Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04_26_04_ccCITY COUNCIL ROLL CALL - PRESENT: A Quorum was present. NOT PRESENT AT ROLL CALL: ABSENT: PRESIDING: Alderman Rainey Alderman Feldman Alderman Newman Aldermen Jean -Baptiste, Wynne, Alderman Kent Mayor Lorraine H. Morton April 26, 2004 Alderman Bernstein Alderman Moran Alderman Tisdahl The OFFICIAL REGULAR MEETING of the City Council was called to order by Mayor Morton Monday, April 26, 2004, at 6:13 p.m. in the Aldermanic Library. Alderman Tisdahl moved that Council convene into Closed Session for the purpose of discussing matters related to litigation and closed session minutes pursuant to 51LCS Section 120/2 (c) (11) and (21). Seconded by Alderman Feldman. (11) Litigation, when an action against, affecting or on behalf of the particular public body has been filed and is pending before a court or administrative tribunal, or when the public body finds that an action is probable or imminent, in which case the basis for the finding shall be recorded and entered into the minutes of the closed meeting. (21) Discussion of minutes of meetings lawfully closed under this Act, whether for purposes of approval by the body of the minutes or semi-annual review of the minutes as mandated by Section 2.06. Roll call. Voting aye — Rainey, Feldman, Newman, Wynne, Bernstein, Moran, Tisdahl. Voting nay — none. Motion carried (7-0). At 7:03 p.m. Alderman Bernstein moved that Council reconvene into Open Session and recess. Seconded by Alderman Jean -Baptiste. Motion carried unanimouslv. Mayor Morton reconvened the City Council meeting at 9:17 p.m. in the Council Chamber. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Public Works Director David Jennings reported that street cleaning for one -side street parking only would start Monday, May 3. The dates for street cleaning are posted on signs on each block. A few two-sided parking streets have dates posted because they are swept eight times a year and not every other week. He reminded residents that streets that are posted are tow away zones on street cleaning days. Those dates are posted on the City's website and schedules are also available by calling the Streets & Sanitation Department. Finance Director Bill Stafford announced that Evanston had retained its Aaa rating from Moody's Investor Service. Moody's noted the City's strong economic base, willingness to pass balanced budgets, sound fiscal operation and the stability Northwestern University provides. They will go to market soon and meet with the underwriter the next day. Council will be kept updated. City Manager Crum thanked Mr. Stafford for doing a great job and noted that the City did not have to go into reserves to balance the budget as many other cities did, which was a plus for the City. Alderman Newman noted that it was Council that did not want to go into reserves, which Mr. Crum had recommended originally. Mayor Morton reported that 400 youth attended the Mayor's Youth Job Fair on Saturday seeking employment through the Summer Youth Employment Program. Youth appeared at 4:00 a.m. to get in line. She expressed gratitude to businesses who hired youth and to City Council for giving them half of the minimum wage. She asked organizations that wished to hire youth to contact the City. Special Presentation April 26, 2004 U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Reconnaissance Study — Potential Marina City Manager Crum said that for many years citizens have asked the City Council if a marina might be feasible, would it make money or not, where would it be and was it a good idea? To answer those questions, City Council needed an update of the last study done more than 30 years ago. Through Evanston's congressional representative, the City obtained the services of the Army Corps of Engineers (at no expense) to conduct Phase I of a feasibility study to answer some of those questions and see if this was something the City wanted to pursue. This is the first time City Council will see this information only presentation, other than two Council members who saw a preview with staff on Thursday. There will be no questions from the audience and no decision will be made by City Council that evening. People may speak at Citizen Comment about this and all items on the agenda. Council would schedule a special meeting on this topic. Parks/Forestry & Recreation Director Doug Gaynor introduced Philip Bernstein, Chief, Planning Branch of the Army Corps of Engineers. He introduced David Wallin, Ph.D., Regional Economist; Hedye Tuydes, Ph.D. candidate NU Civil Engineering Department with special interest in transportation modeling and NU graduate student Amit Talati, under contract to provide analysis. Mr. Bernstein stated most of this information is available on their website. The Corps was asked to provide a first phase marina feasibility study. Because funding was limited, it was not their objective to provide a fully fleshed document to allow them to make a decision to go forward at this time in terms of an actual marina. The items they ordered up were dictated by the steering committee consisting of several aldermen and City staff. They were interested in the demand for boat slips and attitudes of residents to a potential marina. It was of particular interest to Congresswoman Schakowsky's office to come up with a conceptual plan and look at some of the environmental impacts of a marina across from Calvary Cemetery. He said that the Corps was acting as a consultant (vendor) to the City. This came about through a letter from the Mayor last year to look into the environmental, engineering and economic issues for a small boat harbor fully fleshed out with some of the formal tasks they were asked to investigate. This presentation is an initial appraisal report to briefly survey and summarize key issues/circumstances and is a top -line report on whether a marina may be feasible or worthy of further investigation. The next step would be a detailed feasibility study that would include detailed engineering, economic and environmental analysis. After that, if it was found a harbor was feasible and interest in developing one, then engineering plans, specifications and preparation for construction would take place. It would be a drawn out process. Even if they did all of these things, the real question is -- is there money to do anything. He said that David Wallin, who oversaw the research portion, would explain the survey of demand and attitudinal/perception of residents. Mr. Wallin said their remarks were confined to a summary, top -line portrayal of what they did and learned. They aimed to get a handle on potential demand of present and potential boat owners, degree of interest in renting wet slips and the willingness to pay for a wet slip in Evanston. They worked from a list of Illinois registered recreational boat owners who live within a 30-mile radius of Evanston, which has been documented as a reasonable market area. They also attempted to contact non -boat owners in the same market areas who resided in ZIP code areas where there are high numbers of boat owners. A systematic random sample of 800 was drawn from the list of Illinois recreational boat -owners. In the second sample of 400 they used a systematic random sample from a telephone universe of listed/unpublished residential numbers using random digit dialing in study ZIP code locations. About 275 individuals were interested in renting a slip space and owned a 20-foot boat or longer and were willing to pay the current Chicago Park District slip rental prices ($1,700-3,600) per season. They found 90 non -boat owners were contemplating buying a boat and expressed a buying preference for a 20-foot boat or larger and very interested in the slip rental prices. The potential demand from owners and non -owners was 350-375. They believed the study's findings sustain the conclusion that there is sufficient demand potential to support investment in a continued evaluation. Mr. Wallin continued with the attitudinal/perception study and noted a "perception" is an opinion, an impression and could depart from a factual base. They tried to get a handle on Evanston residents' perceptions of environmental and economic impacts of a prospective marina at the lakefront. This should not be equated with supportable factual data. Topic areas they were asked to investigate included the impact on water quality, of fuel (oil/gas), parking, silt build-up, traffic congestion, noise level impacts, water circulation and aesthetic changes to the lakefront. On the economic issues they asked for perceptions on taxes imposed on marina operation, boat fees/assessments, security service costs and facility/ground expenses. Qualified respondents were male/female heads April 26, 2004 of households who were residents of Evanston for at least the last 12 months. They tried to find views and opinions of those people who would be most impacted economically; used a systematic random sample size of 400 using RDD of residential telephone listings in Evanston. Opposition to the proposed lakefront harbor/marina on environmental grounds was a key finding and was the dominant view among survey respondents. The views were held strongly. The following potential problem areas registered substantial pluralities about parking, traffic congestion, higher noise levels, oil/gas discharges and impaired water quality. He exhibited a chart that quantified the perceived problem areas and perceived as serious problems. The highest response totals in the "oppose" market segment were women compared to men 59.8%/40.2%. Homeowners, when compared to renters, 83.2%/16.8% and non -boat owners, compared to boat owners 88.6%/11.4%. From the "oppose" market segment from the east of Ridge Avenue subset, those who live within three blocks of the lake, compared to those who live three to six blocks from the lake or more than six blocks from the lake: 47.6%/33.3%/19%. People who lived nearer the lake opposed the marina more. They were told that no one who lived near the lake was surveyed. People living south of Church Street, compared to those who live north of Church Street oppose 60.3%/39.7%. Opposition by quadrant was NW 28.6, NE 11.0, SW 24.7 and SE 37.5. The survey found no unequivocal opposition to lakefront development/expansion. The following development options registered substantial "in favor" pluralities: 60.5% for expansion of beaches, 60.5% for more parks and green space 74.2%. From an economic perspective, the project was viewed as having a contribution to City revenues through taxes/fees - 71.8%; stimulus to local business - 55.5% and creation of jobs here - 59.3%. Summary evaluation of the perceptions, on balance and viewed in isolation, the findings of this survey of resident only, do not appear to support investment in a continued evaluation of the feasibility of a lakefront marina in Evanston. Mr. Bernstein said based on the wet slip demand, a layout was prepared detailing breakwater and slip configurations and adjacent parking. At the request of another congressman, they looked at the design of a similar small boat harbor for Whiting, IN, which is very close to the projected demand for the Evanston marina. For this stage of the study, this design was modified slightly and relocated to the Calvary Cemetery location. It has room for 350-375 boats with parking to meet demand. Parking would run parallel with Sheridan Road. The rip rap there would be removed and landfill would be extended to provide parking for 310 automobiles. There were no cost estimates done for this facility because they don't have the basic engineering necessary to do a creditable cost estimate. They did do a quantitative analysis of the traffic impacts. They engaged Northwestern University's traffic center to do that. He thought all agreed NU is pre -imminent in the field of traffic modeling. In addition, they felt a more objective viewpoint, relative to transportation by a renowned entity, would benefit everybody in decision making. Their only role was to provide the total number of boat slips and the traffic counts provided by Public Works Director David Jennings. They used standard traffic methodologies employed around the country. They ran three cases to get an evaluation of the real impacts. The base case was traffic that exists there now. Then the worst case condition/peak hour traffic volumes with worst -case marina traffic superimposed on this peak base traffic volume and expected conditions — the most likely marina traffic superimposed on the worst day peak hour base traffic. He showed boat use distribution by month and day. July and August are peak months and Saturday is the peak day. The study went from Sheridan/Howard to Sheridan/South Blvd. He showed delay times on all scenarios, which are in seconds. They found the marina generated traffic demand delay time increase negligible under the worst case. Level of service is unchanged by additional traffic. No traffic signal is warranted at the marina ingress/egress points. Based on quantitative modeling, it did not appear that perception related to reality. They also did an estimate of increased air emissions for the peak one hour of traffic interaction and found it marginal. Noise pollution was also looked at and, because traffic delays were found to be negligible and the increase in traffic load marginal, increases in noise pollution would also be expected to be insignificant. Those conclusions were reached by their contractor. Obviously, no impacts are expected during those times when the marina is not operational. They also examined and reviewed concerns relating to recreational boating and marina. They looked at surveys and studies done around the country and tried to understand what the prevailing situation was regarding what marinas impose on an area. They looked at marina operators' support of the clean marina programs; potential pollution and related problems at marinas and management measures and best management practices. The U.S. EPA surveyed 25 marinas around the nation for practices and to determine what kind of investments in environmental improvements and stabilizations were taking place and found that benefits in those investments far outweigh the costs. He concluded there could be environmental impacts associated with a marina that many have articulated, but depending upon management practices and laws, it appears the marina operators and boat owners have recognized it is only good business to maintain a facility that has minimal or no environmental impacts because this generates more revenue in the long run. No financial April 26, 2004 analysis has been done to date. They don't know if it meets the required standards of benefit/cost ratios — namely are the benefits greater than the cost of the project? If they want to look at this further and, it is determined that benefits exceed the costs, then possible cost sharing, vis-a-vis federal participation, would be considered. They know the distribution of boats by size and potential users; know the prevailing market rates for boat slips based upon the Chicago Park District rates; know that boaters would be willing to pay some expansion of those rates. That revenue stream and, with the City's Aaa credit rating, they estimate if bonds were issued, estimated revenue generated would support a capitalization of $21 million. That does not include any other sources of revenue associated with the marina. All marinas offer other services that generate income. In conclusion, he noted the environmental concerns are real but there are legislative safeguards in place to encourage clean marina programs. Perceptions about transportation impacts have not been validated by the independent contractor's scientific investigation. From an economic view, the demand potential has been documented and people will use a facility in this area. He received a call asserting that construction had been authorized here. He reiterated that the Army Corps was involved only as a consultant to the City. They have no vested interests and are not involved in harbor construction at this time. They recommend that if a marina or there is something of interest at this juncture that they have enough information to do more detailed studies to make possible more precise information for decision making. The $100,000 for this study was at no cost to the City. Federal funds were used. Any future studies need to be matched with local/state or non-federal funds. Part of those could be work in -kind. All federal funding must be obtained through Congressional input. The Army Corps does not budget for marinas and recreation is a low priority for them. He said they would be happy to get citizen comments on their website (www.usace.army.mil) and respond to those concerns. All the documents in this study are on their website. ■ ■ Alderman Wynne thanked Phil Bernstein and the Army Corps staff for their hard work. She thought, based upon the study, comments and discussion in the community for the past months, there was not enough interest or desire for an Evanston marina to merit further investment of time and money. She moved that City Council advise staff to take no further action on this study. Seconded by Alderman Newman. Alderman Newman supported the motion; said when they originally got this topic, it was not something the I" Ward would have any interest in pursuing. He saw a certain unfairness in singling out a certain location. If he could not support it in the Vt Ward, he could not support it in the 3rd Ward. In this atmosphere, he did not think there was anywhere near a consensus for this. The study bears that out and the neighborhood in the 3rd Ward has problems that this would aggravate. Evanston's lakefront is special because it has a high level of activity and is enjoyed by many. Adding this type of activity is not desirable. He urged them to get rid of this issue. They have the study that looks at opinions and there have been community meetings. The support for this comes from boat owners who want a slip and those who advocate commercializing Evanston to obtain revenue. They have expanded the City's economic base and it is not necessary to go to the lakefront, which is special. He appreciated the work in studying this and saw no point in having a public hearing, unless five Council members strongly favor this, want to spend money and lead the way. He thought the anxiety this was creating was unnecessary; suggested they put this to rest now. Alderman Feldman also supported the motion. After viewing the presentation, the kind of impact on the lakefront would be so dramatic and change that area so substantially; it would require an overwhelming consensus by the community. That is not there. He has received no calls for the marina and those received were against it. In lieu of any monumental benefit that would solve Evanston's problems and bring joy, he saw no way that they could support going further. Alderman Tisdahl thanked all who worked on the study. She thought the study was clear that the community does not support this and for a reason. People are concerned about pollution in the water and air, traffic and parking, all the things that showed up in the study. She thought there is a demand and it might make money. The theory in Washington, DC is that you sell off pollution for money does not work in Evanston. She strongly supported the motion. April 26, 2004 Alderman Moran found the study interesting and saw real challenges. When it was brought to Council originally, he questioned it for various reasons. Some results have addressed perceptions that appear to be mistaken and the ability to study this over time would provide them with options, alternatives and answers he does not have. He noted that, at the direction of Mayor Daley, the City of Chicago is discussing lakefront planning. Several proposals have been made by design firms for development from Hollywood to Evanston, which have the possibility to enhance the quality of life in Chicago. That development, with a potential marina in Evanston, provides interesting possibilities here. In his 13 years on Council, when it comes to planning, developing and maintaining major infrastructure, the City has not always done the best job. They have the tendency to be reactive rather than proactive. They have the tendency to take situations that people bring them with a "take it or leave it" attitude. The juncture they are at on this project is not a "take it or leave it" attitude. It is a question of whether they can to say to the Corps that they want to continue to examine this. He does not know the ultimate answer and his imagination was spurred on. He is a sailor, which may color his perspective, and he recommended that people who have not sailed try it. It was hard to say what this project would be in terms of size, types of boats allowed and whether power boats would be included, whether it would be 375 boats, and the notions of further engineering analysis to see if hurdles could be overcome would be interesting. He likes planning and having options to examine and consider. He first saw the study Saturday morning. To say too much work has been done, with the results available only to a limited few, was unfortunate. He thought the study should not be quashed and that people should have the opportunity to comment. He suggested the study be published more widely in Evanston so people have the opportunity to review it and comment on whether they should go to the next step. He thanked the Corps for the presentation. Alderman Rainey had no opinion on the matter, but had a strong curiosity because they were told no decisions would be made that evening and Council has had no discussion on this as a committee or Council, which she regretted. Her tendency would be to object to a marina, but did not want to have a knee-jerk response to the survey. She thought the thoughtful thing would be to meet where all could have a discussion and then vote. Alderman Bernstein clarified that he is not a boater and no relation to Phil Bernstein; said he has been portrayed as "poster child for the marina" which was not true. He disagreed with Alderman Newman and said it was incumbent upon them to use their resources, two waterways that are adjacent to the community, which was the spirit in which they went forward. He had not had an opportunity to read the study and had questions. He agreed with the traffic engineering report and did not think there would be a negative impact but did not agree with the number of parking spaces. A table showed 11/z spaces per boat and conservatively 2 per boat, so he did not know how they arrived at 310 spaces. A big concern was the negative effect on parking in the 3Cd Ward. He did not think about power boats when this came up but about tall boats. All along he has said this is step one and, based on the facts in this study, he probably would not support a marina. Congresswoman Schakowsky is not pro marina and is pro environment. To go forward with this a lot of federal funds would be needed because the City does not have $21 million. If the City had $21 million, his priority would not be a marina. He would prefer the money go to recreational facilities. He said the motion is premature. He has waited for the report and wanted to study it. Alderman Jean -Baptiste noted the 2nd Ward is not at the lakefront, yet is stretching there as they do have a waterway on the canal. He thought the motion tried to address concerns and fears of lakefront residents. Council has had to address those regarding events at the lakefront because quality of life is essential for everybody. He thought the perception at the beginning of the marina were not borne out by the study. He was not at the same stage as proponents of the motion by saying this would be a disaster. He did not see that. Perhaps he will come to that position. He was not willing to cast it aside. He was not sure this will help the City in the long run and was in no position to draw a specific conclusion. Alderman Wynne appreciated her fellow aldermen's comments in opposition to the motion. She has thought about this and ultimately decided there is not support for a marina by the Council. She has read through the study carefully and offered to go through it with each one and tell them why she is opposed. She believed that the additional expense of time, money and staff time was unnecessary. Alderman Newman said the City Manager told them there would be no action on this that evening. Where did that come from? Speaking to Alderman Bernstein, he could not have this both ways. He said there needs to be an advocate for the April 26, 2004 marina. There is a lot of opposition and they disagree about commercializing the lakefront. This would be a major development in a neighborhood. He has supported a lot of development in his ward that affects people, so he does not come as someone who does not support development in his ward. He hears one who wants to look at this. There has been discussion, community meetings and communications about this. He agreed that some concerns are mitigated in the study. But there is a lot of opposition to a marina and to commercializing the lakefront. There has to be consensus and people who will stand up and say they really want a marina here. To go through all they will have to go through and cause this neighborhood the anxiety that they are being caused because they are thinking about it (is wrong). These people are nervous and think a marina is going to happen here. If there is somebody who really wants it, that person should stand up. It might not be popular. There must be someone to support the marina to put this neighborhood through this aggravation. That was why it needed to stop now. The people here feel impacted. He supported the motion. Alderman Feldman generally is in favor of strong analysis and this Council characterizes respect for information. He was convinced by the presentation that some of the issues of concern were mitigated, but did not think more study would change his mind because the case was made. He did not know what they would do to analyze this in committee. The report said that pollution and traffic would not be as bad as people feared. Most people they contacted were against it and felt strongly. What is there in the study that was so compelling to have another study? He agreed with Alderman Newman that unless there was something so monumental about this project, they could say to citizens there might be a "pearl" here and because there might be they have to wait and explore. Nobody here can say that. They have a group of anxious people. He could overlook the anxiety if there was any chance the outcome of another study would be different. The case was not made. No Council member will stand up and say that this is his/her heart's desire and a principle he/she would fight for. With nothing in the project that is compelling, they should end it now. The lakefront is not for sale. Alderman Rainey was disappointed that they have taken this turn. She did not know how many were present for smoking and for the marina. All know that smoking kills. They have spent months talking about and listening to people testify at a public hearing. Then they came up with something that was not quite what they should have but that was because of economic concerns. She entirely favored the outcome of that discussion. However, this has to do with something different — with a process. While all in the room want to hear Council cut off discussion, Council has never had a discussion about this. That is unfortunate and not the way the Council should operate. People living on the lakefront might not like this. The only call she got was from a person who lives on Sheridan Square who told her she was not sure she liked a marina. It would be unfortunate not to obtain all the information they could get on this matter. All of the information for making good policy is that 60% surveyed don't want a marina and 40% might/might not like it. It is almost like they are not allowed to have a different opinion. She respected Aldermen Wynne and Newman's opinions but that is not to say they should not have a discussion. Several aldermen think there should be more discussion. Her vote to oppose the motion has nothing to do with wanting or aiding a marina, other than she wants to look at this a little more. She does not have all the information and wants a more detailed discussion with colleagues. She knows some don't like it because citizens don't like it. She would not vote for it because she wanted a discussion on the merits. Citizens wanted them to ban smoking in restaurants and bars. She asked for a show of hands that agreed. Many hands were raised. They have to look at more details and she asked for a Council discussion. Alderman Bernstein was not an advocate for a marina but for doing his homework. When he first came on Council, one of the first things directed to him was from Alderman Newman that they needed to support an 18-screen movie theater and that it would not impact anything. The people who elected him told him he had to vote "no." He will read and analyze. He did not study it because on Thursday they agreed this would be a presentation and, subsequently, would have a public meeting or some kind of dialogue. He did not know if they needed a public meeting because he did not know if he would ever be captain of the ship to go forward to support a marina. There could be a pearl out there. He knows people get concerned and don't like change. He did not want to put these people through more anxiety. He has not made up his mind about this. There are many things he does not like about this. When he does the calculations — increasing the number of boat slips and the rental rate, it does not generate enough money to service the debt and make a profit. He remembered the meeting at the library where an individual from Northwestern University had analyzed a potential marina and came up with $1 million net revenue. He did not know where they were getting it because there are maintenance costs. In the same newspaper where he said, "This is step one," one of the strongest opponents said to put a pier out there with a gazebo. Without parking, he asked, what an ice cream stand in the lake would do to the April 26, 2004 community? He was against the motion. He saw this as a possibility, though not probable. Alderman Jean -Baptiste recalled three years ago, the day he was sworn in as alderman, the issue on the table was to build the District #65 administration building and early childhood center on McDaniel on green space. Council was packed with 2nd Ward residents with signs, who had called and lobbied aldermen for a long time. When it came to a vote, except for Alderman Rainey (and Alderman Tisdahl, who was not on the Council) Council silently supported this in spite of 2nd Ward residents begging them not to. He understood that sometimes things have to be balanced. Nothing is for sale in the City. They have to provide the leadership that they can and he does not want to be browbeaten into submission because he wants to think further about this matter. The other reality is the pull for revenue. They are talking about building a new Robert Crown Center that will cost a lot of money. They constantly weigh options in terms of things they really want here. They don't want to disturb citizens' quality of life, but when a proposal is put on the table, they have to look at it. He does not know if he will advocate for it when he has all the facts, but apparently somebody advocated for it to begin the analysis. Due to the financial affairs of the City, they need to continue to generate revenues to keep it whole and healthy. They spent many hours considering events on the lakefront and to stand in citizens shoes to be sure they took all the citizens concerns into account. They also have to think about the entire City and it was not fair to engage in further discussion that evening because they were deadlocked on this issue. Alderman Wynne called the question. Roll call. Voting yes — Aldermen Feldman, Newman, Wynne, Tisdahl. Voting nay — Aldermen Rainey, Jean -Baptiste, Bernstein, Moran. Tie Vote (4-4) Mayor Morton said that Council needed to think about the whole community. The lakefront does not belong to the l't, or 3rd ward and belongs to none. They have access to use it. She supported the concerns of Aldermen Rainey, Bernstein, Jean -Baptiste and Moran; was hearing that they wanted to study it and she would too. She was making a vote because of her concern for all citizens of the community so that all could have a voice about something that would cost everybody. She noticed that not all applauded, so she knew there were some who have opposing views. She said if they tell the community they are going to have a presentation and no decision, that is the message they have to adhere to by law. They cannot make decisions without informing the community ahead of time. She also felt strongly about the commitment made by Congresswoman Schakowsky, who obtained $100,000 for this study. They took the $100,000 and with no further study did not respect her by looking and talking about the study then making a decision. She was neutral; was concerned that citizens have a fair chance to look at this and aldermen discuss this. She said this Council may vote this down but the time is coming when different generations will look at the environment differently. She has not heard anybody say they supported a marina. Her vote was "no." Alderman Feldman referred the marina studv to the Human Services Committee. COMMUNICATIONS: None CITIZEN COMMENT: Janice Loughlin, 476 Sheridan Rd., 34-year resident, asked Council not to skip the part that says constituents don't want the marina. She saw 70% against on page three. The report did not say a marina would not hurt the environment. Mr. Bernstein admitted he did not do a real impact analysis on the environment but attempted to address how communities throughout the country have dealt with marinas. They need to compare the damage to air and water to the limited financial benefits and what you would see when you come into Evanston, which would be a parking lot. Mardi Klevs, 2690 Prairie Ave., member Environmental Board with an advanced degree in Environmental Engineering; stated the report is dishonest and a self-serving attempt by Parks/Forestry & Recreation to foist a plan to sell off the precious lakefront to boat owners to raise revenue. She said it was dishonest because there was no costibenefit analysis. There is a big discussion about federal laws but no discussion of Illinois laws, which is where they live. She thought that past problems with marinas were glossed over. The discussion for the clean marina movement is there because there are environmental problems with marinas. She favors those management practices but it is not a simple situation. It was a one-sided discussion. April 26, 2004 Peter Kellv, 1316 Davis St., 31-year resident, supported a marina. He said on the survey portion, 31 people out of 400 wanted to apply for a boat slip. That is .05% of the population. When extrapolating that out, they could sell all slips in Evanston. He was surprised to see 33.3% east of Ridge support a marina. Those close to the site don't support it, but go out three blocks and they almost have a 50% split in the three to six block range. He said they do a lot to support activities of neighbors. They do not insist that 50% of their neighbors skate before they build a skating rink. He said it is time to share the lakefront with neighbors. He does not have a boat but would like to have one and be a good neighbor. They won't pollute but want to make better use of the lakefront. Donald Gordon, 1228 W. Lunt, Chicago, chair Parks & Beaches Committee for Alderman Moore, spoke for the committee and not the alderman. He was disappointed that Council missed an important point. They are not asking one question. This report does not address what a marina would do to these communities. What a marina will do to the character of the communities is important. The questions don't address that. He suggested that aldermen do their homework by going to Calvary Beach at 5:43 a.m. when the sun rises and look at what they will give away. They will have a parking lot there. He reported that Alderman Wynne took them up on their suggestion to work together in a coalition to come up with alternative uses for the lakefront. All that was presented was one idea. There are other ideas and they may not raise revenue but the marina may not either. He urged them to get other ideas before going forward. Mary Gavin, 2400 Simpson St., 26-year resident, came as a member of the Community -Wide Teacher Appreciation Initiative to invite all to the ceremonies at 5:00 p.m., May 7 at the Levy Center. It will be the culmination of Teacher Appreciation Week in Evanston, which Mayor Morton has proclaimed. There will be a short reception followed by awards to teachers recognized by students as inspiring and by their peers as mentors. Evanston is a thoughtful community with a lot of time, passion and resources dedicated to public education. Looking at Council she sees a teacher, former teacher/principal and former school board member. She thought if asked to name one's favorite teacher, several names would come to mind. Hearing students read their essays about teachers who inspired them reaffirms the value of the work and time spent freeing young minds to the wonders and challenges of citizenship in this country and world. Members of the teacher's initiative hoped to see them all at 5:00 p.m. on May 7. Dan Cusick, 1015 Sheridan Rd., born at St. Francis Hospital and has four children. He swims at Lee Street Beach, when it is open; likes to sail and races a J24 out of Belmont Harbor. He does the Mac Race annually; sails a Laser from Dempster Street Beach. He is against the harbor project in its entirety. The study was incomplete because it does not measure future traffic or developments and also ignored noise and pollution. He has relatives in Calvary Cemetery and thought they would be flabbergasted at the continued discussion of a boat harbor in the view of the lake they have now. Mary Lvman, 630 8th St., Wilmette, spoke about the proposed smoking ban. She attended a meeting several weeks ago and listened as each alderman stated that they don't smoke, detested smoke and avoid smoky restaurants and bars. She thought that these five Evanston residents are not going to smoky restaurants, therefore, there is an economic impact. They are afraid to go "smoke free" yet don't support smoky restaurants. Alderman Bernstein mentioned he had not been to Pete Miller's for six -seven years because of cutting through the haze of smoke. An article in the New York Times talks about the success of bars/restaurants there and how they measure air particles, that the air is as clean at midnight as at 6:00 p.m. and a bartender at the end of the night can breathe. She wished they would keep an open mind about this issue. Frank Kovnelman, 1122 Hinman Ave., 25-year resident, said how appalled he was to spend money to further investigate a luxury use when the City and the public are strongly against that use. He was pleased that his alderman and three others had voiced clear opposition to this proposal and that the four aldermen and the Mayor who wished to think further about this, are voting for that, and not indicating support for this development. The idea of an incursion two hundred yards into the lake and four hundred yards north/south along the lake would be an atrocity to welcome people to Evanston. Laura Allen -Simpson, 542 Michigan Ave., said she and her husband came because both were anxious about the proposed marina; hoped to have their anxieties allayed. She asked that residents' views not be seen as invalid because they are perceptions and not facts, noting that perceptions raise or sink property values. Perceptions can be and, in this case, are based on facts. They have received facts from other experts that are equally valid. Wanting to do homework is a safe position. She is an editor of textbooks and it is a good thing to do. She hoped this would not become a platform for the April 26, 2004 need of process because the facts and the community are so strongly opposed to the marina that it is not worth the time. Timothv Schoolmaster, 1454 Elmwood Ave., 37-year resident of 7th ward; former 30-year city employee and 20-year adjunct faculty at Northwestern University Center for Public Safety dealing with traffic safety. He has sailed for 18 years at Monroe Street Harbor and could not support this. He has seen marinas in Illinois, Wisconsin, California, Michigan, Virginia, New Jersey, South Carolina, Maine, Mexico, British Columbia and Botswana. If they think there is no potential for pollution, for public rescue and safety issues, especially when they have trouble furnishing basic safety things, noise and traffic issues, cost overrun issues, he will happily take them on a tour of marinas on a Saturday and they will see all those things. He thought this needed to be studied further if they wished. In his years with the City he has seen many studies in the multiples of $100,000 and has a list of them. They seem to come in two categories: one a foregone conclusion that is legitimized by doing a study and one where they don't like the answers and they never see the light of day. He hoped this is approached with open and critical eyes. Cameron Davis, 114 Kedzie St., Lake Michigan Federation, did a presentation at the library about six weeks ago. The Lakefront Task Force found a number of troubling aspects about the proposals including water quality, traffic and the tendency to exacerbate beach closures. The other troubling aspect was they heard about evaluating all options, which has not been done. There was a decision to look at one location on the lakefront and one waterway. He thought there are alternatives. The Federation is not opposed to marinas because they help get people to the lake, which helps them enjoy and want to protect the lake. There is a place and a time to do the right thing in the right place. This is the wrong thing in the wrong place. Richard Meher, 482 Sheridan Rd., said the number there was a fraction of the 786 people who have signed petitions to oppose the marina. People represent a strong opposition to the marina concept. If Council needs evidence of citizens' opposition they would provide it with emails, petitions and letters. (He gave petitions to the City Clerk.) Barry Greenbere. 2426 Hartzell St., 7th Ward, asked the definition of a sailor — noted the Corps report eliminated any boat under 20-feet long, which means all the sailboats, lasers and sunfish. There are about 2,000 sailors from Evanston up to Lake Forest. They are there because there are no power boats cutting them in half. There are none in Chicago because it is dangerous out there. He stated that none of Council knows anything about sailing, which was a problem. If they knew anything about sailing, they would know the traffic isn't about the parking lot. The traffic they should look at is two and a half and three miles out into the lake. It is two cigarette boats getting to a person before their sound does. They should look at the traffic in ten years. Look at what the military is cooking up in power boats that go back and forth between England and France. They will be sold in ten years instead of what people see in the harbors now. They travel at 45 mph and it is easy to put the throttle on. Addressing the Mayor, he said the devil is in the details. Those details are what happens on the lake. When these boats are added to what they get from Chicago it means that pristine sailing is over. Ten years down the road it will probably be over anyway, so hang on as long as they can. Allan Johnston, 548 Sheridan Rd., 11-year resident, said his perspective is that the lake is like a wilderness area. If you go to Albuquerque you see a mountain range and can experience them -- that is what the lake means to many who live here. People can walk to and on the beaches and have direct contact with water, fish, birds and animals. He thought a marina would take some of that away and was the main reason he opposed it. Stuart Katz, 719 Hinman Ave., suggested traffic would slow down if they were going to have tall boats. He lives in a vintage building with 27 units and residents are opposed unanimously to a marina. There have been many changes in southeast Evanston in the past few years. Every time they blink a small structure goes down and a large building goes up. Parking in the neighborhood is poor and getting worse; traffic has increased. Quality of life in this neighborhood is deteriorating. Many moved there because it was a great neighborhood. He said they don't need to keep changing the neighborhood but preserve it. That is what Council should be thinking about. Fred Ash, 537 Sheridan Rd., 25-year resident, a professional municipal analyst, he looks at capital projects for municipalities every day and found what little they know about this project troubling. He said if they look at municipal defaults they are usually concentrated in the area of revenue bonds. The revenue stream from this project seems to exhibit all the signs that would lead to financial trouble. He understood the impetus for this proposal was to provide revenue for the General Fund of the City. They must understand that for a considerable period funds will go into the Debt Service 10 April 26, 2004 Fund to retire debt. If they take out revenue for other purposes it impairs the ability to sell the bonds. He knows the City is proud of its Aaa bond rating. That could be impaired by having a default on revenue bonds. Other troubling aspects include the fact that all types of cultural and recreational bonds have the highest rate of default of municipal bonds. He said there are many municipalities, even those that have received millions of dollars in federal funds, that would gladly give Evanston their marina if it could be moved here. He called this a risky proposition. Eric Utech, 1309 W. Fargo, Chicago, a teacher, grew up in Evanston and graduated from ETHS class of 85. He noted the federal tax dollars came from his pocket. He e-mailed the following to Council members that the Army Corps failed on building the cooling pond on the landfill. Now water has to be put into it three feet above the lake level. That entire project on the landfill is a failure. Alderman Moran said how interested he was in Mayor's Daley connecting the land area from Hollywood up to Calvary Cemetery. He hoped that Moran understand the plan was to extend that for a bicycle path, but why stop at a bike path when it could be increased to an extension of Lake Shore Drive. If that ends at Evanston, does that make Evanston Uptown? Jovice Elias, 1210 Sherman Ave., 20-year resident, said the study's results made a lot of sense. The majority of people in Evanston do not want a marina. Citizens have elected Council to represent them so it is time to listen to what people here want. A marina would affect everybody all along the shoreline. The impact of traffic according to the study would be minimal and she has heard that before. She did not think that traffic anywhere has not been affected with all the construction underway. Cars and more boats cause pollution. She frequents the lakefront regularly; her family walks there and are avid beach goers. Last year there were many beach closings. She sees that happening with more people and more boats. There are other ways to enjoy the lake. The eco system will definitely be changed. The City is in financial trouble but a marina is not the answer and will benefit a few people who have boats. The rest of them will experience more beach closings. If they insist on doing a study why don't they call in the Sierra Club, which has another point of view? Maureen Glasoe, 901 Hinman Ave., echoed many comments opposing the marina. She appreciated the need for more discussion but thought they would find the community is overwhelmingly opposed. Her husband Ted is a sailor and does not support a marina. Junad Rizki, 2784 Sheridan Rd., 20-year resident, stated that federal and City pork is all the same. He said talk about process is interesting. Recently aldermen discussed the Civic Center in a closed meeting, which is the process. At Robert Crown Center, they want to spend $10 million on that. These projects will add up to more than the cost of a marina. A marina will not pass because too many residents are opposed and it would not work anyway. There will be no revenue from this, which is being pushed by the Recreation Department. If they developed this marina, it would be in the red just as the Recreation Department. If City Council wants to deal with process, they ought to do their homework on the Robert Crown and Civic Center studies. He said that the process is a problem here. He knew they were not going to pass it so why study it. He thought people should be concerned about these other projects because property taxes would go up. Tom McSheehv. 131 Clyde Ave., came to Evanston from Oak Park for the lake, noted that it is the only open space and wild forest that people have. He commutes daily and lives here to be near the water. They have an obligation to preserve this natural resource and treat it like a national park. It is a precious natural resource and nobody would put a mall in the middle of a national forest. Open land and water is dwindling today. Development is easy while preservation is much tougher. He was educated in environmental studies so this is an area of expertise for him. Nature has a carrying capacity and is balanced. When nature reaches its carrying capacity, it collapses. He is concerned about the development in Evanston; said it is important to balance budgets but development at the cost of quality of life will also cost in real estate values. He noted the concentration of traffic on Chicago Avenue is so intense it prevents left turns these days. Density impacts traffic and creates stress and that impacts Evanston now. He asked the carrying capacity of Evanston and that Council serve everybody, not the small minority a marina would serve. Susan Llovd, 715 Sheridan Rd., 11-year resident, said years ago she owned property on the other side of Lake Michigan, in New Buffalo, before the Army Corps came in and approved the marina that is there. She urged them to go to New Buffalo and see the traffic congestion, boat traffic, safety issues, see that people cannot swim anymore because of the fast boats and the noise. She has never seen powerboats that don't come with jet skies, which are noise polluters beyond 11 April 26, 2004 belief Evanston is a peaceful and serene community and she hoped they keep it that way. Rhonda Present, 546 Michigan Ave., thanked Alderwoman Wynne for the motion; understood the desire and need for discussion. She was opposed to a marina on the grounds of the effect on her family's health and quality of life in the community. As parent of a six year old with asthma, she did not need to see more studies to know that living two blocks from the proposed marina with more than 350 cars and boats would impact her daughter's health and quality of life. It could mean that eventually they would have to leave the community they want to raise her in. If there were a proposal to develop a marina on the canal, she would oppose that also, because it would affect the health of the children and families in that community. She believed that her tax dollars are intended to benefit the public good and should be used for the public not for 350 people who have more means. If a marina won't benefit the majority of the people here and the City has $21 million, she suggested the City write a check to District 65. Donna Bicknese. 503 Sheridan Rd., came to Evanston because of its lakefront. She is purchasing a condo at 719 Hinman and vehemently opposes building a marina. There are few open spaces and she hears over and over that in the absence of deleterious effects of this project, it would be okay to proceed. It is not okay to proceed. This is a small precious community and if they have the funds to waste money to study this, they should take that small strip in front of Calvary Cemetery and South Blvd. Beach, develop it and put up snow fences so snow stays on the beach. She stated that the beach is not managed properly. Don't make people go to Dempster Beach to buy a token, make it so that people can use that beach. She urged them not to waste money on 350 wealthy people who are not from this community. Karl Gromelski. 2727 Broadway Ave., supported studying the marina proposal because he is tired of taxes going up. This was proposed as a revenue enhancement and he still thought it might be. He said they have too many questions and not enough answers. He recalled 15 years ago there was a lot of opposition to a development at Howard/Hartrey and now that development is one of the prime real estate areas and generates so much sales tax it is saving Evanston. He said they need to start looking at the future. He understood there would be some inconvenience. A resident of the 71h Ward, he suggested they look at the stadium as a possible revenue enhancement as well. He suggested that they need to look at what is good for the City, not what is good for one's ward, one's street or for one's family. Evanston is a community and needs to start acting like one. The more they say "I don't want it in my backyard" the more property taxes will go up and they will lose more diversity. Evanston is losing senior citizens and young middle -income families because they cannot afford to live here. They have to start looking at what Evanston's assets are and how they can be leveraged. He applauded Mayor Morton, Aldermen Rainey, Moran, Bernstein and Jean -Baptiste for at least exploring this and if it is a bad idea, then he urged them not to proceed with it. Catherine Counard,, 217 Kedzie St., a physician and leader of Evanston Citizens for Clean Indoor Air, said that people are harmed by second-hand smoke on the job everyday here. The City Council has a responsibility to take action to prevent that from happening. She appreciated that Alderman Rainey acknowledged the tremendous citizen support for this effort. According to Nielsen ratings, 45 shows covered the March 1 hearing regarding their effort to protect workers, reaching 6.5 million viewers. Illinois is watching Evanston and looking to the City Council for leadership. Tonight they are considering a resolution that asks the Illinois General Assembly to enact a statewide ban in all indoor workplaces and public places, including bars and restaurants. They would be thrilled if the whole state went smoke -free. She urged passage of the resolution, but was not sure that it would achieve its desired goal. Every state that has gone smoke -free started at the local level. In Massachusetts, 95 communities protected the health of workers before the state legislature took action. Illinois does not seem likely to break that mold. She has been to Springfield twice with other physicians to work with legislators to eliminate the preemptive clause that prevents 19 communities here from having strong indoor air ordinances. That did not get out of the House for lack of a vote. Short of taking stronger action, she was afraid approval of the resolution would achieve nothing. Alderman Newman suggested an annual trip to Springfield by at least one Council member to lobby for protecting workers' health. She urged them to adopt that language as well as adding in a timeframe for the state legislators to take action, such as within the next five years because "as soon as possible" may never happen. She said this needs enthusiastic Council leadership. If the entire Council went to Springfield and spoke up, that would be ground breaking. She was ready to take them anytime. Richard O'Dwyer, 420 South Blvd., watched this on cable television; lives close to the proposed marina and strongly favors exploring having it if restrictions could be put on it such as what one sailor said, "they don't want cigarette boats 12 April 26, 2004 and jet skies out there." He also would not favor a lot of powerboats that make noise and pollution. He does not own a boat but a relative has a sailboat at Wilmette Harbor, where he sailed and in Chicago as well. He said that harbors are great places and the lakefront would not be diminished by sailboats that sail from this point. He said the location is not ideal for a marina. There is the road and a narrow sidewalk covered with sand and a pile of rocks. It is not a pristine environment; would enhance the Evanston side and will make Rogers Park better. His property is next to Calvary Cemetery. He wants Rogers Park to be better because people use garbage cans to jump the cemetery fence and mug people. That is not the safest corner in Evanston. He saw a lot of benefits to the marina. Council took a break from 11:43-11:55 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA (Any item marked with an Asterisk*) Alderman Feldman moved Council approval of the Consent Agenda with these exceptions: Ordinance 45-0-04 — Fine Increase for Certain Alcohol Violations; Ordinance 47-0-04 — Fine Increase for Consumption/Possession of Alcohol on Public Way; Sidewalk Caf6 Permit — Type Two Restaurant/Taco Bell Express; Misa Subdivision Plat Approval; 2520 Hurd Subdivision Plat Approval; Ordinance 52-0-04 — Zoning Map Amendment; Ordinance 49-0-04 — Zoning Text Amendment: Mixed Residential Uses/Unique Uses; Ordinance 50-0-04 — Planned Development & Unique Use: 1314 Ridge Ave. and Asbury -Ridge Re -Subdivision Plat Approval. Seconded by Alderman Moran. Roll call. Voting aye — Rainey, Feldman, Newman, Jean -Baptiste, Wynne, Bernstein, Moran, Tisdahl. Voting nay — none. Motion carried (8-0). * ITEMS APPROVED ON CONSENT AGENDA MINUTES: * Approval of Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of April 13, 2004. * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION AND ROLL CALL (8-0) I t k3l :7WOC,[•1i7101KelL1i'LI1a X,1, * Approval, as recommended, of the City of Evanston payroll for the period ending April 22, 2004 and the City of Evanston bills for the period ending April 27, 2004 and that those be authorized and charged to the proper accounts, summarized as follows: City of Evanston payroll (through 4/22/04) $1,954,179.40 City of Evanston bills (through 4/27/04) $3,747,939.96 * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION AND ROLL CALL (8-0) * Approval of the lowest responsive and responsible bid of Chicagoland Paving Contractors for the Fitzsimons Park Tennis Court Improvement Project at a cost of $128,000. (Funded by 2003-04 GO Bonds.) * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION & ROLL CALL (8-0) * Approval of the sole source purchase from Konnerth Sales Assoc. for Tallmadge Luminaires (streetlights) at a cost of $57,096. (Funded through Division of Transportation Capital Account.) * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION & ROLL CALL (8-0) * Approval of the contract for (a) construction of a chemical building access way, 3-double-bay garage facility and installation of a chlorine scrubber with Kovilic Construction Co., in the amount of $1,562,600; and (b) replacement of motor and gear drive on low -lift pump no. 7 with Advance Mechanical Contractors, in the amount of $475.00. (Funding through Water Fund.) * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION & ROLL CALL (8-0) * Approval of the lowest responsive and responsible bid of SunBurst Sportswear for a two-year contract to provide clothing items for the Parks/Forestry & Recreation Department. (Last year, purchases totaled about $20,000. Funded through recreation centers' program budgets.) * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION & ROLL CALL (8-0) 13 April 26, 2004 * Approval of the three-year professional services contract, with two optional one-year extensions, with Johnson & Associates for office furniture for City of Evanston offices. (Funding from various department budgets.) * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION & ROLL CALL (8-0) * Approval of Change Order #1 with M.G. Electric Service for the 480-volt substation replacement, reducing the contract by $1,732, from $172,600 to $170,867.46. * APPROVED -CONSENT AGENDA MOTION & ROLL CALL (8-0) * Annroval of Use of Funds from Isabella St. Stub Vacation — Consideration of a recommendation to use the monies from the Isabella St. stub vacation ($525,000) to fund additional street resurfacings. * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION & ROLL CALL (8-0) * Resolution 22-R-04 — Lease for League of Women Voters — Consideration of proposed Resolution 22-R-04, which authorizes the City Manager to enter into a lease agreement with the League of Women Voters for Room 1002, 2100 Ridge Ave. * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION AND ROLL CALL (8-0) * Ordinance 11-0-04 — Subsurface Easement Agreement — Consideration of proposed Ordinance 1I- 0-04, which authorizes the City Manager to execute a subsurface easement agreement with Central Park LLC for a foundation and earth retention easement for 2935 Central St. * MARKED INTRODUCED — CONSENT AGENDA * Ordinance 51-0-04 — Amendment to Citv Code Regarding Use of Public Sewers — Consideration of proposed Ordinance 51-0-04, which amends Section 7-13-8 of the City Code relating to the use of the public sewers. * MARKED INTRODUCED — CONSENT AGENDA * Ordinance 48-0-04 — Pertaining to Bicvcle Riding on Sidewalks — Consideration of proposed Ordinance 48-0-04, introduced April 13, 2004, which amends Section 10-9-4(C) of the City Code to expand the area where bicycle riding on sidewalks may be prohibited. * ADOPTED CONSENT AGENDA AND ROLL CALL (8-0) PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT: * Sidewalk Caf6 Permit — Tvne Two Restaurant (Liquid Caf6) — Consideration of a recommendation of the Site Plan & Appearance Review Committee to grant a sidewalk caf6 permit to Liquid Cafe, 1100 Davis St. * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION & ROLL CALL (8-0) * Sidewalk Cafe Permit — Tvpe One Restaurant (Jackv's Bistro) — Consideration of a recommendation of the Site Plan & Appearance Review Committee to grant a sidewalk caf6 permit to Jacky's Bistro, 2545 Prairie Ave. (Type One located within 200' of residential property and outside Liquor Control Regulations Core Area). * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION & ROLL CALL (8-0) * Resolution 23-R-04 — Bond Volume Can Allocation for Year 2004 — Consideration of proposed Resolution 23-R-04, which protects and reserves the City's right to issue $5,567,925 in tax-exempt revenue bonds in 2004 for eligible projects under the federal government's annual bond volume cap restriction. * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION & ROLL CALL (8-0) * Ordinance 40-0-04 — Snecial Use for 2401 Brummel Place (Religious Institution) — Consideration of proposed Ordinance 40-0-04, introduced March 22, 2004, which grants a special use for 2401 Brummel Pl. (former Shure property) for a Religious Institution to Vineyard Christian Fellowship. ADOPTED CONSENT AGENDA AND ROLL CALL (8-0) 14 HUMAN SERVICES: April 26, 2004 * Robert Crown Center Recommendation — Consideration of the Human Services Committee's recommendation regarding the Playground & Recreation Board's User Input Report on the Robert Crown Center & Ice Complex. * APPROVED -CONSENT AGENDA MOTION & ROLL CALL (8-0) * Resolution 25-R-04 — Amending Agreement with Evanston Environmental Association — Consideration of proposed Resolution 25-R-04, which amends the agreement between the City of Evanston and EEA concerning time extension for repaying of a loan. * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION & ROLL CALL (8-0) * Resolution 26-R-04 — Endorsing a Statewide Ban on Indoor Smoking in Public Places — Consideration of proposed Resolution 26-R-04, whereby the City Council would recommend adoption of a statewide ban on indoor smoking in public places. * APPROVED - CONSENT AGENDA MOTION & ROLL CALL (8-0) APPOINTMENTS: Mayor Morton asked that the following appointment be confirmed: Neal A. Vogel Preservation Commission 2035 Harrison St. For term ending May 15, 2007 Mayor Morton asked that the following reappointments be confirmed: William S. Smith, Jr. Civil Service Commission 3038 Hartzell St. For term ending May 15, 2007 Gladys Bryer Environment Board 550 Sheridan Sq. For term ending May 15, 2008 Judy Lyn Freeman Environment Board 937 Sherman Ave. For term ending May 15, 2008 Victoria Kalish Mental Health Board 810 Dobson St. For term ending May 15, 2008 Carol Sittler Mental Health Board 1234 Elmwood Ave. For term ending May 15, 2008 Kyra Walsh M/W/EBE Committee 1907 Lincoln St. For term ending May 15, 2006 * APPROVED — CONSENT AGENDA 15 April 26, 2004 REPORT OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES ADMINISTRATION & PUBLIC WORKS: Ordinance 45-0-04 — Fine Increase for Certain Alcohol Violations — Consideration of proposed Ordinance 45-0-04, introduced April 13, 2004, amending Section 3-5-14 of the City Code to increase the fine for consumption/possession of alcohol, false IDs and other age -related violations. Alderman Rainey moved approval. Seconded by Alderman Feldman. Alderman Rainey said that she and other members thought this was an important step in resolving under age drinking problems in the community. Chief Kaminski told them that the $200 fine would have much greater impact than the $35-50 fine for those arrested and that the Secretary of State accepts submittal of these violations for those people who have Illinois driver's licenses. Of those arrested with fake IDs, 22 of 30 have had their Illinois licenses suspended for a year. They were told when a C ticket is given to a NU student, the university is notified. If high school students are arrested with fake IDs, their parents are notified. She thought the Police Department had done a fine job of trying to curtail this serious problem. Alderman Moran said there are other disincentives for people who would violate the fake ID or public drinking ordinances. He thought the sanction of losing a driver's privilege or disciplinary process through the university would be much more of a disincentive than these two ordinances, which simply hike the minimum fine that could be levied on these ordinance violations. He argued in the committee that he did not forsake the idea of increasing the minimum fine could be a disincentive. He offered an alternative, which failed to get support. He suggested doubling the current minimum fine for fake ID violation from $35 to $70. The $200 fine is a six -fold increase. On the drinking in public ordinance, the current minimum is $50 and the $200 fine would be a four times increase. Increasing these fines by four and six times had a punitive flavor that he found unappealing. The target of these ordinances is underage drinkers with a focus on students. The extent of the increases seemed harsh. Alderman Feldman said that the license suspension offered by the Secretary of State would not be a deterrent for students with out-of-state driver's licenses. He did not think that Alderman Moran had the benefit of attending the Human Services Committee meeting when residents told about the ordeals they experienced when some NU students drink. Residents used words such as "terrorized," "afraid to go outside," their quality of life was diminished and they were intimidated. One got the feeling that this was a community under siege by underage young people who abuse the law. If not underage, some drank brazenly in public, committed acts of disrespect and indecency. As a result of that meeting, a committee was formed with Northwestern University, the 1st Ward alderman, community members and the Police Department. They continued to articulate that Evanston's fines were so low that they were disregarded and the fines laughed at. Statistics showed these people did not come to Administrative Adjudication. The plea of the neighborhood was to make the fine much higher and $200 was suggested. The committee found no reason to change that number. He said it was important that people get the message that this is a serious issue here. He saw no reason why people had fake IDs and bought liquor for underage kids. This is one of the few ways the City has to dissuade them from this behavior. He urged Council support. Alderman Newman related he came home from a Council meeting and saw a group of about 150 people at 1945 Sherman. He called the landlord and had him listen to the party from his car so he could hear the noise. During these meetings, they found that people are more comfortable calling Evanston police in the neighborhood west of the university because they get a better response. There are two or three NU police who patrol in cars. On that night he came home from a meeting, police responded to 22 calls in one area. Until NU picks up its share and hires more police, it will be the City's responsibility. Last week at 1:30 a.m. he watched a group of 15-20 students walking down the street drunk, drinking and using foul language and children live there. They are talking about the character of residential neighborhood. This has a greater impact than whether a house is 25 or 35 feet high. This has a real impact on character. If Council wants to make the statement that they do not want these neighborhoods to be taverns for university students and that these are places where children can be raised without hearing filthy language, they must say that underage drinking is not wanted. A $35 fine, when $35,000 is paid to attend the university, is not a lot of money. He thanked the committee for supporting saving this neighborhood and would do this for any neighborhood here. 16 April 26, 2004 Roll call. Voting aye —Rainey, Feldman, Newman, Jean -Baptiste, Wynne, Bernstein, Tisdahl. Voting nay — Moran. Motion carried (7-1). Ordinance 47-0-04 — Fine Increase for Consumntion/Possession of Alcohol on the Public Wav — Consideration of proposed Ordinance 47-0-04, introduced April 13, 2004, amending Section 9-5-10(D) of the City Code to increase the fine for consumption/possession of alcohol on the public right-of-way. Alderman Rainey moved approval. Seconded by Alderman Feldman. Alderman Rainey said they spoke about how seriously the City's fine is taken. She reviewed attendance at Administrative Adjudication hearings for tickets issued on this in 2003. In one section, 10 tickets were issued and 1 person came to the hearing. In another section, 20 tickets were issued and 5 came; 148 tickets were issued in another section and 100 people never appeared; in another case, 17 tickets were issued and 10 did not show up. There was an amazing disregard for the system. They believed the fine raised to $200 will cause some people to come and argue they were accused unjustly. The committee urged support. Roll call. Voting aye —Rainey, Feldman, Newman, Jean -Baptiste, Wynne, Bernstein, Tisdahl. Voting nay — Moran. Motion carried (7-1). Alderman Rainey said several were concerned about the memo on tree planting. Alderman Feldman made a motion that Option One be implemented. Council will see an ordinance in the near future that increases the rate at which parkway trees are replaced. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT: Sidewalk Cafe Permit — Tv )e Two Restaurant (Taco Bell Express) — Consideration of a recommendation of the Site Plan & Appearance Review Committee to grant a sidewalk cafe permit to Taco Bell Express, 1743 Sherman Ave. Alderman Newman reported the applicant was not present. He moved removal of this item from the agenda and referred back to committee. Seconded by Alderman Wynne. Motion carried. Misa Subdivision Plat Approval — Consideration of a recommendation of the Site Plan & Appearance Review Committee to grant a subdivision plat approval for the Misa subdivision plat, 1243 Maple Ave., for two house lots at the southeast corner of Maple and Dempster. Alderman Newman moved approval. Seconded by Alderman Bernstein. Roll call. Voting aye — Rainey, Feldman, Newman, Jean -Baptiste, Bernstein, Moran, Tisdahl. Voting nay — Wynne. Motion carried (7-1). 2520 Hurd Subdivision Plat Approval — Consideration of a recommendation of the Site Plan & Appearance Review Committee to grant a subdivision plat approval for 2520 Hurd Ave. to create two single-family detached residences. Alderman Newman said this subdivision is in a historic district and Council has no discretion. It is a ministerial act. He moved approval. Seconded by Alderman Bernstein. Alderman Moran asked that that this item be held. Seconded by Alderman Rainey. At the reauest of two aldermen this item will be held. Ordinance 52-0-04 — Zonine Map Amendment — Consideration of proposed Ordinance 52-0-04, which approves a recommendation of the Plan Commission regarding amending the zoning map to place the currently zone B3 Business District at Main/Chicago, into the B3/oRD Business Redevelopment Overlay District. Alderman Newman moved that a substitute ordinance that denies the recommendation of the Plan Commission and re- 17 April 26, 2004 zone the business district to a C I a (commercial district) be marked introduced and referred to committee. Ordinance 49-0-04 — Zoning Text Amendment: Mixed Residential Uses/Unioue Uses — Consideration of proposed Ordinance 49-0-04, which approves a recommendation of the Plan Commission for a Zoning Text Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regarding authorizing various residential uses on zoning lots in residential districts where not permitted as of right. Alderman Newman asked that this item be marked introduced and referred back to committee. Ordinance 50-0-04 — Planned Development & Unique Use — 1314 Ridge Ave. — Consideration of proposed Ordinance 50-0-04, which approves a recommendation of the Plan Commission to grant a Unique Use and Planned Development for former District 65 headquarters at Asbury/Dempster/Ridge. Alderman Newman asked that this item be marked introduced and referred back to committee. Asburv-Ridge Re -Subdivision Plat ADDroval — Consideration of a recommendation of the Preservation Commission and SP&ARC to grant a re -subdivision plat approval for the former District #65 property at Asbury -Dempster -Ridge. Alderman Newman reported that this item was held in committee. CALL OF THE WARDS: Bch Ward. Alderman Rainey thanked the P&D Committee for being understanding about the confusion on the Vineyard special use. On the issue of the marina study, she thought it interesting that those who oppose the marina told them all the things the study did not do. Those are the things she wanted to get at. She thought it extremely interesting that Alderman Wynne is meeting with the 49t' Ward Parks & Beaches Committee to come up with alternative ideas. The idea of a marina with powerboats was nothing she ever thought about; did not know about tall ships. She liked the idea of short ships. Sail boating is a quiet, peaceful activity. She found the Lake Michigan Federation person interesting and would like to have a discussion with him present. She thought they generated interest in discussing uses for the lakefront. 91h Ward. No report. 1" Ward. Alderman Newman had a different point of view on the marina. The idea that the marina would be a big f ind- raiser is about 20 years away. The $21 million debt has to be paid first and the idea that they would take on that kind of debt for 368 boat owners, when a good portion of those people don't live here, to generate the needed funds they would have to have large boats that most people cannot afford. He said a project like this would never come to fruition unless it has a strong advocate. Council is divided and as a member of the Human Services Committee, he does not want to spend a lot of time on this unless there is strong support. He expects it to go to the committee and come back with a negative recommendation. A project of this magnitude cannot happen without strong leadership fighting for it, which he did not see that happening. This is different than the movie theaters where people were willing to fight for them. He noted the City will have to pay at least $1 million to fix the Civic Center roof and because parts are falling, the City has a liability. It is a damned if you do and damned it you don't situation. If they spend $1 million on a building that needs $18 million in repair/rehab, they are accused of throwing money away. If they don't fix the roof somebody could get injured. Council cannot win. At the Civic Center Committee they have looked at a way to replace the Civic Center without a tax increase because it can be done with reasonable re -development of the site. It is not a luxury but a necessity. On the Robert Crown Center the architect told him there is $6 million in immediate needs. There are code violations, and life/safety issues and a daycare operation there is not being run properly. That has to be addressed. 18 April 26, 2004 He noted the final dissolution of the Research Park was in their packets. That secret society was one of the worst decisions made by the City. People asked why they could not work together. He said they worked together and land in the Research Park owned by the City was put under almost total control of an NU vice president. People who opposed what was going on were not allowed on the committee until 1997 when an election changed that. From 1990-97, City land was allowed to sit there and do nothing. When they finally forced a study it came back and said the northern part had to be developed differently than with office buildings. A Council member who was wed to the park said that would mean the end of the Research Park. The City lost millions of dollars. The time it changed was when the City took over. He said the largest movie theater chain wrote and the letter was turned over to the VP of NU, who was the head of the Research Park, and the response was that they were not interested in movie theaters. There was no public debate or consultation with Council. Working together may have a positive result. Working together on the Research Park set Evanston back millions of dollars. Since 1997, they have a movie theater, hotel, stores and a wonderful street on Maple. It was a large turnaround. The end of this partnership is one of the best things ever to happen to Evanston and symbolic of the City going forward. The idea that if NU took over they would get ahead, did not happen. That happened when the City took over. For eight years, the citizens on that board advocated that the land be controlled by NU. This is a good day and the success in the north part of the park is due to the initiatives of the City and the City Council. Alderman Rainey commented that she was the only person on the Council who was present at the time they voted on the agreement and she voted "no." 2°d Ward. Alderman Jean -Baptiste thought the marina discussion was important and maybe the issue is dead if they understand the totality of the impact of it. They could not have done that if they shoved it aside. In five -ten years it would come back. He learned a lot that evening. He thanked City Manager Crum for the citywide cleaning proposal and to troubleshoot situations here. He asked that they consider cleaning alleys semi-annually and systematize that. The objective is to have a clean city. He said the Onyx Waste and Active Service property at Church/ Darrow needs to be looked at more closely as they try to develop the area. There is a prospective rodent infestation in the summer and bad odors. It seems that Onyx is moving to do more business outside of Evanston. Mr. Crum asked this be referred to him. Alderman Jean -Baptiste attended an event that honored families of those serving in Iraq. Congresswoman Schakowsky spoke and a number of parents of soldiers spoke. When he hears the news, he is reminded that his children are the same age as those serving. He thought hearing directly from the families who are experiencing this angst and tragedy, they face a war many don't support. He urged them to keep those in their prayers. Only people can change those conditions. 3'd Ward. Alderman Wynne thanked the P&D Committee for moving forward on B3 at Main/Chicago. There is a moratorium and they have one more meeting to act before the moratorium expires. She appreciated the discussion about the marina and that they learn more what the community cares about. She felt confident with more questioning that this is inappropriate at that site with the issues it brings. 4tb Ward. Alderman Bernstein reminded all there would be a Civic Center Committee meeting Wednesday at 5:00 p.m. 5thWard. No report. 6t" Ward. No report. 7th Ward. Alderman Tisdahl announced a meeting of Civic Center neighbors the next evening at 7:00 p.m. There being no further business to come before Council, Mayor Morton asked for a motion to adjourn. The Council so moved and the meeting was adjourned at 12:40 a.m. Mary P. Morris, City Clerk A videotape recording of this meetine has been made Dart of the Dermanent record and is available in the Citv Clerk's office.