Village of Lombard Legistar System

Upon Roll Call by Village Clerk, Suzan L. Kramer, the following were Present: President

Mueller, Trustees DeStephano, Tross, Koenig, Sebby, Florey and Soderstrom.

Quorum Present

Appointed Officials Present:

Village Manager William T. Lichter

Assistant to the Village Manager Ellen Balsamo

Finance Director Len Flood

Management Assistant Melissa Mundt

Village Attorney Janet Petsche

Village Attorney George Wagner

Interim Police Chief George Graves

Fire Chief George Seagraves

Village Engineer Dave Dratnol

Director of Public Works Stan Rickard

Director of Community Development David Hulseberg

Senior Planner William Heniff

Planner 1 Margaret Gibbs

Deputy Village Clerk Barbara Johnson

President Mueller announced the promotion of Officer Cynthia Abenante. Chief Graves

introduced Sergeant Abenante. A swearing in ceremony was conducted by Clerk

Kramer. Chief Graves said that Ms. Abenante had served in the Army Reserves and

had obtained her degree in Law Enforcement Administration from Western Illinois

University. He gave a brief history of Ms. Abenante's career with the Lombard Police

Department including liaison to the Middle and High Schools, Accreditation Manager,

investigations, Self Defense instructor for women, instructor at the Suburban Law

Enforcement Academy, and Officer of the Year in 1990. He said that she has recently

been in the patrol division on the midnight shift and was promoted by the Fire and Police

Commission on March 26. She introduced her husband Jim who is a detective with the

Village of Hillside Police Department, her daughters Vanessa and Jessica, her sister

Judy, nephew Sal, and sister Sandy, who is her twin. She also introduced her friend

Deb, an officer with the Hoffman Estates Police Department as well as her Aunt Connie,

her Uncle Nick, her Mother Carmen, her father Jessie and Grandmother Mary. Ms.

Abenante then introduced the many members of the Lombard Police Department in

attendance.

Chief Seagraves introduced Lieutenant Vince Hanlon who described the incident which

led to Mr. Rohloff being awarded the good neighbor award. Mrs. Kopick had emptied

ashtray into her trash container, which started on fire. She had grabbed a pillow to

extinguish the fire and had taken in quite a bit of smoke. Mrs. Kopick called for her

assistance. Mr. Rohloff was in the hallway and came to help. He grabbed the fire

extinguisher, put out the fire and opened a window. Mr. Rohloff then got a neighbor to

care for Mrs. Kopick. Without his intervention this incident could have been tragic and

deadly. Mr. Rohloff was presented the Good Neighbor Award, and his wife Marie and

sons Jeff and Jimmy were introduced. He said that the neighbor who took care of Mrs.

Kopick was his coworker, Diane.

Mary Dickson spoke as the Attorney of FBM Properties regarding the involuntary

annexation of 2N109 Rt 53. She had expressed their concerns regarding the matter.

Her clients are not excited about the annexation, but look forward to meeting with Village

Staff regarding plans for their facility. She wants to work together to develop the

property to benefit both her client, Mr. Constanza, and the Village.

Bernadine Fitzloff 514 S. Lodge Lane spoke as resident and participating business

owner regarding the Lombard Farmer's Market. She said she had learned that Lombard

is hiring the French Market to run the downtown Farmer's Market and asked the Board

why. She stated that the market has had a regular clientele of about 600 patrons

weekly. She finds the French Market Company's fees prohibitive. She said other

vendors say the French Market is a craft show. She said that the present workers work

very hard as small vendors. Director of Community Development, Hulseberg said that

Downtown Lombard United said that there was not enough interest to maintain the

market. The former organizers have waned off and have looked for relief from running

it. Hulseberg added that the French Market has been attracting 6 to 10 thousand people

in Wheaton. He said that the cost of a Table is $40, and they have a good track record.

Trustee DeStephano said she was a former market master, with Downtown Lombard

United and understands why they need to have professionals. She asked if it is

primarily a craft show. Director Hulseberg explained that there is everything from

tupperware to flowers available at the French Markets. Trustee DeStephano wanted to

investigate letting vendors share the cost and space of one table.

Manager William T. Lichter gave the following overview of the proposed FY2002-2003

budget.

The proposed FY 2002-2003 budget was prepared based on direction from 9 different

meetings beginning with the 2002 Strategic Plan, three budget workshops focusing on

departmental presentations, two joint meetings of the Village Board and Public Works

Committee, review and recommendation from the Community Promotion and Tourism

Committee, joint meeting of the Village Board and Finance Committee, and review by

the Finance Committee of the proposed budget.

The proposed total budget is $52,963,854 excluding interfund transfers. This is an

increase of $296,729 (.56%) in the proposed budget to the original FY 01-02 budget, an

increase of $786,797 (1.51%) in the proposed budget to the amended budget, and an

increase of $1,330,886 (2.58%) compared with FY 2001-2002 estimated actual

expenditures.

GENERAL FUND

The General Fund budget reductions were made in July and October 2001 of

$1,094,885 (5.4%). Those cuts affected everything from personnel to contract services.

Page 8 of the proposed budget document lists those cuts.

The Village is expected to end the current fiscal year with revenues exceeding

expenditures in the General Fund by $301,598.

The General Fund expenditures for FY 2002-2003 are proposed at $23,845,900. This

reflects a decrease of -$352,760 (-1.46%) budget to budget, an increase of $294,662

(1.25%) compared with the current year's amended budget, and an increase of

$346,733 (1.48%) over FY 2001-2002 estimated actual expenditures.

He said that Departments were told to stay as close as possible to the current year's

amended budget. Changes are as follows (excluding contingency and interfund

transfers):

Legislative, a decrease of $24,626

Executive, $733

Legal, $3,334

Central Services, a decrease of $8,835

Police Department $22,529

Fire $17,754

Community Development a decrease of $17,813

Public Works a decrease of $156,097

Pages 9-10 of the document lists the proposed reductions. They include:

a) Full year freezing of 7 full-time positions.

b) Leaving Vacant 6 Part Time Seasonal positions. This will impact the summer code

enforcement program and pavement-marking program.

c) Postponing until Mid-year the hiring of a new Fire Marshal.

d) Delay filling one Police Officer vacancy until March 2003 and 2 vacancies until

October 2003.

e) Delay filling one Firefighter vacancy until March 2003.

f) Reduce contract tree trimming from $40,000 to $10,000. This would be the second

year that the program is cut back.

g) Reduce tree planting from $77,000 to $50,000.

The FY 2002-2003 budget reflects a deficit of -$300,500. This includes $108,150 in

one-time costs. It is proposed that we use the $301,598 additional fund balance

accrued this year to cover the deficit rather than increasing the total fund balance by that

amount. We will still have a General Fund balance of 27.4%, as is our policy.

WATER AND SEWER FUND

Expenditures for FY 2002-2003 are proposed at $10,334,800. This is an increase of

$98,380 (.96%) compared with the FY 2001-2002 original budget, an increase of

$153,405 (1.51%) compared with the amended budget, and an increase of $351,423

(3.52%) compared with this year's estimated actual expenditures.

We are proposing to estimate water sales revenue based on selling 1.42 billion gallons

rather than the 1.45 billion gallons used in the past. The proposed figure is closer to the

actual sales.

Revenue for FY 2002-2003 is estimated at $9,737,550, a decrease of -$273,540

(-2.73%) under this year's estimated revenue and a decrease of -$498,870

(-4.87%) under the current year's budgeted revenue.

A water and sewer rate increase of .48 (7.5%) is proposed. See page 10-11.

Mr. Lichter explained that the increase included increased costs in Water Meter Reading

Services, Capital Improvements, and possible DuPage Water Commission increases.

HOTEL TAX FUND AND CIP

Mr. Lichter explained that the revenues in the Hotel Motel Tax Fund were at $815, 000,

which is $315,000 under estimates. The budget for the fund has been decreased by

$125,000. The items included in this year's Hotel Motel Tax Fund Budget include the

Lilac Parade, The Taste of Lombard, Cruise Nights, Prairie Path Lighting, The First

Impressions Program and other beautification programs, various grants for a total of

$181,000 and the Historical Museum and the Peck House in the amount of $105,000.

Funding for The Criterium Bike Race and Entertainment for Autumn Fest have been

eliminated.

He said that the 10 Year Capital Improvements Plan represents expenditures of $82.8

Million and the first year of the program is included in the proposed FY 2002-2003

budget for an amount of $14.7 Million and is primarily for street repairs.

In conclusion, Mr. Lichter said that the Finance Committee had reviewed and approved

the budget, but had withheld recommendation regarding the Water and Sewer rate

increase until the DuPage Water Commission approves their budget. The Commission

will hold a public hearing on their budget on April 11. Prior to the April 18, 2002 Village

Board Meeting, the Finance Committee will meet at 5:00 p.m. and make their

recommendations to the Village Board in light of the DuPage Water Commission

decision.

Trustee DeStephano reported that the Committee met on March 26. She called

attention to the Lombard Pride and in particular a water quality article on conservation

and protecting the environment by preventing run off of metal and nitrate sources that

can come from our homes. She announced that the Household Hazardous Waste

Collection will be held on April 27th at the College of DuPage. She gave the number to

call for information as 682-7373. She explained that Collection provides the chance to

dispose of those wastes correctly. She also announced that the Committee has

designed a new program for recycling of bottles and cans at the Art Fair and at Cruise

nights . She said that the program needs volunteers to make it work, and she asked

that any one interested in assisting pleasecall 620-5740 for the Village of Lombard

Public Works Department. She said that the date for this year's extravaganza has been

set for Saturday, September 14. The April meeting will be held on the 23rd.

Trustee Sebby mentioned that the Lombard Jaycees Easter Egg Hunt at Moran Water

Park was very well attended and a fun time. He thanked the Jaycees but said he

thought they needed at bit more organization so the adults would know what was going

to happen. Trustee Florey commented that the Park District also held an Easter Egg

Hunt and he thanked both organizations for the events. Trustee DeStephano thanked

staff for the evening parking signage in the Downtown so that shoppers would not be

confused thinking that they could not Park because of Commuters.

Trustee Tross referred to the item regarding 701 S. Main, saying he had no problem

with the item but that the report indicated that when Main Street is done, we would want

to look into sewer separation (separate Sanitary and Storm Sewers). He asked if this

sewer is designed to later go into that separated sewer. Mr. Rickard confirmed that it

had been designed to work properly with the new the sewers when built.

Mr. Lichter asked Director Hulseberg to review the issue. Director Hulseberg introduced

Senior Planner William Heniff who presented an overview of the case. He explained

that the petitioners had requested a resubdivision of the lot width and a side-yard

setback for an existing bay window. He explained the history of the tract of land

involved. He said that the Village determines lot width 30 feet from the Right of Way

line. He explained the encroachment of the existing bay window. He said that the tract

had two variations and pointed out that the remnant was created by the homeowners.

The intent of subdividing is so a home can be built on the remnant tract. He indicated

that the approval of this lot would be setting a precedent for lots in the area which are

now around 107 feet. He concluded saying that Staff does not see any unique

situations that would warrant the variations, but that Board has the authority to approve

the variation.

Attorney for the petitioner, Joseph Castello, spoke regarding the petition submitted by

Dolores Keller. He said that the 1957 plat did not show the division. He said that the plat

act of 1874 said that while you had to have a plat, it does not say that you have to

record it. Therefore, he said, it is not required. He said the lot was 50ft by 175ft deep.

When the previous lot was divided, it created the flag shaped lot. He said that when this

was divided, 50 ft was considered a legal lot. He went on to say that staff decided that

this is a "through lot" and that the front is the Division Street side. When this was platted

there was not a lot size requirement. He said he feels they are taking away the owners'

rights as there are other lots that are 50ft wide. He thinks this is arbitrary and capricious

and Staff has given no moral, health or safety reason why this property cannot be

developed as residential.

He added that it would not change the character of the neighborhood. He said that the

square footage actually exceeds the minimum lot size. He says that there is no reason

to call this a remnant lot. He said that it was the petitioner's parents who did this in

1912. She did not create this to get financial gain. In closing he said that he saw no

reason to deny. He discounted the notion that this would set a precedent and asked

that his client be allowed to use this property. He said that she has paid taxes on the

property but the VIllage would not allow her to use it.

Anthony Keller, 20 W 068 Shelly Dr., Naperville, thanked the Village Board for

considering the request of his Aunt who is the petitioner. He told the Board that the

property has been in the family for a century and was subdivided three quarters of a

century before there was a Division Street in the 1920s. He gave a family history and

highlighted that his Aunt was a World War II nurse and that this property represents her

retirement.

Director Hulseberg said that Mrs. Keller's signature was on the plat from 1977.

Trustee Tross said he had read the plat book and the representation was made about

tract 2 being a remnant lot. He said that he noted that the plat book showed that it had a

PIN number. He asked if there is record of when a Parcel was assigned. Mr. Heniff

answered that it was assigned when Kellers resubdivision was platted. Trustee Tross

said that the concern is that other lots will subdivide, but this was already segregated in

the 1920s. He said that the remnant tract is a new name and we collect taxes on all of

them no matter what they are called, and the residents should enjoy the benefit of their

land whether for profit or a vegetable garden.

Trustee Florey said this situation has been ongoing and he is not persuaded that this

was a legal lot of record before 1960 when width requirements were established. He

said that owners can not be granted a PIN and then come to the Village to call it a lot of

record. He said that if approved, there will be no basis to deny future subdivisions and

that this would be against our variation policy. He said he accepts the recommendation

of Staff to deny the petition.

Trustee Tross questioned why they would need a variation for the window, if you deny

the resubdivision. Director Hulseberg said there is a tax parcel line but not a lot line. In

the event that they decide to sell the property, because of where the house is, they may

need the variation so that an abutter can get a variation.

Ray Kacerek, 40 W. Long Shadow, said he spoke on behalf of a neighbor of Mrs.

Keller, Louie Prignano, who is a developer and stated that he is opposed to this

variation. He said he feels that if the land is available to purchase in order to conform to

the standards without a variation, she should do it right regardless of when the property

was subdivided. He does not think that they are legal lots. He said this would not

conform to the neighborhood. He recalled the lot on Morningside which was clearly

legal and a petition was presented by the neighbors, but the Board denied the request

two years ago. He said the Village should make the Kellers go to court to prove this was

legal in the 1920s. He said that both sides should be evaluated in court.

Attorney Costello said he did not say Mrs. Keller's father subdivided. He objected to

Trustee Florey's comments about long standing policies. He said when this property

was divided there was no policy and this property was not in Lombard at that time. He

stated that the property has been in existence since 1912 and it is unconstitutional for

the Village to deny the Keller's request. He said that the Lombard citizens would not

want to pay for the suit.

Trustee Florey referred to the attempt a neighbor willing to sell her 10 feet to have a

legal lot and the Kellers have not come to economic terms. He moved to deny the

request for minor plat subdivision,

Trustee Sebby expressed concern that it may be on the books to deny a request in

cases where structures will cover 10 percent of the lot, and there may be a need for

ZBA variations, but he feels that common sense should apply. He feels that maybe the

percentage should be increased, but it should be decided on a case by case basis.

Trustee DeStephano added that depending on the impact on the neighborhood there

should be variations made.

President Mueller asked Director of Community Development, David Hulseberg to have

the Plan Commission review the policies and report back to the Village Board.

Community Development Director Hulseberg introduced the subject and said that staff

has been studying policy and is looking at involuntary annexations along Route 53.

Margaret Gibbs reported on the right of the Village to annex and said that the Village is

not obligated to rezone or grant relief for zoning. She presented items for the Board's

consideration. Ms. Gibbs pointed out that the area is within Lombard's planning

jurisdiction and annexation of the area would help define boundary efficiencies. The

plan is to annex larger areas at a time to encourage development, and to improve the

quality of the area by limiting cell towers and billboards through amortization or

redevelopment negotiations.

She explained that while all properties have Village water, only some are connected to

our sewers. Our ordinance requires that property owners hook up to Village sewers

within 90 days. Ms. Gibbs added that If the properties are annexed, septic tanks must

be abandoned and wells sealed. She said that these procedures can be expensive in

some cases.

Ms. Gibbs also stated that the areas being looked at may not comply with our zoning

codes. All of the properties would go in as residence (R1) and those who are not R1

uses will be considered as legal non conforming. If relief is granted then the properties

may be rezoned as appropriate. She said that Staff met with owners to explain and

address concerns and advises individuals in the area to meet with staff so that they can

do an evaluation of each property. Her report also expressed the owner's concerns.

She said that the connections for the Utilities can be expensive $1,800 for short Water

Service runs and $3,600 for long ones across Route 53.

Director Hulseberg asked for Board Direction to allow staff to begin negotiations rather

than presenting any ordinances at this time. Trustee DeStephano was astounded at the

utility hook up costs. Mr. Hulseberg said that staff would like to be extremely flexible

and make sure that the businesses can afford the associated costs. He mentioned that

many properties in the area are a detriment to the aesthetics of the neighborhood and

neighbors want to have the annexations occur so that there will be relief from unsightly

neighboring properties. Director Hulseberg said that negotiations would have to occur

but that Staff would be flexible whenever possible.

President Mueller explained that the high costs are due to construction costs, not our

fees.

Trustee Tross stated that he is opposed to forced annexations and thinks that it is better

to have negotiations beforehand. He asked if many of these properties are enforcement

problems, why would we want to take them on. He can't understand why the business

people would want to be annexed so that they can be code violators.

Director Hulseberg explained that the properties reflect badly on Lombard and are

perceived as part of Lombard. In addition, we can better direct redevelopment than the

County.

Trustee Destephano agreed that often people drive through and think that this is part of

Lombard. Trustee Florey said that without annexation, the properties would remain in

disrepair indefinitely.

Trustee Tross said that Route 53 and North Avenue will be subject to economic

development and should be annexed later as properties redevelop. Trustee Sebby

concurs with Staff and Trustee DeStephano that the perception is that this is Lombard

and he does not feel that some of these businesses will change their ways. Trustee

Florey asked if the properties annexing in as R1 gives us more leverage. Mr.

Hulseberg answered that it would, to some degree.

Trustee Tross asked if we take in enforcement issues and forcibly annex, how would we

bring them into compliance including permitted uses and buffering.

Mr. Hulseberg said that only one of the properties would match that description, and it

also has bigger problems such as an uninhabitable structure and health issues. They

would be told they have to take care of the issues or close up shop. When they rebuild

or redevelop, they will have to come into compliance.

Trustee Tross reiterated that he is totally against forced annexations, he said we should

use leverage to have owners voluntarily annex.

Trustee Sebby said that some properties like the Hackers would come forward, but the

worst areas would likely not want to annex and the area would become more spotty.

Director Hulseberg agreed that the enforcement properties would have no reason to

come forward and annex and therefore nothing would improve.

President Mueller explained that the County is not doing any enforcement, so they will

remain in disrepair.

Director Hulseberg said that the annexations could occur within 30 days and then Staff

could come back to the Board with specific recommendations for individual properties,

waiver of fees and the like.

Trustee DeStephano indicated she is in support of the forcible annexations and asked

for staff's flexibility with the various owners. Trustees Sebby and Florey added their

support. Trustee Tross objected. Trustee Soderstrom had no objection, nor did Trustee

Koenig.

President Mueller gave the example of the Hackers property, they want to keep their

well to water their plants, they do not have contaminated wells, and he said that Staff

and the Board should use common sense in individual cases.