Kane County Reporter

The village of Bartlett Board of Trustees met Oct. 4 to hear from petitioners and residents.

Here are the meeting's minutes, as provided by the board:

--- "VILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT

COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 1 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nPresident Wallace

called the Committee of the Whole meeting to order at 7:16 p.m.\r\nPRESENT: Trustee

Arends (via webcam), Camerer, Carbonaro, Deyne, Hopkins,\r\nReinke, and President

Wallace\r\nABSENT: None\r\nALSO PRESENT: Village Administrator Valerie Salmons,

Assistant Administrator\r\nPaula Schumacher, Assistant to the Village Administrator

Scott Skrycki, Finance\r\nDirector Jeff Martynowicz, Director of Public Works Dan

Dinges, Community\r\nDevelopment Director Jim Plonczynski, Assistant Community Development

Director\r\nRoberta Grill, Economic Development Coordinator Tony Fradin, Building

Director Brian\r\nGoralski, Food & Beverage Manager Paul Petersen, Police Chief

Kent Williams, Deputy\r\nChief Patrick Ullrich, Village Attorney Bryan Mraz and

Village Clerk Lorna Giless.\r\nPLANNING & ZONING COMMITTEE\r\nAshton Gardens\r\nTrustee

Reinke stated that they will be taking comments from the residents during this\r\nsession

rather than the Village Board meeting. He turned it over to staff and stated that\r\nthey

will talk about the public comments and receive the comments and consider.\r\nCommunity

Development Director Jim Plonczynski stated that Brent Schreiber is there\r\nthis

evening and he is the developer for Ashton Gardens. They are requesting a\r\npreliminary

final PUD plan, a Special Use for a PUD, Special Use for reception banquet\r\nhall

place of assembly, serving of liquor, building height, variations for the reduction

in\r\nthe number of required parking spaces, reduction from the 20 foot interior

parkway\r\nrequirement and to allow one tree for each double parking island (zoning

calls for one\r\ntree for each parking island). The property is currently zoned

as B-3 PUD\r\n(Commercial).\r\nThe concept plan was reviewed by the Village Board

in January 2016. At that time the\r\npetitioner was encouraged to go through a full

submittal. The Village Board Committee\r\nof the Whole in July 2016, reviewed the

petitioner’s request and went forward to the\r\nPlan Commission and a Public Hearing.

The petitioner had submitted a site plan and\r\nfinal PUD plan. It shows a chapel

facility, small office and the banquet hall. The\r\npetitioner has curb cuts proposed

along Devon Avenue as well as Prospect and parking\r\nin the front of the property.

The petitioner went through the Plan Commission review on\r\nAugust 11, 2016 for

both a preliminary PUD, the Special Uses, serving of liquor,\r\nbuilding height

and place of assembly. The Plan Commission recommended approval\r\nsubject to conditions

and findings of fact outlined by the staff in their report. Basically,\r\nthe petition

included kitchen vents and rooftop mechanicals for the reception hall be\r\nlocated

east as far as possible and the rooftop mechanicals be screened. There was \r\nVILLAGE

OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE

MINUTES Page 2 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nalso a request from one

of the Plan Commissioners that incident reports for both Villa\r\nOlivia and Bartlett

Hills be provided to the Trustees. The developer went on to the\r\nZoning Board

of Appeals on September 1, 2016 on the variances for the reduction in\r\nthe interior

parkway (one tree per island) and a reduction in the number of parking\r\nspaces.

The Zoning Board with the court reporter minutes are in the packet and they\r\nvoted

3-2 on the petition for the variances. A positive recommendation from the Zoning\r\nBoard

requires 4 members. That is why it is just a report as the petition stated.\r\nSubsequently,

they received a formal protest to the Special Use from the surrounding\r\nproperty

owners. In the case of a written protest against any proposed Special Use is\r\nacknowledged

by at least 20% of the frontage proposed to be altered or by the owners\r\nof 20%

of the frontage immediately adjoining or across an alley therefrom or by 20% of\r\nthe

frontage directly opposite the frontage that is to be altered. It is filed with

the Village\r\nClerk and the Special Use will be passed by a favorable vote of 2/3

of the Trustee of the\r\nVillage. The protest with the map confirming that the surrounding

residents make up\r\nthe 20% is also included in the packet.\r\nGoing back into

the preliminary PUD plan, Ashton Gardens shows a fence detail\r\nsurrounding the

property that will be a decorative fence to block the view with\r\nlandscaping.

The site will be heavily landscaped around the perimeter. The petitioner\r\nprefers

to put the trees along the perimeter to act as a screening as well as visual effect.\r\nThere

are some trees along the site that need to be removed and they will try to save\r\nsome

of them. The petitioner went through a number of reiterations and concessions\r\nsince

the Committee’s initial review. He has conceded that no outdoor events would\r\noccur

at this location, the Sunday hours would be reduced from a closing time of 12:30\r\nAM

to 10:30 PM, no deliveries or garbage pickup prior to 9:00 AM. The seven trees but\r\nwere

going to be on the islands will be provided around the perimeter of the site. They\r\nexplored

overflow parking if needed for large events that exceed the parking and will\r\nutilize

Metra parking as a viable option and provide shuttle service. The 8 foot high solid\r\nwood

fence around the perimeter is located on the south and west and has increased\r\nover

the original 6 foot. The larger trees would be planted along the perimeter and the\r\nlandscaping

area. A 4 foot high decorative fence with evergreen shrubs will be around\r\nthe

perimeter along Devon and Prospect and screened with additional evergreen\r\nshrubs.

The petitioner has provided information on incident reports in some of his other\r\nfacilities.

There are very little incident reports. There was a property value chart and the\r\npetitioner

has shown that the property values in the surrounding areas have not been\r\nimpacted.

There was a noise analysis done which measures the decibel levels around\r\nthe

property. It does not exceed any of the ambient noise standards. Ashton Gardens\r\nhired

a traffic engineer that did a full site analysis that determines the impact would

be\r\nalmost negligible on that intersection and it operates at a level of service

and our traffic\r\nconsultant concurred with it.\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE

MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 3 of 26

REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nTrustee Reinke suggested, unless there were

objections, they hear from the petitioner\r\nnext, and then the residents, and engage

in their discussions.\r\nBrad Schreiber, Managing Partner and President of Ashton

Gardens thanked the\r\nVillage for entertaining the project. He stated that most

of the important points were\r\ncovered by staff. Since the last meeting, clearly,

some of the items of most concern\r\nwith the neighbors were parking and potential

incidents. He delved way back into their\r\nbusiness back to 2005. He re-created

statistics on 5,050 events. Three out of the four\r\ncurrent operating facilities

that they have, seats 400 guests and the other seats 300\r\nguests. Out of the 5,050

events of 250 guests or more, comes up to 113 events or 2.2%\r\nof all the events.

The average event is 146 guests. It is consistent with the occupancy\r\naccounts

of weddings in the Chicago area which is right at 150 guests. The concern\r\nabout

the parking, at least according to his history, and what proves out to be the history\r\nof

the size of the events in this market, even if they go up to 200+ events, they are

only\r\n16.3% of all of our events. If we do 200 events at the Bartlett facility

they will have\r\napproximately 10 to 15 cars that they would need parking for.

From a business\r\nstandpoint, it would be a good thing but from a realistic standpoint

it just isn’t going to\r\nhappen. He hopes that this will ease the minds of the

Board as well as the public. They\r\nhave overflow and they have a plan for it.

The concerns have been many and the\r\nconversations have been spirited. The facts

prove out to be that it is only on rare\r\noccasion that they will experience enough

to require overflow parking.\r\nAnother concern that came up had to do with potential

incidents of their guests drinking,\r\ndriving through the neighborhoods, driving

over lawns, harming pets, doing other foul\r\nthings in people’s yards. To add some

validity to prior presentations, in the past 12\r\nyears or 5,050 events, they have

had four reported incidents. All of very minor concern:\r\na gentleman fell asleep

in his car and had a cell phone stolen; one incident of the four,\r\nrelative to

alcohol consumption was a couple that wanted more alcohol after the bar\r\nclosed

and management would not serve them so their local security rectified the\r\nproblem.

The Seville had 39 incidents over the course of two years of certainly more\r\nmajor

situations than they had. There was theft, domestic issues, public drunkenness\r\nand

that sort of thing.\r\nThey have stated that the level of professionalism and their

conscientiousness or the\r\nsafety of their guests and neighbors and or employees

and the public proves out in\r\nthese incident facts. He does not present that to

pose an argument to the public but\r\nhopes that it will give them a feeling of

who they are and how they do business and the\r\nlevel of concern and professionalism

how they manage their business. They have made\r\nsome concessions, changed their

event times, moved trees to the south side of the\r\nproperty, adjusted their landscape

plan and deliveries. They do have private security\r\nwhich will be off-duty or

retired police officers. They bring a lot to the community and\r\nwill have 40+

employees that will be hired locally and he hoped that some of them\r\nwould be

from the direct neighbors. They bring over $1 million of other spending such \r\nVILLAGE

OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE

MINUTES Page 4 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nas local DJs, cake bakers,

florists, officiates and rehearsal dinners, etc. The competition\r\nfor Bartlett

Hills, speaking on capacity, we have dates that are requested that are\r\nbooked,

they would refer dates to other neighboring facilities as well as rehearsal\r\ndinners.

Most rehearsal dinners are in the vicinity of the facility because it just makes\r\nsense.

They would support local restaurants and the more people that visit them or\r\nBartlett

Hills, the better for all of us. When they come to this area they are not just going\r\nto

look at us, they are going to look at other facilities in the area. There is reason

they\r\ncould choose one over the other and it could be size, outdoor feel of a

country club,\r\nprice, and those are the other reasons how they enhance other local

businesses. It is\r\nnot just a matter of fact, but a model of their business and

how they support local\r\nbusinesses as best they can. They want to be good neighbors

and support the\r\ncommunity at every possible opportunity.\r\nPresident Wallace

asked how many events they actually book as compared to how\r\nmany visit the facility?\r\nMr.

Schreiber stated that each property hosted 1,000 tours per year. They can only do\r\n200

weddings and their booking rate is somewhere in the low 20%. Certainly if there

is\r\na way that they could recommend and send business over there, they would certainly\r\ndo

so.\r\nPresident Wallace asked what the reason was for losing that many possible

bookings.\r\nMr. Schreiber stated that Saturday nights are booked first and there

are only 52 of\r\nthose. The number one reason is availability and the second reason

is price. There are\r\na lot of other facilities in the markets that are less expensive

than they are.\r\nPresident Wallace asked what the average price per plate is.\r\nMr.

Schreiber stated that the guest fee is between $115 and $118 per plate depending\r\non

the facility. The average price for a wedding is between the $16,000 and $17,000\r\nrange.\r\nTrustee

Reinke asked what the average price is per plate at Bartlett Hills for a wedding.\r\nFood

& Beverage Manager Paul Petersen stated $70 to $100 per plate and an average\r\nwedding

for 150 people, about $15,000.\r\nPresident Wallace asked how many people does he

talk to and how many become\r\nbookings.\r\nMr. Petersen estimated that it would

be 10% to 20%.\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE

OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 5 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nPresident

Wallace stated that there is a lot of sharing between these facilities based on\r\nthe

fact that there are only 52 Saturdays and nobody likes Friday’s or Sunday’s.\r\nMr.

Petersen stated that bookings are based on availability, pricing and the setting

of\r\nwhich they could vision their wedding taking place at.\r\nMr. Schreiber stated

that the potential brides may not like the formality of Ashton\r\nGardens and may

prefer a more natural setting. The market is pretty broad and tastes\r\nare pretty

broad also. In his opinion, they would probably complement each other. They\r\nhave

really great relationships with their competitors in all the markets. They get\r\ntogether

and talk about the market, pricing and what one venue may be experiencing\r\nversus

another because they are all fishing from the same pond and refer people back\r\nand

forth.\r\nPresident Wallace asked if they anticipated using local vendors for food,

etc. The\r\nVillage has a large food manufacturing portion of the community.\r\nMr.

Schreiber stated that produce, seafood, meats are all local and they would commit\r\nto

that.\r\nTrustee Reinke asked if they could make that a condition of the conditional

use?\r\nTrustee Arends stated that would not be fair to him.\r\nAttorney Mraz stated

that they could do them.\r\nTrustee Reinke stated that he will now open up the discussion

to the residents and he\r\nasked them to try to limit their comments to three minutes.

He asked them to try not to\r\nbe duplicative in their comments and yield the balance

of your time to the next speaker.\r\nJay Schack, 120 Plymouth Court\r\nMr. Schack

stated that he left off with taxes. Are you going to put a business in town\r\nthat

will compete with two facilities that are supported with our property taxes. If

they\r\nstart taking away from Bartlett Hills and Villa Olivia and the income stream

for those two\r\nfacilities goes down, the first place that the Village will look

for to boost it up will be the\r\nproperty taxes. He is concerned that his property

taxes will support Ashton Gardens by\r\nsupplementing the income lost to the two

facilities. He asked the Board to consider this\r\nin the considerations of the

entire project. A private golf course is owned by the owners\r\nor the members and

paid for by the members. Our facilities are owned by the Village\r\nand the residents,

therefore the source of income and revenue stream is totally\r\ndifferent. He spoke

about the people leaving the facility at night and the fact that they\r\ncould be

going through a maze of streets and cause more problems.\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE

MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 6 of 26

REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nPresident Wallace commented that you could

Google Earth the other facilities and see\r\nthe overlying topographical. A couple

of them are almost identical to the nature of this\r\nenvironment here in Bartlett.\r\nScott

Erickson, 211 Lido Trail\r\nMr. Erickson spoke about the amount of space for emergency

traffic on the side streets.\r\nThey have a strong belief that although there are

precautions from Ashton Gardens to\r\nhandle overflow parking and maybe use Flextronics,

Metra, etc., the fact is that people\r\ncoming to events, show up late. This will

cause people to park on the side street to\r\navoid shuttle service. Lido Trail

being the first target street, both sides of that street are\r\nfilled with cars,

the minimum requirement is 11.5 feet for emergency vehicles to get\r\nthrough. Our

concern is when winter time hits, when the plows bring the cars closer to\r\nminimum

clearance, emergency traffic is going to be jeopardized. He submitted a\r\npicture

for the record.\r\nGeorge Koziol, 654 Hazelnut Ct.\r\nMr. Koziol stated that as

a concerned resident of Bartlett, he witnessed something of\r\ngreat concern. He

attended the Plan Commission’s Public Hearing on August 11, 2016\r\nand then the

Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing on September 1, 2016. Both of\r\nthese meetings

were dedicated to the Ashton Gardens proposal to develop the property\r\nat the

southwest corner of Prospect and Devon.\r\nThe majority of the people present were

very much against the proposed development.\r\nOnly a few spoke in favor of the

proposed plan.\r\nWhat is it about human nature that causes people to only speak

out when they are\r\nagainst something that is bringing change. Why won’t people

take the time to speak out\r\non behalf of something. Our elected officials need

to hear when something is good.\r\nWhat concerns me very much is that this is a

very vocal minority over ruling the silent\r\nmajority. Let’s pause a moment and

look at some numbers related to this issue. He\r\nsaw a combined total of approximately

120 residents at the Plan Commission (PC)\r\nmeeting and the Zoning Board of Appeals

(ZBA) meeting. So let’s use 150 as the\r\nnumber of people who spoke about Ashton

Gardens coming to Bartlett. There are\r\napproximately 42,000 residents in Bartlett.

With a little quick math, the 120 represent\r\n4/10 of 1 percent of the population

of Bartlett, aka the vocal minority. The remaining\r\n41,850 represent 99.6 percent

of the population, aka the silent majority.\r\nHe is a resident and voter who is

a part of that silent majority, who happens to think\r\nAshton Gardens (AG) is a

worthwhile project, a development that would serve Bartlett\r\nwell.\r\nVILLAGE

OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE

MINUTES Page 7 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\n? AG is probably the

most interesting commercial (proposed) project outside of\r\nBrewster Creek to come

to Bartlett in many years.\r\n? The executives from Ashton Gardens looked all over

the Chicago suburban area\r\nand chose Bartlett.\r\n? Ashton Gardens believes strongly

in making it work and they are willing to spend\r\na large sum of money to make

it happen.\r\n? The likelihood of success would be high because there is no end

in sight to\r\nbrides and couples looking for a place to celebrate their weddings.\r\n?

AG would take a property that has been vacant since 1963 when the property\r\nwas

annexed to the Village and develop it and put it to an exciting use.\r\n? Although

the AG project is outside the area of the Bartlett TOD Plan, this might\r\njust

become the start, the catalyst to jumpstart the TOD development and other\r\npositive

activity in downtown Bartlett.\r\n? Just think, Bartlett along with Ashton Gardens,

might just become a real\r\ndestination in the Chicago area, having the one and

only venue such as this.\r\n? Visitors might just like what they see and want to

move to Bartlett to live or to\r\nstart their businesses.\r\n? The property is zoned

for Commercial and AG has a plan.\r\n? AG will change the property tax status from

a vacant/undeveloped property to\r\ndeveloped and will pay higher real estate taxes

as a result.\r\n? AG will bring sales tax revenue to the Village.\r\n? AG will bring

jobs to Bartlett.\r\n? Limited hours of operation Friday & Saturday 9:00 a.m. to

12:30 a.m. and\r\nSunday 9:00 a.m. until 10:30 p.m.\r\n? Limited hours of operation

during the week for deliveries and public visits.\r\n? Outer perimeter will be landscaped

with an aluminum, wrought iron like fence\r\nwith a variety of landscaping, trees

and shrubs.\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE

OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 8 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\n?

Inner perimeter (residential), will include an 8 foot wood stockade fence along\r\nwith

heavy landscaping, trees and shrubs.\r\n? Remember, this property is zoned commercial

and could become another strip\r\nmall with many unknowns and in operation 24 hours

per day, 7 days per week.\r\nHe hoped that the Board understands that he is speaking

for more than myself. He is\r\nspeaking for the silent majority, the 99.6 percent

of the residents of Bartlett who did not\r\nattend either of the public meetings

to voice their opinions. It is possible that their\r\nsilence is a form of acceptance

for the project.\r\nMay the discussions during the Committee of the Whole be positive,

upbeat and\r\nbeneficial to all. In the end, he is hoping that you rule positively

for Ashton Gardens and\r\nmove the project on to a meeting of the entire Village

Board for approval.\r\nThe Ashton Gardens project just might benefit all of Bartlett.

We are hoping that you\r\nwill do what is right and best for all of Bartlett. He

thinks that we can say that with this\r\nproject, the “glass is more than half full.”\r\nTrustee

Carbonaro referenced the picture that was submitted earlier and he asked the\r\nChief

if there would be problems with emergency vehicles if there were cars parked on\r\nboth

sides of the street. His understanding was that these vehicles would be towed –\r\ncorrect?\r\nChief

Williams stated that during a significant snowfall there is no on-street parking

–\r\nthey would be towed.\r\nAdam Newman, Evanston, IL – works for Cynthia Borbas

who circulated petitions\r\nMr. Newman submitted petitions with 68 names and stated

that he did not want to get\r\ninto the statistics or the math about what a minority

68 names are. As elected officials,\r\nyou know how difficult it is to get signatures

and how hard it is to get people to come to\r\nmeetings. People work really hard

and don’t really want to get engaged in politics\r\nespecially after such a mess

this election season. They expect their local leaders to do\r\nthe right things

and it is hard to find childcare and so the fact that there is so much\r\noutpouring,

especially from the people that are most concentrated, says a lot.\r\nAnn Marie

Westfall, 109 S. Western Ave.\r\nMs. Westfall stated that this town is always glad

to have new businesses opening up.\r\nRecently in the Examiner, there were several

new businesses that will be opening - It is\r\ncalled economic growth. The way the

economy is with no jobs, Mr. Schreiber is going\r\nto employ people and is a good

thing. Mr. Schreiber has brought a very well-thought-out \r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE

MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 9 of 26

REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nplan to the Village Board and the people of

Bartlett. He has always been very\r\ncooperative with the Board and changes that

were asked of him. He also addressed all\r\nthe people’s questions and concerns

at the last meeting. The people that bought the\r\nhouses where Ashton Gardens is

hopefully going to be built, knew that the property was\r\nzoned for commercial

use and that is the chance that you took when you bought your\r\nhouse at that location.\r\nScott

Ummel, 225 John Drive\r\nMr. Ummel stated that a lot of the statements that were

made tonight by the petitioner\r\nhimself and some of the staff members have no

credibility to those statements. There\r\nare no statistics to back it up or companies

that got these decibel readings. One thing\r\nthat he learned in school is the fact

that when you write a paper you have to cite your\r\nsources and it is illegal not

to do so. For someone to come up here and say that there\r\nwas a crime report written

and they looked into it and there are only four. Where did\r\nyou get that information

from? Who is the town that reported that? Where is the\r\npaperwork that says that?

Another thing he noticed from taking criminology classes is if\r\nyou are a witness

or on the stand you were not supposed to put your own feelings or\r\nopinions into

a case. For some of the staff members to be up there and say what there\r\nwas a

nice overhang or nice windows shows the level of unprofessionalism on this\r\npoint.\r\nMr.

Plonczynski stated that he is not an architecture designer. He was trying to express\r\nthe

desire of the windows.\r\nMargaret Territo-Erdman, 220 Dallas Drive\r\nMs. Territo-Erdman

stated that they have had their difficulties with the businesses\r\nstaying open

and populated in the downtown area for many years. She didn’t think this\r\nvenue

was the right place for this neighborhood area. She didn’t think the parking was\r\nenough

with only 120 spots. If you have two events going on with 150 guests plus 30 to\r\n40

workers, there will be overflow and she feels sorry for the folks who will have

excess\r\nflow parking on their streets. She didn’t think it would help the businesses

in the\r\ndowntown area. She mentioned the two other banquet venues and she wasn’t

sure but\r\nshe didn’t think they were packed all the time. What happens in 5 to

6 years if they don’t\r\nsucceed in their business and we have another empty building

or vacant business. The\r\nfresh market has been empty for a long time and do we

really want another empty\r\nbuilding.\r\nPresident Wallace stated that we can absolutely,

100% control parking on Lido Trail. He\r\nhas heard that repetitively and it was

one of his concerns as well. He agreed with one of\r\nthe resident comments that

when people are late they may choose to park there but if\r\nthat car is not there

when they get out, they will wish that they didn’t. There are\r\ncontrollable’s

involved with this parking question and part of those controllable’s are\r\nsomething

that the Village can enforce and it is an additional revenue stream.\r\nVILLAGE

OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE

MINUTES Page 10 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nHe stated that several

people have mentioned that this venue is in direct competition to\r\na taxpaying

body right now and he has a tendency to disagree with that statement just\r\nbecause

of the price level at which this organization operates. It is well above the price\r\nlevel

of Villa Olivia or Bartlett Hills. As Mr. Schreiber stated there are only 52 Fridays\r\nand

52 Saturdays and you only book 20% of your venues, the hardest thing is to get\r\npeople

to come and look at the place. If you have people coming from other venues that\r\nare

going to drive right down the street on the same day and look at that venue and

it’s\r\npart of the challenge of booking your banquet hall. He believes this an

enhancement to\r\nthe number of events we can have at all of the locations. He also

agreed with Mr.\r\nKoziol, there is a very silent majority, he wanted to make this

clear, he has heard from a\r\nvery silent majority that they are very, very interested

in seeing this move forward. He\r\nthought it was important that everyone here this.

We have a continual environment in\r\nthis country with retail jobs shrinking and

shrinking because everyone is buying online. If\r\nwe are going to think about a

strip mall there eventually, we are having a hard enough\r\ntime filling those stores

and the other strip mall right across the street. You have this\r\nshrinking environment

of retail jobs so you are going to have some kind of service\r\nenvironment there

that will be a food store or restaurant or something in that state law\r\nthat they

will not like at all. The service-oriented jobs are the biggest growing market.\r\nThe

amount of time that it would take us to replace this particular location with a

similar\r\ntype business would be very unusual.\r\nTrustee Deyne stated that he

said just about everything he wanted to say. We talked\r\nabout vacant buildings

and he is going to hitchhike on what President Wallace said. He\r\nwas going through

the permitted uses in B-3 and he won’t read them all but they do\r\ninclude: convenience

store, garden supply and feed store, meat markets, supermarkets,\r\npostal distribution,

those would not require any special behavior. You could wake up\r\none morning and

have a strip shopping center there. He spoke about the vacant Gorski\r\nPlaza and

his fear is that if we talk about vacancies, if we do strip shopping centers, the\r\npotential

of having vacant spots would be greater on what we would possibly have here.\r\nIn

essence, when we look at this, in lieu of some of the other uses we possibly could\r\nhave

on that property are special uses. These would include animal hospitals, dog\r\nkennels,

automobile repair shops (including major repair), automobile and truck sales,\r\nbanquet

halls, car washes and it goes on and on. It is zoned B-3 and we can’t regulate\r\nspecifically

what will be there. We have to treat this as the project that’s been presented\r\nbefore

us this evening. We don’t regulate dentist or other medical offices, hair salons,\r\nrestaurants

and that is not the purpose of this Board. If somebody wants to make an\r\ninvestment

in the community they have rights and we don’t regulate. He agreed with\r\nregulation

of the parking and felt that it would resolve any potential problems. We\r\nrepresent

the entire community and that was brought up with the silent majority. We\r\nhave

to take a look at what this could potentially bring to the Village and the amount

of\r\njobs, the amount of revenue and tax dollars. Right now the property is vacant.

Isn’t it\r\nabout time we do something with this parcel of property? He would like

to see it move\r\nforward.\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober

4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 11 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF

OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nTrustee Hopkins stated that one of his issues is parking. How

would we regulate parking\r\non Lido Trail.\r\nChief Williams stated that with a

snow event they would tow the vehicles. As far as\r\npreventing a car from parking

there, it’s easier said, then done and they would get a\r\ncitation. If that became

a problem, we work with the community and the business owner\r\nto do more signage

more high visibility patrols on those particular events especially if\r\nwe were

to get communication from the owner that he will have an overflow evening.\r\nThey

could put staff out there to help the neighborhood and that would be a primary\r\nconcern

of theirs.\r\nTrustee Hopkins stated that the first step would be ticketing cars?\r\nChief

Williams stated that it would be ticketing cars and removing them in a significant\r\nweather

event and also working with the owner in the neighborhood to make sure that\r\ntheir

presence is known as a preventative measure. We would have to monitor that to\r\ndetermine

how much proactive efforts were needed in that neighborhood during a\r\nsignificant

event.\r\nTrustee Reinke asked if he proposed banning parking on Lido and Hillandale?\r\nChief

Williams stated that you certainly wouldn’t want to do that on both sides but that\r\nwould

be a question of the Board. If the Board wanted to prevent it altogether it would\r\njust

be a matter of simple signage.\r\nTrustee Reinke stated that if they ban parking

on one or both sides of the street, this is\r\nsomebody’s neighborhood. People park

on the street.\r\nChief Williams stated that the unintentional consequences of that

is if they have an\r\noverflow in their driveway.\r\nAttorney Mraz stated that we

currently do not have restrictions for residents to have\r\npermits, etc. If it

became a problem it could be something that could be adopted. We\r\ntypically say

parking or not on one side of the street but that limits the parking for the\r\nresidents

of the neighborhood.\r\nPresident Wallace stated that it is a doable thing. He has

been to many, many different\r\nlocations in his years of traveling to sporting

events where signs say “no parking here\r\nduring game day”. Wheaton towed a bunch

of cars one day when people were ignoring\r\nthe sign. There has to be a workaround

for that particular situation.\r\nTrustee Reinke asked if the workaround is a parking

permit?\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE

OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 12 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nAttorney

Mraz stated that is an option if it became a problem.\r\nPresident Wallace stated

that only 2.2% of the events are 250+ and 16.3% are 200+.\r\nHe stated that he certainly

wouldn’t want to park on Lido and have to go all the way\r\naround the berm and

the fence to get to the chapel. He would just assume to be a little\r\nlater and

take the shuttle.\r\nTrustee Camerer stated that now that we are able to accommodate

bigger weddings at\r\nBartlett Hills, what are the parking accommodations there

and do we ever have issues\r\nwhere there is not enough parking?\r\nMr. Petersen

stated that they could have more difficulty during the day on weekends\r\nwhen the

golf course is full and they have wedding showers where they would have a\r\n50,

a 60, and an 80 at the same time. Once all of the permanent tee-time people leave\r\non

the weekend nights, even if they have a wedding with 230 people (10% of events),\r\nthey

have 206 parking spaces and it’s never a problem.\r\nPresident Wallace stated that

it is the theory that no one goes to a wedding by\r\nthemselves.\r\nTrustee Reinke

stated that looking at the diagrams it appears there is no sidewalk or\r\nbike path

on the east side of the property and he asked if that was true.\r\nMr. Plonczynski

stated that there are sidewalks on Prospect and a path on Devon that\r\nwill remain.\r\nTrustee

Reinke stated that this is a tough one. He thought President Wallace’s and\r\nTrustee

Deyne’s points are well taken. When you look at the uses in the B-3, they are\r\nundesirable

for a residential neighborhood. One of the themes from one of the hearings\r\nwas

“would you and your family want to live next door to this”. That is a great question\r\nbecause

we all live here and have families. If the question was “would you rather live\r\nnext

to a strip-mall or this banquet hall” his answer would be that he preferred to live\r\nnext

to the banquet hall. He stated that he has experience with strip malls and if it

is\r\nfive or seven tenants in a strip-mall, it is problematic because each one

of them is going\r\nto be doing their own thing. He thinks this is a much more desirable

use than a stripmall.\r\nAt the same time he can’t get his mind around this parking

issue. If we ban\r\nparking on Lido and Hillandale it will be problematic, is the

135 spaces going to be\r\nenough, maybe or maybe not, what about snow, what about

people that park goofy. It\r\nis problematic for him and we can’t flood these peoples

neighborhood with cars. The\r\n390 extension is another thing he hasn’t heard in

these conversations. He thought it\r\nwas important to talk about because wasn’t

the current design to have North Avenue as\r\none of the off ramps?\r\nVILLAGE OF

BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE

MINUTES Page 13 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nMr. Plonczynski stated

that was in the conceptual plan for the future of the Elgin O’Hare.\r\nTrustee Reinke

stated that if we have cars coming down North Avenue and they\r\ndecided to zip

down Prospect than that can be a bear. The traffic and the parking here\r\nmake

it very difficult to support this.\r\nPresident Wallace stated that he disagrees.

They are both controllable things.\r\nTrustee Deyne stated that there have been

a number of concerns regarding the traffic.\r\nHe wanted to address that the facts

that they have were not just created. Staff has put\r\na great deal of time researching

and putting these numbers together so the Board would\r\nhave information and could

make an intelligent decision. A traffic study was submitted\r\nby the petitioner

and our consultant reviewed and concurred with the findings of the\r\npetitioner’s

findings. We did, under a FOIA request, receive incident reports from the\r\nother

locations that the petitioner has and found that there was little to no police activity.\r\nEverything

was minor as the petitioner stated and he was not lying. He also wanted to\r\nmention

the decrease in property values and stated that the numbers presented this\r\nevening

were researched and we did see over a five year period, a 17-18% increase in\r\nproperty

values. This has not reduced property values. He agreed with Trustee Reinke\r\non

the parking issues but when you talk about the number of events that they will have\r\non

an annual basis, parking issues will be confronted with will be a small percentage

of\r\nthe events that he will have. He does not think that will be enough to preclude

the\r\nproject from moving forward. He felt that between the staff and the police

department\r\nthey could deal with the parking situation.\r\nTrustee Arends stated

that she believes fully in the free enterprise system. This is what\r\nhas made

this country great and she thinks that the use on this property is far superior\r\nto

another strip-mall. If she lived on an adjacent street, she would much rather see

this\r\nthan a strip-mall. As far as the traffic goes, we have done our due diligence

on that and\r\naddressed most of the objections. She respects the fact that the

people that live there\r\nare all of the sudden being asked to put up with development

there. After all this time, I\r\nmight be a little perturbed too. We cannot dictate

exactly what goes in a certain area\r\nspecifically. The only thing that this petitioner

is looking for is some leeway on parking.\r\nHe has cooperated and gone beyond what

we have requested of him. For that reason,\r\nshe thinks this is a good use and

should move forward.\r\nTrustee Hopkins asked Mr. Plonczynski if he knew of any

other communities that use\r\ncommuter property to shuttle patrons back-and-forth?\r\nMr.

Plonczynski stated that he didn’t know about shuttling but the use of the Metra

lot is\r\nregularly advertised for business use after the Metra hours. Our businesses

in the\r\ndowntown district do use this parking.\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE

MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 14 of 26

REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nTrustee Arends asked if this were to go through

would the petitioner join the Chamber of\r\nCommerce.\r\nMr. Schneider stated “absolutely”.

They don’t want to take advantage of anyone or any\r\npart of the city and he felt

they demonstrated that with all the concessions and all the\r\nefforts that they

have made. Once they get in, they are part of the community. One of\r\nthe things

they do relative to parking is to publish in advance, meet with their security\r\nand

discuss all of the events on every detail including parking. The security is to

protect\r\nthe guests, protect the business, manage parking to whatever it is that

they feel is\r\nnecessary including protecting neighbors and their interests. The

local law enforcement\r\nperson will know, if they so desire, what events are happening,

when they are\r\nhappening, and how many guests will be there. If someone attending

their event parks\r\nillegally, they want them towed. They are part of the community

and most of the guests\r\nthat attend these events are not part of the community.

They do not want them to take\r\nadvantage of any special treatment at all. They

will take every effort in communicating\r\nand partnering with whatever is asked

of them to help manage things. That is part of\r\ntheir business model and part

of the way they run their company.\r\nTrustee Camerer stated that not everyone is

going to drive to the wedding and leave,\r\nsome people stay overnight. At his son’s

recent wedding in Bartlett they had people stay\r\nat a hotel and the hotel provided

a shuttle service back and forth. Not everyone that\r\ncomes in for a Saturday night

wedding, especially when they’re coming from out of\r\ntown, are going to leave

and drive off.\r\nTrustee Carbonaro stated that they annexed this property back

in 1963 and it has been\r\nempty ever since. When he moved here in 1985 Prospect

went from Stearns to Country\r\nand there was no connection to Devon. If you wanted

to get to Devon you would have\r\nto drive around. When they sold the farm, they

put in Wilcox and Amherst. The whole\r\narea was still unincorporated. It has been

sitting there empty for over 50 years and he\r\nthought it was time they put something

there. It will bring in the revenue to the Village\r\nand he agrees with Trustee

Deyne that we don’t restrict businesses in town because we\r\nhave eight pizza places,

14 dentists, 11 hairstylists, 7 nail salons, 12 restaurants which\r\ninclude fast

food, 11 places to receive physical therapy or chiropractic services, and 9\r\ncleaners.

We are only at 2 wedding facilities so maybe we should try third one.\r\nTrustee

Deyne stated that he was not a parking expert but we are on the same page as\r\nfar

as parking stickers or permit parking. He wondered if the petitioner could have

a\r\nmaster list of the people in the neighborhood and when he has a large wedding

that\r\nwould require additional parking he could place “no parking” signs in the

neighborhood.\r\nTrustee Reinke stated that the next step is to move this on to

the Village Board for a\r\nvote. The objections and the failure to receive a positive

recommendation from the ZBA\r\nboth require a vote of two thirds of the Trustees.

The Mayor’s vote would not count \r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober

4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 15 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF

OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nbecause of not having the positive recommendation from the ZBA

but the neighbors\r\npetitions that require two thirds of the Trustees votes for

the Special Use. He stated that\r\nfour trustees would have to vote in favor for

this to pass. He thought that the petitioner\r\nand the audience has a good idea

of where they are all at.\r\nDowntown TOD Plan\r\nMr. Plonczynski stated that the

downtown TOD plan put forth a vote at a previous\r\nmeeting where it was tabled

to the October 18th meeting. There was also a discussion\r\nto bring it back to

the Village Board Committee prior to that meeting. There were some\r\nconcerns expressed

at that meeting concerning business owners in the Bartlett Plaza\r\nnot being fully

aware of the plan. Subsequent to that meeting the staff has visited and\r\nhanded

out the TOD plan to all the businesses in the Bartlett Plaza and talked to\r\nseveral

of the business owners to answer their questions and concerns about the plan.\r\nIn

addition, our consultant from SCB prepared a memorandum regarding the section on\r\nimplementation

strategies of the plan. It basically emphasized that it is just a plan, it’s\r\nconceptual

in nature and it is also flexible. All plans have to be implemented, have a\r\ndeveloper

who is interested in doing something and there has to be support from the\r\nVillage

Board, Plan Commission and the Zoning Board for that type of implementation\r\nof

the plans.\r\nOne of the residents assumed that there would be a loss of parking.

Let’s assume that\r\nthere is this loss of parking because there is a road being

put in. How are we going to\r\ndeal with that?\r\nMr. Plonczynski stated that with

any development that occurs, the Board reviews the\r\nproject and considers the

implications just like they are doing with Ashton Gardens.\r\nThat is part of the

review process.\r\nTrustee Reinke stated that if they don’t like what they see then

they can kill it.\r\nAdministrator Salmons stated that you do what Metra has us

do. We look at some\r\ndevelopment in downtown and if we want to use the parking

that we have, we replace it\r\nsomewhere else. If there were compelling reasons

why this road had to fill in and it’s\r\ntaking away from parking she would think

it would be the responsibility of the developer\r\nto replace it in a location where

it is convenient for that which was there before.\r\nTrustee Camerer asked that

the audience be allowed to make comments. He stated\r\nthat part of the reason he

was concerned about this even though it was a conceptual\r\nplan is that it has

the potential to dispose several service oriented businesses in a Plaza\r\nwithout

having a plan where to put them. Who’s going to provide buildout and shift\r\nthese

businesses and keep them in town. You also have a plan that potentially takes \r\nVILLAGE

OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE

MINUTES Page 16 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\ndown apartment buildings.

Who is going to be taking on this project? He also looks at it\r\nfrom a historical

perspective and how the downtown has conceptualized change\r\nthrough bringing in

condominiums and townhomes but it didn’t bring change\r\ninstantaneously. He wanted

the Board to be concerned about the businesses and how\r\nto keep these businesses

in Bartlett. One of the statements in the plan says that 50.4%\r\nof the businesses

in downtown Bartlett are professional, medical and service\r\nbusinesses and yet

the study would displace 20 businesses in Bartlett Plaza without a\r\nplan of saying

where they will put them. Are they going to build the commercial places\r\nfirst

before they tear down a part of the building? It is so vague in how they talk about\r\ntearing

down the east side of the shopping center as well and as part of the north part

of\r\nthe parking lot for a road. Where does it stop? We lose our post office? If

this plan is\r\nconceptualized to do this, do you think that this post office is

going to move to another\r\nlocation in Bartlett with the postal economy being the

way it is, we could have our\r\ndoubts and potentially lose it. The other concern

he has is that he does not want to give\r\nthe impression to businesses that may

be viable businesses to come into the shopping\r\ncenter that why should they bother

since it’s going to be torn down anyhow. He thinks\r\nthey should be careful about

portraying that vision and the prospect of looking at things\r\ninto critical overview.

He also takes issue with the fact that somehow we are saying to\r\nbuild more apartments

because that is going to bring in more people and revitalize the\r\ndowntown area.

If it does, it will not be quick. Somehow we are gearing these\r\napartments to

people in their 20’s and the seniors 55 to 74 and 75+. The last time he\r\nlooked

those are not age groups that have expendable income to get out and live in a\r\n$1,600

apartment and every night go out and eat. He liked some of the changes that\r\nwere

made and felt that it gave them a little more direction… although it is not in a\r\ndirection

he is so certain of.\r\nChristine Carlyle from SCB stated that the plan was done

with the Steering Committee\r\nand they talked to a lot of businesses, had pre-community

meetings, not a lot of input\r\nfrom people throughout the community about this.

It is a series of actions for the\r\ndowntown. The main purpose of the plan is to

enhance the downtown area to look at\r\nvarious sites where it can have future development.

Her emphasis was to create a\r\nseries of options for the Village, create a roadmap

and to think about development as a\r\nsequence and that you can do one or the other.

When they met with the Gorski’s there\r\nwas a focus on the fact that they had a

grocery store space that was obsolete and they\r\nknew that. They were not going

to put any more money into it and there was no viable\r\noption for them in terms

of today’s commercial value for the site. It has a lot more value\r\nas residential.

They looked at ways to make the very large block that goes north of the\r\nrailroad

tracks to Devon to Prospect and over to Main Street and how to break it up so\r\nyou

could have some other through traffic to serve those businesses. The issue of the\r\nparking

could be accommodated by creating the right-of-way for the apartments. Every\r\none

of these recommendations will take a lot of coordination. Development doesn’t just\r\ntake

place from a plan. The next set of sequences is if there is a developer or if it

is\r\nVillage initiated, looking at the infrastructure, water, sewer and how it

services some of \r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE

OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 17 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nthese

properties. There are many different elements to implementation and you have to\r\nbe

talking to your businesses on a regular basis because it is very, very important

that\r\neveryone is accommodated. You have 20% of the Bartlett Plaza that is vacant

so there\r\nis an opportunity for moving some of the businesses into that area.

She understood that\r\nmoving has significant costs and if there was a TIF in place,

funds could be used to help\r\nmitigate those kinds of concerns. There are many

different processes for implementing\r\nany of these recommendations and one of

the first steps is to have a plan in place\r\nwhich you can say, in general, we

agree with these elements. Each one of them will be\r\na planning process and you

will be meeting with each other and your prospective\r\ndevelopers. In terms of

the point of apartments and senior housing in millenniums, there\r\nis a lot of

data out there and she would be happy to send him a report in terms of where\r\nthe

growth is projected in the next 20 to 30 years. It will be from two generations.

There\r\nare big chunks of people who have been waiting a long time in their lives

to make\r\ndecisions and the millennials have been strapped with a lot of debt.

They are looking\r\nfor places to go and communities that have access to trains

and other amenities are\r\nbenefits for them because they are looking for little

more open environment. A lot of\r\nseniors have been held back from selling their

properties and want to stay in the\r\ncommunity. We can offer them a little more

carefree lifestyle and apartments. Those\r\nthings are out there and there is a

lot of real estate data. She thought it would be an\r\nimportant thing to make sure

for your community that you can have places where\r\npeople can buy into and not

necessarily a single-family home.\r\nTrustee Camerer stated that he is not saying

that millennial’s and seniors wouldn’t want\r\napartments, he is just that he doesn’t

know if that particular age group is going to\r\nrevitalize the downtown area. He

didn’t think she has statistics that the twenty-somethings\r\nrevitalize cities.\r\nMs.

Carlyle stated that they have actually have statistics in this region. They have

been\r\nworking with Palatine on their downtown area and a good percentage are in

those two\r\nbrackets. They have looked at a variety of different communities and

thinks that there\r\nare real benefits from both of those groups.\r\nTrustee Camerer

stated that he is not saying that there are not benefits to having\r\ngroups there

but he disagrees that this age group will bring expendable income. He\r\nasked what

happens when a landlord can’t rent out a $1,600 a month apartment. He\r\nwill have

to rent it and will be bringing in a lower income housing group.\r\nMs. Carlyle

stated that right now you have a phenomenal rental vacancy rate - it’s like\r\n98%

is occupied and that is pretty amazing in Bartlett.\r\nTrustee Reinke stated that

he hears two different conversations going on and one\r\nreminds him of George Koziol’s

statement when the TOD plan was first up. He stated\r\n“this was a good plan and

you might not like all parts of it, don’t vote it down just \r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE

MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 18 of 26

REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nbecause you don’t like one part of it”. It

sounds like there are parts of it that we don’t\r\nlike and he is not a big fan

of the apartment building on Western and Bartlett Avenue. It\r\ndoes not make sense

to him but they are not voting on that. There’s nothing magic\r\nabout this plan

but nothing magic about development. It is part of what he does for a\r\nliving,

and it is very difficult. Let’s take Bartlett Plaza for example, the Gorski’s could

sell\r\nthat place from under you. You probably have a written lease, there is probably

a\r\nprovision where you will consent to that sale and what is the subsequent buyer

going to\r\ndo. That can happen for each and every parcel in this area. It can be

sold out from\r\nunder you unless you own it. They are going to be constrained by

their legal obligations\r\nand he can’t imagine that the post office is going to

roll over and walk away. He\r\nunderstood what he was saying but it’s a very organic,

long-term process. If there is a\r\nmarket for the millennial’s and they wanted

apartments and then some developer is\r\ngoing to figure out a way to make it work

monetarily. If they don’t, you have plenty of\r\nexamples of that in town while

developers think they are going to charge a fortune for\r\ndowntown space and then

we can’t keep the business down here. That pie-in-the-sky\r\nthinking – those are

the bad developers. The good developers have an idea of how\r\nmuch things are going

to cost and what they need to make on the other side of it\r\nregardless if there

is a TIF. He thinks it’s a good plan, it’s not perfect, there are\r\nchallenges

and he could see where it is very scary for particular business owners. This\r\nis

a long-term plan.\r\nTrustee Camerer stated that he likes parts of the plan as well,

especially the downtown\r\narea. He is happy to see some of the potential areas

are built up and have new parking\r\ngarages. We just need to give it some thought

when it comes to small businesses and\r\nthe impact it is going to have on them.

That is the reason he delayed this.\r\nPresident Wallace stated that he thought

it was very effective and he thought that his\r\npoint was well taken. He shouldn’t

worry because this is not going to happen until 20\r\nthings happen prior. It is

disconcerting for people who put their time in the particular\r\narea and suddenly

somebody bulldozes their place.\r\nTrustee Reinke suggested that they have a sunset

provision so every five years it\r\nshould pop back up and they should talk about

it, get input from the residents, see\r\nwhere the market is going, maybe something

will happen with the millennial’s or the\r\nbaby boomers. We should renew this every

few years and should be part of whatever\r\nwe are going to vote for.\r\nAdministrator

Salmons stated that they can write that into the final.\r\nTrustee Carbonaro asked

if it was going to take them six months to approve this?\r\nBatavia recently passed

a $40 million downtown renovation in about six days. Maybe\r\nthey are used to having

businesses downtown, he didn’t know. This is a visionary plan\r\nthat has taken

a year to put together. There were four meetings at 7:00 PM and he \r\nVILLAGE OF

BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE

MINUTES Page 19 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\ndidn’t see anyone else

at those meetings except Trustee Deyne. If you had concerns,\r\nyou should have

gone to those meetings. There were two daytime meetings of which he\r\ntook a vacation

day and a personal day to show up so they could discuss Village\r\nbusiness. This

is a Village plan. For you to take your personal business and put this on\r\nhold

is absolutely despicable Trustee Camerer.\r\nTrustee Deyne stated that no plan is

perfect but one of the advantages we have here is\r\nthat anything a developer would

want to do has to come before the Board and go\r\nthrough the process. He thought

some consideration should go towards how this will be\r\nfunded and now we are back

to where we were early on when we talked about a TIF.\r\nHe didn’t know if that

was the answer but thought it should deserve some consideration.\r\nTrustee Camerer

asked staff if they have attendance records for all of the meetings?\r\nHe asked

for records of attendance to be sent to all the Board members so he could\r\nknow

who showed up to every meeting. One of the people that he asked to be on the\r\ncommittee

only showed up one time. He stated that he did not show up because his\r\nimpression

was that it was a downtown TOD plan not incorporating Bartlett Plaza. He\r\nstated

that he has more invested in this downtown than Trustee Carbonaro could ever\r\nthink

about. He has a business here for 27 years, he owns one of the apartments\r\ndowntown

and he has more invested than he can ever think about.\r\nTrustee Carbonaro stated

that what he is saying is that his personal business takes\r\nover.\r\nTrustee Reinke

stated that this matter will be moved on to the Village Board for a vote.\r\nPresident

Wallace stated that they will be taking a five minute recess at 9:00 PM.\r\nThe

Board reconvened the meeting at 9:06 PM.\r\nFINANCE & GOLF COMMITTEE\r\nGeneral

Obligation Bonds for Proposed Police Facility\r\nTrustee Deyne asked the Finance

Director to proceed with his presentation.\r\nFinance Director Jeff Martynowicz

stated that the Board has been looking at plans and\r\ndiscussing a new police facility

and we are now coming into the process of proposing a\r\nfinancing plan for that

police facility. The bond ordinance in the packet tonight is one\r\nformal action

to be taken by the President and Board of Trustees to approve general\r\nobligation

bonds which will be issued for the purpose of financing and constructing a\r\npolice

facility. Most importantly this ordinance establishes a parameter style ordinance

\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT

COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 20 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nwhich means

that the final interest rates and other repayment concerns of the bonds are\r\nnot

set forth the ordinance but rather the ordinance established parameters which act

as\r\nlimitations that must be followed when the final terms of the bonds are established.

The\r\nordinance delegates the final approval of those terms to the designated officers

which\r\nare the Village President, Clerk, Treasurer and Finance Director on some

statistics or\r\nparameters of the ordinance. We are including a maximum amount

to be borrowed at\r\n$16.2 million with a $3.8 million contribution from the Village.

The maturity date would\r\nbe in 2037 and an annual maturity amount of $1.42 million

and a maximum interest rate\r\nof 7%. We had a question tonight about the 7% and

that is very flexible and Tom Gavin\r\nwith RW Baird, who serves as our financial

advisor, can explain the process of issuing\r\nbonds. They looked at what $16.2

million would mean to a resident on a $250,000\r\nhome and that would increase the

property tax bill by approximately $88.76.\r\nTrustee Hopkins stated that one thing

that jumps out at him is the parameters for the\r\ninterest rate. It is 3.985% and

the maximum amount is 7%. Obviously, he didn’t think it\r\nwould ever reach the

7% but in the event it does, it makes the police facility not feasible.\r\nThe tax

rate on a resident would be well above $88 per year. Is that something that can\r\nbe

changed?\r\nTom Gavin from RW Baird stated that what is in demand right now is premium

bonds\r\nthat bear higher interest rates but give you more money for the amount

you borrow. You\r\nwould actually issue your bonds on a premium structure. He stated

that 7% is a little bit\r\ngenerous and they could cut that down to 5% if that were

acceptable. That would give\r\nthem plenty of room to allow for premium bonds that

would get better financing.\r\nTrustee Hopkins stated that he thought 5% was a lot

better than 7%.\r\nPresident Wallace stated that it is all based on the market.

You’re not going to create\r\nany magic but he agreed that some kind of would make

you feel better.\r\nMr. Gavin stated that they will be accepting bids for the bonds

and expect many bids so\r\nit should be pretty tight.\r\nTrustee Reinke asked if

they get good bids, is it possible that this $88 projection is\r\ngoing to last?\r\nMr.

Gavin stated “sure”.\r\nTrustee Reinke stated that $88 scares him. He looked at

his tax bill and the Village\r\nportion is $617 and if you raise that $88 that is

like 14%. That is a lot of money for\r\npeople especially when we are getting hammered

by other taxing districts.\r\nTrustee Deyne asked if there were any other options.\r\nVILLAGE

OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE

MINUTES Page 21 of 26 REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nTrustee Reinke asked

if there was a way to push the cost down on this.\r\nTrustee Arends stated that

we should thank our lucky stars that we have such a good\r\nbond rating because

that in itself is quite a bit to do with what the options will be on\r\nthese bonds.\r\nTrustee

Reinke stated that this new ordinance designates officers who approve the\r\nbonds

and their three people were authorized to approve it. Is there a way that in the\r\nevent

it goes ½ a percent over the 3.98% that it comes back before the Board for a final\r\napproval?\r\nAttorney

Mraz stated that is the point of the 5%. The bond rates change daily.\r\nMr. Martynowicz

stated that if the bids came over the parameters that were set in the\r\nordinance

they would have to reject the bids and they would come back and start over\r\nagain.\r\nAttorney

Mraz stated that one of his clients at the Schaumburg Park District have done\r\nthis

parameter style ordinance every year for at least the last 5 to 10 years and it

has\r\nworked well. You actually captured, timing wise, some of the best market

that is\r\navailable even though it’s a little disconcerting because you haven’t

done it this way and\r\nwere giving up a little control. He thought that Mr. Gavin

can explain this a little further.\r\nMr. Gavin stated that they work for the Village

and have a fiduciary duty to the Village.\r\nHis goal is to make sure the interest

rate is as low as possible and to look towards\r\nstructuring the bond issue to

allow premium bonds allowing a broader investor base to\r\npay attention and want

your bonds. It is just really shining the blue light special on\r\nBartlett bonds

versus all the other hundreds of bond issues that are done every week.\r\nEverybody

is searching for investor attention and when you offer flexibility, investors are\r\nmore

likely to care about your bond issuance and that drives interest rates down.\r\nTrustee

Hopkins asked how many times they will solicit bonds over the course of one\r\nyear?\r\nMr.

Gavin stated that he handles about 30 to 40 transactions per year. His office in\r\nNaperville

handles about 75 transactions per year.\r\nTrustee Hopkins asked if when this goes

before the Board for a vote is there any way\r\nwe can list the cost to other home

values just to be more transparent?\r\nAdministrator Salmons stated that it will

return to the Board for a final vote at the\r\nappropriate time.\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT\r\nCOMMITTEE

MINUTES\r\nOctober 4, 2016\r\nVILLAGE OF BARTLETT COMMITTEE MINUTES Page 22 of 26

REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 4, 2016\r\nPOLICE & HEALTH COMMITTEE\r\nTrustee Carbonaro

stated that the Village Board approved the contract for architectural\r\nservices

for a proposed police facility with Williams Architects on June 21, 2016. He\r\nstated

that this would be the presentation for the floor plans.\r\nMark Bushhouse, President

of Williams Architects stated that his goals were as follows:\r\nkeep the police

facility here on this site, keep th