Loading...
CITY COUNCIL 2021/09/20 Agenda THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Monday, September 20, 2021 at 6:30 pm REMOTE ACCESS MEETING Please be advised that all of the City Council members will be remotely attending this Council meeting by electronic means, in compliance with the recent amendments to the Open Meetings Act. The Mayor of the City Council has determined that it is not prudent or practical to conduct an in-person meeting due to the COVID-19 pandemic and that it is not feasible to have the City Council members or members of the public physically present at the meeting due to the pandemic disaster. The City will be providing members of the public with various opportunities to watch or attend this meeting, as well as provide public comment at the meeting. For example, members of the public can participate remotely in the meeting by following the public audience link which will provide both video and audio means to attend the meeting. Public Access Link https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83232611513?pwd=ZDB0OW0xUEhWZDF4UVFDMWNSR3huUT09 Webinar ID: 832 3261 1513 Passcode: 1861 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 6:30 p.m. Honorable Mayor, George Pandaleon James E. Morris, Alderman First Ward Jim Preschlack, Alderman Third Ward Jennifer Karras, Alderman First Ward Ara Goshgarian, Alderman Third Ward Melanie Rummel, Alderman Second Ward Raymond Buschmann, Alderman Fourth Ward Edward U. Notz, Jr., Alderman Second Ward Eileen Looby Weber, Alderman Fourth Ward PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE REPORTS OF CITY OFFICERS 1. COMMENTS BY MAYOR A. Swearing in Firefighter/Paramedic Nick Dovel B. Report on General Obligation Refunding Bonds 1 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda 2. COMMENTS BY CITY MANAGER A. Community Spotlight - Dr. Montgomery, Superintendent for Lake Forest School Districts 67 and 115 3. OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL . 4. COMMITTEE REPORTS 5. ITEMS FOR OMNIBUS VOTE CONSIDERATION 1. Approval of September 7, 2021, City Council Meeting Minutes A copy of the minutes can be found beginning on page 18 COUNCIL ACTION: Approval of September 7, 2021, City Council Meeting Minutes 2. Acknowledge Receipt of the Notification of Sale of General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2021 STAFF CONTACT: Elizabeth Holleb, Finance Director (847-810-3612) PURPOSE AND ACTION REQUESTED: It is requested that the City Council acknowledge receipt of the Notification of Sale associated with the 2021 Refunding Bond issue, as required in the Bond Ordinance approved by the City Council on August 2, 2021. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The City regularly monitors bond market conditions to assess opportunities to refund, or refinance, existing debt obligations and achieve a savings through lower interest rates. With an opportunity to refinance the 2013 General Obligation (GO) Bonds, staff was authorized to proceed with preparation for a refunding bond issue. A preliminary official statement was prepared and submitted to Moody’s Investors Service with a request for a rating, and Moody’s assigned a Aaa rating to the proposed issue and affirmed the Aaa rating on all GO debt of the City. On August 19, a competitive online auction was hosted by Speer Financial, the City’s financial advisory firm. Nine bidders submitted a total of 63 bids during the auction. The successful bidder was Northland Securities who bid a True Interest Cost of 1.0065%. Savings over the life of the bonds exceeds $1.6 million. All parameters set forth in the ordinance approved by City Council were met and the City took official action to accept the low bid. The bond closing will occur on September 15. PROJECT REVIEW/RECOMMENDATIONS: 2 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda Reviewed Date Comments Online Bond Auction 8/19/21 Nine (9) bidders submitted a total of 63 bids City Council 8/2/21 Final Approval – Bond Parameters Ordinance City Council 7/19/21 First Reading – Bond Parameters Ordinance Finance Committee 7/19/21 Recommend staff proceed with preparations for a refunding issue. BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: Savings over the life of the bond issue exceeds $1.6 million. COUNCIL ACTION: Acknowledge Receipt of the Notification of Sale of General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2021 (page 24) 3. Approval of the Purchase of a New Storage Array for the City’s Data Center in the Amount of $54,814 Based on State of Illinois Contract STAFF CONTACT: Joseph Gabanski, Assistant Director of IT, 847-810-3591 PURPOSE AND ACTION REQUESTED: Staff requests approval to purchase a new Storage Array for the City’s Data Center. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: In summer of 2015 The City retained an IT Consultant, Client First Consulting to facilitate a completive selection process for a new Data Center implementation or data center cloud offering. At that time, it was found that Nimble Storage Attached Network (SAN) device was the storage option that best fit the needs of the City. The device is approaching end of life on 12/31/2021 and a replacement is required in order to maintain support. The Nimble Storage array is responsible for the entire virtual server environment including the BS&A ERP System, Fire records management system, RecTrac, the LF Now app database, and other critical systems. In June 2021, the IT Department evaluated product offerings of similar size and functionality. It was determined that an in-place replacement of the Nimble storage device is in the best interests of the City due to the current system meeting or exceeding performance and functionality expectations. BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: On July 15, 2021 City staff received a proposal from CDW for the system replacement. Pricing obtained from this proposal is based on the State of Illinois Contract CMT1021170 as part of the Illinois Department of Central Management Services’ joint purchasing program. This contract was awarded to the lowest cost and responsible bidder. 3 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda FY2022 Funding Source Amount Budgeted Amount Requested Budgeted? Y/N IT Operating 101-1303-466.66-11 $88,500 $54,814 Y Has City staff obtained competitive pricing for proposed goods/services? No Directive 3-5, Section 6.1D – Government Joint Purchases COUNCIL ACTION: Approval of the purchase of a new storage array for the City’s data center in the amount of $54,814 4. Approval of a 3 Year Renewal Agreement for Microsoft Enterprise Licensing with Dell Marketing L.P. Based on State of Illinois Contract STAFF CONTACT: Joseph Gabanski, Assistant IT Director (847-810-3591) PURPOSE AND ACTION REQUESTED: Staff is requesting City Council approval to enter into a three-year contract with Dell Marketing, L.P., (Dell) for Microsoft software which includes maintenance support services and licensing for all City Microsoft workstation and server operating systems, databases, SharePoint Online, and the Office 365 suite. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: In 2015, City Council approved to move to the Office 365 suite, at that time, being a lower cost alternative to replacing on-premise Microsoft systems. Since its initial inception, the City has been increasing utilization of the additional product offerings included in the Office 365 suite. In 2017, the City moved the majority of file storage to the SharePoint Online and OneDrive platforms, easing the transition to remote-working during the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2019, the IT department implemented the Power BI platform, to deliver meaningful information from discontinuous data sources to support various City operations. IT is currently in process of implementing Microsoft’s Power Automate and Power Apps in order to reduce manual/repetitive data entry for staff. PROJECT REVIEW/RECOMMENDATIONS: Milestone Date Comments RFP Issuance 08/05/2021 RFP Published in Pioneer Press, published in publicnoticeillinois.com, 5 Vendors Notified Proposals Submitted 08/25/2021 Four Vendor Submitted Proposals Received & Reviewed BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: On August 25, 2021 staff received five proposals before the deadline in response to an August 5, 2021 RFP issuance. Proposals were evaluated based primarily on cost with additional considerations for value-added support services included in the vendor proposals. Vendor Total Amount Dell $111,490 4 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda Zones $122,373 CDW $120,765 Heartland $128,703 eMazzanti $679,465 Dell has been awarded the State of Illinois Master Contract #CMT1176800 for Microsoft licensing as part of the Illinois Department of Central Management Services’ joint purchasing program. This contract was awarded to the lowest cost and responsible bidder. Has City staff obtained competitive pricing for proposed goods/services? Yes Below is an estimated summary of Project budget: FY2022 Funding Source Account Number Amount Budgeted Amount Requested * Budgeted? Y/N IT Operating 101-1315-415-43-37 $103,201 $111,490 Y * The amount requested over budget can be absorbed through other budgetary savings COUNCIL ACTION: Approval of a 3 Year Renewal Agreement for Microsoft Enterprise Licensing with Dell Marketing L.P. Based on State of Illinois Contract 5. Award of Proposal to Data Works Plus LLC. for the Purchase of a Live Scan Fingerprint System in the amount of $28,637.00 STAFF CONTACT: Rob Copeland, Deputy Chief of Police (847-810-3809) PURPOSE AND ACTION REQUESTED: Staff is requesting City Council approval to award the vendor, DataWorks Plus LLC, for the purchase of one (1) live scan fingerprint system for the Police Department booking area. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The live scan fingerprint system is used by every police department throughout the State of Illinois for the processing most criminal arrestees, completing criminal background checks and verifying identities of criminal suspects. The digital fingerprints are transmitted electronically to the Illinois State Police and the FBI fingerprint database. All positively identified criminal suspects must go through the booking process and then entered into the NCIC criminal database supported by the FBI. Any unidentified suspects or suspects providing false identification can be more readily identified through the electronic submission of their fingerprints. The police department has had its current Live Scan Fingerprint System for six (6) years. The operating system for the hardware cannot be upgraded and is no longer supported by the Illinois State Police and has reached its end of life. BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: Staff submitted for quotes from five vendors approved by the Illinois State Police for use in the criminal justice system. Tyler Technologies, the company who provides our department with Records Management Software (including our arrest and booking application) was also consulted as to which system integrated with their system. Tyler 5 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda Technologies does require any vendor chosen to pay a one-time interphase fee of $4,640.00 to integrate the new system with their records management system used by LFPD. Has City staff obtained competitive pricing for proposed goods/service? Yes State Approved Vendors Dollar Amount Tyler Technologies Interphase Fee Total Amount Biometrics4ALL $30,270.00 $4,640.00 $34,910.00 DataWorks Plus $23,997.00 $4,640.00 $28,637.00 HID Global $19,938.84 $4,640.00 $24,578.84 Idemia $23,364.00 $4,640.00 $28,004.00 ID Networks $30,165.00 $4,640.00 $34,805.00 Upon review of the submitted proposals, staff recommends proceeding with the proposal received by DataWorks Plus due to the custom integration with TylTechnologies software, and with their ability to fulfill all requirements from Illinois State Police. FY22 Funding Source Account Number Account Budget Amount Requested Budgeted? Y/N Police Equipment 101-7603-475.75-49 $50,000 $28,637.00 Y COUNCIL ACTION: Award of Proposal to Data Works Plus LLC. for the Purchase of a Live Scan Fingerprint System in the amount of $28,637.00 6. Approval of the Purchase of Computer Workstations, Laptops, Hybrid Tablets, and Rugged Tablets for All City Departments STAFF CONTACT: Joseph Gabanski, Assistant IT Director (847-810-3591) PURPOSE AND ACTION REQUESTED: Staff requests approval to purchase 25 desktop computers, 15 laptops, 4 rugged laptop, and 1 rugged tablet. The project is to replace computers based on a 5-year replacement cycle for workstations, laptops, and hybrid computers. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The City has 25 desktop computers, 15 laptops, 4 rugged laptop, and one rugged tablet recommended for replacement in FY22. The oldest computers of this proposed replacement are 5 years old, with the average being 4 years old. The City’s current inventory of computers consists of 126 desktops, 79 laptops, 30 hybrid tablets, and 34 rugged tablets. The City standardized all desktops and laptops with Dell products 21 years ago. The standardizations help staff to efficiently deploy, troubleshoot, and maintain the systems. This year the City received pricing from three vendors: CDW, Dell, and SHI. CDW provided the City with a proposal based on the National IPA Technology Solutions (2018011-01) contract pricing. 6 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: Staff received the following pricing for this project: Vendor Total Amount Dell Workstations, Laptops, Hybrid and Rugged Tablets CDW $57,025 DELL $62,306 SHI $65,337 Has competitive pricing been obtained for proposed goods/services? Yes Below is an estimated summary of Project budget: FY2022 Funding Source Amount Budgeted Amount Requested Budgeted? Y/N IT Operating 101-1303-466.66-11 $111,500 $57,025 Y COUNCIL ACTION: Approval of the Purchase of Computer Workstations, Laptops, Hybrid Tablets, and Rugged Tablets for All City Departments 7. Award of Bid for the 2021 Dickinson Hall Tuck Pointing Project to the Lowest Responsive and Responsible Bidder, Bruce Brugioni Construction, in the Amount of $130,533.47 to Include a 10% Contingency Amount of $13,053.35 for a Grand Total of $143,586.82 STAFF CONTACT: Jim Lockefeer, Assistant to the Director of Public Works (810-3542) PURPOSE AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Public Works Committee and City staff requests City Council award of bid for the 2021 Dickinson Hall Tuck Pointing Project to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, Bruce Brugioni Construction, in amount of $130,533.47 to include a 10% contingency amount of $13,053.35 for a grand total of $143,586.82. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Dickinson Hall, located on the historical Grove Campus, is home to the Lake Forest – Lake Bluff Senior Center. Dickinson Hall was built in the 1930s, acquired by the City in the late 1990s, and was most recently renovated in 2000. The majority of the building’s exterior brick is original and requires the tuck pointing of historic lime mortar to preserve the brick. Tuck pointing is an important process to maintain the integrity of a building’s brick masonry. As mortar deteriorates, it allows more water to seep into the masonry. After Building Maintenance Section staff identified areas of exterior mortar grout decay, staff enlisted the help of Leverett Masonry Consulting to inspect current conditions of the exterior, develop design specifications in order to preserve the historic brick and mortar, and assist with the bidding process and project oversight. Leverett Masonry Consulting provided similar services on the recent restoration of the Lake Forest Cemetery front gate. The exterior tuck 7 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda pointing and other masonry repairs included in this project will help preserve the building for many years into the future. PROJECT REVIEW/RECOMMENDATIONS: Reviewed Date Comments Public Works Committee 9/8/2021 Reviewed and Recommended Approval BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: On July 16, 2021, City staff initiated the public bidding process. Fifteen contractors attended the mandatory pre-bid meeting and on August 6, 2021 the City received seven sealed as outlined below. Has City staff obtained competitive pricing for proposed goods/services? Yes Company Name Total Project Cost Berglund Construction Company $55,000.00 Bruce Brugioni Construction $130,533.47 Action One Construction Inc. $141,000.00 Carving in Stone Inc. $154,000.00 Cruz Brother’s Construction Company $155,785.00 A-One Group $246,200.00 Union Contracting $249,300.00 The low bid received from Berglund Construction Company immediately presented concerns to both City Staff and Leverett Masonry Consulting. Berglund Construction Company’s bid is substantially lower than the Leverett Masonry Consulting’s original project construction estimate of $160,000. In addition, the range of the six other bids received were much more in line with the construction estimate. City staff and Leverett Masonry Consulting were in agreement to reject the low bid from Berglund Construction Company due a misunderstanding of the project scope. Bruce Brugioni Construction has considerable experience working with historic masonry and lime mortar. The company has completed multiple residential and commercial projects throughout The City of Lake Forest. Bruce Brugioni Construction also previously and successfully completed historic tuck pointing for the City at Gorton Community Center. City staff and Leverett Masonry Consulting were in agreement in identifying and recommending Bruce Brugioni Construction as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Below is an estimated summary of Project budget: FY2022 Funding Source Amount Budgeted Amount Requested Budgeted? Y/N Capital Improvement Fund 311-1503-467.67-76 $160,000 $143,586.82 Y COUNCIL ACTION: Award of Bid for the 2021 Dickinson Hall Tuck Pointing Project to the Lowest Responsive and Responsible Bidder, Bruce Brugioni Construction, in the Amount of 8 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda $130,533.47 to Include a 10% Contingency Amount of $13,053.35 for a Grand Total of $143,586.82 8. Authorization for the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with 20-10 Engineering Group and HOH Group for Facility Mechanical Engineering Services STAFF CONTACT: Jim Lockefeer, Assistant to the Director of Public Works (810-3542) PURPOSE AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Public Works Committee and City staff requests City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with 20- 10 Engineering Group and HOH Group for facility mechanical engineering services. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The City of Lake Forest regularly contracts with outside service providers to perform professional mechanical engineering services for various facility projects. In an effort to improve efficiency and provide consistency on City projects, the Public Works Committee and City staff is seeking to establish an agreement that will designate two engineering firms, 20-10 Engineering Group and HOH Group., to provide professional mechanical engineering services. Either firm may be selected, however, the firm selected will depend on the firm’s availability and the project type. Professional engineering services for mechanical engineering projects will include, but are not limited to, the development of schematic design, final design and construction documents, bidding documents and bid process support, and project construction oversight. Additionally, the selected firms will be expected to collaborate with City staff in the development of a proposed project designs. An example of a project that the City expects the approved professional mechanical engineering services firms to complete would be the design of a project related to a facility HVAC replacement. The selected firm would need to design and develop all the related replacement specifications and bidding documentation in order for the City to place the project out to bid for contractor installation services. This RFP process was modeled after recent City Council approved RFP’s for professional landscape architectural services and professional ravine engineering services. Similarly, these agreements were recommended to improve efficiency and provide consistency on City projects. PROJECT REVIEW/RECOMMENDATIONS: Reviewed Date Comments Public Works Committee 9/8/2021 Reviewed and Recommended Approval BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: On August 4, 2021 a Request for Proposals (RFP) was released by the City, published in the Lake County News Sun, and posted on the City’s website. In addition, a bid opportunity announcement was emailed directly to multiple firms who provide mechanical engineering services. On August 24, 2021, three submittals were received and a 9 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda selection committee, comprised of City staff, was formed to review and evaluate the written responses based on firm experience, references/project results, and fee schedule. Has City staff obtained competitive pricing for proposed goods/services? Yes Company Name Fee Schedule (Hourly Rate Range) 20-10 Engineering Group $85 - $195 HOH Group $81 - $175 ME Engineers $110 - $300 After careful consideration, 20-10 Engineering Group and HOH Group were unanimously selected by the selection committee as the successful candidates. The basis for the selection was as follows: • 20-10 Engineering Group and HOH Group met and surpassed all qualifications outlined in the RFP. • 20-10 Engineering Group and HOH Group have extensive experience with municipal mechanical engineering projects. • 20-10 Engineering Group and HOH Group have presented reasonable fee schedules associated with their proposed project teams. Below is an estimated summary of Project budget: FY2022 Funding Source Amount Budgeted Amount Requested Budgeted? Y/N Operating Budget 101-1522-467-67-65 $145,000 See Below Y The FY2022 General Fund Budget includes an annual allocation of $145,000 for general building improvements from which some professional mechanical engineering services may be paid. Work may also be paid from other budget accounts as applicable, but any single project for which services exceed $25,000 will be separately approved by the City Council. Work for both firms may also exceed the $25,000 aggregate amount in a fiscal year. The agreement with 20-10 Engineering Group and HOH Group is intended to be for a period of three years, which will include the option of two additional, one year terms based on performance at the City’s sole discretion. COUNCIL ACTION: Authorization for the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with 20-10 Engineering Group and HOH Group for Facility Mechanical Engineering Services 9. Award of Bid for a Three-Year Fire Alarm Testing & Inspection Services Contract to Esscoe, LLC in the Amount of $30,016 STAFF CONTACT: Jim Lockefeer, Assistant to the Director of Public Works (810-3542) 10 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda PURPOSE AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Public Works Committee and City staff requests City Council award of bid for a three-year Fire Alarm Testing & Inspection Services Contract to Esscoe, LLC in the amount of $30,016. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The City’s annual Fire Alarm Testing & Inspection Services Program keeps over 1,500 fire alarm system devices in 31 City facilities operating efficiently by ensuring reliability, identifying any necessary repairs, and reducing operating costs. The devices serviced consist of the fire alarm panel and all attached detectors, input devices, and audio/visual units. All program testing and inspections of devices are completed in accordance with the National Fire Protection Association (“NFPA”) Standard on National Fire Ala rm and Signaling Code. In addition, all testing and inspection work is completed by a State of Illinois licensed Alarm Contractor Agency with personnel that have technical resources and expertise to maintain complex and large alarm systems. PROJECT REVIEW/RECOMMENDATIONS: Reviewed Date Comments Public Works Committee 9/8/21 Reviewed and Recommended Approval BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: On July 22, 2021, City staff initiated a public bidding process for Fire Alarm Testing & Inspection Program services. The bid opportunity was posted in the Lake County News Sun and was made available on the City’s website. In addition, a bid opportunity announcement was emailed directly to multiple contracting firms who provide fire alarm testing & inspection services. On August 6, 2021, the public bid process closed and in total, three bids were received, as outlined below. Company Name 3-Year Contract Total Esscoe, LLC $24,210 TEC Electric Inc. $36,637 F.E. Moran, Inc. $101,060 During the public bid process, City staff issued an addendum that updated the building specifications and pricing sheet. The addendum notice was shared directly with all participating firms and was made available on the City’s website. Both Tec Electric and F.E. Moran failed to use the revised specification and pricing sheet issued via the addendum and their bids were subsequently rejected due to failing to follow bidding instructions. Immediately following the opening of all sealed bids, Esscoe informed the City that they were withdrawing their bid due to an internal clerical pricing error. On August 13, 2021, City staff again initiated a public bidding process for Fire Alarm Testing & Inspection Program services. The bid opportunity was posted in the Lake County News Sun and was made available on the City’s website. In addition, a bid opportunity announcement was emailed directly to multiple contracting firms who provide fire alarm testing & inspection services. On August 27, 2021, the public bid process closed and in total, one bid was received, as outlined below. Has City staff obtained competitive pricing for proposed goods/services? Yes 11 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda Company Name 3-Year Contract Total Esscoe, LLC $30,016 Esscoe has considerable experience working with municipal, commercial, educational, and healthcare fire alarm systems. Staff contacted Esscoe’s fire alarm testing & inspection service references, which included Lake County government facilities and Lake Forest College. Both Lake County and Lake Forest College shared very positive experiences in working with Esscoe and explained that they provided a high level of service. Esscoe is a State of Illinois licensed Alarm Contractor Agency. Esscoe also provided staff with their fire alarm system inspection certificate template which staff found very detailed. Overall, staff was very comfortable with their submitted bid. The contract terms are for three years, which will include the option of two additional, one- year terms, subject to contractor acceptable performance reviewed at the end of each year. Each additional contract year cannot exceed a two percent increase per year. In addition, a written request must be submitted to include documentation, justifying the need for the increase. Below is an estimated summary of Project budget: FY2022 - 23 Funding Source Amount Budgeted Amount Requested Budgeted? Y/N Operating Budget Multiple Accounts $30,016 $30,016 Y If awarded, Esscoe would begin program services this October. COUNCIL ACTION: Award of Bid for a Three-Year Fire Alarm Testing & Inspection Services Contract to Esscoe, LLC in the Amount of $30,016 10. Approval of a Resolution Committing Local Funds for the 2021 Safe Routes to School Program for The City of Lake Forest Project Grant Application and the Authorization of the City Manager to Execute Related Grant Application Documents STAFF CONTACT: Jim Lockefeer, Assistant to the Director of Public Works (810-3542) PURPOSE AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Public Works Committee and City staff requests approval of a Resolution committing Local Funds for the 2021 Safe Routes to School Program for The City of Lake Forest Project grant application and the authorization of the City Manager to execute related grant application documents. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Illinois Safe Routes to School Program (“SRTS”) is a federal program administered by the Illinois Department of Transportation (“IDOT”). The SRTS program supports projects and programs that enable and encourage walking and bicycling to and from school. The program applies to schools serving grades Kindergarten through 8th grade. All infrastructure projects must be completed within a 2-mile radius of a school. SRTS funds are awarded competitively and any local government, school, or school district is eligible to apply. Project sponsors may receive up to eighty (80) percent reimbursement for 12 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda eligible project costs. This year, SRTS will provide $12 million in federal funding. The deadline for application submittals is September 30, 2021 and successful application awards are anticipated to be announced in the Spring of 2022. City staff and the Public Works Committee have identified an eligible sidewalk connection project in the Whispering Oaks Subdivision just south of Cherokee School. This project is specifically located along Longwood Drive, Morningside Drive, Grandview Avenue, and Beverly Place. Currently, the sidewalks around these blocks do not connect across intersections. Completing these sidewalk connections would meet the overall goal of the SRTS program in improving conditions for walking and biking to school. In addition, these sidewalk improvements would also improve accessibility. In order to submit the project grant application, SRTS requires a Resolution committing local funds for the project. On page 29 of the packet, a copy of the proposed project Resolution is included. PROJECT REVIEW/RECOMMENDATIONS: Reviewed Date Comments Public Works Committee 9/8/2021 Reviewed and Recommended Approval BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: SRTS grants provide 80% federal grant funding. The City of Lake Forest would be responsible for the 20% local agency matching funds if the project grant application is successful. Below is a prospective grant funding assessment for the project. Project Estimated Total Project Cost ITEP Funding Estimate (80%) Total Local Share Estimate (20%) Amount Budgeted in FY2021 Whispering Oaks Sidewalk Connections $175,000 $140,000 $35,000 $0 Approval of this Resolution affirms that the City is committed to the project and pledges to fund the required local share if grant funding were awarded. In addition, the City would agree to fund any project cost overruns. If approved, City staff intends to designate this project as grant dependent in the Fiscal Year 2023 Capital Improvement Program. If project funds are awarded, the City would need to formalize a funding agreement with IDOT. This agreement would be brought to City Council for review and approval. COUNCIL ACTION: Approval of a Resolution Committing Local Funds for the 2021 Safe Routes to School Program for The City of Lake Forest Project Grant Application and the Authorization of the City Manager to Execute Related Grant Application Documents. 11. Consideration of Ordinances Approving Recommendations from the Building Review Board. (First Reading, and if Desired by the City Council, Final Approval) STAFF CONTACT: Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development (810-3504) 13 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda PURPOSE AND ACTION REQUESTED: The following recommendations from the Building Review Board are presented to the City Council for consideration as part of the Omnibus Agenda. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: 1535 Sage Court – The Building Review Board recommended approval of a new single family residence on a vacant lot in the Oak Knoll Woodlands Subdivision. No public testimony was presented. (Board vote: 7 - 0, approved) 1505 Sage Court – The Building Review Board recommended approval of a new single family residence on a vacant lot in the Oak Knoll Woodlands Subdivision. No public testimony was presented. (Board vote: 6 - 0, approved) The Ordinances approving the petitions as recommended by the Building Review Board, with key exhibits attached, are included in the Council packet beginning on page 30. The Ordinances, complete with all exhibits, are available for review in the Community Development Department. COUNCIL ACTION: If determined to be appropriate by the City Council, waive first reading and grant final approval of the Ordinances approving the petitions in accordance with the Building Review Board’s recommendations. 12. Consideration of Ordinances Approving Recommendations from the Zoning Board of Appeals. (First Reading, and if Desired by the City Council, Final Approval) STAFF CONTACT: Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development (810-3504) PURPOSE AND ACTION REQUESTED: The following recommendations from the Zoning Board of Appeals are presented to the City Council for consideration as part of the Omnibus Agenda. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: 342 N. Western Avenue – The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended approval of a variance from the lot-in-depth setback to allow construction of a two car garage on the west side of the house. Two neighboring property owners testified, one in support of the petition and the other noted concerns about existing drainage issues on his property. The Board directed that the City Engineer be informed of the neighbor’s concerns prior to review of the drainage and grading plan. (Board vote: 6-0 recommending approval) 2 June Terrace – The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended approval of front and side yard variances to allow various updates and limited expansion of an existing, small, nonconforming residence and replacement of a nonconforming single car garage. There was no testimony presented to the Board. The Board recognized that the small lot and the nonconforming conditions present a challenge and noted that with respect to the house, the extent of the proposed side yard encroachment aligns with the existing footprint of the house and with respect to the garage, the new garage is setback further from the property line than the existing garage. (Board vote: 5 -2 recommending approval) 293 Rose Terrace - The Zoning Board of Appeals recommended approval of front and side yard setback variances to allow the addition of an open front porch. No public testimony was presented on this petition. (Board vote: 6-0 recommending approval) 14 Monday, September 20, 2021 City Council Agenda The Ordinances approving the petitions as recommended by the Zoning Board of Appeals, with key exhibits attached, are included in the Council packet beginning on page 52. The Ordinances, complete with all exhibits, are available for review in the Community Development Department. COUNCIL ACTION: If determined to be appropriate by the City Council, waive first reading and grant final approval of the Ordinances approving the petitions in accordance with the Zoning Board of Appeals’ recommendations. COUNCIL ACTION: Approval of the twelve (12) omnibus items as presented. 6. OLD BUSINESS 7. NEW BUSINESS 8. ADDITIONAL ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ COMMENTS BY COUNCIL MEMBERS 9. ADJOURNMENT A copy of the Decision Making Parameters is included beginning on page 16 of this packet. An instruction guide on how to participate at a City Council meeting is included beginning on page 17. Office of the City Manager September 15, 2021 The City of Lake Forest is subject to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Individuals with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who require certain accommodations in order to allow them to observe and/or participate in this meeting, or who have questions regarding the accessibility of the meeting or the facilities, are required to contact City Manager Jason Wicha, at (847) 234-2600 promptly to allow the City to make reasonable accommodations for those persons. 15 ^Qtu^^ C^'NA<WA£BT-<^ ^.Scie^^t^wS^'X. §.. ^..,,.e-..^ f-l&ff"^ THE CITY OF LAKE FOREST DECISION-MAKING PARAMETERS FOR CITY COUNCIL, AND APPOINTED BOARDS & COMMISSIONS Adopted June 18, 2018 The City of Lake Forest Mission Statement: "Be the best-managed, fiscally-responsible and appealing community and promote a community spirit of trust, respect and citizen involvement. " The Lake Forest City Council, with the advice and recommendations of its appointed advisory Boards and Commissions, Lake Forest Citizens, and City Staff, is responsible for policy formulation and approval. Implementation of adopted strategy, policy, budgets, and other directives of Council is the responsibility of City Staff, led by the City Manager and Senior Staff. The Mayor and Aldermen, and appointed members of Boards and Commissions should address matters in a timely, deliberate, objective and process-driven manner, making decisions guided by the City of Lake Forest Strategic and Comprehensive Plans, the City's Codes, policies and procedures, and the following parameters: . Motions and votes should comprise what is in the best long-term interests of all Lake Forest citizens, measured in decades, being mindful of proven precedents and new precedents that may be created. . All points of view should be listened to and considered in making decisions with the long-term benefit to Lake Forest's general public welfare being the highest priority. . Fundmg decisions should support effectiveness and economy in providing services and programs, while mindful of the number ofcidzens benefittmg from such expenditures. . New initiatives should be quantified, qualified, and evaluated for their long-tenn merit and overall fiscal unpact and other consequences to the community. . Decision makers should be proactive and timely in addressing sto-ategic planning initiatives, external forces not under control of the City, and other opportunities and challenges to the community. Community trust in, and support of, government is fostered by maintaining the integrity of these decision-making parameters. The City of Lake Forest 's Decision-Making Parameters shall be reviewed by the City Council on an annual basis and shall be included on all agendas of the City Council and Boards and Commissions. 16 CITY COUNCIL – REMOTE ACCESS MEETING GUIDE Rules:  An online guide to using Zoom is available here  Participants can join using the Zoom application, using the call in number located at the top of the agenda, or can stream the meeting live via YouTube.  All Participants should use their real name (first and last) to identify themselves in the meeting. Public Participation:  Please wait to be recognized by a staff member, and the Mayor prior to making your comment.  If you would like to address your public comment to the City Council live, you can use one of two options o The Raise hand function via the zoom application.  If you are using the raise hand function, wait to be promoted to turn on your microphone to make a comment. There is a slight delay after you are promoted. You can then unmute yourself and address your comments to the City Council. o Calling the public comment line at 847-810-3643  If you are calling the public comment line, be sure to step away from your computer or TV, where you are watching the meeting, to avoid feedback. Device Audio Connection Ideal Zoom app on a desktop or Laptop A headset with microphone Wired connection via Ethernet Better Zoom app on a mobile phone or tablet A headset (using built-in microphone) Using a phone to dial in Connected Wirelessly via WiFi Okay Calling into conference line (without Zoom app) Computer speakers (using built-in microphone) Speakerphone on phone Connected via 4G / LTE (cellular data) Using a phone to dial in Tips Make sure your device is fully charged and you have access to Zoom on your device When Participating, pick a quite space to avoid any background noise If you have to use WiFi, try to pick a workspace close to your router. 17 The City of Lake Forest CITY COUNCIL MEETING Proceedings of the Monday, September 7, 2021 City Council Meeting - City Council Chambers REMOTE ACCESS MEETING CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Honorable Mayor Pandaleon called the meeting to order at 6:30pm, and the City Clerk Margaret Boyer called the roll of Council members. Present: Honorable Mayor Pandaleon, Alderman Morris, Alderman Karras, Alderman Rummel, Alderman Notz, Alderman Preschlack, Alderman Goshgarian, Alderman Buschmann and Alderman Weber. Absent: none CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was recited. REPORTS OF CITY OFFICERS COMMENTS BY MAYOR Mayor Pandaleon made the following statement as required by the Open Meetings Act. In accordance with state statute, Mayor Pandaleon has made a determination that it was not practical or prudent to schedule an in-person City Council meeting because of the COVID-19 pandemic, which is why this September 7, 2021 City Council meeting is being held remotely. Mayor Pandaleon spoke about the recent music festival and antique car show. COMMENTS BY CITY MANAGER A. Community Spot Light - Open Lands, Susie Hoffman, Director of Education and Center for Conservation Leadership City Manager Jason Wicha introduced Open Lands, Director of Education, Susie Hoffman, to provide an update on their upcoming events. She provided the City Council with information on their latest events including the recent Land Blessing, Helping Hands, and their signature event, Bagpipes and Bonfire. Ms. Hoffman stated that Bagpipes and Bonfire is scheduled to take place on September 19 from 4 pm – 8 pm. OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Members of the public can provide public comment by calling into the following number during the meeting: 847-810-3643 COMMITTEE REPORTS ITEMS FOR OMNIBUS VOTE CONSIDERATION 18 Proceedings of the Tuesday, September 7, 2021 Regular City Council Meeting 1. Approval of August 2, 2021, City Council Meeting Minutes 2. Approval of the Check Register for the Period of July 24 – August 27, 2021 3. Approval of an Amendment to the City Council Schedule of Regular Meetings Previously Adopted by the City Council for the Year 2021 COUNCIL ACTION: Approval of the three (3) Omnibus items as presented Mayor Pandaleon asked members of the Council if they would like to remove any item or take it separately. Seeing none, he asked for a motion. Alderman Rummel made a motion to approve the three (3) Omnibus items as presented, seconded by Alderman Weber. The following voted “Aye”: Alderman Morris, Karras, Rummel, Notz, Preschlack, Goshgarian, Buschmann and Weber. The following voted “Nay”: None. 8-Ayes, 0 Nays, motion carried. Information such as Purpose and Action Requested, Background/Discussion, Budget/Fiscal Impact, Recommended Action and a Staff Contact as it relates to the Omnibus items can be found on the agenda. ORDINANCES OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 1. Consideration of an Appeal of a Decision of the Historic Preservation Commission to Deny a Certificate of Appropriateness for the Third Condominium Building in the McKinley Road Multi-Family Planned Development. (Action by Motion) Mayor Pandaleon made a statement providing details of the process the City Council will follow for the item presented. Specifically, Mayor Pandaleon stated that the Council would not be conducting a public hearing on this appeal as that hearing had been held by the Historic Preservation Commission. He also noted that the zoning and development approvals were not the subject of this hearing. He addressed various communications submitted by an attorney for neighboring residents, and noted that in his opinion, the City Council had jurisdiction to consider the appeal tonight. City Attorney, Julie Tappendorf, then provided additional information regarding the appeal process. She stated that the City Council had the authority to consider an appeal of the Historic Preservation Commission’s decision to deny an application for a certificate of appropriateness. She also noted that the Council had been provided with a significant amount of information and documentation relating to the Commission’s hearings and proceedings. She stated that the City Code provides that the Council is to consider the same standards as the Commission but that is not the only consideration and the Council is to consider the standards in the context of the Council’s other responsibilities to the City, including the responsibility to promote the public health, safety, and welfare and its fiduciary responsibilities to the City. Director of Community Development, Catherine Czerniak, presented a brief background of the McKinley Road development. Ms. Czerniak began by providing the history of the first two Phases of the project that are completed. Additionally, she explained the timeline of this project, and the outcomes at its various levels of discussion. 19 Proceedings of the Tuesday, September 7, 2021 Regular City Council Meeting The Appellant, Peter Witmer, made a presentation about its appeal, explaining the changes that were made to the proposed project to address concerns raised by the Historic Preservation Commission about the project. Mr. Witmer stated that he believe the Commission erred in denying his application when it adopted findings that were contrary to its decision, and requested the decision of the Historic Preservation Commission be overturned. Alderman Morris provided a statement recusing himself from the proceedings of this item. Mayor Pandaleon asked members of the City Council to provide brief preliminary comments regarding the McKinley Road development project to see where the Council stands before going to public comment. Alderman Notz offered comments in support of overturning Historic Preservation Commission decision, including his opinion that the application satisfies the standards and that the process was thorough and fair to all parties. Alderman Buschmann offered comments in support of upholding the Historic Preservation Commission decision. He stated that the Commission did make findings that the standards weren’t met and that the Council should affirm the Commission and deny the appeal. Alderman Rummel offered comments in support of upholding the Historic Preservation Commission decision for numerous reasons, including that the application failed to meet all of the standards and based on the Council’s fiduciary responsibility. Alderman Weber stated she was inclined to uphold the Historic Preservation Commission decision. Alderman Karras also stated she was in favor of upholding the Historic Preservation Commission decision. Alderman Preschlack offered comments in support of overturning Historic Preservation Commission decision. He stated his opinion that upholding the Commission does not strike the right balance. He stated six reasons for his opinion, including the potential legal liability if the City Council denied the appeal, the potential chilling effect on future development. Alderman Goshgarian offered comments in support of overturning Historic Preservation Commission decision. He stated his opinion that the standards were met and that the Commission erred in denying the application. Mayor Pandaleon opened public comment. Robert Grabemann, Attorney for the Neighbors, provided comments to the City Council on behalf of the residents in the historic district. He stated that the appeal is based on a misrepresentation of the Commission hearing and that Commission members stated that certain standards were not met. He asked the Council to uphold the HPC decision. Regina Lind offered comments to the City Council including her opinion that the north façade is not compatible. Tim Downey offered comments to the City Council including his opinion that the application did not meet the standards and that there would be litigation either way. Mark Pasquesi offered comments to the City Council including that upholding the Commission would chill future development and be a setback for Lake Forest and asked the Council to overturn the Commission. 20 Proceedings of the Tuesday, September 7, 2021 Regular City Council Meeting Susan Athenson offered comments to the City Council in her role as President of the Lake Forest Preservation Foundation. She asked the Council to uphold the Commission and stated her opinion that the application failed standards 1, 8, 10, 14, 2-6, 8, 9, and 11 and that it is not visually compatible. Tom Prarie offered comments to the City Council, including that he had submitted a letter to the Council. He expressed his opinion that the rooftop use was a problem and asked the Council to uphold the Commission. Leslie Lardino offered comments to the City Council, stating that she was not opposed to a building but that the proposed building does not fit and the scale and brick do not match the houses in the area. Tom Swarthout offered comments to the City Council, including his agreement with Alderman Preschlak and provided examples of previous developments that had opposition. He stated his opinion that the decision to deny the project was a big disappointment to him and most of Lake Forest. Reed Dailey offered comments to the City Council including his opinion that the project would impact his home and a condo project was not a transition to the neighborhood Stephanie Capparelli offered comments to the City Council, including her opinion that the building was not visually compatible and she appreciated the Commission’s decision to deny the project. Jeff Torosian offered comments to the City Council including that the Commission’s decision was not close and that the Council should listen to the Commission. Arthur Miller offered comments to the City Council including that he supported the Commission’s decision. Patrick Corsiglia offered comments to the City Council, stating that when he purchased a unit in a neighboring building he knew there would be a third building and that the City should live up to its commitment to the developer. Bud Angelus offered comments to the City Council including that the proposed rooftop use caused problems with residents. Tom Sweeny offered comments to the City Council including that the City’s treatment of residents is unjust and nobody wants to live in Lake Forest. James Sharron offered comments to the City Council, including his opinion that the City should protect single family homes. Mayor Pandaleon then provided an opportunity to the Appellant to respond to public comments. Mr. Witmer asked about a statement made regarding potential conflicts of interest. Attorney Tappendorf responded that she was aware of no conflict of interest that would preclude an Alderman from voting on this appeal. Following public comment, Mayor Pandaleon asked the Council if they had additional remarks. Alderman Buschmann provided his opinions as to the proposed development. He then stated his disagreement with the Appellant’s claim in its appeal that the HPC found all relevant 17 criteria were met, stating that based on the record and HPC’s deliberations, the HPC had determined several specific standards were not met. He suggested a remand to the HPC if the Council felt the HPC’s real intentions were not clear. Otherwise he asked for the opportunity at the appropriate time to make a motion to deny Petitioner’s appeal and affirm the HPC’s decision to deny a Certificate of Appropriates for three reasons. First, he stated his opinion that the basis of the appeal is faulty and without merit. Second, he stated that a review of the 21 Proceedings of the Tuesday, September 7, 2021 Regular City Council Meeting record confirms that several relevant standards are not met, including the reasons stated in a communication from the Lake Forest Preservation Foundation dated 9-1-21. And third, he stated that the Council’s broader responsibility for the welfare of its citizens and its fiduciary responsibility justifies denial. Alderman Goshgarian provided comments regarding the completion of the project, and the Historic Preservation Commission meeting minutes. He also discussed the existing zoning of the property and the PUD approval, and that development should be considered as a whole. Alderman Weber provided comments regarding the architectural aspects of the project. She stated that she is in favor of multi-family but wants the building redesigned to be a better transition and had hoped the Commission would have approved a better project. Alderman Karras provided comments regarding development in the historic district and discussed 4 factors, including the responsibility to all Lake Forest residents, the Commission finding that 5 standards were not met, the Council following Commission decisions, and that it would be bad precedent to overturn the Commission. Alderman Rummel provided additional comments regarding the Historic Preservation Commissions decision and how it relates to the 17 standards of appropriateness. She stated that an application only needs to fail one standard to justify a denial. She stated that standards 1, 8, 2, 6, 7, 10, 4, 11, and 14 were not met. She stated that many of these were discussed during the Commission hearings, and she referenced building height compatibility, roof shapes, building massing, entrance porch, building materials, architectural style as standards that were not met. She stated that the City Code allows the Council to consider its fiduciary responsibility, as well as the health, safety, and welfare. She stated that the Council should listen to the Commission, Preservation Foundation, and residents, reject the applicant’s and staff’s findings, and uphold the Commission. COUNCIL ACTION: Options for Council action are offered below in the form of possible motions. Any of these require a motion and a second along with a roll call vote. 1. Deny the appeal and uphold the Historic Preservation Commission’s decision to deny a Certificate of Appropriateness for the third condominium in the McKinley Road Multi-Family Planned Development. OR 2. Grant the appeal and overturn the Historic Preservation Commission’s decision. OR 3. Remand the matter to the Historic Preservation Commission for further consideration, public testimony and action. Mayor Pandaleon asked if members had any questions of the petitioner. Seeing none he asked for a motion. Mayor Pandaleon asked the City Attorney to clarify what a particular vote on a motion means prior to the City Council voting. Alderman Buschmann asked for assistance from the City Attorney in framing a motion based on option 1. He then made a motion to deny the appeal and uphold the Historic Preservation Commission’s decision to deny a Certificate of Appropriateness for the third condominium in the McKinley Road Multi-Family Planned Development. He based his motion on the three grounds he had noted earlier, as well as the statements and findings presented by Aldermen Rummel, Weber and Karras, statements made by certain Commissioners at the July 12, 2021 hearing of the Historic Preservation Commission, as well as other 22 Proceedings of the Tuesday, September 7, 2021 Regular City Council Meeting evidence supporting the Commission’s decision and the finding that the appeal is without merit and the application did not meet the applicable standards to justify a certificate of appropriateness. Seconded by Alderman Rummel. The City Attorney explained that a yes vote means that an Alderman agrees with the HPC decision to deny the application and a no vote means an Alderman does not agree with the HPC decision to deny the application. The following voted “Aye”: Alderman Karras, Rummel, Buschmann and Weber. The following voted “Nay”: Alderman, Notz, Preschlack and Goshgarian. The following Abstained: Alderman Morris. 4-Ayes, 3-Nays, 1- Abstention. The motion to deny the appeal and uphold the Historic Preservation Commission’s denial carried. ADDITIONAL ITEMS FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION/COMMENTS BY COUNCIL MEMBERS ADJOURNMENT There being no further business Mayor Pandaleon asked for a motion. Alderman Rummel made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Alderman Weber. Motion carried unanimously by voice vote at 9:23 pm. Respectfully Submitted Margaret Boyer, City Clerk A video of the City Council meeting is available for viewing at the Lake Forest Library and on file in the Clerk’s office at City Hall. You can also view it on the website by visiting www.cityoflakeforest.com. Click on I Want To, then click on View, then choose Archived Meetings Videos. 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. ____ WHEREAS, The City of Lake Forest, hereinafter referred to as CITY, located in the County of Lake, State of Illinois, desires to construct and connect sidewalks in the Whisper Oaks Subdivision located south of Cherokee School to improve student walkability and bikeability conditions; WHEREAS, a Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS) Grant will fund 80% of the construction for the project with 20% to be paid for with local funds; WHEREAS, the CITY does hereby commit funds in the amount of $35,000 to cover its share of the construction expenses; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the CITY: FIRST: The findings made in the prefatory portion of this Resolution are herby adopted. SECOND: The City does hereby commit the approximate amount of $35,000 plus any project cost overruns. ADOPTED this 20th day of September, 2021 pursuant to a roll call vote as follows: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: APPROVED by me this 20th day of September, 2021. _______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ City Clerk 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79