12/13/2004MINUTES
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
DECEMBER 13, 2004
The village board met at 7:00 p.m. as a committee of the whole in the board room of the
village hall on Monday, December 13, 2004. In attendance were:
Village Board
Robert Benton, Trustee
Jerry Kayne, Trustee
Harriet Rosenthal, Trustee
William Seiden, Trustee
Vernon Swanson, Trustee
Matthew Wylie, Trustee
(arrived at 8:25 p.m.)
vuo-s+e
1. eater Treatment Stud
Staff
Robert D. Franz, Village Manager
Robert Fialkowski, Director of Finance
Barbara Little, Director of Public Works
and Engineering
Philip Kiraly, Asst. to the Village Manager
Gregory Rackow, Administrative Intern
The board was informed that no decisions were expected this evening on the
wastewater treatment report. The objective was to present the consultant's
findings and determine what further information might needed to make decisions
as part of the 2005-06 budget process.
He then introduced Stanley Consultants, the engineering firm retained by the
village to study Deerfield's Wastewater Treatment System and, particularly, the
treatment plant on Hackberry Road. John Callan introduced the Stanley team that
worked on the project and generally described the objectives of the study
authorized by the board earlier this year. Chris Lucie, Project Director, reported
on the status of the village's "satellite facilities", the nine remote sites in the
village that are an integral part of the sanitary sewer system. He emphasized that
improvement of these facilities will be needed regardless of what plant alternative
is selected by the village.
Frank Tiefert then discussed Stanley's findings on the treatment plant, noting that
some parts of it are 50 years old. It was constructed in 1954 and underwent its
last major plant expansion in 1975. Improvements made to the sanitary system in
the 1980's reduced substantially the amount of excess flow treated at the plant.
However, it was estimated that there is still 30 to 40 million gallons a day (MGD)
in excess flows during heavy rainfall events. The consultant strongly
recommends that the infiltration and inflow (I&I) problem be investigated further.
Two primary alternatives were studied and evaluated by the consultant:
1. Continued village operation of the plant
2. Utilizing regional treatment facilities
Options for continued local operation include:
1. Rehab existing treatment plant by replacing the aging mechanical
components and repairing the structures
2. Convert the plant to an oxidation ditch activated sludge process
3. A combination of the first two alternatives
Costs of these alternatives ranged from $12million to over $25 million.
James Smith discussed regionalization opportunities; noting that the village is
within reach of three regional treatment districts
1. Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MSD)
2. North Shore Sanitary District (NSSD)
3. Lake County Public Works (LCPW)
The MSD was not interested in adding areas outside of Cook County. NSSD was
interested but, due to inadequate capacity at their Clavey Road facility,
Deerfield's sewage would have to be transported 15 miles north to Gurnee, and
this is not a practical solution. Lake County Public Works appears interested and
has capacity at the nearly Des Plaines River plant located 4 miles west of
Deerfield. There is an existing 36" force main owned by NSSD on Lake Cook
Road that could be used by the village. The village would have to construct a
new force main from a new pump station at the existing plant.
Costs for the regionalization options are projected from $24 million and up.
Other factors to be considered are the staffing requirements and the loss of local
control of the sanitary treatment operation. The consultants emphasized that, in
order to maintain treatment while the design and construction of the selected
alternative is implemented, certain improvements will be needed at the plant.
At this point, Stanley believes the best alternative is for the village to continue
operation of its treatment plant with the improvements recommended under
Alternate 1. The infrastructure upgrades would occur over a 5 to 7 year period
and would handle Deerfield's sanitary treatment needs for 20 years and beyond.
A cost of service rate analysis was performed to recommend sewer rates that
would fund these various alternatives. Expenses include operating cost and
financing for capital improvements. Stanley estimates the current average
payment of $16 per month could increase by as much as $30 per month. They
noted that even after such an increase, the monthly fees would not be substantially
different from similar fees in neighboring communities.
In response to questions from the board and audience, Stanley advised that one
year would be needed to plan and design the improvements, and two years would
be needed for construction. Also, there don't appear to be any alternatives for
Deerfield to join adjacent communities to jointly treat wastewater.
It was agreed that the board will further consider the consultant's findings and
discuss the matter in more detail early next year.
2. Lake Cook Road Improvements
Barbara Little described to the board Lake Cook Road improvements proposed by
the Cook County Highway Department. They have completed their preliminary
design plans and are ready to proceed with final plans for improvements at
Huehl/Birchwood and Wilmot Roads involving intersection improvements and
concrete patching from Pfingsten to Wilmot.
The larger project is widening to six lanes that section of Lake Cook Road
between Pfingsten and east of Ellendale that will include major intersection
improvements at Waukegan Road. The project will also include removing the
bridge under the Lake Cook/Pfingsten intersection that will require closing
Pfingsten for a two week period.
The street widening will impact access to businesses in the area due to the
installation of barrier medians on all four legs of the Waukegan/Lake Cook Road
intersection. The county needs ROW from several of these property owners,
which may delay the start of the project now projected in 2006.
The county has two construction staging proposals on which they would like
village input. One involves a two-year project spreading out the improvements
between two construction seasons. The other is a more accelerated time frame
where some work would be completed in the fall and the balance during the
following year. Both involve reductions to one lane in each direction, with left
turn lanes provided at intersections.
The village could request landscaped medians if it is willing to assume
maintenance responsibilities. Some medians will be as wide at 16'. The
difficulty in maintaining these areas was noted by some trustees.
Board members discussed the proposed plans, indicating that they would prefer a
shorter construction period if possible. They directed staff to meet with the
various businesses/owners along the construction route to inform them of the
improvements and garner their input. The county would like some reaction from
the village in early 2005.
3. 2004 ProveProveM Tax Lev
The proposed 2004 property tax levy was discussed at the request of Trustee
Seiden. He felt that due to the level of surplus in the General Fund, the increase
in the levy that was discussed by the board in the spring and included in the
approved budget was not necessary. Trustee Rosenthal stated that the board had
discussed the necessity of raising the levy to keep pace with increased expenditure
levels, to offset the declining revenues from the hotel/motel tax and investment
income, and to begin funding the infrastructure needs of the Village. Trustee
Swanson indicated that he too would support the increased levy to augment the
infrastructure replacement funding. The levy ordinance has to be filed by the last
Tuesday in December. The second reading of the levy ordinances will be at the
December 200' village board meeting.
4. Takeda Annexation
The board was informed of the schedule involving Takeda Pharmaceuticals'
annexation and development proposal for the northeast corner of Lake Cook and
Saunders. A public hearing on annexation is scheduled for the January 3`d board
meeting, at which time the plan commission report and recommendation also will
be before the board.
The draft annexation agreement will be sent to the board early for its review. One
item which has not been resolved is the "incentives" in which Takeda has
indicated an interest without requesting a specific amount. They have advised
that the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity has offered
substantial monetary incentives and have indicated that these generally trigger
incentives from the local community. The board will continue to keep an open
mind on the issue.
5. Village Hall Expansion Project
Staff discussed with the board its plans for the expansion of the village hall to
incorporate the department of community development. This was originally
discussed in 2000, at which time it was decided that only the police department
would be renovated. Now that West Deerfield Township is due to vacate the
annex in late March, the village can proceed with the expansion and renovation of
the village hall.
The concept of design -build was reviewed with the board. It differs from the
more traditional design -bid -build in two ways:
a. The design and construction components are packaged into a
single contract. That single firm works with the owner to develop
and execute a construction project from start to finish.
b. The single contract is not necessarily awarded to the low bidder
after competitive bidding. Rather, the contract is awarded on the
basis of whose proposal has the best value in meeting the interests
of the village and meeting the objectives of the project.
The board briefly discussed the concept, with Trustee Wylie, most familiar with
it, sharing his views on the matter. Staff will continue finalizing plans for the
project and keep the board informed of its progress.
6. Facade Rebate Pro ramp
Property owners have inquired whether multiple buildings on one lot could each
receive the $50,000 rebate and whether that same interpretation could apply to
separate parking lots on the same lot. The board briefly discussed the matter and
directed that the rebates should be on a per lot basis, with a maximum of $50,000
for building(s) improvements and $50,000 for site improvements.
The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Minutes prepared by:
T. lrMa
-
' •ice