or other sources. Each participating law effforcement agency shall assume sole responsibility for indemnifying their own employees, as provided by state or federal law and/or local ordinance, and for providing personnel benefits, including benefits that arise due to injury or death, to their own employees as required by state or federal law. Each participating-agenCy shall also be responsible, regardless of fault, for repairing or replacing any damage to their own vehicles or equipment that occurs while providing assistance under this Agreement. The participating agencies agree that this Agreemem shall not give rise to any liability or responsibility for the failure to respond to any request for assistance made pursuant to this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be construed as or deemed to be an Agreement for the benefit ofnny third party or parties, and no third party or parties shall have any right of action whatsoever hereunder for any cause whatsoever. The participating agencies further agree that each agency will be responsible for defending their own respective entity in any action or dispute that arises in connection with or as the result of this .A~greement and that each agency will be responsible for bearing their own costs, damages, losses, 6~nses, and attorney fees. The chief law enforcement officers of the participating agencies will maintain a governing board and establish an operational plan for giving and receiving aid under this Agreement. Said plan will be reviewed, updated and tested at regular intervals. Section 4 Adoption · This mutual aid agreement shall be in full force and an in effect when approved and executed by a representative of a Participating law enforcement agency who has the legal authority to sign and enter into this Agreement on behalf of his law enforcement agency. Section 5 Termination Any participating law enforcement agency may withdraw from this Agreement upon giving ninety · (90) days written notice addressed to each of the other participating agencies. ection 6 Signatory Page This signatory certifies that this mutual aid agreement, for the Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System (ILEAS), has b.een adopted and approved by ordinance, resolution, memorandum of understanding or other'manner approved by law, a copy of which document is attached hereto. Political Entity or Agency Chief Law Enforcement Officer President, Mayor, Chairman or other Chief Executive Officer (if applicable) Title Date Date Title Date October 23, 2002 ILLINOIS LAW ENFORCEMENT ALA~ sYSTEM Mutual Aid Agreement The undersigned law enforcement agencies agree pursuant to the Constitution of the State of Illinois 011. Const. Art. VII, sec. 10), the Illinois Intergovernmental Cooperati°n Act (5 ILCS 220/1 et seq.), the L0eal Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 10/7-101 et seq.) and the Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/11-1-2.1), as follows: Section 1 Purpose of Agreement This Agreement is made in recognition of the fact that natural or man-made occurrences may result in emergencies that exceed the resources, equipment and/or law enforcement personnel of a law enforcement agency. Each law enfomement agency who signs a copy 0fthis Agreement has and does express its intent to aid and assist the other'participating law enforcement agencies during an emergency by assigning some of their resources, equipment and/or law enfomement personnel to the affected law enforcement agency as circumstances permit and in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. The specific intent 0f this Agreement is to safeguard the lives, people and property of citizens during an emergency by enabling other law enforcement agencies to provide additional resources, equipment and/or law enforcement personnel as needed. S~cfion 2 Defimt~ons For the purpose of this Agreement, the following terms are defined as follows: Aiding law enforcement agency: A participating law enforcement agency that provides resources, equipment and/or law enforcement personnel to a stricken law enforcement agency during an emergency. Disaster: An occurrence or threat of widespread or severe damage, injury or loss of life or property resulting from any natural or technological cause, including but not limited to fire, flood, earthquake, wind, storm, hazardous materials spill or other water contamination requiring emergency action to avert danger or damage, epidemic, air contamlrlation, blight, extended ~_ fiods of severe and inclement weather, drougtit, ififestafion, critical shortages of essential fuels and energy, explosion; riot, hostile military.or paramilitary action, or acts of domestic terrorism. Emergency: A natural or man-made situation that threatens or causes loss of life and property and exceeds the physic.al and organizational capabilities of a unit of loeai, state or federal government. Law enforcementPersonnel: An employee cfa participating law enforcement agency who is a peace officer (as defined by state law and the Illinois Law Enforcement Training and Standards Board or I federal law) and by virtue'of his office or public emploYment, is vested by the' state or federal law with the primary duty of maintaining public order and making arrests for violations of state or federal law. Mutual aid: A definite and prearranged written agreement and plan whereby regular response and assistance is provided in the event ora natural or man-made emergency. Participating law enforcement agencies: A law enforcement agency that commits itself to this mutual aid agreement by having an authorized representative sign this Agreement. State: The term state refers exclusively to the State of Illinois. Stricken law enJbrcement agency: A participating law enforcement agency who has primary jurisdiction over the site of the emergency but due to insufficient resources, equipment and/or law enforcement personnel is unable to provide an adequate response to an emergency without the assistance of others. 'Section 3 Agreement to Effectuate the Mutual Aid Plan Each undersigned party agrees that in the event of an emergency, they will respond to requests for assistance by a stricken law enforcement agency with such law enforcement personnel, equipment~ facilities, or services as is, in the opinion of the aiding law enforcement agency, available. Provided, however, that each party reserves the right to refuse to render assistance or to recall any or all rendered assistance, whenever it believes that such refusal or recall is necessary to ensure adequate protection of its own jurisdiction or personnel. It is expected that requests for mutual aid under this Agreement will be initiated only when the needs of the slxicken agency exceed its reseurces. Aiding agencies will be released and returned to their own jurisdictions as soon as the situation is restored to the point where the stricken agency is able to satisfactorily handle the situation with its own resources or When an aiding agency decides to recall its assistance. Whenever an emergency is of such magnitude and consequence that it is deemed adVisable by the senior officer present, of the stricken law enforcement agency, to request.assiStance from an aiding law enforcement agency, he is hereby authorized to do so,.under the terms of this mutual aid agreement. The senior officer present of the aiding law enforcement agency is anthorized to and shall forthwith take the following actions: · - Immediately determine what type of assistance is being requested. - Immediately determine if the requested resources, equipment and/or law enfOrcement personnel can be committed to the stricken law enforcement agency. - Immediately dispatch the resources, equipment and/or law enforcement personnel that are available to the stricken law enforcement agency 2 At the emergency site; the most senior officer of the stricken law enforcement agency who is present shall assume full responsibility and command for law enforCement Operations at the scene. Law enforcement personnel from the aiding agencies shall report to and shall work under the direction and supervision of the stricken agency. Provided, however, that at all times, the personnel of the aiding agencies shall remain employees of their own agency and shall adhere to the policies and procedures of their own employer. While working under the direction of the aiding agency, law enforcement personnel shall only be required to respond to lawful orders. All services performed under this Agreement shall be rendered without reimbursement, regardless of · thgpossibility of reimbursement from the requesting agency or other sources. Each participating law effforcement agency shall assume' Sole responsibility for indemnifying their own employees, as provided by s~ate or federal law and/or local ordinance, and for providing personnel benefits, including benefits that arise due to injury or death, to their own employees as required by state or federal law. Each participating agency shall also be responsible, regardless of fault, for repairing or replacing any damage to their own vehicles or equipment that occurs while providing assistance under this Agreement. The participating agencies agree that this Agreement shall not give rise to any liability or responsibility for the failure to respond to any request for assistance made pursuant to tbSs Agreement. This Agreement shall not be construed as or deemed to be an Agreement for the benefit of any third party or parties, and no third party or parties shall have any right of action whatsoever hereunder for any cause whatsoever. The participating agencies further agree that each agency will be responsible for defending their own respective entity in any action or dispute that arises in connection with or as the result of this Agreement and that each agency will be responsible for bearing their own costs, damages, losses, expenses, and attorney fees. The chief law enforcement officers 0fthe participating agencies will maintain a governing board and establish an operational plan for giving and receiving aid under this Agreement. Said plan will be reviewed, updated and tested at regular intervals. Section 4 Adoption · This mutual aid agreement Shall be in full force and an in effect when approved and executed by a representative of a participating law enforcement agency who has the legal authority to sign and enter into this Agreement on behalf of his law enforcement agency. Section 5 Termination Any participating law enforcement agency may withdraw from this Agreement upon giving ninety (90) days written notice addressed to each of the other participating agencies. ection 6 Signatory Page This signatory certifies that this mutual aid agreement, for the Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System OLEAS), has been adopted and approved by ordinance, resolution, memorandum of understanding or other'manner approved by law, a copy of which document is attached hereto. Political Entity or Agency Chief Law Enforcement Officer President, Mayor, Chairman or other Chief Executive Officer (if applicable) Title Date Date Attest: Title Date October 23, 2002 4 vwl RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT TO ADOPT AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR MUTUAL AID AMONG LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES FOR HOMELAND SE:CURITY WHEREAS, the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have deemed that the best interests of the Village may be served by entering into intergovernmental agreements; and WHEREAS, Section 10 entitled Intergovernmental CoOperation of Article Vii of the Illinois Constitution empowers municipalities to enter into intergovernmental cooperation agreements; and WHEREAS, the Village of Mount ProSpect desires to enter into an agreement with certain law enforcement agencies to provide mutual aid, as stated in the Intergovernmental Agreement, attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the Village of Mount ProspeCt and other agencies have received, or may receive, federal funding to assist in this project; and WHEREAS, said Agreement is a direct benefit to the Village of Mount PrOspect and its residents by providing for safety throughout the Village. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: P;:~E.D_T~J~ That the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect are hereby authorized to execute the Intergovernmental Agreement with the Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System for Homeland Security, attached hereto and made a part of this Resolution as Exhibit "A." Page 2/2 Homeland Security after its passage and approval in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of This Resolution shall be in full force and effective from and ,2002. ATTEST: Gerald L. Farley Mayor Velma W. Lowe Village Clerk NOTICE OF PROPOSED PROPERTY TAX LEVY FORTHE VILLAGE OF MOUHT PROSPECT A public hearing to approve a proposed property tax levy for the Village of Mount Prospect for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2002 and ending December 31, 2002 will be held on December 3, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. at the Mount Prospect Park District Centrat Community Center, 1000 West Central Road, Mount Prospect, Illinois. Any person desiring to appear at the public hearing and present may contact Douglas 100 South Emerson (847) 392-6000. testimony to the taxing district R. EIIsworth, Director of Finance, Street, Mount Prospect, Illinois i II. The corporate and special purpose property taxes extended or abated for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2001 and ended December 31, 2001 were $14,239,491. The proposed corporate and special purpose property taxes to be levied for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2002 and ending December 31, 2002 are $14,400,063. This represents a 1.1% increase over the previous year. III. The property taxes extended for debt service for the fis- cal year beginning Ja;nuary 1, 2001 and ended December 31, 2001 were $686,746. The estimated property taxes to be levied for debt ser- vice for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2002 and ending December 31,2002 are $2,504,707. This repre- sents a 264.7% increase over the previous year. IV. The total property taxes extended or abated for the fis- cal year beginning January 1, 2001 and ended December 31, 2001 were $14,926,237. The estimated total property taxes to be levied for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2002 and ending December 31,2002 are $16,904,770. This represents a 13.3% increase over th~ previous year. Dated this 22nd day o! November, 2002. is/Vetma W. Lowe Village Clerk Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: PURPOSE: MICHAEL JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER DIRECTOR OF FINANCE NOVEMBER 22, 2002 2002 PROPERTY TAX LEVY AND ABATEMENT ORDINANCES To obtain approval of the attached four ordinances related to the tax levies of the Village, the Mount Prospect Library, and the Village's special services areas. BACKGROUND: Prior to December 26, 2002 the Village must have on file with the County Clerk its 2002 tax levy and abatement ordinances. Proceeds from the 2002 tax levy will be collected by the Village in 2003. The Village Board first discussed the proposed 2002 tax levy at its October 22~ Committee of the Whole meeting, at which staff recommended a net Village tax levy of $11,010,747, an increase of 4.8% over the pdor year's levy. The Village Board off'~lally establiShed the tentative levy at the Board meeting of November 6, 2002. The Mount Prospect Library Board approved their tax levy request at its meeting of October 17~. They are asking for a total levy, inclusive of a 2% prevision for loss and cost, of $5,894,023. This represents an increase of 33.4% over the 2001 levy. DISCUSSION: The following table summarizes the proposed 2002 tax levy for the Village and Library. The amounts presented in the table are net of abatements and are inclusive of the 2% provision for loss and cost. Fund 2001 LEVY 2002 LEVY INCREASE % CHANGE VILLAGE General $ 5,762,659. $ 6,074,610 $ 311,951 5.4% Refuse 2,489,820 2,289,820 (200,000) (8.3) Debt Service 686,746 851,988 165,242 24.1 Police Pension 744,090 874,653 130,563 17.6 Fire Pension 818,657 919,676 101,019 12.3 Total Village $10,501,972 $11,010,747 $ 508,775 4.8% LIBRARY Operations $ 4,417,240 $ 4,241,304 $ (175,936) (4.0)% Debt Service 0 1,652,719 1,652,719 n/a Total Library $ 4,417,240 $ 5,894,023 $1,476,783 33.4 % TOTAL $14,919,212 $16,904,707 $1,985,558 13.3 % 002 Property Tax Levy November 22, 2002 Page 2 A detailed spreadsheet of all proposed levies, including detailed levies and abatements for each outstanding bond issue, is also attached. The Village's 2001 equalized assessed valuation (EAV) was $1,255,360,556. Our 2002 EAV is estimated at $1,257,871,300, an increase of two-tenths of one percent. The Village's 2002 tax rate is expected to increase to $0.8752 from the 2001 rate of $0.8365. The Library's 2002 tax rate is estimated at $0.4695, compared to the 2001 rate of $0.3519. For illustration purposes only, a home with an EAV of $55,400 (a market value of approximately $250,000) will pay taxes of $446 to the Village of Mount Prospect and $260 to the Library. This represents increases of $20 and $65, respectively, over the 2001 levy. Special Service Area No. 5 was created in the mid-eighties to help fund the bringing of Lake Michigan water to the Village's water system. It is recommended the 2002 levy remain the same as the 2001 levy, that being $1,545,773. The tax rate is estimated to be $0.1231. Special Service Area No. 6 was created in 1987 to fund certain capital improvements in the area of George and Albert Streets. Bonds were sold in 1988 to fund the construction. Debt service is paid by only those properbj owners benefiting from the improvements. A net levy of $33,440 is being recommended. This includes an abatement of $4,991 using available funds on hand. The Village Board is being asked to consider four ordinances related to the 2002 tax levy. Two of the ordinances establish the initial levy of the Village (including the Library) and the two special sewice areas. There are also two abatement ordinances that reduce a portion of the debt service tax levies established by the vadous bond ordinances. The proposed ordinances reflect the numbers as presented in the proposed 2003 budget. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Village Board approve the attached 2002 tax levy and abatement ordinances. DOUGLAS R. ELLSWORTH, CPA DIRECTOR OF FINANCE Attach. DRE I:\Taxes\Property~2001 Levy\Board Memo.doc VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT AND THE MOUNT PROSPECT PUBLIC LIBRARY SUMMARY OF 2002 PROPERTY TAX LEVY VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT General Corporate Fund Refuse Fund Police Pension Fund Firefighters' Pension Fund Debt Service Funds Series 1987A (Ord. 3782) Series 1996A & B (Ord. 4780) Series 1998A & B (Ord. 4917) Series 1998 Taxable (Ord. 4977) Series 1999 (Ord. 4999) Series 2000 (Ord. 5114) Series 2001 (Ord. 5212) Series 2002A & B (Ord. 5236) Total Village MOUNT PROSPECT PUBLIC LIBRARY Libmry Operations Library Debt Service Total Library TOTAL -VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT AND PUBLIC LIBRARY 2% Net Provision Total 2002 2002 Loss and 2002 Levy Abatement Levy Costs Extension 5,955,500.00 0.00 5,955,500.00 119,110~00 6,074,610.00 2,244,922.00 0.00 2,244,922.00 44,898.00 2,289,820.00 857,503.00 0.00 857,503~00 17,150.00 874,653.00 901,643.00 0.00 901,643.00 18,033.00 919,676.00 66,000.00 0.00 66,000.00 1,320.00 67,320.00 212,740.00 212,740.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 966,932.50 966,932.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 150,385;00 150,385.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 523,200.00 523,200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 111,497.50 111,497.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 389,615.00 166,578.00 223,037.00 4,461.00 227,498.00 1,915,075.00 1,368,830.00 546,245.00 10,925.00 557,170.00 14,295,013.00 3,500,163.00 10,794,850.00 215,897.00 11,010,747.00 4,158,141.00 0.00 4,158,141.00 83,163.00 4,241,304.00 1,620,313.00 0.00 1,620,313.00 32,406.00 1,652,719.00 5,778,454.00 0.00 5,778,454.00 115,569.00 5,894,023.00 20,073,467.00 3,500,163.00 16,573,304.00 331,466.00 16,904,770.00 1,515,464.00 0.00 1,515,464.00 30,309.00 1,545,773.00 37,775.00 4,991.00 32,784.00 656.00 33,440.00 SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NO. 5 SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NO. 6 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF TAXES FOR THE CORPORATE AND MUNICIPAL PURPOSES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2002 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2002 PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES the __ day of ,2002 Published in pamphlet form by authority of the corporate authorities of the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois the day of ,2002. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF TAXES FOR THE CORPORATE AND MUNICIPAL PURPOSES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FOR THE FISCAL ~AR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2002 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2002 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois, as follows: Section 1: That the sum of Sixteen Million Five Hundred Seventy Three Thousand Three Hundred and Four Dollars ($16,573,304), the same being the total amount to be levied of budget appropriations heretofore made for the corporate and municipal purposes for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2002 and ending December 31, 2002 as approved by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect, be and the same is hereby levied on all taxable property within the Village of Mount Prospect according to the valuation of said property as is, or shall be assessed or equalized by the State and County purposes for the current year 2002. Section 2: The budgetary appropriations theretofore having been made heretofore by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect were passed and approved by Ordinance No. 5227 at a meeting hereof regularly convened and held in said Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois, on the 18th day of December, 2001, and as amended by Ordinance No. 5249 passed and approved on the 16t~ day of April, 2002, and further amended by Ordinance No. 5288 passed and approved on the 6th day of November, 2002, thereafter duly published according to law, the various objects and purposes for said budgetary appropriations are heretofore made and set forth under the column entitled "Amount Budgeted", and the specific amount herein levied for each object and purpose is set forth under the column entitled "Amount Levied", in Articles I through XVIII. VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY ARTICLE I - GENERAL FUND 01 Public Representation 0! Mayor and Board of Trustees Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Total Mayor and Board of Trustees 02 Advisory Boards and Commissions Personal Services Employee Benefits O~her Employee Costs Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Total Advisory Boards and Commissions Total Public Representation 11 Village Administration 0I Village Manager's Office Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Total Village Manager's Office 02 Legal Services Contractual Services Office Equipment Total Legal Services 03 Personnel Services Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Amount Amount Budgeted Levied 25,002 0 2,286 0 200 0 55,393 0 475 0 7,000 0 0 0 90,356 0 8,696 0 2,111 0 200 0 3,500 0 800 0 15,307 0 105,663 0 296,398 51,062 9,500 10,009 ~200 3,750 500 375,419 343,380 0 0 0 343,380 0 166,020 0 34,939 0 34,097 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Total Personnel Services 04 Management Information Systems Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Total Management Information Systems 05 Public Information Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Total Public Information Total Village Administration 12 Television Services Division 02 Cable TV Operations Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Other Equipment Total Cable TV Operations 04 Intergovernmental Programming Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Amount Amount Budgeted Levied 34,429 0 1,500 0 5O0 0 271,485 0 64,150 0 14,820 0 1,550 0 102,056 0 510 0 2, t50 0 3,500 0 188,736 0 41,594 0 12,105 0 2,250 0 93,528 0 520 0 30,750 0 I80,747 0 1,359,767 0 68,705 0 18,652 0 3,000 0 36,582 0 5,00O 0 6,475 0 13,750 0 152,164 0 35,300 0 7,709 0 0 0 3,180 0 500 0 2,125 0 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Other Equipment Total Intergovernmental Programming Total Television Services Division 14 Village Clerk's Office 02 Village Clerk's Office Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Total Village Clerk's Office 17 Finance Department 01 Finance Administration Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Total Finance Administration 02 Accounting Pemonal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Commodities Total Accounting 03 Data Processing Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Total Data Processing Amount Amount Budgeted Levied 4,250 0 53,064 0 205,228 0 84,985 0 24,390 0 2,300 0 23,029 0 1,600 0 8,200 0 144,504 0 129,489 0 25,092 0 5,300 0 41,076 0 6,100 0 7,700 0 4,000 0 218,757 0 228,166 0 62,643 0 6,350 0 3,000 0 300,159 0 77,744 0 23,429 0 1,000 0 95,500 0 5,150 0 2,200 0 205,023 0 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY 04 Duplicating Services Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Total DupY~cating Services 05 Insurance Program Pemonal Services Employee Benefits Insurance Total Insurance Program 06 Customer Services Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Total Customer Services 07 Cash Management Personal Services Employee Benefits Total Cash Management Total Finance Department 21 Community Development Department 0i Community Development Administration Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Total Community Development Administration 02 Planning & Zoning Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Total Planning & Zoning Amount Amount Budgeted Levied 5,300 0 6,300 0 11,600 0 46,327 0 10,503 0 236,682 0 293,512 0 22O,377 0 56,430 0 42,200 0 8,129 0 327, I36 0 29,898 0 7,118 0 37,016 0 1,393,203 0 143,323 0 28,399 0 1,440 0 13,611 0 3,705 0 500 0 190,978 0 155,548 0 40,984 0 3,290 0 21,698 0 3,660 0 2,610 0 227,790 0 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY 03 Economic Development Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Total Economic Development 05 Building Inspections Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Total Building Inspections 06 Housing Inspections Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Total Housing Inspections 07 Health Inspections Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Total Health Inspections Total Community Development Dept. 31 Human Services Department 01 Human Services Administration Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Amount Amount Budgeted Levied 44,070 0 8,625 0 660 0 18,500 0 71,855 0 456,886 0 129,578 0 7,100 0 52,977 0 10,575 0 6,080 0 0 0 663,196 0 185,699 0 49,986 0 2,825 0 13,477 0 3,890 0 3,025 0 258,902 0 65,218 0 17,698 0 950 0 13,622 0 2,230 0 1,505 0 101,223 0 1,513,944 0 102,290 0 20,760 0 2,800 0 77,741 0 7,280 0 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Other Equipment Total Human Services Administration 02 Social Services Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Total Social Services 03 Nursing/Health Services Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Other Equipment Total Nursing/Health Services 04 Senior Center Leisure Programs Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Total Senior Programs 05 Youth Activities Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Commodities & Supplies Total Senior Programs Total Human Services Department 41 Police Department 01 Police Administration Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Amount Amount Budgeted Levied 6,350 0 2,000 0 0 0 219,221 0 200,405 0 48,774 0 1,700 0 2,500 0 0 0 253,379 0 78,112 0 18,108 0 350 0 23,800 0 28,175 0 1,500 0 150,045 0 37,619 0 9,634 0 21,600 0 1,150 0 70,003 0 49,645 0 6,843 0 350 0 2,000 0 58,838 0 751,486 0 712,979 0 946,543 0 72,796 0 7 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY 02 03 04 05 06 Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Total Police Administration Patrol and Traffic Enforcement Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Other Equipment Total Patrol and Traffic Enfomement Crime Prevention & Public Services Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Total Crime Prevention & Public Services Investigative and Juvenile Program Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Other Equipment Total Investigative and Juvenile Program Crossing Guards Personal Services Employee Benefits Commodities & Supplies Total Crossing Guards Equipment Ma'mtenance & Operations Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Other Equipment Total Equipment Maintenance & Operations Total Police Department Amount Amount Budgeted Levied 166,225 0 53,000 0 11,130 0 10,550 0 1,973,223 0 4,776,369 3,334,800 634,977 0 508,767 0 44,635 0 1,000 0 14,850 0 5,980,598 3,334,800 186,201 0 21,456 0 4,900 0 2,700 0 7,250 0 222,507 0 912,076 0 101,861 0 28,140 0 4,250 0 0 0 0 0 1,046,327 0 23,058 0 1,764 0 150 0 24,972 0 582,280 0 8,000 0 9,900 0 600,180 0 9,847,807 3,334,800 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Amount Amount Budgeted Levied 42 Fire Department 01 Fire Administration Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Other Equipment Total Fire Administration 506,976 0 966,015 0 57,350 0 58,751 0 1,800 0 10,450 0 10,500 0 7,500 0 1,619,342 0 02 03 04 05 Fire Department Operations Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Building Improvements Other Equipment Total Fire Department Operations Fire Tra'ming Academy Personal Services Employee Benefits Commodities & Supplies Total Fire Training Academy Fire Prevention Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Other Equipment Total Fire Prevention Fire Communications Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies 4,551,438 2,620,700 500,355 0 35,150 0 122,585 0 13,125 0 6,000 0 47,200 0 5,275,853 2,620,700 9,000 0 135 0 4,000 0 13,135 0 328,796 0 78,837 0 7,140 0 2,800 0 8,510 0 1,900 0 427,983 0 17,400 0 42,300 0 500 0 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY 06 Other Equipment Total Fire Communications Equipment Maintenance Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Other Equipment Total Equipment Maintenanee 07 Emergency Preparedness Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Total Emergency Preparedness 08 Paid-On-Call Program Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Other Equipment Total Paid-On-Call Program Total Fire Department 50 Public Works ~ Administration 51 01 Public Works Administration Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Other Equipment Total Public Works Administration Public Works - Streets/Bldgs/Park'mg 01 Street Division Administration Personal Services Employee Benefits Total Street Division Administration Amount Amount Budgeted Levied 2,000 0 62,200 0' 103,090 0 26,274 0 750 0 218,344 0 51,000 0 1,000 0 400,458 0 2,000 0 5,925 0 6,625 0 14,550 0 24,600 0 2,182 0 8,775 0 1,500 0 37,057 0 7,850,578 2,620,700 204,258 0 77,944 0 26,765 0 628,618 0 17,775 0 10,220 0 4,500 0 560 0 970,640 0 100,570 0 19,120 0 119,690 0 10 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Amount Amount Budgeted Levied 02 04 05 06 07 08 Maintenance of Public Buildings Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Total Maintenance of Public Buildings Street Maintenance Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Infrastructure Total Street Maintenance Snow Removal Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Other Equipment Total Snow Removal Leaf Removal Personal Services Employee Benefits Commodities & Supplies Total Leaf Removal Storm Sewer and Basin Maintenance Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Total Storm Sewer and Basin Maintenance Maintenance of State Highways Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Total Maintenance of State Highways 349,831 0 84,191 0 174,350 0 12,700 0 61,000 0 682,072 0 138,954 0 28,621 0 16,445 0 3~795 0 255,500 0 474,315 0 147,378 0 27,560 0 28,390 0 9,035 0 0 0 212,363 0 117,186 0 24,627 0 14,500 0 156,313 0 95,969 0 23,475 0 17,940 0 8,600 0 145,984 0 18,839 0 4,372 0 17,070 0 21,460 0 61,741 0 11 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Amount Amount Budgeted LexSed 62,150 0 14,249 0 21,170 0 97,569 0 1,950,047, 0 09 Traffic Sign Maintenance Personal Services Employee Benefits Commodities & Supplies Total Traffic Sign Maintenance Total Public Works - Streets/Bldgs/Parking 52 Public Works - Forestry/Grounds 52 01 Forestry Division Admin'tstration Personal Services Employee Benefits Total Forestry Division Administration 02 Ma'mtenance of Grounds Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Other Equipment Total Maintenance of Grounds 03 Forestry Program Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Total Forestry Program 04 Public Grounds Beautification Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Total Public Grounds Beautification Total Public Works - Forestry/Grounds Public Works - Engineering 01 Engineering Services Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs 143,306 0 31,279 0 174,585 0 200,592 0 44,533 0 84,705 0 7,385 0 5,770 0 342,985 0 271,887 0 66,158 0 1,335 0 377,895 0 12,480 0 729,755 0 20,006 0 4,512 0 10,750 0 12,170 0 47,438 0 1,294,763 0 480,229 0 110,731 0 5,335 0 12 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies Office Equipment Other Equipment Total Engineering Services 05 Traffic Control & Street Lighting Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Total Traffic Signals & Street Lighting Total PubY~c Works - Engineering 61 Community Service Programs 01 Community Groups & Misc. Contractual Services Other Expenditures Total Community Groups & Misc. 03 4th of July & Civic Events, Etc. Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Total 4th of July & Civic Events, Etc. 04 Holiday Decorations Personal Services Employee Benefits Contractual Services Utilities Commodities & Supplies Total Holiday Decorations 05 Blood Donor Program Personal Services Employee Benefits Commodities & Supplies Total Blood Donor Program Total Community Service Programs Amount Amount Budgeted Levied 66,504 0 7,110 0 1,750 0 2,260 0 673,919 0 67,560 0 15,848 0 9,410 0 120,000 0 6,000 0 218,818 0 892,737 0 92,900 0 9,000 0 101,900 0 46,O00 0 5,538 0 54,750 0 1,I35 0 16,405 0 123,828" 0 6,111 0 1,437 0 54,395 0 I00 0 12,800 0 74,843 0 1,917 0 147 0 850 0 2,914 0 303,485 0 13 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Amount Amount Budgeted Levied 82 Retiree Pensions 01 Miscellaneous Pensions Pension Benefits Total Miscellaneous Pensions Total Retiree Pensions 89 Non-Departmental 01 Contingencies Interfund Transfers Total Contingencies Total N°n-Departmental TOTAL GENERAL FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR GENERAL FUND AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR GENERAL FUND 15,627 0 15,627 0 15,627 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28,599,479 5,955,500 28,599,479 5,955,500 119,110 6,074,610 ARTICLE II - REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND 56 Public Works - Refuse Disposal 01 Refuse Disposal Program Personal Services Employee Benefits Other Employee Costs Contractual Services Utilities Insurance Commodities & Supplies Total Refuse Disposal Program Total Public Works - Refuse Disposal TOTAL REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR REFUSE DISPOSAL FUND 71,633 0 17,670 0 1,500 0 3,151,670 2,244,922 525 0 3,843 0 6,520 0 3,253,361 2,244,922 3,253,361 2,244,922 3,253,361 2,244,922 3,253,361 2,244,922 44,898 2,289,820 14 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Amount Amount Budgeted Levied ARTICLE III - SERIES 1987A DEBT SERVICE FUND, PUBLIC BUILDINGS 81 Debt Service 02 G.O.Bonds - Property Taxes Bond Principal Interest Expense Bank and Fiscal Fees Total G.O.Bonds - Property Taxes Total Debt Service TOTAL SERIES 1987A DEBT SERVICE FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR SERIES 1987A DEBT SERVICE FUND, PUBLIC BUILDINGS AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SERIES 1987A DEBT SERVICE FUND, PUBLIC BUILDINGS 20,587 20,587 45,413 45,413 0 0 66,000 66,000 66,000 66,000 66,000 66,000 66,000 0 66,000 1,320 67,320 ARTICLE IV - SERIES 1996A DEBT SERVICE FUND, FLOOD CONTROL 81 Debt Service 04 G.O.Bonds - Flood Control Bond Principal Interest Expense Bank and Fiscal Fees Total G.O.Bonds - Flood Control Total Debt Service TOTAL SERIES 1996A DEBT SERVICE FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR SERIES 1996A DEBT SERVICE FLrND, FLOOD CONTROL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SERIES 1996A DEBT SERVICE FUND, FLOOD CONTROL 180,000 0 32,740 0 500 0 213,240 0 213,240 0 213,240 0 213,240 0 0 0 15 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Amount Amount Budgeted Levied ARTICLE V - SERIES 1998A DEBT SERVICE FUND, FLOOD CONTROL 81 Debt Service 04 G.O.Bonds - Flood Control Bond Principal Interest Expense Bank and Fiscal Fees Total G.O.Bonds ~ Flood Control Total Debt Service TOTAL SERIES 1998A DEBT SERVICE FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR SERIES 1998A DEBT SERVICE FUND, FLOOD CONTROL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SERIES 1998A DEBT SERVICE FUND, FLOOD CONTROL 55,000 0 12,220 0 500 0 67,720 0 67,720 0 67,720 0 67,72O 0 0 ARTICLE VI - SERIES 1998A DEBT SERVICE FUND, STREET IMPROVEMENTS 81 Debt Service 05 G.O.Bonds - Street Improvements Bond Principal Interest Expense Bank and Fiscal Fees Total G.O.Bonds - Street Improvements Total Debt Service TOTAL SERIES 1998A DEBT SERVICE FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR SERIES 1998A DEBT SERVICE FUND, STREET IMPROVE. AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SERIES 1998A DEBT SERVICE FUND, STREET IMPROVEMENTS 830,000 0 69,713 0 1,000 0 900,713 0 900,713 0 900,713 0 900,713 0 0 t6 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Atnount Amount Budgeted Levied ARTICLE VII - SERIES 1998C DEBT SERVICE FUND, DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMlgNT 81 Debt Service 03 G.O.Bonds - Tax Increment Bond Principal Interest Expense Bank and Fiscal Fees Total G.O.Bonds - Tax Increment Total Debt Service 115,000 0 35,385 0 750 0 151,135 0 151,135 0 151,135 0 TOTAL SERIES 1998C DEBT SERVICE FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR SERIES 1998C DEBT SERVICE FUND AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SERIES 1998C DEBT SERVICE FUND, DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT 151,135 ARTICLE VIII - SERIES 1999 DEBT SERVICE FUND, DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT 81 Debt Service 03 G.O.Bonds - Tax Increment Bond Principal Interest Expense Bank and Fiscal Fees Total G.O.Bonds - Tax Increment Total Debt Service 255,000 0 268,200 0 750 0 523,950 0 523,950 0 523,950 0 TOTAL SERIES 1999 DEBT SERVICE FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR SERIES 1999 DEBT SERVIcE FLrND AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SERIES 1999 DEBT SERVICE FUND, DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT 523,950 0 0 0 17 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Amount Amount Budgeted Levied ARTICLE IX - SERIES 2000 DEBT SERVICE FUND, FLOOD CONTROL 81 Debt Service 04 G.O.Bonds - Flood Control Bond Principal Interest Expense Bank and Fiscal Fees Total G.O:Bonds - Flood Control Total Debt Service TOTAL SERIES 2000 DEBT SERVICE FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR SERIES 2000 DEBT SERVICE FUND, FLOOD CONTROL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SERIES 2000 DEBT SERVICE FUND, FLOOD CONTROL 0 0 111,498 0 1,000 0 112,498 0 112,498 0 112,498 0 112,498 0 0 0 ARTICLE X - SERIES 2001 DEBT SERVICE FUND, PUBLIC BUILDINGS 81 Debt Service 02 G.O.Bonds - Property Taxes Bond Principal Interest Expense Bank and Fiscal Fees Total G.O.Bonds - Property Taxes Total Debt Service TOTAL SERIES 2001 DEBT SERVICE FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR SERIES 2001 DEBT SERVICE FUND, PUBLIC BUILDINGS AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SERIES 2001 DEBT SERVICE FUND, PUBLIC BUILDINGS 175,000 175,000 214,615 48,037 1,500 0 391,115. 223,037 391,115 223,037 391,115. 223,037 391,115 223,037 4,461 227,498 18 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Amount fiAT1ount Budgeted Levied ARTICLE XI - SERIES 2002A DEBT SERVICE FUND, DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT 81 Debt Service 03 O.O.Bonds - Tax Increment Bond Principal Interest Expense Bank and Fiscal Fees Total G.O.Bonds - Tax Increment Total Debt Service 100,000 0 4,300 0 1,588 0 105,888 0 105,888 0 TOTAL SERIES 2002A DEBT SERVICE FUND 105,888 0 0 0 0 TOTAL BUDGET FOR SERIES 2002A DEBT SERVICE FUND, DOWTOWN RED. AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SERIES 2002A DEBT SERVICE FUND, DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT 105,888 ARTICLE XII - SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND, PUBLIC BUILDINGS 81 Debt Service 02 G.O.Bonds - Property Taxes Bond Principal Interest Expense Bank and Fiscal Fees Total G.O.B°nds - Property Taxes Total Debt Service TOTAL SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FLrND, PUBLIC BUILDINGS AMOLrNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND, PUBLIC BUILDINGS 580,200 546,245 44,760 0 750 0 625,710 546,245 625,710 546,245 625,710 546,245 625,710 546,245 10,925 557'i70 19 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Amount Amount Budgeted Levied ARTICLE XIII - SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND, FLOOD CONTROL 81 Debt Service 04 G.O.Bonds - Flood Control Bond 'Principal Interest Expense Bank and Fiscal Fees Total G.O.Bonds - Flood Control Total Debt Service TOTAL SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND, FLOOD CONTROL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND, FLOOD CONTROL 452,100 0 28,023 0 750 0 480,873 0 480,873 0 480,873 0 480,873 0 0 ARTICLE XIV - SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND, STREET IMPROVEMENTS 81 Debt Service 05 G.O.Bonds - Street Improvements Bond Principal Interest Expense Bank and Fiscal Fees Total G.O.B0nds - Street Improvements Total Debt Service TOTAL SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND, STREET IMPROVE. AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND, STREET IMPROVEMENTS 570,000 0 26,025 0 750 0 596,775 0 596,775 0 596,775 0 596,775 0 0 0 20 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Amount Amount Budgeted Levied ARTICLE XV - SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND, WATER IM~PROVEMENTS 81 Debt Service G.O.Bonds - Water and Sewer Revenues Bond Principal Interest Expense Bank and Fiscal Fees Total G.O.Bonds - Water and Sewer Revenues Total Debt Service TOTAL SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE WATER IMPROVEMENTS AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SERIES 2002B DEBT SERVICE FUND, WATER IMPROVEMENTS 102,700 0 6,967 0 500 0 110,167 0 110,167 0 110,167 0 110,167 0 0 0 ARTICLE XVI - POLICE PENSION FUND 82 Retiree Pensions 02 Police Pensions Pension Benefits Contractual Services Total Police Pensions Total Retiree Pensions TOTAL POLICE PENSION FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR POLICE PENSION FUND AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR POLICE PENSION FUND 1,975,510 857,503 3,500 0 1,979,010 857,503 1,979,010 857,503 1,979,010 857,503 1,979,010 857,503 17,150 874,653 21 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY Amount Amount Bud,gered Levied ARTICLE XVII - FIREFIGHTERS' PENSION FUND 82 Retiree Pensions 03 Firefighters' Pensions Pension Benefits Contractual Services Total Firefighters' Pensions Total Retiree Pensions TOTAL FIREFIGHTERS' PENSION FLrND TOTAL BUDGET FOR FIREFIGHTERS' PENSION FUND AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR FIKEFIGHTERS' PENSION FUND 1,918,500 901,643 3,300 0 1,921,800 901,643 1,921,800 901,643 1,921,800 901,643 1,921,800 901,643 18,033 919,676 ARTICLE XV][II - MOUNT PROSPECT LIBRARY FUND 95 Mount Prospect Library 02 Library Services Component Unit Expenditures Total Library Services 03 Library Debt Service Bond Principal Interest Expense Total Library Debt Service TOTAL MOUNT PROSPECT LIBRARY FUND TOTAL BUDGET FOR MOUNT PROSPECT LIBRARY FUND AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS & COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR MOUNT PROSPECT LIBRARY FUND 5,382,877 4,158,141 5,382,877 4,158,141 185,000 185,000 1,435,313 1,435,313 1,620,313 ~,620,313 7,003,190 5,778,454 7,003,190 5,778,454 115,569 5,894,023 22 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS 2002 TAX LEVY SUMMARY Article Amount Total to be Raised Amount ~ax Levy Amount by for Loss Incl. Loss Fund Budgeted Tax Levy and Cost and Cost I General II Refuse Disposal III Series 1987A Debt Service, Public Bids. IV Series i996A Debt Service, Flood Ctrl. V Series 1998A Debt Service, Flood Ctrl. VI Series 1998A Debt Service, Street Imp. VII Series 1998C Debt Service, TIF VIII Series 1999 Debt Service, TI]? IX Series 2000 Debt Service, Flood Ctrl: X Series 2001 Debt Service, Public Bldgs 32[ Series 2002A Debt Service, TIF XII Series 2002B Debt Service, Public Bldgs XIII Series 2002B Debt Service, Flood Ctrl. XIV Series 2002B Debt Service, Street Imp. XV Series 2002B Debt Service, Water XVI Police Pension Fund XVII Firefighters' Pension Fund Village Totals XVIII Mount Prospect Library Library Services Series 2002 Library Bonds Debt Service Library Totals Village and Library Totals $ 28,599,479 5,955,500 119,110 6,074,610 3,253,361 2,244,922 44,898 2,289,820 66,000 66,000 1,320 67,320 213,240 0 (a) 0 0 67,720 0 (a) 0 0 900,712 0 (a) 0 0 151,135 0 (a) 0 0 523,950 0 (a) 0 0 112,498 0 (a) 0 0 391,115 223,037 (a) 4,461 227,498 105,888 0 (a) 0 0 625,710 546,245 (a) 10,925 557,170 480,873 0 (a) 0 0 596,775 0 (a) 0 0 110,167 0 (a) 0 0 1,979,010 857,503 17,150 874,653 1,921,800 901 643 18,033 919,676 40,099,433 10,794,850 215,897 11,010,747 5,382,877 4,158,141 83,163 4,241,304 1,620,313 1,620,313 32,406 1,652,719 7,003,190 5,778,454 115,569 5,894,023 47,102,623 16,573,304 331,466 16,904,770 (a) Amounts to be raised by tax levy have been reduced by abatements to be filed of $3,500,163. 23 Section 3: The sum of $278,400 is estimated to be received from personal property replacement tax revenue during the fiscal year commencing January 1, 2002 and ending December 31, 2002 and has been included herein as funds to be derived from sources other than property taxes for general obligation bonds and interest, pensions, library services and general corporate purposes. Section 4: That the County Clerk is directed to add 2% to the requested tax levy as a provision for loss and cost. Section 5: That the Village Clerk of the Village of Mount Prospect is hereby directed to certify a copy of this Ordinance and is hereby authorized and directed to file a copy of the same with the County Clerk of Cook County, Illinois, within the time specified by law. Section 6: That, if any part or parts of this Ordinance shall be held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such constitutionality or invalidity, shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance. The President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect hereby declares that they would have passed the remaining parts of the Ordinance of they had known that such parts or parts thereof would be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. Section 7: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval, publication in pamphlet form and recording, as provided by law. AYES: NAYES: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this __ day of December, 2002. ATTEST: Gerald L. Farley, Village President Velma W. Lowe, Village Clerk 24 ORDINANCI~, NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHO~ZING THE LEvy AND COLLECTION OF TAXES FOR THE MUNICIPAL PURPOSES OF SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NUMBER FIVE AND SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NUMBER SIX OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2002 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2002 PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES the __ day of ,2002 Published in pamphlet form by authority of the corporate authorities of the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois the ... day of ,2002. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF TAXES FOR THE MUNICIPAL PURPOSES OF SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NUMBER FIVE AND SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NUMBER SIX OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2002 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2002 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect, Cook County, Illinois: Section 1: That the sum of One Million Five Hundred Fifteen Thousand Four Hundred Sixty- Four Dollars ($1,515,464), the same being the total amount to be levied of budget appropriations heretofore made for the municipal purposes for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2002, and ending December 31, 2002, as approved by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect, be and the same is hereby levied on all taxable property Within the Special Service Area Number 5 of the Village of Mount Prospect according to the valuation of said property as is, or shall be, assessed or equalized by State and County purpose~ for the cun'ent year 2002. The budgetary appropriations having been made heretofore by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect were passed and approved by Ordinance No. 5227 at a meeting hereof regularly convened and held in said Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois on the 18~ day of December, 2001, and thereafter duly published according to law, the various objects and purposes for said budgetary appropriations were heretofore made are set forth under the c. olnmn entitled ~Amount Budgeted," and the specific amount herein levied for each object and purpose is set forth under the column entitled "Amount Levied" in Article I. Section 2: That the sum of Th'my Seven Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy-Five Dollars ($37,775), the same being the total amount to be levied of budget appropriations heretofore made for the municipal purposes for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2002, and ending December 31, 2002, as approved by the President and Board of Trustees of the Viliage of Mount Prospect, be and the same is hereby levied on all taxable property within the Special Service Area Number 6 of the Village of Mount Prospect according to the valuation of said property as is, or shall be, assessed or equalized by State and County purposes for the current year 2002. The budgetary appropriations having been made heretofore by the President and Board of Trastees of the Village of Mount Prospect were passed and approved by Ordinance No. 5227 at a meeting hereof regularly convened and held in said Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois on the 18* day of December, 2001, and thereafter duly published according to law, the various objects and purposes for said budgetary appropriations were heretofore made are set forth under the colanm entitled "Amount Budgeted," and the specific amount herein levied for each object and purpose is set forth under the column entitled "Amount Levied" in Afficle II. Amount Amount Budgeted Levied ARTICLE I - SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NO. 5 61 Lake Water Acquisition 6105512-540800 SSA #5 JAWA Water 1,598,600 370,464 6105512-540815 SS,~ ~5 JAWA FiXed Costs 1,145,000 .1,145,000 TOTAL APPROPRIATED FOR SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NO; 5 LAKE WATER ACQUISITION 2,743,600 AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY 1,515,464 ADD 2% FOR LOSS AND COST OF COLLECTION 30,309 TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NO. 5 1,545,773 ARTICLE II - SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NO. 6 83 Special Service Area No. 6 Bond and Interest 8308106-710607 SSA #6 Principal 8308106-720608 SSA#6 Interest 30.000 30,000 7,775 7,775 TOTAL APPROPRIATED FOR SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NO;6 BOND AND INTEREST AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY ADD 2% FOR LOSS AND COST OF COLLECTION TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE RAISED BY TAX LEVY FOR SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NO. 6 37,775 37,775 755 38,530 Article I Special Service Area No. 5 II Special Service Area No. 6 SUMMARY Amount Amount to Amount for Total Tax Bud.qeted be Levied .Loss & Cost Levy 2,743,600 1,515,464 30,309 1,545,773 37,775 37,775 755 38,530 Section 3: That the County Clerk is directed to add 2% to the requested tax levy as a provision for loss and cost. Section 4: That the Village Clerk of the Village of Mount Prospect is hereby directed to certify a copy of this Ordinance and is hereby authorized and directed to file a copy of the same with the County Clerk of Cook County, Illinois, within the time specified by law. Section 5: That, if any part of this Ordinance shall be held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such unconstitutionality or invalidity, shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance. The Presidem and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect hereby declares that they would have passed the remaining parts of the Ordinance if they had known that such part or parts thereof would be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. Section 6: That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval, publication in pamphlet form and recording, as provided by law. NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this Gerald L. Farley, Village President ATTEST: Velma W. Lowe, Village Clerk ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO ABATE A PART OF THE TAXES LEVIED FOR CORPORATE AND MUNICIPAL PURPOSES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2002 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2002 PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES the day of ,2002 Published in pamphlet form by authority of the corporate authorities of the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois, the day of ,2002. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO ABATE A PART OF THE TAXES LEVIED FOR CORPORATE AND MUNICIPAL PURPOSES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2002 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2002 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: Section One: follows: A. mo The President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect find as That pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 4780 adopted March 6, 1996 and authorizing issuance of general obligation bonds for fin_~ncing flood control projects, capital projects, and certain public improvements within the Village's District No. 1 Tax Increment Redevelopment PrOject Area there was levied for the year 2002 the sum of $212,740.00 for bond principal and interest payments. That pursuant to Village Ordlnunce No. 4917 adopted March 18, 1998 and authorizing issuance of general obligation bonds for financing flood control improvement projects, street improvements and the acquisition of land within the Village's District No. 1 Tax Increment Redevelopment Project Area there was levied for the year 2002 the sum of $966,932.50 for bond principal and interest payments. That pursuant to Village Or¢iinance No. 4977 adopted December 1, 1998 and authorizing issuance of general obrlgation bonds for financing land acquisition costs and other redevelopment costs within the Village's District No. 1 Tax Increment Redevelopment Project Area there was levied for 2002 the sum of $150,385,00 for bond principal and interest payments. That pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 4999 adopted March 2, 1999 and authorizing issuance of general obligation bonds for financing the acquisition of land within the Village's District No. 1 Tax Increment Redevelopment Project Area there was levied for the year 2002 the sum of $523,200.00 for bond principal and interest payments. That pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 5114 adopted June 6, 2000 and authoriz'mg issuance of general obligation bonds for financing various flood control capital improvements there was levied for the year 2002 the sum of $111,497.50 for bond principal and interest payments. That pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 5212 adopted October 2, 2001 and authorizing issuance of general obligation bonds for financing a portion of the construction costs of a new village hall and parking structure there was levied for the year 2002 the sum of $389,615.00 for bond principal and interest payments. That pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 5236 adopted March 5, 2002 and authorizing the issuance of general obligation refunding bonds, Series 2002A, and general obligation refunding bonds, Series 2002B, to refund the Village's Series 1993A bonds, Series 1993B bonds, and Series 1994A bonds, there was levied for the year 2002 the sum of $1,915,075.00 for bond principal and interest payments. That as of December 1, 2002 there has been collected, deposited to and on hand in the Series 1996A and 1996B General Obligation Bond and Interest Funds the sum of $212,740.00 for application to bond principal and interest payments for the bonds issued pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 4780 adopted March 6, 1996. That as of December 1, 2002 there has been collect~l, deposited to and on hand in the Series 1998A and 1998B General Obligation Bond and Interest Funds the sum of $966,932.50 for application to bond principal and interest payments for the bonds issued pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 4917 adopted March 18, 1998. That as of December 1, 2002 there is available in the Village's Downtown Redevelopment Fund the amount of $150,385.00 for application to bond principal and interest payments for the bonds issued pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 4977 adopted December 1, 1998. That as of December 1, 2002 there is available in the Village's Downtown Redevelopment Fund the amount of $523,200.00 for application to bond principal and interest payments for the bonds issued pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 4999 adopted March 2, 1999. That as of December 1, 2002 there is available in the Village's Series 2000 General Obligation Bond and Interest Fund the sum of $111,497.50 for application to bond principal and interest payments for the bonds issued pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 5114 adopted June 6, 2000. That as of December 1, 2002 there is available in the Village's Series 2001 General Obligation Bond and Interest Fund and the Village's General Fund the sum of $166,578.00 for application to bond principal and interest payments for the bonds issued pursuam to Village Ordinance No. 5212 adopted October 2, 2001. That as of December 1, 2002 there is available in the Village's Series 2002A and Series 2002B Debt Service Funds the sum of $1,368,830 for application to bond 2 principal and interest payments for the bonds issued pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 5236 adopted March 5, 2002. Section Two: It is hereby declared and determined by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect that the mount of $212,740.00 levied for G.O. Bond and Interest payments for the purpose of financing flood control projects, capital projects, and certain public improvements within the Village's District No. 1 Tax Increment Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 4780 be and the same is hereby abated in the amount of $212,740.00 being the entire amount levied for such bond and interest payment purposes for the fiscal year commencing January 1, 2002 and ending December 31, 2002. Section Three: It is hereby declared and determined by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect that the amount of $966,932.50 levied for G.O. Bond and Interest payments for the purpose of financing flood control projects, street improvements and the acquisition of land within the Village's District No. 1 Tax Increment Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to Ordinance No. 4917 be and the same i.s hereby abated in the amount of $966,932.50 being the entire amount levied for such bond and interest payment purposes for the fiscal year commencing January 1, 2002 and ending December 31, 2002. Section Four: It is hereby declared by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect that the amount of $150,385.00 levied for G.O. Bond and Interest payments for the purpose of funding property acquisition within the Village's District No. 1 Tax Increment Redevelopment Project Area pursuant to Ordinance No. 4977 be and the same is hereby abated in the amount of $150,385.00 being the entire amount levied for such bond and interest payment purposes for the fiscal year commenc'mg lanua~ 1, 2002 and ending December 31, 2002. Section Five: It is hereby declared by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect that the amount of $523,200.00 levied for G.O. Bond and Interest payments for the purpose of funding property acquisition within the Village's District No. 1 Tax Increment Redevelopment Project Area purs~ant to Ordinance NO. 4999 be and the same is hereby abated in the amount of $523,200.00 being the entire amount levied for such bond and interest payment purposes for the fiscal year commencing January 1, 2002 and ending December 31, 2002. Section Six: It is hereby declared by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect that the amount of $111,497.50 levied for G.O. Bond and Interest payments for the purpose of funding various flood control capital improvements pursuant to Ordinance lqo. 5114 be and the same is hereby abated in the amount of $111,497.50 being the entire amount levied for such bond and interest payment purposes for the fiscal year commencing January 1, 2002 and ending December 31, 2002. Section Seven: It is hereby declared by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect that the amount of $389,615.00 levied for G.O. Bond and Interest payments for the purpose of funding a portion of the construction costs of a new village hall and parking structure pursuant to Ordinance No. 5212 be and the same is hereby abated in the amount of 3 $166,578.00, leaving a balance of $223,037.00 as that mount levied for such bond and interest payments for the fiscal year commencing January 1, 2002 and end'mg December 31, 2002. Section Eight: It is hereby declared by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mourn Prospect that the amount of $1,915,075.00 levied for G.O. Bond and Interest payments for the purpose of refunding a portion of the Series 1993A, Series 1993B and Series 1994A bonds pursuant to Ordinance No. 5236 be and the same is hereby abated in the amount of $1,368,830.00, leaving a balance of $546,245.00 as that amount levied for such bond and interest payments for the fiscal year commencing January 1, 2002 and ending December 31, 2002. Section Nine: Village Ordinance Nos. 4780, 4917, 4977, 4999, 5114, 5212 and 5236 are and each is hereby amended with respect to the tax abatements declared herein and set forth in Sections Two through Eight of this Ordinance. Section Ten: The Village Clerk of the Village of Mount Prospect is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this Ordinance with the County Clerk of Cook County, IllinOis within the time specified by law: Section Eleven: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form and filing as provided by law. NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of ., 2002. ATTEST: Gerald L. Farley, Village President Velma W. Lowe, Village Clerk 4 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO ABATE A PART OF THE TAXES LEVIED FOR UNLIMITED TAX BONDS OF SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NUMBER SIX OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2002 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2002 PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES the __ day of ,2002 Published in pamphlet form by authority of the corporate authorities of the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois, the day of ,2002. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO ABATE A PART OF THE TAXES LEVIED FOR UNLIMITED TAX BONDS OF SPECIAL SERVICE AREA NUMBER SIX OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2002 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2002 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: Section One: The President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect find as follows: That pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 3950 adopted June 21, 1988 authorizing the issuance of Unlimited Tax Bonds of Special Service Area Number 6 of the Village of Mount Prospect there was levied for the year 2002 the sum of $37,775 for principal and interest payments. That as of December 1, 2002 there has been collected, deposited to and on hand in the Article I - Unlimited Tax Bond and Interest Fund the sum of $4,991 for application to bond and interest payments for the bonds issued pursuant to Village Ordinance 3950 adopted June 21, 1988. Section Two: It is hereby declared and determined by the President and Board of Trustees of this Village that the amount of $37,775 levied for Unlimited Tax Bond and Interest payments of Special Service Area Number 6 of this Village, pursuant to Village Ordinance No. 3950 adopted on June 21, 1988 be and the same is hereby abated in the amount of $4,991 leaving a balance of $32,784 as that amount levied for such bond and interest payment purposes for the fiscal year commencing January 1, 2002 and ending December 31, 2002. Section Three: It is hereby declared and determined by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect that Village Ordinance 3950 is hereby amended with respect to the tax abatement declared herein and set forth in Section Two of this Ordinance. Section Four: The Village Clerk of the Village of Mount Prospect is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this Ordinance with the County Clerk of Cook County, Illinois within the time specified by law. Section Five: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form and filing as provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of ,2002. ATTEST: Gerald L. Farley, Village President Velma W. Lowe, Village Clerk 2 Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect, Illinois INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MICHAEL JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER DIRECTOR OF FINANCE NOVEMBER 25, 2002 PROPOSED 2003 BUDGET PURPOSE: To present for the Village Board's consideration an ordinance adopting the annual budget for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2003 and ending December 31, 2003. BACKGROUND: The Village Manager released his proposed budget on October 8, 2002. Over the past six weeks the Finance Commission met four times to review the document. The Village nd Board, meeting as a Committee of the Whole, reviewed the document on October 22 , November 12t~ and November 26th. DISCUSSION: Attached hereto are certain changes to the proposed 2003 budget and the 2004 forecast budget Which staff is recommending. Changes to 2003 Budget Projected Village revenues are being increased by $124,221. Village expenditures are being increased by $2,108,642. The more significant changes have to do with adjusting the projected payout schedule on the new village hall/parking deck project. At the time the proposed budget was prepared and distributed, the Mount Prospect Public Library budget, included in the Village's budget as a component unit, was not yet available. The Library's budget for 2003 reflects revenues of $26,171,713 and expenditures of $26,171,713. Included in their budget is $19,000,000 for the librarY expansion project and $1,620,000 for debt service on the Series 2002 Library bonds the Village issued on their behalf. 003 Proposed Budget November 25, 2002 Page 2 Chan,qes to 2004 Forecast Budget Projected revenues are being decreased by $1,641 and expenditures are being decreased a total of $879,482. The large decrease in anticipated spending for 2004 can also be attributed to a revised payout schedule on the village hall project. Summary With the aforementioned changes, the proposed 2003 Budget for the Village totals $82,254,028. This represents a 2.8% increase over the current 2002 Budget. Projected revenues for 2003 now stand at $76,899,612, an increase of 5.4%. Both the projected revenues and budgeted expenditures for the Mount Prospect Library for 2003 are $26,171,713. A public hearing on the proposed budget has been scheduled for December 17th. Notice of the public hearing will be published in the Daily Herald on December 5, 2002. The proposed ordinance attached hereto would officially adopt the budget for the Village of Mount ProsPect. Once the ordinance is passed, the Finance Department will revise the budget document to incorporate the approved changes. We expect to have the approved budget document produced no later than January 15th, RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Village Board pass the accompanying draft ordinance adopting the 2003 annual budget. DOUGLAS R. ELLSWORTH, CPA DIRECTOR OF FINANCE Attach. I:\budget~2003\Ordinance Cover Memo,doc VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 2003 PROPOSED BUDGET SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED CHANGES 2003 BUDGET Account Name Account Number GENERAl_ FUND Expenditures Village Manager's Office Public Information Other Professional Services Village Clerk's Office Copier Lease Payments Finance Department Contractual Services Copier Lease Payments Other Expenditures Total Expenditures 2OO3 2003 Budget Proposed Originally Recommended Budget Proposed Change As Amended 0011105-540210 52,000 7,000 59,000 0011402-540938 0 3,840 3,840 0011704-540938 0 3,840 3,840 29,941,748 0 29,941,748 29,993,748 14,680 30,008,428 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUND Revenues Intergovernmental Revenues CDBG Grant Other Revenues Total Revenues 0700000-433000 Expenditures Community Development CDBG Community Programs Club RecPlex Program Low Income Health Care Special Leisure Services CDBG Single Family Rehab Programs Single Family Rehab Other Expenditures Total Expenditures 370,151 86,000 456,151 56,800 0 56,800 426,951 86,000. 512,951 0702305-540220 3,000 500 3,500 0702305-540270 10,000 1,000 11,000 0702305-540283 2,500 (500) 2,000 0 0 0 0702307-590200 151,950 85,000 236,950 259,501 0 259,501 426,951 86,000 512,951 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND Revenues Other Revenues Developer Donations Other Revenues Total Revenues Expenditures Community Improvement Projects 5100000-485000 0 40,500 40,500 515,000 0 515,000 515,000 40,500 555,500 Page 1 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 2003 PROPOSED BUDGET SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED CHANGES 2003 BUDGET Account Name Account Number Infrastructure Residential Street Lights Other Expenditures Total Expenditures 5107702-690005 2O03 2003 Budget Proposed Originally Recommended Budget Proposed Change As Amended 678,697 (535,911) 142,786 572,119 0 572,119 1,250,816 (535,911) 714,905 G.O. SERIES 2001 PROJECT FUND Revenues Investment Income interest income Other Revenue Accounts Total Revenues Expenditures Village Improvements Contractual Services Other Professional Services Building Improvements Station 12 Improvements Village Hall/Community Center Parking Structure Other Expenditures Total Expenditures 5250000-460100 5257701-540110 7,307 13,059 20,366 0 0 0 7,307 13,059 20,366 141,000 152,873 293,873 5257701-640003 0 275,500 275,500 5257701-640015 1,500,000 (290,000) 1,210,000 5257701-640017 830,319 1,535,318 2,365,637 0 0 0 2,471,319 1,673,691 4,145,010 G.O. SERIES 2003 PROJECT FUND Revenues Investment Income Interest Income Other Revenue Accounts Total Revenues Expenditures Village Improvements Contractual Services Other Professional Services Building Improvements Station 12 Improvements Village Hall/Community Center Parking Structure Other Expenditures Total Expenditures 5260000-460100 5267701-540110 135,440 (15,338) 120,102 12,235,000 0 12,235,000 12,370,440 (15,338) 12,355,102 423,000 (94,000) 329,000 5267701-640003 275,500 (275,500) 0 5267701-640015 4,500,000 1,275,000 5,775,000 5267701-640017 4,469,681 (35,318) 4,434,363 605,600 0 605,600 10,273,781 870,182 ' 11,143,963 Page 2 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 2003 PROPOSED BUDGET SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED CHANGES 2003 BUDGET Account Name Account Number 2003 2003 Budget Proposed Originally Recommended Budget Proposed Change As Amended LIBRARY FUND Revenues Property Taxes, Library Property Taxes, IMRF Property Taxes, Maint. & Repair Property Taxes, Insurance & Audit Property Taxes, Debt Service Other Revenues Total Revenues Expenditures Administration Payroll Pension Medical Insurance Other Administration Postage & Printing Programs Contractual Services Library Supplies Other Operating Expenses Audit and Insurance Building Utilities Building Maintenance Equipment Maintenance Equipment & Equipment Rental Other Materials Books Audio Visual Other Materials Contingencies Other Funds Bldg. & Equipment Fund Gift Fund Library Debt Service Fund Library Capital Projects Fund Total Expenditures 9500000-499100 9500000-499101 9500000-499102 9500000-499103 9500000-499104 9500000-499109 9509502-900110 9509502-900120 9509502-900130 9509502-900140 9509502-900150 9509502-900155 9509502-900160 9509502-900170 9509502-900171 9509502-900210 9509502-900200 9509502-900220 9509502-900225 9509502-900226 9509502-900300 9509502-900310 9509502-900311 9509502-900312 9509502-900313 9509502-900330 9509502-900700 9509502-900701 0 3,545,520 3~545,520 0 315,390 315,390 0 246,641 246,641 0 50,590 50,590 0 1,620,313 1,620,313 0 20,393,259 20,393,259 0 26,171,713 26,171,713 0 2,676,200 2,676,200 0 321,700 321,700 0 190,500 190,500 0 50,400 50,400 0 0 0 0 148,800 148,800 0 54,600 54,600 0 78,600 78,600 0 51,600 51,600 0 63,000 63,000 0 25,000 25,000 0 44,500 44,500 0 96,900 96,900 0 12,000 12,000 0 338,400 338,400 0 79,400 79,400 0 119,800 119,800 0 300,000 300,000 0 600,000 600,000 0 300,000 300,000 0 1,620,313 1,620,313 0 19,000,000 19,000,000 0 26,171,713 26,171,713 Page 3 VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT 2003 PROPOSED BUDGET SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED CHANGES 2004 FORECAST BUDGET Account Name Account Number 2004 Forecast Budget 2004 Forecast Originally Recommended Budget Proposed Change As Amended GENERAL FUND Expenditures Village Manager's Office Village Clerk's Office Copier Lease Payments Finance Department Contractual Services Copier Lease Payments Other Expenditures Total Expenditures 0011402-540938 0011704-540938 0 3,840 3,840 0 3,840 3,840 31,870,612 0 31,870,612 31,870,612 7,680 31,878,292 G.O. SERIES 2003 PROJECT FUND Revenues Investment Income Interest Income Other Revenue Accounts Total Revenues Expenditures ViIiage Improvements Building Improvements Village Hall/Community Center Parking Structure Construction Contingencies Other Expenditures Total Expenditures 5260000-460100 4,588 (1,641) 2,947 0 0 0 4,588 (1,641) 2,947 5267701-640015 1,000,000 115,000 1,115,000 5267701-640017 1,000,000 (1,000,000) 0 5267701-640023 3,957 (2,162) 1,795 97,290 0 97,290 2,101,247 (887,162) 1,214,085 Page 1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AN ANNUAL BUDGET FOR THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JANUARY I, 2003 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2003 IN LIEU OF PASSAGE OF AN APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES the day of ,2002 Published in pamphlet form by authority of the corporate authorities of the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois the day of ., 2002. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AN ANNUAL BUDGET FOR THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JANUARY 1, 2003 AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2003 IN LIEU OF PASSAGE OF AN APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE WHEREAS, the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect in accordance with Statutes, have provided for the preparation and adoption of an Annual Budget in lieu of passage of an Appropriation Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the tentative Annual Budget for the Village of Mount Prospect for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2003 and ending December 31, 2003, as prepared by the Budget Officer for the Village and submitted to the President and Board of Trustees, was placed on file in the Office of the Village Clerk on October 8, 2002 for public inspection, as provided by Statute; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice duly pUblished on D~Cember 5, 2002, a public hearing was held by the President and Board of Trustees on said tentative annual budget on December 17, 2002, as provided by Statute; and WHEREAS, following said public hearing, said tentative Annual Budget was reviewed by the President and Board of Trustees and a copy of said tentative Annual Budget is attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION ONE: The Annual Budget for the Village of Mount Prospect for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2003 and ending December 31, 2003, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby approved and adopted as the Annual Budget for the Village of Mount Prospect for said fiscal year. SECTION TWO: Within thirty (30) days following the adoption of this Ordinance there shall be filed with the County Clerk of Cook County a copy thereof duly certified by the Village Clerk and Estimate of Revenues by source anticipated to be received by the Village in the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2003 and ending December 31, 2003, duly certified by the Chief Fiscal Officer. SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in pamphlet form in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED AND APPROVED this day of ,2002. ATTEST: Gerald L. Farley, Village President Velma W. Lowe, Villa, ge Clerk 2