Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5. New Business 09/16/2014Village of Mount Prospect MountProspe Community Development Department MEMORANDUM Ji TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 SUBJECT: PZ -27-14 / 213 W. PROSPECT AVE. / CONDITIONAL USE (DWELLING UNIT ON GROUND FLOOR) The Petitioner is seeking Conditional Use approval to allow a dwelling unit located on the ground floor for the property located at 213 W. Prospect Avenue. The Subject Property contains a three -flat residential apartment building and is zoned B5 Central Commercial District. The residential apartment building dates back to the 1970s when the property was zoned low-density residential. The Subject Property was rezoned to B5 Central Commercial in the 1990s. Because the current zoning is B5 Central Commercial District, the existing residential land use on the ground floor is considered nonconforming. Dwelling units located on the ground floor require Conditional Use approval. The Petitioner is seeking Conditional Use approval to allow a dwelling unit located on the ground floor in order to refinance the subject property. No changes to the building or site are proposed. The Planning & Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing to review the request on Thursday, August 28, 2014, and by a vote of 7-0, recommended approval of a Conditional Use to allow a dwelling unit located on the ground floor at the property located at 213 W. Prospect Avenue. Details of the proceedings and items discussed during the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing are included in the attached minutes. Please forward this memorandum and attachments to the Village Board for their review and consideration at their September 16, 2014 meeting. Staff will be present to answer any questions related to this matter. William J. Cooney, AICP Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department CASE SUMMARY — PZ- 27-14 LOCATION: 213 W. Prospect Avenue PETITIONER: Joseph V. Trebat OWNER: Joseph V. Trebat PIN #: 08-12-112-031-0000 LOT SIZE: 0.12 acres (5,200 sq.ft.) ZONING: B5 Central Commercial LAND USE: Three Flat Residence REQUEST: Conditional Use approval to allow dwelling unit on the ground floor LOCATION MAP 1,77_ 213 W. Prospect Ave 45.� ' �l co Ac �.. r, % , �,•^p p't h ..... ,.. L� `+,fir R�� �•+�--+.----r .. "'tea .. . ''�. r ,10 � • x"11 �-' " -�1� 1,77_ 213 W. Prospect Ave 45.� ' �l co Ac �.. r, % , �,•^p p't h ..... ,.. L� `+,fir R�� �•+�--+.----r .. "'tea .. . ''�. Village of Mount Prospect W Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: HEARING DATE: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND MOUNT PROSPECT PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JOSEPH P. DONNELLY, CHAIRPERSON CONSUELO ANDRADE, SENIOR PLANNER AUGUST 5, 2014 AUGUST 28, 2014 PZ -27-14 / 213 W. PROSPECT AVE. / CONDITIONAL USE (DWELLING UNIT ON GROUND FLOOR) / JOSEPH V. TREBAT A public hearing has been scheduled for the August 28, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting to review the application by Joseph V. Trebat (the "Petitioner"), regarding the property located at 213 W. Prospect Avenue (the "Subject Property"). The Petitioner is seeking Conditional Use approval to allow a dwelling unit on the ground floor. The P&Z Commission hearing was properly noticed in the August 13, 2014 edition of the Daily Herald newspaper. In addition, the Petitioner has completed the required written notice to property owners within 250 -feet and Staff posted a Public Hearing sign on the Subject Property. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Subject Property is located south of the railroad tracks on Prospect Avenue, and contains a three -flat residential apartment building. The Subject Property is zoned B5 Central Commercial and is bordered by the B5 Central Commercial District to west and east, and the RA Single Family District to the south. SUMMARY The three -flat residential apartment building dates back to the 1970s when the property was zoned low-density residential. The Subject Property was rezoned to B5 Central Commercial in the 1990s. Because the current zoning is B5 Central Commercial District, the existing residential land use on the ground floor is considered nonconforming. Dwelling units located on the ground floor in the B5 District require Conditional Use approval. The Petitioner is seeking Conditional Use approval to allow a dwelling unit located on the ground floor in order to refinance the subject property. GENERAL ZONING COMPLIANCE The Plat of Survey indicates the Subject Property complies with the B5 Districts bulk requirements. A Variation allowing 1,733 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit was approved in 1972. The Petitioner does not intend to make any changes to the building or site. The following table compares the Subject Property to the B5 District's requirements: PZ -27-14 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting August 28, 2014 Page 3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION The Village Comprehensive Plan designates the Subject Property as Central Commercial, which calls for "a dense, intensive land use pattern focusing on an urban style of development and architecture." The plan further notes that the Central Commercial area should contain a mix of land uses. CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS The standards for Conditional Uses are listed in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Village Zoning Ordinance and include seven specific findings 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; • There is adequate provision for utilities, drainage, and design of access and egress to minimize congestion on Village streets; and • The request is in compliance of the Conditional Use with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and other Village Ordinances. Per the Petitioner, a request to refinance the Subject Property was turned down because the property is in a commercial district and requires Conditional Use approval for a residential dwelling unit to be located on the ground floor. The Petitioner further points out that the Subject Property has always been residential and has not had a negative impact on the surrounding properties. Staff researched the building permit history of the Subject Property and found that it was developed in 1958 as two -flat residential building. The two -flat was converted to a three -flat building in 1972. Staff is supportive of the Conditional Use to allow a dwelling unit on the ground floor as the existing land use is not changing. The existing land use would remain as a three -flat, which is consistent with multi -family buildings located along Prospect Avenue. The existing utilities and access/egress would be maintained. The Village has supported similar requests for projects on the periphery of the central downtown area. Examples of projects include the Prospect Avenue Townhomes (PZ -38-07), Miller's Crossing Townhomes (ZBA-18-99), and most recently for the 122 S. Wille Street residence (PZ -04-14). RECOMMENDATION Staff finds that the Conditional Use request meets the standards as listed in the Zoning Code and that granting such request would be in the best interest of the Village. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval of the following motion: B5 Requirements Existing Proposed Setbacks: Front (N) ±29' (average of established setbacks) 30.75' No Change Interior Side (W) N/A 7.99' No Change Interior Side (E) N/A 10.18' No Change Rear (S) ±25' (transitional setback) 26.64' No Change _Height 35' Max. X25 No Change LotCoveraEe ....... ..........................� N/A 55% No Change Densitv 16 DU/acre 25 DU/acre No change COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION The Village Comprehensive Plan designates the Subject Property as Central Commercial, which calls for "a dense, intensive land use pattern focusing on an urban style of development and architecture." The plan further notes that the Central Commercial area should contain a mix of land uses. CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS The standards for Conditional Uses are listed in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Village Zoning Ordinance and include seven specific findings 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; • There is adequate provision for utilities, drainage, and design of access and egress to minimize congestion on Village streets; and • The request is in compliance of the Conditional Use with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and other Village Ordinances. Per the Petitioner, a request to refinance the Subject Property was turned down because the property is in a commercial district and requires Conditional Use approval for a residential dwelling unit to be located on the ground floor. The Petitioner further points out that the Subject Property has always been residential and has not had a negative impact on the surrounding properties. Staff researched the building permit history of the Subject Property and found that it was developed in 1958 as two -flat residential building. The two -flat was converted to a three -flat building in 1972. Staff is supportive of the Conditional Use to allow a dwelling unit on the ground floor as the existing land use is not changing. The existing land use would remain as a three -flat, which is consistent with multi -family buildings located along Prospect Avenue. The existing utilities and access/egress would be maintained. The Village has supported similar requests for projects on the periphery of the central downtown area. Examples of projects include the Prospect Avenue Townhomes (PZ -38-07), Miller's Crossing Townhomes (ZBA-18-99), and most recently for the 122 S. Wille Street residence (PZ -04-14). RECOMMENDATION Staff finds that the Conditional Use request meets the standards as listed in the Zoning Code and that granting such request would be in the best interest of the Village. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval of the following motion: PZ -27-14 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting August 28, 2014 Page 4 "To adopt staff findings in the staff report as the findings of the Planning and Zoning Commission and recommend approval o£ A Conditional Use to allow a dwelling unit located on the ground floor at the property located at 213 W. Prospect Avenue. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. I concur: Will amooney, AICP, Director of Community Development /jmc HAPLANTIanning & Zoning CONC"&Z 20141SIn1TRepons\PZ-27-14 217 W. Prospect Ave (Conditional Use -DU on Ground Floor) docz MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ -27-14 PROPERTY ADDRESS: PETITIONER: PUBLICATION DATE: PIN NUMBER: REQUEST MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Hearing Date: August 28`h, 2014 213 W. Prospect Avenue Joseph V. Trebat August 13`h, 2014 [IIi� [►•II [ f►•alxl QIIIIIII; Conditional Use approval to allow dwelling unit on the ground floor Agostino Filippone Thomas Fitzgerald Sharon Otteman William Beattie Keith Youngquist Jeanne Kueter Norbert Mizwicki Joseph Donnelly, Chairman None Consuelo Andrade, Senior Planner Brian Simmons, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: Joseph V. Trebat Chairman Donnelly called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. Commissioner Beattie made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Youngquist to approve the minutes of the July 20, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting; the minutes were approved 6-0 with one Commissioner abstaining. Chairman Donnelly introduced Case PZ -27-14, 213 W. Prospect Avenue. Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner for PZ -27-14 is seeking Conditional Use approval to allow a dwelling unit on the ground floor for the property located at 213 W. Prospect Avenue. Ms. Andrade further explained the Subject Property is located south of the railroad tracks on Prospect Avenue, and contains a three -flat residential apartment building. The Property is zoned B5 Central Commercial and is bordered by the B5 Central Commercial District to west and east, and the RA Single Family District to the south. Ms. Andrade stated that the three -flat residential apartment building dates back to the 1970s when the property was zoned low-density residential. The Subject Property was rezoned to B5 Central Commercial in the 1990s. She further explained, because the current zoning is B5 Central Commercial District, the existing residential land use on the ground floor is considered nonconforming. Dwelling units located on the ground floor in the B5 District require Conditional Use approval. The Petitioner is seeking Planning and Zoning Commission- August 28th, 2014 PZ -27-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair Conditional Use approval to allow a dwelling unit located on the ground floor in order to refinance the subject property. Ms. Andrade stated that the Petitioner is not intending to make any changes to the site. Ms. Andrade summarized the standards for a Conditional Use as the following: • 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; • There is adequate provision for utilities, drainage, and design of access and egress to minimize congestion on Village streets; Ms. Andrade stated per the Petitioner a request to refinance the property was turned down because the property is in a commercial district and requires Conditional Use approval for a residential dwelling unit to be located on the ground floor. The Petitioner further points out that the Subject Property has always been residential and has not had a negative impact on the surrounding properties. Ms. Andrade stated that Staff researched the building permit history of the Subject Property and found that it was developed in 1958 as a two -flat residential building. The two -flat was converted to a three -flat building in 1972. Ms. Andrade stated that Staff is supportive of the Conditional Use to allow a dwelling unit on the ground floor as the existing land use is not changing. The existing land use would remain as a three -flat, which is consistent with multi -family buildings located along Prospect Avenue. The Village has supported similar requests for projects on the periphery of the central downtown area. Examples of projects include the Prospect Avenue Townhomes (PZ -38-07), Miller's Crossing Townhomes (ZBA-18-99), and most recently for the 122 S. Wille Street residence (PZ -04-14). Ms. Andrade stated that Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval for the following motion: "To adopt staff findings in the staff report as the findings of the Planning and Zoning Commission and recommend approval of: A Conditional Use to allow a dwelling unit located on the ground floor at the property located at 213 W. Prospect Avenue." Ms. Andrade stated the Village Board's decision is final for this case. Chairman Donnelly asked if the board had any questions for Staff. Hearing none, he called the Petitioner to the stand. Chairman Donnelly swore in Joseph Trebat Jr. 213 W. Prospect Avenue. Mr. Trebat stated that he is simply trying to refinance the property at 213 W. Prospect Avenue. He further explained because of the current zoning district the Subject Property couldn't be rebuilt if something catastrophic were to occur. Chairman Donnelly asked the board if there were any questions for the Petitioner, hearing none, he opened the case to the public. Hearing none, he closed the public portion of the meeting and brought the Planning and Zoning Commission- August 28th, 2014 PZ -27-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair discussion back to the board. Hearing no further discussion Commissioner Beattie, seconded by Commissioner Youngquist made the following motion: "To approve a Conditional Use to allow a dwelling unit located on the ground floor at the property located at 213 W. Prospect Avenue." UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Otteman, Fitzgerald, Beattie, Youngquist, Kueter, Mizwicki, Donnelly NAYS: None The motion was approved 7-0. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. After hearing three (3) additional cases Commissioner Otteman made a motion seconded by Commissioner Beattie and the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 pm. ," iej4a Moder, Admi 4 Mrative Assistant Othmunity Development Department Planning and Zoning Commission- August 28t", 2014 PZ -27-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (DWELLING UNIT ON GROUND FLOOR) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 213 WEST PROSPECT AVENUE, MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS WHEREAS, Joseph V. Trebat (“Petitioner”) has filed a petition for a Conditional Use permit with respect to property located at 213 West Prospect Avenue, (“Property”) and legally described as follows: Lot 1 in Krasnowski’s Resubdivision of Lots 51 and 52 in H. Roy Berry Company’s Colonial Manor being a Subdivision of part of the Northeast ¼ of Section 11 and part of the Northwest ¼ of Section 12, all in Township 41 North, Range 11, East of the Third Principal Meridian, according to the Plat of said Krasnowski’s Resubdivision registered in the Office of the Registrar of Titles of Cook County, Illinois, on October 5, 1972 as Document No. 2652715. Property Index Number: 08-12-112-031-0000; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner seeks a Conditional Use permit to allow a dwelling unit on the ground floor for the property located at 213 West Prospect Avenue; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on the request for a Conditional Use permit being the subject th of PZ-27-14 before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 28 day of August, 2014, pursuant to proper legal notice having been published in the Daily Herald th Newspaper on the 13 day of August, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has submitted its findings and recommendations to the Mayor and Board of Trustees in support of the request being the subject of PZ-27-14; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have given consideration to the request herein and have determined that the same meets the standards of the Village and that the granting of the proposed Conditional Use permit would be in the best interest of the Village. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS ACTING IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR HOME RULE POWERS: SECTION ONE: The recitals set forth are incorporated as findings of fact by the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect. SECTION TWO: The Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect do hereby grant a Conditional Use permit, to allow a dwelling unit on the ground floor at the property located at 213 West Prospect Avenue, as shown on the Plat of Survey dated July 14, 2014, a copy of which is attached and made a part of this Ordinance as Exhibit “A”. SECTION THREE: 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 FOUR 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. Page 2/2 PZ- 27-14, 213 West Prospect Avenue AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of September, 2014. ____________________________________ Arlene A. Juracek Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ M. Lisa Angell Village Clerk H:\\CLKO\\WIN\\ORDINANCE2\\2014\\C USE 27-14 213prospectavesept16 2014.doc f6 ORDER NUMBER: 140159 PLAT OF SURVEY BY MAmR w I-. JOHN M. HENRIKSEN SCALE: 1 INCH =15 FEET 576 E. NORTHWEST HIGHWAY DES PLAINES, ILLINOIS 60016 TEL. 047-7950301 FAX. 847-7934= PIN # AFOOT W W W.HENRWENSURVEY.COM " OF 08-12-112-031-0000 E LOT I IN KRASNOWSKI'S RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 51 AND 52 IN H ROY BERRY o3}r o�r�vr COMPANY'S COLONIAL MANOR BEING A SUBDIVISION OF PART OF THE 5 NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 11 AND PART OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION BUILDING LINES AND EASEMENTS, IF ANY, SHOWN 12, ALL IN TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 11, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL 0Ar5- MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF SAID KRASNOWSKI'S RESUBDIVISION 0.os=7��^ REGISTERED IN THE OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF TITLES OF COOK COUNTY, SHOWN ON THE RECORDED SUBDIVISION PLAT. CONSULT ILLINOIS, ON OCTOBER 5, 1972 AS DOCUMENT NO. 2652715. O:FT 062=7-vr COMMONLY KNOWN AS: 213 W. PROSPECT AVENUE o,oO=I-vr PROSPECT, IL BY LOCAL ORDINANCES, jlMOUNT rY 0l>=T o67 -r 'A D.12=I-Vr o.16=1 -I? 0[ lr 0.67-lavr f6 ORDER NUMBER: 140159 MAmR w I-. -N r V.'vlvm fs'19 SCALE: 1 INCH =15 FEET aMttMjWnj9M AFOOT 001 -IT 0.25=3- ORDEREDBY: JOSEPHTREBAT o.omvr 0ol=ae- o3}r o�r�vr OOL=VC 03F4Vr BUILDING LINES AND EASEMENTS, IF ANY, SHOWN o o:-vr 0Ar5- HEREON ARE BUILDING LINES AND EASEMENTS AS 0.os=7��^ SHOWN ON THE RECORDED SUBDIVISION PLAT. CONSULT 0.07-7T 0A 1- O:FT 062=7-vr LOCAL AUTHORITIES FOR BUILDING LINES ESTABLISHED o,oO=I-vr 06T7-vr BY LOCAL ORDINANCES, O.Io-I•vr 0.11-1-iT 0l>=T o67 -r PLEASE CHECK LEGAL DESCRIPTION WITH DEED D.12=I-Vr o.16=1 -I? 0[ lr 0.67-lavr o Mal-vr o.a-Maur COMPARE ALL POINTS BEFORE BUILDING AND REPORT 0,1 IY-I'w No oS ANY DISCREPANCY IMMEDIATELY. 016=1-f1r o.17 -r 700=11- r DIMENSIONS ARENOTTOBE ASSUMED FROM SCALING. :�d:,.141IIItS pt At AifilcS,. "tfflr'jiW • THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CONFORMS TO THE CURRENT KLE4018 MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR A BOUNDARY SURVEY. PROPERTY CORNER NOT STAKED PER CLRNTREQUEST. STATE OF [ LINOIS) COUNTY OF COOK) 4 JOHN M. HENRBCSEN, AN ILLINOIS PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE SURVEYED THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY AND THAT THE PLAT HEREON DRAWN IS A CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF SAID SURVEY. DIMENSIONS ARE SHOWN IN FEET DECIMAL PARTS THEREOF D LAIN", I[.] [4075 _ I91,I.L4.22144- ILLIWAS PROFESS NAL LAND SURVEYOR NO- Um LICENSE EXIPRES NOVEMBER 70, 2014. Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 N't'i I[ Prospect SUBJECT: PZ -23-14 / 600 WHEELING RD. / CONDITIONAL USE (GYMNASTICS SCHOOL) The Petitioner currently operates a gymnastics school at 550 Business Center Drive and would like to relocate the gymnastics school to 600 Wheeling Road. The subject property is zoned 11 Limited Industrial. A gymnastics school requires Conditional Use approval in the 11 District. Therefore, the Petitioner is seeking Conditional Use approval to allow a gymnastics school at 600 Wheeling Road. The Planning & Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing to review the request on Thursday, August 28, 2014, and by a vote of 7-0, recommended approval of a Conditional Use to allow a gymnastics school at 600 Wheeling Road, subject to the conditions listed in the Staff Report. Details of the proceedings and items discussed during the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing are included in the attached minutes. Please forward this memorandum and attachments to the Village Board for their review and consideration at their September 16, 2014 meeting. Staff will be present to answer any questions related to this matter. William J oney, Jr., ICP Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department CASE SUMMARY — PZ -23-14 LOCATION: PETITIONER: OWNER: PARCEL #: LOT SIZE: ZONING: 600 Wheeling Road The Gymnastics Shop — Julian Basler Northwest Suburban Council, Inc. Boy Scouts of America 03-35-103-006-0000 1.5 acres (65,571 sq. ft) I1 Limited Industrial LAND USE: Office and Warehouse Building REQUEST: Conditional Use approval for a Gymnastics School LOCATION MAP rlu Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department FROM: DATE: HEARING DATE: SUBJECT: I::�y K!I 3�111►`IE MEMORANDUM MOUNT PROSPECT PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JOSEPH P. DONNELLY, CHAIRPERSON CONSUELO ANDRADE, SENIOR PLANNER AUGUST 6, 2014 AUGUST 28, 2014 PZ -23-14 / 600 WHEELING RD. / CONDITIONAL USE (GYMNASTICS SCHOOL) / JULIAN BASLER A public hearing has been scheduled for the August 28, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting to review the application by Julian Basler (the "Petitioner"), regarding the property located at 600 Wheeling Road (the "Subject Property"). The Petitioner is seeking Conditional Use approval to operate a gymnastics school. The P&Z Commission hearing was properly noticed in the August 13, 2014 edition of the Daily Herald newspaper. In addition, the Petitioner has completed the required written notice to property owners within 250 -feet and Staff posted a Public Hearing sign on the Subject Property. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Subject Property is located on the west side of Wheeling Road, in the Kensington Business Center, and includes a 17,859 square foot office and warehouse building with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned I1 Limited Industrial and is bordered to the west by the R1 Single -Family Residence District, and to the north, east, and south by the I1 District. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The Petitioner operates a gymnastics school at 550 Business Center Drive, which is two buildings down from the Subject Property. The business has grown and the Petitioner would like to purchase the Subject Property and relocate the gymnastics school there. A gymnastics school is considered a vocational school and requires Conditional Use approval in the I1 District. The proposed floor plan indicates some of the office space would be converted to a parent viewing area, a workout room and a parent toddler area. The warehouse area would be converted to training areas consisting of uneven bars, tumbling floors, balance beams, trampolines and tumble tracks. The Petitioner provided a general description of the school's programs and age groups it serves. The school offers different classes throughout the year to various age groups. Classes would run on the hour and class sizes would vary from 3-26 students at a time, with a maximum of twenty six (26) students and five (5) staff at any given time. Only classes and practices would be held on-site; competitions or performance events would be held off-site. PZ -23-14 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 28, 2014 PARKING Page 3 The Petitioner anticipates a peak number of five (5) staff and twenty-six (26) students. Based on the peak number of employees and students anticipated, the gymnastics school will require a total of twenty-nine (29) parking spaces. The Plat of Survey indicates thirty (30) standard parking spaces with no accessible parking spaces. Per the Illinois Accessibility Code, a minimum of two (2) accessible parking spaces is required. Once two (2) accessible parking spaces are provided, the property would provide twenty-eight (28) parking spaces, which would not comply with the required parking for the gymnastics school with a peak number of five (5) staff and twenty-six (26) students. The Petitioner modified the proposal to include no more than twenty-five (25) students at any given time. This would bring down the parking requirements to twenty-eight (28). The following table summarizes the parking requirement: Tenant Classification Size (sq.ft.) Parking Requirement Spaces Required Gymnastics School 17,859 2 spaces per 3 employees 28 (5 employees, 25 students) plus 1 space per maximum number of students Total Spaces Required 28 Total Spaces Provided 28 (including 2 accessible) ADDITIONAL STAFF COMMENTS Planning- A parking lot striping plan indicating a minimum of two (2) accessible parking spaces, including signage, will be required. Each accessible parking space will be required to measure sixteen (16) feet wide, including an eight (8) foot wide diagonally striped access aisle. A U.S. Department of Transportation R7-8 (Reserved Parking) and R7 -I101 ($250 Fine) sign will be required to be permanently mounted in the center of the 16 -foot wide accessible parking space. Fire — An egress plan including, occupant loads, travel distances, egress widths, and common path of travel distances, will be required when the building plans are submitted for review. Further, a fire sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13 and an alarm system will be required. Fire sprinkler shop drawings, hydraulic calculations, fire alarm shop drawings with point to point wiring diagrams, battery load calculations, and equipment cut sheets will be required at time of building permit plan submittal. While these are issues to be addressed as part of the building permit process, these requirements are included as part of the Staff Report in an effort to ensure the Petitioner is aware of the requirements and submits the necessary documentation. CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS The standards for Conditional Uses are listed in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Village Zoning Ordinance and include seven specific findings 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; PZ -23-14 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 28, 2014 Page 4 • There is adequate provision for utilities, drainage, and design of access and egress to minimize congestion on Village streets; and The request is in compliance of the Conditional Use with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and other Village Ordinances. Per the Petitioner, the gymnastics school at 550 Business Center Drive has been in operation for seven (7) years without any issues. He is looking to expand the variety of classes he offers and is seeking to purchase the Subject Property and relocate the gymnastics school there. Staff has reviewed the Petitioner's request and is supportive. Other departments reviewed the Petitioner's proposal and did not object to the use or find that it would have an adverse impact on the adjacent properties. The gymnastics school is currently in operation at 550 Business Center Drive and has not had impacts on the adjacent properties. Conditional uses for gymnastics school have been approved for adjacent properties including 520, 550, and 900 Business Center Drive. RECOMMENDATION The gymnastics school meets the Conditional Use standards contained in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Zoning Ordinance subject to complying with the conditions listed below. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval of the following motion: "To approve a Conditional Use permit for a gymnastics school at 600 Wheeling Road, Case No. PZ -23-14 subject to the following conditions: 1) Limiting the peak number of staff to five (5) and students to twenty-five (25) at any given time. 2) Providing two (2) accessible parking spaces, including signage. 3) Compliance with all applicable Village Code requirements, including, but not limited to, fire code, lighting regulations, sign code regulations, and building regulations." The Village Board's decision is final for this case. I concur: Wi] G 1-C cxlnc�, AICP, Director of Community Development -,3&Z 2014\SIa1FRcpor1s\PZ-23-14600 WI—ling Road(CU- gylnnaslicsschool) doc MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ -23-14 PROPERTY ADDRESS: PETITIONER: PUBLICATION DATE: IaIca cU1V I:1D�' REQUEST Id Iota MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Hearing Date: August 28`', 2014 600 Wheeling Road The Gymnastics Shop- Julian Basler August 13`h, 2014 11lt�ti.�[IIi�lI17�1I1I1I17 Conditional Use approval for a Gymnastics School Agostino Filippone Thomas Fitzgerald Sharon Otteman William Beattie Keith Youngquist Jeanne Kueter Norbert Mizwicki Joseph Donnelly, Chairman None Consuelo Andrade, Senior Planner Brian Simmons, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: The Gymnastics Shop- Julian Basler Chairman Donnelly called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. Commissioner Beattie made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Youngquist to approve the minutes of the July 24`h, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting; the minutes were approved 7-0 with one Commissioner abstaining. After hearing one (1) additional case, Chairman Donnelly introduced Case PZ -23-14, 600 Wheeling Road and stated the case was Village Board Final. Ms. Andrade stated that the Petitioner for PZ -23-14 is seeking Conditional Use approval to operate a gymnastics school at 600 Wheeling Road. Ms. Andrade explained the Petitioner currently operates a gymnastics school at 550 Business Center Drive. The business has grown and the Petitioner would like to purchase 600 Wheeling Road and relocate the gymnastics school there. A gymnastics school is considered a vocational school and requires Conditional Use approval in the Il District Ms. Andrade stated the Subject Property includes a 17,859 square foot office and warehouse building with related improvements. The subject property is zoned I1 limited industrial and is bordered to the west by the R1 single-family residential district, and to the north, east, and south by the Il district. Planning and Zoning Commission- August 28th, 2014 PZ -23-14 Joseph Donnelly- Chair Ms. Andrade stated the plat of survey indicates thirty (30) standard parking spaces with no accessible parking spaces. Per the Illinois accessibility code, a minimum of two (2) accessible parking spaces is required. Ms. Andrade explained the Petitioner intends to renovate some of the office spaces into a parent viewing area, a workout room, and a parent toddler area. The warehouse area would be converted to training areas consisting of uneven bars, tumbling floors, balance beams, trampolines and tumble tracks. Ms. Andrade stated, per the Petitioner, the school offers different classes throughout the year to various age groups. Only classes and practices would be held on-site; competitions or performance events would be held off-site. She further stated, per the Petitioner's application, the Classes would run on the hour and class sizes would vary from 3-26 students at a time, with a maximum of twenty six (26) students and five (5) staff at any given time. Ms. Andrade explained, based on the peak number of employees and students anticipated the gymnastics school will require a total of twenty-nine (29) parking spaces. Ms. Andrade stated, however, once the parking lot is re -striped to provide the required two (2) accessible parking spaces, the property would provide a total of twenty-eight (28) parking spaces, which would not comply with the required parking for the gymnastics school with a peak number of five (5) staff and twenty-six (26) students. She further explained the Petitioner modified the proposal to include no more than five (5) staff and twenty-five (25) students at any given time. This would bring down the parking requirements to twenty- eight (28) parking spaces. Ms. Andrade summarized the standards for Conditional Uses as the following: • 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; • There is adequate provision for utilities, drainage, and design of access and egress to minimize congestion on Village streets; and • The request is in compliance of the Conditional Use with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and other Village Ordinances. Ms. Andrade stated, per the Petitioner, the gymnastics school at 550 Business Center Drive has been in operation for seven (7) years without any issues. Ms. Andrade stated Staff has reviewed the Petitioner's request and is supportive. Other departments reviewed the Petitioner's proposal and did not object to the use or find that it would have an adverse impact on the adjacent properties. The gymnastics school is currently in operation at 550 Business Center Drive and has not had impacts on the adjacent properties. Conditional uses for gymnastics schools or vocational schools have been approved for adjacent properties including 520, 550, and 900 Business Center Drive. Ms. Andrade stated based on Staff's review, Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approve of the following motion: Planning and Zoning Commission- August 28th, 2014 PZ -23-14 Joseph Donnelly- Chair "To approve a Conditional Use permit for a gymnastics school at 600 Wheeling Road, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report." The Village Board's decision is final for this case. Commissioner Beattie asked if a similar Conditional Use approval was needed when the Petitioner moved into their current space. Ms. Andrade stated that is correct. Commissioner Youngquist asked how big the Petitioner's current facility is. Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner has that information, she further explained their current space is similar to the Subject Property; however, they do not occupy the entire building. Commissioner Youngquist asked if there were any complaints as far as parking at the current school. Ms. Andrade stated Staff was not aware of any issues; however, as part of this request Staff received some concerns from residents wondering about the parking. Chairman Donnelly asked if the loading dock isn't going to be used for the business, could the Petitioners park cars there for additional parking. Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner could convert the loading dock into parking space. Chairman Donnelly swore in Julian Basler 2701 Park Street Rolling Meadows, Illinois and Kaylee Seibert 1160 Brandywine Lane Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Chairman Donnelly asked the Petitioner to address any issues with the new location such as moving, parking, etc. He asked if the proposed parent viewing room will increase the number of parking spots needed. Mr. Basler stated the current school has space for parent viewing already; however, the new one will be behind glass in an actual room as opposed to out on the gymnastics floor. He stated that at the current facility parking is never an issue and doesn't expect it to be at the new location. Chairman Donnelly asked if the new location is similar in size to their current location. Mr. Basler stated the new location is nearly three times bigger than their current 6,000 square foot space. The new location is roughly 17,900 square feet. He further explained the gymnastics part of the school has grown and with that the need for more equipment which takes up majority of the space. Chairman Donnelly asked what the average class size is. Mr. Basler stated they have three different types of classes varying with student/teacher ratios ranging from 3:1, 5:1, 8:1, but don't max out more than twenty-four (24) students. He stated that the amount of students per class would stay the same and he would like to offer a few different classes. Mr. Basler explained that certain classes run simultaneously throughout the gym. Planning and Zoning Commission- August 28th, 2014 PZ -23-14 Joseph Donnelly- Chair Commissioner Beattie stated he is concerned about the amount of students and feels it would be difficult to limit the amount of students to twenty-five. Mr. Basler stated he understood his concern and further explained he keeps the ratio of coaches to students low in order to help control the amount of students. Commissioner Beattie asked if they were open seven days a week. Mr. Basler stated they are open seven days a week and will only offer the birthday parties on Saturday evenings when classes aren't in session. Mr. Basler stated the building he is currently in is being sold and that is why he is looking to purchase the building at 600 Wheeling Road. He further stated that the dock would be converted into a pit in the future so parking would not be available in that location. Commissioner Mizwicki asked the hours of operation. Ms. Siebert stated they were Monday -Friday 3:30-8:45pm, Saturday 10-3:30pm, and Sunday 9-5:15pm. Mr. Basler stated that if they move into the new building the hours would be extended from 9:00-9:00pm. Commissioner Beattie asked if there have been any noise level issues with the residential neighbors. Mr. Basler and Ms. Siebert both stated there haven't been any issues brought to their attention. Chairman Donnelly asked if there were any further questions for the Petitioner, hearing none he opened the case for discussion to the public. Chairman Donnelly swore in Edward Kowalski 513 Eastman Court, Mount Prospect, Illinois. Mr. Kowalski asked if the Petitioner is affiliated with International Gymnastics. Mr. Basler stated they have no affiliation. Mr. Kowalski stated he is concerned about the trash containers that may be visible from the parking lot. He asked if they will be put away in the garages where they are intended to be stored. He further stated he is concerned that trucks and trailers will be kept overnight in the parking lot, and further asked if the dead tree and shrubbery on the north end of the property will be addressed if they move in to the subject property. Mr. Basler stated he would enclose the trash containers in order to shield them from view. He further addressed Mr. Kowalski's issues by stating no semis or trailers would be parking in the lot overnight; and finally stated that the dead tree will be removed and maintained by a landscaper. Chairman Donnelly asked if there were any further comments, hearing none he closed the public portion of the hearing and brought the discussion back to the board. Hearing no further discussion Commissioner Beattie made the motion seconded by Commissioner Fitzgerald to approve the following motion: "To approve a Conditional Use permit for a gymnastics school at 600 Wheeling Road, subject to the conditions listed in the staff reports." Planning and Zoning Commission- August 28th, 2014 PZ -23-14 Joseph Donnelly- Chair UPON ROLL CALL AYES: Fitzgerald, Beattie, Youngquist, Kueter, Mizwicki, Otteman, Donnelly NAYS: None Chairman Donnelly stated the motion was approved 7-0 and the Village Board decision is final for the case. After hearing two (2) additional cases Commissioner Beattie Commissioner Otteman made a motion seconded by Commissioner Beattie and the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 pm. Je nModer, Adm ntstrative Assistant C winunity Development Department Planning and Zoning Commission- August 28t', 2014 PZ -23-14 Joseph Donnelly- Chair Summary of Actions Requested The Proposed building i am trying to purchase on Wheeling Rd will be used as a gymnastics training center. Gymnastics can be broken into many different levels such as developmental Parent Tot classes, Pre school, Kindergarden , Boys gymnastics competitive level 1 through 10 or just recreational, Girls gymnastics competitive level 1 through 10 or just recreational, Tumbling and Trampoline, Power tumbling, Cheerleading tumbling, or Acrobatic. These are all disciplines of gymnastics. At my current location we train all of these at some aspect even though we don't compete all of them. My coach to student ratio is 1 to 3 or 1 to 5. III have 3 to 5 coaches usually coaching at one time so there won't be any parking issues. Zoning Request Im requesting to get special conditional use approval for 600 North Wheeling Road in Mount Prospect the building is locaated two buildings down from my current location 550 Business Center Drive where I currently teach gymnastics. I currently offer tumbling classes for teams like MPCC, Arlington Cowboys, Rolling Meadows Youth Football League, Prospect, Hersey, Elk Grove High School, Cheerleading and others Jr Highs. My gymnastics team has gone from 3 kids to 26 in the last two years and have seen growth as well in the recreational gymnastics classes. Im looking to expand into doing parent tot and kinder garden classes as well. The new space would allow me to provide more and different classes to people in Mount Prospect and the surrounding areas. My classes run on the hour with a max of 20 students and 3 to 5 coaches. A lot of kids car pool and parents do the drop off in and pick up we don't have any issues with parking and crowding. Standards for Conditional Use Approval 1. My current location is two buildings down from the proposed building I'd like to purchase. The new building will enable me to continue to coach kids. Also help kids to be active, give them a place to belong, grow as individual, I believe gymnastics is a tool to help build their confidence, self esteem, and help them overcome fears. 2. The current tenant is a non for profit as opposed to me I will be paying property taxes. I have a bigger stake in making sure I'm compliant and help the property values go up since I will eventually sell or pass along the building to my kids. Having a positive relationship with neighbors is an important aspect of staying in good standing in the community. Since Ive been in the industrial park theres never been an issue with my neighbors . Im still going to have the same neighbor on my east side he will just be on the other side of me now. 3. The proposed building will be no different than my current location. Its important to me to have a good looking building since that is the first impression that people get of my business. The outside of the building will remain the same therefore it will not change the character of the neighborhood. The proposed building won't change the light or air to the adjacent properties since I won't be changing the property. I don't believe there will be an addition to danger of fire, or drainage problems. I believe I will increase properties values since the current tenant is a non for profit and doesn't pay property taxes and I will. 4. 1 believe the current building complies with the adequate public utilities, access roads , and drainage. Since Im not changing the outside of the building there shouldn't be any issues. 5. The time of classes allow for easy in and out parking and don't conflict with parking regulations. I believe there will be no traffic congestion since there are two entrances and two exits. Also we currently don't have any parking issues right now so i don't think this will be an issue. 6. Ive been in my current location for 7 years the conditional use I'm trying to be approved for does deviate from the current objective. 7. Im not planning on changing the outer structure of the building only removing a false wall in the warehouse. The building is an industrial building but my use would be to use it for gymnastics training. A warehouse type of setting is required for gymnastics with high ceilings. The building itself is a great shape to have a gymnastics gym it is long and rectangular in shape. Gymnastics equipment takes up a lot of room by nature. Below is the area that is required for each even some space can be shared between events ex rings can be hung over the floor exercise Floor the size of a floor is 42 X 42 feet One balance beam takes up 8 feet wide by 40 feet length Uneven Bars and high bar take up 12 feet by 35 feet 35 feet Vault consists of a runway thats usually of a 4 foot wide 70 feet of run way and 18 feet of landing area Pommel Hoarse and Parallel Bars 12 X 14 feet Rings 8 X 18 feet Text eo��oz- :�=afa�a � N 130 •• o�y � 32'-35' 31'-0' O N o p m m� C) C) GZs z as � c�i o � D O Fav O 0 r a N.N -N o— _ b T ma� T a _moo a C cu — - zl m O _ _ m _ b'b' 21'-105' y A b D m m m Om 33'-4' �ocnr,oN of EY'r„5TM^6 wnTErz MA,N ', n y CL It <0 0. L , — w w LLJ LO A BUILDING FEATURES: ■ 17,520 SF with +/- 6,000 SF of Office ■ 1.5 Acre Site ■ 29 Parking Spaces ■ 2 Interior 57' Deep Truck Docks with I Dock Leveler ■ 16' Ceiling Height ■ Located in prestigious Kensington Business Center ■ 600 Amps, 270/480 Volt, 3Phase Power ■ Fully Sprinklered ■ 30'x3 I' Bay Size ■ Zoned 1-1 (Limited Industrial) ■ Sale Price: $1,000,000 ($57.07 PSF) FOR MORE INFORMATION: RAY OKIGAWA Associate Vice President Chicagolond Direct: 847.246.9632 Commercial ray@chicagotandcommercial.com 1240W. Nonhwest Hwy., Palatine, IL 60067 LEAsiN,_ , SALES, TENANT AovisoRY I MANAGE11ENT w w w. c h i c ago l a n d c o m m e r c i a l. c o m ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 600 WHEELING ROAD MOUNT PROSPECT, ILLINOIS WHEREAS, Julian Basler, The Gymnastics Shop (“Petitioner”) has filed a petition for a Conditional Use permit for the property located at 600 Wheeling Road, (“Property”) and legally described as follows: LOT 5 IN KENSINGTON CENTER PHASE 1, BEING A SUBDIVISION IN THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 34, AND THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 42 NORTH, RANGE 11 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. Property Index Number: 03-35-103-006-0000; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner seeks a Conditional Use permit to allow a gymnastics school for the property located at 600 Wheeling Road; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on the request for a Conditional Use permit being the subject of PZ- 23-14 before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Village of Mount Prospect on the 28th day of August, 2014, pursuant to proper legal notice having been published in the Daily Herald Newspaper on the th 13 day of August, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has submitted its findings and recommendations to the President and Board of Trustees in support of the request being the subject of PZ-23-14; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have given consideration to the request herein and have determined that the same meets the standards of the Village and that the granting of the proposed Conditional Use permit would be in the best interest of the Village. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION ONE: The recitals set forth are incorporated as findings of fact by the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect. SECTION TWO: The Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect do hereby grant a Conditional Use permit for a gymnastics school for the property located at 600 Wheeling Road, as shown on the Plat of Survey dated June 11, 2014, a copy of which is attached and made part of this Ordinance as Exhibit “A.” SECTION THREE: Approval of the Conditional Use permit is subject to complying with the following conditions: 1. Limiting the peak number of staff to five (5) and students to twenty-five (25) at any given time; and 2. Providing two (2) accessible parking spaces, including signage; and 3. Compliance with all applicable Village Code requirements, including, but not limited to, fire code, lighting regulations, sign code regulations and building regulations. SECTION FOUR: The Village Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to record a certified copy of this Ordinance with the Recorder of Deeds of Cook County. Page 2/2 PZ- 23-14, 600 Wheeling Road SECTION FIVE: 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 September 2014. ____________________________________ Arlene A. Juracek Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ M. Lisa Angell Village Clerk H:\\CLKO\\WIN\\ORDINANCE2\\2014\\C USE600WheelingRdgymnasticsschoolSept2014.doc A.L.T.A. / A.C.S.M. LAND TITLE SURVEY PIN# 03-35-103-006-0000 + + warms \ t..wn vrarr�agwx rNe •ounc ernerirxtnwv_ + \ Brw .man tauxtotts.uo stcasatr rn xew. + t� sJin aacnort�Br:rBit� Ir�otexrtealdso Bneuo nrwe�Lr I�ttmao � aunreran tTB �� nser�cxworoscnitncnaa. } MWalA1Y 1R{1TM �+ b aECO1r1wE ttaK IiltCl LVCM /1Rf 11�yt TIIY.iIYNtl Opy�lryy(��� Wt�nwwxA wlfaOWCfJ��p• r�libltA B4xm UIatL li. ana I— d/P iut \ a FROF✓>EYi1Q& racmt lse d tm S I�w Mrt'�[+vs � Carse �nar+ ssrry �..�. I I I I I I PREP•Rm FOR: �RS[lv�g6A.R��^4JNM ` `� �st!tl�rtanax sxen na rr. Cx�r•rrr+YSInYCp�fY1. Wattll�x��RAiYL! 11i Y11fI0k s�OMrt 11YiT1CMi�l1MY11A MI10��(M w�noroo�wirtssa. �.wrmx + \ taIMlYlJ�fl,ptM�llpMOO1�M✓<Blllplrt 6 `7 "+ey '`°- �:� �� • ` ��' aiY Sou1MK�f �.. ,•. Wt�nwwxA wlfaOWCfJ��p• SiA AOYc (li Gt 136-i MC FA1t ,rr aJ.• •aenr u \ e ng— 0 � `�iavo ata:s atr + � 7 A/ t� a .ab•u,. i aw'sprls • rats' m I 'I I ` � rouo ttga} aa• IsWJllt a rJa^ qn� Wl�flp� � _ JOB NO,:— ta�ew �-OR�Wtl BY: 4a Cx�r•rrr+YSInYCp�fY1. Wattll�x��RAiYL! 11i Y11fI0k s�OMrt 11YiT1CMi�l1MY11A MI10��(M NEKOLA SURVEY, INC.^ taIMlYlJ�fl,ptM�llpMOO1�M✓<Blllplrt WW�pQ i% LOO eJ. "+ey '`°- �:� +�rucanaa•*wwenerrr�rs neia+eeso ow n. ]tlfRCV iR�st• iGMMVOT AD.. si. YO] ■O LeN'd iiq Ol[. 1LLtpCtli iDNA 8907 i26 -t �.. ,•. Wt�nwwxA wlfaOWCfJ��p• SiA AOYc (li Gt 136-i MC FA1t J � °�t`rpzJs•' ! Carse �nar+ ssrry �..�. YO! �YHs���4a Village of Mount Prospect Mount Prospect Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 SUBJECT: PZ -25-14 /13 W. RAND RD. / CONDITIONAL USE & VARIATION The Petitioner proposes to construct a McDonald's drive-through restaurant with related improvements. The proposed development requires Conditional Use approval to allow a drive-through restaurant and a Variation to the parking lot setback along the west property line. The restaurant will include two drive-through ordering lanes at the south end of the building that would taper down to one pick-up lane along the east building elevation. Parking would be provided on all sides of the building. The existing parking lot setback measuring five and four fifths (5.8) foot along the west property line would be maintained. Since the Village Code requires a minimum ten (10) foot parking lot setback, the Petitioner is seeking a Variation to maintain the five and four fifths (5.8) foot parking lot setback along the west property line. The existing access to Kensington Road and Rand Road (via the adjacent property to the east) would be maintained. The Planning & Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing to review the requests on Thursday, August 28, 2014, and by a vote of 7-0, recommended approval of the following motions: 1) A Conditional Use to operate a drive-through restaurant; 2) A Variation to allow a five and four fifths (5.8) foot parking lot setback along the west property line, subject to the following conditions: a. Development of the site in general conformance with the site plan prepared by Watermark Engineering dated August 15, 2014. b. Development of the building in conformance with the elevations prepared by McDonald's U.S. Research and Development dated July 10, 2014. c. Development of the site in general conformance with the landscape plan prepared by Watermark Engineering dated August 15, 2014, but revised to comply with Code d. Submittal of a photometric (lighting) plan and fixture cut sheets that comply with Village Code requirements. e. Compliance with all Development, Fire, Building, and other Village Codes and regulations including signage. Details of the proceedings and items discussed during the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing are included in the attached minutes. Please forward this memorandum and attachments to the Village Board for their review and consideration at their September 16, 2014 meeting. Staff will be present to answer any questions related to this matter. �� William S C oney, Jr., AI Village of Mount Prospect MountPtnspect Community Development Department CASE SUMMARY — PZ -25-14 LOCATION: 13 W. Rand Road PETITIONER: Goldstine, Skrodzki, Russian, Nemec and Hoff, Ltd. for McDonald's USA, LLC OWNERS: Surender Puri and Saroj Puri PARCEL #: 03-27-301-022 and 03-27-301-023 LOT SIZE: 1.914 acres (83,354 sq.ft.) ZONING: B3 Community Shopping LAND USE: Commercial REQUEST: 1) Conditional Use for a drive-through 2) Variation to allow a five and four fifths (5.8) foot parking lot setback along the west property line 3) A Special Use to allow an electronic message center (EMC) with a display period of less than thirty (30) seconds 4) Variation to allow an EMC with multiples colors 5) Variation to increase the number of menu boards 6) Variation to increase the size of menu boards LOCATION MAP 13 W. Rand Rd. 01 t - m mfr '• 0„ r .� ^ 4 "ry r Ari M iw'� r{ - e �R - r i` __b 7qI 6 f� M Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: HEARING DATE: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND MOUNT PROSPECT PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JOSEPH P. DONNELLY, CHAIRPERSON CONSUELO ANDRADE, SENIOR PLANNER AUGUST 7, 2014 AUGUST 28, 2014 PZ -25-14 / 13 W. RAND ROAD / CONDITIONAL USE (DRIVE-THROUGH) & VARIATIONS (PARKING LOT SETBACK, SIGNS) & SPECIAL USE (EMC) A public hearing has been scheduled for the August 28, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting to review the application by Goldstine, Skrodzki, Russian, Nemec and Hoff, Ltd. for McDonald's USA, LLC (the "Petitioner") regarding the property located at 13 W. Rand Road (the "Subject Property"). The Petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use for a drive-through restaurant, a Variation to the parking lot setback along the west property line, a Special Use to allow an electronic message center (EMC) with a display period of less than thirty (30) seconds, and Sign Variations to allow an EMC with multiples colors, two menu boards, and increase the allowable sign area for the menu boards. The Planning and Zoning Commission hearing was properly noticed in the August 13, 2014 edition of the Daily Herald Newspaper. The Petitioner completed the required written notice to property owners within 250 -feet and Staff posted a Public Hearing sign on the Subject Property. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Subject Property is a located on the north side of Kensington Road, south of W. Rand Road, and contains a vacant commercial building with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned B3 Community Shopping and is bordered to the west, north, and east by B3 Community Shopping and by the RA Single Family Residence to the south. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The Petitioner proposes to demolish the existing building and construct a drive-through restaurant with related improvements. The project requires Conditional Use approval for the drive-through and Variations to the required parking lot setback, foundation landscaping, and signage. The various elements of the proposal are outlined below. Site Plan —The site plan indicates that a 5,311 square foot building will be constructed. The restaurant will include two drive-through ordering lanes at the south end of the building that would taper down to one pick-up lane along the east building elevation. Conditional Use approval is required for the drive-through lanes. The site plan indicates parking would be provided on all sides of the building. The parking lot would maintain the existing parking lot setback along the west property line, which measures approximately five and four fifths (5.8) feet when the Village Code requires a minimum ten (10) foot parking lot setback. The Petitioner is seeking Variation approval to allow the five and four fifths (5.8) foot parking lot setback along the west property line. PZ -25-14 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 28, 2014 Page 3 The Subject Property currently includes has an access drive from Kensington Road. The property has access to Rand Road via the adjacent property to the east. Neither access drives are signalized. The proposed improvements will maintain the existing access drives. Lot Coverage- The Village Code allows a maximum of seventy-five (75) percent overall lot coverage. The existing overall lot coverage is approximately fifty-nine (59) percent. The proposed development will reduce the overall lot coverage to fifty-two (52) percent. Parking — The Village Code requires twelve (12) parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area for a drive-through restaurant. For the purposes of determining off-street parking requirements for restaurant uses, the areas devoted primarily for storage, restrooms, and corridors used solely for accessing these areas are not included in the floor area used to determine the parking requirements. Therefore, the proposed restaurant will require fifty- three (53) parking spaces based on approximately 4,401 square feet of floor area. The Petitioner's proposal will exceed the parking requirements by providing fifty-nine (59) parking spaces. Village Code requires eight (8) stacking spaces for the first window and two (2) stacking spaces for each additional window. The proposed drive-through restaurant will include one drive -up window on the east side of the building. Therefore only eight (8) stacking spaces will be required. The site plan indicates over eight (8) stacking spaces will be provide for the drive -up window. Traffic - The Petitioner submitted a traffic impact study. The study concluded that the existing access drives, which will be maintained, provide excellent flexibility. Additional access on Rand Road or Kensington Road is not requested nor needed. The proposed drive-thru stacking will provide ample stacking and will not detrimentally impact on-site circulation. The study further concludes the proposed development will provide sufficient parking for peak customer and employee demands. Trash Enclosure - The site plan indicates a trash enclosure will be located to the southeast of the building. The detail plan indicates the trash enclosure will be constructed to match the principal building. The enclosure will measures six (6) feet in height and will be constructed out of brick that will match the brick used for the principal building. Mechanical and Utility Equipment- Roof plans were not submitted. All rooftop mechanical equipment will be required to be completely hidden from view. The site plan indicates a ground mounted transformer. The Village Code requires screening of ground mounted mechanical and utility equipment. The Petitioner will be required to submit equipment cut sheets indicating the height and to provide the required screening. Building Elevations - The attached elevations indicate the building materials will include brick, tile, metal canopies, and corrugated metal along the roof line The plans do not indicate the brick size. Detailed elevation plans indicating the brick size and height will be required. Modular/standard brick size shall be used. Landscaping - The attached landscape plan details the proposed plant materials and sizes. As currently drawn, the landscape plan does not comply with the landscape requirements. The landscape plan shall be revised to address the following comments: 1. Replacing the Frontier Elm trees, which are prohibited, with recommended shade trees. 2. Replacing at least fifty percent (50%) of the deciduous shrubs with evergreen shrubs. 3. Providing one additional shade tree along the north property line to provide a total of three (3) shade trees at the equivalent of not more than seventy five feet (75') apart. 4. Providing perimeter landscaping along the south property line. Plantings shall be placed in clusters, containing a minimum of seven (7) shrubs per cluster, spaced at intervals of approximately thirty five feet PZ -25-14 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 28, 2014 Page 4 (35') along the property line. A shade tree shall be provided at the equivalent of not more than seventy five feet (75') apart. Providing a minimum of three (3) shade trees at the equivalent of not more than seventy five feet (75') apart along that portion of the west property line abutting the parking spaces. Providing a minimum of two (2) shade trees at the equivalent of not more than seventy five feet (75') apart along that portion of the east property line abutting the parking spaces. Replacing some of the plantings proposed at the base of the freestanding signs with evergreens shrubs. All planting beds shall be mulched in their entirety with shredded bark or other similar material. The Zoning Ordinance requires the installation of an automatic underground sprinkling system. An irrigation plan was not submitted and will be required for the proposed development. Lighting Plan — The plans indicate light poles and building lighting will be provided to illuminate the site. The photometric plan indicates light levels that exceed the Village Code limitations on lighting as measured at the lot lines. The light levels at the west and east property line exceed the maximum .5 foot-candles permitted. The light levels at the west lot line measure up to .6 foot-candles and at the east lot line measures up to 1.1 foot-candles when a maximum of .5 foot-candles is permitted. Fixture cut sheets were not provided for the parking lot light and wall mounted fixtures. The Petitioner is not seeking relief from the Village's lighting regulations and is required to modify the plan and submit fixture cut sheets for all exterior lighting that comply with Sections 14.314 and 14.2219. Signal — The attached sign package illustrates the proposed signs for the Subject Property. A freestanding sign will be provided at each access drive. The freestanding sign proposed along Rand Road will include an electronic message center (EMC). The sign area will exceed the maximum area seventy-five (75) square feet permitted. The sign area will measure approximately seventy-seven and one half (77.5) square feet when a maximum of seventy-five (75) square feet is permitted. The Petitioner is not seeking a variation request to increase the area of the freestanding sign. The Petitioner will be required to reduce the sign area for the freestanding sign that includes the EMC to a maximum seventy-five (75) square feet. The EMC would consist of a display period of less than thirty (30) seconds, which requires Special Use approval. The sign would be subject to the Village Sign Code's minimum ten (10) second display time before changing. The electronic message center would consist of text and graphic(s) on a colored background. The graphic(s) would be an image that correlates with the text being displayed. Since the Village Sign Code requires uniformity in color, appearance, and font, the Petitioner is requesting a Variation to allow an electronic message center consisting of multiple colors. Because the proposed drive-through will include two ordering lanes, two menu boards are proposed. The Village Sign Code permits only one menu board for a drive-through restaurant. Each menu board will measure forty-one (41) square feet when a maximum of thirty-two (32) square feet is permitted. The Petitioner is seeking Variation approval to allow two (2) menu boards each measuring forty-one (41) square feet. The plans also indicate wall signs on each building elevation and directional signs. The business identification on the directional signs will be subject to a maximum of ten percent (10%) of the area of the sign. The Petitioner is not seeking Variations for the wall or directional signs. Compliance with the Village Sign Code regulations will be required. The freestanding signs along the property lines will be subject to a minimum setback of five (5) feet from the property lines and to be located outside of the sight triangles. PZ -25-14 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 28, 2014 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION Page 5 The Comprehensive Land Use Map designates the Subject Property as Community Commercial. The Petitioner's proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's designation. CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS The standards for Conditional Uses are listed in Section 14.203.F.8 of the Village Zoning Ordinance and include seven specific findings 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 Per the Petitioner, the proposed improvements will be an investment that will be beneficial rather than diminish or impair property values. The new drive-through restaurant will replace an outdated vacant building and will be consistent with the previous use on the Subject Property. The site currently provides utilities and access. The proposed improvements will provide all necessary drainage and will maintain the existing access drives from Kensington and Rand Roads. The traffic study reviewed the site to ensure the Subject Property was appropriate for a drive-through establishment and would not have a negative impact on traffic. The Petitioner further points out that the ordering speakers will not be detrimental due to the considerable distance from any residence. The closest residence is located 350 feet away. The ordering speakers will include automatic volume controls, which will adjust the outbound volume based on the outdoor ambient noise levels. The volume will reduce once ambient noise levels naturally decrease at night. The proposed landscaping will aid in buffering the noise. Staff has reviewed the Petitioner's request for a drive-through restaurant and feels that it meets the standards for a Conditional Use. The development has been designed as to not have a detrimental impact or be injurious. The proposed development will utilize the existing access drives and has been designed to ensure safe and efficient traffic circulation within the site. The ordering speakers will be located away from the residents and will include automatic volume controls and landscaping to buffer the noise. The use as a drive-through restaurant complies with the Comprehensive Plan and will be constructed according to Village Codes. VARIATION STANDARDS 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 list is a summary of these findings: Would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located; Lack of desire to increase financial gain; and Protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character. Prior to submittal, the Petitioner discussed the proposal with Staff. The site design, including maintaining the existing parking lot setback along the west property line, was determined to be the preferred design from a safety PZ -25-14 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 28, 2014 Page 6 and operations standpoint. Village Staff is supportive of the Variation request to allow the five and four fifths (5.8) foot parking lot setback along the west property line and believes that it would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood as it would be consistent with the existing conditions. SPECIAL USE STANDARDS Required findings for Special Use requests are contained in Section 7.720 of the Village's Sign Code; the following list is a summary of these findings: • Protection of public safety and welfare; • Harmony with the scale and architecture of nearby buildings and signs; • Lack of negative impacts on adjacent properties or signs; and • Compliance with other provisions of the Sign Regulations. Per the Petitioner, the Subject Property is set back from the street and has limited visibility to Rand Road. The electronic message center will provide the site with the visibility necessary to make it viable for commercial use. The sign will serve the public convenience by providing sufficient advance notice of McDonald's in order to allow the public to make the traffic movements necessary to enter the site. The electronic message center will be placed near the bottom of the freestanding sign and will be unobtrusive. Provided the electronic message center complies with the minimum ten (10) second display period before changing, Staff is supportive of the Petitioner's Special Use request to allow an electronic message center with a display period of less than thirty (30) seconds. Additionally, the proposed sign would be consistent with signage located on other commercial properties in the Village. SIGN VARIATION STANDARDS Required findings for sign variations are contained in Section 7.725 of the Village of Mount Prospect Sign Code. The section contains specific findings, listed below, that must be made in order to approve a variation: • The sign allowed under code regulations will not reasonably identify the business; • The hardship is created by unique circumstances and not serve as a 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 materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood; and • 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 of the neighborhood; and be in harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. The Petitioner is seeking sign Variations to allow an electronic message center including multiple colors and graphics, two menu boards and increase the allowable area for the menu boards. Per the Petitioner the Variation request to allow an EMC with multiple colors and graphics is necessary in order to have an effective sign for the Subject Property, which has limited visibility due to the surrounding commercial development. The lot layout and lack of visibility from the Rand Road roadway requires an effective sign. The Village has approved electronic message centers that consist of text and multi -colored graphics provided the displays comply with the Village Sign Code's design guidelines, which call for architecturally pleasing signs that are legible, brief, simple, orderly, and compatible with the building they identify. Staff recommends adding conditions of approval limiting the number and area occupied by graphics to two (2) and up to twenty five (25) percent of the overall electronic message center area. Regarding the text, Staff recommends a condition of PZ -25-14 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 28, 2014 Page 7 approval requiring any text displayed to be single uniform in color. These conditions of approval would be consistent with prior approvals for Northwest Assembly of God (PZ -16-12), Culvers (PZ -06-14), and Langostino's Seafood Restaurant (PZ -19-14). Regarding the number and size of menu boards, the Petitioner states the second menu board is warranted as the proposed drive-through restaurant will include two ordering lanes versus a typical drive-through restaurant with only one. Two drive-through ordering lanes are efficient and provide better customer service than a traditional single lane. Two menu boards are necessary in order to make the drive-through work. The second menu board will not have a detrimental impact. The menu boards will be located at the back of the building, which will be significantly setback from adjacent properties. Staff is supportive of the Variation request to allow the second menu board. The Village previously supported a variation allowing two menu boards for Chick-fil-A in 2011 (PZ -13-11). Regarding the size of the menu board, the Petitioner states the larger size is necessary in order to convey the variety of menu options in a legible way and allow for easy changes of menu items as the menu changes during the day. The Petitioner points out that the menu board cabinets include mechanical areas that do not convey any information but are calculated in the sign area. The menu boards would comply if the mechanical areas of the sign where not included. Staff is supportive of the second menu board and larger menu boards. The menu boards would be located internally to the property and would not be detrimental to the surrounding properties. The Village has previously approved variations for larger menu boards. The Village granted a variation allowing a thirty-five (35) square foot menu board for Panera (PZ -22-11). This year, the Village granted a Variation allowing a forty-six (46) square foot menu board for Culvers (PZ -06-14). RECOMMENDATION Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval of the following motions: "To approve: 1) A Conditional Use to operate a drive-through restaurant; 2) A Variation to allow a five and four fifths (5.8) foot parking lot setback along the west property line, subject to the following conditions: a. Development of the site in general conformance with the site plan prepared by Watermark Engineering dated August 15, 2014. b. Development of the building in conformance with the elevations prepared by McDonald's U.S. Research and Development dated July 10, 2014. c. Development of the site in general conformance with the landscape plan prepared by Watermark Engineering dated August 15, 2014, but revised to comply with Code d. Submittal of a photometric (lighting) plan and fixture cut sheets that comply with Village Code requirements. e. Compliance with all Development, Fire, Building, and other Village Codes and regulations including signage. The Village Board's decision is final for the motions above. Based on the Staff's review of the proposed signs, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission approve the following motion: PZ -25-14 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting August 28, 2014 Page 8 1) A Special Use to allow an electronic message center with a display period of less than thirty (30) seconds, subject to the following conditions: a. Providing a static display image. b. Providing a minimum display period often (10) seconds before changing; and c. Compliance with the standards for electronic message centers as listed in Section 7.330 (A) of the Sign Code." 2) A Variation to allow an electronic message center with multiple colors, as shown on the attached exhibit prepared by Watermark Engineering dated July 17, 2014, subject to the following conditions: a. Any text displayed on the message center shall be in a single uniform color. b. Up to two (2) images may be displayed in conjunction with the text and may be multiple colors. c. The total area occupied by the graphic(s) shall not exceed twenty five (25) percent of the overall electronic message center area. 3) A Variation to allow two (2) menu boards. 4) A Variation to allow menu boards measuring forty-one (41) square feet in area, as shown on the attached exhibits prepared by Watermark Engineering the dated July 17, 2014." The Planning & Zoning Commission's decision is final for these sign requests. I concur: W' lli J. Cooney, AICP Director of Community Development H TLAMPIanning & Zoning COMM\P&Z 2011\S1aRRcporIAPZ-25-1i U W, Rand RD (CU Drive-d—gh & VAR- Parking Setback, & Signage) docs MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ -25-14 PROPERTY ADDRESS: PETITIONER: PUBLICATION DATE: PIN NUMBER: Hearing Date: August 28th, 2014 13 W. Rand Road Goldstine, Skrodzki, Russian, Nemec and Hoff, Ltd. for McDonald's USA, LLC August 13th, 2014 03-27-301-022 and 03-27-301-023 REQUEST 1) Conditional Use for drive-through 2) Variation to allow a five and four fifths (5.8) foot parking lot setback along the west property line 3) A Special Use to allow an electronic message center with a display period of less than thirty (30) seconds 4) Variation to allow an EMC with multiple colors 5) Variation to increase the number of menu boards 6) Variation to increase the size of menu boards MEMBERS PRESENT: Agostino Filippone Thomas Fitzgerald Sharon Otteman William Beattie Keith Youngquist Jeanne Kueter Norbert Mizwicki Joseph Donnelly, Chairman MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Consuelo Andrade, Senior Planner Brian Simmons, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: Goldstine, Skrodzki, Russian, Nemec and Hoff, Ltd. for McDonald's USA, LLC Chairman Donnelly called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. Commissioner Beattie made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Youngquist to approve the minutes of the July 24th, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting; the minutes were approved 7-0 with one Commissioner abstaining. After hearing three (3) additional cases, Chairman Donnelly introduced Case PZ -25-14, 13 W. Rand Road and stated the case was Village Board Final. Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner for PZ -25-14 is requesting a Conditional Use for a drive-through restaurant, a Variation to the parking lot setback along the west property line, a Special Use to allow an electronic message center (EMC) with a display period of less than thirty (30) seconds, and Sign Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting- August 28th, 2014 PZ -25-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair Variations to allow an EMC with multiples colors, two menu boards, and increase the allowable sign area for the menu boards for the property at 13 W. Rand Road. Ms. Andrade explained the Subject Property is a located on the north side of Kensington Road, south of W. Rand Road, and contains a vacant commercial building with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned B3 Community Shopping and is bordered to the west, north, and east by B3 Community Shopping and by the RA Single Family Residence to the south. Ms. Andrade further explained the site currently contains a vacant one-story 4,960 sq.ft. building which was formerly occupied by Bakers Square. The Subject Property currently includes an access drive from Kensington Road. The property has access to Rand Road via the adjacent property to the east. Ms. Andrade stated the proposed improvements include demolishing the existing building and constructing a drive-through restaurant with related improvements. The site plan indicates that a 5,311 square foot McDonalds building will be constructed. The proposed improvements will maintain the existing access drives. Ms. Andrade stated per the site plan, parking would be provided on all sides of the building. The proposed restaurant will require fifty-three (53) parking spaces. The Petitioner's proposal will exceed the parking requirements by providing fifty-nine (59) parking spaces. Ms. Andrade further explained the proposed development would maintain the existing parking lot setback along the west property line, which measures approximately five and four fifths (5.8) feet when the Village Code requires a minimum ten (10) foot parking lot setback. The Petitioner is seeking Variation approval to allow the five and four fifths (5.8) foot parking lot setback along the west property line. Ms. Andrade stated the restaurant will include two drive-through ordering lanes at the south end of the building that would taper down to one pick-up lane along the east building elevation. Village Code requires eight (8) stacking spaces for the first window and two (2) stacking spaces for each additional window. The proposed drive-through restaurant will include one drive -up window on the east side of the building. Therefore only eight (8) stacking spaces will be required. The site plan indicates over eight (8) stacking spaces will be provide for the drive -up window which complies with Village Code. Ms. Andrade stated the proposed building elevation plans indicate the building materials will include brick, tile, metal canopies, and corrugated metal along the roof line. Ms. Andrade stated the proposed landscape and photometric plan indicate the proposed plantings and lighting for the site. Both require minor revisions in order to comply with Village Code. She further explained the Petitioner is not seeking relief from the Village's landscape or lighting regulations. Ms. Andrade stated a freestanding sign will be provided at each access drive along with a directional sign. Because the proposed drive-through will include two ordering lanes, two menu boards are proposed, which require Variation approval. Ms. Andrade explained the proposed freestanding sign along Rand Road will include an electronic message center (EMC) with a display period of less than thirty (30) seconds, which requires Special Use approval. Further, the electronic message center would consist of text and graphic(s) on a colored background. The graphic(s) would be an image that correlates with the text being displayed. Since the Village Sign Code requires uniformity in color, appearance, and font, the Petitioner is requesting a Variation to allow an electronic message center consisting of multiple colors. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting- August 28`", 2014 PZ -25-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair Ms. Andrade further explained the sign area will measure approximately seventy-seven and one half (77.5) square feet when a maximum of seventy-five (75) square feet is permitted. The Petitioner is not seeking a variation request to increase the area of the freestanding sign and will be required to reduce the sign area for the freestanding sign that includes the EMC to a maximum seventy-five (75) square feet. Ms. Andrade stated the menu boards will measure forty-one (41) square feet when a maximum of thirty- two (32) square feet is permitted. The Petitioner is seeking Variation approval to allow forty-one (41) square foot menu boards. Ms. Andrade summarized the standards for a Conditional Use as the following: • 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; Ms. Andrade stated per the Petitioner, the proposed improvements will be an investment that will be beneficial rather than diminish or impair property values. The new drive-through restaurant will replace an outdated vacant building and will be consistent with the previous use on the Subject Property. The site currently provides utilities and access. She further explained the proposed improvements will provide all necessary drainage and will maintain the existing access drives from Kensington and Rand Roads. The traffic study reviewed the site to ensure the Subject Property was appropriate for a drive-through establishment and would not have a negative impact on traffic. Ms. Andrade stated, per the Petitioner, the ordering speakers will not be detrimental due to the considerable distance from any residence. The closest residence is located 350 feet away. The ordering speakers will include automatic volume controls, which will adjust the outbound volume based on the outdoor ambient noise levels. The volume will reduce once ambient noise levels naturally decrease at night. The proposed landscaping will aid in buffering the noise. Ms. Andrade stated Staff has reviewed the Petitioner's request for a drive-through restaurant and feels that it meets the standards for a Conditional Use. The development has been designed as to not have a detrimental impact or be injurious. The proposed development will utilize the existing access drives and has been designed to ensure safe and efficient traffic circulation within the site. The ordering speakers will be located away from the residents and will include automatic volume controls and landscaping to buffer the noise. The use as a drive-through restaurant complies with the Comprehensive Plan and will be constructed according to Village Codes. Ms. Andrade summarized the standards for a Variation as the following: • Would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located; • Lack of desire to increase financial gain; and • Protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character. Ms. Andrade stated prior to submittal, the Petitioner discussed the proposal with Staff. The site design, including maintaining the existing parking lot setback along the west property line, was determined to be Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting- August 28`h, 2014 PZ -25-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair the preferred design from a safety and operations standpoint. Village Staff is supportive of the Variation request to allow the five and four fifths (5.8) foot parking lot setback along the west property line and believes that it would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood as it would be consistent with the existing conditions. Ms. Andrade stated the required findings for Special Use requests as the following: • Protection of public safety and welfare; • Harmony with the scale and architecture of nearby buildings and signs; • Lack of negative impacts on adjacent properties or signs; and • Compliance with other provisions of the Sign Regulations. Ms. Andrade stated per the Petitioner, the Subject Property is set back from the street and has limited visibility to Rand Road. The electronic message center will provide the site with the visibility necessary to make it viable for commercial use. The sign will serve the public convenience by providing sufficient advance notice of McDonald's in order to allow the public to make the traffic movements necessary to enter the site. The electronic message center will be placed near the bottom of the freestanding sign and will be unobtrusive. She further stated, provided the electronic message center complies with the minimum ten (10) second display period before changing, Staff is supportive of the Petitioner's Special Use request to allow an electronic message center with a display period of less than thirty (30) seconds. Additionally, the proposed sign would be consistent with signage located on other commercial properties in the Village. Ms. Andrade summarized the required findings for sign variations as the following: • The sign allowed under code regulations will not reasonably identify the business; • The hardship is created by unique circumstances and not serve as a 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 materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood; and • 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 of the neighborhood; and be in harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner seeking sign Variations to allow an electronic message center including multiple colors and graphics, two menu boards and increase the allowable area for the menu boards. She further stated, per the Petitioner, the Variation request to allow an EMC with multiple colors and graphics is necessary in order to have an effective sign for the Subject Property, which has limited visibility due to the surrounding commercial development. The lot layout and lack of visibility from the Rand Road roadway requires an effective sign. Ms. Andrade stated the Village has approved electronic message centers that consist of text and multi- colored graphics provided the displays comply with the Village Sign Code's design guidelines, which call for architecturally pleasing signs legible signs. Staff recommends adding conditions of approval limiting the number of graphics to two (2) and area occupied by graphics up to twenty five (25) percent of the overall electronic message center area. Regarding the text, Staff recommends a condition of approval requiring any text displayed to be single uniform in color. These conditions of approval would be consistent with recent approvals for Northwest Assembly of God (PZ -16-12), Culvers (PZ -06-14), and Langostino's Seafood Restaurant (PZ -19-14). Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting- August 28`x', 2014 PZ -25-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair Ms. Andrade stated regarding the number and size of menu boards, the Petitioner states the second menu board is warranted as the proposed drive-through restaurant will include two ordering lanes versus a typical drive-through restaurant with only one. Staff is supportive of the Variation request to allow the second menu board. The menu boards will be located at the back of the building, which will be significantly setback from adjacent properties. Further, the Village previously supported a variation allowing two menu boards for Chick-fil-A in 2011 (PZ -13-11). Ms. Andrade addressed the size of the menu board and stated per the Petitioner, the larger size is necessary in order to convey the variety of menu options in a legible way and allow for easy changes of menu items as the menu changes during the day. The Petitioner points out that the menu board cabinets include mechanical areas that do not convey any information but are calculated in the sign area. The menu boards would comply if the mechanical areas of the sign where not included. Ms. Andrade stated that Staff is supportive of the second menu board and larger menu boards. The menu boards would be located internally to the property and would not be detrimental to the surrounding properties. The Village has previously approved variations for larger menu boards. The Village granted a variation allowing a thirty-five (35) square foot menu board for Panera (PZ -22-11). This year, the Village granted a Variation allowing a forty-six (46) square foot menu board for Culvers (PZ -06-14). Ms. Andrade stated based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval of the following motions: "To approve: 1) A Conditional Use to operate a drive-through restaurant; and 2) A Variation to allow a five and four fifths (5.8) foot parking lot setback along the west property line, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report: The Village Board's decision is final for these motions. She further stated based on the Staff's review of the signs, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission approve the following motion: "To approve: 1) A Special Use to allow an electronic message center with a display period of less than thirty (30) seconds, 2) A Variation to allow an electronic message center with multiple colors, 3) A Variation to allow two (2) menu boards; and 4) A Variation to allow menu boards measuring forty-one (41) square feet in area, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report The Planning & Zoning Commission's decision is final for the sign requests. Commissioner Youngquist asked if Staff had any issues with the drive access into the Subject Property from Rand Road. Ms. Andrade stated that Staff did review that same concern with the Petitioner. She further explained the Petitioner decided to continue with the current design. Mr. Simmons stated that Public Works had some minor revisions regarding the stripping and exiting of the site which would assist with channelizing traffic exiting the property. Chairman Donnelly swore in James Olguin from the law firm of Goldstine, Skrodzki, Russian, Nemec and Hoff, 835 McClintock Drive Burr Ridge, Illinois. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting- August 28`", 2014 PZ -25-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair Mr. Olguin stated they are looking to relocate the current McDonalds on Rand Road across the street to the Subject Property. He further explained the current McDonalds is the oldest company owned store in the region. Mr. Olguin stated McDonalds wants to reinvest in the community by building the newest design available but believes logistically it wouldn't be feasible at the current location. Mr. Olguin stated the Subject Property provides the space needed in order to construct a new building with a dual drive through. He further explained that majority of the requests are based on the existing conditions at the Subject Property and technical items such as the menu boards. Mr. Olguin explained the oversized menu boards are designed to be able to rotate between breakfast and lunch items. He further stated, even though the space is ideal for the restaurant there are some challenges they need to overcome. Mr. Olguin explained there are some issues with visibility along Rand Road; because of the visibility issue they are proposing an electronic message center in order to give customers enough time to make traffic adjustments in order to enter the site. Mr. Olguin introduced Dan Olson to discuss the landscape plan. Chairman Donnelly swore in Dan Olson 2631 Ginger Woods Aurora, Illinois; Dan Brinkman, 8504 Sage Drive Vernon Hills, Illinois. Mr. Olson stated that they plan to maintain the existing driveways into and out of the site, but will change the traffic circulation onsite to create a one way counter -clockwise traffic circulation which is the best way to function with the drive through and to make traffic flow safely on and off the site. Mr. Olson stated there are going to be fifty-nine (59) parking spaces and thirteen (13) staking spaces. He stated they are redoing the parking lot for logistical reasons but keeping the setback along the west side of the property. He further explained the sidewalk, access from both Kensington and Rand Roads will be redone. Mr. Olson stated the side by side drive through system is newest design and works the best with dual ordering lanes that merge into one pay and pickup window. Branding elements will be placed in the drive through to draw customers to it. Mr. Olson further explained the canopies in the drive through have a built in speaker system for sending and receiving orders that are equipped with auto volume control which detects ambient noise and will adjust the volume as needed. Mr. Olson further stated a masonry trash corral would be provided on site to house the trash and recycling containers and shield them from view. He stated they are willing to make the changes to the lighting and landscaping plans to accommodate Staffs recommendations and comply with code. Mr. Olson stated that McDonalds has an extensive landscaping plan for the perimeter of the site and along the drive through which will shield it from the residential neighbors. Mr. Olson stated they are proposing a rain garden on the southern part of the site. The rain garden will aide in not only aesthetics but remove pollutants from the water before it is moved into the detention pond. Mr. Olson stated McDonald's uses only LED lights in all of the fixtures on site, and will adjust the plans in order to comply with the code. Mr. Olguin stated they are very proud of the design and materials that would be used for the project and look forward to contributing to the community. Commissioner Youngquist asked what the percentage that uses the drive through is. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting- August 281h, 2014 PZ -25-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair Mr. Olguin stated that typically around 70% of the business is done at the drive through. Commissioner Beattie asked how many customers they could serve at any given time. Mr. Olguin stated they had their traffic engineer look at the site especially at the Kensington access. He explained the significant majority of the customers are already on the road and not necessarily getting in their cars just to go to McDonalds. He further stated they are aware the close proximity Prospect High School is to the Subject Property and believe the sidewalk improvements off of Kensington will help create another entry point for customers onto the site. Mr. Brinkman discussed the traffic study that he conducted on the Subject Property. He stated he studied the morning and evening peak hours and because of the proximity to the high school he also studied midday hours as well. He explained the majority of customers during the peak hours are coming from traffic that is already on the road. Mr. Brinkman stated that the Kensington access would be the busiest during the midday. He stated students are already visiting the existing location during the midday peak hours and if anything the new location will prevent them navigating the Kensington/83/Rand intersection. Mr. Brinkman stated the double drive through has proven to speed the ordering process along with which will help cut down on traffic backing up on the site. There was general discussion regarding the efficiency of the one way traffic circulation and the amount of stacking spaces that will be available on the site. Commissioner Mizwicki asked what the expected increase in use would be at the new site. Mr. Brinkman stated there wouldn't be a dramatic change in the amount of customers to the site because McDonalds isn't typically a destination rather than a stop from the flow of traffic. There was general discussion between the board and the Petitioner about what would happen to the existing site. Mr. Olguin stated he wasn't sure if it would be knocked down or sold to another company. Chairman Donnelly asked if there were any further questions for the Petitioner, hearing none he opened the public portion of the meeting and swore in Marty Thomas 718 N. Pine Street Mount Prospect, Illinois. Mr. Thomas asked if the McDonalds would be open 24 hours, and expressed his concern about the increased amount of traffic on side roads because of the long light at Rand and Route 83. Mr. Thomas also stated he was concerned about the noise level from the menu boards. Chairman Donnelly asked Staff if there is a limit on the business hours. Mr. Simmons stated the Zoning Code doesn't regulate hours of operation, the only limited hours would be for outdoor dining establishments. Chairman Donnelly asked Staff if they had any complaints from the residents across from Panera Bread regarding noise levels from the menu boards. Mr. Simmons stated they have not, and per the Petitioner the volume would be controlled based on the noise levels outside. Chairman Donnelly stated there shouldn't be any problems with noise levels. Mr. Thomas stated he was also concerned that littering will be increased down the side streets. Chairman Donnelly swore in Earnest Johnson 717 N. Pine Street Mount Prospect, Illinois. Mr. Johnson stated the he was also concerned about the increased amount of garbage. Chairman Donnelly swore in Maryann Blyn 615 N. Pine Street. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting- August 28th, 2014 PZ -25-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair Ms. Blyn asked where the trucks will be entering the site to drop off deliveries; she further stated her concerns about the increased traffic on Kensington. Chairman Donnelly swore in Richard Newmann 712 N. Pine Street Mount Prospect, Illinois. Mr. Newmann stated he was concerned about the lighting on the property. He stated he could see the lighting from the current location from his home. Chairman Donnelly stated the lighting at the current site is not up to code and will be considerably dimmer on the new site. Commissioner Youngquist stated the new lighting would be full cut off fixtures and will not allow light to spill over off the property. Chairman Donnelly swore in Ken Bowman 613 Pine Street Mount Prospect, Illinois. Mr. Bowman stated he is concerned about the traffic cutting through the residential neighborhood. Chairman Donnelly stated there are three (3) ways traffic can cut through in order to avoid the intersection including this property and the adjacent lots. He further explained the McDonalds cut through is the least effective and would likely not happen that often. Commissioner Beattie the same issue would arise no matter what tenant occupies the Subject Property. There was general discussion between the board and Mr. Bowman regarding the speed and amount of traffic on Pine Street. Chairman Donnelly swore in Joe Iacovo the owner of Cafe X-Presso located in front of the Subject Property. Mr. Iacovo stated that he felt placing a McDonalds next to his coffee shop would be injurious to his business. Mr. Iacovo stated from January to April 2014 there were eight (8) accidents at 1 W. Rand Road and that about twenty-two (22) in 2012. He is concerned that the accident rate will increase because of the increased amount of cars. Commissioner Beattie stated that the traffic that would be going through the new McDonalds would be roughly the same as the amount of traffic going through the current McDonalds. Chairman Donnelly swore in Patricia Thomas 718 N. Pine Street. She stated she feels the amount of business would increase because the building is brand new. Commissioner Youngquist stated that McDonalds does this all the time and doesn't except to see a significant influx because of the new building. Chairman Donnelly asked the Petitioner to address the various concerns of the citizens. Mr. Olguin stated the current location is a 24 hour operation and would expect it to stay that way. He also stated it was corporate owned. Mr. Olson stated that the delivery trucks would be entering from Rand Road and would take up one of the drive through lanes in order to unload the product. Commissioner Filippone asked what the delivery hours would be. Mr. Olson stated he didn't know for this particular site, however it would be a couple of times a week during an off peak time. Chairman Donnelly asked Mr. Brinkman to discuss the traffic concerns. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting- August 28"', 2014 PZ -25-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair Mr. Brinkman stated he would have to research the crash reports for the individual accidents Mr. Iacovo brought up. He stated they all may not have been involving drive through incidents. He further stated he didn't think they would see a significant increase in accidents at the intersection but it would be impossible for him to say there wouldn't be any due to the increase in activity. Mr. Brinkman stated that he was surprised that the amount of cars making a left out of the current site was almost the same as the amount of cars making a right. Mr. Brinkman stated there wasn't much that could be done to help slow the traffic going down Pine Street. It is unfortunately the awkwardness of the intersection at Kensington/Rand/83 that makes this problem exist. Commissioner Filippone asked what the construction time line would be for the project and where construction vehicles would be accessing the site. Mr. Oguin stated that it would be about ninety (90) days and they would use both access drives for materials being delivered. Mr. Bowman asked if a left turn bay off of Kensington was proposed. Mr. Simmons stated that there is not enough right-of-way area to have a dedicated left turn bay turn into the drive. Commissioner Otteman stated because of the proximity of the subdivision to Kensington residents will have to expect some traffic because of the businesses off of Kensington. Chairman Donnelly swore in Allen Ipjian 617 N. Pine. Mr. Ipjian asked how would customers exit the site to continue going Northwest onto Rand. Commissioner Fitzgerald stated McDonalds would probably lose the business going northwest on Rand and pick up business from the cars going south. There was general discussion regarding the nature of traffic in the adjacent subdivision and vehicles cutting through this area. The Commission recommended any concerned citizens to discuss these items with the Village Board if additional measures to calm traffic were necessary. Chairman Donnelly closed the public portion of the hearing. Commissioner Beattie made the following motion seconded by Commissioner Otteman "To approve: 1) A Variation to allow a five and four fifths (5.8) foot parking lot setback along the west property line, subject to the following conditions: a. Development of the site in general conformance with the site plan prepared by Watermark Engineering dated August 15, 2014. b. Development of the building in conformance with the elevations prepared by McDonald's U.S. Research and Development dated July 10, 2014. c. Development of the site in general conformance with the landscape plan prepared by Watermark Engineering dated August 15, 2014, but revised to comply with Code d. Submittal of a photometric (lighting) plan and fixture cut sheets that comply with Village Code requirements. e. Compliance with all Development, Fire, Building, and other Village Codes and regulations including signage. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting- August 28`h, 2014 PZ -25-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair UPON ROLL CALL AYES: Youngquist, Kueter, Mizwicki, Otteman, Fitzgerald, Beattie, Donnelly NAYS: None Commissioner Beattie made a motion seconded by Commissioner Youngquist to approve the following motion: 1) A Conditional Use to operate a drive-through restaurant UPON ROLL CALL AYES: Youngquist, Kueter, Mizwicki, Otteman, Fitzgerald, Beattie, Donnelly NAYS: None The motion was approved 7-0. This portion of the case is Village Board Final. Commissioner Otteman made a motion seconded by Commissioner Beattie to approve the following motion: "To Approve" 1) A Variation to allow two (2) menu boards. UPON ROLL CALL AYES: Youngquist, Kueter, Mizwicki, Otteman, Fitzgerald, Beattie, Donnelly NAYS: None Commissioner Beattie made a motion seconded by Commissioner Youngquist to approve the following motion: "To Approve" 1) A Variation to allow menu boards measuring forty-one (41) square feet in area, as shown on the attached exhibits prepared by Watermark Engineering the dated July 17, 2014." UPON ROLL CALL AYES: Youngquist, Kueter, Mizwicki, Otteman, Fitzgerald, Beattie, Donnelly NAYS: None Commissioner Beattie made a motion seconded by Commissioner Kueter to approve the following motion: "To Approve" 1) A Special Use to allow an electronic message center with a display period of less than thirty (30) seconds, subject to the following conditions: a. Providing a static display image. b. Providing a minimum display period often (10) seconds before changing; and c. Compliance with the standards for electronic message centers as listed in Section 7.330 (A) of the Sign Code." UPON ROLL CALL AYES: Youngquist, Kueter, Mizwicki, Otteman, Fitzgerald, Beattie, Donnelly NAYS: None Commissioner Beattie made a motion seconded by Commissioner Kueter to approve the following motion: "To Approve" Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting- August 28th, 2014 PZ -25-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair A Variation to allow an electronic message center with multiple colors, as shown on the attached exhibit prepared by Watermark Engineering dated July 17, 2014, subject to the following conditions: a. Any text displayed on the message center shall be in a single uniform color. b. Up to two (2) images may be displayed in conjunction with the text and may be multiple colors. The total area occupied by the graphic(s) shall not exceed twenty five (25) percent of the overall electronic message center area. UPON ROLL CALL AYES: Youngquist, Kueter, Mizwicki, Otteman, Fitzgerald, Beattie, Donnelly NAYS: None The motions were all approved 7-0. The Planning & Zoning Commission's decision is final for these sign requests. After hearing three (3) additional cases Commissioner Otteman made a motion seconded by Commissioner Beattie and the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 pm ^ Jenna oder, Adm i n istra ive Assistant Com ity Development Department Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting- August 28`h, 2014 PZ -25-14 Joseph Donnelly, Chair TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY To: Elizabeth Stack McDonald's USA, LLC From: Bill Grieve _� (�11 Date: July 16, 2014 Subject: Proposed McDonald's Relocation Mt. Prospect, Illinois PART I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND SUMMARY STATEMENT r�' GEWALT NAMILTGN k_0 I F i ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 850 Forest Edge Drive, Vernon Hills, IL 60061 TEL 847.478.9700 * F,ax 847.478.9701 820 Lakeside Drive, Suite 5, Gurnee, IL 60031 Tri. 847.855.1100 ■ FAx 847.855.1115 53 W. Jackson Blvd., Suite 924, Chicago, 1L 60604 T� 1 3123 29,0577 ■ FAX 312.329.1942 wwwgha-engineers.com GEWALT HAMILTON AssocIATES, INC. (GHA) has conducted a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) for the above captioned project. As proposed, McDonald's would relocate their existing restaurant at 100 W. Rand Road in Mt. Prospect, Illinois across the street to the former Bakers Square parcel at 13 W. Rand Road. The building will have about 5,200 square feet of seating and kitchen space and a double lane drive-thru would be provided for McDonald's customers' convenience. The following summarizes our findings and provides various recommendations for your consideration. Exhibits and Appendices referenced are located at the end of this document. Briefly summarizing, we believe that the adjacent roadways and the site access drives can accommodate McDonald's traffic activity. Reasons include: McDonald's traffic will use the excellent flexibility provided by the existing site access drives. No additional access on Rand Road or Kensington Road is being requested, nor is it needed to accommodate site traffic. Ample drive-thru stacking is provided, so as to not detrimentally impact on-site circulation. Sufficient parking is available to ensure that the busiest customer and employee demands can be met on-site. PART ll. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site Location Map and Photo Inventory Exhibit 1 provides aerial photos of the site vicinity and Exhibit 2 provides a photo inventory of current traffic operations. Pertinent comments to the adjacent roadways include... Rand Road (US 12) is a major route that traverses from southeast to northwest throughout the northwest suburbs. Rand is under the jurisdiction of the Illinois Department of Transportation and is classified as a Strategic Regional Arterial (SRA) route. Four through travel lanes and a painted center median are provided in the site vicinity. The posted speed limit is 40 -mph. Proposed McDonald's Relocation Mt. Prospect, Illinois IL 83 is a major north -south route that is under IDOT jurisdiction and is also classified an SRA route. Two through travel lanes plus a painted center median striped with separate left turn lanes provided in the site vicinity. Kensington Road is an east -west route that is under local jurisdiction. Kensington tends to "collect" traffic from the local neighborhoods and businesses along its entire length from River Road on the east to Northwest Highway on the west. Two travel lanes in each direction are provided along the site and the posted speed limit is 30 -mph. The IL 831 US 121 Kensington Road triangle intersections all have traffic signal control. At IL 83, a separate eastbound right turn lane was recently constructed on Kensington Road, which seems to have mitigated at least part of a historical cut-thru traffic problem in the neighborhood to the south. Existing Traffic GHA conducted weekday morning, midday, and evening peak period traffic counts at the existing access drives on Rand Road and Kensington Road in June 2014, No unusual events occurred during the counts, such as road construction, emergency vehicle activity, or severe weather, which would have impacted the traffic volumes and/or travel patterns. This data was augmented by traffic counts conducted by GHA in June 2013, as well as from the IDOT web -site. Exhibit 3 illustrates the existing weekday morning, midday and evening peak hour traffic counts that occurred from 7:30-8:30 AM, Noon to 1:00 PM, and from 5:00-6:00 PM. Pertinent comments from the count data and our observations include: • There is a strong directional split on Rand Road during the morning peak hour, with the vast majority of traffic (over 60%) traveling southeast. The volumes were split much more evenly during the midday and evening peak hours. • The volumes on Kensington Road are split fairly evenly during all three peak hours. • Although Wille Street is posted "Do Not Enter", a few vehicles turned right (eastbound) during all three peak hours. At least two of the vehicles were locally generated. • Various vehicles from the adjacent Randhurst Commons commercial center, both customer and employee, park in the Bakers Square parking lot and use the site access on Kensington. PART III. TRAFFIC EVALUATION Site Plan and Proposed Access Exhibit 4 illustrates the proposed McDonald's site plan prepared by Watermark Engineering Resources, Ltd. The restaurant will have about 5,200 square feet of floor space. The existing full access drives on Kensington Road and Rand Road would remain. Discussion Point. No new drives are being requested to serve the site. This is an example of excellent access management strategy. GEWALT HAMILTON ASSOCIATES, INC. — Page 2 Proposed McDonald's Relocation Mt. Prospect, Illinois McDonald's Traffic Characteristics Exhibit 5 — Part A lists the traffic generation calculations for McDonald's, based on rate data published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), and the anticipated hours of operation, which may be 24 -hours at least for the drive-thru. Discussion Point. The traffic generations are probably overstated, because vehicles already "passing by" on the adjacent streets will, per ITE information, make 65% or more of the McDonald's trips. Discussion Point Also shown in Exhibit 5 — Part A is a trip generation comparison to the previous Bakers Square sit down restaurant. As can be seen, although McDonald's has much more driveway activity, the volume of "new" traffic is about one vehicle per minute or less, because restaurants such as Bakers Square are much more "destination" oriented. Exhibit 5 — Part B provides the anticipated trip distribution, which is primarily based on current travel patterns and the planned access drives. As can be seen, the majority of trips would be oriented along Rand Road. The distribution also reflects the convenience of right turn movements, for example as a stop at the McDonald's drive-thru for coffee and/or breakfast items on the way to work. Traffic Assignments Exhibit 6 illustrates the site traffic assignment, which is based on the traffic characteristics summarized in Exhibit 5 (e.g. traffic generations and trip distribution) and the site access drives. Site traffic and the background volumes (see Exhibits 3 and 6) were combined to produce the Total Traffic Assignment, which is illustrated in Exhibit 7. Discussion Point. The total traffic volumes are probably too high, because the ITE allowed discount for "pass -by" trips was not taken. Intersection Capacity Analyses Intersection capacity analyses were conducted, per guidelines published in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). At signalized intersections, Level of Service (LOS) reports operations using the letter designations "A" (best) through "F" (worst) and measures the average control delay per vehicle in seconds. At unsignalized intersections where the minor approaches have stop control, the HCM measurement is approach delay in seconds, with the results reported from LOS A to LOS F. Exhibit 8 summarizes the intersection capacity analysis results for the weekday morning, midday, and evening peak hours. The software printouts are also provided in Appendix A for reference. Key Finding. As can be seen, the access intersections on Rand and Kensington will continue to operate at the ''design" LOS C or better during all three weekday peak hours. In fact, McDonald's traffic has only a 1 -second maximum impact on the overall intersection delay at both access drives. This will help ensure that the local streets south of Kensington Road will be used by McDonald's trips generated within the neighborhood and will not attract cut-thru trips. GEWALT HAMILTON ASSOCIATES, INC. — Page 3 Proposed McDonald's Relocation Mt. Prospect, Illinois Traffic Impact Discussion Reviewing the existing traffic volumes (see Exhibit 3), and the project and total traffic assignments (see Exhibits 6 and 7) indicates that McDonald's traffic would have a minimum impact on Rand Road and Kensington Road. Thus, our traffic recommendations focus on the access operations and site plan elements. PART IV. RECOMMENDATIONS Access Traffic Operations Rand Road Access Drive 1. No geometric changes are needed, as the drive provides two inbound and two outbound lanes separated by a landscaped median. 2. A review of the total traffic assignment (see Exhibit 7) indicates that a separate southeast -bound right turn lane should not be needed. 3. Exiting site traffic should have Stop control. 4. Exiting McDonald's traffic from the internal drive connection should be under Stop control, so that entering traffic from Rand Road will have 'free flow" operations. 5. A sidewalk connection is proposed to be provided from McDonald's to Rand Road, but an easement may be required from the adjacent lot to construct it. Kensinaton Road Access Drive 1. No geometric changes are needed. One inbound and one outbound lane will readily accommodate the projected site traffic (see Exhibit 6). 2. The total traffic assignment (see Exhibit 7) and the results of the capacity analyses (see Exhibit 8) indicate that a separate westbound right turn lane or an eastbound left turn lane are not needed. 3. Exiting site traffic should have Stop control. 4. A sidewalk connection to Kensington Road should be considered to promote non -auto trips. It could be an attached ("carriage") walk to the driveway with a minimum 5 -foot width. Parking and Internal Circulation Per the Watermark site plan: • One-way counterclockwise circulation with angle parking will be provided. • 61 parking spaces are proposed, which should readily accommodate the anticipated customer and employee demands. Service Area Operations Based on information provided by McDonald's: McDonald's will have minimal service area activity, as 10 or fewer trips (e.g. refuse pick-up, deliveries, etc.) are usually generated during the entire week. Deliveries and refuse pick-up are typically scheduled to not coincide with busy restaurant hours. GEWALT HAMILTON ASSOCIATES, INC. — Page 4 Proposed McDonald's Relocation Mt. Prospect, Illinois PART V. TECHNICAL ADDENDUM The following Exhibits and Appendices were previously referenced. They provide technical support for our observations, findings, and recommendations discussed in the text. Exhibits 1. Site Location Aerial 2. Photo Inventory 3. Existing Traffic 4. Site Plan 5. Project Traffic Characteristics 6. Site Traffic 7. Total Traffic 8. Intersection Capacity Analyses Appendices A. Capacity Analysis Worksheets GEWALT HAMILTON ASSOCIATES, INC. — Page 5 EXHIBITS GEWAIT HAMILTON McDonald's fil f.ASSOCIATES, INC. Mt. Prospect, Illinois T O (1) CL U) O L C� G O D V d t/1 O CL O L- CL CL 'Lm a 0 o J W Cl) TJ m TJ Leaend: XX Morning Peak Hour 7:30-8:30 AM [XX1 Midday Peak Hour Noon -1:00 PM (XX) - Evening Peak Hour 5:00-6:00 PM 0 Illegal Turns go Existing Traffic Signal ,xx- Average Daily Traffic (ADT) \O �O J i e� 00 i i IC - Site (5) 141 5-} Kensington Rd (325) 13301 385— (1) 121 2-} (330) 13351 390— (3) [11 2� N O) N Not to Scale I RW H M19M Exhibit 3 \ I ASSOCIATES, INC. Existing Traffic (Source: IDOT and GHA — June 2013 & 2014) PH—1FLgSwx Pm PH POeH JO DffiN D3dSOad 1W - S,(1-1dNO(10 WWQ -1I 'apffnUQ1J8M oob alms 'PEON Pia.N!M oZ£;Y NV -Id 3Ia13WO30 N N N e N�saa U U J z m # � w Qm _e r F 'ix a J m , DO-) W g8 a „a HEY 0 � 0 -- s w v i M a a w W - LL i �a M s 0 0'21) CO a o � F- ------- I II till T[ I—'I L __�� 133211S 7/// // g D r has e V I Itl 'g14.,i• R IIR O@ & �in` �• ~ e � y ��V • � �3f of III �R e Iw)M. mH _ � d J La� - ml Elk J m3 ag" m ms"m a UP 2 95'w`8 m 1 W;og � J M� H81111 3m �s �`g 11 o� too a va > > > of K< NV -Id 3Ia13WO30 N N N e N�saa U U J z m # � w Qm _e r F 'ix a J m , DO-) W g8 a „a HEY 0 � 0 -- s w v i M a a w W - LL i �a M s 0 0'21) CO a o � F- ------- I II till T[ I—'I L __�� 133211S 7/// // g D r has e V I Itl 'g14.,i• R IIR O@ & �in` �• ~ e � y ��V • � �3f of III �R e Iw)M. mH _ M V N c� E 3 cn s !_ 00 N O 00 O O CID LO o CID LO LO O co 'T co 'T co O N Cp + 0co O kl) LO � CID mO N + O rn Lr) + O O N L co O to 0 co O O 0 N O LO O 'T rn N O 0 N NT LO O N LO LO 11 + I N L 0 00 II _ U LO 0 LO o O M 00 N � 000 O OM 0) 00 0 � L H o rn 11 (1)rn II _ U o * _ (j)00 o0 o0 00 00 00 0 � L OLO i cu N Q d N_ � m N N U) ON 0 D 07 L 11 L E N cu 0- � U) O i m w (0 O h h Q c E Q) O CO W "y Q o Q) c W 0 o LO o � � O � h I uj- v I� h W IQ) a z � N a a J r_a as v C7 a M m m `iA U O O O D 70 O� O V U u ��U)U c� a) CU � c�a)o4-0C)(D OLS O+- i - Q 0)— N C: U) wE (6 i i N i 0 i Q Y 0 H d (j)00 o0 o0 00 00 00 0 OLO LO 0 0 N Q N N 0 D L E aU- a� in 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 s 00 Oen ono 0 V N 0 Q Q Q II to O H O O O D 70 O� O V U u ��U)U c� a) CU � c�a)o4-0C)(D OLS O+- i - Q 0)— N C: U) wE (6 i i N i 0 i Q Y 0 a N Lend: XX – Morning Peak Hour 7:30-8:30 AM [XX) – Midday Peak Hour Noon -1:00 PM (XX) – Evening Peak Hour 5:00-6:00 PM • – Illegal Turns • – Existing Traffic Signal Not to Scale (18) 1191 13—} Kensington Rd (9) 1121 12— +: Co ? r��l►1 RWHM19M ASSOCIATES, INC. 12 12 — M OD J Exhibit 6 Site Traffic I I i ! I I I I I I I I ! I � ! I I ! I � I i I I I I � I � I ! I I i ! I ! I ! McDonald's I ! I ! I � I i ! I � I � I � I � I � ! I ! I ! I ! Site I ! I ! I I I i ! h I ! I ! ^ � N I � f� N .r'7� L*_ I i 1121 i9T--- ---- ---- -- - N Lend: XX – Morning Peak Hour 7:30-8:30 AM [XX) – Midday Peak Hour Noon -1:00 PM (XX) – Evening Peak Hour 5:00-6:00 PM • – Illegal Turns • – Existing Traffic Signal Not to Scale (18) 1191 13—} Kensington Rd (9) 1121 12— +: Co ? r��l►1 RWHM19M ASSOCIATES, INC. 12 12 — M OD J Exhibit 6 Site Traffic N Legend: XX — Morning Peak Hour 7:30-8:30 AM 1XX1 — Midday Peak Hour Noon -1:00 PM (XX) — Evening Peak Hour 5:00-6:00 PM • — Illegal Turns • — Existing Traffic Signal Not to Scale ri i i i ! i i i McDonald's (18) 1231 23—JKensington Rd (v 121 2— (325) 13301 385— (335) 13501 400 +(3)1112 AI RW H M19M Exhibit 7 I ASSOCIATES, INC. Total Traffic s > LO LO LO o NM LO V VI VI VI VI y o -0 -0 -0 -0 o NLO VI M M M M n R 0 LO M —y n n N n n N Q O y OI Q co :.. -11 c� C � ui h �" •- N •O U N N U) Y N 7 N Q 1 t O O Y .� i 7 N O Q N N 7 N N Q W N Y .Z N Q N .�.-� O O o a� Q> ami U a > a� U N h 0 o (15) '. -O O U N IL O 0 C N O N LD U N V .� .� Q m Q a� a� axi oo m _ O U 2- W N C Q D Q cn Z:) > Z:) cD N M LO 000 > vi vi vi vi -O -O -O -O 0 N VI N N N N A O O Lo Lo R n n n n d w 0 Q L ~ 0< m U a A O A U U m m L Q � 0 co m m v 0 o L U R N C. m> O` N Q1 co co Lq (D y D- d QO Dj O .4 M Lr;Lu Q Q N N m N m z V V V V V V C J Q m Q m m 3 7 H V 0 � (n L L � r J i d - R Q W r -O � m m m m m m Co O R O 0 = Q Q Q Q Q Q H t = H J n n CL 0 C R r n n = Q Q Q Q Q Q C J n n n n E R 11 R L U 7 d d > y Ol O = O O U d Cl) c c c c O O c J ,•'` m Q m m m z U U U U U U Cl) a O L N J v) 3 0 = N d w J N Q y = Cl) O = t/1 O _ cC C c3 Q Cl) c c c c c c R a d 'a W x W R - z cc I U U a)o (n U U U U C � U O 2 N W U_ U_ A U_ R R N L L L = M _ _ j .T N w~ w~ x 0 Q Q a x Q af°i Ci LU CL N vI N •L •� �L •a Y 0� Y 0� Y 0� W fC j .N0 j .T j .T w H w H w H Q m V A R Q co Q co m m v 0 L U R 2 n N Q1 Lq Lq O) Dj O Dj O O O m ~ V V V V V V J Q m Q m m m = Q Q Q Q Q Q H J n n n n n n = Q Q Q Q Q Q J n n n n n n N Q O Cl) c c c c c c m U U U U U U N N d y = Cl) O = _ Cl) c3 Q Y R d R a d 'a W x W R c U a)o (n U U O 2 N W U_ U_ A U_ R R R .T j .T Y w~ w~ x 0 Q oo Ci LU N APPENDIX A Capacity Analysis Worksheets GEWALT HAMILTON McDonald's L 1 ASSOCIATES, INC. Mi. Prospect, Illinois HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Bq Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 7/7/2014 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Intersection: Rand Rd. @ Site Access Jurisdiction; Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year; Existing Project ID: East/West Street: Rand Road North/South Street: Site Access Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 _Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 1300 43 19 715 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1300 43 19 715 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type/Storage TWLTL / 1 RT Channelized? _ Northbound No Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 0 Configuration L T R L T TR Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street Approach _ Northbound Southbound — Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R ---------------------- Volume 26 ----- 23 -- -- --- Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 26 23 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C(m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service EB WB Northbound Southbound — 1 4 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L L L R 0 19 26 23 881 509 177 473 0.00 0.04 0.15 0.05 0.00 0.12 0.50 0.15 9.1 12.3 28.8 13.0 A B D B 21.4 C HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Bg Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 7/7/2014 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Intersection: Rand Rd. @ Site Access Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Total Project ID: East/West Street: Rand Road North/South Street: Site Access Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 _—Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 0 1300 91 31 715 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1300 91 31 715 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type/Storage TWLTL / 1 RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 0 Configuration L T R L T TR Upstream Signal? No No --------------------------------------- Minor Street: Approach Northbound ----------- Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 38 69 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 38 69 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 Percent Grade (o) 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C (m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS 181 FA Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service______ EB WE Northbound Southbound �- 1 4 N 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L L 6 L R 0 31 38 69 881 488 174 473 0.00 0.06 0.22 0.15 0.00 0.20 0.80 0.51 9.1 12.9 31.4 13,9 A B D B 20.1 C HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Bg Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 7/7/2014 Analysis Time Period: Noon Peak Intersection: Rand Rd. @ Site Access Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Existing Project ID: East/West Street: Rand Road North/South Street: Site Access Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): _Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R 0.25 Volume 0 850 38 10 830 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 850 38 10 830 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 0.01 0.05 Median Type/Storage TWLTL 0.04 0.17 / 1 9.5 9.8 RT Channelized? 10.8 A No C B Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 0 Configuration L T R L T TR Upstream Signal? No No — Minor Street: Approach– Northbound Southbound— Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume 15 14 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 15 14 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C (m) (vph) v/C 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS 161 f Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service f EB WE Northbound Southbound 1 4 17 8 9 I 10 11 12 L L I L R -------__ _------------- ------ 0 ---------- 10 15 14 798 758 282 634 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.17 0.07 9.5 9.8 18.5 10.8 A A C B 14.8 B HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Bg Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 7/7/2014 Analysis Time Period: Noon Peak Intersection: Rand Rd. @ Site Access Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Total Project ID: East/West Street: Rand Road North/South Street: Site Access Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 –_ —_— _Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments — Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound– Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 0 850 88 22 830 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 850 88 22 830 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type/Storage TWLTL A B / 1 B RT Channelized? No 13.8 Approach LOS Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 0 Configuration L T R L T TR Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 27 62 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 27 62 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Approach Movement Lane Config Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service EB WE Northbound Southbound - 1 4 17 8 9 10 11 12 L L L R v (vph) 0 22 27 62 C(m) (vph) 798 726 276 634 v/c 0.00 0.03 0.10 0.10 95% queue length 0.00 0.09 0.32 0.32 Control Delay 9.5 10.1 19.5 11.3 LOS A B C B Approach Delay 13.8 Approach LOS B HCS-: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Bg Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 7/7/2014 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Intersection: Rand Rd. @ Site Access Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Exisitng Project ID: East/West Street: Rand Road North/South Street: Site Access Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound –Westbound --- Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R --------------- -- Volume --------------- 0 1030 25 6 1000 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1030 25 6 1000 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type/Storage TWLTL 564 v/c / 1 0.01 0.05 RT Channelized? 95% queue length No 0.03 0.15 0.09 Lanes 1 2 1 21.7 11.6 1 2 0 B Configuration L T R Approach Delay L T TR 15.6 Upstream Signal? Approach LOS No C No Minor Street Approach –__--Northbound Southbound– Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R I L T R -- -------- ------------ Volume 11 ------------ 17 – -- -- Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 11 17 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 Percent Grade (o) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R __Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service_—____ Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 17 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config L L L R v (vph) 0 6 11 17 C(m) (vph) 688 656 226 564 v/c 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.03 95% queue length 0.00 0.03 0.15 0.09 Control Delay 10.2 10.5 21.7 11.6 LOS B B C B Approach Delay 15.6 Approach LOS C HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Bg WE Northbound Southbound 1 4 1 7 8 Agency/Co.: L L I L R Date Performed: 7/7/2014 -------- 0 15 — — ------------------------- 20 51 688 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak 223 564 0.00 0.02 0.09 0.09 Intersection: Rand Rd. @ Site Access 0.30 10.2 10.8 Jurisdiction:. 12.0 B B C $ Units: U. S. Customary 15.0+ C Analysis Year: Total Project ID: East./West Street: Rand Road North/South Street: Site Access Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments_________ Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound _ Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R I L T R ---------------------- Volume --- 0 1030 -- 59 15 -------- 1000 0 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1030 59 15 1000 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type/Storage TWLTL / 1 RT Channelized? No Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 0 Configuration L T R L T TR Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound -- Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume 20 51 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 20 51 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 Percent Grade (a.) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage Lanes 1 1 Configuration L R Approach Movement Lane Config ------------- v (vph) C (m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service EB WE Northbound Southbound 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 12. L L I L R -------- 0 15 — — ------------------------- 20 51 688 636 223 564 0.00 0.02 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.07 0.29 0.30 10.2 10.8 22.7 12.0 B B C $ 15.0+ C HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Bg Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 7/7/2014 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Intersection: Kensington Rd. @ Site Access Jurisdiction Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Exisitng Project ID: East/West Street: Kensington Road North/South Street: Site Access Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 __Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound — Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 5 385 0 0 190 2 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 5 385 0 0 190 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / HFR RT Channelized? 6 0 10 Percent Heavy Vehicles Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR Upstream Signal? Lanes No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound --------- Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R L T R – ------------------------ Volume ------------------------------------ 6 0 10 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 6 0 10 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade (o) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No / Lanes 0 1 0 Configuration LTR ------------------Delay, Queue Length, and Level ------------------- of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LT I LTR --- -- – v (vph) 5 -- — -- 0 —------- ------ 16 C(m) (vph) 1379 1170 778 v/c 0.00 0.00 0.02 95% queue length 0.01 0.00 0.06 Control Delay 7.6 8.1 9.7 LOS A A A Approach Delay 9.7 Approach LOS A HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Bg Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 7/7/2014 Analysis Time Period: AM Peak Intersection: Kensington Rd. @ Site Access Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Total Project ID: East/West Street: Kensington Road North/South ,Street: Site Access Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 __— Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments ---------- Major Street: Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R I L T R Volume 23 385 0 0 190 14 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 23 385 0 0 190 14 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / No / RT Channelized? 0 1 0 Configuration Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Movement 7 8 9 L T R Southbound 10 11 12 L T R Volume 18 0 27 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 18 0 27 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade (o) 0 736 0 0.00 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / 0.00 No / Lanes 0 1 0 Configuration B LTR Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C (m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service EB WB Northbound Southbound 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 LT LT I LTR -- ---- 23 ------------------------------------- 0 – 45 1365 1170 736 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.05 0.00 0.19 7.7 8.1 10.2 A A B 10.2 B HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Bg 4 0 18 C(m) (vph) Agency/Co.: 1226 747 v/c 0.00 Date Performed: 7/7/2014 0.02 95% queue length 0.01 0.00 Analysis Time Period: Noon Peak Control Delay 7.8 7.9 9.9 Intersection: Kensington Rd. @ Site Access A A A Jurisdiction: 9.9 Approach LOS Units: U. S. Customary A Analysis Year: Exisitng Project ID; East/West Street: Kensington Road North/South Street: Site Access Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 __Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound — Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 4 330 0 0 270 2 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4 330 0 0 270 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 Il 12 L T R I L T R Volume 6 0 12 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 6 0 12 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade (o) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No / Lanes 0 1 0 Configuration ------------------ LTR Approach Movement Lane Config Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service_____ EB WS Northbound Southbound 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 LT LT LTR v (vph) 4 0 18 C(m) (vph) 1288 1226 747 v/c 0.00 0.00 0.02 95% queue length 0.01 0.00 0.07 Control Delay 7.8 7.9 9.9 LOS A A A Approach Delay 9.9 Approach LOS A HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Bg Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 7/7/2014 Analysis Time Period: Noon Peak Intersection: Kensington Rd. @ Site Access Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Total Project ID: East/West Street: Kensington Road North/South Street: Site Access Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25 _ _____ __Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments_______ Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 23 330 0 0 270 14 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 23 330 0 0 270 14 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR Upstream Signal? No No —__---------- Minor Street: Approach —----------- Northbound ------- -- Southbound -- --- Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R —--------- _ ------------------ Volume 18 ------ 0 --- — 30 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 18 0 30 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade M 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No / Lanes 0 1 0 Configuration LTR Approach Movement Lane Config Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service___ EB WB Northbound Southbound 1 4 17 8 9 I 10 11 12 LT LT LTR v (vph) 23 0 48 C(m) (vph) 1275 1226 700 v/c 0.02 0.00 0.07 95o queue length 0.06 0.00 0.22 Control Delay 7.9 7.9 10.5 LOS A A B Approach Delay 10.5 Approach LOS B HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.6 TWO -WAX STOP CON'T'ROL SUMMARY Analyst: Bg Agency/Co.: Date performed: 7/7/2014 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Intersection: Kensington Rd. @ Site Access Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Existing Project ID: East/West Street: Kensington Road North/South Street: Site Access Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): __Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments___ Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R 0.25 Volume 5 325 0 0 350 3 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 5 325 0 0 350 3 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach VNorthbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume Peak Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade (%) 0 Flared. Approach: Exists?/Storage Lanes Configuration Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C (m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS 4 0 6 1.00 1.00 1.00 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 / No / 0 1 0 LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service EB WB Northbound Southbound 1 4 17 8 9 10 11 12 LT LT LTR 5 0 10 1202 1231 662 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.05 8.0 7.9 10.5 A A B 10.5 B HCS+: Unsignalized Intersections Release 5.6 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Bg Agency/Co.: Date Performed: 7/7/2014 Analysis Time Period: PM Peak Intersection: Kensington Rd. @ Site Access Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: Total Project ID: East/West Street: Kensington Road North/South Street: Site Access Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): --------- _____---Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 L T R L T Volume 18 325 0 0 350 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 18 325 0 0 350 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? 0.25 6 R 12 1.00 12 Lanes 0 2 0 0 2 0 Configuration LT TR LT TR Upstream Signal? No No ------ ----------------------------------------------- Minor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Volume Peak Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade (%) 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage Lanes Configuration Approach Movement Lane Config ._.. _ 13 ——— 0 — 19 1,00 1,00 1,00 13 0 19 0 0 0 0 / No 0 1 0 LTR / Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service EB WB Northbound Southbound 1 4 17 8 9 10 11 12 LT LT I I LTR v (vph) 18 0 32 C(m) (vph) 1193 1231 638 v/C 0.02 0.00 0.05 95% queue length 0.05 0.00 0.16 Control Delay 8.1 7.9 10.9 LOS A A B Approach Delay 10.9 Approach LOS B FU N F1 EE= C: O LU c O LL ❑ � AJ cu a) O c a ° o Ci) -Z5 a` Q > m a 0 a 2 c O O U ❑ U O N_ 0 cn O Q O CL ...... .. .. - ... •...... o-1-1`Vsn s.PIyzuoao y I I I IoM 0 so n,oa OOOM/DOOM -b L L94 ONimine aavaNvis I,OZ b-,Zb ------------------------------ 0 -- �q O LL Y Nz2�m � I I <z N yH w I r z � I a'l`, KS Q O =Qo o r � o � H Zz cs� �w 0 0 I o> e. I• I �� I= O O O� ONo v V • -- O U) u+ - �- Wv o o II o z z w z cr) m w w i -- w I CO I ------------ r. zo I III Q� W -17 I LO cn � say o Q p W I I I I I � II II C '^) V A 1 _ IL_IF ----- -' M O L O �w NEW o w -- �o �x 'G -7 I I E.. O 4 0-,9b SlOuaa'sl leP P UHJ 1 151pH uo18u[sUex Pm PH �kl Jo eMA[W w�� oa, 103dS08d 1W - S,CI-MOC]eW m an saoanosTa7a T N 99908-11'01[nue.ueM Mvaa 0 o Dob elms 'pl eN pia.MM 0z£b ��� a Nois3a J 11— 4N s,p[euoQo4V o a6 j y �_` a u m � � s � zs a W co W Q ayeai s°f N m LLJ Z f 0 - j 0 4 - O �J 21 i O O 0 O O 111 O a o 49g w as g 7 We� K [B W �I z s a Z 1C;i C 0 1, r[ o �— n F m , a z z cl) — a h H2 o = O m o • i s Cn W 4}e$§ 8 gMi LL O O O o p �� ,moi � olll II II � i I IR • -- — -- II I I I Itl • I III • �a — _ _ II a � I III II I I III LO o � II II I I I tl N� I� • I I I a'� o a- II �co II III I I IIR � I z I� � II �I II VI I I IItl � � �" � � ��� r' • �---�_ _yp o��� l I IItl • • � � � • � � •5€y b1 � i III ----- V' 1 c j a l O wu!III-s1yD€dH !✓auscud PH uo18w-M Pue PH P—H J. DffiN D3dSOad 1W - S,CI-ldNOCIC) 532909 -1I '011AUQ.ueM oot almS 'PEoll Pia.MM OZH;r lo7 /.Ile \S —TTTTI — I It y N T Y A IR VIII III I III .co - _— -- o III I I I I z h �I ul tl I ,I 0 r) U P --- - pH—l8u[s°ex Poe PH P—H Jo OMt.[ D3dSOad 1W - S,U]-ldNOU]0 532909 -1I '01 [AUQlJ8M o0b almS 'PEoll Pia.MM OZH;r a..®®.>o oN o om F - w wow w w O O V U lilii U r Q W x x W Q� n Up e N�s3a v r J� J� W Z Z Q Q Q Q mmmm ��//) a z 0 € Z rr r r CL n 0 -lin $ ac z oa z w�W w ``5`Qax CA CL ui Z� so€ � 0 o z wee € QQ w - 'Wq W �0 Lu > ■ Zca J V III J 0 > 0 0 0- <„>aWoo Asa Z 5z L �DRHi ' QQ <<<<J CL rNM V ILL LL, WoW] N CO 7 LO M N M� M to v z (A in v to (n to to L U U U U U U U U U /I CL z 0 U N ® I 0 r) U P --- - pH—l8u[s°ex Poe PH P—H Jo OMt.[ D3dSOad 1W - S,U]-ldNOU]0 532909 -1I '01 [AUQlJ8M o0b almS 'PEoll Pia.MM OZH;r 133HS a3n00 a..®®.>o oN o om F - w wow w w O O V U lilii �� r Q W x x �o air Q� P Up e N�s3a �w J� J� W Z Z Q Q Q Q mmmm U J a� € Z p. r r Z Z O O O W JIL W -lin $ W z oa W W ``5`Qax a 0 so€ ®R a _ wee € -� N ep" - 'Wq W W > F 5 w =s J 0 0 0- <„>aWoo Asa ".W �� _, �DRHi ' QQ <<<<J CL rNM V ILL LL, WoW] N CO 7 LO M N M� 133HS a3n00 ...... ... . .I oN o om F - w wow w w O O V U Y m W s r Q W x x � Q� V Up e N�s3a �w J� J� W Z Z Q Q Q Q mmmm U J a� € Z p. r r Z Z O O O W JIL W -lin $ W z oa y z W CC W W JZJJ—J0 W iL W 0 OL0 EL z0Cn 0 `se �j cr3�p cznHC7i�Jp�®0��� z U® U® U®Q W HF FHHHH Lu ¢ < > F co Lu m m 0 0 0- F New,_ 133HS a3n00 ...... ... . .I oN o om F - w wow w w O O V U Y m W s r Q W x x � J- Z ZZ Z V Up e N�s3a �w J� J� W Z Z Q Q Q Q mmmm U J a� € Z p. r r Z Z O O O W JIL W -lin $ W z oa y z W CC W W JZJJ—J0 W iL W 0 OL0 EL z0Cn 0 `se ae cr3�p cznHC7i�Jp�®0��� z U® U® U®Q W HF FHHHH Lu ¢ < > F Jaz Lu m m 0 0 0- U. y� xw x x U y Woo j ¢Q W o ' QQ <<<<J CL rNM V �Y Q h U oN o om F - w wow w w O O V U Y m W s r Q W x x J- Z ZZ Z Up Z O ® �w J� J� W Z Z Q Q Q Q mmmm �r a Z o r r Z Z O O O W JIL W X f M z oa y z W CC W W JZJJ—J0 W iL W 0 OL0 EL z0Cn 0 Q > � Z cznHC7i�Jp�®0��� z U® U® U®Q W HF FHHHH Lu ¢ < W WZrrWmW�WJW W W ��FCO�Uf)�-Q-)-) F Jaz Lu m m 0 0 0- U. y� xw x x U y Woo j ¢Q W o ' QQ <<<<J CL rNM V ILL LL, WoW] N CO 7 LO M N M� M to v z (A in v to (n to to Z Q J- Z ZZ Z Up Z O ® CO J� J� W Z Z Q Q Q Q mmmm Q O ® Fm Q Z F����� Z�gJJ°l0�l l 0- Z O O O W JIL 02 ZJ>>H HQQQQ X Z H iL Q W Q W Q Z o H W 0 J Q J Q � Q U OL a- WW 0 0 H H H H W CC W W JZJJ—J0 W iL W 0 OL0 EL z0Cn 0 OC C[ CC: Z) Z) Z) Z) MQOmow-CEMOL-OL— Z cznHC7i�Jp�®0��� z U® U® U®Q W HF FHHHH — z Z W W WZrrWmW�WJW W W ��FCO�Uf)�-Q-)-) QOa®Q0�®W WW WCACOCOCO Q0 <0 »» W W W W J >OQJQZQZJH00 O W 0020200 W Cc CC 0 0 0- 008 HHC]ZOM mHHHH JZ JZJZQ200 E5FDm j U (3 U Z) CL U O_ U UA 0i1 O_ ' QQ <<<<J CL rNM V N CO 7 LO M N M� M coU co r r N (7 -'t 0 0 0 O O O OFFS Hco U)U;)U;) U U U U U U U U U r N M J— 0 �] � 0 co U) U) U) NV-ld OIa1zIWO3O s!ou!m 'tea soa7w 3 VV win s�Woo��s�o-Wa�o�eM.,M,. afle�SE . .......... 4 - PH uoIFLRSMN Pm PH POSH Jo aMn N >, zosas�i �y v oo� a - Ra, _ „a „cam _ n lO3dSOad 1W ,CJ - S-dNOCJaW oli'saoanosaa3M N 99908 'II `epinua.ueM ��-µddµ`a, L�NOSID 0:19 Mvaa o V Pisiao , OOb alms'PEONploULj.imOZE-Y ��� eNsIs3a J s,plEOOc[z)wciatl[ z e e a e ap m ase 2 Z w m Q - <NLL menen�no ?k' W as p�som'4 wooing _�o mg LLJ .1 _= W N� - 0 �r sum., 0 ww � w r F 'ix a J W m 3 w r pa�n� co O 9U w ==i q gga yF = Nz q w ZgF eS�d 4h s pL C .�i mco g8 a w ap u i co 0 a _ - w .�e's%z + w a w W.,l — LL s i �a sM m &e3V� J o< co w d w 0 Q '6w ttl �� m gezy U �� w er�s� a o � i ia �;(�� f I �I-17I T�1 133J1S � 40 �- • PC a i1q, _ I I tl g El loIV � e V I Itl �' I� •�� t1 ��� ./ � O € I' � a� I II < I I I Itl H III y a ~ PH—lFLgs-x Pm PH POeH JO OMt.[ D3dSOad 1W - S,CJ-lVNO(10 SS909 -1I 'ap[n0a.ueM 00b ales 'PEoN Pia.N!M oZei� _==m�oow��osN - �3�Ya ani p� Wam - �m� om aimsjGS= `� w a� - oo vgz N�rc�TN - ~Ns - a - w 5�w5N wG� - ahaD N 'moo xaxx��aW �m�axxu�rci�n���x�arc�.�.��5�##� .rc Ua LL3��mx a ��m smx Np«Nn�xp E� a� 8 NV -1d ONICJVHO NV-lcJ uniln I o , o , �azl ekY., �giF55933 5.e$B@ 1 � � ? / / ��� as �� •,$ 5 P� ' � � t A4R 3 _ �e gg,,F�,Q 133211S :•e; gF `• €"s?[� "se �s� — — _„� I I � — � m tgE� ? sa 3mlro� P:�• R Itea: I C sad � a s� �I sF 7I1 ��I _ tl r Intl ..cea e • 50 4� E g I y IF • _w-•. w — ” � � ��� s s � € e ��- oI II ag.M I IIR 3 ouiP p -,w pH uo lBuFsuexPua PH uakl Jo aMn PH i SOad 1W - S,CI-MOC]aW •,� >, o wmo�Wo,��o�o-Wa�o,eM.,M,. afl:�5 '1 n„ Yoli's7a^oanoTsaia P N�-11,Q jib� a, fl � - 'I\ V N J js Mvaa _ CL R 99908'II'epinue.18M P�is�iao , 5' oob alms 'pleu c[z)w M OZEY S s,pleuoQ�N[ e Iv��s3a -- _— w �10 '53'330 ON3 — tx — — _ _ — rc w D O Z O O ^J^ o bus z5n m F o.>a a � = o C LL H - - - - - - o\ / I A O + 3am�ao s Cf),I \ � 10 tl31N3] I o , o , �azl ekY., �giF55933 5.e$B@ 1 � � ? / / ��� as �� •,$ 5 P� ' � � t A4R 3 _ �e gg,,F�,Q 133211S :•e; gF `• €"s?[� "se �s� — — _„� I I � — � m tgE� ? sa 3mlro� P:�• R Itea: I C sad � a s� �I sF 7I1 ��I _ tl r Intl ..cea e • 50 4� E g I y IF • _w-•. w — ” � � ��� s s � € e ��- oI II ag.M I IIR 3 — js _ CL -- _— w �10 I o , o , �azl ekY., �giF55933 5.e$B@ 1 � � ? / / ��� as �� •,$ 5 P� ' � � t A4R 3 _ �e gg,,F�,Q 133211S :•e; gF `• €"s?[� "se �s� — — _„� I I � — � m tgE� ? sa 3mlro� P:�• R Itea: I C sad � a s� �I sF 7I1 ��I _ tl r Intl ..cea e • 50 4� E g I y IF • _w-•. w — ” � � ��� s s � € e ��- oI II ag.M I IIR 3 uuiln -u uscud -lw pH uo18u[swx Pm PH P—H Jo DMA[ D3dSOad 1W - S,(1-1VNO(10 S6S09 -1I 'ap[AUQ1J8M oob alms 'PEON Pia.N!M oZ£;Y NV -1d -10UNOO N0I808A BIOS 1 3SVHd J H Z Z Z O� U5 Q 00 CE LL w U J_ w O CL cf) a) cr Cl ® ZLLQ 0 1 J 0Q F- W w0 CO w w CO o , o / mill iu e s ss :: mnd Y s. � € aEs �, � °"� L' v' `�, •*d `Fd %�' � R `,JI tgEs .:� I amino ° , _ LU ��j�•/ � _ -- � _- :e. a ��. �� �I ?IIS �% ✓�TTT TIT -1T. r•P� ��`Q&. g',1 `'•,. ``� � `i / �� � •�. vk u 11 �.l 1�4 11 RR � � � � � � VII 3a I �S �� �� �� '€' :�— Ih , .�� � � `�. .•.. �: i p� -� I x m \� T IIR ep�<. -v°� � •�I I I� �I ISI I� � I I I�`+�l'I 6 14g1�41 I,�� � �.� '` ,�� e �� :II d . I`J V ggga ;.°�'°� iii i - ", pH—IFLgswx Poe PH PoeH Jo DMfa[ D3dSOad 1W - S,(1-1dNOCJ0 SSS09'JI `ep[AUQIJ8M oob alms 'PEON Pia.N!M oZ£i• NV -1d -10H1NOO N0I8083 BIOS II 3SVHd J H Z Z Z O O� U5 Q 00 CE LL w U J_ w O CL cf) a) cr CI O ZLLQ 0 I J 0Q F- W w0 CO w w CO W N I v ANII.N U J Z O CO Z E J w 11 J_ J O O® �CE Z w 0 803dS (INV S-IIV13O -IOUNOO NOISOH3 BIOS s�ou�pl '! sold 'm 3, wm s�uoo�ie�o-wa�o�eM.,M,. aoe�5c . ............... - PH uo19,4.-x Pua PH P—H Jo OMt.[ >, zosas�i �ymr oo. a - Ra, _ .„a „cam n 103dSOH J 1W - S,O-VNOOaW on "saoanosaanx � ^ N n,�3 77^^ nOTS3i � 99909-11'epinue. BM ��-x7d��7j NT'^—T Mvaa o �'— V Pisiao , 00'b alms 'PEON Pi08u!M OZE'Y s,plEOociatl[ J O Cl) _ cr W o CL LLJ Hiw z Hiw .e - - - - J �* —* 11111111111=11 W z Z W II ¢ 0 Q -1 CO J ap w O - 0 - - - U =111N — a 2 x Z w - Q — — — W Q �I I w — — J III LLJ z oo =a3a='w �3 ulllllllllll o Eio <2e 33 w z - - LU LL it- - W U<pw - U spa 1 H zi z , As LL o 9 sC - Om=== _ �w�w� pry¢o'FeN� W- - y p~ - __ es - - \~ mo Oo�'wa -m a '¢9 - ¢ev Naom 6zzm Z,' U6 - J m w Om a Ga�N 1 wa neem Z OJ m mxn um Om jjj- h Fa WYw s� s� xvw .e� ll m .zL Q _ OCO 2— OzzQaW _ - WE solE4.61- T gip$ - 'W^uo�o� ��aNa moaw�=<mma"mwm 'Nsaza'a o Z - — - _ w<�r<�Z2omwmw�wm�� - - _ Z - - - - p Q - qpsg - - - o�<aaammo - N> zw mw as _ x< m �o aoz�pp�wWk��3�"> wo�pa= = s o p T ouaW� m w m�awom zoopQm W�=�� a Z 00 Via= air W io mm�a 0�5 $m �jj < iLLommo m � w zoo eiw<a5m Nw-G51,—w�lEi8- 0 �Qa =�� o ww z �w m zm��woo U � mT -.2 03 m � �m� c~n amm o W ��=wpm „opom� a w w x �owma �mmm=�a - - >wx �. 3 - 0 o r �zm S _ - _ - U - - ow W - 3�S"mprc"Sr���Wz'"y - Z - — m -Y_ <�ioai��m�zmUNWaoo��� Q O� - - - wa:?ma=Y=zn3o m=zm<=<ma COOm �a_wWWa ��`p��a�o���'=_��ap���p<'E�h� H�<m<d mo'-a<�Ns�o<=8o M, maim m m_amaa 0 3 _ S -11d13(1 1O3f OHd s!ou!m'� —d Jw 3 VV wm s�Roo��s�o-Wa�oteM.,M,. aflewSR . ............... - PH uo19,4. ex p- PH P—H Jo aM€. >, zosas�i �ymr oo. a - Ra, _ .„a „cam n 1O3dSOad 1W - S,CI-MOCION 111 "saoanosaan �N n,�3 77^^s�TT7i7x � 99909'JI`epinue. BM -�7d�f4j NT'^—T Mvaa /I\ a �'— V P�is�iao , �balms'PEONc[z)w MOZE-Y`� eNs�s3a J s,plEOOciatl[ s a W f e O Z U 3 `S € a 0 co C 3 a d€ s r DF£ „6 co Z d w z - J sa s Q e = e _ LL Ial t e E - - URI _ _, 1 g” tl E . S 5 4 �g 3 Q g W o § d2a a J m oll z i a e a i • $ j i- . II _ s — r- - z 00 J Sfl ' l! sw w wt -s e �� CC /x'/' s fltl S a4 r'_rl� £sIlio ;t P b6 �Ek' tt.tlt w.9- 5 'III, i kl wwRrit �. in EeC n "J I q3 9 6 1 � c HI i = tl> uqq flS �� 9 l s J . ca z �T fla � v� IMI r to SNOUVO131O3JS 133f OHd B�Ou�lll'J —d'1W wm a�uoo�ie�o-wa�o,eM.,M,. aoeu5& . ............... n,�3 PH uo19,4. ex Pua PH P—H Jo aMr. >, zosas�i �ymr oo. a - Ra, - �.„a „cam "saoanosaan � 1O3dSOad 1W - S,CJ�VNOCJaW 77^^s�TT7i7x � -�7d��7j - n N 111 99909'JI'epinue. BM NT'^—T OOb alms 'PEONc[ow MOZE-Y`� Mvaa V eNs�s3a J P,isiao , s,plEOOciatl[ �e O LL z= WWom CL 0o me" � smN a3 - - _ CO - Qrc- _- - _ - -_ �� Na ✓r _ - �3wP_Maa- <� - - _ -o - - e Np 9 nWfo- _ _ - - - - --- - - z- -- - - - - M - - z- - - - - - 0 _ -- LL _ - - w�a -_ 'w') Iz w -- 9w on z -ws - M ffiT Aw_ _ - _ __ - - 9wp Waco Ms 385 eiF L. 8_ - - - - - ma _� -n—F. - _ _ _ a�_- - aw - w N - o g5- ���` v - - -- oiom� _ - - _ - - _ z- _ _ _ _ __ei _ - - _ - _ p�3 -a 6 o a gh 5 - - - - - E2 3 2 �Npew __ _ -8 - - - - _ - _ _ _ _ - 32_ g—q- _ _N _ --_ - PQq< - - - _- -9,- - - _ _ __ cesa�rcuw� - _ - - _ 'lpo _ a - () v New _ - Fy No V - w LEGAL DESCRIPTION GRIP111C SCALE ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE 11 -TI INT 1 1. N- I 11-IIAN, A '.011.1"A"T 1/� w ­ I �l I'll 11, AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY T " " I", "N.- N.- "'. , ::17�TIlN­l NI T" 11.1 IT I TI I -IN 11 -1 NAM 11 ITI ­­ 1 /1 1 ­­ zT AREAxSU oay IT' -111A. 1ANIT.-I "AINNI, A, A' I 1 -1 11 M N- IAST ALONG INE IAIT UNI AI "I III 'I III ITT 11 ­TTTllT 1-1 IT 1- - I _� I �IIT I' " N,_ I_, ", i7Nll I "I 'ITI I'll I'll I UNE SITA 10T,� 1AffA��T� Zl%T'TlT`llMone N0nTo,­ 1. 111N. I.I. N 11-1 �l .- I N. TIT A , to m�xtr uveas (uAsm oafs) SITE LOCA7IQY -GET �T :L N-11=111 111-T 11-T 11 EIE-T .- 1111TI 111. 111 � 1.1 1 1. �IN­ I AT I 1/� � '1 11 N.TT. 11111 1. 1111 Il .1 -1 11IN11AAL I.,. 1 1.1- 11 IllAll 11 *Arl.lA1111 1.1 IN.1 IIINNI AN. - -Al. 21 ITT- TI A., I A N- IT N'll A., N"I". I T ROB. c- aEn 3) VICINITY MAP SCHEDULE B EXCEPTIONS ❑ :R6 1.1 NAl�lTIllNI%llNNN L,, 589'5]52 � T� AN 11A .111MAT117II-I'Al. - - - - - - - - - - ' IAA N INN1.1 IT 1.1 All 11 1111TI -ITNI. .1 1 A. A- 1�­& N, A 111- (1) - (1) - TI.1 -2 A MFNT ❑ ��rDE� `Aly� U � '6=2 , ANN, ANN Earew )Y IN A MIT_U,2N� LN T -1 N� IN31 NE IN % 1� ILI I "I'A I Fl 11INT TI, y 2Z`N'Q"`2UQ`A "EUMST' J,� -1- 12 II -INT -1- A F1 A TME Ty "W'AN-AE11M 1A _Nla WT I Z2212 AT '1 1.11 �1­ -1 F, 7y _ _ _ _ NAN 1- -.1 1111T I- I- INI M- :N-..' I'.- -Al A IAAI`AURT,��T -, =I N� INY.PNIVAI RH Pa TEC " I " Ana �� I I'l �NTITIIT A UIT16 TZ XMITIM..-T.-F 41'�'ER`T`Y"AsN`M`N­ 11-NAIIIN'N.- - - ITII Tl. IN- . N­IINT Fill 'I EnA,I,T,ll,U,T F­IITIAJC�l� =I -1 A Otl I. do a I AT 01 NNI 11-- Nl III IN NIT L_ �I IN-- ..IN IMI) IIIT -N. -:� .1 A, IA Z,, 11, 1111TI IF TI A -1111I ­ are ­ mTME -.NR.T 1. IF ­E.11I IITF_l� FlIlFC�EPT1,1,lT A �. G 1. 1 AI, L AA, A% y 4 U. A .1 x .1 N.1 -11 N- I F -I 11N�_ S' Ll I _T I F FI I I FI I I I I �N �N I I a'LS 1 a' 1111Y 1� IN mE -Al IF N -I II ,.11 ITTI C-11- N-11 -1 11 1-11 IY .11A. TlI NNE ­Nc AN EIIII- N- IF AY 1. INS ­ F- W`N R AN ­ I (ANNAN T� �E .-.E III ANNJAL " '_'� AIN� Ll I IN. III T,I - ..A.Al .U.- A . IA. � 1ITIT l�. - I A I T"S 11- IE -E TORMS TI "' 'T' ` ­ MU" ITA"N­ I.R T- ­ MIFA-I I ", I a 211 TTT�IINT�,�_TO �­ 2,�Ul�l,�NJ, MSTA, ARD L NIQU R'MENTA a C - ,I NIIN AlW �l 11 N-1 �N TTE 11 -IT -11. 1. -ITINT .11.61T 211 -1 �� �o ®�, wrre�arss° lll,­AAA� FaPRmExrr x N T� N I TINN_ %EE12.' I A- ANN I— 1%T TNE N.N. Axa -1 -1w 111 .111. pf -p ZONING NOT);: ITTI -1 NIA -11- 11 111. IF ..NT PRAI-T PAR EL I 1� INN. A I -T- IN -NT '_&N A, -N T - t'l ooW ,Trare. IN -1 I IN -1.1 111 1- N III I I NIN.IM .,mares , II III axN.R 111N. 21 111 I LIT 1-NNAE%= I .-MMMM ­­ 1-11 � IET NN I ITANI 1 -1, I N -N - -Al 1. IT 1p"i MUZZ .A 8 L"M AlYWRIM XXA'NAMl132lS`IlTlIl­ Al ANN -ING LNI IT— M- ­ M" -A- NN -- r Ra )INTAIII 13 ANIAIR I 1 11 TlI I N Mll ­ 4. IAII ITL N - A=T Nl � All. lANNNIA ­ ANN 1 1-1- 1.11NI I -I . .1 C'N'j"I AA %1.M 'AMT1INNMEC12AMMUMNMm .IT A 11TA- E yamS ABBREVIATIONS 'ANN' Nt -N, A, N ­ I -CE LEGEND LINE LEGEND -E. . . . 11 TA' - - - - - - - ' 7 89'1752"W(�2 2' SURVEYORS CERTIFICATION ��,TMA I � ­ATON � OILAWANI =A�E.� NIND N 'ANA ANE xmxnxrc ­ 14 A A. -I 11 ITLI I A', ..I _KENSINGTIDN 'I MAP PLAT ANN T"I RUR NI I = - "`IlS.T.oZ'E" _ IN, NN, a now 'TANNIAll ITA L Zl= IT. RE N_ WEST R D nrF �171 Al- 1' 11 111 111 N11111 1-1 1 (A) C ) _ 'I NF 1- A I T1. AIIN - -1- IN - 12, 1- T_o_ _N SCOTT IINI I III 1117­�ll `� *AUR , L IM _NN, o o Lu Lu Lu IT IN—. -1 1-1 . 15. INEN. IAINRIN II/- F_ A_ T_-, —, -I- A� �J­F IRA 1-111111-2- 1. uTrLTW STATEINTT N, COMPASS IN -D-1 LC 12-2617 O SURVEYING LTD 7-8-14 !MRA �Tj ILIA I— . -Y I ­NTNl­ NI- AT—O =­Il`TIN AN' ­V c 0% 2631 DS P 1-100 MCDON C ­ -WAY, iL _ _0"O�TIGN ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY GRAPHIC SCALE of -- — — — — — — --- — — — pw� A 71 y, 417 el le, W + ---------- 4 IS, .......... �l 1111 —11111 A' 11111.11 \i I,G awa°ws,w e, d IS 7 A, r'L res IF '4 77 '(PURIP" TOP, ROAD — RA W LLI COMPASS UTILITY STATEMENT Ak �d,LCI_�107 SURVEYING LTD z 't KfCDON —IS CORPORA I J- ... ....... ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY GRAPHIC SALE X, xn � .00a o saE, a ER,°'' �PEa oa��E�, T,o,�< �� c o�589'57'52"E(M) 1930g2I m) I fi I I li I I � I I I I I I I PEiGE A- I I =o I I a I I ® I I I I I II I I I I \ _ oI� I I I I I I \ i z5 ®---- J d � z I � I � I I I I I � I I � I I � I I I I I I I I I `I I I I I I I I I I I I I � I �m I I I I I I I I I I I «powz ------------- - 1-+ Na95752'w(M) 19s.2'(M) II ,a.1 ;R.—EIT1 II II II II - k K-ENS NGT-GN ROAD-- 0 AD-- (-TH VARIES) onP=da,o��m. P,onn,h..o��ova.a��o AE,„,000.d„g L.!-1 COMPASS ® M n T`I (IEI C12-261- 1' f1^ UTILITY STATEMENT o E O SURVEYING LTD - E'-IRAl ITIR110 MCDON SLD'S CGUOPkTION wsw., Sao- m,x�uxo�wwuxo Axa �`R'"`"�5 N0' ,sbelrn o_�,. o-9,« t„x o o�� uw . ��,��� o_ •"° K�Call oerore yon dig. PuIIII.W uscu - pH-l8u[swx Poe PH PoeH Jo OMt.[ D3dSOad 1W - S,CJ-ldNO(10 S6S09 -1I 'ap[AUQlJ8M oot alms 'PEoN Pia.N!M oZHr ppm � 53 R 4 '� ffi� SPS: H, eek s,e� Vp RR 8"Nz �Wao p " £X5c &9W8y maaey "plan me"Mr 2vo "a=B�a"o gz�3 �aGa - 5 y Ek k& tIia s11����aaLL � € 4 5 €I SrI -- =a 11 6 NV7J DJVOSCJNV-1 N N NI J IINVI e N N1111 U J -77-m �4) rWW�= ' Oi000 Z'a pp zHe.i � J � - d vih •mom F uui nnn viii ilj�// � a Z0. 0 g71�+s ppm � 53 R 4 '� ffi� SPS: H, eek s,e� Vp RR 8"Nz �Wao p " £X5c &9W8y maaey "plan me"Mr 2vo "a=B�a"o gz�3 �aGa - 5 y Ek k& tIia s11����aaLL � € 4 5 €I SrI -- =a 11 6 NV7J DJVOSCJNV-1 N N NI J IINVI e N N1111 U J -77-m �4) rWW�= ' Oi000 Z'a pp zHe.i � J � - d vih •mom >4 viii ilj�// g71�+s >4 viii ilj�// AF I I D D pH _l8u[swx Poe PH PoeH Jo OMt.[ D3dSOHd 1W - S,CJ_lVNO(10 536S09 -1I 'ap[AUQlJ8M oot alms 'PEoN Pia.N!M oZHr v 0 NV_ld 1N3W3AVd nHHl-3NH(1 D � D D � D N � r N 11111111 IT--�#— Tq --111 limmilmo v 0 NV_ld 1N3W3AVd nHHl-3NH(1 D � D D � D N � r N IT--�#— Tq iL SDI I o rr Wz wraNNo w Y fp Y D D v � JJ D ec D ❑ �D W _ --- I Lm rd$w 1 G � �o O i oeoo N dJ - I - wo =o w ow D I I I I II o D D Nd -Id 1Nauin03 ndHl-3NHCJ N N n� 1V4 F N e NMvaa � Nosoa ..e n�is3a � U ®2 V Q Im LLL LCL Q CE M� 2 w D a PH uol8u[swx Pm PH PueH Jo OMt.[ �y 103dSOad 1W - S,CI-ldNOCh SSS09 -11 '01 [nua.ueM P is iao 5Si oob almS 'PEoll Pia.MM OZeOPI s'P[euoQo6V ON ?mow N o dRRA a, z 2.2 `Po x [1FJ g W -2 v � JJ D ec D ❑ �D W _ --- I Lm rd$w 1 G � �o O i oeoo N dJ - I - wo =o w ow D I I I I II o D D Nd -Id 1Nauin03 ndHl-3NHCJ N N n� 1V4 F N e NMvaa � Nosoa ..e n�is3a � U ®2 V Q Im LLL LCL Q CE M� 2 w D mIVl3a nHHl-3NHG 'saoanosaa sioug[C� sw JW wms�uzos'1y;�1,rofl �'�o. „.. afleawE ° - B PH uo18u1smx Pm PH PueH Jo OMt.[ , A ' p'� 1O3dSOH J 1W- S,CI-MOCION V V oliN Y ^v�T77 99908'11 `Bpinua.ueM lligo l U4 P�is�iao ,`Mv , OOb alms'PEONMOZE-Y eNMlsaaa sp1EOOc[z)w ^ Joor cl 60 - ° /Lb - J 9 t4 r a - � s o m II C) © n 6i Go II Q O - II � - IV a F < / O e 3�p o 2 _ W w ry �I Q a -Q s z w W ma U5 M = w 6 0 Ell Ll 3 W Y O a ¢ ¢ 4 i p Q � W a W Om w i U O i i i 4 z Z Q s mivl3a nHHl-ENHa sloulal'�aso,dJw B PH uo18u1sudx Pm PH P—H Jo 1O3dSOad 1W- 8,(]-IvNOaOW V V wms=uzos'�y;��'�1�ro oli'saoanosaa 7^ no— �i^_ o ?I N J Mvaa 99909-11`01[AUQ. BM P,is�iao , oot a1mS s,p[euocJON[ U) J H W 2 H i d € _ of W FE [4? Z 3 Q O ¢ pQ o m Q m w Cc LL s o i HI a ttF cs` �e 17 5�3sM um – O FoI W o 3 o O o w T - - m f 0 2 _ o A U z F rw o -A JIw Y E F '€ °y 's 4 r ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANT AND VARIATION FOR PARKING LOT SETBACK FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13 WEST RAND ROAD, MOUNT PROSPECT, IL WHEREAS, Goldstine, Skrodzki, Russian, Nemec and Hoff, Ltd for McDonald’s USA, LLC (“Petitioner”), has filed a petition for a Conditional Use to operate a Drive-Through Restaurant and Variation for Parking Lot Setback, for property located at 13 West Rand Road (“Property”) and legally described as; PARCEL1: LOT2INUNITYRESUBDIVISIONOFLOT1INDOYLE'SSUBDIVISION,BEINGINTHESOUTHWEST 1/4OFSECTION27,TOWNSHIP42NORTH,RANGE11,EASTOFTHETHIRDPRINCIPALMERIDIAN, INCOOKCOUNTY,ILLINOIS. BEINGTHESAMEAS: LOT2INUNITYRESUBDIVISIONOFLOT1INDOYLE'SSUBDIVISION,BEINGINTHESOUTHWEST 1/4OFSECTION27,TOWNSHIP42NORTH,RANGE11,EASTOFTHETHIRDPRINCIPALMERIDIAN, MOREPARTICULARLYDESCRIBEDASFOLLOWSBASEDONMEASUREDVALUES: BEGINNINGATTHENORTHEASTCORNEROFSAIDLOT2;THENCESOUTH00DEGREES06 MINUTES45SECONDSEASTALONGTHEEASTLINEOFSAIDLOT2,ADISTANCEOF431.85FEET TOTHESOUTHEASTCORNEROFSAIDLOT2;THENCENORTH89DEGREES57MINUTES52 SECONDSWESTALONGTHESOUTHLINEOFSAIDLOT2,ADISTANCEOF193.02FEETTOTHE SOUTHWESTCORNEROFSAIDLOT2;THENCENORTH00DEGREES06MINUTES45SECONDS WESTALONGTHEWESTLINEOFSAIDLOT2,ADISTANCEOF431.85FEETTOTHENORTHWEST CORNEROFSAIDLOT2;THENCESOUTH89DEGREES57MINUTES52SECONDSEASTALONG THENORTHLINEOFSAIDLOT2,ADISTANCEOF193.02FEETTOTHEPOINTOFBEGINNING,IN COOKCOUNTY,ILLINOIS. PARCEL2: PERPETUALANDNON-EXCLUSIVEEASEMENTAPPURTENANTTOANDFORTHEBENEFITOF PARCEL1OVER,UPONANDTHROUGHTHENORTH90.00FEETOFLOT1INUNITY RESUBDIVISIONOFLOT1INDOYLE'SSUBDIVISION,BEINGINTHESOUTHWEST1/4OFSECTION 27,TOWNSHIP42NORTH,RANGE11,EASTOFTHETHIRDPRINCIPALMERIDIAN,INCOOK COUNTY,ILLINOIS,FORTHEPURPOSEOFINGRESSANDEGRESS,ASCREATEDBYWARRANTY DEEDFROMTHETALMANHOMEFEDERALSAVINGSANDLOANASSOCIATIONOFILLINOISTO BOBEVANSFARMS,INC.,ACORPORATIONOFOHIO,DATEDJULY11,1984ANDRECORDEDJULY 19,1984ASDOCUMENT27178783. Property Index Nos. 03-27-301-022-0000 and 03-27-301-023-0000; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner seeks Conditional Use Permit to operate a Drive-Through Restaurant and a Variation to allow a five and four-fifths foot (5.8’) parking lot setback along the west property line. WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on the request for Conditional Use Permit and Variation designated as PZ-25-14, before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Village of Mount Prospect th on the 28 day of August, 2014, pursuant to due and proper notice thereof having been published in the th Daily Herald Newspaper on the 13 day of August, 2014; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has submitted its findings and recommendations to the Mayor and Board of Trustees in support of the request being the subject of PZ-25-14; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have given consideration to the request herein and have determined that the same meets the standards of the Village and that the granting of the proposed Conditional Use permit and Variation would be in the best interest of the Village. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS ACTING IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR HOME RULE POWERS: SECTION ONE: That the recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated herein as findings of fact by the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect. SECTION TWO: The Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect grant a Conditional Use permit to operate a Drive Through Restaurant as shown on the Site Plan, a copy of which is attached and made a part of as Exhibit “A.” SECTION THREE: The Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect grant a Variation to allow a five and four-fifths foot (5.8’) parking lot setback along the west property line subject to the following conditions: 1. Development of the site in general conformance with the site plan prepared by Watermark Engineering dated, August 15, 2014; and 2. Development of the building in general conformance with the elevations prepared by McDonald’s U.S. Research and Development dated July 10, 2014; and 3. Development of the site in general conformance with the landscape plan prepared by Watermark Engineering, dated August 15, 2014, but revised to comply with Village Code; and 4. Submittal of a photometric (lighting) plan and fixture cut sheets that comply with Village Code requirements; and 5. Compliance with all Development, Fire, Building and other Village Codes and regulations including signage. SECTION FOUR: 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 September, 2014. ______________________________________ Arlene A. Juracek Mayor ATTEST: __________________________________ M. Lisa Angell Village Clerk H:\\CLKO\\files\\WIN\\ORDINANC\\Con Usepz25-1413randsept2014 PH—1FLgSwx Pm PH POeH JO DffiN D3dSOad 1W - S,(1-1dNO(10 WWQ -1I 'apffnUQ1J8M oob alms 'PEON Pia.N!M oZ£;Y NV -Id 3Ia13WO30 N N N e N�saa U U J z m # � w Qm _e r F 'ix a J m , DO-) W g8 a „a HEY 0 � 0 -- s w v i M a a w W - LL i �a M s 0 0'21) CO a o � F- ------- I II till T[ I—'I L __�� 133211S 7/// // g D r has e V I Itl 'g14.,i• R IIR O@ & �in` �• ~ e � y ��V • � �3f of III �R e Iw)M. mH _ � d J La� - ml Elk J m3 ag" m ms"m a UP 2 95'w`8 m 1 W;og � J M� H81111 3m �s �`g 11 o� too a va > > > of K< NV -Id 3Ia13WO30 N N N e N�saa U U J z m # � w Qm _e r F 'ix a J m , DO-) W g8 a „a HEY 0 � 0 -- s w v i M a a w W - LL i �a M s 0 0'21) CO a o � F- ------- I II till T[ I—'I L __�� 133211S 7/// // g D r has e V I Itl 'g14.,i• R IIR O@ & �in` �• ~ e � y ��V • � �3f of III �R e Iw)M. mH _ Mount Prospect Mount Prospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: VILLAGE MANAGER MICHAEL JANONIS FROM: PROJECT ENGINEER DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 2014 SUBJECT: CENTRAL ROAD & ARTHUR AVENUE, CENTRAL ROAD & BOSCH DRIVEWAY PEDESTRIAN CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS Background The Village of Mount Prospect in cooperation with the Village of Arlington Heights wishes to improve the pedestrian crossings at the intersections of Central Road & Arthur Avenue and Central Road & Bosch Driveway. Central Road is a five -lane, 35 mph speed limit roadway under the jurisdiction of the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) that carries approximately 21,200 vehicles per day. Arthur Avenue is a collector street that Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights share and carries approximately 7,300 vehicles per day. Bosch Driveway is privately owned. The intersections are currently controlled with traffic signals and have incomplete pedestrian crossing systems. Further, Melas Park, multi -family complexes, and single family homes are all near these busy intersections. The Village has received requests from concerned residents over the years to improve the pedestrian crossings at these intersections. Neither intersection has a marked crosswalk or pedestrian crossing signal to cross Central Road. Today, there is one crosswalk to cross Arthur Avenue on the north side of the intersection and one crosswalk to cross Bosch Driveway. Project Scope At Central Road & Arthur Avenue, pedestrian crossing signals and marked crosswalks will be added to the three legs of the intersection that currently have none. Sidewalk will also be installed at the southwest corner to provide a complete sidewalk system. At Central Road & Bosch Driveway, pedestrian crossing signals and a marked crosswalk will be added across Central Road. After execution of an Intergovernmental Agreement between the two Villages, a Request for Proposal will be sent to engineering firms to develop construction drawings and specifications. A recommendation to hire an engineering firm will then be presented to the Village Board of Trustees. The engineering firm will assist in securing a permit from IDOT in addition to developing construction drawings. The two Villages have already collaborated to receive conceptual approval from IDOT as they own and maintain the traffic signal systems at both intersections. Once the construction drawings have been approved and both Villages have budgeted for construction, we will receive bids from qualified contractors through the standard bidding process. A recommendation to hire a contractor will then be presented to the Village Board of Trustees. page 1 of 2 Central Road & Arthur Avenue, Central Road & Bosch Driveway Pedestrian Crossing Improvements September 3, 2014 Intergovernmental Agreement The Villages of Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights are to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement as a condition of the project. The estimated total cost of $78,000.00 includes design engineering, construction and inspection costs. As a majority of the work is in Arlington Heights, all phases of the project will be split 2/3 Arlington Heights ($52,000.00) and 1/3 Mount Prospect ($26,000.00). Mount Prospect will serve as the lead agency and provide project management as the requests for this project have been generated by our residents. Arlington Heights will reimburse Mount Prospect their share of the project based on actual design and construction costs. Both Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights have sufficient funds to complete design engineering in this year's budget. Construction will be considered in 2015 but is contingent upon both communities having sufficient funds. Upon completion of the project, IDOT will maintain the new pedestrian signals. There will be no additional maintenance costs associated with the new pedestrian signals. Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights will be responsible to refresh the crosswalks as needed in the future. The Village of Arlington Heights approved the Intergovernmental Agreement at their August 18, 2014 Village Board Meeting. The Village of Mount Prospect Attorney has reviewed and approved the Intergovernmental Agreement. Recommendation It is Staff's recommendation that the Village Board of Trustees approve the Intergovernmental Agreement between the Villages of Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights, and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Please include this item on the September 16th Village Board Meeting Agenda. Matthew P. Lawrie I concur with the aboverecomrTYendation. Sean P. Dors44N ector of Public Works Attachments: Location Map & Intergovernmental Agreement h:\engineering\traffic\signals\pedestrian\central-arthur\vb_iga_memo.docx page 2 of 2 .kVM3ARIa HaSOS z z Y J I a LL a co N 3 a 1 r,N L) cn c) O v w z p W I x RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT AND THE VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF PEDESTRIAN CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS AT THE INTERSECTIONS OF CENTRAL ROAD AND ARTHUR AVENUE AND CENTRAL ROAD AND BOSCH DRIVEWAY WHEREAS, the Village of Mount Prospect is a home rule unit of government pursuant to the Illinois Constitution of 1970; and WHEREAS, the provisions of the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, (5 ILCS 220/1 et seq.,) authorizes and encourages intergovernmental cooperation; and WHEREAS, the Village of Mount Prospect and the Village of Arlington Heights are units of government within the meaning of the Constitution of the State of Illinois, 1970 Article VII, Section 10, having the power and authority to enter into an intergovernmental agreement; and WHEREAS, in order to ensure the safety of pedestrians and the motoring public, the Village of Arlington Heights and the Village of Mount Prospect wish to make pedestrian safety improvements at the intersections of Central Road and Arthur Avenue and Central Road and Bosch Driveway; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect have deemed that the best interests of the Village will be served by entering into the Intergovernmental Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS,PURSUANT TO ITS HOME RULE POWERS: SECTION ONE: The Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect do hereby authorize and direct the Mayor to execute the Intergovernmental Agreement between the Village of Mount Prospect and the Village of Arlington Heights for pedestrian safety improvements at the intersections of Central Road and Arthur Avenue and Central Road and Bosch Driveway attached hereto and made a part of this Resolution as Exhibit “A.” SECTION TWO: That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval in the manner provided by law. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: PASSED and APPROVED this day of September, 2014. _________________________________ Arlene A. Juracek Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ M. Lisa Angell Village Clerk INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT CENTRAL ROAD At Arthur Avenue VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS CENTRAL ROAD At Bosch Driveway This Intergovernmental Agreement (the "Agreement") is made and entered into by and between the Village of Mount Prospect ("Mount Prospect"), a municipal corporation of the State of Illinois, and the Village of Arlington Heights ("Arlington Heights"), a municipal corporation of the State of Illinois. Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights are sometimes collectively referred to as the "Parties." RF.f TTAT ,C WHEREAS, the Constitution of the State of Illinois, 1970, Article VII, Section 10, authorizes units of local government to contract or otherwise associate among themselves in any manner not prohibited by law or ordinance; and WHEREAS, the provisions of the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, (5 ILCS 220/1 et seq. ), authorize and encourage intergovernmental cooperation; and WHEREAS, Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights are units of government within the meaning of the Constitution of the State of Illinois, 1970, Article VII, Section 10, having the power and authority to enter into an intergovernmental agreement; and WHEREAS, in order to ensure the safety of pedestrians and the motoring public, Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights wish to make pedestrian safety improvements at the intersections of Central Road and Arthur Avenue and Central Road and Bosch Driveway; and WHEREAS, the improvement is described as additional pedestrian signals and appurtenances to provide a complete crossing system at both intersections, sidewalks, Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") compliant sidewalk ramps and crosswalk pavement markings (hereinafter called "Project"); and WHEREAS, Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights, by this instrument, desire to memorialize their respective obligations and responsibilities toward plan development, engineering, construction and funding, as well as future maintenance responsibilities of the completed Project; and NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, covenants, terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, the Parties hereto agree as follows: 1 SECTION 1. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS The above recitals are incorporated into this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. SECTION 2. TERM AND TERMINATION This Agreement between Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights shall not become effective unless authorized and executed by authorized representatives of both municipalities. This Agreement is a legal, valid and binding agreement, enforceable against both Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights in accordance with its terms. This Agreement shall terminate upon completion of the Project. SECTION 3. PROJECT FUNDS 3.1 Mount Prospect's Share of the Project. Mount Prospect's share of the expenses for the Project shall be equal to 33% of the total costs of the Project that consist of design engineering, construction engineering and construction costs and is estimated as $25,740. 3.2 Arlington Heights' Share of the Project. Arlington Heights' share of the expenses for the Project shall be equal to 67% of the total costs of the Project that consist of design engineering, construction engineering and construction costs and is estimated as $52,260. 3.3 Cost Estimates. The Mount Prospect share and the Arlington Heights share are more fully described in the Funding Breakdown for the Project which is incorporated and attached hereto as Exhibit A. The funding Breakdown is only an estimate and does not limit the financial obligations of the parties as described in §§ 3.1 and 3.2, above. SECTION 4. PROJECT REVIEW AND APPROVAL The Project will require review and approval from the Illinois Department of Transportation ("IDOT"). A permit from IDOT will be needed prior to construction and such permit will be issued to Mount Prospect as the Lead Agent for the Project. SECTION 5. ENGINEERING CONSULTANT AND CONTRACTOR 5.1 An engineering consultant will need to be retained for the Project and a contractor will be needed for Project construction. 5.2 The engineering consultant will provide professional services for developing plans and specifications for the Project, incorporating the pedestrian signal timing into the overall traffic signal timing program, obtaining necessary approvals from IDOT, providing a construction cost estimate, assisting with the bid process and providing construction inspection. 2 5.3 The contractor shall manage the construction activities related to the Project and meet all the requirements set forth by IDOT and Mount Prospect and/or Arlington Heights and included in the engineering plans and specifications. SECTION 6. MOUNT PROSPECT'S RESPONSIBILITIES 6.1 Mount Prospect as the Lead Agent. Mount Prospect shall act as the Lead Agent for the Project. As the Lead Agent, Mount Prospect will have oversight for the plan development phase of the Project, the bid process and procedures, and the construction phase. 6.2 Engineering Consultant and Contractor. Mount Prospect will secure the engineering consultant and the contractor who shall perform the services described in Section 5 above, with the input and concurrence of Arlington Heights. Mount Prospect shall have the sole expense for the costs of any Request for Proposals ("RFP") and/or bidding processes required to secure the services of the engineering consultant and the contractor for the Project. 6.3 Design Engingering. Mount Prospect shall conduct design engineering and prepare the Project construction plans, specifications, estimates and contract documents, with the input and concurrence of Arlington Heights, and obtain the necessary approvals, including from IDOT. 6.4 Payment of Engineering Consultant and Contractor. Mount Prospect shall pay the engineering consultant and the Project contractor directly. 6.5 Construction. Mount Prospect shall provide construction engineering and ensure that the Project is built in accordance with approved design plans, specifications and a construction contract. 6.6 Equipment. All pedestrian signal equipment shall be of the type and brand that is acceptable to IDOT. Mount Prospect shall be responsible for securing IDOT approval for the pedestrian signal equipment. One copy of all approved catalog cuts shall be furnished to IDOT prior to installation. 6.7 As -Built Drawings. Mount Prospect shall furnish IDOT as -built construction drawings prior to the Final Inspection of the Project. 6.8 Invoicing and Reimbursement. Mount Prospect shall invoice Arlington Heights and seek reimbursement for its share of the expense for the Project design engineering, construction engineering and construction. 6.10 Public Notification of the Project. Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights shall each coordinate and control public notification of the Project scope, timing and duration for its community through methods of communication such as village newsletters, websites, etc. 3 SECTION 7. ARLINGTON HEIGHTS' RESPONSIBILITIES 7.1 Engineering Consultant. Arlington Heights shall provide input with the selection of the engineering consultant who will perform the duties described in Section 5, above. 7.2 Plan Development. Arlington Heights shall provide input with all decisions pertaining to the development of Project plans. 7.3 Project Construction. Arlington Heights shall provide input with all decisions pertaining to Project construction. 7.4 Bid Process. Arlington Heights shall provide input with all decisions pertaining to bid process for the Project. 7.5 Final Inspection. Arlington Heights shall participate in the Final Inspection of the Project once construction is completed. 7.6 Payments to Mount Prospect. Mount Prospect shall pay the costs for Project design engineering, construction engineering and construction directly. Mount Prospect shall send Arlington Heights an invoice for its share of the Project costs within 90 days of completion of the three phases: design engineering, construction engineering, and construction. Arlington Heights shall pay Mount Prospect within 90 days after receipt of said invoices from Mount Prospect. SECTION 8. MAINTENANCE 8.1 Ownership of Traffic Signals at the Intersections. IDOT owns the traffic signals at the intersections of Central Road and Arthur Avenue and Central Road and Bosch Driveway, including pedestrian signals and it shall own the pedestrian signals installed as part of the Proj ect. 8.2 Maintenance at the Central Road and Arthur Avenue Intersection. IDOT oversees maintenance of the traffic signals, including the pedestrian signals, at the Central Road and Arthur Avenue intersection and pays 100% of the maintenance costs. This arrangement shall continue with regard to the pedestrian signals that are part of the Proj ect. 8.3 Maintenance at the Central Road and Bosch Driveway Intersection. IDOT oversees maintenance of the traffic signals, including the pedestrian signals, at the Central Road and Bosch Driveway intersection and Mount Prospect reimburses IDOT 100% of the maintenance costs on a quarterly basis. This arrangement shall continue with regard to the pedestrian signals that are part of the Project. 4 SECTION 9. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE Indemnification and Insurance. The maintenance of the traffic signals, including those installed as part of the Project, shall be conducted by IDOT pursuant to an existing agreement between the Parties and IDOT for ongoing maintenance of designated intersections in Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights over which IDOT has jurisdiction. All applicable indemnification and insurance provisions set forth in the current existing maintenance agreement(s) between IDOT and Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights shall be in full force and effect with regard to the maintenance of the traffic signals, including those installed as part of the Project, at the intersections of Central Road and Arthur Avenue and Central Road and Bosch Driveway. SECTION 10. GENERAL PROVISIONS 10.1 Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be interpreted under, and governed by, the laws of the State of Illinois, without regard to conflicts of laws principles. Any claim, suit, action, or proceeding brought in connection with this Agreement shall be in the Circuit Court of Cook County and each Party hereby irrevocably consents to the personal and subject matter jurisdiction of such court an waives any claim that such court does not constitute a convenient and appropriate venue for such claims, suits, actions or proceedings. 10.2 Default. Mount Prospect shall be in default hereunder in the event of a material breach by Mount Prospect of any term or condition of this Agreement including, but not limited to, a representation or warranty, where Mount Prospect has failed to cure such breach within 30 days after written notice of breach is given to Mount Prospect by Arlington Heights, setting forth the nature of such breach. Failure of Arlington Heights to give written notice of breach to Mount Prospect shall not be deemed to be a waiver of Arlington Heights' right to assert such breach at a later time. Upon default by Mount Prospect, Arlington Heights shall be entitled to exercise all available remedies at law and in equity, including but not limited to termination of this Agreement upon 30 days' notice to Mount Prospect. Arlington Heights shall be in default hereunder in the event of a material breach by Arlington Heights of any term or condition of this Agreement including, but not limited to, a representation or warranty, where Arlington Heights has failed to cure such breach within 30 days after written notice of breach is given to Arlington Heights by Mount Prospect, setting forth the nature of such breach. Upon default by Arlington Heights, Mount Prospect shall be entitled to exercise all available remedies at law and in equity, including but not limited to termination of this Agreement upon 30 days' notice to Arlington Heights. 10.3 Modification. This Agreement may not be altered, modified or amended except by a written instrument signed by both Parties. Provided, however, the Parties agree that provisions required to be inserted in this Agreement by laws, ordinances, rules, regulations or executive orders are deemed inserted whether or not they appear in this 1.1 Agreement and that in no event will the failure to insert such provisions prevent the enforcement of this Agreement. 10.4 Binding Successors. Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights agree that their respective successors and assigns shall be bound by the terms of this Agreement. 10.5 Force Majeure. Neither Mount Prospect nor Arlington Heights shall be liable for failing to fulfill any obligation under this Agreement to the extent any such failure is caused by any event beyond such Party's control and which event is not caused by such Party's fault or negligence. Such events shall include, but not be limited to, acts of God, acts of war, fires, lightning, floods, epidemics or riots. 10.6 Notices. Unless otherwise specified, any notice, demand or request required under this Agreement must be given in writing at the addresses set forth below by any of the following means: personal service, overnight courier or first class mail. TO THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT Mr. Sean Dorsey Director of Public Works Village of Mount Prospect 1700 West Central Road Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 TO THE VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS Mr. James Massarelli Director of Engineering Village of Arlington Heights 33 South Arlington Heights Road Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 10.7 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between Mount Prospect and Arlington Heights, merges all discussion between them and supersedes and replaces any and every other prior or contemporaneous agreement, negotiation, understanding, commitments and writing with respect to such subject matter hereof. L IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have entered into this Agreement as of the last date of execution set forth below. VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT By: Mayor Date: Attest: Village Clerk 7 VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS Uz Village President Date: Attest: Village Clerk TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: MOUNT PROSPECT POLICE DEPARTMENT FORMAL MEMORANDUM MICHAEL JANONIS VILLAGE MANAGER TIM JANOWICK CHIEF OF POL ILLINOIS LAW 1NT ALARM SYSTEM REVISED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 BACKGROUND CHF 14-89 CONTROL NUMBER aA, W�, a 91t I The Village of Mount Prospect originally entered into an intergovernmental agreement with the Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System (ILEAS) in 2002. With a foundation to provide law enforcement mutual aid based on the model of the Northern Illinois Police Alarm System (NIPAS), ILEAS expanded the concept to a statewide level. Through federal grant programs, ILEAS not only established mutual aid response plans, but the organization also established eight regional multi -agency emergency response teams with response capabilities for traditional crisis events (i.e., active shooter, hostage situations, barricaded gunman, and high risk search warrants) and incidents involving weapons of mass destruction. In addition, ILEAS also established regional mobile field force teams for handling incidents of civil unrest. In 2013, the Illinois Law Enforcement Training and Standards Board questioned the validity of ILEAS based on the construction of the by-laws, the articles of incorporation for ILEAS, and the definition of emergency events whereby pre -planned activities would not be considered a valid use of the mutual aid response system while also claiming ILEAS was attempting to declare itself a "law enforcement agency." The Office of the Attorney General completed a thorough review of the allegations presented by the Law Enforcement Training and Standards Board. The Attorney General's office determined the ILETSB allegations did not have merit, but did provide recommendations for shoring the organization's by-laws and intergovernmental agreements. As a result, ILEAS drafted and approved revised organizational by-laws at the annual meeting in March 2014. In addition, ILEAS drafted a revised intergovernmental agreement and presented the agreement to the participating agencies during the March 2014 annual conference. ILEAS requested member agencies have the revised agreement approved by their respective governing bodies by the end of 2014. Finally, ILEAS drafted a revised Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement to be executed by member law enforcement agencies. Page 1 of 3 With COURAGE we protect, with COMPASSION we serve. MOUNT PROSPECT POLICE DEPARTMENT I CIF 14.89 FORMAL MEMORANDUM MOUNT PROSPECT POLICE PARTICIPATION CONTROL NUMBER The Mount Prospect Police Department and the Village have benefited through our participation in the ILEAS program by means of the mutual aid our community has received. Most recently, the police department received the assistance of mutual aid and the regional mobile field force team during the funeral reception for a motorcycle gang member. Regionally we realized the benefits of the ILEAS program during the NATO summit in 2012. As the region prepared for a reported influx of protesters"and anarchists, mobile field force and emergency response team assets from throughout the state were mobilized in the suburban Chicago area As a result of Mount Prospect's participation in ILEAS, all sworn members of the police department received AVON FM -12 gas masks for response incidents of civil unrest or as escape tools from areas of potential or actual weapons of mass destruction. In addition, the agency received radiological detectors and a STARCOM radio prior to the expansion of the statewide radio system allowing all officers to carry a STARCOM radio on their person. Finally, the agency has benefitted from training programs produced by ILEAS at either the organization's annual conference and through ILEAS-sponsored training sessions held regionally or at the ILEAS training facility in Springfield. As a result of our participation in ILEAS, the police department contributes one (1) police officer to the regional emergency response team and two (2) police officers to the regional mobile field force team. Patrol officers have responded numerous times to member agencies requesting assistance for many varying types of incidents including providing traffic direction at the scenes of significant vehicle crashes, providing outer perimeter control at the scene of an officer - involved shooting, and assisting on the perimeter of incidents requiring the response of the emergency response team. Our participation has been reciprocal and mutually beneficial. REVISED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT REVISED LAW ENFORCEMENT MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT The ILEAS Board of Directors requested a revised intergovernmental agreement be drafted and approved by member agencies prior to the end of 2014. The revised intergovernmental agreement is an approving document allowing for the Mount Prospect Police Department to complete a revised Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement with the Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System and engage in mutual aid responses of a law enforcement nature with member agencies. A copy of the revised Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement is attached for your review as well as supporting informational documents from ILEAS. Page 2 of 3 MOUNT PROSPECT POLICE DEPARTMENT I CT( 14-89 FORMAL MEMORANDUM RECOMMENDATION The police department respectfully requests the Village Board approve the ILEAS Intergovernmental Agreement to allow for the execution of the Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement and our continued participation in this mutually beneficial organization. \ Attachments TJ Page 3 of 3 By -Laws of the Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System Regions Article I — Authority The Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System (ILEAS) was established by Intergovernmental Mutual Aid Agreements in 2002. System membership is in full force and in effect with the passage and approval of a companion ordinance by a participating agency, in the manner provided by law, 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. Article II — Purpose ILEAS is organized to provide a system of Mutual Aid among participating law enforcement agencies. The purpose is explicit in the "intergovernmental agreement" reading as follows: This agreement is made in recognition of the fact that natural or man-made occurrences may result in situations which are beyond the ability of the individual community to deal with effectively in terms of manpower and equipment resources on hand at a given time. Each community has and does express its intent to assist its neighboring communities by assisting some of its manpower and equipment resources to an affected community as resources and situations allow. The specific intent of this agreement is to permit the police departments of each community to more fully safeguard the lives, persons, and property of all residents. Article III - Membership Section 1 Before any agency may become a member of ILEAS, its membership must be approved by the Governing Board. Membership shall be limited to law enforcement agencies, as defined by Illinois Statutes. Section 2 Governing Board officers, will by a majority vote, approve or disapprove the membership of any requesting agency after the submission of approval of application form and the recommendations of an active ILEAS member. Section 3 Member agencies each have one vote. Section 4 When considering membership, the Governing Board shall consider all factors including: A) Agencies' capabilities of providing or being resources to ILEAS communities. B) Geographic proximity to other ILEAS communities. Section 5 Applicants shall become members upon the approval of the Governing Board, the execution of the Intergovernmental Mutual Aid Agreement by the corporate authority of the applicant agency, and the payment of fees or dues, if any. Section 6 Members who fail to meet their obligations in accordance with the Intergovernmental Mutual Aid Agreement or with these Bylaws may be excluded from membership by a two-thirds vote of the Governing Board. Section 7 By a two -third vote of the Governing Board, any agency found responsible of any behavior detrimental to law enforcement or whose continued membership would prove detrimental to ILEAS, shall be suspended or expelled from membership. Before any member may be suspended or expelled, the member will be notified of the hearing and shall have a right to appear before the Governing Board. 1 Article IV - Board of Officers Section 1 The Governing Board of ILEAS shall consist of the Co -Chairmen (one Chief and one Sheriff from the region), Secretary, Treasurer, the immediate past Co -Chairmen, and Sergeant of Arms. The Co - Chairmen shall serve for a two-year period. The remaining members of the Board shall be appointed, by the Co -Chairmen, to a one-year term of officer at the Annual General Meeting. All officers must be the Chief Executive Officer of official designee of a participating ILEAS agency. Section 2 The Governing Board shall have the authority to take all appropriate actions and to perform all duties required to accomplish the goals of ILEAS. Section 3 The Governing Board shall convene at a time and place specified by the Co -Chairmen. The Co - Chairmen shall preside at the meeting of the Board of Officers and conduct business for ILEAS. Minutes of these meetings shall be provided to all members. Section 4 Decisions by the Governing Board shall be determined by a simple majority of the members present. Section 5 Objections to rules or actions by the Governing Board may be made by any member. Objections by members will be brought to a core by the general membership and decided by a majority vote. Section 6 The Governing Board shall promulgate an operational plan for giving and receiving aid under the provisions of the Intergovernmental Mutual Aid Agreement. Section 7 In the event that the Co -Chairmen are unable to agree on rules or action, they will be brought to the Governing Board to be decided on by majority vote. Article V — Officers of ILEAS Section 1 The officers of ILEAS shall consist of the Co -Chairmen, Secretary, Treasurer and Sergeant of Arms. They shall have been a member, in good standing, for at least one year prior to their election. Section 2 The Co -Chairmen shall hold office for a term of two years or until their successors have been duly elected, providing they continue to qualify for active membership during their term of office. All officers may be reelected or appointed for additional terms of office. The Secretary, Treasurer and Sergeant of Arms are appointed by the Co -Chairmen with approval by the Governing Board. Vacancies to the position of Co -Chairmen within the two-year term will be appointed by the remaining Co - Chairmen subject to approval by the Governing Board. Section 3 A Nominating Committee consisting of three Active Members shall be appointed by the Co -Chairmen of the Governing Board. It shall be the duty of the Nominating Committee to present one nominee to serve if elected prior to placing the name in the Nomination. The current officers shall not serve as Nominating Committee Members. Any active member of ILEAS may make additional nominations from the floor. Section 4 Election shall be by ballot. If there is but one nominee for each office, election may be by voice vote. A majority shall elect on the first ballot. In the event no candidate receives a majority vote, a second ballot shall be taken between the two candidates receiving the highest number of votes. Elected officers shall be installed at the first annual meeting and shall assume their duties of office at that time. 0a Article VI — Duties of the Officers Section 1 The Co -Chairmen shall preside at all general meetings of ILEAS. Section 2 The Secretary shall keep an accurate record of the proceedings of all meetings for ILEAS. He or she shall carry on all official correspondence of the Association under the direction of the Governing Board, provide to each member the official minutes of all meetings, and maintain charters and legal documents and all official records and correspondence. Section 3 The Treasurer shall receive all monies of ILEAS and shall be custodian of all funds; these funds to be deposited in a financial institution approved by the Governing Board. The treasurer shall give a full report at the General Membership Meeting. The treasurer shall also sign checks and perform such duties as usually pertain to the office. Section 4 The Sergeant of Arms shall keep order in all the proceedings of all meetings for ILEAS. He or she shall provide guidance to the Governing Board on the proper protocols for meetings as dictated in Roberts Rules of Order. Article VII — ILEAS Staff Section 1 The Governing Board officers are authorized to appoint and discharge staff to help carry out administrative duties of ILEAS. Section 2 The duties and responsibilities of appointed staff personnel are defined in the ILEAS "Definitions and Operating Procedures." Article VIII — Compensation Section 1 All officers and members of the Governing Board shall serve without compensation. October 23, 2002 LEAS' goal is to get every current member to sign the new mutual aid agreement in the next year. (LEAS has worked to make the process as simple as possible. Here are the pertinent steps to getting your agency onto the new agreement: A public agency is defined by the Illinois Intergovernmental Cooperation Act (5 ILCS 220/2(1)). Counties, municipalities, townships, special districts, school districts, and public community college districts are all examples of public agencies. If you are not a public agency, but your agency has lawful police power and you want to maintain your participation in (LEAS or are interested in joining, please review paragraph six of the mutual aid agreement and contact Jim Page at ILEAS at 217-328-3800. (LEAS is mailing a hard copy to every local law enforcement agency in Illinois. The new agreement is also available for download online at www.ileas.org. Please note that every agency must adopt the same agreement. The key to regional and statewide mutual aid is that every agency adopt the identical agreement to all others. For that reason, individual modifications to the agreement cannot be accepted. If your city or county attorneys have questions, please direct them to (LEAS at 217-328-3800 or to Executive Director Jim Page at jrpage@ileas.org. Your county, city, town, village or other public agency is empowered to join (LEAS by several Illinois laws. You may want to review the following: • Constitution of the State of Illinois (III. Const. Art. VII, § 10) • Illinois Intergovernmental Cooperation Act (5 ILCS 220/1 et seq.) • Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 10/7-101 et seq.) • Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/11-1-2.1) However, the procedures your agency needs to follow to adopt this agreement also depend on your own local rules and legislation. Most agencies will pass a resolution through a board or council. A sample resolution to get you started is available for download online at www.ileas.org. Whether through ordinance, resolution or other procedure employed by your public agency, your public agency should dearly authorize someone, or someone who holds a specific office, to sign the new mutual aid agreement. Remember, the individual who signs is signing not for themselves but as a representative of the public agency which is desiring to become part of a mutual aid agreement— a public agency is never a person or position (even if elected). SIGNATURE Near the end of the new agreement, your public agency, through a recognized agent of the public agency, will find the place to sign and notarize your agreement. This should be completed in the presence of a Notary Public by an agent of your county, city, town, village or other public agency who has been given the authority to sign this agreement. agreement. You are not entering into an agreement wan iLtus, you are creating a stronger ILEAS and reaffirming your commitment to law enforcement mutual aid throughout the State of Illinois. As part of its centralization and coordination responsibilities, (LEAS will collect all the signed agreements and keep them on file. Print and sign two documents. Keep one original for your records. Send a signed original to (LEAS along with any supporting documentation deemed appropriate such as the adoptive resolution. (LEAS will provide a copy by posting it on a secured website established just for your agency. WHAT DOES MEMBERSHIP IN ILEAS OFFER agencies who are specially trained to deal with civil unrest and crowd control while respecting everyone's FirstAmendment rights. The MFF teams TO LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES? are also trained to provide Law Enforcement Patrol Team services to provide ILEAS is the largest and most effective law enforcement mutual aid Ion term olice services after disasters strike The are in essence a organization in the United States. Over 900 counties, cities and other units Of local government have joined (LEAS. (LEAS member agencies employ over 95% of the law enforcement officers in Illinois. (LEAS' motto is "Strength Through Cooperation." Its continuing mission is to reduce costs and increase effectiveness of local law enforcement through the combining and sharing of resources and statewide coordination of mutual aid. (LEAS has been recognized by state and federal authorities as having one of the most robust law enforcement mutual aid capabilities in the United States. When joining (LEAS, every city, county or special district which has a law enforcement capability signs the same Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement. This agreement 1) provides the capability to request or to deploy law enforcement resources both regionally and across the State of Illinois at no cost, and 2) creates the organization called (LEAS which coordinates those mutual aid requests 24 hours a day and 365 days a year. Examples include the historic Southern Illinois Flooding (2011), the tornadoes that struck Harrisburg (2012) and Washington (2013). Those affected Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs made one call to (LEAS which coordinated the response statewide. Dozens of local law enforcement officers responded to each of those calls for help — at no cost to the requesting agencies. If a disaster is declared and public assistance is authorized, (LEAS assists the responding and requesting agencies in applying for cost reimbursements from the State or Federal government. Additionally, the (LEAS mutual aid agreement provides a mutual understanding of liability with regard to insurance coverage and worker's compensation. (LEAS has also created regionalized, multi -jurisdictional specialized teams drawn from participating agencies which are capable of responding throughout the State when necessary. These teams include Special Response Teams (SRT) and Mobile Field Force (MFF) teams. The SRT teams are regionally based SWAT teams of 25 to 35 officers that have received hundreds of hours of Federally -approved training and are equipped with the highest quality equipment available. The SRT teams can provide basic SWAT services across the State and are also trained to manage tactical problems in a contaminated or potentially contaminated environment. The Mobile Field Forces are also regionally based and each team consists of approximately 60 highly trained and equipped officers from participating 9 P y portable police department that can be moved anywhere in the State to assist stricken jurisdictions. (LEAS also provides funding for and supports nine local Bomb Teams in Illinois. When a disaster strikes requiring more law enforcement resources than your city, town, village or county has available, (LEAS will notify other member agencies in the region and coordinate as many officers and equipment requested. At least one (LEAS employee with years of law enforcement disaster management experience will be available to respond to provide planning support for the affected chief or sheriff. (LEAS will work with the Illinois State Police, the Illinois Emergency Management Agency and other state and regional agencies to ensure a coordinated response providing tools for the stricken agency to effectively and efficiently manage the situation. (LEAS does NOT take over or manage the incident. That responsibility and authority remains with the local law enforcement executives and civil authorities. (LEAS provides support, both in terms of resources and planning advice based on experience. Go to the (LEAS home page at www.ileas.org for video testimonials regarding previous responses to local disasters. As defined in the Illinois Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, ILEAS is a public agency which has representative oversight and a staff based in Urbana, Illinois. (LEAS has a 21 -member Governing Board consisting of, 1) eight chiefs of Police and eight sheriffs elected by the member agencies based out of eight regions throughout the State, 2) representatives from the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police and the Illinois Sheriffs' Association, 3) an appointee of the Director of the Illinois State Police and 4) two appointees from the Chicago Police Department. (LEAS is subject to the Open Meeting Act, the Freedom of Information Act, conducts annual independent financial audits and complies with other statutes governing public agencies. ILEAS receives its funding in the form of Federal Homeland Security Grants provided to (LEAS by the Illinois Emergency Management Agency. Members pay a very low annual dues based on the agency size. Most agencies dues equal the cost of one tank of gas for a squad car. (LEAS is not a State agency. It is a separately -existing public agency that is formed by a consortium of public agencies which have come together by intergovernmental agreement for the mutual benefit of all of the signatory public agencies. ILEAS exists to provide operational support and services to local law enforcement by harnessing and cultivating the power of collaboration and cooperation! HISTORY OF ILEAS - HOW IT STARTED AND ILLINOIS LAW ENFORCEMENT ALARM SYSTEM ILLINOIS LAW ENFORCEMENT ALARM SYSTEM database capabilities. More data will be gathered about each member agency so that a more focused response to a request for assistance can be made. At the requests of various sheriffs, (LEAS will collect information about correctional resources throughout the State so that sheriffs can reach out to 'LEAS for correctional mutual aid in addition to general law enforcement. HOW IT GREW! THE NEXT STEP (LEAS is a consortium of over 900 local law enforcement public agencies established pursuant to the Constitution of the State of Illinois (III. Const. Art. VII, sec. 10), the Illinois Intergovernmental Cooperation Act (5 ILCS 220/1 et sec.), the Local 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). (LEAS was created as a public agency when, atter September 11'h, the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police, the Illinois Sheriffs' Association, the Chicago Police Department, the Illinois Emergency Management Agency and the Illinois State Police worked together to create a statewide law enforcement mutual aid organization. (LEAS was based on the same mutual aid principles that governed the Mutual Aid Box Alarm System (MABAS) which is the statewide fire services mutual aid system. Based on decades long success of MABAS, (LEAS emulated MABAS' agreement and structure and expanded the concept statewide. In 2003, member agencies elected the first Governing Board. Local jurisdictions started adopting the mutual aid agreement and the first Governing Board was elected — ILEAS was in business! ESTABLISHING MUTUAL AID (LEAS' first order of business was collecting a database of resources possessed by its member agencies and contracting with both Northwest Central Dispatch in Arlington Heights and Peoria Dispatch for dispatch support. ILEAS maintains the database which includes number of officers/ deputies, squad cars, K-9 units, SWAT teams, translators, and mobile command posts. (LEAS makes this updated database available to the dispatch centers. When a member agency is in need, it simply calls the dispatch center and makes its resource requests. The dispatch agency queries the database to determine the closest agency with that resource. That agency is then called and a request is made for them to respond to aid the stricken jurisdiction. (LEAS' first official request for mutual aid was the tornado in Utica on April 20, 2004. That activation was so successful that the word spread throughout Illinois and hundreds of agencies joined (LEAS. From that first successful mutual aid activation in Utica, (LEAS grew rapidly and is now capable of handling virtually any size of mutual aid requests, both in- and out -of -State. ILEAS coordinated the deployment of 287 officers to assist the Chicago Police during the NATO Summit in May of 2012, 150 officers and deputies to accompany State Troopers sent to Katrina in August of 2005 and 25 local officers accompanying the Illinois State Police to New Jersey after Super -Storm Sandy in November of 2012. IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE WAY While (LEAS has been operationally very successful, it is always looking for ways to improve. ILEAS has fine-tuned its special team training, exercising and deployment process. (LEAS engaged the services of retired experienced senior law enforcement commanders and executives to provide planning and operational support services in the field directly to member agencies. When funds are available, (LEAS has provided millions of dollars of equipment in the form of ruggedized laptops, radiation detectors, respirators and mobile command post vehicles. ILEAS represents the homeland security needs and interests of its members to the State Terrorism Task Force and to Federal agencies when necessary. The original database on paper was moved online for a more efficient and flexible implementation. It can now be updated in seconds and made available to every agency for use in non -emergencies. In 2014, ILEAS will start the implementation of a modernization and expansion of its resource The law enforcement mutual aid agreement has remained a constant for the last ten years. (LEAS is no different than other vibrant and successful enterprises that are constantly looking for ways to improve and build on their success. (LEAS has undertaken a year-long examination of the mutual aid agreement and determined that it can build on success by implementing improvements to the agreement. Modifications have been identified that will offer more flexibility and provides a more robust description of (LEAS' mandate in order to protect (LEAS and its member agencies in an increasingly litigious society. During this mutual aid agreement review, (LEAS sought advice from private counsel, General Counsel for the Governor of Illinois, General Counsel of the Illinois Emergency Management Agency and the Attorney General's Office. Based on that advice and discussion internally, the (LEAS Governing Board has authorized the implementation of a new updated Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement to be implemented in 20141 COMPARING THE OLD AND NEW MUTUAL AID AGREEMENTS Since 2003, there has been an (LEAS mutual aid agreement which was initially executed by a multitude of public agencies in the wake of the events of the September 11'h terrorist attacks. The original mutual aid agreement has never been updated, modified or changed since its inception. The elected representatives of those agencies desire to enhance and reaffirm their commitment to law enforcement mutual aid while outlining more specifics with regard to the relationship that currently exists between each of the public agencies forming (LEAS as a public agency and (LEAS itself. SIMILARITIES BETWEEN THE CURRENT AND NEW AGREEMENTS • Mutual aid is handled exactly the same ♦ Agencies can request mutual aid assistance and receive it in the exact same fashion under the new agreement as it can pursuant the current agreement ♦ The chief executive of the requesting agency is still in charge of any incident where mutual aid is rendered • The Governing Board process is virtually identical ♦ The Governing Board will still be based on elections of chiefs and sheriffs in the regions and with the appointed members from the Illinois State Police, Chicago Police and the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police and the Illinois Sheriff's Association. ♦ The current Governing Board stays in place until 2015 when regional elections take place. • The (LEAS operation will not change ♦ ILEAS will still employ staff to manage the mutual aid requests, special teams support, regional planning support, grant processing, etc. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE CURRENT AND NEW AGREEMENTS • The clarity of intent that the signatory member public agencies agree to create ILEAS ♦ The original agreement established the (LEAS Governing Board in one sentence. Pursuant to that, the Governing Board was created and adopted by-laws which guides its actions. ♦ The new mutual aid agreement provides a very detailed and specific process for governance so that every agency signing the agreement understands the underpinnings of ILEAS, the nature of the organization, how ILEAS is governed and a clear description of the relationship of the parties executing and being formed by the agreement. • The inclusion of the basic by-laws into the actual agreement ♦ A significant portion of the new agreement sets out the process by which (LEAS is governed in a fashion that is consistent with the laws and regulations of the State of Illinois while adding clarity to the operations of (LEAS. ♦ Working off the original agreement which was determined to be adequate but not ideally detailed in a fashion that promoted the adaptability and modern needs of ILEAS and those forming (LEAS, the Governing Board desires to have a set of processes which more specifically identifies how (LEAS works and recognizes the need of ILEAS to change as circumstances change. • The establishment of an amendment process so that the agreement can be kept current without completely replacing it each time an improvement is necessary ♦ The original agreement did not provide for an amendment process. R new laws or regulations require a change in the agreement, (LEAS would have to go through the entire process of implementing a new agreement by having all 900 members sign anew. ♦ The new agreement provides a process that amendments can be made by a vote of signatory public agencies instead of implementing an entirely new agreement • Creating a smooth transition from the original agreement to the new agreement over a period of time ♦ The new agreement is written in such a way that the current agreement and the new agreement can co -exist for a period of time to avoid operational disruption. ♦ ILEAS' goal is to get every agency to sign onto the new agreement as soon as possible; but failure to sign the new agreement will not jeopardize an agency's ability to respond to or request mutual aid. • More clearly defining the legal foundation of ILEAS and signatory public agencies' agreement: ♦ As time passes and the legal environment changes, organizations need to constantly examine their foundational documents to ensure that they are compliant with current laws and court cases. ♦ ILEAS is a unique organization that only has a handful of peer agencies in Illinois and it does not fit into common categories such as a unit of local government like a city or county. Because (LEAS is a public agency without the ability to levy a tax, a well- established foundation is necessary to ensure (LEAS is on solid legal footing in the future. • Establishes a more specific minimum level of insurance coverage for participating agencies. • Expands the definition of Law Enforcement Personnel to include Correctional Officers so that sheriffs can utilize the (LEAS mutual aid agreement to assist each other with jail emergencies This new agreement establishes a smooth transition from the original agreement to the new agreement over a period of time. The new agreement is written in such a way that the current agreement and the new agreement can co -exist for a period of time to avoid operational disruption. (LEAS' goal is to get every agency to sign onto the new agreement as soon as possible; but a delay to sign the new agreement will not jeopardize an agency's ability to respond to or request mutual aid. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A LAW ENFORCEMENT MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT AND THE EXISTENCE AND FORMATION OF THE ILLINOIS LAW ENFORCEMENT ALARM SYSTEM BY INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION WHEREAS, the Village of Mount Prospect is a local unit of government and duly constituted public agency of the State of Illinois; and WHEREAS, the Village of Mount Prospect, as a public agency of the State of Illinois, is authorized and empowered by the Constitution of the State of Illinois (Ill. Const. Art. VII, § 10) and the Illinois Intergovernmental Cooperation Act (5 ILCS 220/1 et seq.) to enter into intergovernmental agreements with other public agencies on matters of mutual concern and interest such as the provision of adequate law enforcement personnel and resources for the protection of residents and property falling within the jurisdiction of the Village of Mount Prospect; and WHEREAS, the Village of Mount Prospect recognizes that certain natural or man-made occurrences may result in emergencies or disasters that exceed the resources, equipment and/or law enforcement personnel of a single given public agency; and WHEREAS, a given public agency can, by entering into a mutual aid agreement for law enforcement services and resources, effectively provide a broader range and more plentiful amount of law enforcement capability for the citizenry which it serves; and WHEREAS, in order to have an effective mutual aid agreement for law enforcement resources and services, the Village of Mount Prospect recognizes it must be prepared to come to the aid of other public agencies in their respective times of need due to emergencies or disasters; and WHEREAS, the Village of Mount Prospect recognizes the need for our specific Municipality to develop an effective mutual aid agreement for law enforcement services and resources upon which it may call upon in its time of need and is prepared to enter into a mutual aid agreement for law enforcement services and resources with other like-minded public agencies; and WHEREAS, the Village of Mount Prospect also recognizes the need for the existence of a public agency, formed by an intergovernmental agreement between two or more public agencies, which can serve to coordinate and facilitate the provision of law enforcement mutual aid between signatory public agencies to a mutual aid agreement for law enforcement services and resources; and WHEREAS, the Village of Mount Prospect has been provided with a certain “Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement” which has been reviewed by the elected officials of this Municipality and which other public agencies in the State of Illinois are prepared to execute, in conjunction with the Village of Mount Prospect, in order to provide and receive law enforcement mutual aid services as set forth in the “Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement”; and WHEREAS, it is the anticipation and intention of the Village of Mount Prospect that this “Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement” will be executed in counterparts as other public agencies choose to enter into the “Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement” and strengthen the number of signatory public agencies and resources available from those public agencies; and WHEREAS, it is the anticipation and intent of the Village of Mount Prospect that the “Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement” will continue to garner support and acceptance from other currently unidentified public agencies who will enter into the “Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement” over time and be considered as if all signatory public agencies to the “Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement” had executed the “Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement” at the same time. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION ONE: That this Resolution shall be known as, and may hereafter be referred to as, the Resolution Authorizing the Execution of a Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement, a copy of which Agreement is attached and made part of this Resolution as Exhibit “A”, and the Existence and Formation of the Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System by Intergovernmental Cooperation. SECTION TWO: That the Board of Trustees of the Village of Mount Prospect hereby authorize the Mayor to sign, execute and deliver the agreement known as the “Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement” and thereby enter into an intergovernmental agreement with such other public agencies of the State of Illinois as are likewise willing to enter into said “Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement” and recognize the existence and formation of the Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System as set forth in the said “Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement”, a copy of which Agreement is attached and made part of this Resolution as Exhibit “A”.Savings Clause: If any section, paragraph, clause or provision of this Resolution shall be held invalid, the invalidity thereof shall not affect any of the provisions of this Resolution. SECTION THREE: That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval in the manner provided by law. Ayes: Nays: Absent: PASSED and APPROVED this day of September 2014. ___________________________________ Arlene A. Juracek Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ M. Lisa Angell Village Clerk Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement This Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement (LEMAA) is executed, in multiple counterparts, by the Public Agency shown on last page hereof on the date that is set forth on the last page of this LEMAA for the uses and purposes set forth herein. Whereas, the undersigned Public Agency of the State of Illinois does hereby declare that it is in the best interest of the Signatory Public Agency to make provision for law enforcement Mutual Aid in the event the undersigned Public Agency should need law enforcement Mutual Aid, and; Whereas, the undersigned Public Agency of the State of Illinois recognizes that law enforcement Mutual Aid is only effective if those Public Agencies who could potentially benefit from law enforcement Mutual Aid are willing to provide law enforcement Mutual Aid to other Public Agencies who are willing to enter into a Mutual Aid agreement such as this Mutual Aid agreement, and; Whereas, in the State of Illinois, there exist constitutional and statutory provisions enabling and supporting the formation of intergovernmental agreements on matters such as law enforcement Mutual Aid, towit, the Constitution of the State of Illinois (III. Const. Art. VII, § 10), the Illinois Intergovernmental Cooperation Act (5 ILCS 220/1 et seq.), the Local 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), and; Whereas, in order to have an effective law enforcement Mutual Aid system, it is necessary and desirable to have a third party entity that can support, centralize, coordinate and organize the provision of law enforcement Mutual Aid by and among Signatory Public Agencies to the law enforcement Mutual Aid agreement, and; Whereas, this LEMAA is made in recognition of the fact that natural or man-made occurrences may result in Emergencies or Disasters that exceed the resources, equipment and/or Law Enforcement Personnel of a given Public Agency; each Public Agency which signs a copy of this LEMAA intends to aid and assist the other participating Public Agencies during an Emergency or Disaster by temporarily assigning some of the Responding Public Agency's resources, equipment and/or law enforcement personnel to the Requesting Public Agency as circumstances permit and in accordance with the terms of this LEMAA; the specific intent of this LEMAA being to safeguard the lives, persons and property of citizens of the State of Illinois during an Emergency or Disaster by enabling other Public Agencies to provide additional resources, equipment and/or Law Enforcement Personnel as needed, and; Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 2 of 23 Whereas, since approximately 2002, there has existed in the State of Illinois an Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System law enforcement Mutual Aid agreement ("Prior Mutual Aid Agreement") which was initially executed by a multitude of signatory parties in the wake of the events of the 911 terrorist attacks and (even though the needs of law enforcement have changed, grown and advanced in various regards) the Prior Mutual Aid Agreement has never been updated, modified or changed since its inception, it is now the desire of the Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA to enhance and reaffirm its commitment to law enforcement Mutual Aid in the State of Illinois while providing more particularity to the relationship that exists between each of the Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA and the third party agency, the Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System, created by such Signatory Public Agencies, Now, therefore, the undersigned Public Agency, does hereby enter into this LEMAA with each and every other Public Agency which signs a counterpart copy of this LEMAA and agrees and contracts as follows: 1. Definitions. The following definitions apply to this Mutual Aid Agreement (the plural version of any defined term meaning two or more instances of the defined term): a. Disaster — An occurrence, or the reasonable threat or possibility of an occurrence of, any of the following: 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, windstorm, tornado, hurricane, severe inclement weather, hazardous materials spill or other water or ground contamination requiring prompt action to avert danger or damage; epidemics, contaminations, blight, extended periods of severe and inclement weather, drought, infestation and critical shortages of essential products, fuels and energy; explosion; riot; significant or large scale civil insurrection or disobedience; hostile military or paramilitary action, or; acts of domestic terrorism. b. Emergency — A natural or man-made situation that threatens to cause, or causes, loss of life and/or property and exceeds the physical and/or organizational response capabilities of a unit of local, state or federal government. C. Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System (or the abbreviation "ILEAS") — the third party Public Agency formed by Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA, or continued from the Prior Mutual Aid Agreement, to promote and facilitate law enforcement Mutual Aid in the State of Illinois, and; d. Initial Governing Board — The first Governing Board of ILEAS established after two or more Public Agencies enter into this LEMAA. Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 3 of 23 e. Law Enforcement Personnel — An employee of a Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA who is a law enforcement officer, county corrections officer or court security officer, as defined in Section 2 of the Illinois Police Training Act (50 ILCS 705/2). f. LEMAA — This agreement g. Mutual Aid — Assistance provided by a Public Agency to another Public Agency pursuant to a definite and prearranged written agreement in the event of an Emergency or Disaster. h. Prior Mutual Aid Agreement — a certain Mutual Aid Agreement having initial signatories in 2002 (with other signatory parties beginning their participation at a time later than the initial signatory parties) and which reflects a document modification date of "October 23, 2002" in the footer of the signature page (page 5). i. Prior Signatory Public Agency — A Public Agency which executed the Prior Mutual Aid Agreement and has neither terminated its participation in the Prior Mutual Aid Agreement nor entered into this LEMAA. i. Public Agency — Such units of government as are defined as a public agency by the Illinois Intergovernmental Cooperation Act (5 ILCS 220/2(1)). j. Requesting Public Agency — A Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA that has primary jurisdiction over the site of an Emergency or Disaster which, due to its perceived insufficient resources, equipment and/or Law Enforcement Personnel, would be unable to provide an adequate response to an Emergency or Disaster without the assistance of others. k. Responding Public Agency — A Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA that provides resources, equipment and/or Law Enforcement Personnel to a Requesting Public Agency during an Emergency or Disaster. I. Signatory Public Agency — a Public Agency that has executed this LEMAA by signature of an authorized individual for the Public Agency under the authority of the Constitution of the State of Illinois (III. Const. Art. VII, § 10), the Illinois Intergovernmental Cooperation Act (5 ILCS 220/1 et seq.) and the final approval required of the Public Agency in order to execute the LEMAA. 2. Agreement to Participate in Law Enforcement Mutual Aid. The Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA agrees that, in the event of an Emergency or Disaster, it will respond to requests for assistance by a Requesting Public Agency with such Law Enforcement Personnel, equipment, resources, facilities, or services as are, in the opinion of the Responding Public Agency, Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 4 of 23 available and useful and being requested by a Requesting Public Agency. Possible responses shall include, but not be limited to, merely being on "stand by," providing the benefit of prior experience or consultation and/or actual "hands-on" participation in law enforcement activities in the jurisdiction of the Requesting Public Agency any one of which may also entail the provision of equipment, resources, facilities or other services. Provided, however, that each Responding Public Agency 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's property, citizenry or personnel. It is expected that requests for Mutual Aid under this Agreement will be initiated only when the needs of the Requesting Public Agency exceed its resources. Responding Public Agencies' resources will be released and returned to their own respective jurisdictions by the Requesting Public Agency as soon as the situation is restored to the point where the Requesting Public Agency is able to satisfactorily handle the emergency or disaster with its own resources or when a Responding Public Agency decides to recall its assistance. Whenever an Emergency or Disaster is of such magnitude and consequence that it is deemed advisable by the highest-ranking officer present of the Requesting Public Agency to request assistance from a Responding Public Agency, he is hereby authorized to do so under the terms of this LEMAA. The highest-ranking officer present of the Responding Public 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 Requesting Public Agency. • Immediately dispatch, in consultation and coordination with the ILEAS dispatcher, the resources, equipment and/or Law Enforcement Personnel that are available to the Requesting Public Agency. At the Emergency or Disaster site, the highest-ranking officer of the Requesting Public Agency who is present shall assume full responsibility and command for operations at the scene. Law Enforcement Personnel from the Responding Public Agencies shall report to, and shall work under, the direction and supervision of the Requesting Public Agency. Provided, however, that at all times, the personnel of the Responding Public Agency 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 Requesting Public Agency, Law Enforcement Personnel shall only be required to respond to lawful orders. Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 5 of 23 All equipment provided or services performed under this LEMAA shall be provided without reimbursement to the Responding Public Agency from the Requesting Public Agency. Nothing contained herein shall prohibit a Responding Public Agency or ILEAS from seeking reimbursement or defrayment of any expenses it may have incurred in responding to a Mutual Aid request from other sources. The Requesting Public Agency agrees to cooperate with any effort to seek reimbursement or defrayment of Mutual Aid expenses on the part of Responding Public Agencies or ILEAS. All Requesting Public Agencies, Responding Public Agencies and ILEAS are required to keep expense and accounting records to identify the costs and expenses of any Mutual Aid provided under this LEMAA. Each Responding Public Agency shall assume sole responsibility for insuring or indemnifying its own employees, as provided by state, 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 just as if the employee would have been working as an employee of the Responding Public Agency in its own home jurisdiction. Each Responding Public Agency shall also be responsible, regardless of fault, for replacing or repairing any damage to its own vehicles or equipment that occurs while providing assistance under this LEMAA. The Requesting Public Agency agrees that this LEMAA shall not give rise to any liability or responsibility for the failure of any other Signatory Public Agency to respond to any request for assistance made pursuant to this LEMAA. Each Responding Public Agency under this LEMAA further agrees that each Responding Public Agency will be responsible for defending itself in any action or dispute that arises in connection with, or as the result of, this LEMAA and that each Responding Public Agency will be responsible for bearing its own costs, damages, losses, expenses and attorney fees. 3. The Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System. By agreement by and between each Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA, there is and was formed and exists a third party Public Agency, created by the Signatory Public Agency parties to this LEMAA and by virtue of this LEMAA, which shall be known as the Illinois Law Enforcement Alarm System (hereinafter referred to as "ILEAS"). The following provisions apply to ILEAS: a. The Public Agency ILEAS shall have a governing board, consistent with the meaning of the phrase "governing board" in 5 ILCS 220/2(1), which shall be known as the "Governing Board." 1. Governing Board Composition and Voting. The Governing Board of ILEAS shall consist of the following individual Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 6 of 23 members, described as follows: (a). Members of the Initial Governing Board — The individuals designated on Exhibit A will be members of the Initial Governing Board of ILEAS and shall serve until such time as their successors are elected or appointed, as the case may be. (b). Composition of the Governing Boards of ILEAS after the Initial Governing Board members have served their term shall be as follows, who shall serve until such time as their successors are elected or appointed, as the case may be: • 16 elected members representing eight (8) established ILEAS regions — there shall be one elected Sheriff member and one elected Chief of Police member from each of the eight (8) established ILEAS regions and the elected Sheriff member and the elected Chief of Police member shall be designated as the "Co -Chairs" from that region; • a permanent, non -elective Governing Board membership for the Illinois State Police Director or the Director's designee, • a permanent, non -elective Governing Board membership for the President of the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police or that President's designee, • a permanent, non -elective Governing Board membership for the President of the Illinois Sheriffs Association or that President's designee. • two permanent, non -elective Governing Board memberships for the City of Chicago, Illinois or those persons designated by the Superintendent of Police, Chicago, Illinois. Subject to the foregoing provisions of this subparagraph (b), no Public Agency shall be permitted to designate (as a candidate for election or appointment) a Governing Board Member unless that Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 7 of 23 Public Agency is a Signatory Public Agency and every Governing Board Member must be affiliated by employment with, or relation to, a Signatory Public Agency. The President of ILEAS, with the advice and consent of the Governing Board of ILEAS, may appoint any number of Ex -Officio Governing Board consultants for the benefit of obtaining their counsel and advice but such individuals, if any, as are appointed to Ex -Officio Governing Board consultant positions shall not have any voting rights on matters to be decided by the Governing Board and, relative to the Board, are not agents or servants of the Governing Board, ILEAS or any Signatory Public Agency. (c). Members of Governing Boards of ILEAS after the Initial Governing Board — For purposes of determining the elected members of the Governing Board after the Initial Governing Board, the State of Illinois shall be divided into eight (8) regions which are shown on Exhibit B hereto. Any Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA may nominate any one or more eligible individuals from its region as a candidate for Governing Board membership, including an individual employed by the Signatory Public Agency. Only Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA may vote for representatives to be elected from their region. Each Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA gets one vote for an elected Sheriff member and one vote for an elected Chief of Police member from its region. Starting in 2015, the election of Governing Board members shall occur every two years in March of the year on a date to be determined by the Governing Board members in office in the October prior to the date of the election. Should a given Governing Board member vote result in a tie between candidates, the two or more candidates with the same highest number of votes shall participate in a "coin toss" selection process to determine who shall fill that Governing Board member position. (d). In the event that an elected Governing Board member dies, retires, resigns, is no longer employed by his employer in the same capacity as at the time of his Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 8 of 23 election or is otherwise unwilling or unable to serve the balance of that member's term, then a replacement Governing Board member from the same region as the Governing Board member being replaced shall be chosen by the remaining Governing Board member from that Region and shall serve until the next Governing Board member vote. If both Governing Board members from a given Region are no longer in office at the same time, then, by majority vote of the remaining Governing Board members still holding office, two replacements shall be chosen from that same Region (in individual, separate votes) and shall serve until the next Governing Board member vote. The replacement Governing Board member shall be a Sheriff if a Sheriff is being replaced and shall be a Chief of Police if a Chief of Police is being replaced. (e) Matters before the Governing Board for decision shall be decided by majority vote of a quorum of the voting members. A quorum for the conducting of the business of the Governing Board shall be established by the Bylaws promulgated by the Governing Board. Nothing contained herein shall prohibit the establishment of committees or subcommittees of the whole for the conduct of business as expressed in the Bylaws promulgated by the Governing Board. 2. Governing Board to Promulgate a Plan of Operation. The Governing Board shall cause to be promulgated a Plan of Operation for the giving and receiving of Mutual Aid under the provisions of the LEMAA and shall promulgate Bylaws for the management of ILEAS. Both the Plan of Operation and Bylaws may be modified from time to time based upon the majority vote of the then current members of the Governing Board. 3. Governing Board Compensation. All officers, members and ex -officio members of the Governing Board shall serve without compensation. 4. Regional Governing Boards. In each of the Regions, in addition to the co-chairs for that region, there may be elected a secretary, treasurer and sergeant at arms for that Region as well as any number of ex -officio members as that Region Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 9 of 23 desires. b. The Public Agency ILEAS shall have a President, Vice President, Secretary, Treasurer and Sergeant at Arms who shall be appointed by and from the Governing Board of ILEAS, at its discretion. The officers shall have the duties, responsibilities and powers accorded to them by the Bylaws of ILEAS as the Bylaws are established and may be amended from time to time by the Governing Board. C. The Public Agency ILEAS shall have an Executive Director, appointed by the Governing Board at its discretion, who shall be the chief operating officer of ILEAS and who shall have the duties, responsibilities and powers accorded to the Executive Director by the Bylaws of ILEAS as the Bylaws are established and may be amended from time to time by the Governing Board. d. The Public Agency ILEAS shall have the authority, right and power to: 1. coordinate law enforcement Mutual Aid responses by and among Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA and act as a central receiving point for Mutual Aid requests; 2. solicit and receive commitments from Signatory Public Agencies to respond to a Mutual Aid request and coordinate and provide support for any legal documentation necessary or desirable to effectuate the provision of law enforcement Mutual Aid; 3. maintain an electronic mutual aid database to which all Signatory Public Agencies provide information related to each respective Signatory Public Agency's manpower, resources and equipment necessary to respond to a Mutual Aid request and to which all Signatory Public Agencies have access; 4. identify through the mutual aid database individuals from Signatory Public Agencies with the ability, training and qualifications suitable for Mutual Aid responses, together with the necessary equipment and other resources as requested by the Requesting Public Agency; 5. coordinate and provide a facility for training exercises and education; 6. solicit, obtain and administer funds for the operations and functions of ILEAS and the provision of law enforcement Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 10 of 23 Mutual Aid in the form of grants, donations, endowments or allocations of funds from other governmental agencies or other sources (but not from the issuance of any debt obligations), to assess Board -approved dues on Signatory Public Agencies and to obtain reimbursement, payment, advances or funds from any governmental entity or agency which provides, allocates or administers funds to defray, pay or reimburse the expenses of those entities participating in Mutual Aid efforts; 7. provide accounting, budgeting, estimation, documentation, archival and general administrative support for law enforcement Mutual Aid deployments (actual, planned, proposed or contemplated) and the general operations of ILEAS; 8. obtain indemnity, casualty, liability and worker's compensation insurance for the operations of ILEAS in amounts and under terms deemed appropriate by the Governing Board; 9. employ support personnel to perform the functions and operations of ILEAS; 10. enter into contracts, agreements, purchase agreements and leases necessary to the functions and operations of ILEAS; 11. provide and display identification, signage, insignias, patches or other indicia which identify ILEAS employees and agents if and when such employees and/or agents are on site to coordinate or facilitate disaster and/or emergency relief performed by various Responding Public Agencies; 12. to own, hold, supply, borrow or lend, in ILEAS' name, such personal property as deemed necessary by the Governing Board to the purposes, functions and operations of ILEAS; 13. facilitate, enhance or enable interagency communication relative to the provision of Mutual Aid; 14. provide to Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA such information as is useful to them relative to what resources are available from ILEAS or other Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA ; 15. maintain a listing or database of available equipment, available animals and alleged independent contractor Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 11 of 23 experts in various fields that would serve as a resource to ILEAS and any Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA which listing would be made available to such Signatory Public Agencies with the understanding on the part of the requesting Signatory Public Agency that ILEAS: (a) does not represent, provide, recommend or warrant to any Signatory Public Agency the appropriateness, integrity, quality, or qualifications of any listed resource, equipment or animal for a given use (such determination to be made solely by the requesting Signatory Public Agency), and; (b) does not furnish, employ, provide, retain or have as its agent, any alleged expert whose contact information is provided to the Signatory Public Agency, such alleged expert being solely an independent contractor and, further, does not represent, recommend or warrant to any Signatory Public Agency the appropriateness, integrity, training, quality or qualifications of any alleged expert (such determinations to be made solely by the requesting Signatory Public Agency), and; (c) relative to any animal, does not represent, recommend or warrant to any Signatory Public Agency the appropriateness, training, behavioral characteristics, quality or qualifications of any animal for a given use (such determination to be made solely by the requesting Signatory Public Agency). 16. engage in such other activities as support, enhance or enable Mutual Aid by and between the Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA. e. It is not the function, responsibility or purpose of ILEAS to warrant or endorse the sufficiency or talents of, deploy, supply, direct, command or manage any Law Enforcement Personnel responding to Mutual Aid requests under this LEMAA. Any Law Enforcement Personnel responding to a law enforcement Mutual Aid request under this LEMAA shall be Law Enforcement Personnel of a Responding Public Agency (and not of ILEAS) and shall take their orders from commanding officers of either the requesting Public Agency or the Responding Public Agency, as otherwise detailed in this LEMAA. In general, ILEAS' function in a Mutual Aid deployment is to receive the Mutual Aid request, identify and contact Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 12 of 23 appropriate potential responding Signatory Public Agency responders, obtain commitments from such potential Signatory Public Agency responders that they will respond to the Mutual Aid request, identify those Signatory Public Agencies who will respond to the Mutual Aid request of the Requesting Public Agency, provide ILEAS' expertise, services and experience relative to issues associated with Mutual Aid deployments and continue to monitor the adequacy of the Mutual Aid response to be able to respond if the Requesting Public Agency determines more assistance is needed and review the sufficiency of the Mutual Aid response that was made. ILEAS may, in its discretion, establish an on site presence at the Mutual Aid site when the Requesting Public Agency or the Responding Public Agencies believe such presence is useful to the purposes and functions of ILEAS and/or the Requesting Public Agency or the Responding Public Agencies. 4. Additional Signatory Public Agency Provisions a. Each Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA agrees to maintain liability insurance with a Best's rated A- or better insurance company or a self insurance trust fund in the face or indemnity amount of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) which would provide, inter glia, liability coverage for any activities in which the Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA might engage under this LEMAA. b. Each Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA agrees to provide to ILEAS information about the equipment, resources and personnel of its Public Agency, jurisdictional and regional demographic information, contact information, National Incident Management Systems information and Reception Site Staging information which may be used by ILEAS to aid in ILEAS' support role under this LEMAA. The Executive Director of ILEAS shall prepare a document, which will be amended from time to time, which requests the information desired and send it to each Signatory Public Agency for completion and update. Each Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA agrees that ILEAS may distribute any information obtained by the Executive Director to any other Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA who may request such information for Mutual Aid purposes. C. Each Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA agrees that it will not hold itself out as an agent of ILEAS or any Public Agency other than itself and will instruct each of its employees that they are not to hold themselves out as employees or agents of ILEAS or any Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 13 of 23 Public Agency other than the one as to which they are actually agents or employees. Further, each Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA agrees to monitor the activities of its agents and employees to maintain compliance with this provision of the LEMAA. d. Each Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA understands that, under the Constitution of the State of Illinois (III. Const. Art. VII, §10) and the Illinois Intergovernmental Cooperation Act (5 ILCS 220/1 et seq.), ILEAS may only be delegated authority, abilities and powers that the Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA has itself. To the extent that a Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA does not have legal authority to participate in cooperative law enforcement mutual aid, this LEMAA is void and of no effect relative to such Signatory Public Agency. e. It is the intent of each Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA that ILEAS be created with all the powers enumerated herein and without further restrictions on those powers. Therefore, each Signatory Public Agency agrees that, if that Signatory Public Agency is determined to not have the authority or powers that are coextensive with those granted to ILEAS in this LEMAA or it is determined that the Signatory Public Agency is limited in the exercise of its authority or its powers to a greater extent than ILEAS is limited by this LEMAA, rather than limiting the powers of ILEAS, that finding will cause the Signatory Public Agency's participation in the creation of ILEAS to be void ab initio and Section 3 of this LEMAA shall not apply to such a Signatory Public Agency. Such a finding will not, however, invalidate the Signatory Public Agency's adoption of this LEMAA for purposes of providing and receiving law enforcement Mutual Aid. f. Each Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA warrants that: 1. It is a Public Agency under the laws of the State of Illinois. 2. It is authorized by the legal process and laws applicable to that Public Agency that it has the full authority and right to enter into this LEMAA. 3. To the extent that it is called upon to provide Law Enforcement Personnel as a Responding Public Agency, the Law Enforcement Personnel the Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA provides have been properly credentialed by the Illinois Law Enforcement Training Standards Board to be a law enforcement officer, county corrections officer or court security officer in the State of Illinois and have been trained Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 14 of 23 relative to the types of tasks that the Law Enforcement Personnel will be undertaking relative to the mutual aid request. 4. To the extent that it is called upon to provide equipment as a Responding Public Agency, the equipment the Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA provides is in good working order with no known defects, problems, faults or limitations that would make its use dangerous or impractical. 5. Termination of Participation in LEMAA a. Any Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA has the right to terminate its participation in this LEMAA upon ninety (90) days notice to ILEAS. ILEAS shall notify remaining Signatory Public Agency parties to the LEMAA of the notice of termination. b. To the extent that a Signatory Public Agency incurs an obligation under this LEMAA prior to the expiration of the ninety (90) day notice of termination period, nothing contained in this section shall be interpreted to mean that that Signatory Public Agency should not meet its obligation under this LEMAA. Termination is automatically effective upon the expiration of the ninety (90) day period without further action by any party. 6. Non -Member Affiliates a. Definition of Status — A non-member affiliate of ILEAS is an incorporeal entity, which is not a public agency, but which has been vested with police powers by the State of Illinois, and which: 1. would be eligible to request or provide law enforcement mutual aid, and; 2. has agreed with ILEAS, under the provisions of this LEMAA, to be a non-member affiliate and abide by the provisions of this Agreement applicable to a non-member affiliates. b. Purpose of Non -Member Affiliate Status — While only Public Agencies may enter into this LEMAA and form ILEAS, there exists value to the public agencies forming ILEAS in having non-member affiliates to provide counsel, advice, experience and different points of view with respect to the problems and issues confronted and addressed by the Public Agencies which have formed ILEAS. As well, as situations sometimes call for coordination with entities with Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 15 of 23 police power which are not Public Agencies, advance cooperation, planning, coordination and sharing with such entities remains valuable to the Signatory Public Agencies forming ILEAS. As well, in situations of emergency or disaster and to the extent permitted by law, law enforcement services may be provided or given by non- member affiliates under agreements approved by the Governing Board of ILEAS. C. Participation by Non -Member Affiliate — A non-member affiliate becomes or remains a non-member affiliate at the sole discretion and pleasure of the Governing Board of ILEAS. • A non-member affiliate may: 1. send its law enforcement officers to participate in ILEAS- organized training and educational events upon terms and conditions determined by ILEAS; 2. have its representative agent serve, at the discretion of the President of ILEAS and with the advice and consent of the Governing Board of ILEAS, as an ex-offcio Governing Board Consultant; 3. at the discretion of ILEAS, provide advice and counsel to ILEAS relative to a mutual aid situation. 4. to the extent permitted by law: (a) and under terms and conditions to be determined by the Governing Board of ILEAS, enter into agreements permitting peace officers of a non-member affiliate to provide law enforcement services, in an emergency or disaster, to Signatory Public Agencies and utilize ILEAS coordination services. (b) and under terms and conditions to be determined by the Governing Board of ILEAS, enter into agreements permitting Signatory Public Agencies to provide law enforcement services, in an emergency or disaster, to the non-member affiliate and utilize ILEAS coordination services. • A non-member affiliate, or its representative(s) may not: 1. represent to any third party or the public at large that it is a "member" of ILEAS or a Signatory Public Agency of ILEAS; Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 16 of 23 2. bind ILEAS, or any of the Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA, to any form of an agreement of any sort or kind; 3. disclose to any third party or the public at large: (a) the discussions to which its representatives may be privy at any Governing Board meeting, (b) any documents, strategems or other planning activities associated with the business or activities of ILEAS or its Signatory Public Agencies, (c) any information deemed by ILEAS or its Signatory Public Agencies as confidential in nature, with the presumption that, if the information was learned at any meeting or assemblage of ILEAS Directors, Officers or Signatory Party representatives, the information should be deemed confidential. • A non-member affiliate shall: 1. to the extent that it participates in ILEAS events, maintain liability insurance with a Best's rated A- or better insurance company or a self insurance trust fund in the face or indemnity amount of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) which would provide, inter glia, liability coverage for any activities in which the non-member affiliate might engage. 2. advise any individual, who will be representing the non- member affiliate, of the terms and conditions of non-member affiliate status and direct that individual to act consistently with those terms and conditions. 3. to the extent determined by the Governing Board of ILEAS, pay appropriate dues for a non-member affiliate. d. Evidence of Participation as Non -Member Affiliate — Upon the endorsement of approval by the President of ILEAS' Governing Board of an application for non-member affiliate status, the incorporeal entity applying for non-member affiliate with ILEAS shall become a non-member affiliate with ILEAS. 1. The granting of non-member affiliate status with ILEAS may be revoked at any time and for such reasons as the Governing Board sees fit in its sole discretion and choice. Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 17 of 23 2. Nothing associated with the granting of a status as a non- member affiliate shall be deemed to create a partnership, joint venture, or any other legal combination of entities, including but not limited to, any principal/agent status by or between the non-member affiliate and either ILEAS or a Signatory Public Agency. 7. Additional Provisions a. Application of Law and Venue Provisions - This LEMAA shall be governed by, and interpreted and construed under, the laws of the State of Illinois. The exclusive venue for the enforcement of the provisions of this Agreement or the construction or interpretation of this Agreement shall be in a state court in Springfield, Illinois. b. Compliance with Laws - All Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA agree to comply with all federal, state, county and local laws and ordinances as well as all applicable rules, regulations, and standards established by any agency of such governmental units, which are now or hereafter promulgated insofar as they relate to the Signatory Public Agencies' respective performances of the provisions of this LEMAA. C. Lack of Waiver - Acceptance of partial performance or continued performance after breach of this LEMAA shall not be construed to be a waiver of any such breach. d. Status of a Signatory Public Agency — Nothing contained within this LEMAA shall be deemed to create, or be interpreted to intend to create, a joint venture, partnership or any other sort of legal association or combination of entities as between the Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA or as between ILEAS and any Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA. Each Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA is acting in its own individual capacity and not as the agent of any other Public Agency which is created by this or any other counterpart copy of this LEMAA or which is a Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA. e. Involuntary Termination of Participation in ILEAS — Under terms and conditions established by the Board of Governors of ILEAS, a Signatory Public Agency may have its participation in this LEMAA involuntarily terminated. The terms and conditions shall describe those situations where such involuntary termination may occur and Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 18 of 23 the process to be followed to make the determination as to whether involuntary termination shall occur. f. Immunities - With respect to ILEAS and each and every Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA, becoming a Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA or performance under the terms of this LEMAA shall not be deemed to waive any governmental immunity or defense to which the Signatory Public Agency or ILEAS would otherwise be entitled under statute or common law in the absence of this LEMAA. g. No Third Party Beneficiary -This LEMAA is not intended nor expected to confer upon or entitle any person or entity, other than ILEAS and the Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA, any information, benefits, advantages, rights or remedies. It is expressly understood and agreed that enforcement of the terms and conditions of this LEMAA, and all rights of action relating to such enforcement, shall be strictly reserved to ILEAS and the Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA and nothing contained in this LEMAA shall give or allow any claim or right of action by any other or third person or entity (including, but not limited to, members of the general public) based on this LEMAA. It is the express intention of ILEAS and the Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA that any person or entity (other than ILEAS and the Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA) who may be deemed to receive services or benefits under this LEMAA shall be deemed to be only an incidental beneficiary to this LEMAA. h. Paragraph Headings - The captions and headings used in this LEMAA are only for convenience of reference and the organization of this LEMAA and shall not be construed as expanding, defining or limiting the terms and provisions in this LEMAA. Severability - If any part, term, or provision of this LEMAA is held by the courts to be invalid, unenforceable, contrary to law or in conflict with any of the laws of the State of Illinois, the validity of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be affected, and the rights and obligations of the Parties to this LEMAA shall be construed and enforced as if the LEMAA did not contain the particular part, term, or provision held to be invalid, unenforceable, contrary to law or in conflict with any law of the State of Illinois. Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 19 of 23 Parol Evidence and Prior Mutual Aid Agreements - This LEMAA constitutes the entire agreement between the Signatory Public Agencies concerning this LEMAA's subject matter, whether or not written, and may not be modified except as otherwise provided herein. • As between Signatory Public Agencies, this LEMAA supersedes, in its entirety, the Prior Mutual Aid Agreement concerning its subject matter. • As between Signatory Public Agencies to this LEMAA and Prior Signatory Public Agencies who have not executed this LEMAA, this LEMAA does not supersede the Prior Mutual Aid Agreement. • Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to affect other Mutual Aid agreements that a Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA may have executed. k. Amendments — As it may be desirable, from time to time, to amend this LEMAA, this subsection shall govern that process. In the event that one or more signatory public agencies wishes to propose an amendment to this LEMAA, such signatory public agency(ies) shall communicate the proposed amendment to the Governing Board in the form of a resolution as to which there can be a vote for the resolution or against the resolution. No resolution may come to a vote unless at least ten (10) then -current signatory public agencies (including the signatory public agency(ies) proposing the amendment) endorse their written desire to have a vote on the resolution. In not less than 30 days nor more than 180 days after receipt of the proposed amendment with the requisite minimum of ten (10) endorsements, the Board shall communicate the proposed amendment to all then -current signatory public agencies to the LEMAA together with the date and time by which the signatory public agency must cast its vote for or against the resolution. Each then -current signatory public agency is entitled to one vote. The vote of the signatory public agency should be sent to whomever is the Executive Director at the time of the cutoff for receipt of the votes and such votes may be sent by letter, fax or email but may not be communicated orally (in person or by telephone). The sender assumes all risk that the communication of the vote will not be received in time so early voting is encouraged. The cutoff date and time for the vote to be received by the Executive Director must Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 20 of 23 not be sooner than fourteen 14 days after the Board has sent out its communication that an amendment has been proposed. The Executive Director shall be the sole individual to determine if the vote was received in a timely fashion in order to be counted and all votes shall be tallied within one day after the date when the voting was terminated. The resolution shall carry if the votes in favor of the amendment constitute greater than fifty percent (50%) of the total votes cast and shall fail if the votes against the amendment constitute less than or equal to fifty percent (50%) of the total votes cast. If the resolution carries, unless the resolution, by its terms, provides for a later date when it would be effective, the amendment is effective upon the determination by vote tally that the resolution carried. As soon as reasonably possible after the results of the voting have been determined, the Executive Director shall communicate the results of the voting to all then -current signatory public agencies. Notices - Notices concerning the withdrawal of a Signatory Public Agency from the terms and conditions of this LEMAA under Section 5 of this LEMAA shall be made to ILEAS at 1701 E. Main St., Urbana, Illinois 61802. Notice of any alleged or actual violations of the terms or conditions of this LEMAA shall be made to ILEAS at 1701 E. Main St., Urbana, Illinois 61802 and each other Signatory Public Agency to this LEMAA who is alleged to have committed the alleged or actual violation of the terms or conditions of this LEMAA. M. Counterparts - This LEMAA may be, and is anticipated to be, executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original of this LEMAA. Balance of this page is intentionally left blank before the signature page. Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 21 of 23 In Witness Whereof, the Signatory Public Agency designated below enters into this LEMAA with all other Signatory Public Agencies who have signed or will sign this LEMAA pursuant to legal authorization granted to it under the Constitution of the State of Illinois (III. Const. Art. VII, § 10), the Illinois Intergovernmental Cooperation Act (5 ILCS 220/1 et seq.) and the final approval required of an entity such as the undersigned Public Agency. Public Agency Name By: Legally Authorized Agent Printed Name: Title: Date: State of Illinois ) ss County of , after being duly sworn on oath, deposes and states under penalty of perjury that he/she is the duly authorized agent for the Public Agency shown above, that he/she has read the cover letter accompanying the LEMAA in its entirety, that the entity shown above the "Public Agency Name" line, above, is a Public Agency within the meaning of 5 ILCS 220/1 et seq. and that he/she signs this document pursuant to proper authority granted by that public agency. Notary Public My Commission Expires: Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 22 of 23 Exhibit A • William Smith, Captain, Illinois State Police • Wayne Gulliford, Deputy Chief, Chicago Police Dept • Steve Georgas, Deputy Chief, Chicago Police Dept • Eric Smith, Chief of Police, Sherman, Illinois • Tom Schneider, Sheriff, Macon County, Illinois • David Snyders, Sheriff, Stephenson County, Illinois • Victor Moreno, Chief of Police, East Moline, Illinois • Thomas Roman, Chief of Police, Waubonsee Community College • Roger Scott, Sheriff, DeKalb County, Illinois • Steve Neubauer, Chief of Police, Tinley Park, Illinois • John Zaruba, Sheriff, DuPage County, Illinois • Mike McCoy, Sheriff, Peoria County, Illinois • Brian Fengel, Chief of Police, Bartonville, Illinois • Don Volk, Chief of Police, Washington, Illinois • Derek Hagen, Sheriff, Iroquois County, Illinois • Richard Miller, Chief of Police, Granite City, Illinois • Jim Vazzi, Sheriff, Montgomery County, Illinois • Andrew Hires, Sheriff, Richland County, Illinois • Bill Ackman, Chief of Police, Robinson. Illinois • Jody O'Guinn, Chief of Police, Carbondale, Illinois • Keith Brown, Sheriff, Saline County, Illinois or their respective successors per this LEMAA Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement Page 23 of 23 Exhibit B 10 DAVIESS STEPHENSON WINNE CARROLL OGLE WHITESIDE LEE IAO REGION 4 NPAGE COOK ROCK IS I AND 8U REAU i •, v sr 7tLiFRCFR REGION 2 PUTNAM MAIN MARSHALL KNDX HENDERSON WARREN PEORIA WOODFORD LIVINCSTQN IROQUOIS AA,DON011GH FULTON TAZEWELL. MCLEAN FORD HANCOCK REGION T REGION G h,i7$DN 'SCHUYLER DE WITi VERMILION LOGAN CHAMPAIGN MENARD PIATT ADAMSLA RROWNY SS MACON SANI;AMON DOUGLAS IOORGAN EDGAR PIKE SCOTT MOUI-TRIE CHRISTIAN COTES GREENE SHELBY CLARK MACOU%N MONTGOMERY CUMBERLAND CALHOUN JERSEY EFFINCHAM REGION g. FAYETTE IASPER CRAWFORD BOND REGION 9 MADISON CLAY LAWRENCE. RICHIAND MARION CUNTON Sr. GLAIR WABASH WAYNE. EDWARDS WASHINGTON TEFF€RSON MgNROE RANDOLPH PERRY HAMILTON WHITE FRANKLIN REGION 11 IACK.SON SALINE CALLATIN W4LLAM30N HARDIN llNN7N IOHNSON POPE ALEXANDER PULASICI MA55AC , ilk !1n i The Regional Answer to Canadian National PROPOSED RULEMAKING ON RAIL TANK CAR SAFETY ISSUE SUMMARY & ACTION REQUEST September 9, 2014 ISSUE SUMMARY: In 2011, after a fatal ethanol train derailment in Cherry Valley, IL, the rail industry began the petition process before the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) seeking improved performance standards for new rail tanks cars carrying liquid hazmat in recognition that the current "workhorse" tank car of the fleet (the DOT -111) has a high tendency to puncture in accidents. These efforts began two decades after the National Transportation Safety Board had warned industry and regulators that there were significant safety-related flaws in this tank car's design. In 2012, the Illinois TRAC Coalition also petitioned PHMSA for improved standards to cover both new and existing tank cars. The rulemaking process stalled, however, until the derailment of a crude oil train in Lac-Megantic, Quebec in July 2013 that killed 47 people. After that tragedy, PHMSA finally released its Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) last fall asking for input into what safety -enhancing provisions should be included in the rulemaking. The comment period for that phase of the process was completed in December 2013, with those comments serving as the basis for the rules PHMSA has now outlined in the NPRM that was released on August 1. Interested parties will have until September 30, 2014 to weigh in on the proposed rules the agency is planning to promulgate. While there are some positive aspects of the rules being outlined by PHMSA, including better safety standards and enhanced braking requirements for tank cars, there is a fundamental defect that must be rectified to adequately protect the safety of the public and the environment. Rather than having the rules apply to all tcrnk„rar's tar_ryi_ng flarninable hazinat, PHMSA chose to minimize the scope of the rulemaking to dead only with enhanced tank car standards and operational controls for "high -hazard flammable trains" or HHFTs (defined as any train with 20 or more cars of Class 3 flammable liquids, which the agency believes will be limited to crude oil and ethanol.) In doing this, PHMSA has exempted from any safety-related upgrades fully 40% of the liquid hazmat that is shipped by rail in deficient DOT -111 tank cars. Its rationale for doing so is not supported by the evidence PHMSA provides from its review of 46 mainline derailments that occurred between 2006 and 2013. Those derailments show that the breach of even a single or a small number of tank cars can result in a significant release of hazmat. In 43 of the 46 mainline derailments used by the agency to support limiting new tank car standards and enhanced operational control to HHFTs, the accidents involved fewer than 20 tank cars releasing their contents. In fact, in 20 of these derailments, only a single tank car was breached. With 93% of these mainline derailments involving fewer than 20 tank cars breaching, it's indefensible for PHMSA to apply its rules solely to HHFTs. The flammable hazmat that would be allowed by PHMSA to remain in DOT -111 tank cars for the next 40 years unless the agency can be convinced to adjust course on this exemption, includes highly dangerous substances like gasoline, diesel fuel, condensate, aviation fuel, acetone, corrosive flammable liquids, oil sands, and even crude oil and ethanol if it is on a manifest train. Therefore, TRAC believes that any tank car carrying liquid hazmat must meet the most robust tank car standards as outlined in the NPRM. The NPRM also fails to adequately address emergency preparation and response for rail hazmat incidents at the local level -- where all emergencies occur. It is critical that new rules require that railroads provide adequate notice to local emergency responders of the type and frequency of hazmat transported within their jurisdictions. Railroads should also be required -- subject to PHMSA and FRA audit and enforcement -- to provide appropriate hazardous materials training and materials to local emergency responders, including the location of sufficient quantities of hazmat response assets to enable a coordinated response effort among the local responders and the railroad. Joint response training events between the railroad and local responders should be required with a reasonable amount of frequency. ACTION REQUEST OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: It is vital that local governments weigh in on this NPRM prior to the September 30, 2014 comment deadline. To that end, a sample resolution is attached that local units of government can adopt and forward to PHMSA to indicate their support for the NPRM changes detailed in this summary. Please act expeditiously to pass this resolution. Once adopted, a copy of your government's resolution should be submitted in one of three ways: • Through the Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Via Fax: 1-202-493-2251. • By mail: Docket Management System; U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Routing Symbol M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and docket number for this notice (as shown in the model resolution) at the beginning of the comment. To avoid duplication, please use only one of the three methods of delivery. Any questions you may have on this matter can be directed to FightRailCongestion@gmail.com. Thank you! RESOLUTION NO. VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT, COUNTY OF COOK, ILLINOIS RESOLUTION REGARDING NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING PROCEEDINGS "HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:ENHANCED TANK CAR STANDARDS AND OPERATIONAL CONTROLSFORHIGH-HAZARD FLAMMABLETRAINS" BEFORE THE PIPELINES AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION IN DOCKET NO. PHMSA-2012-0082 (HM-251) WHEREAS , each day, rail freight operations impact thousands of villages, towns, cities and counties across all regions of the United States of America; and WHEREAS, safe rail operations are of critical interest to local units of government based on the need to prevent catastrophic accidents like the one that occurred in Lac-Megantic, Canada in July 2013 as well as several others since then; and WHEREAS, local governments have the responsibility to provide emergency response to manage the impact of rail accidents and derailments in communities across the country and to oversee clean up and environmental remediation; and WHEREAS, clean up, environmental remediation, medical expenses other personal injury damages or wrongful death claims for community residents have the potential to surpass the rail industry's ability to pay for them; and WHEREAS, ethanol, crude oil, and other flammable Class 3 hazmat are a large and exponentially growing segment of rail freight being shipped across the nation and will continue as a growing and market-flexible transport mode for this hazmat; and WHEREAS, since 1991, it has been known to industry and federal regulators that there are safety- related defects in the DOT-111 tank car that serves as the primary tank car used in the shipping of these hazardous flammable materials via freight rail; and WHEREAS, the federal Pipelines and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) regulates the safe transport of hazardous materials by railroads in the United States with the mission "toprotect people and the environment from the risks of hazardous materials transportation"; and WHEREAS, the business decisions of railroad companies and hazardous material shippers impact the safety, environment, and emergency response systems in the communities in which the freight railroads traverse, but state and local governments have no ability to regulate railroad operations; and WHEREAS, industry has failed to act in the last two decades to correct the known safety deficiencies in DOT-111 tank cars despite repeated National Transportation Safety Board warnings, and waited until 2011 to seek government approval to upgrade safety standards for tank cars meant to carry liquid hazmat; and the comments submitted to PHMSA on December 5, 2013 by Barrington, Illinois and WHEREAS, the Illinois TRAC Coalition reflect the point of view of local governments, which is supported by recommendations of the National Transportation Safety Board, that changes are needed in federal regulations and/or law to better protect public safety relative to car safety standards; and tank the August 1, 2014 NPRM released by PHMSA proposed various regulatory options for WHEREAS, improving the crashworthiness of tank cars consisting of three standards of robustness and Option 1is the best solution for maximizing the crashworthiness of tank cars and will best protect the public's safety; and the NPRM undercuts the strength of the proposed rules by limiting its coverage to only WHEREAS, "high-hazard flammable trains" (HHFTs), defined as trains composed of 20 or more cars of Class 3 flammable liquids, and thereby exempts over 40% of rail car origins involving Class 3 hazmat commodities; and placed in the 2012 data context provided by PHMSA, this exempts from improved WHEREAS, safety regulations 281,404 tank car originations annually -or 771 carloads of flammable hazmat traveling each day of the year in deficient tank cars throughout the United States; and if PHMSA does not bar the use of DOT-111 tank cars for all flammable hazmat WHEREAS, service in its new regulations, those deficient tank car will be allowed to carry dangerous liquid hazmat for the remainder of their useful life (up to another 40 years); and any regulatory solution should solve the whole problem and not provide the public with WHEREAS, a false sense of security around the rail transport of hazmat because federal Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) are designed "to ensure that hazardous materials are packaged safely"- meaning ALL hazmat, and not just large quantities; and PHMSA's rationale for limiting the coverage of its new rules to HHFTs is not WHEREAS, supported by the evidence the agency provides from its review of 46 mainline derailments that occurred between 2006 and 2013, in that those derailments show that the breach of even a single or a small number of tank cars can result in a significant release of hazmat; and a DOT-111 tank car is too dangerous for the shipment of any Class 3 hazmat and WHEREAS, allowing a regulatory gap that extends their use for this transport will likely encourage industry to make operational changes that will continue to endanger the public and pose an environmental hazard; and it is critical in the event of a hazardous materials rail incident that local emergency WHEREAS, responders are prepared and have access to adequate resources to appropriately respond; and preparation begins with local responder knowledge of what hazardous material is WHEREAS, passing through a locality and the proper response beforehand; and railroads have the ability to inform local emergency responders about the hazmat threat WHEREAS, to their localities and provide training for response to such, including information about the location and sufficiency of railroad assets which can be deployed to assist in an emergency response; and railroads have the ability to make the existence and location of hazardous cargo WHEREAS, consists available promptly and directly to local emergency responders in the event of a rail incident. Therefore, Be It Resolved by the Corporate Authorities of the Village of Mount Prospect, Illinois,as follows: SECTION 1 : We support comments seeking to insure that all tank cars used in the transport of Class 3flammable hazmat, not only those in HHFTs, will be covered by the agency's newrules. SECTION 2 : We support comments supporting the Option 1 tank car standards, as that maximizes the crashworthiness and best protects public safety, as outlined in detail in Docket No. PHMSA-2012-0082 (HM-251). SECTION 3 : We support comments seeking to require railroads to provide to local emergency responders: adequate and timely information about the hazmat traveling through their jurisdictions, sufficient training to prepare for emergencies, including response support from the railroads transporting such hazmat in order to provide an effective and coordinated response to hazmat rail incidents. SECTION 4 : This Resolution shall take effect from and after its passage and approval as provided by law. SECTION 5 : This adopted Resolution shall be sent to the Pipelines and Hazardous MaterialsSafety Administration in Docket No. PHMSA-2012-0082 (HM-251) urging expeditious action so thatrail transport of all Class 3 hazmat is covered by the rules promulgated from the August 1, 2014 PHMSANPRM. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: th PASSED and APPROVED this 16 day of September, 2014. _____________________________ _ Arlene A. Juracek Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ _ M. Lisa Angell Village Clerk