HomeMy WebLinkAbout05.16.11
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF EVANSTON, ILLINOIS
LORRAINE H. MORTON CIVIC CENTER
2100 RIDGE AVENUE, EVANSTON 60201
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Monday, May 16, 2011
7:00 p.m.
ORDER OF BUSINESS
(I) Roll Call – Begin with Alderman Burrus
(II) Mayor Proclamations and Public Announcements
National Public Works Week, May 15-21
Evanston Preservation Commission: 2011 Preservation and Design Awards
(III) City Manager Presentations and Announcements
Water Quality Certification Report and Recognition of City’s Chemist
Eleanore Meade and Microbiologist Al Diaz-Mazarredo
(IV) Citizen Comment
Members of the public are welcome to speak at City Council meetings. As part of the Council
agenda, a period for citizen comments shall be offered at the commencement of each regular
Council meeting. Those wishing to speak should sign their name, address and the agenda item
or topic to be addressed on a designated participation sheet. If there are five or fewer speakers,
fifteen minutes shall be provided for Citizen Comment. If there are more than five speakers, a
period of forty-five minutes shall be provided for all comment, and no individual shall speak longer
than three minutes. The Mayor will allocate time among the speakers to ensure that Citizen
Comment does not exceed forty-five minutes. The business of the City Council shall commence
forty-five minutes after the beginning of Citizen Comment. Aldermen do not respond during
Citizen Comment. Citizen comment is intended to foster dialogue in a respectful and civil manner.
Citizen comments are requested to be made with these guidelines in mind.
(V) Special Order of Business
(SP1) Presentation and Discussion of Salt Dome Issues
(SP2) Safety Update
(SP3) FY2012 Budget Issues and Community Priorities
(VI) Executive Session
(VII) Adjournment
1
City Council Agenda April 12, 2011 Page 2 of 2
5/13/2011 3:22 PM
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
(SP1) Presentation and Discussion of Salt Dome Issues
Staff recommends that City Council receive the updated salt dome report and
staff requests City Council approval of the salt dome style and location or short
list of locations for final consideration.
For Action
(SP2) Safety Update
Staff recommends consideration of a status report on implementation on the City
Council’s goal regarding safety. The report will be provided at the May 16, 2011
Special City Council meeting.
For Discussion
(SP3) FY2012 Budget Issues and Community Priorities
Staff recommends City Council consideration of the FY2012 Budget issues and
discussion of community priorities.
For Action
Information is available about Evanston City Council meetings at:
http://www.cityofevanston.org/government/agendas-minutes/agendas-minutes---city-council/index.php.
Questions can be directed to the City Manager’s Office at 847-866-2936. The city is committed to ensuring
accessibility for all citizens; If an accommodation is needed to participate in this meeting, please contact the City
Manager’s Office 48 hours in advance so that arrangements can be made for the accommodation if possible.
2
For City Council meeting of May 16, 2011
2011 Evanston Preservation and Design Awards
Presentation of Awards
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Steve Griffin, Director, Community and Economic Development Dept.
Dennis Marino, Manager, Planning & Zoning Division
Carlos D. Ruiz, Historic Preservation Coordinator, Planning & Zoning Division
Subject: 2011 Evanston Preservation & Design Awards Program
Date: May 11, 2011
We are pleased to report that on Saturday, May 7, 2011 a jury composed of three
professional architects: Roderick S. Winn, LEED AP Associate of Eckenhoff Saunders
Architects, Leonard Koroski, AIA LEED AP, Goettsch Partners, and Nicole Egan Ducar
of Cohen & Hacker Architects, selected the 2011 Evanston Preservation & Design
Awards recipients.
The Awards presentation will take place on Monday, May 16, 2011 at a Special City
Council Meeting at 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers. Part of program includes a
PowerPoint presentation of the selected projects and the Mayor’s presentation of the
Certificates to the award recipients.
Among the eighteen nominations, the jury selected twelve projects as follows:
Award for Proper Rehabilitation/Alteration: 2100 Ridge – Lorraine H. Morton Civic
Center (Listed in the National Register of Historic Places)
Project: Roof replacement, cornice restoration, replacement of balustrades, new copper
gutters
Jury Comments:
• Great to see the City investment in this building
• A high caliber renovation/restoration
• Look forward to the City continuing this level of stewardship
• Award for Proper Rehabilitation category, not Sensitive Addition as the addition is
not yet completed.
Award for Adaptive Reuse: 1601, 1607 and 1611 Simpson Street (Evanston Landmark)
Project: Rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of three adjacent buildings on Simpson Street
Memorandum
3
Page 2
2011 Preservation & Design Awards Memo
May 11, 2011
Jury Comments:
• Adding vitality to the neighborhood
• Creative use of materials, incorporating artist work.
• Interesting internal courtyards
Award for Sensitive Addition: 2305 Hartrey Avenue
Project: Two-story addition at rear of main house
Jury Comments:
• The addition and the deck have a simple clean massing, appropriate to the scale
and style of the home
• The internal spaces created appear to be nicely scaled and naturally lite.
• The new architecture was nicely proportioned and blended to the original.
Award for Sensitive Addition: 2448 Lincolnwood Drive (Evanston Landmark)
Project: Second-story addition over existing attached garage
Jury Comments:
• Thoughtful massing and materials
• A creative solution to adding a good amount of square footage without
obliterating the original roofline. The careful brickwork at the old garage doors is
wonderfully appropriate and clever.
Award for Adaptive Reuse: 1228 Florence Avenue
Project: Interior and storefront rehabilitation and loft apartments at rear of property
Jury Comments:
• This is a special neighborhood with an eclectic urban quality – this project adds
another layer of artistic quality to the neighborhood with a nice massing, a public
street presence and some wonderful private garden spaces
• This project, while being awarded for its overall impact on the neighborhood and
nice design, sparked conversation about when adaptive reuse goes so far that
the original street façade is no longer present.
Award for Sensitive Addition/Alteration: 1334 Hinman Avenue
Project: Interior rehabilitation and redesign and rebuilding of the existing back porch on
the rear façade
Jury Comments:
• Simple clean massing, an elegant addition and massing change
]
4
Page 3
2011 Preservation & Design Awards Memo
May 11, 2011
Award for Proper Rehabilitation/Restoration: 1143 Forest Avenue (Evanston Landmark)
Project: Comprehensive restoration of the exterior facades, including 50 wooden storm
windows, front porch stairs and balustrade and the installation of custom cut wood
shingles to match the original roof
Jury Comments:
• the neutral colors allow the geometry and the beauty of the house to stand out
• The work was obviously undertaken by a thoughtful and detail-oriented person.
The care in keeping as much original material as possible while stabilizing and
cleaning it up was nicely done and in accordance with the Secretary of the
Interior’s standards and intent.
Award for Proper Rehabilitation/Restoration: 1702 Chicago Avenue (Evanston Landmark)
Project: Restoration of building’s original wood windows as well as repair and window
replacement at the building’s enclosed porch
Jury Comments:
• Respectful restoration of the slate roof, windows, and porch
• Look forward to their continuing stewardship of the building
• The new windows and handrail on the enclosed porch area are an excellent and
appropriate improvement. The restored windows in the other areas look right.
Award for Sensitive Addition: 721 University Place (Evanston Landmark)
Project: Three-story addition to the north of the existing structure utilizing the existing
architectural vocabulary and building materials
Jury Comments:
• The new entry is more comfortable, approachable, and inviting
• The window massing and dormer are nicely consistent with the adjacent (east)
elevation. The eave detailing is nice. The proportions of the windows look right.
And the reuse of the arched opening stones is a thoughtful and impactful detail.
It is a nice improvement over the previous elevation.
Award for Sensitive Addition: 2205 Sherman Avenue
(Northeast Evanston Historic District)
Project: One-and-half stories addition to the rear of the main house
Jury Comments:
• A wonderful connection of the house terracing down to the yard.
• The detailing on the addition, taking cues from the original house, marries the
addition nicely to the house. When compared to the original rear elevation, this
is a very nicely executed improvement to a charming home from the street.
5
Page 4
2011 Preservation & Design Awards Memo
May 11, 2011
MARY PERKINS AWARD FOR PRESERVATION: 1881 Sheridan Road – Harris Hall
(Evanston Landmark)
Project: Comprehensive interior renovation and restoration of interior historic spaces
and exterior restoration and new garden level addition in limestone and paved with
bluestone. Also, replacement of main entrance stairs on the west side of the building;
restoration of window frames and installation of new window sashes with exterior
profiles to match the original windows
Jury Comments:
• A project to be celebrated for both its preservation of the original design and the
quality of design in its expansion.
• An extraordinary example of how to appropriately update and reorganize an
historic structure in a sensitive manner.
MARY PERKINS AWARD FOR PRESERVATION: 1461-1467 Ashland Avenue
Project: New construction of seven live-work townhomes with storefront retail space on
the ground floor
Jury Comments:
• Thoughtful, creative site planning created a transition between two different
neighborhoods.
• The buildings are modern but have a historic character and breakdown of
materials
• There is a nice break-down of inside and outside space, public and private
6
For City Council meeting of May 16, 2011 Item SP1
Business of the City by Motion: Construction of Replacement Salt Dome and
Storage Facility
For Action
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Suzette Robinson, Public Works Director
Don Cornelius, Interim Superintendent of Streets & Sanitation
Sat Nagar, Senior engineer
Ingrid Eckersberg, Civil Engineer
Subject: Updated Report on the Construction of a New Replacement Salt Dome
and Storage Facility
Date: May 10, 2011
Recommended Action:
Receive the updated salt dome report and staff requests City Council approval of the
salt dome style and location or short list of locations for final consideration.
Funding Source:
The funding for the new replacement salt dome and storage facility will be from MFT
and CIP Funds. Depending on the final location, limited funding may also be obtained
from TIF funds.
Summary:
In June 2009, the Public Works Department presented the initial salt dome report to the
Administration and Public Works Committee that included the justification for replacing
the existing facility. While the Salt Dome has been discussed briefly during the annual
Capital Improvements Review process, this is our first detailed discussion of this facility
since 2009.
The City of Evanston is in need of a new salt storage facility. The existing 2,500-ton
concrete salt dome located at the Municipal Service Center is over 20 years old, in poor
condition and in need of replacement. The City’s annual salt needs call for a larger
4,000-ton salt storage facility to insure that the City has adequate salt reserves each
year to hedge against salt shortages, delayed deliveries and price spikes.
This report provides the background, history and need for a new salt storage facility. It
re-examines the site selection criteria, assumptions and recommendations from a 2004
Public Works Department study and presentation to the Administration and Public
Memorandum
7
2
Works (APW) Committee. It also explores additional potential site locations. Staff is
seeking direction from Council on which alternatives to pursue.
The costs estimate for the proposed salt dome has increased from the 2009 estimate of
$510,000 due to the inclusion of:
• Pre-wetting and technology improvements to the salt facility
• Increased storage in the event that storage is no longer available at the
Recycling Center.
These increases are the same for all locations listed in this report
Salt Dome and Storage Facility Report
Background and Need
In the June 2009 review, the stated need for the new facility was based on the poor
condition of the existing dome, a need for additional salt storage capacity, and safety
issues with loading and delivery of salt in the overcrowded Municipal Service Center
site. In 2008, the Public Works Department retained the structural engineering
consultant, Moshe Calamaro and Associates, to assess the condition of the existing salt
dome. Mr. Calamaro noted in his final report that the dome is in poor condition and in
need of major repairs but that the repair work to meaningfully extend the service life of
the dome was too expensive to be a good investment. He recommended concrete
patching the existing holes in the dome to get one more year of service from the facility.
In addition to the advanced age and poor condition of the existing salt dome, there need
is a need for additional equipment storage and the installation of salt conservation
technology system. This salt conservation technology pre-wets the salt stockpiles with a
brine solution within the facility to ensure that more salt stays on the roadway at
application.
In October 2008, just prior to accepting the season’s first shipment of salt, the Public
Works Department had the holes in the concrete dome patched. Additionally, $510,000
was programmed in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for replacement of the
salt dome in 2009. The CIP was approved by the City Council later in the year. In 2010
staff hired Great Lakes Soil & Environmental Consultants to perform a soils analysis at
the former compost site. We are planning to request funding in 2012 CIP so that the
new salt dome can be constructed before 2012 snow season.
Salt Dome Style
The City’s existing 2,500-ton salt dome has a base diameter of roughly 75 feet. A 4,000-
ton salt dome would require an estimated 100-foot diameter base, which would translate
into a minimum site size of approximately 150 feet x 150 feet to allow for adequate truck
staging, deicing and onsite maneuverability. If the storage facility was constructed as a
rectangular shed with a gambrel roof structure as opposed to a conical dome, the site
could be narrower and longer, approximately 100 ft. x 200 ft. Site characteristics, cost
8
3
and operational requirements ultimately dictate selection of the facility type. (Gambrel
and Dome Style structures are shown in Attachment A). Staff is recommending the
gambrel structure for aesthetics and additional storage options. Another factor point of
consideration was that the Gambrel style is large enough to support liquid deicing and
brine making equipment.
Attachment A shows pictures of two salt dome building styles and Attachment B
contains a graphic depiction of each site in Figures 1 through 4.
Salt Dome and Storage Facility Site Evaluation Criteria
I. Salt Storage Site Requirements
The Salt Institute (SI) and the American Public Works Association (APWA) recommends
that ideally a community should store 75% to 100% of an average winter’s salt
requirements to hedge against periodic salt shortages and periods of heavy demand
that can result in communities:
1) paying exorbitant salt prices; or
2) not being able to get salt in a timely fashion, potentially resulting in not being able
to apply salt during snow events.
Communities with adequately sized salt storage facilities such as Des Plaines (pop.
58,000), who recently constructed a 4,000-ton salt storage facility, are better able to
straddle salt shortages, price spikes and delayed deliveries following back-to-back
storms. Given price fluctuations of this commodity, larger salt storage facilities can pay
for themselves in a relatively short period of time. The City’s existing 2,500-ton salt
dome located at the Municipal Service Center provides just 50% of the city’s average
winter salt use of 5,000 tons.
A 4,000-ton salt storage facility would be within the SI and APWA recommended range
(80% of the City’s annual salt use based on an average winter season for the area). In
addition the site must be large enough to support liquid deicing and brine making
equipment and to house parts and equipment currently stored out in the recycling center
and out in the open. Therefore, a site of approximately 150 feet x 200 feet was used to
evaluate potential locations.
II. Location, Truck Access and Safety
Ideally, a centralized location within the City is preferable to reduce “dead head”
distances for empty salt trucks to reload. While important, this is less of a concern in
Evanston than in most communities given Evanston’s relatively small size (7.8 square
miles). More important is proximity to designated arterial truck routes that facilitate
prompt access to the City’s primary routes. Also the storage sites should permit easy
access by trucks and other equipment entering and leaving the site. Generally
speaking, it is best to site facilities directly on or near routes already designed for truck
9
4
traffic. During an average snow event, the salt storage facility generates approximately
seven (7) truck loadings/trips per hour.
Importance of Direct Access to McCormick Boulevard/Green Bay Road -
In the 2004 salt storage location evaluation, the McCormick Boulevard to Green
Bay Road limited-access truck route was determined to be the optimum north-
south route for distributing salt via truck to the City because it:
• was designed for heavy trucks;
• has few residential properties abutting it; and
• provides very efficient travel times compared to alternative north-south
routes through the City.
III. Regulatory Requirements
Storage sites should comply with local land use and zoning requirements and be
consistent with comprehensive and area master plans. The site should also comply with
any local, state and federal regulations governing environmental discharge concerns.
IV. Adequate Drainage & Visual Screening
Storage sites should allow for proper drainage leading storm water away from the
storage area. Also adequately-sized drainage facilities are needed to support the City’s
snow melting operation. Storage facilities are generally large, utilitarian structures
devoid of significant architectural features that benefit greatly from visual screening.
V. Cost Considerations
Obviously, cost is a very important consideration in site selection. Several of the factors
listed above impact the ultimate cost of the facility. For example, cost can increase
quickly if significant site work is required to provide proper access, traffic control and/or
drainage. A major factor that will impact cost is whether land for the site is available or
will need to be acquired by the municipality.
Viable Locations for Considerations
Non City Owned Alternative Site: Ryan Stadium Parking Lot - Figure 1
The north end of Northwestern University’s expansive Ryan Stadium Parking Lot at
Ashland Avenue and Isabella Street offers good truck access. Already serving heavy
traffic for sports and entertainment events, Ashland Avenue’s concrete pavement can
handle the truck impacts while the proximity to Central Street gives good access to
major routes.
10
5
This site meets the following criterion:
• Salt Storage Site Requirements
• Adequate Drainage & Visual Screening
• Cost Considerations
The lot’s activity would impact residents in Evanston and Wilmette though the
immediate area impacted by the salt operations would be the parking lot and the sports
facilities on either side of the Ashland corridor. This site is currently owned by
Northwestern University and would have to be leased or purchased from them.
There are approximately 172 Evanston and 162 Wilmette residential addresses within
1,000 feet of the proposed location.
The estimated construction cost of for the proposed salt dome at this location is
$948,000 including brine and blending equipment installation.
Because of the preliminary nature of this discussion, Staff has not approached
Northwestern and will do so based on Council direction.
Former City Compost Site, James Park - Figure 2
The 2004 staff report sited the proposed new salt storage facility directly adjacent to the
Recycling Center. The two primary concerns with the proposed location raised at the
A&PW Committee meeting were the:
• potential truck traffic impacts of the proposed facility on Oakton Street; and
• aesthetic/open space impacts given its close proximity to Oakton Street and
James Park.
Both of these concerns can be addressed by shifting the proposed location of the salt
storage facility to the old compost site which is farther south to a location bounded by
the PACE Office Building to the west, the CTA Yellow Line embankment to the south,
and James Park Hill to the east (see Figure 2). Access to the site would be provided by
PACE’s existing concrete base driveway via Oakton Street.
This unique location would have natural screening provided by James Park Hill and the
CTA embankment, and its ample set-back from Oakton Street would allow for tree
screening on the remaining two sides of the facility. The new location would also
minimize impacts to open space as it is in an area that has traditionally been used for
composting and debris storage. With regard to additional truck traffic impacts, this
location would have two important benefits:
1) it would take advantage of the existing PACE driveway, which is already built to
heavy bus/truck standards, thereby eliminating a potentially significant cost to the
City; and
11
6
2) it would take advantage of the new traffic signals recently installed with the Oakton
Shoppes project that would provide ample gaps in traffic on Oakton Street to safely
accommodate the additional seven (7) hourly truck trips generated by the salt
storage facility during an average storm.
The Public Works Department would be able to regulate the timing and route of salt
deliveries from the City’s suppliers as well as the routes of its own salting trucks. The
intent would be to use Oakton Street to McCormick Boulevard for salt distribution during
storm events.
This site meets all the criteria except the cost. Since this is landfill site there is existing
fill material up to forty feet. This site will require pile foundation for the salt dome and
additional site preparation to accommodate the trucks access.
With regard to its proximity to residential areas, the proposed location is excellent.
There are only 10 residential addresses and about 10 non-residential addresses within
1,000 feet of the proposed location.
The estimated construction cost for construction the proposed salt dome at this location
is $1,012,000 including brine and blending equipment installation. The estimated
additional cost for pile foundation is $1,000,000 as provided by Moshe Calamaro &
Associates, Inc, structural engineer, hired to perform soil analysis and subsequent
building cost impacts. The total cost of the salt dome is estimated @ $2,012,000.
Non City Owned Alternative Site: Open Space at Ashland and Noyes–Figure 3
This MWRDGC owned site west of Noyes Street and Ashland Avenue offers an open
site in a centralized location with direct truck access to Green Bay Road and McCormick
Blvd. It is large enough to accommodate the storage facility but would impact Evanston
residents (see Figure 3). The site is currently owned by the MWRD and would have to
be leased or purchased from them.
This site meets the all the criterion:
• Salt Storage Site Requirements
• Location, Truck Access and Safety
• Adequate Drainage & Visual Screening
• Cost Considerations
This site is most centrally located with an existing signal @ Noyes Street & Green bay
Avenue. There are approximately 257 residential addresses within 1,000 feet of the
proposed location. The existing bike path needs to be relocated.
The estimated construction cost for the proposed salt dome at this location is $948,000
including brine and blending equipment installation
12
7
Because of the preliminary nature of this discussion, Staff has not approached the
MWRD and will do so based on Council direction.
Non City Owned Alternative Site: Open Space North of District 65 Headquarters –
Figure 4
This publicly held site on the northwest corner of Church Street and McDaniel Avenue
offers an open site in a centralized location with excellent truck access to McCormick
Blvd. It is large enough to accommodate the storage facility but would impact residents
in Evanston and Skokie (see Figure 4). The site is currently owned by the MWRD and
would have to be leased or purchased from them.
This site meets the all the criterion:
• Salt Storage Site Requirements
• Location, Truck Access and Safety
• Adequate Drainage & Visual Screening
• Cost Considerations
There are approximately 168 Evanston and 89 Skokie residential addresses within
1,000 feet of the proposed location.
The estimated construction cost for the proposed salt dome at this location is $948,000
including brine and blending equipment installation.
Because of the preliminary nature of this discussion, Staff has not approached MWRD
or District 65 and will do so based on Council direction
Considered but rejected sites:
Modified Service Center Location
The existing Service Center site does not work well for salt storage because it fails to
meet the primary selection criteria related to:
• Salt Storage Site Requirements
• Truck access & Safety
Not only is the site too small for a 4,000-ton storage facility, it is too small for the
existing 2,500-ton facility. The undersized, highly congested site provides very poor
truck access, maneuverability and safety. It is also in very close proximity to residential
areas with 711 residential addresses and 189 non-residential addresses within 1,000
feet of the dome. The City often receives noise complaints from residents whose quality
of life is impacted during our winter operations. These complaints have increased in the
last two years as a result of the snow melting operation.
The modified site at the Service Center requires a use agreement or acquisition of
property owned by Northwestern University. While this modified configuration
13
8
somewhat improves traffic flow, it is still considered to be a poor site due to the close
proximity to residential areas, poor truck access, and doesn’t provide space for the
much needed construction materials and equipment storage space.
Removal of the existing salt dome will provide safer vehicle operation and badly needed
storage space at the Service Center for storing construction debris and heavy
equipment.
Other privately-owned locations in commercial/industrial areas on truck routes were
found to be of suitable size to accommodate a salt storage facility, but the cost of
purchasing them could not be justified because they did not provide any significant
advantages over a municipally-owned site with respect to access to arterial truck routes
and distance from residential areas.
2424 Oakton
In close proximity to the James Park compost site, 2424 Oakton shares many its
attributes. It is, however, privately owned and the area under consideration for the salt
dome is now being commercially developed.
This site cannot meet:
• Cost Considerations
North Shore Towing Lot
Located on the north side of Oakton Street just east of the North Shore Channel this site
is large enough to accommodate the storage facility, provides good truck access to
McCormick Boulevard, and would have only 16 residential addresses within 1,000 ft. of
the site.
However the lot is currently not for sale and the owner is not interested in selling.
Beyond that, the existing driveway is already heavily used and can become quite
congested as materials and vehicles are frequently moved about increasing the City’s
liability exposure. Additionally there may be contaminated soils that would need testing
and remediation. The truck access drive may need to be modified to accommodate
additional truck traffic. While the location does provide direct access to a primary route,
it is located on the south end of the City. Finally, the owner was contacted and has no
interest in selling or leasing the property
Therefore, the site fails to meet the criteria for:
• Location, Truck Access and Safety
• Cost Considerations
• Availability
• Regulatory
14
9
Junkyard Lot
(Property located in Southwest TIF).
This site located just northeast of North Shore Towing has many of the same qualities
as North Shore Towing. It is large enough to accommodate the storage facility, but has
possible contaminated soil, and an owner who is unwilling to sell or lease at this time.
In addition, the site does not provide direct access to a primary and residential city
street. The site is currently accesses via an alley. The alley access provides indirect
access to Main Street a primary route. This intersection is a highly congested area that
would not be conducive to making a left turn to access McCormick a necessity as the
quickest route to the north end of the City.
The site fails to meet the criteria:
• Location, Truck Access and Safety
• Cost Considerations
• Availability
• Regulatory
Any benefits provided by these alternative sites would not appear justified given the
added costs of purchasing and modifying these sites.
Recommendation
It is recommended that a salt storage facility be constructed at a site that is of ample
size and configured to accommodate a 4,000-ton storage facility, provide additional
storage for salt spreaders and plows, salt brine operation and liquid storage tanks with
quick access to primary routes. Staff believes that both the Ashland and Noyes site and
the open space adjacent to the District 65 Headquarters Building to be the most
advantageous to the City because the sites are centrally located, provide immediate
access to a primary route, are the least costly to construct from an operational, and
more readily available for occupancy. With approval of the A&PW/City Council, the
next steps in the process would be to further research the alternative selected by the
City Council.
15
10
Attachment A
Dome Style Salt Storage Facility
Gambrel Style Salt Storage Facility
16
Attachment B - Figure 1
17
12
Attachment B - Figure 1
18
13
Attachment B - Figure 2
19
14
Attachment B - Figure 2
20
15
Attachment B - Figure 3
21
16
Attachment B - Figure 3
22
17
Attachment B - Figure 4
23
18
Attachment B - Figure 4
24
Page 1 of 1
For City Council meeting of May 16, 2011 Item SP2
Update on Council Goal: Safety
For Discussion
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Wally Bobkiewicz, City Manager
Richard Eddington, Chief of Police
Subject: Update on City Council Safety Goal
Date: May 13, 2011
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends consideration of a status report on implementation on the City
Council’s goal regarding safety. The report will be provided at the May 16, 2011 Special
City Council meeting.
Memorandum
25
For City Council meeting of May 16, 2011 Item SP3
Business of the City by Motion: FY2012 Budget Issues & Community Priorities
For Discussion
To: Honorable Mayor Tisdahl and Members of the City Council
From: Wally Bobkiewicz, City Manager
Subject: FY2012 Budget Issues and Community Priorities
Date: May 13, 2011
On March 22, 2011, the City of Evanston held its first public meeting in preparation for
the fiscal year 2012 budget process. During this meeting, staff provided a summary of
the major financial issues facing the City in FY2012 and beyond. The following items
were among the financial issues identified at the meeting:
• Insufficient Revenue Growth – Staff projects City revenues will be outpaced by
expenditures in future years. City revenues are projected to increase at a rate of
2% annually in FY2012 and FY2013. In contrast, expenditures are projected to
increase at a rate of 4% annually for the next two fiscal years. Staff anticipates a
General Fund deficit of $1.4M in FY2012 and a deficit of $3.2M in FY2013 as a
result of this shortfall.
• Personnel Costs – Although staffing has been reduced by 10% since FY2006-
07, personnel costs still represent approximately 77% of the City’s operating
budget. It is unlikely that additional staff reductions can be made without
negatively impacting City services.
• Capital Needs – City infrastructure improvements have been delayed due to
competing priorities and a lack of available funding. By delaying infrastructure
improvements the City has produced a backlog of capital projects. Additionally,
the City’s high level of general obligation debt will result in limited opportunities
for funding future capital projects with debt. To address this issue, staff has
proposed a $2M transfer from the General Fund to fund capital projects in future
years. This proposal would increase the projected General Fund deficit to $3.4M
in FY2012 and $5.2M in FY2013.
Engage Evanston
After identifying the City’s major financial issues at the March 22, 2011, meeting, staff
provided an explanation of the FY2012 budget planning process. The first stage of the
Memorandum
26
2
process involved soliciting input and ideas from the community with the goal of
generating solutions and strategies to address the City’s projected budget deficit. This
process, called “Engage Evanston,” took place May 1-7, 2011, and was promoted by
staff at several community locations and events throughout the City including a
Community Budget Meeting at the Civic Center on May 5, 2011.
Engage Evanston directed residents to a section of the City website where they could
submit questions, comments and suggestions related to the FY2012 budget process.
Residents could also submit ideas by calling into the City’s 311 Center and written
comments were received at the Civic Center and the Community Centers. When ideas
were posted on the Engage Evanston website, residents could comment on each
suggestion and indicate whether they supported or opposed the item.
Through the Engage Evanston publicity campaign, the City received approximately 175
budget-related ideas and suggestions from residents. A complete list of resident
comments has been attached for your information. These comments will be presented
and further discussed at the Community Budget Meetings scheduled for September,
2011.
Priority-Based Budgeting
Staff will utilize the Priority-Based Budgeting (PBB) approach for developing the FY2012
budget. The PBB approach involves a comprehensive review of existing programs and
services and ranks these items based on their influence relative to the City’s overall
priorities. The first step in this process is to identify and define the City’s priorities. To
identify a City’s priorities, the PBB approach recommends consulting the organization’s
Strategic Plan. Staff reviewed the City’s Strategic Plan, the Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report (CAFR) and the City Council’s 2011 Goals and generated the following
list of functional areas for City Council consideration:
• General Management and Support Services
• Public Safety
• Public Works and Utilities
• Health and Human Services
• Recreation and Cultural Opportunities
• Diverse Housing Options
• Economic Viability
• Environmental Sustainability
• City Council Goals
The next stage of the PBB process is the development of a City Services Inventory. A
list of City services, which will be evaluated as part of this inventory, has been attached
for your information. For each service listed, staff will provide programmatic information
to assist with the evaluation and prioritization process. The City Services Information
form to be completed for each program has also been attached for your information.
Upon completion of the inventory, each service will be scored based on various
program attributes and relevance to the City’s priorities as listed above.
27
3
Ideas for Service Changes
In relation to budget development for 2012, it will be important for the City to continue to
look at the best and most cost effective way to deliver services. As a result of the ideas
submitted through Engage Evanston, a list has been developed of potential service
changes. The Budget Team will work with City staff to analyze the viability of the ideas
listed over the next two months, at which time they will be discussed at length with the
City Council to determine if they are feasible and should be implemented. The City’s
employees will be engaged during the review process to give thoughts and comments
about the service change ideas. Only after a full discussion with the City Council will
the ideas on the attached list become viable. At this time the City will take the usual
and customary steps relative to any impacts of the changes on members of staff.
The City of Evanston continues to face uncertainty as it relates to its future and the
ability to provide a full array of services. The staff will continue to work diligently to find
the best and most cost effective ways to do so with the least amount of impact on all of
its stakeholders.
Next Steps
The next meeting to discuss the FY2012 budget process will be held on August 8, 2011.
During this meeting, staff will provide updates to the City Council and public regarding
the following items:
• Program Prioritization Summary – Based on the results of the City Services
Inventory, programs will be scored and ranked relative to their influence on
overall City priorities. This program prioritization summary will provide the basis
for staff’s service reduction and elimination proposals.
• Recommended Program Reductions / Eliminations – Staff will propose a series
of potential service reductions and eliminations for City Council consideration.
The proposed list of service reductions will be discussed throughout the budget
process and program reductions approved by the City Council will be
incorporated into the FY2012 Budget.
• Revised General Fund Deficit Projection – Staff will continually monitor the City’s
financial performance throughout 2011. From this analysis, staff will provide an
updated General Fund deficit projection for FY2012 and FY2013 during the
August 8, 2011 meeting.
• Comparable Community Survey – This survey will compare the City Evanston
with ten communities of similar size, demographics and characteristics. The goal
of this survey is to compare and contrast the various methods utilized by these
communities to address their budget issues.
Community Budget Meetings will be held in September, 2011 to discuss the City service
reductions and eliminations proposed by staff. Dates for these meetings will be
28
4
announced in the coming months. The Proposed FY2012 Budget will be published on
October 7, 2011.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachments:
Engage Evanston Response Summary
City Services and Programs List
City Services and Programs Inventory Template
Ideas for Service Changes
29
Engage Evanston Response SummaryFor 5‐16‐11 Council MeetingIdeaDate Idea Posted # Likes # Dislikes TotalLease Space in Civic Center4/29/201177869Allow Alcohol Sales at Park Events4/29/2011902268Email Paycheck Stubs Rather than Printing4/29/2011862165Require NU to Collect Trash After Football Games5/2/201171764Sell Advertisement Space in City Publications4/29/2011681058Increase Collections for Damage to City Property4/29/201160357Charge for Staffing Time at Special Events4/29/201161655Utilize a More Fuel Efficient Fleet4/29/201159554Rent Space to a Food Vendor at the Civic Center4/29/2011711754Charge Other Communities More for our Water5/2/201156353Allow Food Vendor Trucks5/2/201159950Sell Water to More Communities4/29/201156650Reduce Police and Fire Department Overtime Costs4/29/2011601149Increase Northwestern University Athletic Tax4/29/2011591346Renovate/Rent or Sell Property to South of Art Center5/2/201149445Increase Fees for Special Events Permits4/29/201151744Cut The Salaries Of the City Manager & Aldermen5/3/2011551243Increase Fines for Building Violations4/29/2011551342Transfer Cost of Crossing Guards to Schools4/29/2011591841Reduce the Number of Times We Clean the Streets4/29/2011561541Continue to Support the Ecology Center5/5/2011491039Support the Ecology Center4/29/2011592039Increase False Alarm Fees4/29/2011571239Increase Ambulance Transport Fee to Medicare Allowable Rate4/29/2011491237Place Advertisements on the City's Website4/29/2011572037Ask Schools to Pay for the School Resource Officer (SRO)4/29/2011461036Develop a Street Clean‐ups Volunteer Program4/29/2011441034Change all Incandescent Light Fixtures to Compact Fluorescent4/29/2011491534Reduce the City Vehicle Fleet4/29/2011461234Share Use of Northwestern University Facilities4/29/2011471334Save Local Retailers5/3/201141833Increase and Enforce Leaf Blower Ban and Fine5/2/2011471433Sell Advertising Rights on City Vehicles4/29/2011502030Privatize Mangement of the Noyes Cultural Arts Center5/2/2011411427Expand the Arts Festivals4/29/2011431825Implement a 401k Program for Employees instead of a Pension5/5/2011371324Increase Ticketing for Failure to Remove Snow from Walkways5/4/2011351223Institute Regularized (and Mandatory) Payments to the City from Hospitals and Universities5/2/201143202330
Engage Evanston Response SummaryFor 5‐16‐11 Council MeetingIdeaDate Idea Posted # Likes # Dislikes TotalCreate a Boat Marina4/29/2011543123Include Composting in Yard Waste Pickup5/2/2011341222Implement a Compost Program5/5/201126521Create a Cost Containing and Environmentally Sustainable Alley Surface Program5/5/201124420Recycle Old Garbage Containers as Compost Bins5/5/201124420Broadcast All City Meetings on the Web5/5/201123419Sell the Civic Center5/2/2011402119Advertise Landscaping Services in Sponsored Gardens4/29/2011301119Reduce the Number of Studies the City is Contracting Out For5/6/201121318Stop funding the Technolgy Inovation Center5/4/201127918Create a Long Term Strategy for Reducing Debt5/6/201117116Cut the Health Center if it Duplicates State & County Programs5/5/201116016Increase Ticketing for Code Offenses5/5/201122616Eliminate the Township5/8/201116115Eliminate Medical Benefits for City Council Members5/6/201119415Consider Reducing the Salaries of the City Manager, Mayor, & Alderman5/6/201119415Use Library Fines to Support the Library Budget5/5/201121615Stop Subsidizing Businesses in Downtown5/2/2011291415Privatize Tree Maintenance4/29/2011372314Higher Vehicle Sticker Price for Large Vehicles5/8/201116313Reduce the use of Credit Cards5/6/201113112Add a Boat Marina5/4/2011342212Require Fee for Replacing Damaged or Missing Garbage Carts4/29/2011342212Perform a Value Analysis Ranking5/5/201116511Replace Consultants with NU Students & Professors5/4/2011231310Pick up Regular Garbage Every 10 Days Instead of Every 7 Days5/2/2011392910Charge Fee for Block Parties4/29/2011413110Remove Intergovernmental Affairs Coordinator position5/6/20111239Outsource Management of Robert Crown5/5/20111789Control Public Safety Costs5/8/2011918Bring a Costco or Wal‐Mart to Evanston5/6/201118108Increase Fees for Businesses that want to Encroach on the Sidewalk5/6/20111468Give the Tilted Kilt their Liquor License5/5/201125178Eliminate Block Grants to the Arts for Studies5/5/20111798Evaluate the MWEBE Coordinator Position5/9/2011707Budget Meeting with Northwestern University Officials5/8/20111037Eliminate Support for the Evanston Community Media Center5/6/20111257Leverage the City’s Intellectual Capital for Volunteers5/6/20111037Make Better Use of the Maple St. Garage5/6/201181731
Engage Evanston Response SummaryFor 5‐16‐11 Council MeetingIdeaDate Idea Posted # Likes # Dislikes TotalReview Parks & Recreation Programs that do not Break Even in Terms of Cost5/6/20111477Mail out Tickets to Drivers who Fail to Yield to Emergency Vehicles5/5/20111587Cancel the Community Picnic & Starlight Concerts5/4/201128217Electric Car Recharging Station5/5/20111486Consider Appropriate Lakefront Development5/4/201130246Pool City Services with Surrounding Municipalities4/29/201127216Space Out Costs of Street Repair4/29/201121156Reduce City Council from 9 Alderman to 55/8/20111055Allow Everyone in Evanston to use NU Circulator Buses5/8/2011945Compare the City of Evanston with other Comparable Communities5/6/2011945Increase Jobs in the City of Evanston by Going Green (e.g. Solar)5/6/20111055Environmental City Stickers5/5/201118135School Art Work Displayed at Stores, Cafes, Etc.5/5/20111055Increase Efficiency of City Employees5/8/2011734A Strong Evanston Union Negotiator5/8/2011404Consolidate Taxes/Fees5/8/2011514Temporary Salary Cut and No COLA Increases5/5/20111844Support the Arts and the Noyes Cultural Arts Center5/9/2011853Repaint Faded Crosswalk Striping on Roads by Volunteers5/8/2011633Prepare a Priority‐Based Climate Action Plan5/8/2011633Intergovernmental Coordination5/8/2011523Increase the Differential for Parks & Recreation Classes5/9/2011202Raise Taxes 1 percent Above What is Needed for Police and Firefighters Pensions5/9/2011642Partner/Faciliate Development of Air Rights over CTA and Metra5/8/2011532Install Alternators on Equipment to Generate Free Electricity5/5/2011872Evaluate the EPD Rank Structure5/9/2011101Consolidate the Park Districts5/9/2011321Evaluate the Youth Coordinator Position5/9/2011431Budget Meeting with State Officials5/8/2011431Drop Plan to Add Yellow Line Stops in Evanston5/8/2011431Increase Affordable Housing5/5/201115141Charge a Fee for Sledding at James Park5/9/2011110Community Events5/9/2011000Charge Rental for Use of City Buildings5/9/2011000Comment Policy5/9/2011000Outsource Work to Not‐For‐Profits5/8/2011660Sell / Retire Snow Melters5/8/2011330Create a Plan for Funding Various Parking Facilities5/6/2011000Budget meeting 9‐29‐10 Response List4/29/201100032
Engage Evanston Response SummaryFor 5‐16‐11 Council MeetingIdeaDate Idea Posted # Likes # Dislikes TotalTransfer Cost of Resource Officers to District 2024/29/2011000Require Non‐Resident Permits for Parking by Metra or CTA Stations5/9/201101‐1Create a Large, Thriving, Revenue‐Generating Community House.5/9/201101‐1Sell Unopened Alley Land5/9/201101‐1Increase Retirement Age for City Pensions5/9/201123‐1Encourage Home‐Based Businesses5/8/201123‐1Offer Free or Low‐Priced Rain Barrels5/9/201113‐2Participatory Budgeting5/8/201113‐2Charge More for Parking5/8/201135‐2Develop a City Dog Park5/5/2011911‐2Continue to Support Mental Health Services5/9/201125‐3Contract Out/In City Street & Park Maintenance5/8/201169‐3Contract out City Finance Services5/8/201147‐3Develop the Evanston Brand – Green, Intellectual, Progressive5/6/201169‐3Consider Lowering Salaries Before Instituting Layoffs5/6/2011710‐3Create a 100 Year Plan for Water, Sewer, Roads, Alleys & Lighting5/6/201158‐3Make Public Transportation More Affordable5/6/201169‐3More Community Arts Cafes5/6/2011710‐3Build a Sports Center5/5/2011811‐3Recruit More Discount Stores5/5/2011912‐3Increase Animal Licensing Fees4/29/20113235‐3Pick up all Refuse in Alleys, Not Streets5/8/201115‐4Eliminate Resident‐Driven Traffic Calming5/8/201126‐4Cut Back on Street Cleaning5/8/201126‐4Natural Resource Conservation5/8/201126‐4Alternate Week Recycling5/8/201137‐4Remove Volunteer Coordinator Position5/6/2011510‐5Buy a Lottery Ticket5/8/201139‐6Encouraging the Construction of World Class Performing Arts Facilities5/4/20111521‐6Sell Naming Rights of the Beach and Facilities4/29/20112632‐6Outsourcing Programs5/8/2011310‐7"Green" the Civic Center Building5/8/201107‐7Contract out City Engineering Services5/8/2011613‐7Adjust Employee Hours to 10‐Hr Days and 4‐Day Weeks4/29/20112633‐7Voluntary Additional Charge on Evanston Passenger Car Stickers4/29/20111734‐7Build a Sustainable Communal Center5/5/2011614‐8Allow Tower to be Built if City Gets Some Floors of Space for New Civic Center5/5/20111624‐8Outsource Evanston's Human Resource Function5/3/20113745‐8Cut Pensions5/2/20113341‐833
Engage Evanston Response SummaryFor 5‐16‐11 Council MeetingIdeaDate Idea Posted # Likes # Dislikes TotalHave Residents Share Garbage Containers5/6/2011514‐9Sell Annual Pass as Option to Meters5/2/20111423‐9Contract Out/In City Forestry Services5/8/2011414‐10Recycle the Beach Tokens5/4/2011717‐10Cut Positions5/4/20111626‐10Eliminate Petty Parking Tickets5/5/2011920‐11Charge for Waste Collection by Weight4/29/20112637‐11Enforce a Residency Requirement for City Employees5/8/2011416‐12Keep the North Branch Open5/5/20111629‐13Eliminate the Christmas Tree Pick‐up Program5/5/2011924‐15Implement a Head Tax5/5/2011622‐16File For Bankruptcy5/5/2011118‐17Build a Small Convention Center5/4/20111027‐17Have Property Owners Remove Their Own Grafitti4/29/20112542‐17Forgo Free Parking for First Hour4/29/20111943‐24Charge for Use of Fire Engines for Motor Vehicle Accidents4/29/20111742‐25Free Parking in Downtown5/4/2011733‐26Expand Township Duties and Responsibilities4/29/20111037‐27Renovate North Branch Space5/2/20111545‐30Add More Parking Meters4/29/20111748‐31Install Red Light Cameras4/29/20112256‐34Close the Noyes Cultural Arts Center5/3/20112261‐39Eliminate Yard Waste Collection Service4/29/2011958‐49Charge a City of Evanston Job Application Fee4/29/2011859‐5134
List of City Services
City Manager’s Office
Administration
Citizen Engagement
Sustainability Programs
Intergovernmental Relations
Law
Administration
Contracts / Transactions
Administrative Adjudication
Liquor Licensing
Litigation
Administrative Services
Administration
Revenue Operations
Payroll
Accounting
Purchasing
Human Resources
Information Technology
Parking Enforcement
Parking Structures
Community & Economic Development
Administration
Planning and Zoning
Housing Code Compliance
Housing Rehabilitation
Building Plan Review and Inspection Services
Affordable Housing and Homeless Services
Economic Development
Neighborhood Stabilization Program
Community Development Block Grant
Fire
Administration
Fire Suppression
Special Response Teams
Emergency Medical Services
Fire Prevention Bureau
Public Education
1 of 335
Health
Administration
Dental Services
Food and Environmental Health
Vital Records
Community Health / Mental Health Board
Library
Administration
Children’s Services
Adult Services
Neighborhood Services
Circulation
Technical Services
Maintenance
Police
Chief of Police
Patrol Operations
Criminal Investigation
Social Services Bureau
Juvenile Bureau
School Liaison
Police Records
Communications
Service Desk - 311
Public Information
Neighborhood Enforcement Team
Traffic Bureau
Community Strategic Bureau
Animal Control
Problem solving Team
Emergency Telephone System
Public Works
Administration
Street Sweeping
Business District Maintenance
Street and Alley Maintenance
Snow Removal Operations
Engineering
Traffic Engineering
Street Light and Signal Maintenance
Recycling Collection and Disposal
Refuse Collection and Disposal
Yard Waste Collection and Disposal
2 of 336
3 of 3
Fleet Services
Parks, Recreation and Community Services
Administration
Communication and Marketing
Robert Crown Community Center & Ice Rink
Chandler-Newberger Community Center
Fleetwood-Jordain Community Center
Fleetwood-Jordain Theater
Levy Center/Senior Services
Beaches and Boat Facilities
Special Recreation
Park Services
Indoor/Outdoor Recreation Programs
Community Services/Youth Engagement
Horticultural Maintenance
Forestry
Ecology Center
Noyes Cultural Arts Center
Cultural Arts Programs
Facility Maintenance, Construction and Repair
Special Events
Utilities
Water Operations
Pumping
Filtration
Distribution
Meter Maintenance
Sewer Operations
37
1
City Services Information
Community Budget Planning Session
May 16, 2011
1. Name of Service:
2. Service Description:
3. Employees delivering the service (add additional rows if necessary):
Job Title
(list one title per row)
Full-Time Equivalents
(FTE) per Job Title
Number of Employees per
Job Title
TOTAL:
4. Financial Information:
Year Revenues Expenditures
FY 2008-09 Actual
FY 2009-10 Actual
FY 2010-11 Actual
FY 2011 Budget
5. What amount and percentage of the cost of service are recovered?
6. Is the service mandated? If so, please check the mandating agency and provide
additional information regarding statute number, ordinance, resolution, etc.
Local State Federal Other
38
2
7. Has there been a change in demand for this service? Check the appropriate box
below and provide an explanation.
Increase in demand Decrease in demand No change
8. Is there an alternative provider of this service?
9. Opportunities for Innovation:
10. Additional Information (if necessary):
39
IDEAS FOR SERVICE CHANGES -
EVALUATE AND DEVELOP IMPLEMENTATION
PROPOSALS
Citywide
1. Youth Services Programs (at-risk youth, youth employment)
2. Ensure Proper Employee Classifications for Work Done
3. Salary and Benefits Model for All Classifications
4. Fees and Charges for All Services (sidewalk encroachment, impact
fees, false alarm fees, vehicle stickers)
5. Enforcement of All Code Offenses
6. Shared Use of Programs/Services with Northwestern University,
Evanston Hospital, St. Francis Hospital, Villages of Skokie, Wilmette
and Lincolnwood
7. Special Events
8. Alcohol Sales at City Facilities
9. Increased Collections of Money Owed to City (fines, taxes, property
damage)
10. Use of Volunteers
Administrative Services/City Manager’s Office/Law
11. Public and Government Cable Television Access Program
12. Costs of Citywide Cell Phone Use
13. Parking Enforcement/Parking Fees Program
14. Crossing Guard Program
15. Accounting, Purchasing, Payroll (contract in/out)
16. Information Technology (contract in/out)
17. Properties Exempted from Property Taxes
Community and Economic Development
18. Minority/Women/Evanston-Owned Business Program
19. Affordable Housing/Emergency Housing Assistance Programs
20. Use of TIF District / Economic Development Funds
Fire
21. Evaluation for Department-wide Efficiencies
Health
22. Community Health Initiatives
Library
23. Evaluation for Department-wide Efficiencies
1 of 240
2 of 2
Parks, Recreation and Community Services
24. All Recreation Programs (costs, revenues, registration, advertisement)
25. Forestry Services (contract in/out)
26. Park Maintenance (contract in/out)
27. Noyes Cultural Arts Center
28. Lighthouse Landing Facilities
29. Ecology Center
30. Chandler/Neuberger Community Center
31. Identify Space for Rental – Civic Center
Police
32. Evaluation for Department-wide Efficiencies
Public Works
33. City Vehicle Fleet Program (contract in/out)
34. Street Maintenance Program (contract in/out)
35. Refuse, Recycling, Yard Waste and Street Sweeping Program
(contract in/out)
36. City Alley Maintenance and Improvement Program
37. Engineering and Street Light Services (contract in/out)
Utilities
38. Evaluation for Department-wide Efficiencies
39. Water Sales to Other Communities
41