Sharon K. Williams, District 1 Vice-Chairperson -Stephen M. Morris, District 10 Junior Watkins, District 2 Gregory Adamson, District 11 Barry Robinson, District 3 Robert Baietto, District 12 Chairperson-Andrew A. Rand, District 4 James T. Fennell, District 13 Rachael Parker District 5 Brian Elsasser, District 14 G. Allen Mayer, District 6 Steven Rieker, District 15 James C. Dillon, District 7 Brad Harding, District 16 Phillip Salzer, District 8 Thomas H. O’Neill, III, District 17 Andrew A. Rand - Chairperson Paul Rosenbohm, District 18 R. Steve Sonnemaker, County Clerk
PEORIA COUNTY BOARD MEETING AGENDA Thursday, June 8, 2017 6:00 PM County Courthouse • 324 Main Street • County Board Room 403 • Peoria, Illinois 61602 Voice: (309) 672-6056 • Fax: (309) 672-6054 • TDD: (309) 672-6073 www.peoriacounty.org/countyboard
CALL TO ORDER MOMENT OF SILENCE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL BY THE COUNTY CLERK
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • Approval of May 11, 2017 County Board Meeting Minutes
II. PROCLAMATIONS & PRESENTATIONS • A presentation of the annual "Deputy of the Year" award • A presentation of the annual "Correctional Officer of the Year" award • A proclamation recognizing the Dunlap High School Girl's Track and Field Team for winning the state championship in the 2017 2A IHSA Girl's Track and Field State Finals • A proclamation recognizing the Dunlap High School's Boys Varsity Tennis Team for winning the state championship in the 2017 1A IHSA Boys Tennis State Finals
III. CITIZENS' REMARKS (To address the County Board, fill out a card and submit it to the Chairman before the Board Meeting.)
IV. CONSENT AGENDA C1. The Treasurer report consisting of the Bank and CD's Portfolio for the month of April 2017 and Revenue & Expenditure Reports for the month
of March 2017.
C2. The Auditor's report of expenditures from Accounts Payable system is accessible at www.peoriacounty.org/auditor/transparency.
C3. A resolution (items 1 - 2 conveyances) from the Ways and Means
Committee recommending that the County Board Chairman be
authorized and directed to execute deed of said property to the highest bidder, and be authorized to cancel the appropriate Certificates of
Purchase. This resolution shall be effective ninety days from June 8,
2017 and any transaction between the parties involved not occurring
within this period shall be null and void.
Peoria County Board Agenda, Thursday, June 8, 2017
C4. A resolution from your Budget Subcommittee recommending approval of a budgetary appropriation and transfer of funds in the amount of
$350,000.00 from the CDAP Fund to the Employee Health Fund to be
used for health insurance related costs associated with the FY 2017
voluntary retirement incentive.
C5. A resolution from your Public Safety and Justice Committee
recommending approval to revert the fee paid by the County of Peoria to
grand and petit jurors to the sum of $15.00 per day with the $.10 per mile
travel expense reimbursement which was in place prior to June 1, 2015.
C6. A resolution from your Public Safety and Justice Committee
recommending approval of a Services Agreement between the Peoria
County Coroner and Dr. Matthew Fox for Forensic Pathology Services.
C7. A resolution from your Land Use Committee recommending approval of
the lowest responsible bid of the lowest responsible bid of Michael Baker
International, Moon Township, PA, in an amount not to exceed
$10,667.50 to provide asbestos testing services on up to 20 flood prone
properties in the Town of Edwards.
C8. A resolution from your Land Use Committee recommending approval of the lowest responsible bid of Hood Demolition & Excavation, Rushville, IL, in an amount not to exceed $127,300.00 for demolition and asbestos remediation on up to 15 flood prone properties in the Town of Edwards.
C9. A resolution from your Land Use Committee recommending approval of
the lowest responsible bid of Midwest Environmental Consulting
Services, Inc., Yorkville, IL, in an amount not to exceed $9,500.00 to
provide asbestos testing services on up to 19 flood prone properties in
Unincorporated areas of Peoria County.
C10. A resolution from your Land Use Committee recommending approval of the lowest responsible bid of Hood Demolition & Excavation, Rushville,
IL, in an amount not to exceed $206,500.00 for demolition and asbestos
remediation on up to 19 flood prone properties in Unincorporated areas
of Peoria County.
C11. A resolution from your County Operations Committee recommending
approval of a final settlement of the insurance claim for 2015 water
damage to the Circuit Clerk's Office and courtrooms in the amount of
$653,942.59.
C12. A resolution from your Infrastructure Committee recommending
approval of an Intergovernmental Agreement between the County of
Peoria and the City of Peoria for the County of Peoria to perform highway
structure inspections for the City of Peoria.
Peoria County Board Agenda, Thursday, June 8, 2017
C13. A resolution from your Infrastructure Committee recommending approval of a Supplemental Preliminary Engineering Services Agreement with Hanson Professional Services for Phase 1 and Phase 2 engineering of the Richwoods Boulevard bridge replacement at a cost not to exceed $99,000.00.
C14. A resolution from your Infrastructure Committee recommending
approval of a Design Services Contract with Dewberry Architects, Inc., in
the amount of $91,000.00, for the renovation of property located at 4422
Brandywine Drive.
C15. A recommendation from the Chairman of Infrastructure Committee and the County Administrator to approve an Ordinance for prevailing rate of wages for laborers, mechanics and other workers contracted in
performing construction of public works in Peoria County as determined
by the Illinois Department of Labor. (Poll Vote per Rules of Order,
Article V, Section 18C)
C16. A resolution from the Chairman of Infrastructure Committee and the
County Administrator recommending approval of a five (5) month extension of the existing Transportation Services Agreement with MV Transportation, Inc., with a final ending term of June 30, 2017. (Poll Vote per Rules of Order, Article V, Section 18C)
C17. Approval of Bond for Matthew Bender, Greater Peoria Sanitary and
Sewage Disposal District.
C18. Chairman Appointments.
Peoria County Board Agenda, Thursday, June 8, 2017
V. ZONING ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTIONS 1. Case #028-17-U, Petition of Drew & Kate Bailey. A Special Use as required in Section 20.5.2.2.1.a.1 of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a special use when a proposed land split does not meet the 25 acre minimum lot size nor the 1 dwelling unit per 25 contiguous acres density requirement in the A-2 Agricultural District. The petitioner proposes to divide two approximately 5 acre lots from a 10.003 acre parcel. The parcel is located in Timber Township. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends approval with restriction. The Land Use Committee concurs.
2. Case #029-17-U, Petition of Marshall Bailey. A Special Use to allow for a major home occupation in the "A-2" Agriculture zoning district, when the lot is less than 5 acres in size. The petitioner requests to operate a trucking business from a 3.1 acre parcel. According to the petition the only business use is to park, enter and exit the property with (1) commercial vehicle and (2) trailers. The request does not include the storage of materials related to the business. If the first request is approved the petitioner requests to allow for variations from the requirements of a major home occupation. Section 20-7.3.5.9 states the home occupation may involve the use of indoor storage of heavy equipment and that the equipment may only be stored in the dedicated accessory structure. A Special Use is also required in Section 20-7.3.5.5 to vary from the requirement that landscaping shall be required to screen off-street parking areas from the view of adjacent landowners, according to provisions set forth in Section 7.6 (Landscaping and Bufferyards). The petitioner proposes to use existing trees and to plant new evergreen trees to screen off-street parking. The petitioner will not meet the landscaping point requirements on the north and east property lines, and will not meet the tree/shrub ratio on the north, east, south and west property lines. The parcel is located in Limestone Township. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends DENIAL. (Pending Committee Approval)
3. A resolution from the Chairman of Public Safety and Justice Committee and the County Administrator recommending approval of the initial appointment of trustees to the Chillicothe Community Fire Protection District. (Poll Vote per Rules of Order, Article V, Section 18C)
4. A resolution from your Infrastructure Committee recommending approval of a Construction Engineering Agreement with Millennia Professional Services, Morton, IL for the Lancaster Road Bridge Replacement Project, at a cost not to exceed $234,192.72. (Pending Committee Approval)
5. Review of Executive Session Minutes
VI. MISCELLANEOUS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS VII. ADJOURNMENT
Sharon K. Williams, District 1 Vice-Chairperson -Stephen M. Morris, District 10 Junior Watkins, District 2 Gregory Adamson, District 11 Barry Robinson, District 3 Robert Baietto, District 12 Chairperson-Andrew A. Rand, District 4 James T. Fennell, District 13 Rachael Parker District 5 Brian Elsasser, District 14 G. Allen Mayer, District 6 Steven Rieker, District 15 James C. Dillon, District 7 Brad Harding, District 16 Phillip Salzer, District 8 Thomas H. O’Neill, III, District 17 Michael Phelan, District 9 Andrew A. Rand - Chairperson Paul Rosenbohm, District 18 R. Steve Sonnemaker, County Clerk
PEORIA COUNTY BOARD MEETING MINUTES Thursday, May 11, 2017 6:00 PM County Courthouse • 324 Main Street • County Board Room 403 • Peoria, Illinois 61602 Voice: (309) 672-6056 • Fax: (309) 672-6054 • TDD: (309) 672-6073 www.peoriacounty.org/countyboard
CALL TO ORDER MOMENT OF SILENCE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL BY THE COUNTY CLERK
Attendance was taken with the Roll Call-Pro voting system, and the following members of the Board were present: Adamson, Baietto, Dillon, Elsasser, Fennell, Harding, Morris, Parker, Rand, Robinson, Rosenbohm, Salzer, Watkins and Williams, with Mayer, O'Neill, and Rieker absent.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • Approval of April 13, 2017 County Board Meeting Minutes
Elsasser moved for approval of the minutes, Baietto seconded. The minutes were approved by a unanimous roll call vote of 14 ayes.
II. PROCLAMATIONS & PRESENTATIONS • A presentation of the Illinois Sheriffs' Association Scholarship Award
The presentation esd given after the Citizens’ Remarks.
• A proclamation recognizing the week of May 14 - 20, 2017 as "National Nursing Home Week"
III. CITIZENS' REMARKS
Mr. Evans requested individuals to keep any comments to what was already presented during the ZBA hearing and not put in any additional items that could be termed as additional evidence.
Dale Schultz 18121 W. Farmington Road, Trivoli, addressed the Board with regard to Item 2. He explained that he lives next door to the gentleman that owns the ground for the airstrip. He noted that he had spoken in front of the Board about 17 years ago about the same topic and it was defeated at that time. He stated that he does use the landing strip and has been flying for 50 years 1 5
Peoria County Board Minutes, Thursday, May 11, 2017
along with his oldest son who is a licensed pilot. He believed that a tower on the proposed site would be very unsafe.
Theodore Brown, 18201 W. Farmington Road, Trivoli, addressed the Board with regard to Item 2. He detailed that he is the owner and operator of the Gordon Brown Airport, a certified airport by the State in 1969. He described that he has an aviation degree from Southern Illinois University, he is a retired Air Force Captain, a Captain with American Airlines, and holds various certifications. He presented an aerial photograph of the Trivoli area with the proposed site and flying patterns around the airport. He explained that the airplanes entering the traffic pattern from all directions would enter at a 45° angle which would be right where the tower would be located. He said that if a plane were to hit the tower it would create a catastrophic event at the houses near the airport. He brought up that the previous tower that was proposed was not built because it was in the traffic pattern for the airport. He said he was not against a cell tower that would be out of the traffic pattern by at least half of a mile. He displayed a chart used to navigate the controlled airspace for the Greater Peoria Airport and including the private airport. He discussed that due to the proximity, planes are forced to stay below a certain altitude in the area, and a pilot coming into the Brown Airport would be at a substantially lower altitude than at other airports. He identified that all certified airstrips can be used in case of an emergency and if a plane needs to land at the airport, it could strike the tower and be a public hazard. He reported that the people in Trivoli are glad to have the airport and call it Trivoli International Airport; 20 residents signed a petition to support not building the tower. He informed that in the area there is only one tower that is built near an airport and that is about a mile away from the Pekin Airport. He highlighted that a gentleman who spoke at the Zoning Board hearing put it well by saying: putting a tower near an airport is never a good thing.
IV. CONSENT AGENDA C1. The Treasurer report consisting of the Bank and CD's Portfolio for the month of March 2017 and Revenue & Expenditure Reports for the
month of February 2017.
C2. The Auditor's report of expenditures from Accounts Payable system is accessible at www.peoriacounty.org/auditor/transparency.
C3. A recommendation from your County Board Chairman and your County Administrator to accept the resignation of Michael Phelan as a Peoria County Board Member effective May 2, 2017.
C4. A resolution (items 1 - 4 conveyances) from the Ways and Means
Committee recommending that the County Board Chairman be
authorized and directed to execute deed of said property to the highest bidder, and be authorized to cancel the appropriate Certificates of
Purchase. This resolution shall be effective ninety days from May 11,
2017 and any transaction between the parties involved not occurring
within this period shall be null and void.
C5. A resolution from your Executive Committee recommending approval to
settle Personal Injury Case 12 L 321 in the amount of $58,000.00. (Poll Vote per Rules of Order, Article V, Section 18C) 2 6
Peoria County Board Minutes, Thursday, May 11, 2017
C6. A resolution from your Public Safety and Justice Committee
recommending approval of the lowest responsible bid of SCRAM
Systems, Illinois, Joliet, IL, in an amount not to exceed $148,062.25, for the provision of Electronic and Alcohol Monitoring.
C7. A resolution from your Land Use Committee recommending approval of the appointment of Kathi Urban to the positions of Zoning Administrator,
Plat Officer and Erosion Control Administrator.
C8. A resolution from your Ways and Means Committee recommending approval of resetting the County Clerk's Take Notice Fee at $10.00 plus
postage costs.
C9. A resolution from your County Operations Committee recommending approval of the lowest responsible bid of The Tree House, Norwood, MA, for the purchase of toner and inkjet cartridges on an as needed basis.
C10. A resolution from your Infrastructure Committee recommending approval of a Construction Engineering Services Agreement with Hermann & Associates L.L.C., Peoria, IL, for construction engineering for improvements to the intersection of Lancaster Road and Pfeiffer Road, at a cost not to exceed $31,585.00.
C11. A resolution from your Infrastructure Committee recommending
approval of the lowest responsible bid of P.A. Atherton Construction, Spring Bay, IL, in the amount of $105,947.78, for improvements to the intersection of Lancaster Road and Pfeiffer Road.
C12. A resolution from your Infrastructure Committee recommending approval of a Construction Engineering Services Agreement with
Hutchison Engineering, Inc., Peoria, IL, for construction engineering for
culvert replacement on Mapleton Road, at a cost not to exceed $18,750.00.
C13. A resolution from your Infrastructure Committee recommending
approval of the lowest responsible bid of Otto Baum, Morton, IL, in the
amount of $89,816.34, for culvert replacement on Mapleton Road.
C14. A resolution from your Infrastructure Committee recommending
approval of the participation of the Peoria Jaycees in the Adopt-A-
Highway Program on Radnor Road.
C15. A resolution from your Infrastructure Committee recommending
approval of the participation of the Limestone Airforce JROTC in the
Adopt-A-Highway Program on Dirksen Parkway. C16. A resolution from your Infrastructure Committee recommending
approval of the lowest responsible Base Bid of Hein Construction, Peoria, IL, in the amount of $260,000.00, and Alternate No. 1 Work of Hein 3 7
Peoria County Board Minutes, Thursday, May 11, 2017
Construction, in the amount of $9,900.00, for the renovation of the County Clerk and Recorder of Deeds Office.
C17. Approval of Bond for John Henson Bliss, Akron-Princeville Fire Protection District.
C18. Chairman Appointments.
Baietto moved to approve the Consent Agenda and Watkins seconded. Morris asked to pull Item C8. The Consent Agenda, except for Item C8, was approved by a unanimous roll call vote of 14 ayes.
C8. A resolution recommending approval of resetting the County Clerk's Take Notice Fee.
Fennell moved to approve Item C8 and Williams seconded.
Morris asked for an explanation on what is happening due to the language of resetting in the resolution.
Mr. Sorrel explained that the fee is collected by the County Clerk’s office, it has been a part of the fee study program, and therefore treated under the statute related to the setting of fees based on the cost of delivering the service. He noted that a situation in another county was brought to the Clerk’s Association and there is a new interpretation that relates to a specific statute that limits the fee to $10 plus postage. He explained that the amount charged previously was higher and the resolution merely sets the fee to what the specific statute requires.
Elsasser requested if the fee was higher and is now being set lower and Mr. Sorrel affirmed.
Item C8 was approved by a unanimous roll call vote of 14 ayes.
V. ZONING ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTIONS 1. Case #014-17-U, Petition of Mark & Sheryl Douras. A Special Use request as required in Section 20-5.3.2.2.e of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a special use for Overnight Accommodations, provided they meet the requirements set forth in Section 7.8 (Overnight Accommodations) and provided that 1) No more than 5 rooms or suites of rooms are rented, and 2) rooms are not rented for a period of more than 14 days. The petitioner proposes to operate overnight accommodations for Refreshing Mercies Ministries in the lower level of the home. The parcel is located in Medina Township. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends approval with restrictions. The Land Use Committee concurs.
Dillon moved to approve the ordinance and Robinson seconded. Dillon described that the use is for a ministry that provides grief counseling after someone close passes away, it is in use only during that time, it was recommended by some counseling agency and church based groups, and passed committee unanimously. The ordinance passed by a unanimous roll call vote of 14 ayes.
2. Case #018-17-V, Petition of James Kaysing. A Variance request from Section 20-7.1.1.2 of the Unified Development Ordinance, which requires that the height of a telecommunication facility shall not exceed 200 feet, if located in a non-residential zoning district. The petitioner proposes 4 8
Peoria County Board Minutes, Thursday, May 11, 2017
to construct a telecommunications tower at a height of 255 feet, resulting in a variance request of 55 feet. The parcel is located in Trivoli Township. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends approval with restriction. The Land Use Committee concurs.
Dillon moved to approve the ordinance and Williams seconded.
Ms. Urban detailed that the variance is requested for a 55 foot variance from the ordinance requirement in an agricultural district. She reported that the siting agent stated the site would be used to increase broadband and cellular coverage.
Dillon noted that there would be red and white lighting on the tower and it would be constructed with cables, not just the tower, which could be a concern with the airport. He emphasized that the committee voted the way it did because the final decision would be made by the FCC and FAA.
Harding remarked that he learned a lot during the ZBA hearing about the airport. He said that it can be used recreationally and it is maintained as a designated safe zone for a light aircraft that has a problem or due to weather that the pilot can use to put down. He highlighted that there is no issue with there being a tower, but it shouldn’t be in the direct flight path of the airport and is a risk that shouldn’t be taken. He mentioned that most airplanes landing at the airport would be at about 800 feet when landing, but because the airport is designed to land airplanes in a hazardous situation, a tower with guide wires at 255 feet in the flight path is not safe and a plane could hit one of the nearby houses. He reported that he and the residents want a tower for expanded service, but that shouldn’t come at a cost to public safety. He noted that the previous request for a tower had been withdrawn and not defeated by the County Board. He said that there are other towers around Trivoli and other locations which would be better. He noted that the Planning and Zoning department has worked up Findings of Fact, if necessary.
Dillon explained that the Findings of Fact would only need to be adopted if voted down by the Board.
Harding asserted that the committee and the ZBA did a good job, but based on public safety he urged a no vote and he would do everything to help AT&T find a new location.
Elsasser described the airport as a gem for the area, it is very useful for those flying, and it provides an additional emergency landing spot for those in trouble. He explained that it is not worth the financial gain to build it so close to the airport. He encouraged the Board to deny it and find a better location.
Baietto brought up that the Board adopted an ordinance to allow for a tower of up to 200 feet and the Board is voting on only the 55 foot variance. He predicted that a tower of that height in any location could become a hazard. He urged a no vote.
Adamson thanked all of the citizens who spoke and the words of the Board members and urged a no vote.
Rosenbohm expressed that he lives next to the Peoria airport and he sees airplanes coming in all the time. He discussed that he sees them from time-to-time coming in very low in bad conditions, and he is going to vote no due to safety concerns; he urged the rest of the Board to 5 9
Peoria County Board Minutes, Thursday, May 11, 2017
vote the same way.
Baietto contended that there have been other issues of height around the Peoria airport and now there is a want to build a 255 foot tower.
Dillon summarized that the committee had a discussion about how a plane should never be flown at 255 feet and that a left could be drawn anywhere and not be in line with that tower. He said that it was brought up in the committee that a tower could have been built closer to the airport. He expressed that the committee took in the public safety concern, but the committee and the ZBA voted the way it did because the FAA will rule on the tower being safe next to the airport along with the FCC. He said that this is just a step in a multiple step process.
Chairman Rand asked if the FAA would be using another set of determinates in its deliberations for approval.
Dillon informed that the committee had lengthy discussion and it was a learning experience while deliberating the question because they are not pilots, but the determination was made that the FAA would make the final decision. He explained that if the Federal government determined it to be a hazard, it would vote against it.
Adamson stressed that anyone who flies says that take-off and landings are the most dangerous part in flying, and using common sense would say a tower would be a hazard. He said that he agrees that it would be better to be safe than sorry.
Morris asked if the petitioner was present; a representative acknowledged presence.
Fennell detailed that he typically likes to support the wishes of the County Board member in the district, but no matter the reasoning, it is not up to the Board to vote on the safety since this is left up to another agency.
Harding contended that it is hoped that the professional staff at the Federal government would do their job, but when the residents were asked to put their safety into the hands of a bureaucrat in Washington D.C., the answer was a resounding no. He asserted that it is incumbent upon the Board to put public safety first.
Baietto mentioned that there are other places for the tower and the airport is small with small aircraft that will land and take-off in line with the tower. He expressed that this is a common sense issue due to weather, and anyone that votes for it could be voting for disaster.
Dillon asserted that voting for it would not be doing something unsafe. He noted that suggestions were made for other locations and common sense would say that they shouldn’t go there, but there weren’t objections to those locations. He said that for that reason, he and the committee voted to let the Federal government make the right decision.
Elsasser requested if there was another flight path that could be taken around the tower.
Dillon informed that pilots use a specific set of left turns and there is debate on where those lefts would have to be, but could be done in other locations.
6 10
Peoria County Board Minutes, Thursday, May 11, 2017
Elsasser inquired that if in a difficult situation, would taking the turns in a different location still work.
Baietto believed that small aircraft with a 30 mile per hour crosswind with a tower would be a problem.
The ordinance failed to pass on a roll call vote of 4 ayes and 10 nays, with Dillon, Fennell, Morris, and Salzer voting aye.
Dillon moved to adopt the Findings of Fact and Harding seconded. The Findings of Fact were approved by a unanimous roll call vote of 14 ayes.
3. Case #020-17-Z, Petition of Marci Shoff, Esq. (Steven G. Rump, owner). A Rezoning request from "R-2" Medium Density Residential to "C-2" General Commercial. The petitioner proposes to rezone this parcel in order to combine it with an adjacent parcel to the south. The parcel is located in Limestone Township. The Zoning Board of Appeals recommends approval. The Land Use Committee concurs.
Dillon moved to approve the ordinance and Rosenbohm seconded. Dillon stated that the property would be a combination of parcels and doing so would lead to the need to rezone. The ordinance passed by a unanimous roll call vote of 14 ayes.
4. A resolution from your Public Safety and Justice Committee recommending approval of an extension of the Public Defender Agreement on a month-to-month basis until further notice.
Baietto moved to approve the resolution and Fennell seconded. Baietto said that the resolution is an extension while there is discussion of using the current model or a different model. The resolution passed by a unanimous roll call vote of 14 ayes.
5. A resolution from your Public Safety and Justice Committee recommending approval of the initial appointment of trustees to the Chillicothe Community Fire Protection District. (Pending Committee Approval)
Baietto moved to approve the resolution and Fennell seconded.
Chairman Rand stated that he would be abstaining because of a business interest in the fire protection community it governs.
Morris explained that he would be abstaining due to a professional conflict.
Baietto said that there was an excellent discussion in committee and urged a yes vote.
Elsasser mentioned that Chief Denzer has a vision for what he does and is very thoughtful in analyzing and planning ahead for the fire district. He remarked that the two appointments are a great base to start the new fire district.
The resolution passed by a roll call vote of 12 ayes and 2 abstentions, with Chairman Rand and Morris abstaining.
7 11
Peoria County Board Minutes, Thursday, May 11, 2017
6. A resolution from your Ways and Means Committee recommending the setting of salaries for the upcoming Board of Review terms and the approval of a budget amendment to the Board of Review annual appropriation. The budget amendment adjusts wages and benefits for the members of the Board of Review. (Poll Vote per Rules of Order, Article V, Section 18C)
Salzer moved to bring the item to the floor and Baietto seconded.
Baietto moved to approve the resolution and Salzer seconded.
Morris moved to amend the resolution and Harding seconded. Morris informed that the Board had adopted a resolution removing it from the health insurance and IMRF, and through the budget cycle, no benefits were budgeted and the salary was reduced for the Board of Review. He detailed that there was unhappiness with removing the benefits and reduction in salary, and there was a concern that it could be harder to fill the Board of Review seats. He said that the amendment intends to hold the line and only set the salary of the members. He noted that candidates must pass the Department of Revenue test prior to taking the position and there is not a second Democrat to serve on the board to be in line with statute. He explained that if the Board is unable to find a candidate after passing the resolution, it can revisit the issue. He predicted that there are probably many people that would take the part-time job at that salary. He perceived that the change in the original resolution was reactionary and rushed, but the County can host the exam, recruit people to take the exam, advertise, and the job is a pretty good gig. He suggested that County Board members could even serve. He asked for the Board to hold the line as there is some time to get a candidate because the Board of Review can continue with one less person. He urged the Board to support the amendment.
Adamson asked for clarification on the amount of time spent in the position.
Morris explained that during his time on the Board there has been no one that has said they have met the threshold of being full-time. He believed that there are times that the members spend more than 20 hours a week, but accumulatively they are below the threshold.
Baietto expressed that when taxes are raised just 1 cent, the Board of Review is worth more than the salary because they have to listen to all of the complaints and approve or deny. He said it is not a job for everyone.
Elsasser discussed that he supports the amendment because there seems to be enough qualified candidates even under the new salary.
Harding requested the committee vote for the resolution. Mr. Sorrel stated that the vote was 5-2 in favor.
Morris asserted that the positions are important positions as they are the judges of fact for the taxpayers when market conditions or comparable conditions suggest the assessed value is too high. He predicted that the salary in the amendment would attract qualified candidates.
Chairman Rand informed that there were three qualified candidates that had passed the test recently; one is an incumbent, Mr. Fletcher, and another individual that doesn’t live in the County. He discussed that the Board of Review is an extremely important function that is supposed to be a qualified, fair, and impartial finder of fact to determine if your property was 8 12
Peoria County Board Minutes, Thursday, May 11, 2017
fairly assessed if you chose to protest. He stated that the Board is not at the end of the runway, but it needs to set the salary and find a candidate to fill the seat. He contended that there is a greater ease in appointments made to other committees, but the Board of Review is a different animal because it requires a certificate from the State prior to appointment. He noted that Morris has left the door open to amend the package, but it is not required at this time.
Elsasser declared that he along with other Board members can do a better job to promote the position.
The motion to amend the resolution passed by a unanimous roll call vote of 14 ayes.
The resolution, as amended, passed by a unanimous roll call vote of 14 ayes.
VI. MISCELLANEOUS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chairman Rand reported that Sarah Hoelzel, an employee at Heddington Oaks, had a fire at her home and lost everything. He encouraged all to help with donations.
Robinson invited all on May 14th at 11:30am to Bethel Baptist Church for his first service as Senior Pastor.
Harding thanked the Planning and Zoning Department for helping guide everyone through its decision along with the Board.
Dillon highlighted two members of the leadership with Amy McLaren winning the President’s Award from the Illinois Chapter of the American Public Works Association and Kathi Urban in her appointment to head the Planning and Zoning Department.
Baietto brought up that the award for Ms. McLaren is one of many awards that she has received and there is no one better than her at the job.
Elsasser congratulated Robinson for sharing the good news of the gospel and that it is a great place to be on the Sabbath.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Board, the Chairman announced the meeting was adjourned.
9 13
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, the Dunlap High School Girl's Track and Field Team won the 2017 IHSA Class 2A Girl's Track and Field Championship on May 20, 2017 at Eastern Illinois University; and
WHEREAS, the Varsity Girl's Track Team enjoyed an unde feated outdoor season, a 4th consecutive Conference Championship and a 3rd consecutive Sectional Championship; and
WHEREAS, the Freshman/Sophomore Track Team were IVC Invite Champions and Conference Champions; and
WHEREAS, to claim the state championship the team won four relays and scored in each of the 11 events in which the team qualified; and
WHEREAS, the Eagles swept the four relay races, coming from behind to win gold in each; and
WHEREAS, the team finished with 78 team points, the highest team points scored by a 2A champion since the three-class split in 2008-2009; and
WHEREAS, it has been 34 y ears since Dunlap High School claimed a state championship trophy;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Andrew A. Rand, Chairman of the Peoria County Board, do hereby recognize the Dunlap High School Girl's Track and Fi eld Team for its outstanding season and for its deserving recognition as the IHSA Class 2A Girl's Track and Field State Champions.
2017 Class 2A Girl's Track and Field Team State Qualifiers Ayah Aldadah, Sydney Bertschy, Jena Brooks, Andrea Copeland, Sarah Georgieff, Tamara Herrmann, Lizzy Hoenes, Jada Kirby, Miranda Kruiswyk, Kaira Pauli, Brittany Rainey, Aanise Sajna, Alex Schaub, Savannah Sullivan, Franny Verville, Falguni Deshpande, Taylor Jockisch, Taylor Muno, Haleemah Na'Allah, Gabrielle Cyr, Acacia Roberts, Allison McFadden, Tatum Hussey
Coach - Patrick Garst Assistant Coaches - Casey Morrow and Rachel Garrett
Dated this 8th Day of June A.D., 2017
______
Andrew A. Rand R. Steve Sonnemaker Peoria County Board Chairman Peoria County Clerk
14 County of Peoria, lllinois Bank Account Portfolio As of April 28, 2017
Account Balance Variance lnterest Account Name Current Month Prior Month Amount Percent Amount Notes
Accounts at lllinois National Bank
Payroll 52,770 53,668 -898 -1 .670/o 57 S,C Juror's Payroll 49,693 61,981 -12,288 -19.82Yo 0c Peoria County Employee Benefit Plan 361,417 352,245 9,172 2.600k OC Peoria County Flex Spending Acct 157,520 189,202 -31,682 -16.750h OC County Collector 2,360,424 2,435,977 -75,554 -3.10% 604 s Operating 7,793,445 8,566,s79 -773,135 -9.03% OS Peoria County Forfeiture - State 532,717 524,215 8,501 1.62% 139 s Peoria County Forfeiture - Federal 17,948 17,948 0 0.00% 0c Emergency Telephone System-E91 1 1,579,707 1,448,118 131 ,589 9.09% 391 s Trust & Condemnation 84J42 84,142 0 0.00% OD County Motor Fuel 3,285,027 3,083,290 201,736 6.54o/o 838 s Township Bridge 210,305 210,250 55 0.03% 55s Township Motor Fuel 1,230,829 1,188,276 42,553 3.58% 320 s CDAP 567,1 1 3 915,721 -348,608 -38.07o/o 236 s VSP - HRA 1,479,574 1 ,152,855 326,720 28.34o/o OC Rural Transportation 353,221 533,849 -180,628 -33.83% 50c Total Accounts at lllinois National Bank 20,115,851 20,818,317 -702,465 -3.37% 2,689
Accounts at Morton Communitv Bank
Capital lmprovement 242,833 242,801 32 0.01% 32 M Operating - lnvestment 17,876,734 17,854,095 22,640 0.'13% 22,640 ICS County Motor Fuel - lnvestment 4,007,522 4,005,261 2,261 0.06% 2241 ICS Total Accounts at Morton Community Bank 22,127,089 22,102,157 24,932 0 .11o/o 24,932
Accounts at Commerce Bank General lnvestment Acct 10,210,721 10,197,864 12,856 0.13% 12,856 Mt
Notes C = Clearing Account Only S = Sweep Account D = Disbursed via Court Orders N/A = Current month information not yet rec'd M = Money Market Account ICS - lnsured Cash Sweep Ml = Mixed lnvestment Acct
Prinled 61512017 @ 9:20 AM Page 1 oI 2 Fite \\FpCH1\Treasurer$\Finance\Board Reports\2017 Board Report\Bank Analysis\o4.30.2017 Bank Analysis.xlsx Bank16 Accounts County of Peoria, lllinois Certificate of Deposit Portfolio As of April 28,2017
lnvestment Purchased Maturity Term lnterest Amou nt Date Date (Months) Rate
Farmers State Bank
.Pending Employee Health '1 ,000,000 04t25117 19 1.50% Employee Health 2,000,000 "Pending 04t13t17 12 043%
Total for Bank 3,000,000
Morton Communitv Bank CDARS
County Health 500,000 01t19t17 07 t20t17 6 0.86% County Health-TB 190,524 03t09t17 09107 t17 6 0.86% Employee Health 1,000,000 01119117 07 t20t17 6 0 86% Employee Health 1,000,000 01t19t17 07 t20t17 6 0.86% Employee Health 1,000,000 01t19t17 07 t20t17 6 0 86% Employee Health 1,000,000 01t19t17 07t20t17 6 0.86%
Total for Bank 4,690,524
Princeville State Bank Employee Health 500,000 05/05/16 05t05t17 12 045% Employee Health 500,000 05/05/16 05t05t17 12 0.45%
Total for Bank 1,000,000
Recap b Fu nd:
030 County Health-TB 690,524 081 Employee Health 8,000,000
Total Certificate of Deposits 8,690,524
Page 2 of 2 Printed 6/5i2017 @ 9:15 AM Analysis.xlsx Fiter \\FPCH 1\Treasurer$\Finance\Board Reports\2017 Board Report\Bank Analysis\o4.30.201717 Bank PAGE NI]MBER: 1 DATE:06/05/20L7 PEORIA COI]NTY, IL REVSTAl 1 TIME: 09:40:07 REVENUE STATUS REPORT SELECTION CRITERIA: ALL ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/L7
SORTED BY: FLIND TYPE,2ND SUBTOTAL TOTALED ON: FUND TYPE PAGE BREAKS ON: FUND TYPE
FTIND TYPE_1 GENERAL
PERIOD YEAR TO DATE AVAILABLE vrD/ 2ND SUBT- TITLE _ - BUDGET RECEI PTS RECEIVABLES RECEIPTS BALANCE BUD 't 310 01 PROPERTY TAXES 7 ,695 ,935 00 00 00 2,156.55 ,693,778.45 .03 31401 OTHER TAXES 581,800 00 1, 586 58 00 2,430 .93 5'78,969 .07 .42 32209 BUILDING/ZONING PERMITS 445, 000 00 28,t72 25 00 54,383.45 390 ,6)_6 .54 1_2 .22 32219 MARRIAGE LlCENSES 59,000 00 4, 095 00 00 9, 585 . 00 49, 415. 00 15 .25 32221- LICENSES / PERMITS 59, 500 00 L ,751 00 00 6,7'10.32 52,729.68 9.74 33350 STATE REVENUE \,602,466 00 64,053 07 00 172,830.56 7,429 ,635 .44 70.79 33s09 INCOME TAX 5,735,000 00 673,557 57 00 L,704,724.43 5,030,275.57 25.31 33529 STATE REIMBTIRSEMENT-SALA 1,280,800 00 145 ,852 91 00 429 , 157 .47 8s1_,542.L9 33.51 33540 INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENU 745 , 71,5 00 l-3, 555 00 00 13,555.00 132, 150 . 00 9.30 33900 SALES TAXES 12,3s0,000 00 855, 489 78 00 1 ,509 ,91s .92 L0,740,084.08 13.04 34050 POLICE PROTECTION CTRCT 1 ,31_4 ,989 00 t-03, 071 23 00 311, 101. 18 1,003,a87.A2 23 .56 3 4110 FEES AND CHARGES 3 , 545, 350 00 359 ,452 4r 00 904 , 32O .45 2,741 ,029.15 24 .8L 34150 REVENUE STAMPS 325,000 00 31 600 00 00 69 ,7 47 .50 255 , 252 .50 21_ .45 34]-'7]- WARRANTS SERVICE 135, 000 00 11 268 05 00 34 , L20 .'7 4 100,879.26 25 .27 341-90 DETENTION CTARGE FEDERAL 585, 000 00 64 285 00 00 158,535.00 426 ,465 .00 27.!0 34194 RENT-BUILDING 1,66 ,'7 40 00 00 00 .00 L66,740.O0 .00 34240 COURT SECURITY FEES 360,000 00 33 ,436 10 00 a4 , o27 .'7 2 275,972.28 23.34 34550 , CIARGES FOR SERVICES 3,488, 110 00 263 ,583 85 00 5A7,3A7.67 2 ,800 ,722 .33 1,9.71 3 5110 COURT FINES 651,500 00 47 ,550 t2 00 to1, ,429 . t5 550,070.85 t5.57 35120 FINES FOR COURT USAGE 162, 000 00 24 00 40 , r37 .90 t21,,862.10 24.'t8 35125 RESTITUTION 00 00 00 25 .00 -25.00 .00 35910 INTEREST 34,830 00 52 72 00 7, 035 . 63 27,794.37 20 .20 36001 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES 1,315,910 00 127 ,467 45 00 327 ,352 .19 988, 557.81 24.88 37500 ASSET DISPOSAL PROCEEDS 30,000 00 3,749 t6 00 7 ,68'7 .90 22 , 3r2 .10 25 .53 42000 TRANSFER IN L48,365 00 3 ,730 a1 00 7L,792 .49 L37 ,t72.51 '7 .54 TOTAL GENERAL 43 ,428, O1,O 00 2,854,475 32 00 6,750,010.90 36,677,999.10 L5.54
18 PAGE NI.IIVIBER: 1 DATET 06/05/20L'7 PEORIA COUNTY, IL EXPSTAl 1 TIME: 09:52:46 EXPENDITURE STATUS REPORT
SELECTION CRITERIA: ALL ACCoUNTING PERIoD: 3/17
SORTED BY: FUND TYPE,2ND SUBTOTAL TOTALED ON: FIIND TYPE PAGE BREAKS ON: FI]ND TYPE
FI,ND TYPE-]- GENERAL
PERIOD ENCUMBRANCES YEAR TO DATE AVAILABLE vrD/ 2ND SUBTOTA - TITLE BLIDGET EXPENDITURES OUTSTANDING EXP BALANCE BUD 51030 FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES 20 ,548 ,52L .00 2,424,758.00 \2,1,68,35r.56 4,903,O79.75 3,477,079.59 83.08 51032 PERSONAL SERVTCES 3,151,456.O0 3'71_ ,523 .60 7 42 , O40 .55 655,789 .43 1,752,636 .02 44.39 5]-240 MEDICAL/HEALTH BENEFITS 3,L95,159.00 259,780.34 r,6a2,011.52 786,776.92 7 26 , 3aO .55 7'7 . 27 51s00 ]MRF\FrCA 15, 000. 00 .00 '00 2 ,928 .58 12,077 -42 19 .52 52040 FooD 337, 915. 00 30,870.00 .00 55,405 .69 282 , 509 .3t 15.40 52090 MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 111, 075 . 00 4 , 492 .67 .00 9 , 632 .27 r0L,442 .'79 I .67 52100 GAS AND OIL PRODUCTS 1, l-00 . 00 .00 .00 .00 1,L00.00 .00 522OO COMMODITIES 826 ,737 .00 50, 553 . 09 72,720.40 186, 758.55 56'7,247 -55 31.39 53018 AUDITING ACCTG COSTS 114, 570 . oo .00 77 ,850.OO 15, 650. 00 21, 070 . 00 81.51 53020 POSTAGE 1,312.00 50.83 .00 82 .44 1, ,229 .56 6 .28 53050 MEDICAL SERVICES 1 ,506 ,075 . 00 L22,364-54 .00 344,767.44 t, L6L ,3 07 . 56 22 .89 53068 FLEET MAINTENANCE EXPENS 535.000.00 53, 000.00 .00 159, 000 . 00 477, 000 . 00 25.00 53070 CONSULTANT SERVICES 453.355.00 t4 , 9L0 .25 42 ,273 .50 22,088.OO 398,993.50 13.89 53080 ELECTION RELATED COSTS 26 ,356 . OO 1,74.42 2,60s.76 3,408.36 20,351.88 22 .81 53L24 PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICES 1,41"9,997.00 LL8 ,162 .34 .00 358, 553 .58 )- , 06L , 343 .32 25 .25 53350 CONTRIBUTIONS & GRANTS 81,030.00 .00 .00 16,027 .OO 65, 003 . 00 19.78 53350 MTCROFILMING/FILM DEVELO 31,9s0.00 .00 .00 .00 31,950.00 .00 53599 UTILITIES GAS/ELECTRIC 681, 545. 00 6L, O49 .25 .00 95, 000 . 00 586, 54s .00 73 .94 53790 COMPUTER EQUIP MAINT '75 ,200 . OO 5, O74 .78 6 ,250 . OO 5,O74.78 64,875.22 74 .86 53999 CONFERENCES & SEMINARS 51, 700 . 00 6, 134 . 18 .00 9 ,6s5 .99 42,O44.01, 18.68 54001 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,489,509.00 453,558.98 t54,433 .25 I ,362,926 .46 4,9'72,249.24 55080 VEHICLES 366.000.00 .00 .00 .00 366, 000 . 00 .00 55100 CAPITAL OUTI,AY 205, 000 . 00 37, 550.00 LO,427 .50 69 ,456 . O0 125, 105 .50 38.97 57001 DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS 10. 580 . 00 .00 .00 .00 10, 580 . 00 .00 61000 TRANSFERS OUT L,542,530.00 !28,544 -15 .00 385 ,632 .48 r,L56,897 .52 25.00 TOTAL GENERAL 4L,890,802.00 4,152,7'7L.51 14, 9s8. 9'74 .55 9,448,813.86 1_7,483,013.59 58 .27
19 PAGE NI]MBER: 2 DATE,06/05/2Ot7 PEORIA COI.'NTY, IL REVSTAl 1 TIME: 09:40 : 07 REVENUE STATUS REPORT SELECTION CRITERIA: ALL ACCoUNTING PERIOD: 3/1'7
SORTED BY: FTIND TYPE,2ND SUBTOTAL TOTALED ON: FUND TYPE PAGE BREAKS ON: FTIND TYPE
FIIND TYPE_2 SPECIAL REVENUE
PERIOD YEAR TO DATE AVAILABLE vrD/ 2ND SUBT_ TITLE _ BUDGET RECEIPTS RECEIVABLES RECEI PTS BALANCE BUD .04 31001 PROPERTY TAXES L6 ,917 , 060 . 00 .00 00 6,L43 .06 L6 , 9L0 , 9t5 .94 32L29 FOOD LTCENSES 536,000. 00 17, 480 . 00 00 432, 580 . oo 103,420.00 80.71 24 .03 3222T LICENSES/PERMITS 969, 500 . 00 99 ,982 .00 00 232,954 .00 735, 535.00 28 .4L 33110 FEDERAL GRANT 1,028,976. 00 89 ,892 .36 00 292 ,360 .67 736 ,615 .33 33350 STATE REVENUE 4,986,4'79. 00 86 ,904 .73 00 110, s89. 37 4,8'75,889.63 2.22 2'7 .00 33509 INCOME TAX I ,328 ,37 0 . 00 ]-40 ,252 .1_3 00 3s8,6t2.76 969,757.24 O98 .77 2s .53 33525 MOTOR FUEL TAX ALLOTMENT 3, 215, 000 . 00 242,L59.99 00 a23 , 901 .23 2,39L, 25 .20 33529 STATE REIMBURSEMENT-SALA 1,450 ,46O . 00 127, 503 . l-5 00 368 , OO9 .47 t,o92,450.53 640 . 00 00 33540 INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENU 6s5 ,640 . 00 .00 00 .00 655, 24 93 34060 ANIMAL PROTECT CONTRACT 300, 000 . 00 74, 331 . 00 00 74,'179 .OO 225,22L.OO rE 20 PAGE NUMBER: 2 DA'IEt 05/05/2Or'7 PEORIA COUNTY, IL EXPSTAll TIME: 09:52:46 EXPENDITURE STATUS REPORT SELECTION CRITER]A: ALL ACCOUNTING PERIOD: f/I7 SORTED BY: FUND TYPE,2ND SUBTOTAL TOTALED ON: FUND TYPE PAGE BREAKS ON: FUND TYPE FIIND TYPE_2 SPECIAL REVENUE PERIOD ENCUMBRANCES YEAR TO DATE AVAILABLE vrD/ 2ND SUBTOTA - TITLE BUDGET EXPENDITURES OUTSTANDING EXP BALANCE BUD 51030 FULL_TIME EMPLOYEES 10 ,1,80 ,2'7 6 00 1,035,451.20 5,373,775.45 2 , 052 , 961 .25 2,743,539.30 73.05 51032 PERSONAL SERVICES 783,725 00 58,712.85 155 ,27 0 .40 1,39,872.66 488, s81.94 37.65 5L240 MEDICAL/HEALTH BENEFITS L ,9L2 ,843 00 132, 090.30 8a7,257 84 397,351.05 698,224.L1, 63.50 51500 IMRF\FICA 8,514,470 00 905,567 .59 I ,596 ,446 23 2,L79,1_84.'78 4,638,838.99 45.52 52040 FooD 133,900 00 7 ,359 .09 00 24,87L.37 109, 028 . 63 18.57 MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 393, s00 00 36,394.71 00 82 , 632 .53 370 , 867 .47 21.00 52090 1' EO 52100 GAS AND OIL PRODUCTS 7t4 ,7 50 00 72,7'74.14 00 725 ,693 .36 5A9 , 056 .64 52I2O EMERGENCY RELIEF 37, 000 00 4 , 07L .46 00 9,174.26 27,825.74 24.80 522OO COMMODITIES 4 ,160 ,250 00 L49 , 266 .5O 62, OO8 70 L95,'t86.2r 3 ,902,455.09 5.20 53018 AUDITING ACCTG COSTS 6, 100 00 .00 00 .00 5, 100 . 00 .00 53020 POSTAGE 40,100 00 s , 468 .54 00 t5 ,936 .69 24 , 1_63 .34 39.74 53040 DEPENDENT CHILD CARE 350,000 00 24 , L29 .00 00 55, 553 .31 294 , 436 .69 15.88 53050 MEDICAL SERVICES 301,190 00 22 , 894 .66 00 89,767 .57 21_! , 422 .43 29.80 53068 FLEET MAINTENANCE EXPENS 74,rOO 00 6, 175.00 00 18, 525.00 55, 575.00 25.00 53070 CONSUITANT SERVTCES 368,155 00 9,271-20 108, 500 00 40,311.30 2]-9,343.70 40.42 53085 RECYCLING IAUL/PROCESS 56 ,445 00 923.'73 00 6,361_.67 50, 083 .33 \r .27 53279 PROGRAM DEVELOP/COORDINA 692,000 00 55, 000 . 00 00 70,702.72 621 ,297.28 t0.22 53289 EMPLOYMENT AGENCY SALARY 3, 000 00 - 00 00 .00 3, 000.00 .00 53300 AUTO REPAIR/MAINTENANCE 236 ,000 00 a2 , \36 .97 00 L8 ,1_02 .63 2L7,897.37 '7 .57 53320 BRIDGE REPAIR 60,000 00 .00 00 .00 50, 000.00 .00 53340 HIGHWAY REPAIR 515, 500 00 2,675.OO 00 2,675-OO 5L2,825 . OO .52 53350 CONTRIBTIIIONS & GRANTS 159 ,340 00 .00 00 .00 159, 340. 00 .00 53599 UTILITIES GAS/ELECTRIC 232,200 00 25,836 .78 00 47 , 560 .24 r84 , 639 .7 5 20 .48 53790 COMPUTER EOUIP MAINT 8,110 00 2, 110.00 00 2. 110 . 00 5, 000.00 25 .02 53999 CONFERENCES & SEMINARS 143. 800 00 6 , 045 .26 00 l-9, 315 .49 724 , 484 .54 13 .43 54001 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 7 ,s94,639 00 394 , 8)_4 .'7 5 3 ,956 00 t,039,794.02 5, 5s0, 888 . 98 L3.74 55080 VEHICLES 479,305 00 .00 119,305 00 .00 350, 000 . 00 24 .89 55100 CAPITAL OUTLAY 4 ,23)- ,648 00 9,L',7Q-4s 85,774 00 39 , 2tt .3L 4 , L05 ,652 .59 2 .98 57001 DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS t-89,930 00 47 , 482 .49 00 47 , 482 .49 L42,447.51 25.00 5],OOO TRANSFERS OUT 827, 835. oo 3,730.83 00 1L , L92 .49 8a6 ,642 .51, 1.35 TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE 43,4]-O,11-1.00 3,050.552.47 8 ,423 ,293 6,742,L49.40 2A ,244 ,65"7 .98 34 .94 21 PAGE NUMBER: 3 DATB: O6/05/2OL7 PEORIA COI'NTY, IL REVSTA1 1 TIME: 09 :40:O7 REVENUE STATUS REPORT SELECTION CRITERIA: ALL ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/).'7 SORTED BY: FIIND TYPE,2ND SUBTOTAL TOTALED ON: FIIND TYPE PAGE BREAKS ON: FUND TYPE FT'ND TYPE-3 DEBT SERVICE PERIOD YEAR TO DATE AVAILABLE YaD/ 2NDSUBT- TITLE-_-_ BUDGET RECEIPTS RECEIVABLES RECEIPTS BALANCE BUD 31001 PROPERTY TAXES 385,280.00 .00 .00 00 38s, 280 . 00 .00 35910 INTEREST .00 .00 .00 419 10 -419.10 .00 35OOO MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES 476,'785.O0 .00 .00 00 4'76,785.00 .00 4,502,s41-.00 43 , 2t2 .33 .00 t29 ,636 99 4,372,904.01 2 .88 42OOO TRANSFER IN )a) TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 5,364,605 .00 43 , 2t2 .33 .00 130, 0s5 09 5,234,549.91 22 PAGE NLI\'IBER: 3 DAaE: A6/05/20t'7 PEORIA COIINTY, IL EXPSTAll TIME: 09:52:46 EXPENDITURE STATUS REPORT SELECTION CRITERIA: ALL ACCoUNTING PERIOD: 3/]-'7 SORTED BY: EUND TYPE,2ND SUBTOTAL TOTALED ON: FUND TYPE PAGE BREAKS ON: FUND TYPE FUND TYPE-3 DEBT SERVICE PERIOD ENCUMBRANCES YEAR TO DATE AVAILABLE YTD/ 2NDSUBTOTA -TITLE--- BI'DGET EXPENDITURES OUTSTANDING EXP BALANCE BUD 54001 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 9,900.00 .00 .00 750.00 9, 1s0 . 00 7.58 57001 DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS 5,388,891.00 .00 .00 .00 5,388,891.00 .00 TOTAL DEBT SERVICE 5,398.79]-.00 .00 .00 750. 00 5,398,041.00 .01 23 PAGE NUMBER 4 REVSTAll DA"IE: 06 / 05 / 207'7 PEORIA COUNTY, IL TIME: 09:40:0'7 REVENUE STATUS REPORT SELECTION CRITERIA: ALL ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/7.7 SORTED BY: FUND TYPE,2ND SUBTOTAL TOTALED ON; FI]ND TYPE PAGE BREAKS ON: FI-IND TYPE FUND TYPE-4 CAPITAL PROJECTS PERIOD YEAR TO DATE AVAILABLE YTD/ 2ND SUBT_ TITLE _ BUDGET RECEIPTS RECEIVABLES RECEIPTS BALANCE Bt]D 33900 SALES TAXES 4,550,000.00 310, 555 .45 .00 513,518.54 3 , 935 ,48L .46 13 48 35910 INTEREST 19,000.00 .00 .00 8,770.93 !0 ,229 . O7 46 15 35OO]. MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES ,000 00 1s0.00 .00 350.00 24 ,550 . O0 1 40 42OOO TRANSFER IN L, 400 ,000 00 .00 .00 .00 1,400,000.00 00 TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS E 994 ,000 00 310, 806 .4s .00 622,639.47 5,37t,350.53 10.39 24 PAGE NUMBER: 4 DAaE:06/a5/2017 PEORIA COUNTY, IL EXPSTAl 1 TIME: 09:52:46 EXPENDITURE STATUS REPORT SELECTION CR]TERIA: ALL ACCOUNTING PER]OD: 3/17 SORTED BY: FUND TYPE,2ND SUBTOTAL TOTALED ON: FUND TYPE PAGE BREAKS ON: FIIND TYPE FI,AJD TYPE_4 CAPITAL PROJECTS PERIOD ENCUMBRANCES YEAR TO DATE AVAILABLE YTD/ 2NDSUBTOTA _TITLE_-_ BUDGET EXPENDITURES OUTSTANDING EXP BALANCE BUD 522OO COMMODITIES 40, 000. 00 .00 - 00 .00 40, 000.00 .00 53070 CONSIILTANT SERVICES 40,000.00 .00 .00 .00 40, 000 . 00 .00 54001 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 148,315.00 23 , 952 .50 43 ,628 .00 23,952.50 80, 734 .50 45.57 55100 CAPITAL OUTLAY 2 , 599 ,322 . O0 L37,598.57 598,798.76 249,'749.L2 )-,750,774.72 32 .64 51OOO TRANSFERS OUT 4,800,484.00 .00 .00 .00 4, 800,484 . 00 .00 TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS 7,628,121.00 151 ,551.07 642 ,426 .7 6 273,70]-.52 6,711,992.62 12.01 25 PAGE NUMBER: 5 DATE:06/05/20L7 PEORIA COUNTY, IL REVSTAl 1 TIME: 09:40:Q7 REVENUE STATUS REPORT SELECTION CRITERIA: ALL ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/I7 SORTED BY: FUND TYPE,2ND SUBTOTAL TOTALED ON: FUND TYPE PAGE BREAKS ON: FIIND TYPE FIJ'}ID TYPE-5 INTERNAL SERVICE PERIOD YEAR TO DATE AVAILABLE v"rD/ 2ND SUBT- TITLE - BUDGET RECE I PTS RECEIVABLES RECEI PTS BALANCE BUD 31001 PROPERTY TAXES 1,319,170.00 00 00 850.06 1,318,309.94 .o7 34110 FEES AND CIIARGES 4,006,585.00 333 ,682 08 00 1,001, 046.24 3,005,538.76 24 .99 34300 HEALTH FEES.EMPLOYEE 2,750,085.00 L75,440 99 00 523, 860.93 L , 526 ,225 .07 24 .36 34310 HEALTH FEES-EMPLOYER 5,768,203 .00 4A7 , t56 75 00 L,466 ,885. 00 4,30L,318.00 25 .43 34550 CIARGES FOR SERVICES 503, 300.00 46 ,5r9 00 00 135, 301.00 36'7 ,999 .00 26 .88 35910 INTEREST 1_2)-,223 .00 00 00 4 , 360 .14 1L5 ,862 .85 3 .60 350O1 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES t,735,995.00 ]-06 ,940 00 00 501,438.75 1 , 234 , 556 .24 28 .88 TOTAL INTERNAL SERVICE L5 ,604 ,552 . O0 1,149,838 00 3,533,'152.L3 t)-,970,809.87 z3 .29 26 PAGE NUMBER: 5 DPITE':06/05/2077 PEORIA COI.]NTY, IL EXPSTAll TIME: 09:52:46 EXPENDITURE STATUS REPORT SELECTION CRITERIA: ALL ACCOIINT]NG PERIOD: 3/1,7 SORTED BY: FUND TYPE,2ND SUBTOTAL TOTALED ON: FUND TYPE PAGE BREAKS ON: FUND TYPE FUND TYPE-S INTERNAL SERVICE PERIOD ENCUMBRANCES YEAR TO DATE AVAILABLE vrD/ 2ND SUBTOTA _ TITLE BUDGET EXPENDITURES OUTSTANDING EXP BALANCE BUD 51030 FULL_TIME EMPLOYEES L,54O,325.00 178, 801 .40 954,189 .72 357 ,5L2 .92 228,622.36 85.16 51032 PERSONAL SERVICES 529, 890 . 00 34, 915. 80 .00 2aa , 843 .17 311-,046.83 41.30 51240 MEDICAL/HEALTH BENEFITS 185,590.00 ro5,730 .25 LL0 ,7!t .2L 206 ,947 08 -1_3L , 968 .29 t1t .07 51750 MEDICAL CI,AIMS 6,907,987.00 550, 619 . 54 .00 1,442,935 L8 5,465,051. 82 20.89 51760 PRESCRIPTION DRUGS L,977,630.00 L52 ,989 .40 .00 370,864 09 1,605,765.91 18.75 51800 UNEMPLOYMENT CLAIMS 50, 000. 00 .00 .00 00 50, 000 . 00 .00 51810 WORKER'S COMP CLAIMS 250, 000. 00 37,555.85 .00 72,534 13 177 ,355 .8'7 29 .05 52040 FOOD 2, s00 . 00 157.L4 .00 L57 t4 2 ,342 .85 5.29 522OO COMMODITIES 587, 991 . 00 a2 , 254 .28 47 ,808.9s 34 ,447 505,334.78 12 .01, 53020 POSTAGE 303,000.00 I ,259 .82 .00 -1, ,289 56 304 ,289 .65 - .43 L2 53046 LIABILITY CI,ATMS 200,000.00 "t , )-o7 .7 3 246.OO 23 ,8L5 01 t'75,938.99 .03 53050 MEDICAL SERVICES 35, O00. 00 .00 .00 00 3s, 000. 00 .00 53054 EXCESS INSURANCE t,4L5,450.00 110,389.59 .00 955 ,439 2L 46O, OtO.79 67.50 53070 CONSULTANT SERVICES 157,300.00 .00 25. 950 . 00 00 131,350-00 15.50 53999 CONFERENCES & SEMINARS 20, 000. 00 -l-40.87 .00 1, 880 00 18, 120 .00 9 .40 54001 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,958,052.00 ).57,995.84 109,032.38 L ,004 ,21-3 26 !,844,805.35 37.63 55100 CAPITAL OUTI,AY s37,628-OO 3, ss9.00 s ,294 . O0 LAt ,368 08 390 ,965 .92 27.28 TOTAL INTERNAL SERVICE L7,758,443.00 1,353,304.88 I , 253 ,232 .25 4 ,830 , L65 88 tt,67s,043.85 34.26 27 PAGE NUMBER: 1 DATE: 06 / 05/ 20L'7 PEORIA COUNTY, IL REVSTAll TfME: 09:35 :34 REVENUE STATUS REPORT SELECTION CRITERIA: orgn. fund=' 075' ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3/17 SORTED BY: EUND,2ND SUBTOTAL TOTALED ON: FUND PAGE BREAKS ON: FUND FIIND-075 PEORIA COUNTY PARKING FAC PERIOD YEAR TO DATE AVAILABLE YTD/ 2ND SUBT- TITLE - BUDGET RECEI PTS RECEIVABLES RECEIPTS BALANCE BUD 341.96 RENT-PARKING 310, 000 . 00 22,628.03 00 58, 195.89 241_ , 804 .11 22.O0 35910 INTEREST 8,000.00 .00 00 2,339.70 5,650.30 29 .25 TOTAL PEORIA COUNTY PARKING F 318,000.00 22 ,628 .03 00 70,535.59 247 ,454 .4)_ 22 .18 TOTAL REPORT 318,000.00 22 , 628 .03 00 70, 535.59 247,454.41 22 .48 28 PAGE NUMBER 1 DATF': 06/05/20L'7 PEORTA COT]NTY, IL EXPSTAl 1 TIME: 09:5L:46 EXPENDITURE STATUS REPORT SELECTION CRITERIA: orgn.fund='075' ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 3 /t7 SORTED BY: FUND,2ND SUBTOTAL TOTALED ON: FUND PAGE BREAKS ON: FUND FUND-075 PEORIA COUNTY PARKING FAC PERIOD ENCL,MBRANCES YEAR TO DATE AVAlLABLE YTD/ 2ND SUBTOTA . TITLE BUDGET EXPENDITURES OUTSTANDING EXP BALANCE BUD 52090 MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 1, 000 . 00 .00 .00 .00 l-, 000. 00 .00 53070 CONSULTANT SERVICES 101, 000 . 00 8, O57 .79 .00 16 , o29 .43 84,970.57 15.87 53599 UTILITIES GAS/ELECTRIC 17, 000 . 00 2 , L53 .82 .00 2 ,62Q . 03 14,379.97 54001 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 55, 500 . 00 257.00 .00 390.27 55, 109 .73 .70 55100 CAPITAL OUTLAY 55, 000 . 00 .00 .00 .00 65, 000 .00 .00 55001 BUILDING DEPRECIATION .00 9,358.2! .00 25 , 254 .2t -25 ,2s4 .21 .00 TOTAL PEORIA COUNTY PARKTNG F 239,500.00 L9,825.A2 .00 44 ,293 .94 195,206.06 18.49 TOTAL REPORT 239,500.00 L9 ,826 .82 00 44 , 293 .94 L95,206.06 L8.49 29 30 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Budget Subcommittee MEETING DATE: May 23, 2017 LINE ITEM: Transfer to Employee Health Fund 040-2-040-4-460-61081 $350,000 Transfer from CDAP Fund 081-5-081-7-730-42040 $350,000 AMOUNT: VSP HRA Medical Health Benefits 081-5-081-7-730-51242 $350,000 ISSUE: Budgetary Appropriation and Transfer of Funds from the CDAP Fund to the Employee Health Fund for Employee Separation Health Insurance Costs BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The personnel cuts in the Fiscal Year 2017 budget were achieved through a combination of voluntary retirements and layoffs. The County was notified by the State of Illinois that Peoria County's revolving loan fund was last capitalized prior to October 1, 1992 and is therefore considered dissolved. As such the funds no longer hold a federal identity and thus may be expended in any manner deemed appropriate by the community (see attached). At the close of FY 2016, the CDAP fund had over $1.1 million in fund balance and $904,354 of that amount was considered cash and cash equivalents. It was proposed that this money be utilized for HRA payments for employees taking the County's voluntary retirement incentive in conjunction with the FY 2017 budget. Since the number of participants was unknown, no amount was budgeted for the HRA payouts in building the FY 2017 budget. A total of 35 participants were each eligible for a final HRA payout of $10,000 each. This equates to $350,000 of total HRA payouts due to the voluntary retirement incentive. It is proposed that the following budgetary items take place: 1) a budget appropriation of $350,000 take place in the CDAP Fund in order to transfer funds to the Employee Health Fund, 2) a budget appropriation of $350,000 to reflect the revenue transferred into the Employee Health Fund, 3) that a transfer of funds in the amount of $350,000 take place from the CDAP Fund to the Employee Health Fund, and 4) that an appropriation of $350,000 take place in the Employee Health Fund in order to cover the final HRA payouts for all participants. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: Financial Stability STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval COMMITTEE ACTION: Approval 5/23/17 (9-0 votes) Mr. Baietto, Mr. Rieker and Ms. Williams absent PREPARED BY: Eric Dubrowski, Chief Financial Officer DATE: May 5, 2017 31 32 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Budget Subcommittee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution: RE: Budgetary Appropriation and Transfer of Funds from the CDAP Fund to the Employee Health Fund for Employee Separation Health Insurance Costs RESOLUTION WHEREAS, The personnel cuts in the Fiscal Year 2017 budget were achieved through a combination of voluntary retirements and layoffs; WHEREAS, The County was notified by the State of Illinois that Peoria County's revolving loan fund was last capitalized prior to October 1, 1992 and is therefore considered dissolved; WHEREAS, As such the funds no longer hold a federal identity and thus may be expended in any manner deemed appropriate by the community; WHEREAS, It was proposed that this money be utilized for HRA payments for employees taking the County's voluntary retirement incentive in conjunction with the FY 2017 budget; WHEREAS, Since the number of participants was unknown, no amount was budgeted for the HRA payouts in building the FY 2017 budget; WHEREAS, A total of 35 participants were each eligible for a final HRA payout of $10,000 each; WHEREAS, This equates to $350,000 of total HRA payouts due to the voluntary retirement incentive; WHEREAS, This resolution authorizes a budget appropriation of $350,000 (Three Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars) to take place in the CDAP Fund in order to transfer funds to the Employee Health Fund (line item 040-2-040-4-460-61081); WHEREAS, This resolution authorizes a budget appropriation of $350,000 (Three Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars) to reflect the revenue transferred into the Employee Health Fund (line item 081-5-081-7-730-42040); 33 WHEREAS, This resolution authorizes the transfer of funds in the amount of $350,000 (Three Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars) to take place from the CDAP Fund to the Employee Health Fund; WHEREAS, this resolution authorizes an appropriation of $350,000 (Three Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars) to take place in the Employee Health Fund in order to cover the final HRA payouts for all participants (line item 081-5-081-7- 730-51242); NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the County Board of Peoria County, the additional budget appropriations are adopted as it is discussed within this resolution; NOW THEREFORE BE IT FUTHER RESOLVED, by the County Board of Peoria County, that a transfer in the amount of $350,000 (Three Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars) come from the CDAP Fund to the Employee Health Fund to be used for health insurance related costs associated with the FY 2017 voluntary retirement incentive. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE 2 34 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Public Safety and Justice Committee MEETING DATE: May 22, 2017 ISSUE: Reduction in juror compensation BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Circuit Clerk collects from the requesting party a fee for civil jury trial demands and the County compensates jurors for their services. Until June 1, 2015, juror compensation was $15/day plus $.10/mile. The Counties Code was then amended by Public Act 98-1132 mandating each county to pay grant and petit jurors no less than $25 for the first day and $50 for each day thereafter, or as such higher amount as may be fixed by the County Board. At the September 10, 2015, County Board meeting the Board voted to pay the minimum fee statutorily required. Subsequently on September 22, 2016, the Illinois Supreme Court declared Public Act 98-1132 unconstitutional. Therefore, the provision requiring increased juror compensation is entirely invalid. The County immediately reverted to the lower compensation of $15/day plus $.10/mile but is bringing this item forward in order for the previous resolution to be updated. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: HIGH PERFORMING PUBLIC ORGANIZATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve compensating jurors at a rate of $15 per day plus $.10 per mile. COMMITTEE ACTION: Approval 5/22/17 (4-0 votes) Mr. Rieker and Ms. Williams absent PREPARED BY: Jennifer Shadid, Assistant Court Administrator DEPARTMENT: Courts DATE: May 8, 2017 35 2016 tL 120377 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS (Docket No. 120377) JAMES KAKOS, D.D.S., et al., Appellants, v. JESSE BUTLER, M.D., et al. (Jerry Bauer, M.D., et al., Appellees). Opinion.filed September 22, 2016. CHIEF JUSTICE GARMAN delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Justices Freeman, Karmeier, Burke, and Theis concurred in the judgment and opinion. Justices Thomas and Kilbride took no part in the decision. OPINION fl1 Plaintiffs filed a complaint at law alleging multiple counts of medical negligence and loss of consortium against defendants. Defendants filed a motion requesting a l2-person jury and seeking a declaration that Public Act 98-l132 (eff. June 1,2015) (Act) is unconstitutional. Public Act 98-l132 limits the size of a civil jury to 6 persons and increases the amount paid per day to jurors across the state. 36 n2 The circuit court found the provision regarding the size of a jury facially unconstitutional based on article I, section 13, of the Illinois Constitution, which protects the right of trial byjury. Ill. Const. 1970,art.I, $ 13. The circuit court also held this provision violates the separation of powers. Plaintiffs appealed to this court as a matter of right. Ill. S. Ct. R. 302(a) (eff. Oct. 4,2011). li3 BACKGROLTND 114 Plaintiffs, Dr. Kakos and his wife, filed a complaint alleging nine counts of medical negligence and nine counts of loss of consortium against defendants: doctors Butler, Bauer, Mardjetko, Wang, and Chen and their respective employers, Spine Consultants, LLC; Center of Brain and Spine Surgery, S.C.; Illinois Bone and Joint Institute, LLC; and Advocate Health and Hospitals Corporation.r The facts regarding these allegations are irrelevant for purposes of this appeal. fls Defendants Bauer and the Center of Brain and Spine Surgery filed their appearance and moved for leave to file a l2-person jury demand and "to declare Public Act 98-l132, which amended 735 ILCS 5/2-l105(b), as unconstitutional." The remaining defendants joined the motion. The circuit court consolidated this motion with motions challenging the constitutionality of the Act filed in several other cases. T6 Public Act 98-1132 amended two statutes: section 2-1105(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-l 105(b) (West 2012)) and section 4-11001 of the Counties Code (55 ILCS 5/4-l l00l (West 2012)). It was enacted in December 2014 and both provisions took effect June 1,2015. Prior to the Act, section 2-1 105(b) provided: "All jury cases where the claim for damages is $50,000 or less shall be tried by a jury of 6, unless either party demands a jury of 12.If a fee in connection with a jury demand is required by statute or rule of court, the fee for a jury of 6 shall beYz the fee for a jury of 12. A party demanding a jury of 12 after another party rDefendants Butler and Spine Consultants, LLC, were dismissed frorn the underlying litigation by the circuit court pursuant to section 2-1010 of the Code of Civil Procedure after plaintiffs filed their appeal in this court (735 ILCS 512-1010 (West 2012)). a 37 has paid the applicable fee for a jury of 6 shall pay the remaining Yz of the fee applicable to a jury of l2;' 735 ILCS 5/2-l 105(b) (West 2012\. The amendment eliminated the ability of either party to request a jury of 12: "All jury cases shall be tried by a jury of 6. If alternate jurors are requested, an additional fee established by the county shall be charged for each alternatejuror requested. For all cases filed prior to the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 98th General Assembly, if a party has paid for a jury of 12, that party may demand a jury of 12 upon proof of payment;'735 ILCS 5/2-1105(b) (West 2014) (amended by Pub. Act 98-l132 (eff. June 1,2015)). Prior to the passage of this Act, section 4-1 1001 of the Counties Code provided that each county would pay to each juror either $4, $5, $10, or some higher amount per day of necessary attendance depending on the class of the county. 55 ILCS 5/4-l l00l (West 2012). The Act amended the section to provide one rate of pay across the state: $25 for the first day and $50 thereafter. n7 The circuit court heard arguments on the consolidated motion and entered a memorandum order and opinion, in which it held that the provision of Public Act 98-1132 that amended section 2-l 105(b) violates the right of trial by jury and the separation of powers. Thus, the circuit court held this provision is facially unconstitutional and that section 2-l105(b) as amended is void. Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal in this court as a matter of right, pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 302. fl8 ANALYSIS fle Plaintiffs maintain that the provision of Public Act 98-l132 that amended section 2-l 105(b) does not violate the right of trial by jr',ry because that right does not entitle a litigant to a jury composed of l2 jurors. Plaintiffs also argue the circuit court erred in concluding this provision violates the constitutionally protected separation of powers because the Act does not interfere with this court's authority. This court reviews de novo whether legislation is unconstitutional. Hayashi v. Illinois Department of Financial & Professional Regulation,2014lL 116023,1122;' Lebron v. Gottlieb Mentorial Hospital, 237 lll. 2d 217, 227 (2010). We presume 3 38 that challenged legislation is constitutional and seek to construe legislation in a manner that upholds its constitutionality if we can reasonably do so. Hayashi,2014 IL 116023, 1122. It is the challenger's burden to establish the provision is unconstitutional. Best v. Taylor Machine Works, 179 lll. 2d 367 ,377 (1997) (citing Bernier v. Burris, ll3 Ill. 2d219 (1986)). When asserting legislation is facially unconstitutional, the challenger "must establish that no set of circumstances exists under which the Act would be valid." United States v. Sctlerno,43l U.S. 739,745 (1987); In re C.E.,161 Ill. 2d200,210-ll (1994). fl10 Right of Trial by Jury fl ll Defendants primarily challenge the Act on grounds that it violates the right of trial by jury as protected by the Illinois Constitution. Both the United States and Illinois Constitutions ensure that civil litigants have the right of trial by jury. This court applies a limited lockstep approach when interpreting cognate provisions of the state and federal constitutions. Under this approach, the court looks to whether the two provisions differ in any substantial manner. "If a provision in the state constitution is similar to a provision in the federal constitution, but differs from it in some significant respect, the language of the [state] provision must be given effect. x** [I]f a provision of the state constitution is identical to or synonymous with the federal constitutional provision, federal authority on the provision prevails, unless 'the language of our constitution, the constitutional convention debates and committee reports, or state custom and practice *** indicate that the provisions of our constitution are intended to be construed differently.'" Hampton v. Metropolitan Water Reclamotion District of Greater Chicago,2016 lL I19861, tf 10 (quoting Hope Clinic for Women, Ltd. v. Flores,2013 IL 112673, u 83, and citing People v. Caballes,22l Ill. 2d 282,289-90 (2006)). 1T 12 The seventh amendment to the United States Constitution provides: "In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law." u.S. const., amend. vII. The united States Supreme court has held that neither the seventh amendment nor the sixth amendment, which protects the right of trial by jury in criminal cases, requires a l2-person jury. cotgrove v. Battin, 4- 39 413 U.S. 149,160 (1973) (seventh amendment); Williams v. Florida,399 U.S. 78, 103 (1970) (sixth amendment). To reach this conclusion, the Court examined whether the amendments protect the common-law features of a jury trial, including jury size. The Court in llilliams identified several features of the sixth amendment that demonstrate that the framers did not intend for the characteristics of a jury at common law to be preserved in the United States Constitution, including the lack of a vicinage requirement and the lack of any express language tying the jury concept to o'accustomed requisites." Williants, 399 U.S. at 96-97; but see id. at 116 (Marshall, J., dissenting); id. at I l7 (Harlan, J., dissenting). In Colgrove, the Court again found that the framers were "concerned with preserving the right of trial by jury in civil cases where it existed at common law, rather than the various incidents of trial by jury" and thus that there was "no intention on the part of the Framers 'to equate the constitutional and common-law characteristics of the jury.' " (Emphasis omitted.) 413 U.S. at 155-56 (quoting Williams,399 U.S. at 99); but see id at 166-67 (Marshall, J., dissenting, joined by Stewart, J.). fl13 Article I, section 13, of the Illinois Constitution, on the otherhand, reveals an intent on the part of the drafters to maintain common-law characteristics of jury trials. Ill. Const. 1970, art.I, $ 13. Article I, section 13, provides: "The right of trial by jury as heretofore enjoyed shall remain inviolate." Id. The phrase "as heretofore enjoyed" plainly indicates that the drafters intended for certain characteristics of a jury trial to be maintained. For this reason, we construe the right of trial by ju.y protected by the Illinois Constitution differently than the rights protected by the federal constitution. People ex rel. Daley v. Joyce, 126 lll. 2d 209,214-15 (1988) (''[The] difference in the language of our State constitution from that of the Federal Constitution **x< is one of substance and not merely one of form. In view of this difference, *:tx we should give our State constitutional provision meaning independent of the construction the Federal courts have placed on the jury trial provisions of the Federal Constitution."). fl14 This court has long interpreted the phrase "as heretofore enjoyed" to mean "the right of a trial by jury as it existed under the common law and as enjoyed at the time of the adoption of the respective Illinois constitutions." people v. Lobb, 17 lll. zd 287,298 (1959); see People v. sanders,238 Ill. 2d391,399 (20r0) ("The court had previously construed those words to mean the right to trial by ju.y as it existed *{<*.")' under the common law Joyce, 126 rll. 2d at 2r5 ("[I]t is the common law 5 40 right to jury trial as enjoyed at the time of the adoption o.f the 1970 constittttiort to which'heretofore enjoyed' refers." (Emphasis in original.)); Reese v. Laymon,2lll. 2d 614, 618 ( 1954) ("As construed by the courts, the provision means the right of trial by jury as it existed at common law, and as enjoyed at the adoption of the respective constitutions."); People v. Brtuter, 343 lll. 146, 149 ( 193 I ) ("The word 'heretofore'evidently relates to the past, and to determine the true meaning of the words 'the right of trial by jury as heretofore enjoyed,' it is necessary to have recourse to the common law of England."); Sinopoli v. Chicago Railways Co., 316 Ill. 609, 616 (1925) ('"The provision in each [constitution] means the same thing, which is the right of trial by jury as it existed at common law and was enjoyed at the adoption of the respective constitutions."); George v. People, 167 lll. 447, 455 ( 1897) ("The right protected by each constitution was the right of trial by jury as it existed at common law."). This provision does not, however, preserye all features of a common-law jury tnal. Lobb, 17 lll. 2d at 299. "The cardinal principle is that the essential features of trial by jury as known to the common law must be preserved and its benefits secured to all entitled to the right. **'* The question of the constitutionality of any particular modification of the law as to trial by ju.y resolves itself into a question of what requirements are fundamental and what are *'F * unessential ." People v. Ke I ly, 3 47 Ill. 221, 225 ( I 93 I ). flls In 1897, the Illinois Supreme Court addressed the meaning of the phrase "heretofore enjoyed" in order to determine whether a prisoner had a constitutional right to have his term of punishment fixed by a jury. George,167 lll. at 456-57 . The court "found that the right of trial by jury [comprises] certain specified things, which cannot be dispensed with or disregarded on the trial of a person charged with a felony." Id. Among these things, a'Jury of twelve men must be empaneled, and any less number would not be a common law jury." Id. at 457 . The jury must also be "'indifferent," "summoned from the vicinage or body of the county in which the crime was alleged to have been committed," and "unanimously concur in the verdict." Id. 1i 16 In 1938, the court considered the constitutionality of a statute that required a civil litigant to pay a fee for a 6-memberjury and an additional fee for a l2-member jury. Huber v. Van Schaack-Mutual, lnc.,368 lll. 142, 144-45 (193g). The appellant asserted that the additional fee violated his right of trial by a jury of 12. Id. The court concluded that the appellant's "constitutional right to have the issues of -6- 41 fact tried by a jury of twelve ha[d] not been violated." Id. at 145. The court did not discuss whether the right of trial by jury includes the right to a jury of 12. Instead, it relied upon precedent upholding the constitutionality of court fees for a jury trial. Id. at 144 (citing Morrison Hotel & Restaurant Co. v. Kirsner,245 Ill. 43 I ( l9l0), and Lltilliams v. Gottschalk,23l Ill. 175 (1907)). While the court did not directly rule on the issue before us today, the Huber decision strongly implies that the court considered the size of the jury to be an essential element of the right of trial by ju.y. nt7 Since that time, this court has not directly addressed whether the size of the jury is an essential common-law characteristic protected by the Illinois Constitution. However, the court has often referred to the size of a jury when describing the essential elements of a constitutional jury in civil lawsuits. See Hartgraves v. Don Cartage Co., 63 lll.2d 425,427 (1976) ("The right to trial by jury is guaranteed by the 1970 Illinois Constitution [citation], and this court has long determined that a jury is comprised of l2 members."); Liska v. Chicago Railways Co.,318 Ill. 570, 583 (1925) ("[The right of trial by jury] is the right to have the facts in controversy determined, under the direction and superintendence of a judge, by twelve impartial jurors who possess the qualifications and are selected in the manner prescribed by law."); Sinopoli,316 Ill. at 619-20 ("The essential thing in the right of trial by jury is the right to have the facts in controversy determined under the direction and superintendence of a judge by twelve impartial jurors having the qualifications and selected in the manner required by law, whose verdict must be unanimous and shall be conclusive, subject to the right of the judge to set it aside if in his opinion it is against the law or the evidence and to grant a new trial."); see also Povlich v. Glodich,3ll Ill. 149, 152 (1924) ("The statute authorized the assessment of damages by a jury, which means twelve men. In all actions governed by the common law a less or greater number is not a jury unless by the consent of the parties."); Bibel v. People ex rel. City of Bloomingtort, 67 lll. 172, 175 (1873) ("If we construe[d] the word jury *"F{< as used in the sense in which that term is understood in all constitutions and statutes when not expressly qualified, then it means a jury of twelve men 'n**.'!). 1T 18 The court has also referred to the right to a jury of l2 in criminal trials. See, e.g., Kelly,347 rll. at 227 ("The three essentials of a jury at common law are, that it should be composed of twelve men, that they should be impartial and that their verdict should be unanimous."); George, 167 rll. at 457 ("A jury of twelve men -7 42 must be empaneled, and any less number would not be a common law jury."); see alsoPeoplev.Ward,32lll.2d253,258-59(1965); Peoplev.Kolep,29lll.2d116, 126 (1963); Lobb, 17 lll. 2d at 298; People v. Schoos,399 lll. 527, 536 (19a8); People v. Scudieri,363 Ill. 84,87 (1936); Joyce,126lll.2d at220. Thus, there is substantial evidence that the size of the jury is an essential feature of the common-law right to trial by ju.y "as heretofore enjoyed" under Illinois law. flle Both parties present arguments addressing how the size of a jury does or does not affect the performance of a jury in support of their respective positions. Plaintiffs cite the studies relied upon by the federal court to conclude that a jury of less than l2 people does not threaten the effectiveness or authenticity of a jury trial. See Ll/'illiams,399 U.S. at l0l nn. 48, 49 (citing a number of studies regarding the effect of 6-person juries and group decision making). Defendants argue the results of these studies have since been refuted. The circuit court cited newer studies "supporting the conclusion that decreasing the number of jurors corresponds to decreasing diversity of the jury and may impede the deliberative process." tT20 Defendants further note that the United States Supreme Court has cast some doubt on the studies relied upon in Wlliams and Colgrove.In Ballew,y. Georgia, the Court recognized a number of studies that indicate progressively smaller juries are less likely to foster effective group deliberation and that a positive correlation exists between group size and the quality of both group performance and group producrivity. 435 U.S. 223,232-39 (1978). Based on these studies, the Court held that a jury of less than 6 would violate a criminal defendant's jury trial right. Id. at 239. However, the Court maintained its holding from Williams that a jury less than 12 does not inherently violate the right protected in the sixth amendment. Id 112t We recognize that both defendants' and plaintiffs' positions have some merit but remain concerned with whether the right to a l2-person jury was "heretofore enjoyed" at the time the 1970 Constitution was drafted. "Our task is limited to determining whether the challenged legislation is constitutional, and not whether it is wise." Best, 179 lll. 2d at 390 (citing Bernier, 1 13 Ill. Zd at 230). q)) There is ample evidence that the drafters at the 1970 Constitutional Convention believed they were specifically preserving the right to a l2-person jury when they adopted the current constitution. Delegates debated allowing the legislature to reduce the size of civil juries to less than l2 members and allowing the legislature -8- 43 to require less than unanimous verdicts in civil trials. Transcripts from the constitutional convention debates disclose that the delegates did not believe that the legislature had the authority to reduce the size of a civil jury prior to the 1970 convention. 1123 Delegate Wilson proposed an amendment to allow the General Assembly to "provide for juries of less than twelve but not less than six and to provide for verdicts in civil cases by not less than three-fourths of the jurors." 3 Record of Proceedings, Sixth Illinois Constitutional Convention 1430 (statements of Delegate Wilson). He explained that the amendment was intended to provide the legislature greater flexibility to address delays and backlogs. 1d "The amendment itself does not do anything as far as the right of trial by jury in civil cases is concemed,'' Delegate Wilson explained, "but it does vest in the legislature the authority which the legislature presently does not have to provide for juries of less than twelve but not less than six and to provide for verdicts in civil cases by not less than three-fourths of the jurors." Id. When asked whether reducing the size ofjuries and abolishing the unanimous verdict requirement would make jury trials more efficient, Delegate Wilson clarified that the proposed amendment would not itself reduce the size ofjuries or abolish the unanimous verdict requirement. ld. at 1432. "The amendment only gives this power to the legislature, to be exercised by the Iegislature if, as, and when the legislature sees fit. As the constitutional provision is now, it is quite inflexible. The hands of the legislature are tied." 1d. (statements of Delegate Wilson). The delegates initially voted to adopt this amendment. Id fi )l After the second reading, however, Delegate Lennon proposed an amendment "'to retain intact the system of jury trials in the state that we have heretofore enjoyed, both in the criminal area and in the civil area." 4 Record of Proceedings, Sixth Illinois Constitutional Convention 3637. "The language that I seek to delete,'" he explained, "would, in effect, provide a means for the legislature to reduce our twelve-man system ofjury trials down to a number as low as six and to provide for verdicts by three-quarters of the jurors in those civil cases." Id. The majority of delegates voted to adopt Delegate Lennon's amendment, effectively reversing the adoption of Delegate Wilson's amendment and returning the provision to its original form. Id. at 3641. After these changes were made, Delegate Gertz, chairman of the Bill of Rights committee, suggested there was no need to schedule a transition regarding the right to jury trial provision, because the constitutional -9- 44 right had not been changed. 5 Record of Proceedings, Sixth Illinois Constitutional Convention 4241 . "As I understand it," he explained, 'juries of less than twelve are by consent of the parties. They are not constitutional or even statutory, except insofar as the statute says that the parties may consent to smaller juries. So far as the constitution is concerned, the jury must be one of twelve members in criminal or civil cases unless the parties otherwise agree." 1rl. (statements of Delegate Gertz). These discussions indicate that the delegates believed the size of the jury was an essential element of the right as enjoyed at the time they were drafting the constitution and they deliberately opted not to make any change to that element. See 7 Record of Proceedings, Sixth Illinois Constitutional Convention, Proposed 1970 Constitution for the State of Illinois-Official Text With Explanation 2686 ("This section is the same as Article II, Section 5 of the 1870 Constitution, except that it deletes an out-dated reference to the office ofjustice of the peace, which has been abolished."); see also Joyce, 126 lll. 2d at 215 (discussing the debate regarding the right of trial by jury at the 1970 Constitutional Convention and concluding that "there was no intent to change trial by jury as that right was enjoyed in this State at the time of the 1970 constitutional convention"). n2s Plaintiffs assert the right as it existed at the time of the 1970 Constitutional Convention did not include a l2-juror requirement. For support, they cite the predecessors to section 2-l 105(b) and Illinois Supreme Court Rule 285 that were in effect when the 1970 Constitution was drafted: section 64(2) of the Civil Practice Act and former Rule 9-l(E) .In 1970, section 64(2) provided that "All jury cases where the claim for damages does not exceed $10,000 shall be tried by a jury of 6, unless eitherparty demands a jury of 12." Ill. Rev. Stat. 1969, ch. I 10, fl 6a(2). This provision did not foreclose a litigant's right to seek a jury of 12. Nothing in this provision implies the legislature had authority to prohibit a litigant from demanding a jury of 12. Similarly, Rule 9-1(E), which was enacted in 1964 and has remained substantively unchanged since, provided: "A small claim shall be tried by the court unless a jury demand is filed by the plaintiff at the time the action is commenced or by the defendant not later than the date he is required to appear. There shall be 6 jurors unless either party demands 12. A party demanding a jury shall pay a fee of $12.50 unless he demands a jury of 12, in which case he shall pay a fee of $25, or, if another party has previously paid a fee for a jury of 6, $12.50." Ill. S. Ct. R. 285 & - l0- 45 Committee Comments ("This is paragraph E of former Rule 9-1, effective January l,1964, without change."). Neither does this rule foreclose a litigant's right to seek a jury of 12, and the fact that the rule had been enacted before the 1970 Constitution was drafted is not evidence that this court believed the right to a trial by jury was satisfied by a jury of less than 12. In cases in which the parties did not seek a jury of 12, it was understood that the parties had waived their right to do so. See Hartgraves, 63 lll. 2d at 427-28 ("[T]his court has long determined that a jury is comprised of 12 members. [Citations.] The parties can, however, consent in open court to a unanimous verdict of a jury of less than 12."); see also Huber,368 Ill. at 144-45 (discussing the constitutionality of a provision that allowed litigants to consent to a jury of 6 and pay a lesser fee than if they demanded a jury of l2); Povlich,3l I lll. at 152 (a less or greater number [than l2] is not a jury unless by the consent of the parties"). n26 Plaintiffs also point to the court's decision in People ex rel. Denny v. Traeger, 372lll.1l (1939), as evidence that not all common-law features of a jury trial were preserved in the 1970 Illinois Constitution.InTraeger, the court addressed whether women could serve on juries. Id. The court had, in several opinions, referred to juries of "twelve men" when discussing the essential elements of the right of trial byjury. See, e.g., Huber,368Ill. atl44; Peoplev. Pierce,369Ill. 172,175 (1938); Scudieri,363 nl. at 87; Kelly, 347 lll. at 227; Sinopoli,3 I 6 Ill. at 6 I 8; George, 167 lll. at 457 ; Bibel, 67 lll. at 17 5 . In fact, the jury trial provision as written at the time Traeger was decided included the term "men." Ill. Const. 1870, art. II, $ 5 ("The right of trial by jury as heretofore enjoyed, shall remain inviolate; but the trial of civil cases before justices of the peace by a jury of less than twelve men may be authorized by law."). The court explained that the term "men" had been used elsewhere in the 1870 Constitution and concluded it would be "absurd and lead to ridiculous conclusions" if the term "men" in these contexts was not interpreted in a generic sense. Traeger,372\ll. at 16-17. There is no similar reason for interpreting the court's repeated use of the number 12 in its descriptions of the essential elements of a jury trial as some number less than 12. q)7 Furthermore, the court in Traeger determined that the sex of a juror is a matter of juror qualification, not an essential element of the right of trial by jury. Id. at - ll - 46 13-14. Qualifications have changed continuously over time as the legislature and court have recognized the abilities of different people to serve as jurors and the importance of having a diverse group of people serve as jurors. 1d. (discussing how, at one time, it was required that jurors be ''selected from the villa or place where the offense was committed or the dispute arose," that they be "drawn from the body of the county," that they be "freeholders," and that they meet "certain standards of personal property ownership and tax payments"). "It is settled that no one set of qualifications of jurors was engrafted upon the law by any of the constitutional guarantees." Id. at 14. Size of the jury is a common-law feature of the jury trial itself, not a juror qualification. Accordingly, Traeger provides no support for plaintiffs' argument that the legislature could change the size of the jury without infringing on the right of trial by jury. n28 Because the size of the jury-I2 people-was an essential element of the right of trial by ju.y enjoyed at the time the 1970 Constitution was drafted, we conclude jury size is an element of the right that has been preserved and protected in the constitution. The provision of Public Act 98-l 132 amending section 2-l 105(b) and reducing the size of a jury in civil trials is thus unconstitutional. 12e Legislation is facially unconstitutional if no set of circumstances exist under which it would be valid. Salerno,48l U.S. at745; In re C.E.,161 Ill. 2d at2l0-ll. There is no set of circumstances in which the provision of Public Act 98-l132 amending section 2-l105(b) could be valid. Even if a litigant wanted a jury of 6, it is the litigant's right to waive the right to 12 jurors.See People exrel. Birkett v. Dockery,235 lll.2d73,78 (2009) ("It is undisputed that because a defendant can waive his entire right to a trial by jury [citation], he can also waive his constitutional right to a jury panel composed of 12 members." (citing Scudieri,363 Ill. at 87, and Pierce,369 Ill. 172)). "The power to waive follows the existence of the right *'ts'k.' Joyce,126lll.2dat222 (quoting Peoplev. Spegal,5 ilI.2d 2ll,2l8 (1955), quoting People v. Scornavcrche, 347 Ill. 403, 419 (1931) (DeYoung, J., dissenting, joined by Dunn and Duncan, JJ.)). Therefore, the Act as it amends section 2-l 105(b) is facially unconstitutional and void ab initio. See Hill v. Cowen, 202 lll. 2d 1 5 l, 156 (2002). fl30 Because we have concluded that the Act and section 2-1105(b), as amended, are unconstitutional based on the right of trial by jury, we need not consider -12- 47 defendant's altemative argument that the Act violates the separation of powers. 1T3l Severability 1132 The circuit court limited its order and opinion to the provision of the Act that amended section 2-l105(b). However, we must consider whether this unconstitutional provision can be severed from the remainder of the Act. "Whether or not an act is severable is a question of legislative intent." Best,l79Ill. 2d at 460. To determine whether a provision is severable, we consider "whether the valid and invalid provisions of the Act are 'so mutually connected with and dependent on each other, as conditions, considerations or compensations for each other, as to warrant the belief that the legislature intended them as a whole, and if all could not be carried into effect the legislature would not pass the residue independently **'8.' '! 1d (quoting Fiorito v. Jones,39 Ill. 2d 531,540 (1968)). fl33 Transcripts from the legislative debates regarding Public Act 98-1132 reveal the legislation was intended to make jury trials more efficient and to incentivize citizens to participate in jury duty. 98th Ill. Gen. Assem., House Proceedings, Dec. 2,2014, at 37,63; 98th lll. Gen. Assem., Senate Proceedings, Dec. 3,2014, at 35-36. To meet these goals, the legislature reduced the size of the jury in civil cases and raised the amount paid to each juror. The two provisions were intended to act in tandem. 98 Ill. Gen. Assem., House Proceedings, Dec. 2,2014, at 37 ("In order to offset the cost of increased payment forjurors, the Bill reduces the number ofjurors in a civil case from 12 jurors to 6." (statements of Representative Burke)); id. at 37-38 ("By being called upon less often and being compensated better, jurors will be more willing to serve.'" (statements of Representative Burke)); id. at 45, 58, 6l-62 (discussing how the jury size provision was included to offset the cost of increasing jury pay). 1134 If the provision raising the amount to be paid to each juror remains valid while the provision reducing the size of the jury is invalidated, then the legislative purpose will be frustrated. The cost ofjury trials across the state will dramatically increase without any offset. Based on the transcripts of the debates, it is evident the legislature would not have passed the provision increasing pay independently. See Best, 179 Ill. 2d at 460. Therefore, we conclude that the provision reducing the size of the jury cannot be severed from the remainder of Public Act 98-l 132 and that the -13- 48 entirely of the Act is invalid. fl3s CONCLUSION fl36 Defendants challenge the constitutionality of Public Act 98- l 132 insofar as the Act prohibits a civil litigant from demanding a jury composed of 12 members. The 1970 Constitution protects the right of trial by jury "as heretofore enjoyed," which means the right as it was enjoyed at the time the constitution was drafted. While there is some flexibility within this definition, it is clear that the drafters intended for the essential common-law features of a jury trial as then enjoyed to be preserved and protected. This court has long included the l2-person size of a jury within its descriptions of the essential features of a jury trial. Additionally, transcripts from the convention debates make clear that the drafters did not believe the legislature had the authority to reduce the size of a jury below l2 members and the drafters did not act to give the legislature such power. n37 Based on this evidence, we conclude the right of trial by jury includes the right to demand a l2-member jury. Because Public Act 98-1132 bars a litigant from exercising this right, we hold the Act and the statute it amended (735 ILCS 5/2-1105(b) (West 2012)) facially unconstitutional. Furthennore, because the provision regarding jury size cannot be severed from the remainder of the Act, which addresses juror pay, we hold the Act is entirely invalid. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed, and this cause is remanded for further proceedings in light of this opinion. 'lT 38 Affirmed and remanded. -14- 49 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Public Safety and Justice Committee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution: RE: Approval fixing juror compensation RESOLUTION WHEREAS, pursuant to authority of the Counties Code, 55 ILCS 5/4-11001 as amended by Public Act 98-1132, and previous County Board Resolutions, juror compensation increased to $25 per day and $50 for every day thereafter on June 1, 2015; and WHEREAS, Public Act 98-1132 was subsequently declared unconstitutional on September 22, 2016, invalidating the increased juror compensation of $25 for the first day and $50 for each day thereafter of necessary attendance; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the County Board of the County of Peoria, that the fee paid by the County of Peoria to grand and petit jurors revert to the sum of $15 per day with the $.10 per mile travel expense reimbursement that was in place prior to June 1, 2015. ______ RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Public Safety and Justice Committee Date: May 22, 2017 50 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Public Safety & Justice Committee LINE ITEM: MEETING DATE: May 22, 2017 AMOUNT: ISSUE: For RESOLUTION: Forensic Pathology Service Agreement BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: In December, the Board Chairman, Coroner, State's Attorney, and County Administrator were made aware that one of the two part-time forensic pathologists we share with McLean County was strongly considering retirement. This has since been accelerated due to a workplace injury by the forensic pathologist. Currently, there is no service agreement between the Coroner and the Forensic Pathologists. With the assistance of the current Forensic Pathologist and input from the Will County Coroner, a Board Certified Forensic Pathologist was located as a permanent replacement. All parties strongly believe that a service agreement is in the best interests of everyone. The attached resolution authorizes and directs the County Administrator, on behalf the County Board and the County Coroner to execute a service agreement with Dr. Matthew Fox, a Board Certified Forensic Pathologist. The Agreement will be prepared by the States' Attorney and will include the following: Services to be Performed: 1. Dr. Fox shall provide to the Coroner post mortem examinations and/or autopsies, when requested by the Peoria County Coroner or his authorized designee. The Peoria County Coroner shall assign Dr. Fox to cases in its sole discretion. All services shall be executed in accordance with the standards and practices established by the American Board of Pathology, and any other applicable professional organizations. Post mortem examinations and/or autopsies shall be performed within 48 hours of time of death, preferably within 24 hours, unless mutually agreed to between the Peoria County Coroner and Dr. Fox. 2. Dr. Fox shall make himself available at the request of the Peoria County State's Attorney for expert witness related activities including but not limited depositions, court appearances, and preparation for court appearances. 3. Dr. Fox shall provide a written report of all relevant findings to the Coroner as soon as possible but in no event later than 30 days after Dr. Fox has completed his examination and received all results pertinent to completion of the case. All reports made in connection with services under this agreement shall be the property of the Peoria County Coroner’s Office. Dr. Fox may keep copies of reports for any proper purpose, but the original report and all ownership interests shall be the property of the Peoria County Coroner. Samples: 1. All samples taken from the body of the deceased shall be retained by the Coroner. Dr. Fox shall not take, remove, transfer or otherwise keep said samples. Dr. Fox may only use said samples for purposes expressly authorized by the Coroner. Payment: 1. Dr. Fox shall be paid $950.00 per autopsy. 2. Dr. Fox shall be paid $350.00 per hour for expert witness related activities. 51 Length of Agreement: 1. The Agreement shall be valid through December 31, 2020. Other Counties: 1. There are 11 other counties that use the Peoria County Morgue for post mortem examinations and/or autopsies. 2. Dr. Fox may perform post mortem examinations and/or autopsies for any of these counties in the Peoria County Morgue, provided the County and its Coroner have executed an Intergovernmental Agreement with the County of Peoria and the Peoria County Coroner which will include but not be limited to morgue usage fees and standardized procedures. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: FINANCIAL STABILITY EFFECTIVE SERVICE DELIVERY HEALTHY VIBRANT COMMUNITIES COLLABORATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL COMMITTEE ACTION: Approval 5/22/17 (4-0 votes) Mr. Rieker and Ms. Williams absent PREPARED BY: Jamie Harwood, County Coroner & Scott A. Sorrel, County Administrator DATE: May 17, 2017 52 Matthew F. Fox, M.D. 2121 W Harrison St | Chicago, Illinois 60612 | (312) 666-0200 | [email protected] ASSISTANT MEDICAL EXAMINER 2016 - Present Cook County Medical Examiners, Chicago, IL FELLOWSHIP 2015-2016 Cook County Medical Examiners, Chicago, IL Fellowship in Forensic Pathology RESIDENCY 2011-2015 Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL Residency in Anatomic and Clinical Pathology RESIDENCY 2009-2010 University of Chicago, Chicago, IL Residency in Anesthesiology and Critical Care INTERNSHIP 2008-2009 New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY Internship in Internal Medicine EDUCATION 2003-2007 University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA Doctor of Medicine 2000-2002 University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA Bachelor of Arts in Molecular, Cell and Developmental Biology PUBLICATIONS, ABSTRACTS & PRESENTATIONS 2/2016 M Fox, S White. Utility of toxicology screening in older adults based on history and scene investigation. Abstract. American Academy of Forensic Sciences. 2/2016 S Serinelli, M Fox., P Arunkumar., L Gitto. Heroin and asthma deaths in Cook County- a two year review. Abstract. American Academy of Forensic Sciences. 2/2016 L Gitto, S Cina, P Arunkumar, M Fox, S Serinelli. Social Media and Medicolegal Death Investigation: Logged in . . . to the Morgue. Abstract. American Academy of Forensic Sciences. 2/2015 A Alsadi, M Fox, S White. Natural Causes of Death in Young Adults in an Urban Medical Examiner's Office. Abstract. American Academy of Forensic Sciences. 53 11/2013 M Fox, L Kluskens. Aortic aneurysm and Loeys Dietz syndrome. Presentation. Registry of Anatomic Pathology Chicago Pathology Society Meeting. 10/2013 M Fox, A Pontier, S Gurbuxani, D Sipkins. Stem cell factor expression in B cell malignancies is influenced by the niche. Publication. Leukemia and Lymphoma. 10/2013 N Jeganathan, M Fox, J Schneider, D Gurka, T Bleck. Acute hemorrhagic leukoencephalopathy associated with influenza A (H1N1) virus. Publication. Neurocritical Care. 11/2012 M Fox, R. Ghai. Primary PEComa of the adrenal gland. Presentation. Registry of Anatomic Pathology Chicago Pathology Society Meeting PROFESSIONAL LICENSES/CERTIFICATIONS 7/2015 Board certification in anatomic and clinical pathology. American Board of Pathology. 5/2015 Illinois professional license to practice medicine. 7/2009 United States Medical Licensing Examination, Step 3. 4/2007 United States Medical Licensing Examination, Step 2. 7/2005 United States Medical Licensing Examination, Step 1. CITIZENSHIP United States of America LANGUAGE ABILITIES English – Native proficiency Spanish – Limited working proficiency French – Elementary proficiency 54 REFERENCES Scott Denton, M.D. Forensic Pathologist & IL Coroners' Physician Bloomington and Peoria, IL Clinical Associate Professor University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria (309) 830-3483 Ponni Arunkumar, M.D. Chief Medical Examiner Cook County Medical Examiner's Office Chicago, IL 60612 (312) 666-0500 Steven White, M.D., Ph.D. Assistant Medical Examiner Cook County Medical Examiner's Office Chicago, IL 60612 (312) 666-0500 Pincas Bitterman, M.D. Director of Gynecologic Pathology Rush University Medical Center Chicago, IL 60612 (312) 942-5249, (312) 942-5260 Paolo Gattuso, M.D. Director of Anatomic Pathology Rush University Medical Center Chicago, IL 60612 (312) 942-6654, (312) 942-5260 55 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Public Safety and Justice Committee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution. Re: Agreement for Forensic Pathology Services RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Peoria County Coroner currently utilizes two part-time Board Certified Forensic Pathologists to conduct post mortem examinations and/or autopsies, and; WHEREAS, one of these Forensic Pathologists has announced his desire to retire from providing Forensic Pathology services to both the Coroner and States Attorney under an existing handshake agreement, and; WHEREAS, the Peoria County Coroner has sought out and secured a replacement Forensic Pathologist, Dr. Matthew Fox, for the provision of services, and; WHEREAS, Dr. Matthew Fox is Board Certified in Anatomic and Clinical Pathology from the American Board of Pathology and comes highly recommended by both current Board Certified Forensic Pathologists used by the Coroner's Office, and; WHEREAS, the Peoria County Board, the Peoria County Coroner, and Dr. Fox desire to have a formalized Agreement for Services, and; WHEREAS, the attached "Agenda Brief" itemizes, in general terms, the scope of services and in exchange the compensation for an Agreement for Forensic Pathology Services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Peoria County Board authorizes and the County Administrator to work with the Peoria County States Attorney to prepare an Agreement for Forensic Pathology Services, and; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Administrator is authorized to execute the Agreement on behalf of the County Board with the Peoria County Coroner and Dr. Matthew Fox. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, PUBLIC SAFETY AND JUSTICE COMMITTEE 56 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Land Use Committee MEETING DATE: June 8, 2017 LINE ITEM: Revenue: Expenditure: ISSUE: Asbestos Testing Services Bids for Edwards Grant Agreement 4116.29-R (HMGP Acquisition/Demolition) BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Bids were received on Monday, February 6, 2017 for Asbestos Testing Services on up to 20 flood prone properties in the Town of Edwards which are eligible for acquisition and demolition under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. All bid documents followed Federal procurement, as specified by the Illinois Emergency Management Agency and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program guidelines. Staff sent out an Invitation to Bid (ITB) requesting qualifications to establish a qualified pool of vendors eligible to bid on these projects. The ITB was sent to 34 contractors with a background in asbestos related services, appeared on the County's website and a legal notice was published in the Peoria Journal Star. Six (6) vendors submitted appropriate qualifications to be eligible to bid on projects. A property list was prepared and sent to the qualified asbestos testing firms to bid. The lowest qualified bid for the Town of Edwards proposal was $590.00 base price per property, plus $10.00 for PLM bulk asbestos sampling per property, plus $27.50 for PLM Point Count asbestos sampling, for a total not to exceed $10,667.50. The lowest qualified bid came from Michael Baker International out of Moon Township, Pa, in coordination with their Chicago, IL office. Approval of the lowest qualified bid will allow for the asbestos testing process to begin immediately following the completion of the acquisition process. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval COMMITTEE ACTION: Approved (7-0) (Ms. Williams absent.) PREPARED BY: Andrew Braun, Planner III & Jim Smith, Purchasing Agent DEPARTMENT: County Administration DATE: 5/12/2017 ATTACHMENTS: Description Type #17-03-17 Bid Report Backup Material #17-03-17 Resolution Resolution Letter 57 COUNTY OF PEORIA PURCHASING DIVISION PEORIA COUNTY COURTHOUSE 324 MAIN STREET - ROOM 501 PEORIA IL 61602 BID REPORT TO: HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PEORIA COUNTY BOARD SCOTT SORREL, PEORIA COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: JIM SMITH, CPPO, CPPB PURCHASING AGENT SUBJECT: BID # 18-03-17: ASBESTOS TESTING SERVICES - EDWARDS DATE: FEBRUARY 8, 2017 CC: ANDREW BRAUN, PLANNING AND ZONING This office, on behalf of the Planning and Zoning Office, solicited bids for Asbestos Testing Services. Thirty-Four (34) notices of the bid letting were mailed, Three (3) vendors registered with the County and Six (2) vendor responses were received. The attached tabulation represents all bids received and may only reflect a portion of the fee section of the bid document. Additional bid document information may be required in selecting a bidder. This report does not evaluate specification compliance. All required documents submitted by all respondents. Please see attached bid tab. 58 Bid tab Peoria County Bid 18-03-17 Asbestos Testing Unincoporated Peoria County Base Cost Property Address Parkland Tropical Anderson Environmental Consulting Inc. Ideal Environmental Inc. Michael Baker International RHP Company Environmental Group Environmental Downers Grove IL Bloomington IL Moon Township PA Chicago IL Inc. Springfield IL Inc. Algonquin IL 10214 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $700.00 $1,020.00 $750.00 10126 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $500.00 $960.00 $750.00 10220 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $700.00 $1,020.00 $750.00 9926 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $700.00 $1,020.00 $750.00 9920 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $500.00 $960.00 $750.00 10016 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $700.00 $1,020.00 $750.00 10216 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $700.00 $1,020.00 $750.00 4914 N Caterpillar Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $800.00 $1,080.00 $750.00 9816 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $500.00 $960.00 $750.00 10228 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $700.00 $1,020.00 $750.00 9914 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $500.00 $960.00 $750.00 9900 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $700.00 $1,020.00 $750.00 10101 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $0.00 $0.00 $570.00 $0.00 10129 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $700.00 $1,020.00 $750.00 10020 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $0.00 $570.00 $570.00 $0.00 10103 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $700.00 $1,020.00 $750.00 10105 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $700.00 $1,020.00 $750.00 10120 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $0.00 $0.00 $570.00 $0.00 10014 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $500.00 $960.00 $750.00 10123 W Powdermill Rd $1,790.00 $595.00 $590.00 $500.00 $960.00 $750.00 $35,800.00 $11,900.00 $10,030.00 $11,370.00 $18,750.00 $12,750.00 59 Bid tab Peoria County Bid 18-03-17 Asbestos Testing Additional Costs outside of base bid Company Services provided-cost Anderson Environmental Perform bulk sampling of suspect ACM: $9 sample Consulting Inc. Downers Prepare Inspection report: $90 Grove IL Ideal Environmental Inc. No additional costs outside of base bid Bloomington IL Michael Baker Additional PLM bulk asbestos sampling (Turn around time 2 weeks) $10.00 International PLM Point Count asbestos sampling (Turn around time 2 weeks) $27.50 Moon Township PA Parkland Environmental No additional costs outside of base bid Group Inc. Springfield IL RHP Chicago IL No additional costs outside of base bid Vermiculite Analysis $100 ea Tropical Environmental TEM Analysis $100 ea Inc. Algonquin IL Point Count Analysis $35 ea 60 61 62 Business_name Contact_Name Address_1 Address_2 City State Zip Email 1st DISTRICT SOLUTIONS PO BOX 3026 PEORIA IL 61612 A & B ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCTION INC ATTN: EDNA LOMELI 205 E NORTH AVE NORTH LAKE IL 60164 A&B ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCTION INC 1108 N 14TH AVE MELROSE PARK IL 60160 AC ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCTION CORP ATTN: VELMA CHEW 235 W 113 ST CHICAGO IL 60628 ACCURATE SITE ATTN: JEREMY HAFLEY 1600 S BUNN ST BLOOMINGTON IL 61701 [email protected] ADAM BLACKARD 3220 NE MADISON PEORIA IL 61603 AQT ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ATTN: KURT BENCKENDORF 7 KNOTTINGHAM CT, SUITE 101 STE 101 BLOOMINGTON IL 61704 ARC ENVIRONMENTAL INC ATTN: RALPH LEWCZYKOWSKI 5406 N MELVINA CHICAGO IL 60630 ASBESTOS LEAD REMOVAL 6 JULIE DR LUDLOW IL 60949 AWI RESTORATION CO ATTN: KEVIN WHITFIELD 8708 S BENNETT AVE CHICAGO IL 60617 [email protected] BMI CONTRACTORS & ASSOCIATES PO BOX 9245 PEORIA IL 61612 BRADY'S LUMBER & CONSTRUCTION ATTN: THOMAS BRADY 22 CAPE CT PEKIN IL 61554 CENPRO SERVICES INC 18 FOX INDUSTRIAL DR PO BOX 259 MADISON IL 62060 CIVIC & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS INC ATTN: JOHN HOCK 555 BUTTERFIELD RD STE 300 LOMBARD IL 60148 [email protected] ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION SERVICES PO BOX 711 EDWARSVILLE IL 62025 ESC OMC ATTN: ALLEN YOUNG 1156 S WESLEY OAK PARK IL 60314 FINISH CONSTRUCTION INC ATTN: ZACH LEROY 1101 E HINES PEORIA HEIGHTS IL 61616 FULTON BOULDIN 4408 ROCKWOOD DR STE 257 PEORIA IL 61615 ICMS ATTN: ROB BALACO 1215 NE JEFFERSON PEORIA IL 61603 IDEAL ENVIRONMENTAL ENG., INC. ATTN: VALERIE CURRY 2904 TRACTOR LANE BLOOMINGTON IL 61701 K & A ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC ATTN: IVAN ABENVANO 5841 S FAIRFIELD AVE CHICAGO IL 60629 L.E. VAUGHN ARCHICTECT LLC ATTN: LAURENCE VAUGHN 615 FONDULAC DRIVE EAST PEORIA IL 61611 M & O ENVIRONMENTAL ATTN: CLINTON TYLER 1625 W ALTORFER DR PEORIA IL 61615 [email protected] MARK ROSENBERG 4114 W SANDRIDGE CT PEORIA IL 61615 MCKEE ENVIRONMENTAL BRAD MCKEE 430 GRIMM RD CONGERVILLE IL 61729 MIDWEST ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES INC ATTN: ROBERT MELLECKER 4 BONNIE LANE YORKVILLE IL 60560 [email protected] MIKE NEVILLE 26385 CR 2450 N TOPEKA IL 61567 PCCEO 711 W MCBEAN ST PEORIA IL 61605 PEORIA ENVIRONMENTAL TEAM 2201 SW ADAMS STE 21 PEORIA IL 61602 PRESERVATION RESTORATION CO ATTN: MICHAEL REDPATH 11950 CLINE RD ATHENS IL 62613 [email protected] SPS ENVIRO ATTN: WITOLD SULIK 3128 S 61ST AVE CICERO IL 60804 [email protected] TIMOTHY LITTLE 1028 E FORREST HILL PEORIA IL 61603 TROPICAL ENVIRONMENTAL INC ATTN: MARK S HAINES 1350 CHASE ST ALGONQUIN IL 60102 [email protected] WILLIAMS SPECIALTY SERVICES 614 WILSHIRE WASHINGTON IL 61571 Plan holder list MIDWEST ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES INC ROBERT MELLECKER 4 BONNIE LANE YORKVILLE IL 60560 [email protected] IDEAL ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING RON CURRY 2904 TRACTOR LANE BLOOMINGTON IL 61704 [email protected] ANDERSON ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING INC KARA SACHS 5120 BELOMONT ROAD STE G DOWNERS GROVE IL 60515 [email protected] 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Land Use & Infrastructure Committee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution: RE: Bid Award for Appraisal Services for Edwards Grant Agreement 4116.29-R (HMGP Acquisition/Demolition); Bid #18-03-17 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, bids were solicited and received with regard to providing asbestos testing services on up to 20 flood prone properties in the Town of Edwards which are eligible for acquisition and demolition under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program; and WHEREAS, six bids were received; and WHEREAS, your Committee met on May 22, 2017 to consider staff's recommendation for Bid #18-03-17, and voted to approve Michael Baker International as the most responsible low bidder; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the County Board of Peoria County, that Michael Baker International is hereby accepted as the lowest responsible bidder for each property contained within Bid #18-03-17, with a $590.00 base price per property, plus $10.00 for PLM bulk asbestos sampling per property, plus $27.50 for PLM Point Count asbestos sampling, for a total proposal not to exceed $10,667.50 for the Edwards Proposal. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, LAND USE & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 77 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Land Use Committee MEETING DATE: June 8, 2017 LINE ITEM: Revenue: Expenditure: ISSUE: Demolition/Asbestos Remediation Services Bids for Edwards Grant Agreement 4116.29-R (HMGP Acquisition/Demolition) BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Bids were received on Thursday, May 4, 2017 for Demolition/Asbestos Remediation Services on up to 15 flood prone properties in the Town of Edwards which are eligible for acquisition and demolition under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. All bid documents followed Federal procurement, as specified by the Illinois Emergency Management Agency and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program guidelines. Staff sent out an Invitation to Bid (ITB) requesting qualifications to establish a qualified pool of vendors eligible to bid on these projects. The ITB was sent to 15 contractors with a background in demolition and asbestos related services, appeared on the County's website and a legal notice was published in the Peoria Journal Star. Five (5) vendors submitted appropriate qualifications to be eligible to bid on projects. A property list was prepared and sent to the qualified demolition/asbestos remediation firms to bid. A mandatory pre-bid was meeting was held and apprenticeship certifications were required in order to be eligible to bid. The lowest qualified bid for the Town of Edwards proposal was $127,300.00 from Hood Demolition & Excavation out of Rushville, IL. Approval of the lowest qualified bid will allow for the demolition/asbestos remediation process to begin immediately following the completion of the asbestos testing process. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval COMMITTEE ACTION: Approved (7-0) (Ms. Williams absent.) PREPARED BY: Andrew Braun, Planner III & Jim Smith, Purchasing Agent DEPARTMENT: County Administration DATE: 5/12/2017 ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Bid #18-06-17 Supporting Documentation Backup Material Bid #18-06-17 Resolution Resolution Letter 78 COUNTY OF PEORIA PURCHASING DIVISION PEORIA COUNTY COURTHOUSE 324 MAIN STREET - ROOM 501 PEORIA IL 61602 BID REPORT TO: HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PEORIA COUNTY BOARD SCOTT SORREL, PEORIA COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: JIM SMITH, CPPO, CPPB PURCHASING AGENT SUBJECT: BID # 18-06-17: DEMOLITION SERVCIES – EDWARDS DATE: MAY 10, 2017 CC: ANDREW BRAUN, PLANNING AND ZONING This office, on behalf of the Planning and Zoning Office, solicited bids for demolition services. Fifteen (15) notices of the bid letting were mailed, Seven (7) vendors registered with the County and Five (5) vendor responses were received. The attached tabulation represents all bids received and may only reflect a portion of the fee section of the bid document. Additional bid document information may be required in selecting a bidder. This report does not evaluate specification compliance. All required documents submitted by each respondent. See attached bid tab. 79 Bid tab Peoria County Bid 18-06-17 Demolition Services Edwards Property Address Hood Demolition River City Demolition Ironhustler CDO Trucking Peoria IL NE Finch Co. Peoria IL Rushville Il Peoria IL Peoria IL 10214 W Powdermill Rd $15,800.00 $7,500.00 $13,588.00 $9,500.00 $16,716.00 10220 W Powdermill Rd $13,600.00 $7,500.00 $15,172.00 $10,500.00 $17,733.00 9926 W Powdermill Rd $18,400.00 $10,000.00 $17,386.00 $12,000.00 $19,976.00 9920 W Powdermill Rd $12,880.00 $5,500.00 $7,468.00 $11,300.00 $12,214.00 10016 W Powdermill Rd $14,980.00 $8,500.00 $17,638.00 $10,000.00 $21,574.00 10216 W Powdermill Rd $14,820.00 $8,000.00 $16,540.00 $10,200.00 $20,459.00 4914 N Caterpillar Rd $24,920.00 $9,500.00 $16,936.00 $21,800.00 $24,128.00 9816 W Powdermill Rd $12,900.00 $5,800.00 $9,844.00 $6,700.00 $12,197.00 10228 W Powdermill Rd $22,880.00 $9,000.00 $18,061.00 $10,800.00 $21,216.00 9914 W Powdermill Rd $5,800.00 $3,500.00 $5,380.00 $3,700.00 $5,349.00 9900 W Powdermill Rd $18,360.00 $13,500.00 NO Bid $10,900.00 $28,313.00 10129 W Powdermill Rd $15,820.00 $12,500.00 $22,084.00 $13,800.00 $25,946.00 10105 W Powdermill Rd $21,770.00 $12,500.00 $21,733.00 $10,700.00 $25,857.00 10014 W Powdermill Rd $18,200.00 $7,500.00 $11,374.00 $9,800.00 $15,310.00 10123 W Powdermill Rd $18,700.00 $6,500.00 $10,042.00 $7,400.00 $12,806.00 $249,830.00 $127,300.00 $65,233.00 $159,100.00 $279,794.00 80 81 Business_name Contact_Name Address_1 Address_2 City State Zip Email ACCURATE SITE ATTN: JEREMY HAFLEY 1600 S BUNN ST BLOOMINGTON IL 61701 [email protected] ADVANC DEMO JAMIE CASSIDY [email protected] ALEXANDER BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CORP ATTN: ALLESTER ALEXANDER ALLESTER ALEXANDER PO BOX 1508 PEORIA IL 61655 CDO TRUCKING INC ATTN: CHRIS OHL 2618 W MOSS AVE PEORIA IL 61604 [email protected] IRONHUSTLER EXCAVATING INC ATTN: ANDREW L WEEKS 1604 W DETWEILER DR PEORIA IL 61615 [email protected] NE FINCH CO PO BOX 5187 PEORIA IL 61607 NJW CONSTRUCTION III CORP ATTN: KIM DOWNS 800 WASHINGTON ST STE 110 ST LOUIS MO 63101 [email protected] OMEGA DEMOLITION CORP ATTN: JENNIFER ZYCHOWSKI 31W566 SPAULDING RD ELGIN IL 60120 [email protected] OTTO MAX TRUCKING KEVIN WINDISH [email protected] PARKLAND ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP INC ATTN: DAVID B STOWERS 2161 E MOFFAT AVE SPRINGFIELD IL 62702 [email protected] PRICE DEMOLITION INC 5721 N TERRACE CT 4 PEORIA HEIGHTS IL 61616 R LOVE DEMOLITION 441 SANFORD ST EAST PEORIA IL 61611 RIVER CITY DEMOLITION JOSH RUNYON PO BOX 726 PEORIA IL 61602 [email protected] SCHAEFER & SON BILLIE SCHAEFER 2530 EAST SANTA FE RD. CHILLICOTHE IL 61523 [email protected] TERRYS BERRIES EXCAVATING ATTN: MARK BEDWELL 6900 N DOG TOWN LN ELMWOOD IL 61529 [email protected] PLAN HOLDERS LIST SCHAEFER AND SON GARY SCHAEFER 2530 EAST SANTA FE RD CHILLICOTHE IL 61523 [email protected] IRON HUSTLER EXCAVATING DAVE SCHIELIEN 1604 WE DETWEILLER DR PEORIA IL 61615 [email protected] 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Land Use & Infrastructure Committee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution: RE: Bid Award for Demolition/Asbestos Remediation Services for Edwards Grant Agreement 4116.29-R (HMGP Acquisition/Demolition); Bid #18-06-17 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, bids were solicited and received with regard to providing asbestos testing services on up to 15 flood prone properties in the Town of Edwards which are eligible for acquisition and demolition under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program; and WHEREAS, five bids were received; and WHEREAS, your Committee met on May 22, 2017 to consider staff's recommendation for Bid #18-06-17, and voted to approve Hood Demolition & Excavation as the most responsible low bidder; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the County Board of Peoria County, that Hood Demolition & Excavation is hereby accepted as the lowest responsible bidder for each property contained within Bid #18-06-17, and a total proposal not to exceed the amount of $127,300.00 for the Edwards Proposal. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, LAND USE & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 98 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Land Use Committee MEETING DATE: June 8, 2017 LINE ITEM: Revenue: Expenditure: ISSUE: Asbestos Testing Services Bids for Unincorporated Peoria County Grant Agreement 4116.28-R (HMGP Acquisition/Demolition) BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Bids were received on Tuesday, April 25, 2017 for Asbestos Testing Services on up to 19 flood prone properties in the Unincorporated areas of Peoria County which are eligible for acquisition and demolition under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. All bid documents followed Federal procurement, as specified by the Illinois Emergency Management Agency and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program guidelines. Staff sent out an Invitation to Bid (ITB) requesting qualifications to establish a qualified pool of vendors eligible to bid on these projects. The ITB was sent to 34 contractors with a background in asbestos related services, appeared on the County's website and a legal notice was published in the Peoria Journal Star. Four (4) vendors submitted appropriate qualifications to be eligible to bid on projects. A property list was prepared and sent to the qualified asbestos testing firms to bid. The lowest qualified bid for the Unincorporated Peoria County proposal was $9,500.00 from Midwest Environmental Consultant Services, Inc. out of Yorkville, IL. Approval of the lowest qualified bid will allow for the asbestos testing process to begin immediately following the completion of the acquisition process. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval COMMITTEE ACTION: Approved (7-0) (Ms. Williams absent.) PREPARED BY: Andrew Braun, Planner III & Jim Smith, Purchasing Agent DEPARTMENT: County Administration DATE: 5/12/2017 ATTACHMENTS: Description Type #18-04-17 Bid Report Backup Material #18-04-17 Resolution Resolution Letter 99 COUNTY OF PEORIA PURCHASING DIVISION PEORIA COUNTY COURTHOUSE 324 MAIN STREET - ROOM 501 PEORIA IL 61602 BID REPORT TO: HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PEORIA COUNTY BOARD SCOTT SORREL, PEORIA COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: JIM SMITH, CPPO, CPPB PURCHASING AGENT SUBJECT: BID # 18-04-17: REBID ASBESTOS TESTING SERVCIES – UNINCORPORATED PEORIA COUNTY DATE: APRIL 26, 2017 CC: ANDREW BRAUN, PLANNING AND ZONING This office, on behalf of the Planning and Zoning Office, solicited bids for asbestos testing services. Thirty-four (34) notices of the bid letting were mailed, Four (4) vendors registered with the County and Four (4) vendor responses were received. The attached tabulation represents all bids received. Additional bid document information may be required in selecting a bidder. This report does not evaluate specification compliance. All required documents submitted by each respondent. 100 Bid tab Peoria County Bid 18-04-17 Rebid Asbestos Testing Unincoporated Peoria County Tropical Midwest Environmental Michael Baker Parkland Environmental Consulting Services Inc. International Environmental Group Inc. Algonquin Yorkville IL Moon Township PA Inc. Springfield IL IL Property Address 13721 N RIVER BEACH DR $500.00 $590.00 $650.00 $1,250.00 17514 N OAKLAWN ST $500.00 $590.00 $550.00 $1,250.00 1120 N HAVEN CT $500.00 $590.00 $650.00 $1,250.00 1204 N HAVEN CT $500.00 $590.00 $650.00 $1,250.00 15807 N FRONT ST $500.00 $590.00 $750.00 $1,250.00 14449 N RIVER BEACH DR $500.00 $885.00 $1,750.00 $3,500.00 15524 N RIVER BEACH DR $500.00 $590.00 $500.00 $1,250.00 15805 N FRONT ST $500.00 $590.00 $500.00 $1,250.00 16502 N LAKEVIEW $500.00 $590.00 $500.00 $1,250.00 17504 N OAKLAWN AVE $500.00 $590.00 $550.00 $1,250.00 17510 N OAKLAWN AVE $500.00 $590.00 $550.00 $1,250.00 17620 N RIVER LANE $500.00 $590.00 $500.00 $1,250.00 17218 N SECOND ST $500.00 $590.00 $650.00 $1,250.00 4006 W HARP HALLOW RD $500.00 $590.00 $550.00 $1,250.00 10314 N STATE ST $500.00 $590.00 $550.00 $1,250.00 13334 N RIVER BEACH DR $500.00 $590.00 $650.00 $1,250.00 16212 N PORTAGE ST $500.00 $590.00 $650.00 $1,250.00 15532 N RIVER BEACH DR $500.00 $590.00 $500.00 $1,250.00 15016 N RIVER BEACH DR $500.00 $590.00 $650.00 $1,250.00 $9,500.00 $11,505.00 $12,300.00 $26,000.00 101 102 Business_name Contact_Name Address_1 Address_2 City State Zip Email 1st DISTRICT SOLUTIONS PO BOX 3026 PEORIA IL 61612 A & B ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCTION INC ATTN: EDNA LOMELI 205 E NORTH AVE NORTH LAKE IL 60164 A&B ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCTION INC 1108 N 14TH AVE MELROSE PARK IL 60160 AC ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCTION CORP ATTN: VELMA CHEW 235 W 113 ST CHICAGO IL 60628 ACCURATE SITE ATTN: JEREMY HAFLEY 1600 S BUNN ST BLOOMINGTON IL 61701 [email protected] ADAM BLACKARD 3220 NE MADISON PEORIA IL 61603 AQT ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ATTN: KURT BENCKENDORF 7 KNOTTINGHAM CT, SUITE 101 STE 101 BLOOMINGTON IL 61704 ARC ENVIRONMENTAL INC ATTN: RALPH LEWCZYKOWSKI 5406 N MELVINA CHICAGO IL 60630 ASBESTOS LEAD REMOVAL 6 JULIE DR LUDLOW IL 60949 AWI RESTORATION CO ATTN: KEVIN WHITFIELD 8708 S BENNETT AVE CHICAGO IL 60617 [email protected] BMI CONTRACTORS & ASSOCIATES PO BOX 9245 PEORIA IL 61612 BRADY'S LUMBER & CONSTRUCTION ATTN: THOMAS BRADY 22 CAPE CT PEKIN IL 61554 CENPRO SERVICES INC 18 FOX INDUSTRIAL DR PO BOX 259 MADISON IL 62060 CIVIC & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS INC ATTN: JOHN HOCK 555 BUTTERFIELD RD STE 300 LOMBARD IL 60148 [email protected] ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION SERVICES PO BOX 711 EDWARSVILLE IL 62025 ESC OMC ATTN: ALLEN YOUNG 1156 S WESLEY OAK PARK IL 60314 FINISH CONSTRUCTION INC ATTN: ZACH LEROY 1101 E HINES PEORIA HEIGHTS IL 61616 FULTON BOULDIN 4408 ROCKWOOD DR STE 257 PEORIA IL 61615 ICMS ATTN: ROB BALACO 1215 NE JEFFERSON PEORIA IL 61603 IDEAL ENVIRONMENTAL ENG., INC. ATTN: VALERIE CURRY 2904 TRACTOR LANE BLOOMINGTON IL 61701 K & A ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC ATTN: IVAN ABENVANO 5841 S FAIRFIELD AVE CHICAGO IL 60629 L.E. VAUGHN ARCHICTECT LLC ATTN: LAURENCE VAUGHN 615 FONDULAC DRIVE EAST PEORIA IL 61611 M & O ENVIRONMENTAL ATTN: CLINTON TYLER 1625 W ALTORFER DR PEORIA IL 61615 [email protected] MARK ROSENBERG 4114 W SANDRIDGE CT PEORIA IL 61615 MCKEE ENVIRONMENTAL BRAD MCKEE 430 GRIMM RD CONGERVILLE IL 61729 MIDWEST ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING ATTN: ROBERT MELLECKER 4 BONNIE LANE YORKVILLE IL 60560 [email protected] SERVICES INC MIKE NEVILLE 26385 CR 2450 N TOPEKA IL 61567 PCCEO 711 W MCBEAN ST PEORIA IL 61605 PEORIA ENVIRONMENTAL TEAM 2201 SW ADAMS STE 21 PEORIA IL 61602 PRESERVATION RESTORATION CO ATTN: MICHAEL REDPATH 11950 CLINE RD ATHENS IL 62613 [email protected] SPS ENVIRO ATTN: WITOLD SULIK 3128 S 61ST AVE CICERO IL 60804 [email protected] TIMOTHY LITTLE 1028 E FORREST HILL PEORIA IL 61603 TROPICAL ENVIRONMENTAL INC ATTN: MARK S HAINES 1350 CHASE ST ALGONQUIN IL 60102 [email protected] WILLIAMS SPECIALTY SERVICES 614 WILSHIRE WASHINGTON IL 61571 PLAN HOLDERS LIST MIDWEST ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES INC ROBERT MELLECKER 4 BONNIE LANE YORKVILLE IL 60560 [email protected] IDEAL ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING RON CURRY 2904 TRACTOR LANE BLOOMINGTON IL 61704 [email protected] ANDERSON ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING INC KARA SACHS 5120 BELOMONT ROAD STE G DOWNERS GROVE IL 60515 [email protected] TROPICAL ENVIRONMENTAL INC MARK S HAINES 1350 CHASE ST ALGONQUIN IL 60102 [email protected] 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Land Use Committee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution: RE: Bid Award for Asbestos Testing Services for Unincorporated Peoria County Grant Agreement 4116.28-R (HMGP Acquisition/Demolition); Bid #18-04-17 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, bids were solicited and received with regard to providing asbestos testing services on up to 19 flood prone properties in the Unincorporated areas of Peoria County which are eligible for acquisition and demolition under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program ; and WHEREAS, six bids were received; and WHEREAS, your Committee met on May 22, 2017 to consider staff's recommendation for Bid #18-04-17, and voted to approve Midwest Environmental Consulting Services, Inc. as the most responsible low bidder; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the County Board of Peoria County, that Midwest Environmental Consulting Services, Inc. is hereby accepted as the lowest responsible bidder for each property contained within Bid #18-04-17, and a total proposal not to exceed the amount of $9,500.00 for the Unincorporated Peoria County Proposal. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, LAND USE COMMITTEE 112 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Land Use Committee MEETING DATE: June 8, 2017 LINE ITEM: Revenue: Expenditure: ISSUE: Demolition/Asbestos Remediation Services Bids for Unincorporated Peoria County Grant Agreement 4116.28-R (HMGP Acquisition/Demolition) BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Bids were received on Thursday, May 4, 2017 for Demolition/Asbestos Remediation Services on up to 19 flood prone properties in Unincorporated Peoria County which are eligible for acquisition and demolition under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. All bid documents followed Federal procurement, as specified by the Illinois Emergency Management Agency and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program guidelines. Staff sent out an Invitation to Bid (ITB) requesting qualifications to establish a qualified pool of vendors eligible to bid on these projects. The ITB was sent to 15 contractors with a background in demolition and asbestos related services, appeared on the County's website and a legal notice was published in the Peoria Journal Star. Five (5) vendors submitted appropriate qualifications to be eligible to bid on projects. A property list was prepared and sent to the qualified demolition/asbestos remediation firms to bid. A mandatory pre-bid was meeting was held and apprenticeship certifications were required in order to be eligible to bid. The lowest qualified bid for the Unincorporated Peoria County proposal was $206,500.00 from Hood Demolition & Excavation out of Rushville, IL. Approval of the lowest qualified bid will allow for the demolition/asbestos remediation process to begin immediately following the completion of the asbestos testing process. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval COMMITTEE ACTION: Approved (7-0) (Ms. Williams absent.) PREPARED BY: Andrew Braun, Planner III & Jim Smith, Purchasing Agent DEPARTMENT: County Administration DATE: 5/12/2017 ATTACHMENTS: Description Type #18-05-17 Supporting Documentation Backup Material #18-05-17 Resolution Resolution Letter 113 COUNTY OF PEORIA PURCHASING DIVISION PEORIA COUNTY COURTHOUSE 324 MAIN STREET - ROOM 501 PEORIA IL 61602 BID REPORT TO: HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PEORIA COUNTY BOARD SCOTT SORREL, PEORIA COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: JIM SMITH, CPPO, CPPB PURCHASING AGENT SUBJECT: BID # 18-05-17: DEMOLITION SERVCIES – UNINCORPORATED PEORIA COUNTY DATE: MAY 10, 2017 CC: ANDREW BRAUN, PLANNING AND ZONING This office, on behalf of the Planning and Zoning Office, solicited bids for demolition services. Fifteen (15) notices of the bid letting were mailed, Seven (7) vendors registered with the County and Five (5) vendor responses were received. The attached tabulation represents all bids received and may only reflect a portion of the fee section of the bid document. Additional bid document information may be required in selecting a bidder. This report does not evaluate specification compliance. All required documents submitted by each respondent. See attached bid tab. 114 Bid tab Peoria County Bid 18-05-17 Demolotion Services Unincoporated Peoria County Hood Demolition NE Finch Co. River City Demolition Ironhustler Peoria CDO Trucking Peoria Il Rushville IL Peoria IL Peoria IL IL Property Address 13721 N RIVER BEACH DR $16,800.00 $10,000.00 $20,167.00 $10,900.00 $27,892.00 17514 N OAKLAWN ST $18,800.00 $8,500.00 $12,868.00 $10,700.00 $22,723.00 1120 N HAVEN CT $12,900.00 $10,000.00 $12,868.00 $9,500.00 $20,255.00 1204 N HAVEN CT $9,800.00 $8,500.00 $12,940.00 $8,900.00 $20,655.00 15807 N FRONT ST $18,400.00 $17,250.00 $31,156.00 $16,000.00 $25,790.00 14449 N RIVER BEACH DR $38,970.00 $31,250.00 $46,492.00 $24,500.00 $25,790.00 15524 N RIVER BEACH DR $18,600.00 $6,000.00 $7,684.00 $9,900.00 $10,579.00 15805 N FRONT ST $19,800.00 $7,500.00 $11,428.00 $8,500.00 $18,543.00 16502 N LAKEVIEW $19,460.00 $6,500.00 $10,060.00 $7,900.00 $10,630.00 17504 N OAKLAWN AVE $19,200.00 $8,000.00 $11,950.00 $9,400.00 $22,608.00 17510 N OAKLAWN AVE $19,900.00 $9,500.00 $14,596.00 $11,000.00 $23,537.00 17620 N RIVER LANE $18,880.00 $7,500.00 $11,140.00 $10,500.00 $24,076.00 17218 N SECOND ST $18,920.00 $12,500.00 $19,429.00 $10,400.00 $25,650.00 4006 W HARP HALLOW RD $24,980.00 $9,500.00 $14,218.00 $19,500.00 $44,109.00 10314 N STATE ST $23,900.00 $8,500.00 $12,148.00 $10,600.00 $25,727.00 13334 N RIVER BEACH DR $18,400.00 $11,500.00 $14,650.00 $11,300.00 $25,750.00 16212 N PORTAGE ST $19,600.00 $13,500.00 $21,508.00 $11,800.00 $26,854.00 15532 N RIVER BEACH DR $14,960.00 $8,000.00 $7,684.00 $9,000.00 $19,556.00 15016 N RIVER BEACH DR No bid $12,500.00 $16,234.00 $20,000.00 $23,322.00 $352,270.00 $206,500.00 $309,220.00 $230,300.00 $444,046.00 115 116 Business_name Contact_Name Address_1 Address_2 City State Zip Email ACCURATE SITE ATTN: JEREMY HAFLEY 1600 S BUNN ST BLOOMINGTON IL 61701 [email protected] ADVANC DEMO JAMIE CASSIDY [email protected] ALEXANDER BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CORP ATTN: ALLESTER ALEXANDER ALLESTER ALEXANDER PO BOX 1508 PEORIA IL 61655 CDO TRUCKING INC ATTN: CHRIS OHL 2618 W MOSS AVE PEORIA IL 61604 [email protected] IRONHUSTLER EXCAVATING INC ATTN: ANDREW L WEEKS 1604 W DETWEILER DR PEORIA IL 61615 [email protected] NE FINCH CO PO BOX 5187 PEORIA IL 61607 NJW CONSTRUCTION III CORP ATTN: KIM DOWNS 800 WASHINGTON ST STE 110 ST LOUIS MO 63101 [email protected] OMEGA DEMOLITION CORP ATTN: JENNIFER ZYCHOWSKI 31W566 SPAULDING RD ELGIN IL 60120 [email protected] OTTO MAX TRUCKING KEVIN WINDISH [email protected] PARKLAND ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP INC ATTN: DAVID B STOWERS 2161 E MOFFAT AVE SPRINGFIELD IL 62702 [email protected] PRICE DEMOLITION INC 5721 N TERRACE CT 4 PEORIA HEIGHTS IL 61616 R LOVE DEMOLITION 441 SANFORD ST EAST PEORIA IL 61611 RIVER CITY DEMOLITION JOSH RUNYON PO BOX 726 PEORIA IL 61602 [email protected] SCHAEFER & SON BILLIE SCHAEFER 2530 EAST SANTA FE RD. CHILLICOTHE IL 61523 [email protected] TERRYS BERRIES EXCAVATING ATTN: MARK BEDWELL 6900 N DOG TOWN LN ELMWOOD IL 61529 [email protected] PLAN HOLDERS LIST SCHAEFER AND SON GARY SCHAEFER 2530 EAST SANTA FE RD CHILLICOTHE IL 61523 [email protected] IRON HUSTLER EXCAVATING DAVE SCHIELIEN 1604 WE DETWEILLER DR PEORIA IL 61615 [email protected] 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Land Use & Infrastructure Committee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution: RE: Bid Award for Demolition/Asbestos Remediation Services for Unincorporated Peoria County Grant Agreement 4116.28-R (HMGP Acquisition/Demolition); Bid #18- 05-17 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, bids were solicited and received with regard to providing asbestos testing services on up to 19 flood prone properties in the Unincorporated Peoria County which are eligible for acquisition and demolition under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program; and WHEREAS, five bids were received; and WHEREAS, your Committee met on May 22, 2017 to consider staff's recommendation for Bid #18-05-17, and voted to approve Hood Demolition & Excavation as the most responsible low bidder; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the County Board of Peoria County, that Hood Demolition & Excavation is hereby accepted as the lowest responsible bidder for each property contained within Bid #18-05-17, and a total proposal not to exceed the amount of $206,500.00 for the Unincorporated Peoria County Proposal. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, LAND USE & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 133 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: County Operations LINE ITEM: 082-5-082-7-734-53009 MEETING DATE: May 22, 2017 AMOUNT: $653,942.59 ISSUE: Approve settlement of insurance claim for 2015 water damage incident. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: On February 14, 2015 the County Courthouse sustained significant water damage as a result of a faulty damper/valve issue. Total costs incurred to remodel the Circuit Clerk's Office and courtrooms on the first, second, and third floors were $$1,211,555.47 and a settlement has been reached to measure the gross loss at $1,150,000.00. The County's deductible is $100,000 and an advance payment has been received in the amount of $396,057.41, leaving a final settlement payment to the County for $653,942.59. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: Effective Service Delivery STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve settlement of $1,150,077.00 and payment to Peoria County for $653,942.59. COMMITTEE ACTION: Approval 5/22/17 (6-0 votes) Mr. Rosenbohm voted yes via teleconference; Mr. Rieker absent PREPARED BY: Shauna Musselman, Assistant County Administrator DEPARTMENT: County Administration DATE: May 15, 2017 134 Statement of Loss Insured: County of Peoria Coverage Abstract: 324 Main Street Real Property (Max Recoverable-All Coverages) Peoria, IL 61602 Extra Expense Cause: Water Damage Professional Fees Date: 2/14/2015 Compliance with the Law Claim No: 441334 Valuable Papers & Records Valuation Policy Deductible Item I: Real Property Loss as Determined: As Claimed AFM as Reviewed As Settled a. Building Building per Insured's Incurred Costs: Circuit Clerk G-22: Floor Covering - Carpet $ 52,140.00 $ 52,140.00 $ 52,140.00 Architect $ 19,920.00 $ 19,920.00 $ 19,920.00 Total Circuit Court Repairs $ 72,060.00 $ 72,060.00 $ 72,060.00 Courtoom 123: Temporary Repairs per Horan Construction Co. # 107720 $ 114,501.99 $ 109,016.00 $ 109,016.00 Demolition per Price Demolition # 108188 $ 2,250.00 $ 2,250.00 $ 2,250.00 Clean-Up per Menhold Restoration # 108102 $ 62,877.37 $ 62,877.37 $ 62,877.37 Final Repairs per Bishop Bros, Inc. # 102588 $ 203,758.00 $ 195,116.55 $ 201,039.55 Final Repairs per Geo J. Rothman Co. # 102487 $ 40,000.00 $ 36,803.85 $ 39,071.90 Architect per Dewberry # 102339 $ 35,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 35,000.00 Lighting per Springfield Electric # 100455 $ 19,970.75 $ 19,970.75 $ 19,970.75 Fire Alarm per Dynamic Controls # 101361 $ 7,827.94 $ 7,827.94 $ 7,827.94 Security Camera R & RI Per Selco #100648 $ 698.00 $ 698.00 $ 698.00 Insured Employee Labor $ 63,591.98 $ 63,591.98 $ 63,591.98 Total Courtroom 123 $ 550,476.03 $ 533,152.44 $ 541,343.49 Courtroom 222: Repairs per Horan Construction # 107720 $ 199,822.22 $ 187,984.62 $ 196,252.67 Demolition per Price Demolition # 108188 $ 2,250.00 $ 2,250.00 $ 2,250.00 Benches & Gates per Geo. J. Rothan Co. # 102487 $ 30,016.00 $ 30,016.00 $ 30,016.00 Security Camera R & RI Per Selco #100648 $ 607.00 $ 607.00 $ 607.00 Total Courtroom 222: $ 232,695.22 $ 220,857.62 $ 229,125.67 Courtroom 322: Repairs per Horan Construction # 107720 $ 199,822.22 $ 187,984.62 $ 196,252.67 Demolition per Price Demolition # 108188 $ 2,250.00 $ 2,250.00 $ 2,250.00 Benches & Gates per Geo. J. Rothan Co. # 102487 $ 30,016.00 $ 30,016.00 $ 30,016.00 Security Camera R & RI Per Selco #100648 $ 607.00 $ 607.00 $ 607.00 Total Courtroom 222: $ 232,695.22 $ 220,857.62 $ 229,125.67 135 Page 1 b. Business Personal Property BPP per Insured Incurred Costs: IT Temporary Replacement Courtroom 123 Per Thompson Electonics $ 7,433.19 $ 7,433.19 $ 7,433.19 IT Permanenet Replacement All Courttooms Per Thompson Electronics $ 110,473.81 $ 40,189.98 $ 65,189.98 Computer Replacement per Peoria County $ 5,722.00 $ 5,722.00 $ 5,722.00 Total BPP $ 123,629.00 $ 53,345.17 $ 78,345.17 Total Real Property $ 1,211,555.47 $ 1,100,272.85 $ 1,150,000.00 Claim Recapitulation: As Settled Gross Loss as Measured $ 1,150,000.00 Less Policy Deductible $ (100,000.00) Net Loss as Measured $ 1,050,000.00 Less Advance Payments $ (396,057.41) Balance $ 653,942.59 Breakdown of payment Payable to: 1. County of Peoria $ 653,942.59 Total payment $ 653,942.59 136 Page 2 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your County Operations Committee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution: RE: Insurance Claim Settlement RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Peoria County Courthouse sustained significant water damage during an incident on February 14, 2015; and WHEREAS, a settlement for the insurance claim has been reached in the amount of $1,150,000.00; and WHEREAS, after accounting for the $100,000 deductible and the $396,057.41 advanced payment, the final settlement payment will be $653,942.59. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the County Board of Peoria County, that the County of Peoria approves the settlement amount and final payment and authorizes the County Administrator to execute the settlement documents. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, County Operations Committee 137 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Infrastructure LINE ITEM: N/A MEETING DATE: May 22, 2017 AMOUNT: N/A ISSUE: Resolution for an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Peoria for Peoria County to perform Highway Structure inspections for the City. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Peoria County entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Peoria in 2012 to perform Highway Structure (bridge) inspections for the City. Under the Intergovernmental Agreement, the County will perform inspections for the City. The City will maintain ownership and responsibility for the structures. The Intergovernmental Agreement will expire June 1, 2022. The City has 13 structures under their jurisdiction that are included in this agreement. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: INFRASTRUCTURE STEWARDSHIP EFFECTIVE SERVICE DELIVERY HEALTHY VIBRANT COMMUNITIES COLLABORATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Resolution COMMITTEE ACTION: Approved 5/22/17 (5-0 votes) PREPARED BY: Jeffrey D. Gilles DEPARTMENT: Highway DATE: April 27, 2017 138 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTY OF PEORIA AND CITY OF PEORIA This Agreement effective and commencing on ______, 2017, by and between the COUNTY OF PEORIA, a body politic and corporate of the State of Illinois, hereinafter called the COUNTY, and the CITY OF PEORIA, hereinafter called the CITY. WITNESSETH THAT: Whereas, the COUNTY and CITY are desirous to further intergovernmental cooperation between the two entities; and Whereas Highway Structure Inspections are an area where intergovernmental cooperation will be beneficial to the CITY; and Whereas the COUNTY can provide Highway Structure Inspections for the CITY; and Whereas the COUNTY and the CITY have reached an agreement pursuant to authority granted by Article VII, Section 10, of the Constitution of Illinois, 1970 and the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, (5ILCS 220/1 et.seq.). NOW THEREFORE, in cooperation of the mutual promises and covenants hereinafter set forth, it is agreed by and between the COUNTY and the CITY that: I. DUTIES OF CITY A. The CITY shall continue to be the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) Program Manager for Highway Structures under the jurisdiction of the CITY. B. The CITY shall notify the COUNTY of any new highway structures, and when the highway structures are completed and are ready for an Initial Inspection. C. The CITY shall notify the COUNTY of all required Special Feature Inspections or any changes to the frequency of the Special Feature Inspections. D. The CITY shall provide the COUNTY with all Highway Structure Plans. E. The CITY shall be responsible for coordination and implementation of any and all weight limit postings, changes to lane width, and closures. F. The CITY shall continue to maintain all permanent Highway Structure records. G. Upon review of the inspections performed by the COUNTY, the CITY shall submit all reports to the Illinois Department of Transportation. H. The CITY shall provide to the COUNTY any special tools, equipment, or traffic control devices and personnel necessary to perform the Highway Structure Inspections. I. The CITY shall bear all responsibility and costs to perform any Highway Structure Inspections or related reports that the COUNTY deems is not within the COUNTY's capability. II. DUTIES OF COUNTY A. The COUNTY shall act as the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) Team Leader for Highway Structures under the jurisdiction of the CITY. B. The COUNTY shall perform all Initial, Routine, and Special Feature Inspections for Highway Structures under the jurisdiction of the CITY at the intervals required by the Structures Information Management System (SIMS) that is maintained by the Illinois Department of Transportation. C. The COUNTY shall notify the CITY of any maintenance items that are found during the inspections that need to be addressed by the CITY. D. The COUNTY shall submit all reports, photographs, and other related items to the CITY upon the completion of the Highway Structures Inspections. 139 III. TERM A. This Agreement shall commence on the day that the last party executes it and shall continue until June 1, 2022. IV. INDEMNIFICATION The CITY shall indemnify and hold harmless the COUNTY and its directors, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all losses, damages, claims, liability, costs, and expenses incidental thereto (including costs of litigation, settlement, and reasonable attorneys' fees) which any or all of them may hereinafter incur, be responsible for or pay out as a result of bodily injuries (including death) to any person or damage (including loss of use) to any property (public or private) which arise out of or are caused by any negligent acts, negligent omissions, or willful misconduct of the CITY, its directors, officers, employees, agents, and contractors in the performance of the terms of this agreement. The COUNTY shall indemnify and hold harmless the CITY and its directors, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all losses, damages, claims, liability, costs, and expenses incidental thereto (including costs of litigation, settlement, and reasonable attorneys' fees) which any or all of them may hereinafter incur, be responsible for or pay out as a result of bodily injuries (including death) to any person or damage (including loss of use) to any property (public or private) which arise out of or are caused by any negligent acts, negligent omissions, or willful misconduct of the COUNTY, its directors, officers, employees, agents, and contractors in the performance of the terms of this agreement. V. GENERAL CONDITIONS: A. This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their successors and assigns. B. If any portion of this Agreement shall be, for any reason, invalid or unenforceable, the remaining portion or portions shall, nevertheless, be valid and enforceable and carried into effect, unless to do so would clearly violate the present legal and valid intention of the parties hereto. C. ENTIRE AGREEMENT - AMENDMENTS The preceding constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and no verbal statements shall supersede any of its provisions. This Agreement may be amended in writing by a mutual agreement executed with the same formalities and in the same manner by which this Agreement was executed. D. APPLICABLE LAW. The parties to this contract agree that it is governed by the laws of the State of Illinois. COUNTY OF PEORIA CITY OF PEORIA By:______By:______SCOTT SORREL PATRICK URICH Peoria County Administrator Peoria City Manager ATTEST:______ATTEST:______STEVE SONNEMAKER BETH A. BALL County Clerk Peoria City Clerk 140 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Infrastructure Committee does hereby recommend the passage of the following Resolution: Intergovernmental Agreement between the County of Peoria and the City of Peoria for the Inspection of Highway Structures within the City of Peoria RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the COUNTY OF PEORIA and the CITY OF PEORIA are desirous to further intergovernmental cooperation between the two entities; and WHEREAS, Highway Structure Inspections are an area where intergovernmental cooperation will be beneficial to the CITY OF PEORIA; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY OF PEORIA can provide Highway Structure Inspections for the CITY OF PEORIA. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the COUNTY OF PEORIA enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement with the CITY OF PEORIA for the COUNTY OF PEORIA to perform Highway Structure Inspections for the CITY OF PEORIA. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Administrator be authorized to sign the Intergovernmental Agreement. Respectfully submitted, Infrastructure Committee 141 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Land Use and Infrastructure LINE ITEM: 034-2-034-5-511-54303 MEETING DATE: May 22, 2017 AMOUNT: $99,000.00 ISSUE: Resolution for a Supplemental Preliminary Engineering Services Agreement with Hanson Professional Services for Phase 1 and Phase 2 engineering of the Kickapoo Township Richwoods Boulevard bridge replacement. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Structure Number 072-3002 on Richwoods Boulevard (T.R. 191B) was closed to traffic on June 7, 2012 due to structural deterioration. At the time of the closure, the bridge carried 150 vehicles per day. Due to the low volume of traffic, site constraints, and the desire of the Road Commissioner to keep the cost as low as possible, the County entered into an agreement with Hanson Professional Services at a cost of $113,000 to design a low water culvert crossing utilizing a series of pipe culverts armored with concrete slopes. A similar type of structure is located in Jubilee Park on a similar type of stream. However, during the approval process, IDOT expressed concerns with the amount of tree and log debris that accumulates at the existing structure. After much communication, IDOT deemed that the multi-culvert structure will not be allowed at this site. This resolution will allow the County to enter into a Phase 1 and Phase 2 supplemental agreement with Hanson Professional Services to design a bridge in this location, instead of the planned multi- culvert structure. Design work that has already been completed for this site will be utilized in the design of the new bridge. However, there is more work involved in designing a bridge, and therefore the cost is increased. The maximum total compensation for the preliminary engineering after the supplement is approved will not exceed $212,000. The County has an Intergovernmental Agreement with Kickapoo Road District, where the cost of the preliminary engineering and construction of the new bridge will be split evenly between the County (50%) and the Road District (50%). This project is located in District # 7 (Dillon). COUNTY BOARD GOALS: INFRASTRUCTURE STEWARDSHIP STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Resolution COMMITTEE ACTION: Approved 5/22/17 (5-0 votes) PREPARED BY: Jeffrey D. Gilles DEPARTMENT: Highway DATE: May 11, 2017 142 072-3002 RICHWOODS BLVD. KICKAPOO TWP. 143 072-3002 RICHWOODS BOULEVARD BRIDGE LOCATION MAP 144 JUBILEE PARK MULTI-CULVERT STRUCTURE Downstream of Jubilee Park Structure Debris accumulation upstream side of Jubilee Park Structure. 145 Municipality L Name O C Hanson Professional Services Inc C O Township A N Address Kickapoo L S 7625 N. University Street, Suite 200 Preliminary Engineering U Services Agreement L County A City G For T Peoria Peoria E Motor Fuel Tax Funds A N N Section State C Supplement No. 1 T C.A. 521 IL Y THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of , 2017 between the above Local Agency (LA) and Consultant (ENGINEER) and covers certain professional engineering services in connection with the improvement of the above SECTION. Motor Fuel Tax Funds, allotted to the LA by the State of Illinois under the general supervision of the State Department of Transportation, hereinafter called the “DEPARTMENT”, will be used entirely or in part to finance ENGINEERING services as described under AGREEMENT PROVISIONS. Section Description Name Richwoods Boulevard Bridge Replacement Route Length Mi. FT (Structure No. 072-3002 ) Termini Bridge is located approximately ¾ mile east of Illinois Route 8 in Kickapoo Township Description: Removal and replacement of Structure Number 072-3002 on Richwoods Boulevard. The new structure is assumed to be a low water crossing with concrete slopewall armoring. Agreement Provisions The Engineer Agrees, 1. To perform or be responsible for the performance of the following engineering services for the LA, in connection with the proposed improvements herein before described, and checked below: a. Make such detailed surveys as are necessary for the preparation of detailed roadway plans b. Make stream and flood plain hydraulic surveys and gather high water data, and flood histories for the preparation of detailed bridge plans. c. Make or cause to be made such soil surveys or subsurface investigations including borings and soil profiles and analyses thereof as may be required to furnish sufficient data for the design of the proposed improvement. Such investigations are to be made in accordance with the current requirements of the DEPARTMENT. d. Make or cause to be made such traffic studies and counts and special intersection studies as may be required to furnish sufficient data for the design of the proposed improvement. e. Prepare Army Corps of Engineers Permit, Department of Natural Resources-Office of Water Resources Permit, Bridge waterway sketch, and/or Channel Change sketch, Utility plan and locations, and Railroad Crossing work agreements. f. Prepare Preliminary Bridge design and Hydraulic Report, (including economic analysis of bridge or culvert types) and high water effects on roadway overflows and bridge approaches. g. Make complete general and detailed plans, special provisions, proposals and estimates of cost and furnish the LA with five (5) copies of the plans, special provisions, proposals and estimates. Additional copies of any or all documents, if required, shall be furnished to the LA by the ENGINEER at his actual cost for reproduction. h. Furnish the LA with survey and drafts in quadruplicate of all necessary right-of-way dedications, construction easement and borrow pit and channel change agreements including prints of the corresponding plats and staking as required. Note: Four copies to be submitted to the Regional Engineer Printed 4/19/2017 Page 1 of 4 146 i. Assist the LA in the tabulation and interpretation of the contractors’ proposals j. Prepare the necessary environmental documents in accordance with the procedures adopted by the DEPARTMENT’s Bureau of Local Roads & Streets. k. Prepare the Project Development Report when required by the DEPARTMENT. k. See Attachment A. (2) That all reports, plans, plats and special provisions to be furnished by the ENGINEER pursuant to the AGREEMENT, will be in accordance with current standard specifications and policies of the DEPARTMENT. It is being understood that all such reports, plats, plans and drafts shall, before being finally accepted, be subject to approval by the LA and the DEPARTMENT. (3) To attend conferences at any reasonable time when requested to do so by representatives of the LA or the Department. (4) In the event plans or surveys are found to be in error during construction of the SECTION and revisions of the plans or survey corrections are necessary, the ENGINEER agrees that he will perform such work without expense to the LA, even though final payment has been received by him. He shall give immediate attention to these changes so there will be a minimum delay to the Contractor. (5) That basic survey notes and sketches, charts, computations and other data prepared or obtained by the Engineer pursuant to this AGREEMENT will be made available, upon request, to the LA or the DEPARTMENT without cost and without restriction or limitations as to their use. (6) That all plans and other documents furnished by the ENGINEER pursuant to this AGREEMENT will be endorsed by him and will show his professional seal where such is required by law. The LA Agrees, 1. To pay the ENGINEER as compensation for all services performed as stipulated in paragraphs 1a, 1g, 1i, 2, 3, 5 and 6 in accordance with one of the following methods indicated by a check mark: a. A sum of money equal to percent of the awarded contract cost of the proposed improvement as approved by the DEPARTMENT. b. A sum of money equal to the percent of the awarded contract cost for the proposed improvement as approved by the DEPARTMENT based on the following schedule: Schedule for Percentages Based on Awarded Contract Cost Awarded Cost Percentage Fees Under $50,000 (see note) % % % % % Note: Not necessarily a percentage. Could use per diem, cost-plus or lump sum. c. See Attachment B 2. To pay for services stipulated in paragraphs 1b, 1c, 1d, 1e, 1f, 1h, 1j & 1k of the ENGINEER AGREES at actual cost of performing such work plus percent to cover profit, overhead and readiness to serve - “actual cost” being defined Printed 4/19/2017 Page 2 of 4 147 as salary cost. Traveling and other out-of-pocket expenses will be reimbursed to the ENGINEER at his actual cost. Subject to the approval of the LA, the ENGINEER may sublet all or part of the services provided under the paragraph 1b, 1c, 1d, 1e, 1f, 1h, 1j & 1k. If the ENGINEER sublets all or part of this work, the LA will pay the cost to the ENGINEER plus a five (5) percent service charge. “Cost to Engineer” to be verified by furnishing the LA and the DEPARTMENT copies of invoices from the party doing the work. The classifications of the employees used in the work should be consistent with the employee classifications for the services performed. If the personnel of the firm, including the Principal Engineer, perform routine services that should normally be performed by lesser-salaried personnel, the wage rate billed for such services shall be commensurate with the work performed. 3. That payments due the ENGINEER for services rendered in accordance with this AGREEMENT will be made as soon as practicable after the services have been performed in accordance with the following schedule: a. Upon completion of detailed plans, special provisions, proposals and estimate of cost - being the work required by paragraphs 1a through 1g under THE ENGINEER AGREES - to the satisfaction of the LA and their approval by the DEPARTMENT, 90 percent of the total fee due under this AGREEMENT based on the approved estimate of cost. b. Upon award of the contract for the improvement by the LA and its approval by the DEPARTMENT, 100 percent of the total fee due under the AGREEMENT based on the awarded contract cost, less any amounts paid under “a” above. By Mutual agreement, partial payments, not to exceed 90 percent of the amount earned, may be made from time to time as the work progresses. 4. That, should the improvement be abandoned at any time after the ENGINEER has performed any part of the services provided for in paragraphs 1a, through 1h and prior to the completion of such services, the LA shall reimburse the ENGINEER for his actual costs plus 200 percent incurred up to the time he is notified in writing of such abandonment -“actual cost” being defined as in paragraph 2 of THE LA AGREES. 5. That, should the LA require changes in any of the detailed plans, specifications or estimates except for those required pursuant to paragraph 4 of THE ENGINEER AGREEs, after they have been approved by the DEPARTMENT, the LA will pay the ENGINEER for such changes on the basis of actual cost plus 200 percent to cover profit, overhead and readiness to serve -“actual cost” being defined as in paragraph 2 of THE LA AGREES. It is understood that “changes” as used in this paragraph shall in no way relieve the ENGINEER of his responsibility to prepare a complete and adequate set of plans and specifications. It is Mutually Agreed, 1. That any difference between the ENGINEER and the LA concerning their interpretation of the provisions of this Agreement shall be referred to a committee of disinterested parties consisting of one member appointed by the ENGINEER, one member appointed by the LA and a third member appointed by the two other members for disposition and that the committee’s decision shall be final. 2. This AGREEMENT may be terminated by the LA upon giving notice in writing to the ENGINEER at his last known post office address. Upon such termination, the ENGINEER shall cause to be delivered to the LA all surveys, permits, agreements, preliminary bridge design & hydraulic report, drawings, specifications, partial and completed estimates and data, if any from traffic studies and soil survey and subsurface investigations with the understanding that all such material becomes the property of the LA. The ENGINEER shall be paid for any services completed and any services partially completed in accordance with Section 4 of THE LA AGREES. 3. That if the contract for construction has not been awarded one year after the acceptance of the plans by the LA and their approval by the DEPARTMENT, the LA will pay the ENGINEER the balance of the engineering fee due to make 100 percent of the total fees due under this AGREEMENT, based on the estimate of cost as prepared by the ENGINEER and approved by the LA and the DEPARTMENT. 4. That the ENGINEER warrants that he/she has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the ENGINEER, to solicit or secure this contract, and that he/she has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the ENGINEER, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. For Breach or violation of this warranty the LA shall have the right to annul this contract without liability. Printed 4/19/2017 Page 3 of 4 148 5. That the attached General Conditions (C/S) Rev. 6 are included in and made a part of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused the AGREEMENT to be executed in quadruplicate counterparts, each of which shall be considered as an original by their duly authorized officers. Executed by the LA: Peoria County of the (Municipality/Township/County) ATTEST: State of Illinois, acting by and through its By Clerk By (Seal) Title Executed by the ENGINEER: Hanson Professional Services Inc. 7625 N. University Street, Suite 200 ATTEST: Peoria, IL 61614 By By Title Associate Title Vice President Approved Date Department of Transportation Regional Engineer Printed 4/19/2017 Page 4 of 4 149 General Conditions Hanson Agreement: C15L0077 Agreement Date: March , 2016 Project Name: Richwoods Boulevard Bridge Replacement 1. Invoices: Charges for services will be billed at harmless HANSON from all claims, damages, losses least as frequently as monthly, and at the completion and expenses including court costs and attorney's of the Project. CLIENT shall compensate HANSON fees arising out of or resulting there from. Any such for any sales or value added taxes which apply to verification or adaptation will entitle HANSON to the services rendered under this agreement or any further compensation at rates to be agreed upon by addendum thereto. CLIENT shall reimburse CLIENT and HANSON. HANSON for the amount of such taxes in addition to the compensation due for services. Payment of 4. Standard of Care: Services performed by invoices shall not be subject to any discounts or set- HANSON under this Agreement will be conducted in offs by the CLIENT unless agreed to in writing by a manner consistent with that level of care and skill HANSON. Invoices are delinquent if payment has ordinarily exercised by members of the profession not been received within 3060 days from date of currently practicing under similar conditions. No invoice. There will be an additional charge of 1 1/2 other representation expressed or implied, and no percent per month compounded on amounts warranty or guarantee is included or intended in this outstanding more than 3060 days. All time spent Agreement, or in any report, opinion, document or and expenses incurred (including attorney's fees) in otherwise. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to connection with collection of any delinquent amount create, nor shall it be construed to create, a fiduciary will be paid by CLIENT to HANSON per HANSON's duty owed by either party to the other party. Hanson current fee schedules. is not acting as a municipal advisor to CLIENT as defined by the Securities and Exchange 2. Termination: This Agreement may be terminated Commission. by either party upon written notice. Any termination shall only be for good cause such as legal, 5. General Liability Insurance and Limitation: unavailability of adequate financing or major HANSON is covered by general liability insurance for changes in the scope of services. In the event of bodily injury and property damage arising directly any termination, HANSON will be paid for all from its negligent acts or omissions, with limits which services and expenses rendered to the date of HANSON considers reasonable. Certificates of termination on a basis of payroll cost times a insurance shall be provided to CLIENT upon request multiplier of 3.0 (if not previously provided for) plus in writing. HANSON shall not be responsible for any reimbursable expenses, plus reasonable termination loss, damage or liability beyond the amounts, limits expenses, including the cost of completing analyses, and conditions of such insurance. HANSON shall records, and reports necessary to document job not be responsible for any loss, damage or liability status at the time of termination. Notwithstanding the arising from any act or omission by CLIENT, its foregoing, the amount paid for services and expenses rendered prior to agents, staff, other consultants, independent termination shall not exceed the total estimated cost of the Contract. contractors, third parties or others working on the 3. Reuse of Documents: All documents including Project over which HANSON has no supervision or reports, drawings, specifications, and electronic control. media furnished by HANSON pursuant to this Agreement are instruments of its services. They are 6. Suspension of Services: If CLIENT fails to make not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse payments when due or otherwise is in breach of this by CLIENT or others on extensions of this project, or Agreement, HANSON may suspend performance of on any other project. Any reuse without specific services upon five (5) calendar days’ notice to written verification or adaptation by HANSON will be CLIENT. HANSON shall have no liability whatsoever at CLIENT's sole risk, and without liability to to CLIENT, and CLIENT agrees to make no claim for HANSON, and CLIENT shall indemnify and hold any delay or damage as a result of such suspension. General Conditions (C/S) Rev. 6 1 150 7. Consequential Damages: Notwithstanding any rendered on the Project, whichever is greater. This other provision of this Agreement, and to the fullest limitation pertains to HANSON and to its extent permitted by law, neither CLIENT nor subcontractors and subconsultants, and applies as a HANSON, their respective officers, directors, single aggregate amount to all work performed partners, employees, contractors or subconsultants under the Agreement, including all work performed shall be liable to the other or shall make any claim for under an amendment or modification. If CLIENT incidental, indirect, or consequential damages arising desires a limit greater than that provided above, out of or connected in any way to this Project or this CLIENT and HANSON shall include in this Agreement. This mutual waiver of consequential Agreement the amount of such limit and the damages shall include, but not be limited to, loss of additional compensation to be paid to HANSON for use, loss of profit, loss of business, loss of income, assumption of such additional risk. CLIENT must loss of reputation and any other consequential notify HANSON in writing, before HANSON damages that either party may have incurred from commences any services, of CLIENT’s intention to any cause of action including negligence, strict negotiate a greater limitation of remedies against liability, breach of contract and breach of strict and Hanson and its associated impact on services, implied warranty. Both CLIENT and HANSON shall schedules, and compensation. Absent CLIENT’s require similar waivers of consequential damages written notification to the contrary, HANSON will protecting all the entities or persons named herein in proceed on the basis that the total remedies against all contracts and subcontracts with others involved in HANSON is limited as set forth above. the Project. 10. Personal Liability: It is intended by the parties to 8. Contingency Fund: The Client and Hanson this Agreement that HANSON’s services in acknowledge that changes may be required during connection with the Project shall not subject construction because of possible omissions, HANSON’s individual employees, officers or directors ambiguities or inconsistencies in the plans and to any personal legal exposure for the risks specifications and, therefore, that the costs of the associated with this Project. Therefore, and project may exceed the construction contract sum. notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained The Client agrees to set aside a reserve in the herein, the Client agrees that as the Client’s sole and amount of Five Percent (5%) of the actual project exclusive remedy, any claim, demand or suit shall be construction costs as a contingency reserve to be directed and/or asserted only against HANSON, a used, as required, to pay for any such increased Delaware corporation, and not against any of project costs. The Client further agrees to make no HANSON’s individual employees, officers or directors. claim by way of direct or third-party action against Hanson or sub-contractors and subconsultants with 11. Assignment: Neither party to this Agreement respect to any payments within the limit of the shall transfer, sublet, or assign any rights or duties contingency reserve made to the construction under or interest in this Agreement, including but not contractors because of such changes or because of limited to monies that are due or monies that may any claims made by the construction contractors become due, without the written consent of the other relating to such changes. party. Subcontracting to subconsultants, normally contemplated by HANSON as generally accepted 9. Additional Limitation: In recognition of the business practice, shall not be considered an relative risks and benefits of the Project to both the assignment for purposes of this Agreement. CLIENT and HANSON, the risks have been allocated such that the CLIENT agrees that for the 12. Statutes of Repose and Limitation: All legal compensation herein provided HANSON cannot causes of action between the parties to this expose itself to damages disproportionate to the Agreement shall accrue and any applicable statutes nature and scope of HANSON’s services or the of repose or limitation shall begin to run not later than compensation payable to it hereunder. Therefore, the date of Substantial Completions. If the act or the CLIENT agrees to limit its remedies against failure to act complained of occurs after the date of HANSON arising from HANSON’s professional acts, Substantial Completion, then the date of final errors or omissions, in any action based on strict completion shall be used, but in no event shall any liability, breach of contract, negligence or any other statute of repose or limitation begin to run any later cause of action, such that the total aggregate than the date HANSON’s services are completed or amount of the CLIENT’s damages shall not exceed terminated. $50,000 or HANSON’s total net fee for services General Conditions (C/S) Rev. 6 2 151 13. Dispute Resolution: In an effort to resolve any and programs. HANSON will not be responsible for conflicts that arise during the design and construction the Contractor's obligation to carry out the work in of this Project or following completion of this Project, accordance with the Contract Documents. HANSON the CLIENT and HANSON agree that all disputes will not be considered an agent of the owner and will between them arising out of or relating to this not have authority to direct the Contractor's work or Agreement or this Project shall be submitted to to stop work. nonbinding mediation. 18. Opinions of Cost: Since HANSON has no 14. Authority and Responsibility: HANSON shall control over the cost of labor, materials or equipment not guarantee the work of any Contractor or or over a Contractor's method of determining prices, Subcontractor, shall have no authority to stop work, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, its shall have no supervision or control as to the work or opinions of probable Project cost or construction persons doing the work, shall not have charge of the cost for this Project will be based solely upon its own work, and shall not be responsible for safety in, on, experience with construction, but HANSON cannot or about the job site or have any control of the safety and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or the or adequacy of any equipment, building component, construction cost will not vary from its opinions of scaffolding, supports, forms or other work aids. probable costs. If the CLIENT wishes greater assurance as to the construction cost, he shall 15. Right of Entry: CLIENT shall provide for employ an independent cost estimator. HANSON's right to enter property owned by CLIENT and/or others in order for HANSON to fulfill the 19. Shop Drawing Review: CLIENT agrees that scope of services for this Project. CLIENT HANSON's review of shop drawings, when such understands that use of exploration equipment may review is included in the scope of services, shall be unavoidably cause some damage, the correction of solely for their conformance with HANSON's design which is not the responsibility of HANSON. intent and conformance with information given in the construction documents. HANSON shall not be 16. Utilities: CLIENT shall be responsible for responsible for any aspects of a shop drawing designating the location of all utility lines and submission that affect or are affected by the means, subterranean structures within the property line of methods, techniques, sequences and operations of the Project. CLIENT agrees to waive any claim construction, safety precautions and programs against HANSON, and to defend, indemnify and incidental thereto, all of which are the Contractor's hold harmless from any claim or liability for injury or responsibility. The Contractor will be responsible for loss arising from HANSON or other persons lengths, dimensions, elevations, quantities and encountering utilities or other man-made objects that coordination of the work with other trades. CLIENT were not called to HANSON's attention or which warrants that the Contractor shall be made aware of were not properly located on plans furnished to his responsibilities to review shop drawings and HANSON. CLIENT further agrees to compensate approve them in these respects before submitting HANSON for any time or expenses incurred by them to HANSON. HANSON in defense of any such claim, in accordance with HANSON's prevailing fee schedule 20. Confidentiality: Each party shall retain as and expense reimbursement policy. Client’s negligent confidential, all information and data furnished to it acts or omissions in designing the location of utility lines or by the other party which are designated in writing by subterranean structures. such other party as confidential at the time of transmission, and are obtained or acquired by the 17. Job Site: Services performed by HANSON receiving party in connection with this Agreement, during construction will be limited to providing and said party shall not disclose such information to assistance in quality control and to deal with any third party, unless required to do so by law or court order. questions by the CLIENT's representative concerning conformance with drawings and 21. Third Party Beneficiaries: Nothing contained in specifications. This activity is not to be interpreted this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship as an inspection service, a construction supervision with or a cause of action in favor of a third party service, or guaranteeing the Contractor's against either CLIENT or HANSON. HANSON’s performance. HANSON will not be responsible for services under this Agreement are being performed construction means, methods, techniques, solely for the CLIENT’s benefit, and no other party or sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions entity shall have any claim against HANSON because General Conditions (C/S) Rev. 6 3 152 of this Agreement or the performance or nonperformance of services hereunder. CLIENT and HANSON agree to require a similar provision in all contracts with contractors, subcontractors, subconsultants, vendors, and other entities involved in this Project to carry out the intent of this provision. 22. Severability: If any term or provision of this Agree- ment is held to be invalid or unenforceable under any applicable statue or rule of law, such holding shall be applied only to the provision so held, and the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 23. Survival: Notwithstanding completion or termination of the Agreement for any reason, all rights, duties, obligations of the parties to this Agreement shall survive such completion or termination and remain in full force and effect until fulfilled. 24. Entire Agreement: This Agreement is the entire Agreement between the CLIENT and HANSON. It supersedes all prior communications, understandings and agreements, whether written or oral. Both parties have participated fully in the preparation and revision of this Agreement, and each party and its counsel have reviewed the final document. Any rule of contract construction regarding ambiguities being construed against the drafting party shall not apply in the interpreting of this Agreement, including any Section Headings or Captions. Amendments to this Agreement must be in writing and signed by both CLIENT and HANSON. 25. Modification to the Agreement: CLIENT or HANSON may, from time to time, request modifications or changes in the scope of services to be performed hereunder. Such changes, including any increase or decrease in the amount of HANSON's compensation, to which CLIENT and HANSON mutually agree shall be incorporated in this Agreement by a written amendment to the Agreement. 26. Governing Law: This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted pursuant to the laws of the State of Illinois. General Conditions (C/S) Rev. 6 4 153 County Peoria Section C.A. 521 SUPPLEMENT No. 1 ATTACHMENT A: SCOPE OF SERVICES RICHWOODS BOULEVARD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROPOSED STRUCTURE NUMBER 072-5012 SECTION NO. COUNTY AID NUMBER (521). (C.A. 521) Hanson Professional Services Inc. (ENGINEER) shall complete project development studies and prepare bid documents for the replacement of structure number 072-3002 on Richwoods Boulevard over the Big Hollow Creek in Kickapoo Township for the Peoria County Highway Department (COUNTY). The proposed improvements include replacement of the existing structure with a new bridge, profile adjustments, minimal approach roadway improvements, approach guardrail, and creek armoring. IDOT will not approve a series of culverts as a low water crossing for this location. The existing structure is structurally deficient and currently closed. The Project shall be designed in accordance with IDOT Bureau of Local Roads Manual State/MFT Funding Guidelines. The project will be funded with County Bridge and Township funds. Plans will be prepared in English units (feet) using Microstation software in accordance with CAD conventions of the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) in IL State Plane Coordinates (West Zone). SCOPE OF SERVICES: The Scope of Services to be provided by the ENGINEER is limited to the following: I. Project Development Services A. The corridor boundaries for data collection are along Richwoods Boulevard from 300 ft. south of the existing structure to 150 ft. northeast of the existing structure and 150 ft. north on the private drive. B. Hydraulic Studies: The hydraulic task will include the modeling and documentation needed to update the proposed replacement plan from a series of culverts to a single-span bridge and included the preparation and submittal of a revised Hydraulic Report. Specific subtasks include: 1. Proposed Conditions Hydraulic Modeling: This task will include coding the proposed bridge structure into the existing conditions hydraulics model, coordination with the bridge and roadway designers, execute and review model results, prepare model documentation, calculate estimated bridge scour, size rip-rap for the proposed abutments and perform internal QAQC of the overall hydraulic modeling for the proposed structure. 2. Prepare & Submit Revised Hydraulic Report. The report will include text related to existing conditions, hydrologic/hydraulic methodology, and summaries of the final design calculations and findings. Exhibits to this report will include waterway information table, hydraulic report data sheets, location map, photographs, and print outs from the design software analysis. 3. Task Management & Coordination: This task includes internal coordination and external coordination with client, if necessary. 1 154 County Peoria Section C.A. 521 Assumptions: IDNR/OWR permitting is not required because the proposed project is considered non-jurisdictional. No Site visit is included. If a site visit is needed for design or permitting reasons, additional scope/fee will be needed. Scour countermeasure design is limited to rip-rap for abutments All coordination meeting will be via telecon. C. Geotechnical Studies 1. Perform soil borings to evaluate existing subsurface conditions at the abutment locations. Assume borings will be to a depth of 50 feet for a total of 100 lineal feet of drilling and sampling. Rock coring will be performed at one boring location to a depth of 10 feet, if rock is encountered at less than 40 feet depth. 2. In accordance with IDOT criteria, soil samples will be obtained by split spoon methods at 2½ foot intervals for the first 30 feet, and 5 foot intervals below this level. Representative portions of samples will be sealed, packaged and transported to the soils laboratory. Groundwater observations will also be made during drilling. 3. Obtain utility clearance for boring locations contacting by JULIE (Joint Utility Locating Information for Excavators), local municipalities and the customary agencies. 4. Samples retained from the borings will be examined by laboratory personnel to verify field descriptions. Laboratory testing will include moisture content determinations and unconfined strength. Other tests deemed to be necessary by the Geotechnical Engineer may also be recommended for your approval. 5. Provide an Abbreviated Structure Geotechnical Report in general accordance with IDOT criteria. The report will summarize the field and laboratory test data and will include a boring location plan and computer generated boring logs. The report will address anticipated soil and groundwater conditions impacting design and construction of the new structures, based upon the information obtained from the borings. 6. Should the study reveal unexpected subsurface conditions requiring a change in scope, the County will be contacted before we proceed with further work. D. Structural Design 1. Bridge Condition Report - Complete 2. Preliminary Bridge Design 3. Prepare and submit Preliminary Bridge Design & Hydraulic Report form to IDOT (BLR 10210) 4. Scour Coding – Form BBS SCE 5. Asbestos Form – BLR 10220 (If applicable) 6. Prepare preliminary opinion of probable construction cost 7. Final bridge design (HL-93 Loading – Assume 80ft long single span deck beam bridge with waterproofing membrane and HMA overlay, no approach slabs) a. General Plan and Elevation (1 Sheet) b. General Data (1 Sheet) c. Final Superstructure Design i. Superstructure (1 Sheet) 2 155 County Peoria Section C.A. 521 ii. Superstructure Details (1 Sheet) iii. PPC Deck Beam (1 Sheet) iv. PPC Deck Beam Details (1 Sheet) v. Steel Railing (1 Sheet) d. Substructure Design i. Abutments (2 Sheets) ii. Boring Logs (2 Sheets) e. Miscellaneous Design & Details i. HP Pile Details (1 Sheet) 8. Quantities & Estimate of Cost and Time 9. Special Provisions 10. Shop Drawing Review (Deck Beams) 11. AASHTOWare bridge rating E. Roadway Geometric Study Revisions 1. Revise vertical alignment. 2. Create proposed alignment and profile. – Revise vertical alignment for proposed bridge instead of culvert. 3. Develop typical sections for the roadway and structure. – Create revised typical section for bridge and the addition of guardrail. 4. Perform design of intersection to verify movements of design vehicle. – Regrade intersection based on revised profiles. 5. Complete cross section studies to finalize proposed horizontal and vertical alignments, including any required channel modification design. – Recut cross sections for roadway and creek based upon new design. 6. Determine utility conflicts and make adjustments as necessary. Determine necessary utility relocations. – Recheck utility conflicts for new design and construction limits. 7. Prepare preliminary plan and profile sheets (@ 1”=50’ H., 1”=5’ V.) and cross sections every 50’ for the project limits. – Update sheets for new design. Adjust labels and callouts. 8. Design layout of proposed structure – Revised structure layout relative to roadway and creek. 9. Erosion control design in roadside ditches and at downstream end of culverts. – Update erosion control design for revised improvements and construction limits. 10. Identify temporary easement and right-of-way needs. – Update based on revised limits of construction. 11. Prepare preliminary opinion of probable cost. – Generate new preliminary opinion of probably cost. 12. Guardrail Analysis – Add design of four quadrant guardrail to protect proposed bridge railing. F. Final Roadway Design/ Construction Documents Revisions 1. Title Sheet (w/ Sheet Index) – Minor updates for new design. 2. General Notes, Standard List, Legend/Abbrev. – Minor updates for new design. 3. Existing/Proposed Typical Sections - Create new proposed typical sections. 4. Removals/Relocations Plan –Update based on new limits of construction. 5. Plan / Profile Sheets (1" = 50' H & 1" = 5' V) – Revise to new design 6. Intersection Grading/Detail Sheet – Revise intersection grading due to profile revisions. 7. Right-of-Way and Temporary Easement Plan Sheets - Revise for new ROW and easement requirements. 8. Erosion Control Plans – Revise to new design 9. Miscellaneous details – Redo creek access design and detail. Add guardrail layout details. 10. Channel Grading Detail and Cross Sections - Revise detail to new design. 3 156 County Peoria Section C.A. 521 G. Prefinal Plans, Specifications & Estimates (90%) 1. QC\QA Review – Review of revised plans. H. Provide project management and coordination with the COUNTY throughout the project. 1. Financial and Schedule Control 2. Additional Coordination Meetings with County (Assume 2) I. Furnish the originals and a reasonable number of prints of all necessary plans and documents, as determined by the COUNTY. J. The COUNTY will provide or cause to be furnished the following: 1. Existing roadway and right-of-way plans, including existing waterway information and Master Inspection Reports. 2. The COUNTY will make available digital files of aerial photographs, contours, and basic topography from the Peoria County G.I.S. data. 3. Existing traffic volume data on streets within the project limits. 4. Tax assessor's maps and taxpayer identification numbers for parcels in the study area and title commitments for all affected parcels. 5. All necessary utility agreements, including plans for relocations and adjustments. K. The following assumptions have been made for this scope of services: 1. The structure will be closed to traffic throughout construction. A signed detour route will not be used to direct traffic around the project site since the road is currently closed. 2. Guardrail will be required. 3. The crossing will be designed as a bridge since IDOT would not approve the culvert design as a low water crossing. L. The following items are not included in the scope of work but could be provided as an addendum to the contract: 1. Construction observation activities 2. Bidding services 3. Shop drawing review (Except Deck Beam Shop Drawing Review Included) 4. Land acquisition services other than plat preparation 4 157 County Peoria Section C.A. 521 SUPPLEMENT No. 1 ATTACHMENT B Payment Richwoods Boulevard Bridge Replacement Section No. C.A. 521 Existing SN 072-3002 The COUNTY agrees to pay the ENGINEER as compensation for all additional services rendered in accordance with this AGREEMENT, on the basis hourly rates using the multiplier of 3.0, with a maximum compensation not to exceed $99,000. Total compensation for the project shall not exceed $212,000. Billings will be issued at least monthly, and will be based upon total services completed and expenses incurred at the time of billing. Total Average Labor+Overhead Direct Tasks Hours Hourly Rate +Profit Costs Costs Fee Hydraulics 98 $138.78 $13,600 $100 $13,700 Geotechnical 60 $173.11 $10,387 $6,800 $17,187 Structural 453 $116.48 $52,765 $11 $52,776 Roadway Design 109 $113.46 $12,367 $0 $12,367 Project Administration 14 $210.00 $2,940 $30 $2,970 Total 734 $125.42 $92,059 $6,941 $99,000 5 158 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Infrastructure Committee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution: RE: SUPPLEMENTAL PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING AGREEMENT TO DESIGN BRIDGES WITHIN PEORIA COUNTY RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Structure Number 072-3002 on Richwoods Boulevard (T.R. 191B) is closed and is Structurally Deficient; and WHEREAS, your Infrastructure Committee, having considered the economic effects of the project, believes that the best interests of Peoria County will be served by the approval of a Supplemental Preliminary Engineering Service Agreement for preliminary engineering to replace bridges using the County Bridge Fund for: Supplemental Phase 1 and Phase 2 engineering for the replacement of Structure Number 072-3002 on Richwoods Boulevard (T.R. 191B), designated as County Aid Number 521, at a cost not to exceed $99,000.00 with Hanson Professional Services, Inc. Total compensation will not exceed $212,000.00. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the supplemental preliminary engineering agreement be approved and that the County Administrator be designated as the officer to sign the engineering agreement; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that $99,000.00 be appropriated from the County Bridge fund for Supplemental Phase 1 and Phase 2 engineering for County Aid Number 521 on Richwoods Boulevard; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Treasurer be authorized to issue checks from the County Bridge Fund in payment of invoices for the engineering work. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 159 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Infrastructure Committee MEETING DATE: May 22, 2017 TYPE DESCRIPTION LINE ITEM AMOUNT EXPENSE: Building Improvements 062-4-062-7-738-55107 $650,000.00 ISSUE: This Capital is identified as ELEC-17-001 and was approved in the amount of $650,000.00. Peoria County (County) has been working with Dewberry Architects Inc. (Dewberry) to assist us with the design and fit-out of 4422 W. Brandywine Dr. Office Building. A copy of Dewberry's Revised Design Services Proposal - 4422 Brandywine Drive Renovations Dated April 26, 2017, (Proposal) is attached. Staff is recommending to the Infrastructure Committee that Dewberry's Proposal be approved. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The County is leasing 6,000 square feet of the 10,914 square feet building. The remainder of the building is a combination of "common areas" and vacant space. The County has been working with the Building Owner to make some necessary corrections inside the Building to address environmental issues. The Owner has been working to make these corrections and as a result the County is ready to engage an Architect / Engineer to do interior building design of our 6,000 square feet of space. Dewberry's fees will come out of the approved capital. Once we have an agreed to design, we will then competitively bid the construction renovation work. Staff will bring those bid results and recommendations back to the Infrastructure Committee for review and action. 2017 Capital Improvements Plan Project No. ELEC-17-001 Remodel: Brandywine Building (Total Budget = $650,000.00) Expenditures Cost ($) Comments Architectural & Engineering $91,000.00 Executive Recap of Proposal: This includes $60,000.00 Lump Plus Sum Costs; plus an Additional Hourly Cost Not-To-Exceed $25,000.00; plus Additional Reimbursable Costs at 1.15 times Reimbursable cost to Dewberry. This Proposal includes Architectural, Costs at 1.15 Construction Cost Estimating, Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing times Cost to (excluding Fire Protection Engineering, and Technology Design Dewberry. (cabling, conduit, back boxes, coordination with Owner's AV/IT equipment) services. This Proposal excludes Site Survey efforts, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Fire Protection Design, and any Building Utility Service Design and/or Coordination. Construction To Be Determined Other To Be Determined Totals $650,000.00 160 The County Administrator shall oversee the issuances of the necessary Contract(s), Change Orders, Purchase Orders, and other Documents necessary to accomplish this portion of the work. All the costs of this Project will be charged to Capital Improvements Plan Project No. ELEC-17-001. Should the total cost of ALL the work exceed the total cost of $650,000.00, then additional appropriations will come from Capital Improvements Plan Project No. CH-16-005 Contingency Improvements. Should the total cost of ALL the work not exceed the total cost of $650,000.00, then the savings will be re-allocated to Capital Improvements Plan Project No. CH-16-005 Contingency Improvements. Finance and Facilities will work with Administration and the User Group to identify and track all costs of this Project. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: INFRASTRUCTURE STEWARDSHIP EFFECTIVE SERVICE DELIVERY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Dewberry's Proposal for the design fit-out of the Election Commission relocation to 4422 W. Brandywine Drive; utilize funds and/or re-allocate funds to Capital Improvements Plan Project CH- 16-005 Contingency Funds only if necessary and approved by the Administrator; and to authorize the County Administrator to issue necessary documents to complete this portion of the Project. ______ COMMITTEE ACTION: Approved 5/22/17 (5-0 votes) PREPARED BY: Daniel O’Connell, Director DEPARTMENT: Peoria County Facilities and Grounds Operations DATE: May 22, 2017 Page 2 of 2 161 April 26, 2017 Peoria County IT Services Attn: Mr. Mark Little, Chief Information Officer 324 Main St. Rm. G11 Peoria, IL 61602 RE: Revised Design Services Proposal – 4422 Brandywine Drive Renovation Scott: Based on our site visit and on-site discussions with representatives of the County and Election Commission, we understand the revised tenant fit-out (interior renovations) scope to be as follows. Please provide suggested revisions as necessary to reflect your intended scope of work. General Understanding Our scope of services for the interior tenant fit-out renovation can primarily be broken into four efforts: First, we will be visually surveying and measuring a portion of the existing interior conditions, approximately 6,000 sf, within the building located at 4422 Brandywine Drive Peoria, IL that the County is considering leasing. The information gathered for the lease space will then be electronically modeled in preparation for the design and documentation phases. The second portion of our work will include the design and bid documentation effort and will consist of two phases. The Design Phase and the Construction Documentation Phase. Third, Dewberry will be assisting the County in publically bidding the scope of work contained in the Bid Documents, tabulating the bids, and evaluating the apparent low bidder. Finally, Dewberry proposes to provide assistance to the County during construction, on a time and material basis, in order to respond to contractor questions, review shop drawings, evaluate contractor pay applications, and determine substantial completion of the construction. In order to complete the above scope, we propose the following process: Existing Conditions Verification 1. Existing interior conditions survey a. Initial site visit to collect majority of information on 6,000 sf of existing interior space. One follow-up visit, as needed, to detail special conditions needing coordination with the existing conditions. b. Visually observe existing materials, conditions, and configurations affecting new interior work. No examination requiring the disassembling or destruction of existing conditions is included. c. Selectively measure and record existing building materials and configurations as required for design of new construction. Page 1 of 5 162 d. Build existing conditions model – only portion of existing building related to interior renovations. i. BIM platform - Revit. ii. BIM Level of Detail (LOD) 300. Design and Construction Documentation 1. Design Phase a. Design Mtg. No. 1 - Initial Kick-off meeting with County and User group representatives to identify operational goals, develop space program, and required adjacencies. b. Develop floor plan options. c. Design Mtg. No. 2 - Review floor plan options with County and User group representatives and select option for further development. d. Initial coordination with Engineering disciplines. e. Develop reflected ceiling plans. f. Model demolition components. g. Model new construction. i. Walls ii. Ceilings iii. Doors and glazed frames iv. Casework v. Mechanical systems vi. Electrical systems vii. Plumbing systems h. Coordinate with any County provided fixtures, furniture, and equipment. i. Develop interior finishes schemes. j. Design Mtg No. 3 – review developed design and interior finish selections. k. Perform quality review and coordination checks. l. Develop opinion of probable cost. m. Design Submission – submit Design documents for review and approval. n. Receipt of County review comments and approval to proceed to Construction Documentation Phase. 2. Construction Documentation Phase a. Develop architectural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing construction plans, sections, details, and schedules. i. Coversheet and Drawing Index. ii. Code Plan. iii. Floor Plans. iv. Dimension and Wall Type Plan. v. Reflected Ceiling Plans. vi. Interior and Casework Elevations. vii. Interior Door and Frame Schedule and Elevations. viii. Construction Details. ix. Schedules. b. Develop project manual specifications. i. Coordinate front end specifications for procurement and contracting and general requirements with County. ii. Develop technical specification sections. c. Perform quality review and coordination checks. Page 2 of 5 163 d. Construction Document Submission – submit Construction Documentation submission for final review and approval. e. Incorporation of County’s final review comments. Bidding and Construction Administration Services 1. Bidding a. Public Bidding: i. Coordination with County issued advertisement of bid. ii. Coordination with printer for distribution of County’s bid documents. iii. Attend pre-bid meeting facilitated by the County. iv. Track and respond to Contractor questions. v. Issue addenda as necessary to respond to Contractor questions. b. Receipt of Bids: i. Attend public bid opening facilitated by the County. ii. Review bid detail of apparent low bidder and make a recommendation to County. 2. Construction Administration a. Dewberry shall visit the site during construction no more than three (3) times at intervals appropriate to the stage of construction to become generally familiar with the progress and quality of the portion of the work completed, and to determine if the work observed is being performed in a manner indicating that the work, when fully completed, will be in accordance with the Contract Documents. On the basis of the site visits, Dewberry shall keep the Client reasonably informed about the progress and quality of the portion of the work completed, and report to the Client observed deviations from the Contract Documents and from the most recent construction schedule submitted by the Contractor, and apparent defects and deficiencies observed in the work. b. Dewberry shall review and approve or take other appropriate action upon the Contractor’s submittals such as Shop Drawings and Product Data and Samples. c. Dewberry shall review and respond to requests for information about the Contract Documents. If appropriate, Dewberry shall prepare and issue supplemental Drawings and Specifications in response to requests for information d. As required, Dewberry shall prepare Change Orders and Construction Change Directives in accordance with the Contract Documents and as required by unforeseen existing conditions. e. Dewberry shall conduct one (1) site observation to determine the date of Substantial Completion and one (1) site observation to determine the date of final completion and prepare information to issue Certificates of Substantial Completion and a final Certificate for Payment based upon a final inspection indicating the work complies with the requirements of the Contract Documents. f. Dewberry will not schedule, conduct or take meeting minutes for any project progress meetings with the contractor or its subs. If Dewberry is requested to attend, we will attend and invoice hourly for these additional meetings. Assumptions / Limitations / Exclusions 1. Dewberry will be afforded timely access to the lease space for the purposes of observing and recording existing conditions configurations. Page 3 of 5 164 2. Any existing documents, which represent the existing conditions, will be provided to Dewberry for temporary use. 3. Any code required third party construction phase testing will be specified by Dewberry and provided by the Owner or Tenant. 4. Design work will be able to be performed in a contiguous manner without work stoppages or delays and according to a workflow efficient for Dewberry and its consultants. 5. Proposal assumes all work will be completed within one year from execution of contract (including project closeout activities). 6. Any work required that is for the betterment of the entire facility to the benefit of the building owner is excluded from this scope of work. This work may include upgrades to the building envelop (exterior doors, windows, walls, and roof), site work, utilities (electric, natural gas, communications, technology, and water), restrooms common to the entire facility, and rooftop units that service the entire facility. 7. Existing materials testing and/or destructive exploration of existing conditions are not included. 8. Existing exterior building envelope performance evaluations are not included. 9. Hazardous materials related services are not included. 10. Detailed door hardware specifications are not included. 11. Furniture specifications are not included. 12. Interior signage specifications are not included. 13. Fire Protection Systems design and specification is not included. 14. Zoning interpretations and/or representations on the County or Owner’s behalf is not included. 15. Construction permits: Permitting, including applications, will be the responsibility of the Contractor. 16. Opinions of probable construction costs will be based on the firm’s experience and qualifications and represents our judgment as Design Professionals. Dewberry makes no warranty, express or implied, that the bids or the negotiated cost of the work will not vary from our opinion of probable cost. Available Additional Services (not included in fee proposal) While currently excluded from the proposed scope of services, Dewberry can include any of the following as additional services. Additional services will be performed on a time and material basis using standard hourly rates or for a negotiated fee. 1. Owner total project budget development. 2. Detailed construction cost estimates based on Uni-format breakdown. 3. Owner design meetings beyond the limit identified above. 4. Color renderings, animations, and physical models. 5. Design associated with upgrades to systems common to the entire facility. 6. Re-design after end of schematic design phase. 7. Bidding alternates. 8. LEED certification and sustainable design efforts. 9. Energy modeling efforts beyond those already required by Code. 10. Technology Design and Specification (Security Electronics). 11. Fire Protection Systems specifications. 12. Value engineering or redesign efforts after receipt of bids. 13. Multiple and/or early bid packages. Page 4 of 5 165 14. Presentations and/or development of presentation materials beyond those identified in the services above. 15. On-site representation during construction beyond limits established in services above. 16. Review of construction shop drawing re-submissions beyond two (2) submissions. 17. Owner requested revisions during construction resulting in a change order. 18. Systems commissioning. 19. Interior Signage Package. 20. Furniture Packages. 21. Door hardware specification. Compensation 1. Our fees for the above described work are as follows: a. Add Services i. Existing Conditions Verification $4,500.00 Lump Sum ii. Construction Cost Estimate $5,000.00 Lump Sum iii. Technology Design $5,200.00 Lump Sum b. Basic Services i. Design and Construction Documentation $51,300.00 Lump Sum c. Sub-Total $66,000.00 Lump Sum d. Bidding and Construction Administration $25,000.00 Hourly Not to Exceed e. Total $91,000.00 2. Reimbursable expenses will be invoiced in addition to our fee at 1.15 times the cost to Dewberry. 3. The revised fee proposal excludes Site Survey efforts, Civil engineering, Structural engineering, Fire Protection design, and any Building Utility Service design and/or coordination. 4. The revised fee includes Architectural, Construction Cost Estimating, Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing (excluding fire protection) Engineering, and Technology Design (cabling, conduit, back boxes, coordination with Owner’s AV/IT equipment) services. If you find this proposal acceptable, please, let us know and we will forward you a draft owner/architect agreement for your review and comment. We would be able to proceed upon receipt of a final agreement executed by both parties. We look forward to working together on this project. Please contact me with questions or clarifications. Sincerely, Tracy Coker Chad DeWeese, AIA Associate Principal Project Manager Page 5 of 5 166 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Infrastructure Committee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution: RE: Approval of 2017 Capital Improvements Plan Project No. ELEC-17-001 Brandywine Building for Architectural / Engineering Design Services Portion of the Project and authorize County Administrator to issue the necessary documents to complete this portion of the Project. RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the County Board approved 2017 Capital Improvement Plan Project ELEC-17- 001 for Remodel of the Brandywine Building for a amount of $650,000.00; and WHEREAS, your Infrastructure Committee recommends that the County Board authorize the County Administrator to execute a Design Services Contract with Dewberry Architects Inc. (Dewberry) in the amount of Ninety-One Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($91,000.00) plus Reimbursable Costs at 1.15 times Cost to Dewberry consistent with Dewberry's Revised Design Services Proposal - 4422 Brandywine Drive Renovations Dated April 26, 2017, (Proposal); and WHEREAS, once the design is completed, Staff will competitively bid the construction renovation work and bring those results to your Infrastructure Committee with recommends for approval; and WHEREAS, your Infrastructure Committee recommends that the County Board authorize the County Administrator to transfer funds from Capital Improvements Plan Project No. CH-16-005 Contingency to this Project, as required, to fully fund this Project; and WHEREAS, your Infrastructure Committee recommends that the County Board authorize the County Administrator to transfer any unexpended Project Funds into the Capital Improvements Plan Project No. CH-16-005 Contingency and/or Capital Improvements Fund Balance once this Project is closed-out; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Peoria County Board, that Dewberry's Proposal dated April 26, 2017 for Design Services portion of the Project is approved and that the County Administrator is authorized to execute the necessary documents required to complete this portion of the Project as indicated above. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Infrastructure Committee Date: May 22, 2017 Page 1 of 1 167 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Infrastructure LINE ITEM: N/A MEETING DATE: POLL VOTE AMOUNT: N/A ISSUE: Prevailing Wage Resolution BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Prevailing Wage Act, 820 ILCS 130/1 et.seq. requires Peoria County to ascertain the prevailing wage for work contracted in performing construction of public works for Peoria County on an annual basis. This resolution allows Peoria County to comply with the Prevailing Wage Act. The Illinois Department of Labor has published Prevailing Wage Rates effective June 5, 2017, and are attached. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: FINANCIAL STABILITY INFRASTRUCTURE STEWARDSHIP EFFECTIVE SERVICE DELIVERY HEALTHY VIBRANT COMMUNITIES WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT COLLABORATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: COMMITTEE ACTION: Approved 6/6/17 via Poll Vote (3-0 votes) PREPARED BY: Jeffrey D. Gilles DEPARTMENT: Highway DATE: March 22, 2017 168 This schedule contains the prevailing wage rates required to be paid for work performed on or after Monday, June 5, 2017 on public works projects in this County. Pursuant to 820 ILCS 130/4, public bodies in this County that have active public works projects are responsible for notifying all contractors and subcontractors working on those public works projects of the change (if any) to rates that were previously in effect. The failure of a public body to provide such notice does not relieve contractors or subcontractors of their obligations under the Prevailing Wage Act, including the duty to pay the relevant prevailing wage in effect at the time work subject to the Act is performed. PEORIA COUNTY PREVAILING WAGE RATES EFFECTIVE JUNE 5, 2017 Base Foreman M-F TradeTitle Region Type Class Wage Wage OT OSA OSH H/W Pension Vacation Training ASBESTOS ABT-GEN All BLD 26.86 28.36 1.5 1.5 2.0 7.70 17.47 0.00 0.80 ASBESTOS ABT-GEN All HWY 29.96 31.46 1.5 1.5 2.0 7.70 17.47 0.00 0.80 ASBESTOS ABT-MEC All BLD 33.00 35.50 1.5 1.5 2.0 11.62 11.06 0.00 0.72 BOILERMAKER All BLD 38.00 41.00 2.0 2.0 2.0 7.07 15.99 0.00 0.40 BRICK MASON All BLD 33.16 34.66 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.40 10.57 0.00 0.79 CARPENTER All BLD 31.71 33.96 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.20 16.21 0.00 0.52 CARPENTER All HWY 33.51 35.76 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.20 16.51 0.00 0.52 CEMENT MASON All BLD 28.05 29.80 1.5 1.5 2.0 7.50 15.65 0.00 0.50 CEMENT MASON All HWY 29.28 30.78 1.5 1.5 2.0 7.50 16.02 0.00 0.50 CERAMIC TILE FNSHER All BLD 30.86 30.86 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.40 10.57 0.00 0.77 ELECTRIC PWR EQMT OP All All 42.47 48.52 1.5 1.5 2.0 6.52 11.89 0.00 0.42 ELECTRIC PWR GRNDMAN All All 29.14 48.52 1.5 1.5 2.0 6.12 8.16 0.00 0.29 ELECTRIC PWR LINEMAN All All 47.16 48.52 1.5 1.5 2.0 6.66 13.20 0.00 0.47 ELECTRIC PWR TRK DRV All All 30.55 32.55 1.5 1.5 2.0 6.17 8.56 0.00 0.31 ELECTRICIAN All All 35.21 37.71 1.5 1.5 2.0 7.10 11.70 0.00 0.80 ELECTRICIAN All BLD 34.82 37.32 1.5 1.5 2.0 6.10 11.43 0.00 0.40 ELECTRONIC SYS TECH All BLD 27.75 29.75 1.5 1.5 2.0 6.85 10.93 0.00 0.40 169 ELEVATOR CONSTRUCTOR All BLD 42.52 47.84 2.0 2.0 2.0 14.43 8.96 3.40 0.60 GLAZIER All BLD 34.12 36.12 1.5 1.5 1.5 10.30 7.70 0.00 1.35 HT/FROST INSULATOR All BLD 44.40 46.50 1.5 1.5 2.0 11.62 12.26 0.00 0.72 IRON WORKER All BLD 32.40 34.30 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.84 14.91 0.00 0.54 IRON WORKER All HWY 36.44 38.44 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.84 14.91 0.00 0.54 LABORER All BLD 25.86 27.36 1.5 1.5 2.0 7.70 17.47 0.00 0.80 LABORER All HWY 29.21 30.71 1.5 1.5 2.0 7.70 19.07 0.00 0.80 LABORER, SKILLED All BLD 26.26 27.36 1.5 1.5 2.0 7.70 17.47 0.00 0.80 LABORER, SKILLED All HWY 29.51 30.71 1.5 1.5 2.0 7.70 19.07 0.00 0.80 LATHER All BLD 30.88 33.13 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.00 15.71 0.00 0.52 MACHINERY MOVER All HWY 35.98 37.98 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.49 13.91 0.00 0.00 MACHINIST All BLD 45.35 47.85 1.5 1.5 2.0 7.26 8.95 1.85 0.00 MARBLE FINISHERS All BLD 30.86 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.40 10.57 0.00 0.77 MARBLE MASON All BLD 32.61 33.86 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.40 10.57 0.00 0.78 MILLWRIGHT All BLD 31.56 33.81 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.20 16.72 0.00 0.52 MILLWRIGHT All HWY 33.59 35.33 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.20 16.95 0.00 0.52 OPERATING ENGINEER All BLD 1 38.62 37.49 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.00 19.23 0.00 3.00 OPERATING ENGINEER All BLD 2 35.84 37.49 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.00 19.23 0.00 3.00 OPERATING ENGINEER All BLD 3 31.27 37.49 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.00 19.23 0.00 3.00 OPERATING ENGINEER All HWY 1 38.62 41.62 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.00 19.23 0.00 3.00 OPERATING ENGINEER All HWY 2 35.84 41.62 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.00 19.23 0.00 3.00 OPERATING ENGINEER All HWY 3 31.27 41.62 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.00 19.23 0.00 3.00 PAINTER All All 34.60 35.60 1.5 1.5 1.5 10.30 8.20 0.00 1.35 PAINTER SIGNS All BLD 33.92 38.09 1.5 1.5 1.5 2.60 2.71 0.00 0.00 PILEDRIVER All BLD 32.71 34.96 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.20 16.21 0.00 0.52 PILEDRIVER All HWY 34.51 36.96 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.20 16.51 0.00 0.52 PIPEFITTER All BLD 38.50 42.74 1.5 1.5 2.0 7.00 12.03 0.00 1.06 PLASTERER All BLD 29.00 30.25 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.15 16.19 0.00 0.80 PLUMBER All BLD 35.17 38.34 1.5 1.5 2.0 7.00 14.21 0.00 0.95 ROOFER All BLD 31.00 32.55 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.95 8.30 0.00 0.25 SHEETMETAL WORKER All BLD 32.75 34.39 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.37 16.46 0.00 0.80 170 SIGN HANGER All HWY 35.98 37.98 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.49 13.91 0.00 0.00 SPRINKLER FITTER All BLD 37.12 39.87 1.5 1.5 2.0 8.42 8.50 0.00 0.35 STEEL ERECTOR All HWY 36.44 38.44 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.84 14.91 0.00 0.54 STONE MASON All BLD 33.16 34.66 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.40 10.57 0.00 0.79 TERRAZZO FINISHER All BLD 30.86 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.40 10.57 0.00 0.77 TERRAZZO MASON All BLD 32.61 32.61 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.40 10.57 0.00 0.78 TILE MASON All BLD 32.61 33.86 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.40 10.57 0.00 0.78 TRUCK DRIVER All All 1 35.02 38.55 1.5 1.5 2.0 11.92 5.66 0.00 0.25 TRUCK DRIVER All All 2 35.54 38.55 1.5 1.5 2.0 11.92 5.66 0.00 0.25 TRUCK DRIVER All All 3 35.77 38.55 1.5 1.5 2.0 11.92 5.66 0.00 0.25 TRUCK DRIVER All All 4 36.10 38.55 1.5 1.5 2.0 11.92 5.66 0.00 0.25 TRUCK DRIVER All All 5 37.05 38.55 1.5 1.5 2.0 11.92 5.66 0.00 0.25 TRUCK DRIVER All O&C 1 28.02 31.14 1.5 1.5 2.0 11.92 5.66 0.00 0.25 TRUCK DRIVER All O&C 2 28.43 31.14 1.5 1.5 2.0 11.92 5.66 0.00 0.25 TRUCK DRIVER All O&C 3 28.62 31.14 1.5 1.5 2.0 11.92 5.66 0.00 0.25 TRUCK DRIVER All O&C 4 28.88 31.14 1.5 1.5 2.0 11.92 5.66 0.00 0.25 TRUCK DRIVER All O&C 5 29.64 31.14 1.5 1.5 2.0 11.92 5.66 0.00 0.25 TUCKPOINTER All BLD 33.16 34.66 1.5 1.5 2.0 9.40 10.57 0.00 0.79 Explanations PEORIA COUNTY The following list is considered as those days for which holiday rates of wages for work performed apply: New Years Day, Memorial Day, 171 Fourth of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day and Veterans Day in some classifications/counties. Generally, any of these holidays which fall on a Sunday is celebrated on the following Monday. This then makes work performed on that Monday payable at the appropriate overtime rate for holiday pay. Common practice in a given local may alter certain days of celebration. If in doubt, please check with IDOL. Oil and chip resealing (O&C) means the application of road oils and liquid asphalt to coat an existing road surface, followed by application of aggregate chips or gravel to coated surface, and subsequent rolling of material to seal the surface. EXPLANATION OF CLASSES ASBESTOS - GENERAL - removal of asbestos material/mold and hazardous materials from any place in a building, including mechanical systems where those mechanical systems are to be removed. This includes the 172 removal of asbestos materials/mold and hazardous materials from ductwork or pipes in a building when the building is to be demolished at the time or at some close future date. ASBESTOS - MECHANICAL - removal of asbestos material from mechanical systems, such as pipes, ducts, and boilers, where the mechanical systems are to remain. CERAMIC TILE FINISHER, MARBLE FINISHER, TERRAZZO FINISHER Assisting, helping or supporting the tile, marble and terrazzo mechanic by performing their historic and traditional work assignments required to complete the proper installation of the work covered by said crafts. The term "Ceramic" is used for naming the classification only and is in no way a limitation of the product handled. Ceramic takes into consideration most hard tiles. ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS TECHNICIAN 173 Installation, service and maintenance of low-voltage systems which utilizes the transmission and/or transference of voice, sound, vision, or digital for commercial, education, security and entertainment purposes for the following: TV monitoring and surveillance, background/foreground music, intercom and telephone interconnect, field programming, inventory control systems, microwave transmission, multi-media, multiplex, radio page, school, intercom and sound burglar alarms and low voltage master clock systems. Excluded from this classification are energy management systems, life safety systems, supervisory controls and data acquisition systems not intrinsic with the above listed systems, fire alarm systems, nurse call systems and raceways exceeding fifteen feet in length. LABORER, SKILLED - BUILDING The skilled laborer building (BLD) classification shall encompass the 174 following types of work, irrespective of the site of the work: cutting & acetylene torch, gunnite nozzlemen, gunnite pump men & pots, kettlemen & carriers of men handling hot stuff, sandblaster nozzle men, sandblasting pump men & pots, setting up and using concrete burning bars, wood block setters, underpinning & shoring of existing buildings, and the unload-ing and handling of all material coated with creosote. LABORER, SKILLED - HIGHWAY The skilled laborer heavy & highway (HWY) classification shall encompass the following types of work,irrespective of the site of the work: jackhammer & drill operator, gunite pump & pot man, puddlers, vibrator men, wire fabric placer, sandblast pump & pot man, strike off concrete, unloading, handling & carrying of all creosoted piles, ties or timber, concrete burning bars, power wheelbarrows or buggies, asphalt raker, brickset-ters, cutting torchman (electric & acetylene), men setting lines to level forms, form setters, gunite nozzle man & 175 sandblasting nozzle man, power man, and rip-rapping by hand. SURVEY WORKER - Operated survey equipment including data collectors, G.P.S. and robotic instruments, as well as conventional levels and transits. TRUCK DRIVER - BUILDING, HEAVY AND HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION Class 1. Drivers on 2 axle trucks hauling less than 9 ton. Air compressor and welding machines and brooms, including those pulled by separate units, truck driver helpers, warehouse employees, mechanic helpers, greasers and tiremen, pickup trucks when hauling materials, tools, or workers to and from and on-the-job site, and fork lifts up to 6,000 lb. capacity. Class 2. Two or three axle trucks hauling more than 9 ton but hauling less than 16 ton. A-frame winch trucks, hydrolift trucks, vactor trucks or similar equipment when used for transportation purposes. Fork lifts over 6,000 lb. capacity, winch trucks, four axle 176 combination units, and ticket writers. Class 3. Two, three or four axle trucks hauling 16 ton or more. Drivers on water pulls, articulated dump trucks, mechanics and working forepersons, and dispatchers. Five axle or more combination units. Class 4. Low Boy and Oil Distributors. Class 5. Drivers who require special protective clothing while employed on hazardous waste work. TRUCK DRIVER - OIL AND CHIP RESEALING ONLY. This shall encompass laborers, workers and mechanics who drive contractor or subcontractor owned, leased, or hired pickup, dump, service, or oil distributor trucks. The work includes transporting materials and equipment (including but not limited to, oils, aggregate supplies, parts, machinery and tools) to or from the job site; 177 distributing oil or liquid asphalt and aggregate; stock piling material when in connection with the actual oil and chip contract. The Truck Driver (Oil & Chip Resealing) wage classification does not include supplier delivered materials. OPERATING ENGINEERS - BUILDING Class 1. Cranes; Overhead Cranes; Gradall; All Cherry Pickers; Mechanics; Central Concrete Mixing Plant Operator; Road Pavers (27E - Dual Drum - Tri Batchers); Blacktop Plant Operators and Plant Engineers; 3 Drum Hoist; Derricks; Hydro Cranes; Shovels; Skimmer Scoops; Koehring Scooper; Drag Lines; Backhoe; Derrick Boats; Pile Drivers and Skid Rigs; Clamshells; Locomotive Cranes; Dredge (all types) Motor Patrol; Power Blades - Dumore - Elevating and similar types; Tower Cranes (Crawler-Mobile) and Stationary; Crane-type Backfiller; Drott Yumbo and similar types considered as Cranes; Caisson Rigs; Dozer; Tournadozer; Work Boats; Ross Carrier; Helicopter; Tournapulls - all and similar types; Scoops (all sizes); 178 Pushcats; Endloaders (all types); Asphalt Surfacing Machine; Slip Form Paver; Rock Crusher; Heavy Equipment Greaser; CMI, CMI Belt Placer, Auto Grade & 3 Track and similar types; Side Booms; Multiple Unit Earth Movers; Creter Crane; Trench Machine; Pump-crete-Belt Crete-Squeeze Cretes-Screw-type Pumps and Gypsum; Bulker & Pump - Operator will clean; Formless Finishing Machine; Flaherty Spreader or similar types; Screed Man on Laydown Machine; Wheel Tractors (industrial or Farm-type w/Dozer-Hoe-Endloader or other attachments); F.W.D. & Similar Types; Vermeer Concrete Saw. Class 2. Dinkeys; Power Launches; PH One-pass Soil Cement Machine (and similar types); Pugmill with Pump; Backfillers; Euclid Loader; Forklifts; Jeeps w/Ditching Machine or other attachments; Tuneluger; Automatic Cement and Gravel Batching Plants; Mobile Drills (Soil Testing) and similar types; Gurries and Similar Types; (1) and (2) Drum Hoists (Buck Hoist and Similar Types); Chicago Boom; Boring Machine & Pipe Jacking Machine; Hydro Boom; Dewatering System; Straw Blower; Hydro Seeder; Assistant Heavy Equipment Greaser on Spread; 179 Tractors (Track type) without Power Unit pulling Rollers; Rollers on Asphalt -- Brick Macadem; Concrete Breakers; Concrete Spreaders; Mule Pulling Rollers; Center Stripper; Cement Finishing Machines & CMI Texture & Reel Curing Machines; Cement Finishing Machine; Barber Green or similar loaders; Vibro Tamper (All similar types) Self-propelled; Winch or Boom Truck; Mechanical Bull Floats; Mixers over 3 Bag to 27E; Tractor pulling Power Blade or Elevating Grader; Porter Rex Rail; Clary Screed; Truck Type Hoptoe Oilers; Fireman; Spray Machine on Paving; Curb Machines; Truck Crane Oilers; Oil Distributor; Truck-Mounted Saws. Class 3. Air Compressor; Power Subgrader; Straight Tractor; Trac Air without attachments; Herman Nelson Heater, Dravo, Warner, Silent Glo, and similar types; Roller: Five (5) Ton and under on Earth or Gravel; Form Grader; Crawler Crane & Skid Rig Oilers; Freight Elevators - permanently installed; Pump; Light Plant; Generator; Conveyor (1) or (2) - Operator will clean; Welding Machine; Mixer (3) Bag and Under (Standard Capacity with skip); Bulk Cement Plant; Oiler 180 on Central Concrete Mixing Plant. OPERATING ENGINEERS - HEAVY AND HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION CLASS 1. Cranes; Hydro Cranes; Shovels; Crane Type Backfiller; Tower, Mobile, Crawler, & Stationary Cranes; Derricks; Hoists (3 Drum); Draglines; Drott Yumbo & Similar Types considered as Cranes; 360 Degree Swing Excavator (Shears, Grapples, Movacs, etc.); Back Hoe; Derrick Boats; Pile Driver and Skid Rigs; Clam Shell; Locomotive - Cranes; Road Pavers - Single Drum - Dual Drum - Tri Batcher; Motor Patrols & Power Blades - Dumore - Elevating & Similar Types; Mechanics; Central Concrete Mixing Plant Operator; Asphalt Batch Plant Operators and Plant Engineers; Gradall; Caisson Rigs; Skimmer Scoop - Koering Scooper; Dredges (all types); Hoptoe; All Cherry Pickers; Work Boat; Ross Carrier; Helicopter; Dozer; Tournadozer; Tournapulls - all and similar types; Operation of Concrete and all Recycle Machines; Multiple Unit Earth Movers; Scoops (all sizes); Pushcats; Endloaders (all types); Asphalt Surfacing Machine; Slip Form Paver; 181 Rock Crusher; Operation of Material Crusher, Screening Plants, and Tunnel Boring Machine; Heavy Equipment Greaser (top greaser on spread); CMI, Auto Grade, CMI Belt Placer & 3 Track and Similar Types; Side Booms; Asphalt Heater & Planer Combination (used to plane streets); Wheel Tractors (with Dozer, Hoe or Endloader Attachments); CAT Earthwork Compactors and Similar Types; Blaw Knox Spreader and Similar Types; Trench Machines; Pump Crete - Belt Crete - Squeeze Crete - Screw Type Pumps and Gypsum (operator will clean); Creter Crane; Operation of Concrete Pump Truck; Formless Finishing Machines; Flaherty Spreader or Similar Types; Screed Man on Laydown Machine; Vermeer Concrete Saw; Operation of Laser Screed; Span Saw; Dredge Leverman; Dredge Engineer; Lull or Similar Type; Hydro-Boom Truck; Operation of Guard Rail Machine; and Starting Engineer on Pipeline or Construction (11 or more pieces) including: Air Compressor (Trailer Mounted), All Forced Air Heaters (regardless of Size), Water Pumps (Greater than 4-1/2" or Total Discharge Over 4-1/2"), Light Plants, Generators (Trailer Mounted - Excluding Decontamination Trailer), Welding Machines (Any Size or Mode of Power), Conveyor, Mixer (any 182 size), Stud Welder, Power Pac, etc, and Ground Heater (Trailer Mounted). CLASS 2. Bulker & Pump; Power Launches; Boring Machine & Pipe Jacking Machine; Dinkeys; Operation of Carts, Powered Haul Unit for a Boring Machine; P & H One Pass Soil Cement Machines and Similar Types; Wheel Tractors (Industry or Farm Type - Other); Back Fillers; Euclid Loader; Fork Lifts; Jeep w/Ditching Machine or Other Attachments; Tunneluger; Automatic Cement & Gravel Batching Plants; Mobile Drills - Soil Testing and Similar Types; Pugmill with Pump; All (1) and (2) Drum Hoists; Dewatering System; Straw Blower; Hydro-Seeder; Bump Grinders (self-propelled); Assistant Heavy Equipment Greaser; Apsco Spreader; Tractors (Track-Type) without Power Units Pulling Rollers; Rollers on Asphalt - Brick or Macadam; Concrete Breakers; Concrete Spreaders; Cement Strippers; Cement Finishing Machines & CMI Texture & Reel Curing Machines; Vibro-Tampers (All Similar Types Self-Propelled); Mechanical Bull Floats; Self-Propelled Concrete Saws; Truck Mounted Power Saws; Operation of Curb Cutters; Mixers - Over Three (3) Bags; 183 Winch and Boom Trucks; Tractor Pulling Power Blade or Elevating Grader; Porter Rex Rail; Clary Screed; Mule Pulling Rollers; Pugmill without Pump; Barber Greene or Similar Loaders; Track Type Tractor w/Power Unit attached (minimum); Fireman; Spray Machine on Paving; Curb Machines; Paved Ditch Machine; Power Broom; Self-Propelled Sweepers; Self-Propelled Conveyors; Power Subgrader; Oil Distributor; Straight Tractor; Truck Crane Oiler; Truck Type Oilers; Directional Boring Machine; Horizontal Directional Drill; Articulating End Dump Vehicles; Starting Engineer on Pipeline or Construction (6 -10 pieces) including: Air Compressor (Trailer Mounted), All Forced Air Heaters (regardless of Size), Water Pumps (Greater than 4-1/2" or Total Discharge Over 4-1/2"), Light Plants, Generators (Trailer Mounted - Excluding Decontamination Trailer), Welding Machines (Any Size or Mode of Power), Conveyor, Mixer (any size), Stud Welder, Power Pac, etc., and Ground Heater (Trailer Mounted). CLASS 3. Straight Framed Truck Mounted Vac Unit (separately powered); Trac Air Machine (without attachments); Rollers - Five Ton and Under 184 on Earth and Gravel; Form Graders; Bulk Cement Plant; Oilers; and Starting Engineer on Pipeline or Construction (3 - 5 pieces) including: Air Compressor (Trailer Mounted), All Forced Air Heaters (regardless of Size), Water Pumps (Greater than 4-1/2" or Total Discharge Over 4-1/2"), Light Plants, Generators (Trailer Mounted - Excluding Decontamination Trailer), Welding Machines (Any Size or Mode of Power), Conveyor, Mixer (any size), Stud Welder, Power Pac, etc., and Ground Heater (Trailer Mounted). Other Classifications of Work: For definitions of classifications not otherwise set out, the Department generally has on file such definitions which are available. If a task to be performed is not subject to one of the classifications of pay set out, the Department will upon being contacted state which neighboring county has such a classification and provide such rate, such rate being deemed to exist by reference in this document. If no neighboring county rate applies to the task, 185 the Department shall undertake a special determination, such special determination being then deemed to have existed under this determination. If a project requires these, or any classification not listed, please contact IDOL at 217-782-1710 for wage rates or clarifications. LANDSCAPING Landscaping work falls under the existing classifications for laborer, operating engineer and truck driver. The work performed by landscape plantsman and landscape laborer is covered by the existing classification of laborer. The work performed by landscape operators (regardless of equipment used or its size) is covered by the classifications of operating engineer. The work performed by landscape truck drivers (regardless of size of truck driven) is covered by the classifications of truck driver. 186 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Infrastructure Committee does hereby recommend the passage of the following Resolution: RE: PREVAILING WAGES ORDINANCE WHEREAS, the Prevailing Wage Act, 820 ILCS 130/1 et seq., requires that the County Board of Peoria County ascertain the prevailing rate of wages as defined in said Act for laborers, mechanics and other workers in the locality of said County contracted in performing construction of public works for said County; and WHEREAS, said Act allows the Illinois Department of Labor to ascertain the prevailing rate of wages for the County and m andates that any and al l revisions of the prevailing rate of wages determined by the Department shall supersede the Department's original determination and apply to any and all public works construction undertaken by the County thereafter. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED, that to the extent and as required by the Prevailing Wage Act, 820 ILCS 130/1 et seq., the general prevailing rate of wages in this locality for laborers, mechanics and other workers contracted in construction of public works coming under the jurisdiction of the County is hereby ascertained to be the same as the prevailing rate of wages for construction in the Peoria County areas as determined by the Department of Labor of the State of Illinois as of June of the current year or the current revised determination, a copy of that determination being attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. As required by said Act, any and all revisions of the prevailing rate of wages by the department of Labor of the State of Illinois shall supersede the Department's June determination and apply to any and all public works construction undertaken by the County. The County interprets the prevailing rates for the various fringe benefits paid in addition to wages to be satisfied by payment in wages or benefits of an amount equal to or greater than the aggregate sum of the individual categories promulgated by the Department of Labor. The definition of any terms appearing in this Ordinance which are also used in aforesaid Act shall be the same as in said Act. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to apply said general prevailing rate of wages as herein ascertained to any work or employment except public works construction of the County to the extent required by the aforesaid Act. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that the County Clerk shall publicly post or keep available for inspection by an interested party in the main office of the County this determination or any revisions of such prevailing rate of wage. A copy of this determination or of the current revised determination of prevailing rate of wages then in effect shall be attached to all contract specifications. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that the County Clerk shall mail a copy of this determination to any association of employers and t o any person or association of employees who have filed their names and addresses, requesting copies of any determination stating the particular rates and the particular class of workers whose wages will be affected by such rates. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that the County Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the area a copy of this Ordinance, and s uch publication shall constitute notice that the determination is effective and that this is the determination of this public body. Respectfully submitted, Infrastructure Committee 187 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Infrastructure Committee LINE ITEM: MEETING DATE: Poll Vote AMOUNT: ISSUE: 5-Month Extension of Transportation Services Agreement with MV Transportation, Inc. Peoria County and MV Transportation, Inc. (MV) entered into a three (3) year Transportation Services Agreement in 2012 for MV to provide public demand response service in the County ("Transportation Services). The 3-year Transportation Services Agreement between the parties was allowed to be extended for two (2) additional one-year periods, putting the ending term of the agreement on June 30 2017. Greater Peoria Mass Transit District (GPMTD) and the County have been working collaboratively toward coordinated dispatch and service delivery. GPMTD and the County both utilize the services of MV. GPMTD plans to solicit bids for a new contract for transportation services later this fall when its contract with MV expires in November 2017. GPMTD and the County have requested permission from IDOT to include the County services as part of GPMTD's next procurement process to further align services between the two transit programs. In response, IDOT has been very supportive of the collaboration between Peoria County and GPMTD and has given official concurrence and agreement to a joint procurement. This would therefore necessitate a 5-month extension to the existing agreement between Peoria County and MV that will end on June 30, 2017. IDOT has also given concurrence to sole-source extension (attached is a concurrence letter from IDOT). Any extension of the agreement would be paid for through rural transportation revenue sources received through the operation of the CountyLink program, such as state and federal grant funding, fares, advertising, and service contracts with social service agencies. No funding from the County General Fund will be required. In order to continue its transportation services, staff is therefore recommending approval of an extension of the existing contract, with no changes being made except for the ending term date being extended from June 30, 2017 to November 30, 2017. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: HIGH PERFORMING PUBLIC ORGANIZATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval COMMITTEE ACTION: Approved via Poll Vote 6/5/2017 (3-0 votes) PREPARED BY: Scott Sorrel, County Administrator DEPARTMENT: County Administration DATE: May 22, 2017 188 EXTENSION of AGREEMENT between Peoria County and MV Transportation, Inc. For Rural Public Transportation Services This Extension of Agreement ("Agreement") is made by and between Peoria County, a body politic and corporate of the State of Illinois (“Peoria County”) with a business address of 324 Main Street, Peoria, IL 61602 and MV Transportation, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, with its home office located at 5910 N. Central Expy., Suite 1145, Dallas, TX 75206 ("MV"), hereafter collectively referred to as the "Parties". WHEREAS, Peoria County and MV Transportation, Inc. ("MV") entered into a three year Transportation Services Agreement in 2012 for MV to provide public demand response service ("Transportation Services); and WHEREAS, the Transportation Services Agreement, under Section 2, allowed for two one-year extensions and the Parties exercised both of these extensions, putting a final ending term to the Transportation Services Agreement on June 30, 2017; and WHEREAS, Peoria County wishes to further extend the terms and conditions of the Transportation Services Agreement by five (5) months to allow for greater service collaboration with its transportation partner the Greater Peoria Mass Transit District; and WHEREAS, the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) has given its agreement and concurrence to a sole-source extension through the attached IDOT approval letter. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that in consideration of the mutual promises, convents and obligations herein, the Parties hereby agree as follows: Terms of Extension Agreement: 1. Conditions of the Agreement. This extension is to be on the same terms and conditions as contained in the original Transportation Services Agreement, as amended and extended, and as set forth herein this Agreement. 2. Effective Date and Term of Agreement. This Agreement is to be effective July 1, 2017 and terminate on November 30, 2017. 3. Charge Rate. The rate in effect on June 30, 2017 is to remain as the rate in effect until November 30, 2017. Page 1 of 2 189 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto, by their duly authorized representatives, have affixed their hands to this contract which consists of two (2) Pages. COUNTY OF PEORIA MV TRANSPORTATION, INC. ______Signature Signature ______Printed Name Printed Name ______Title Title Dated:______2017 Dated:______2017 Page 2 of 2 190 191 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Infrastructure Committee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution: RE: Five-Month Extension of Transportation Services Agreement with MV Transportation, Inc. RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Peoria County and MV Transportation, Inc. ("MV") entered into a three year Transportation Services Agreement in 2012 for MV to provide public demand response service ("Transportation Services); and WHEREAS, the Transportation Services Agreement, under Section 2, allowed for two one-year extensions and the Parties exercised both of these extensions, putting a final ending term to the Transportation Services Agreement on June 30, 2017; and WHEREAS, Peoria County wishes to further extend the terms of Transportation Services Agreement by 5 months to allow for greater service collaboration with its transportation partner the Greater Peoria Mass Transit District (GPMTD); and WHEREAS, GPMTD and the County both utilize the services of MV and GPMTD plans to solicit bids for a new contract for services in the fall of 2017 when its contract with MV expires in November 2017; and WHEREAS, GPMTD has requested permission from IDOT to include the County services as part of its next procurement process to further align services between the two transit programs; and WHEREAS, IDOT has given official concurrence and agreement to a joint procurement; and WHEREAS, a joint procurement would necessitate a 5-month extension to the existing agreement between Peoria County and MV that will end on June 30, 2017; and WHEREAS, IDOT has also given agreement and concurrence to Peoria County for a sole-source extension. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the County Board of Peoria County, that the County Board Chairman and/or County Administrator, with the review and approval of the State's Attorney's Office, are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a 5-month extension agreement with MV Transportation, Inc. for the purposes of providing transportation services in Peoria County. RESPECTFULLY SUMBMITTED, INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 192 193 PEORIA COUNTY BOARD APPOINTMENTS June 8, 2017 *Subject to Change* Board of Health (Length of Term: 3 years) David Trachtenbarg 2419 E Reservoir Blvd. Peoria IL 61614-8029 Expiring: 6/30/2020 Joyce Harant 3914 N Donna Lane Peoria IL 61615 Expiring: 6/30/2020 Todd Baker 1015 N. Edgehill Court Peoria IL 61604 Expiring: 6/30/2020 Care and Treatment Board (Length of Term: 3 years) Greg Chance 523 N. Fairgrounds Way Elmwood IL 61529 Expiring: 6/30/2020 Peoria County Plat Officers (Length of Term: 2 years) Kerilyn Gallagher 324 Main Street, Room 301 Peoria IL 61602 Expiring: 6/1/2019 Zoning Board of Appeals (Length of Term: 5 years) Andrew Keyt 326 N. Sterling Avenue West Peoria IL 61604 Expiring: 6/1/2022 194 Jim Bateman 13705 River Beach Drive Chillicothe IL 61604 Expiring: 6/1/2022 John Harms 9153 N. Picture Ridge Rd. Peoria, IL 61615 Expiring: 6/1/2022 Replaces: Robert German Loren Bailliez 413 N. Saylor Glasford IL 61533 Expiring: 6/1/2022 195 PEORIA COUNTY BOARD APPOINTMENTS July 13, 2017 *Subject to Change* NO APPOINTMENT TERMS DUE TO EXPIRE 196 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Land Use LINE ITEM: N/A MEETING DATE: May 11, 2017 AMOUNT: N/A ISSUE: ZBA Case #028-17-U. A Special Use as required in Section 20.5.2.2.1.a.1 of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a special use when a proposed land split does not meet the 25 acre minimum lot size nor the 1 dwelling unit per 25 contiguous acres density requirement in the A-2 Agricultural District. The petitioner proposes to divide two approximately 5 acre lots from a 10.003 acre parcel. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This case is located in District #18, which is County Board member Paul Rosenbohm's district. The petitioners, Drew & Kate Bailey, request a special use in order to divide two approximately 5 acre lots from a 10.003 acre parcel, owned by a family member. There are 0 consents and 0 objections on file. The parcel is located at 17108 W. Nubbin Ridge Road in the northwest quarter of Section 31 in Timber Township. Adjacent parcels contain cropland, timberland, and residential uses. Within less than a quarter of a mile of the subject parcel are 5 residential properties, two of which lie directly to the east. One of the resulting parcels already contains a detached single-family dwelling, owned by a family member of one of the petitioners. According to the petitioner, a second home would be built on the resulting adjacent parcel. The two 5 acre parcels resulting from the split would be consistent with the size of the residential parcels in the surrounding area. The proposed request is consistent with the low density residential use and character of the surrounding area. The overall LESA score was 197.3 out of 300, which is a low rating for protection. Through a phone conversation, the petitioner mentioned that hay is currently harvested from a portion of the property. The petitioner mentioned that this use was due mainly to the fact that the land would otherwise go unused if it was not harvested. According to the petition, the parcel is served by an existing private septic system and the T-L Rural Water district. The new single family home would be served by private septic and the T-L Rural Water district as well. The Health Department indicated that at this time, no conditions were found that would cause them to recommend denial. However, the Department indicated that the property has a shallow limiting layer for soil boring #1. This could reduce the available options for a subsurface onsite wastewater system, and could potentially increase the size and cost of the system in order to comply with Code requirements. The subject parcel is located on the Southwest corner of the intersection of Nubbin Ridge Rd. and Romine Rd. The traffic count for these roads is not reported by IDOT. With one additional dwelling, additional trips should have a low impact on the transportation system. The County Highway Department has no objections to the case. No comments have been received by the township road commissioner. The Peoria County Future Land Use Form Map designates this area as Agriculture and Environmental Corridor. The land uses allowed in the Agriculture Land Use Form are agriculture, open space, and mineral extraction. The land uses allowed in the Environmental Corridor land use form are agriculture, open space, and conservation design residential. The request is not consistent with the Land Use Form map, but is consistent with the Peoria County Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The proposed request is consistent with the Peoria County Comprehensive Land Use Plan Smart Growth Principle of encouraging new development to be located in areas within or adjacent to areas of existing development. The use is consistent with the Peoria County Comprehensive Land Use Plan Agricultural Preservation Principle of preserving prime agricultural land from development. The request is also consistent with the Peoria County Rural Areas Growth Strategy which supports permitting low density residential living and cluster development in the A-1 and A-2 zoning districts. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: HEALTHY VIBRANT COMMUNITIES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with Restriction 1. Parcels created by the approval of this Special Use may not be divided again, even if subsequently combined with other parcels, unless a rezoning is granted by the County Board or unless each lot to be created meets the 25 acre minimum lot size of the "A-2" zoning District. ZBA RECOMMENDATION: Approval with Restriction (6-0) COMMITTEE ACTION: Approval (7-0) (Ms. William absent.) PREPARED BY: Corbin Bogle, Planner I DEPARTMENT: Planning & Zoning DATE: May 12, 2017 197 REPORT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR THE MAY 11, 2017 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: May 2, 2017 CASE/PETITIONER : 028-17-U / Drew & Kate Bailey / 403 S. Poplar Street., Glasford, IL 61533 REQUEST: 028-17-U: A Special Use as required in Section 20.5.2.2.1.a.1 of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a special use when a proposed land split does not meet the 25 acre minimum lot size nor the 1 dwelling unit per 25 contiguous acres density requirement in the A-2 Agricultural District. The petitioner proposes to divide two approximately 5 acre lots from a 10.003 acre parcel. LOCATION: NW1/4, Section 31, Timber Township. 17108 W. Nubbin Ridge Rd., Canton / Parcel ID# 19-31-100-010 LAND USE FORM: Agriculture / Environmental Corridor CURRENT ZONING: “A-2” Agricultural PRESENT USE: Agriculture / Residential / Timber SIZE OF SITE: 10.003 acres SURROUNDING ZONING : North, South, East, and West: “A-2” Agricultural SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Agriculture/Timber South: Agriculture / Timber East: Agriculture/Residential/Timber West: Agriculture PUBLIC SERVICES: Fire: Timber-Hollis Water: T-L Rural Schools: Illini Bluffs USD #327 Sewer: Private Septic TRANSPORTATION: Nubbin Ridge Road, Township Road Romine Road, Township Road PERTINENT ZONING CASES ON SITE: None PERTINENT ZONING CASES IN SURROUNDING AREA: None PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL WITH RESTRICTION 198 CASE ANALYSIS REQUEST AND LOCATION: The petitioner, Drew & Kate Bailey, request a special use in order to divide two approximately 5 acre lots from a 10.003 acre parcel. The parcel is located at 17108 W. Nubbin Ridge Road in the northwest quarter of Section 31 in Timber Township. PERTINENT ZONING CASES ONSITE: None PERTINENT ZONING CASES IN SURROUNDING AREA: None SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USE: The subject parcel consists of a residential use with cropland and timberland. All directly adjacent parcels are zoned "A-2" Agriculture. Parcels to the north and south contain cropland and timberland. The parcel to west is used for cropland. Directly to the east are two residential parcels. One of these properties also contains timberland. Within less than a quarter of a mile of the subject parcel are 5 residential properties, two of which lie directly to the east. The parcel is intended to be split into two approximately 5 acre parcels. One of these potential parcels already contains a detached single-family dwelling. According to the petitioner, a second home would be built on the resulting adjacent parcel. Of the 5 surrounding residential parcels, 4 are less than 5 acres. The parcel directly to the east, across Romine Rd, is 4.30 acres. The two 5 acre parcels resulting from the split would be consistent with the size of the residential parcels in the surrounding area. The proposed request is consistent with the low density residential use and character of the surrounding area. TECHNICAL ADEQUACY: The petitioner proposes to divide the 10.003 acre parcel into 2 parcels of approximately 5 acres each. One proposed parcel contains an existing single family residence. The other is intended for the same use. Section 20-5.2.2.1.a.1 of the Peoria County Unified Development Ordinance allows for a special use when a proposed land split does not meet the 25 acre minimum lot size nor the 1 dwelling unit per 25 contiguous acres density requirement in the "A-2" Agricultural District. A LESA was conducted on the parcel to determine whether the land involved in the split should be protected for agricultural use. The site scored 78 out of 100 for agland evaluation and 119.3 out of 200 for the site assessment component. The overall LESA score was 197.3 out of 300, which is a low rating for protection. Through a phone conversation, the petitioner mentioned that hay is currently harvested from a portion of the property. The petitioner mentioned that this use was due mainly to the fact that the land would otherwise go unused if it was not harvested. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: According to the petition, the parcel is served by an existing private septic system and the T-L Rural Water district. The new single family home would be served by private septic and the T-L Rural Water district as well. With proper maintenance, the septic system should have little to no negative impacts on the surrounding environment. The Health Department indicated that at this time, no conditions were found that would cause them to recommend denial. However, the Department indicated that the property has a shallow limiting layer for soil boring #1. This could reduce the available options for a subsurface onsite wastewater system, and could potentially increase the size and cost of the system in order to comply with Code requirements. TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS: The subject parcel is located on the Southwest corner of the intersection of Nubbin Ridge Rd. and Romine Rd. The traffic count for these roads is not reported by IDOT. A single- family detached dwelling generates an average of 9.57 vehicle trips per weekday. With one additional dwelling, such additional trips should have a low impact on the transportation system. The County 199 Highway Department has no objections to the case. No comments have been received by the township road commissioner. LAND USE FORM: The Peoria County Future Land Use Form Map designates this area as Agriculture and Environmental Corridor. The land uses allowed in the Agriculture Land Use Form are agriculture, open space, and mineral extraction. The land uses allowed in the Environmental Corridor land use form are agriculture, open space, and conservation design residential. The Peoria County Comprehensive plan indicates that agriculture is the predominant use in the Agriculture Land Use Form and that other types of development are restricted to the lowest producing agricultural land. The request is consistent with this portion of the land use form, as this parcel earned a LESA score of 197.3, which is a low rating for protection. The Comprehensive Plans indicates that residential development is not prohibited, but is carefully managed to allow some development. This includes residential development. CONCLUSIONS CONSISTENCY WITH ADOPTED COUNTY PLAN: The Future Land Use Form map in the Peoria County Comprehensive Land Use Plan designates this area as Agriculture and Environmental Corridor. The land uses allowed in the Agriculture Land Use Form are agriculture, open space, and mineral extraction. The land uses allowed in the Environmental Corridor Land Use Form are agriculture, open space, and conservation design residential. The request is not consistent with the Land Use Form map, but is consistent with the Peoria County Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The proposed request is consistent with the Peoria County Comprehensive Land Use Plan Smart Growth Principle of encouraging new development to be located in areas within or adjacent to areas of existing development. The subject parcel currently contains a residential use and is only 10 acres in size. Two other parcels with residential uses lie directly to the east. The use is consistent with the Peoria County Comprehensive Land Use Plan Agricultural Preservation Principle of preserving prime agricultural land from development. The existing cropland on the subject parcel obtained a low rating for protection through the LESA. The request is also consistent with the Peoria County Rural Areas Growth Strategy which supports permitting low density residential living and cluster development in the A-1 and A-2 zoning districts. CONSISTENCY WITH COMMUNITY CHARACTER: The area surrounding the subject parcel consists of agricultural and residential uses. The subject parcel contains a residential use, cropland, and timberland. Although cropland will be brought out of production in order to place a house on one of the new parcels, Peoria County Supervisor of Assessments data indicates that it is only 3.07 acres of land. In addition, the parcel earned a LESA score of 199.8 which is a low rating for protection. There are five other residential parcels within a quarter mile of the subject parcel that contain a residential use. Of these, two lie directly to the east. The 5 acre sizes of the two new parcels will be consistent with a 4.30 acre parcel directly to the east. The request is consistent with the rural residential character of the surrounding area. MINIMIZING ADVERSE EFFECTS: The request will split an existing 10.003 acre parcel into two approximately 5 acre parcels. One of the new parcels will continue its current residential use. A single- family detached home is intended to be built on the other new parcel. Several other residential parcels that are less than 5 acres exist in the area. These include two directly to the east. While 3.07 acres of cropland will be taken out of production, the LESA score for this site indicates a low rating for 200 protection. The addition of one new single-family dwelling should not cause a great impact on the transportation system in the area. PRESENCE OF NATURAL/HISTORICAL RESOURCES: The request does not impact known natural or historical resources. COMPLIANCE WITH ADDITIONAL STANDARDS: If granted, the two parcels created by this special use request would not be permitted to be divided again unless rezoned, as indicated in Section 20-5.2.2.1.a.1 of the Peoria County Unified Development Ordinance. 201 202 RECOMMENDATION Based on the above information, the Department recommends approval with the following restriction: 1. Parcels created by the approval of this Special Use may not be divided again, even if subsequently combined with other parcels, unless a rezoning is granted by the County Board or unless each lot to be created meets the 25 acre minimum lot size of the "A-2" zoning District. Respectfully submitted, Corbin Bogle Kathi Urban Planner I Director 203 MINUTES OF THE DELIBERATION OF THE PEORIA COUNTY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS A meeting of the Peoria County Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, May 11, 2017, in Room 403 of the Peoria County Courthouse, 324 Main Street, Peoria, Illinois. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson William O'Brien at 9:00 a.m. PRESENT: William O'Brien, Loren Bailliez, Jim Bateman, Richard Heinz, Greg Fletcher, Linda O'Brien ABSENT: Andrew Keyt, Justin Brown STAFF: Kathi Urban - Director Corbin Bogle - Planner I Kerilyn Gallagher - Planner II Jennifer Morris - Civil Assistant State’s Attorney Ellen Hanks - ZBA Administrative Assistant Case No. 028-17-U at 9:00 a.m. Hearing to be held in room 403, of the Peoria County Courthouse, Peoria, Illinois. Petition of DREW & KATE BAILEY, acting on behalf of JAMES & CHARLENE MOHN (owner), A SPECIAL USE as required in Section 20.5.2.2.1.a.1 of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a special use when a proposed land split does not meet the 25 acre minimum lot size nor the 1 dwelling unit per 25 contiguous acres density requirement in the A-2 Agricultural District. The petitioner proposes to divide two approximately 5 acre lots from a 10.003 acre parcel. FINDINGS OF FACT FOR SPECIAL USES Section 20-3.5.4 When considering an application for a special use permit, the decision making body shall consider the extent to which: 1. That the special use will be consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and standards of any officially adopted County plan and these regulations, or if not consistent, the factors which justify deviation; • This is a Special Use Request as required in Section 20.5.2.2.a.1 of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a Special Use when a proposed land split does not meet the 25 acre minimum lot size nor the 1 dwelling unit per 25 contiguous acres density requirement in the A-2 Agricultural District. The petitioner proposes to divide two approximately 5 acre lots from a 10.003 acre parcel and build a single family residence on one of the divided 5 acre parcels. There is a roadway access along the property line, so the traffic impact would be minimal. There would be no ingress or egress problem created by the petitioner's request. 2. That the special use will be consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development, or if not consistent, the factors which justify the inconsistency: 204 • The Future Land Use Form Map in the Peoria County Comprehensive Land Use Plan designates this area as Agricultural and Environmental Corridor. The request is not consistent with the Land Use Form Map, but is consistent with the Peoria County Comprehensive Land Use Smart Growth Principle of encouraging new development to be located in areas adjacent to areas existing development. The current land zoning is A-2 Agricultural. The present land use is Agriculture/Residential/Timber. The existing cropland on the subject parcel obtained a low rating for protection through the LESA. Surrounding land use is Agriculture/Timber to the south and north, timber to the east, and Agriculture to the west. There are no objections to the petitioner's request. 3. That the design of the of the proposed use will minimize adverse effects, including visual impacts on adjacent properties, except for land splits in the A-2 District and individual mobile homes; • If the petitioner's special use request is approved, the residence will be comparable to other nearby residences and will maintain the community character of the area. 4. That the development has been reviewed and approved by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources with regard to the presence of endangered species, and archaeological and/or historical resources, if applicable; and • This request does not impact known or historical resources. 5. That the proposed use will comply with all additional standards imposed on it by the particular provision of these regulations authorizing such use and by all other applicable requirements of the ordinances of the County. • If granted, the two parcels created by this special use request would not be permitted to be divided again unless rezoned, as indicated in Section 20-5.5.2.2.a.1 of the Peoria County Unified Development Ordinance. The petitioner has agreed to comply with all County ordinances and regulations. The Department recommends approval with the following restriction: Parcels created by the approval of this Special Use may not be divided again, even if subsequently combined with other parcels, unless a rezoning is granted by the County Board or unless each lot to be created meets the 25 acre minimum lot size of the A-2 Zoning District. A motion to approve the Findings of Fact was made by Mr. Bailliez and seconded by Mr. Fletcher. Six affirmative votes; (6-0). A motion to approve the proposed Special Use with restriction was made by Ms. O'Brien and seconded by Mr. Bateman. The motion was approved; (6-0). Meeting adjourned 4:54 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Ellen Hanks ZBA Administrative Assistant 205 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Land Use Committee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution: RE: Approval of Special Use with Restriction, Drew Bailey and Kate Bailey. Resolution WHEREAS, the County of Peoria has enacted a Unified Development Ordinance, Chapter 20 of the Peoria County Code; and WHEREAS, said ordinance requires a Special Use when a proposed land split does not meet the 25 acre minimum lot size nor the 1 dwelling unit per 25 contiguous acres density requirement in the A-2 Agricultural District; and WHEREAS, a hearing on said Special Use was held before the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) on May 11, 2017 in Case No. 028-17-U; a copy of the deliberation minutes of said hearing and a legal description of the subject property are attached; and WHEREAS, the ZBA deliberated its decision on May 11, 2017, and voted to recommend approval of the Special Use; a copy of the ZBA’s findings of fact is attached; and WHEREAS, your Committee met on May 22, 2017 to consider the ZBA’s recommendation, and voted to approve the Special Use. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED, by the County Board of Peoria County,that the Special Use in Case No. 028-17-U is hereby approved with the following restriction: 1. Parcels created by the approval of this Special Use may not be divided again, even if subsequently combined with other parcels, unless a rezoning is granted by the County Board or unless each lot to be created meets the 25 acre minimum lot size of the "A-2" zoning District. NOTICE: Approval of this special use does not constitute approval of wells or septic systems for the property required by the Peoria City/County Health Department. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, LAND USE COMMITTEE 206 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Land Use LINE ITEM: N/A MEETING DATE: June 8, 2017 AMOUNT: N/A ISSUE: Special use case #029-17-U, a request to allow for a major home occupation in the "A-2" Agriculture zoning district, when the lot is less than 5 acres in size. The petitioner requests to operate a trucking business from a 3.1 acre parcel. According to the petition, the only business use is to park, enter and exit the property with 1 commercial vehicle and 2 trailers. The request does not include the storage of materials related to the business. If the first request is approved, the petitioner requests to allow for variations from the requirements of a major home occupation. Section 20-7.3.5.9 states the home occupation may involve the use or indoor storage of heavy equipment, and that the equipment may only be stored in the dedicated accessory structure. Only 1 vehicle and only 2 trailers or pieces of equipment may be permitted. The petitioner is proposing to use the allowable number of equipment but to store the equipment outside. Also, a Special Use request as required in Section 20-7.3.5.5 to vary from the requirement that landscaping shall be required to screen off-street parking areas from the view of adjacent landowners, according to the provisions set forth in Section 7.6 ("Landscaping and Bufferyards"). The petitioner proposes to use existing trees and to plant new evergreen trees to screen off-street parking. The petitioner will not meet the landscaping point requirements on the north and east property lines, and will not meet the tree/shrub ratio on the north, east, south and west property lines. The parcel is located at 3314 S. Walters School Rd. in the northeast quarter of Section 29 in Limestone Township. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This case is located in District #17, which is County Board member Thomas O'Neill's district. The petitioner, Marshall Bailey, requests 3 special uses related to a major home occupation. There are 0 consents and 4 objections on file. In 2016, the petitioner filed zoning case #020-16-U to request a major home occupation with variations from the major home occupation standards for a trucking business to use 4 vehicles and 4 trailers. This case was dismissed at the November 10, 2016 ZBA hearing. Subsequently, the petitioner filed zoning case #005-16-U to request a major home occupation with variations from the major home occupation standards for a trucking business to use 2 vehicles and 4 trailers. This request was denied by the County Board. The subject parcel is 3.1 acres and consists of a dwelling, detached residential garage, and a barn. The surrounding land use is agriculture. According to the petitioner, farm equipment drives through the subject parcel to access adjoining farm fields. All adjacent properties are zoned “A-2” Agriculture. The subject parcel is north of Rose Estates subdivision which is zoned "R-1" Low Density Residential. The request should have as similar impact on the area as the use of agricultural vehicles and equipment. The request is consistent with other agricultural Bufferyard Request uses in the area. The request is inconsistent with Required Total Point Half Trees the residential subdivision; however, the petitioner proposes a landscaping plan that would Buffer Points Variance / Half Half mitigate visual impact. The petitioner also Location Required Total Points Obtained Request Shrubs? Evergreen? requests to allow the commercial equipment to North 371 234 137 All Evergreen East 299 Some Deciduous 299 No Evergreen be stored outdoors and to vary from bufferyard All Trees requirements (summarized in the table to the South 370 414 + Existing Deciduous 0 Half Evergreen right). Instead of more landscaping on the north West 200 324 0 All Evergreen and east sides, the petitioner proposes to install a 7 foot high wooden privacy fence to screen the parking area. A 7 foot high fence requires a 1 foot variance from the fence maximum height standard. The fence would mitigate some visual impacts. Along the south and west sides the required number of points and evergreen species is obtained; however, the required plant mix is not. An unscreened distance on the south side will remain to accommodate a farm equipment path. The subject parcel is located off S. Walters School Rd., a township road. The vehicles may be operated between 8 AM-7 PM. According to the petitioner, in a recent 15 month period there were 2.5 trips per month. Total trips may vary due to the nature of the business. The subject parcel shares a driveway with the two parcels to the north. The Limestone Township Road Commissioner has commented the proposed vehicle weights do not exceed the weight limits of the road but has concerns about the type, number, and weight of the vehicles and the potential impact on the road. If the special use is approved, the Limestone Township Road District will likely need a structural improvement to the roadway. The County Highway Department has no comment on this request. The Limestone Township Planning Commission voted to deny the requests. The Peoria County Future Land Use Form Map designates this area as Agriculture Preservation and Environmental Corridor. The proposed use is inconsistent with the form map but does not disrupt the existing agricultural uses or fragment the environmental corridor. The granting of the special use should not have an impact in excess of agricultural use on the subject parcel and in the surrounding area. The special use request is consistent with the Peoria County Growth Strategy of continuing to strive for a strong, stable, and diverse economy. The request is for a low-intensity trucking business which will not include the storage or hauling of materials to or from the site. The number of equipment is consistent with that permitted for a major home occupation. The low-intensity nature of the use minimizes adverse effects associated with a trucking business. The visual adverse impact of outdoor parking is minimized by the proposed landscaping plan. If the special use is granted, in accordance with Section 20-3.5.8.3.c "Inspections after Development" the Zoning Administer shall inspect the special use on an annual basis to determine whether the conditions of the special use continue to be met. If any of the conditions have been violated, appropriate enforcement action will be taken, and the special use permit may be revoked. 207 COUNTY BOARD GOALS: HEALTHY VIBRANT COMMUNITIES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with restrictions 1. The Special Use shall be void should there be a change in ownership of the property or should there be a change in management of the trucking business. 2. The Special Use shall be void should the petitioner cease to reside at the property. 3. No more than one commercial vehicle and two trailers may be stored as part of the major home occupation. Said trucks and equipment may be parked outdoors. 4. All permitted vehicles and equipment for the major home occupation must be parked in the designated areas corresponding with the site plan. 5. No materials or goods acquired as part of the major home occupation may be transported to or from the property. No materials or goods acquired as part of the major home occupation may be stored on the property. 6. In order to screen off-street parking from the view of adjacent landowners to the north and east, a solid privacy fence of at least 6 feet in height shall be installed and maintained in good and sound condition along the north and east property lines. Such fence, at a minimum, must extend 186 feet along the north property line and extend 96 feet along the east property line, which is consistent with the fence shown on the site plan. 7. In order to screen off-street parking from the view of adjacent landowners, the major home occupation shall be required to install a transitional bufferyard which must meet or exceed the number and type of plant material shown on the approved site plan. 8. All required plant materials must be maintained in a healthy, vigorous growing condition in order to fulfill the purpose for which they were established. Plant materials shall be replaced as necessary and kept free of refuse and debris. 9. Required fence must be installed within 30 calendar days of the special use approval by the Peoria County Board. To allow for planting into early autumn, the required plant material must be installed no later than 120 calendar days after the special use approval by the Peoria County Board. ZBA RECOMMENDATION: Denial (6-0) COMMITTEE ACTION: PREPARED BY: Kerilyn Gallagher, Planner II DEPARTMENT: Planning & Zoning DATE: May 16, 2017 208 REPORT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR THE MAY 11, 2017 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: May 2, 2017 CASE/PETITIONER : 029-17-U / Marshall Bailey / 410 E. South Third Street, Findlay IL 62534 REQUEST: A Special Use request as required in Section 20-5.2.2.1.b of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a special use for a Major Home Occupation in the "A-2" Agriculture Zoning District, when the lot is less than 5 acres in size and/or is located within a platted subdivision. The petitioner would like to operate a trucking business, from this 3.1 acre parcel, for hauling debris and other items connected with environmental disasters and major clearance projects. Also, a Special Use request as required in Section 20-7.3.5.9 of the Unified Development Ordinance to vary from the requirement that the home occupation may involve the use or indoor storage of heavy equipment, and that the equipment may only be stored in the dedicated accessory structure. Only 1 vehicle and only 2 trailers or pieces of equipment may be permitted. The petitioner is proposing to allow 1 commercial vehicle and 2 trailers. He proposes to store these vehicles outside. Also, a Special Use request as required in Section 20-7.3.5.5 of the Unified Development Ordinance to vary from the requirement that Landscaping shall be required to screen off-street parking areas, loading zones, outdoor storage areas and outdoor work areas from the view of adjacent landowners, according to the provisions set forth in Section 7.6 ("Landscaping and Bufferyards"). The petitioner proposes to use existing trees and to plant new evergreen trees to screen off-street parking from the view of adjacent landowners. The petitioner will not meet the landscaping points requirements on the north and east property lines, and will not meet the tree/shrub ratio on the north, east, south and west property lines. LOCATION: NE1/4, Section 29, Limestone Twp. 3314 S. Walters School Road, Mapleton / Parcel ID# 17-29-200-020 LAND USE FORM: Agriculture Preservation & Environmental Corridor CURRENT ZONING: “A-2” Agriculture PRESENT USE: Residential & Agriculture SIZE OF SITE: 3.1 acres SURROUNDING ZONING : North, South, East, and West: “A-2” Agriculture SURROUNDING LAND USES: North, South, East, and West: Agriculture PUBLIC SERVICES: Fire: Limestone Water: Limestone Walters Schools: Limestone #310 Sewer: Private Septic TRANSPORTATION: Walters School Road, Township Road PERTINENT ZONING CASES ON SITE: #020-16-U, #005-16-U, #030-17-V PERTINENT ZONING CASES IN SURROUNDING AREA: #019-15-U PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL WITH RESTRICTIONS 209 CASE ANALYSIS REQUEST AND LOCATION: The petitioner, Marshall Bailey, requests a special use for a Major Home Occupation in the "A-2" Agriculture Zoning District, when the lot is less than 5 acres in size. The petitioner would like to operate a trucking business, from this 3.1 acre parcel, for hauling debris and other items connected with environmental disasters and major clearance projects. The petitioner intends to store 1 commercial vehicle and 2 trailers outside. According to the petition, the only business use of the subject site is to park, enter and exit the property with the requested vehicle and trailers. According to the petition, no material will be hauled on or off the site in connection with the business. There are no employees and no business visitors to the site. A major home occupation does allow for one employee who is not a resident of the dwelling unit. The petitioner's proposed use includes a Special Use request as required in Section 20-7.3.5.9 of the Unified Development Ordinance to vary from the requirement that the home occupation may involve the use or indoor storage of heavy equipment, and that the equipment may only be stored in the dedicated accessory structure. The petitioner is proposing to store outdoors 1 commercial vehicle and 2 trailers. The petitioner's landscaping plan for the proposed use includes a request to vary from landscaping requirements. The request is a Special Use as required in Section 20-7.3.5.5 of the Unified Development Ordinance to vary from the requirement that landscaping shall be required to screen off-street parking areas, loading zones, outdoor storage areas and outdoor work areas from the view of adjacent landowners, according to the provisions set forth in Section 7.6 ("Landscaping and Bufferyards"). The petitioner proposes to use existing trees and to plant new evergreen trees to screen off-street parking from the view of adjacent landowners. However, the landscaping plan will not meet the point requirements on the north and east property lines, and will not meet the tree/shrub ratio on the north, east, south and west property lines. The parcel is located at 3314 S. Walters School Rd. in the northeast quarter of Section 29 in Limestone Township. PERTINENT ZONING CASES ON SITE: The subject petitioner filed special use case #020-16-U which was a request to operate a major home occupation for a trucking business in the "A-2" zoning district when the lot is less than 5 acres. The petition asked permission for the outdoor storage of 4 commercial vehicles and 4 trailers and variance from the landscaping requirements to screen off-street parking. The request was continued four times and dismissed at the November 10, 2016 ZBA hearing. The subject petitioner filed special use case #005-17-U which was a request to operate a major home occupation for a trucking business in the "A-2" zoning district when the lot is less than 5 acres. The petition asked permission for the outdoor storage of 2 commercial vehicles and 4 trailers and variance from the landscaping requirements to screen off-street parking. The ZBA recommended denial. The Land Use Committee recommended approval. The case was denied by the County Board. The subject petitioner has concurrently applied for variance case #030-17-V for a 1 foot fence height variance in order to install a 7 foot high privacy fence in the agricultural district for residential uses. The fence is proposed along the north and east side of the proposed outdoor parking area. PERTINENT ZONING CASES IN SURROUNDING AREA: Special use case #019-15-U was granted in 2015 to divide a 34.8 acre parcel into three parcels. The request resulted in three parcels around the subject parcel. Each of the three parcels is suitable for one residential dwelling. SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USE: The subject parcel is 3.1 acres and consists of a single family dwelling, a detached residential garage, and a barn. According to the petitioner, approximately 1-2 acres 210 of the parcel will be used for pasture. In the immediate area are four other parcels consisting of agricultural land. There are no structures on these parcels. According to the petitioner, farm equipment drives through the subject parcel to access adjoining farm fields. The adjacent properties are zoned “A- 2” Agriculture. The primary use in the surrounding area is agriculture. The subject parcel is north of the residential subdivision Rose Estates, zoned R-1 "Low Density Residential". The nearest parcel in Rose Estates is approximately 70 feet from the southernmost property line of the subject parcel. However, the proposed outdoor commercial parking will be approximately 280 feet from the nearest parcel in Rose Estates and approximately 450 feet to the nearest dwelling in Rose Estates. The special use request should have as similar an impact on the surrounding area as the use of agricultural vehicles and equipment. The request is consistent with other agricultural uses in the area. The request is not consistent with the nearby residential subdivision; however, the petitioner proposes a landscaping plan that would mitigate visual impact on adjacent parcels and on the subdivision. TECHNICAL ADEQUACY: According to Section 20-7.7.7.7 in the Unified Development Ordinance commercial vehicles and trailers are not permitted to be parked accessory to a residence, except when otherwise provided in Section 20-7.3 "Home Occupations". The petitioner proposes a major home occupation for a trucking business on a 3.1 acre parcel. Section 20-5.2.2.1.b allows for a special use for a major home occupation, as provided in Section 20-7.3 "Home Occupations", if the lot is less than 5 acres and/or is located in a platted subdivision. Provided this first request for a major home occupation is approved, the petitioner requests to vary from the standards of Section 20-7.3 "Home Occupations" in order to store the equipment outdoors and vary from landscaping requirements. Section 20-7.3.5 allows for variations from the standards of Section 20- 7.3 "Home Occupations" individually by Special Use. Section 20-7.3.5.9 states a major home occupation may involve the use or indoor storage of heavy equipment, and that the equipment may only be stored in the dedicated accessory structure. Only 1 vehicle and 2 trailers or pieces of equipment may be permitted. The petitioner proposes to store the permitted amount of equipment (1 vehicle and 2 trailers) outdoors. The petitioner is also requesting a Special Use to vary from Section 20-7.3.5.5 which requires landscaping to screen the proposed off-street parking from the view of adjacent landowners in accordance with provisions in Section 20-7.6 "Landscaping and Bufferyards". The number of points that must be achieved through landscaping is based on the overall length of the property lines where the proposed parking is visible to adjacent landowners. Based on the petitioner's site plan, the proposed parking is visible from adjacent properties to the north, south, east and west. The bufferyard requirements are summarized in the table to the right. The Bufferyard Request bufferyard point requirement is as Required Total Point Half Trees follows: 371 points along the Buffer Points Variance / Half Half Location Required Total Points Obtained Request Shrubs? Evergreen? north property line, 299 points on North 371 234 137 All Evergreen the east side, 370 points along the East 299 Some Deciduous 299 No Evergreen All Trees south side, and 200 points along South 370 414 + Existing Deciduous 0 Half Evergreen the west side. Section 20-7.6.7 West 200 324 0 All Evergreen requires half the points from trees and half from shrubs. In addition, half of the total points must be from evergreen species with a minimum planting height of 6 feet for trees and 2 feet in height or spread for shrubs. The petitioner's 211 proposed landscaping plan includes proposed evergreen trees between 4-6 feet in height. The landscaping point requirements would only be met by the 6 foot or taller trees at time of planting. According to the petitioner's site plan, the north and east sides of the proposed parking would not include enough landscaping to meet the point requirements of Section 20-7.6. The petitioner proposes to have a total of 13 evergreen trees on the north side. There are some deciduous trees on the east side. According to the petition, more landscaping along these property lines is not included because of the considerable depth of asphalt and rock aggregate. Instead, the petitioner proposes to install a 7 foot high wooden privacy fence along the north and east sides of the parking area. The fence would mitigate some visual impacts on the parcel to the north and parcel to the east. A 7 foot high fence requires a 1 foot variance from the fence maximum height standard. According to the site plan, on the south side of the parking area, existing deciduous trees and 23 proposed evergreen trees will provide a buffer to the parcel to the south. The petitioner intends to maintain a farm equipment path which would result in unscreened views of the parking from the property to the south. According to the site plan, on the west side 18 evergreen trees will screen the parking from the parcel to the west. Along the south and west sides the required number of points and evergreen species is obtained (provided the proposed trees are 6 feet or taller at time of planting); however, the required plant mix requirement is not met. The plan includes more evergreen points than required by the landscaping standards which will result in more year round screening. The proposed fence is a reasonable alternative to screen the equipment where ground conditions prohibit plant growth. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: According to the petition, the parcel is served by an existing private septic system and public water. There are no comments from the Health Department on this request. With proper maintenance, the existing septic system should have little to no negative impacts on the surrounding environment. TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS: The subject parcel is located off of S. Walters School Rd., a township road. According to the IDOT traffic map there are approximately 800 vehicle trips in a 24-hour period along this portion of S. Walters School Rd. The petition states the home occupation will use 1 commercial vehicle (truck tractor) and 2 trailers which may be operated between 8 AM and 7 PM. The Limestone Township Road Commissioner has commented the proposed vehicle weights do not exceed the weight limits of Walters School Road. According to the petitioner, in a recent 15 month period there were 2.5 trips per month. Total trips may vary due to the nature of the business. There would be no trips from customers to or from the site. A recorded legal driveway and utility easement allows the subject parcel and two parcels to the north to share an existing driveway off of Walters School Road. The existing drive is located on the adjacent parcel to the north. According to the petition, farm equipment has been driven over the same shared drive. The major home occupation is similar in use to driving farm equipment to and from the subject parcel or to adjacent parcels. The request may increase noise and will result in added trips on the shared drive but the amount should not be significantly greater than existing agricultural uses. The Limestone Township Road District is concerned about the type, number, and weight of the vehicles and the potential impact on Walters School Road. If the special use is approved, the Limestone Township Road District will likely need a structural improvement to the roadway, likely full depth asphalt for a certain distance at the driveway to accommodate the heavy truck turning movements. The County Highway Department has no comment on this request. 212 LAND USE FORM: The Peoria County Future Land Use Form Map designates this area as Agriculture Preservation and Environmental Corridor. The primary uses in the Agriculture Preservation Land Use Form are agriculture and open space. The land use form is characterized by agricultural uses, homesteads, and agriculturally-related businesses. Land in the Environmental Corridor Land Use Form has been identified as having valuable environmental assets and should be protected. The proposed use is not consistent with the Land Use Form map but does not disrupt the existing agricultural uses or fragment the environmental corridor. The granting of the special use should not have an impact in excess of agricultural use on the subject parcel and in the surrounding area. The special use will not change the residential use on site. The home occupation will not take any farmland out of production. The petitioner proposes a landscaping plan that will keep the existing farm equipment path while still screening the outdoor parking from adjacent parcels. TOWNSHIP REVIEW: The Limestone Township Planning Commission voted to deny the request. CONCLUSIONS CONSISTENCY WITH ADOPTED COUNTY PLAN: The special use request is consistent with the Peoria County Growth Strategy of continuing to strive for a strong, stable, and diverse economy, including the solicitation of minor commercial businesses. The special use would allow for an independently operated business to operate at this location. The Future Land Use Form map designates this area as Agriculture Preservation and Environmental Corridor. While the proposed use is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Form map the use will not disrupt nearby agricultural uses, nor have an impact in excess of agricultural use on the subject parcel. CONSISTENCY WITH COMMUNITY CHARACTER: The area consists of agricultural and residential uses. The use is similar to storing agricultural equipment on farmland. According to the petitioner farm equipment uses the same shared drive to reach the adjoining farmland. The request is consistent with agricultural uses in the surrounding area. The request is inconsistent with existing nearby residential uses and potential future residential uses on adjacent parcels. However, the petitioner proposes a landscaping plan that will partially screen the proposed outdoor parking from the view of adjacent land owners. The request is consistent with the purpose of home occupation regulations, which is to control the impact on the neighborhood character and the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties. The request is for a low-intensity trucking business. According to the petitioner the only business activity on site is to park outdoors commercial equipment and to enter and exit said equipment. The request is consistent with the number of vehicles and equipment allowed for a major home occupation. The alternative to outdoor storage would require a large accessory structure in order to accommodate the length of the trailers. MINIMIZING ADVERSE EFFECTS: The request is for a commercial trucking business on the subject parcel. The proposed use does not include transport of materials to or from the site, storage of materials on site, or additional trips from customers or employees. The extent of the use is to park one commercial vehicle and two trailers on the site and to enter and exit the property with said equipment. The low intensity nature of the use minimizes adverse effects of a trucking business. The visual adverse impact of outdoor parking is minimized by the proposed landscaping plan. The petitioner intends to provide screening of the parking area through a solid fence and existing and proposed tree mix. While the request does not meet all of the buffering requirements of a major home occupation to screen the 213 parking area from adjacent landowners, the proposed landscaping plan will provide some visual screening from all directions. The requested use would use a shared drive off Walters School Road with two other parcels. This may result in conflict over access but the type of equipment is similar in use to the farm equipment that can and does use the same shared drive. PRESENCE OF NATURAL/HISTORICAL RESOURCES: The request does not impact known natural or historical resources. COMPLIANCE WITH ADDITIONAL STANDARDS: A request for commercial equipment accessory to a residential use may only be granted through compliance with Section 7.3 "Home Occupations". Without approval of a special use for a major home occupation the commercial equipment on the subject site is not in compliance with Peoria County Unified Development Ordinance. Except for the requests made, all other standards for a home occupation permit are met or not applicable to the proposed use. If the special use for a major home occupation is granted, the major home occupation permit shall be renewed on an annual basis and a fee shall be paid. If the special use is granted, in accordance with Section 20- 3.5.8.3.c "Inspections after Development" the Zoning Administer shall inspect the special use on an annual basis to determine whether the conditions of the special use continue to be met. If any of the conditions have been violated, appropriate enforcement action will be taken, and the special use permit may be revoked. 214 215 RECOMMENDATION Based on the above information, the Department recommends approval with the following restrictions: 1. The Special Use shall be void should there be a change in ownership of the property or should there be a change in management of the trucking business. 2. The Special Use shall be void should the petitioner cease to reside at the property. 3. No more than one commercial vehicle and two trailers may be stored as part of the major home occupation. Said trucks and equipment may be parked outdoors. 4. All permitted vehicles and equipment for the major home occupation must be parked in the designated areas corresponding with the site plan. 5. No materials or goods acquired as part of the major home occupation may be transported to or from the property. No materials or goods acquired as part of the major home occupation may be stored on the property. 6. In order to screen off-street parking from the view of adjacent landowners to the north and east, a solid privacy fence of at least 6 feet in height shall be installed and maintained in good and sound condition along the north and east property lines. Such fence, at a minimum, must extend 186 feet along the north property line and extend 96 feet along the east property line, which is consistent with the fence shown on the site plan. 7. In order to screen off-street parking from the view of adjacent landowners, the major home occupation shall be required to install a transitional bufferyard which must meet or exceed the number and type of plant material shown on the approved site plan. 8. All required plant materials must be maintained in a healthy, vigorous growing condition in order to fulfill the purpose for which they were established. Plant materials shall be replaced as necessary and kept free of refuse and debris. 9. Required fence must be installed within 30 calendar days of the special use approval by the Peoria County Board. To allow for planting into early autumn, the required plant material must be installed no later than 120 calendar days after the special use approval by the Peoria County Board. Respectfully submitted, Kerilyn Gallagher Kathi Urban Planner II Director 216 DECISION OF THE PEORIA COUNTY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS A meeting of the Peoria County Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, May 11, 2017, in Room 403 of the Peoria County Courthouse, 324 Main Street, Peoria, Illinois, to conduct a hearing on the petitions of Marshall Bailey in cases 029-17-U and 030-17-V. A continued meeting of the Peoria County Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Monday, May 15, 2017, in Room 403 of the Peoria County Courthouse, 324 Main Street, Peoria, Illinois. The meeting was held in order to deliberate cases 029-17-U and 030-17-V. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson William O'Brien at 1:00 p.m. PRESENT: Chairperson - William O'Brien, Loren Bailliez, Jim Bateman, Richard Heinz, Linda O'Brien, Greg Fletcher ABSENT: Justin Brown, Andrew Keyt STAFF: Kathi Urban - Director Kerilyn Gallagher - Planner II Corbin Bogle - Planner I Jennifer Morris - Civil Assistant State’s Attorney Ellen Hanks - ZBA Administrative Assistant Case No. 029-17-U docketed at 10:00 a.m. on May 11, 2017, Hearing held in room 403, of the Peoria County Courthouse, Peoria, Illinois. The hearing proceeded on the Petition of MARSHALL BAILEY, acting on behalf of himself, and represented by counsel, Jack Teplitz. The Petition is as follows: A Special Use request as required in Section 20-5.2.2.1.b of the Unified Development Ordinance. This section allows for a special use for a Major Home Occupation in the "A- 2" Agriculture Zoning District, when the lot is less than 5 acres in size and/or is located within a platted subdivision. The petitioner would like to operate a trucking business, from this 3.1 acre parcel, for hauling debris and other items connected with environmental disasters and major clearance projects. Also, a Special Use request as required in Section 20-7.3.5.9 of the Unified Development Ordinance to vary from the requirement that the home occupation may involve the use or indoor storage of heavy equipment, and that the equipment may only be stored in the dedicated accessory structure. Only 1 vehicle and only 2 trailers or pieces of equipment may be permitted. The petitioner is proposing to allow 1 commercial vehicle and 2 trailers. He proposes to store these vehicles outside. Also, a Special Use request as required in Section 20-7.3.5.5 of the Unified Development Ordinance to vary from the requirement that Landscaping shall be required to screen off- street parking areas, loading zones, outdoor storage areas and outdoor work areas from 217 the view of adjacent landowners, according to the provisions set forth in Section 7.6 ("Landscaping and Bufferyards"). The petitioner proposes to use existing trees and to plant new evergreen trees to screen off-street parking from the view of adjacent landowners. The petitioner will not meet the landscaping points requirements on the north and east property lines, and will not meet the tree/shrub ratio on the north, east, south and west property lines. A public hearing was conducted on May 11, 2017 with testimony and evidence being presented by Petitioner and objectors. Upon closing of the hearing for the purpose of presentation of evidence, the Board moved to continue their deliberations for Cases 029-17-U and 030-17-V to May 15, 2017 at 1:00 p.m. During the May 15th hearing, Ms. O'Brien moved to deliberate in executive session pursuant to 5 ILCS 120/2(c)(4), and was seconded by Mr. Fletcher. Executive session began at 1:08 p.m. Open session resumed at 4:27 p.m. The Board evaluated the application for special use under the approval standards set forth in Section 20-3.5.4 of the Peoria County Unified Development Ordinance, and determined as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT Standard No. 1: The Board evaluated whether the special use would be consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and standards of any officially adopted County plan and these regulations, or if not consistent, the factors which justify deviation; • The Peoria County Land Use Form Map’s designates this area as Agriculture Preservation and Environmental Corridor. The Agriculture Preservation Land Use Form is characterized by agricultural uses, farmhouses, and homesteads associated with agricultural uses and agriculturally-related businesses. Although the proposed use is non- agricultural, it would not disrupt the existing agricultural uses on the parcel or adjacent agriculturally-zoned parcels. However, it may disrupt future use of surrounding properties for residential purposes. Land in the Environmental Corridor Land Use Form has been identified as having valuable environmental assets and should be protected, however, the proposed use would not fragment the environmental corridor. The request is consistent with the Peoria County Growth Strategy regarding a stable and diverse economy, to the extent that it would allow a commercial business to operate out of this location. However, the request is inconsistent with the Peoria County Growth Strategy for areas in an A-2 district, which is meant to promote low density residential living. In addition to the County’s officially adopted plans, the ZBA also has considered the applicable zoning regulations. Section 7.3 of the County’s Unified Development Ordinance sets forth the regulations to control the impact of home occupations. All home occupations are subject to the general standards at Section 7.3.2, including the following: 218 3. The use must be conducted entirely within the dwelling or the accessory structure by members of the family residing on the premises. 5. Operation of the use shall not be noticeable from any existing dwelling on an adjacent lot (including, but not limited to, lights or other displays visible from the exterior of the structure) and shall not change the essential character of the principal use. With respect to subparagraph 3, testimony was given by the Petitioner that he does indeed reside on the premises at issue. He testified not only that he lives there, but that his children also live there and attend Limestone Walters, the nearby public school. The Petitioner testified that he was confused in his testimony during prior proceedings when he testified that in addition to the home at 3314 S. Walters School Road, he kept a residence in Findlay, Illinois. He indicated that the Findlay address was designated as a mailing address for his business. Although the ZBA doubts there was “confusion” regarding the address, the ZBA notes that sufficient testimonial evidence was provided in these proceedings to establish that the Petitioner currently resides on the subject premises. The ZBA also considers the requirement that operation of the use shall not be noticeable from any existing dwelling on an adjacent lot. Although evidence was submitted by an adjacent property owner, no evidence was presented that there is an existing dwelling on the Mattarelli property. The staff report indicates that there is no structure on any of the three immediately adjacent parcels. However, there are questions as to whether the proposed special use alters the character of the principal use. The current land use is residential/agriculture according to the Petitioner, and the Petitioner wants to use it for commercial purposes – specifically, to store a semi truck and two trailers outdoors. The Board questions whether the Petitioner is indeed using the property for agricultural purposes. Even if there is a recent alleged agricultural function, the primary land use has been residential, and a commercial trucking operation would be a significant departure. The Petitioner is also subject to the regulations in Section 7.3.5 of the Unified Development Ordinance regarding major home occupations, including the following: 5. Landscaping shall be required to screen off-street parking areas, loading zones, outdoor storage areas, and outdoor work areas from the view of the adjacent landowners, according to the provisions set forth in Section 7.6 (“Landscaping and Bufferyards”). 9. The home occupation may involve the use of indoor storage of tractor trailers, semi-trucks, and heavy equipment such as construction equipment used in the home occupation and may involve warehousing or distribution. Such equipment may only be stored in the dedicated accessory structure. Only one vehicle and 219 only two trailers or pieces of equipment may be permitted as part of the home occupation. The Petitioner acknowledges that he does not intend to meet the requirements of subparagraphs 5 and 9, and thus has asked for a variance of the landscaping and indoor storage requirements. Those requested variations are permitted as special uses subject to the Special Use provisions of Section 3.5, including this approval standard at Section 3.5.4.1. Thus, to the extent that Petitioner’s request is not consistent with the landscaping and indoor storage requirements, the ZBA must consider the factors, if any, which justify deviation. The Petitioner requests that he be allowed to deviate from those standards because: • There is no accessory structure on the property large enough to house the cab and trailers. The barn is currently used to house livestock. Thus the vehicles/equipment cannot be stored inside. It is too expensive to build a structure or remodel the existing structure. • He cannot meet the landscaping requirements on the north and east sides of the property because the ground makeup consists of several feet of rock aggregate. • There are existing deciduous trees on the east side of the property as well as on the south side of the property between the property and Rose Estates. • He cannot plant where he needs to maintain a farm equipment path. • The Norway Spruces that he has planted and/or intends to plant are full at the base, justifying the variance from the plant mix requirements. • Although the points value is not met, the inclusion of numerous evergreen trees in the screen will provide year-round screening. The ZBA feels that there is a justifiable reason to vary from the landscaping requirements on the NE side of the property – specifically, that the ground is not conducive to planting. However, the ZBA does not feel that sufficient evidence has been presented to find justification for varying from landscaping requirements on the other parts of the property. The ZBA also does not feel that the cost is a justifiable reason to deviate from the indoor storage requirement. Cost is the reason given by the Petitioner as to why he couldn’t construct an accessory structure or remodel the current structure to accommodate the commercial vehicles. Ms. O'Brien made a motion to approve the findings for Standard #1 and was seconded by Mr. Bateman. Six affirmative votes; (6-0). Mr. Bateman made a motion that Standard #1 had been met and was seconded by Mr. Bailliez; A voice vote was taken and the motion was denied; (2-4) (Mr. Bateman, Mr. Bailliez, Mr. Heinz, and Ms. O'Brien all voted to deny.) Standard #1 was determined not to have been met. Standard No. 2: The Board evaluated whether the special use would be consistent with the community character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development, or if not 220 consistent, the factors which justify the inconsistency; • In determining whether the proposed special use is consistent with the character of the immediate vicinity, the ZBA has considered all evidence submitted to the ZBA both prior to the hearing and at the hearing, with the exception of the testimony of Amber Hopwood, whose testimony is specifically struck and excluded due to her refusal to submit to cross examination. The ZBA does, however, accept and consider the photos submitted by Mrs. Hopwood, as those could have been provided to the ZBA even without her presence or testimony at the hearing, given that the ZBA is not subject to the strict rules of evidence. Based on the evidence presented the Board makes the following findings: • The property at issue is zoned A-2 with A-2 zoning in all surrounding directions. The surrounding land use is agriculture. The subject parcel is also about 70 feet from the nearest residential property in the Rose Estates subdivision, which is zoned R-1, low density residential. • Petitioner operates a disaster relief cleanup business and needs to store one cab and two trailers used for the business. Most of the projects are a considerable distance away, so he does not bring the equipment back daily. Instead, he parks near the job site. • No customers visit the property. • Other trucks and heavy equipment utilize the nearby roadways, as was noted in the Petitioner’s testimony and photos, as well as the site video presented by the Planning & Zoning staff. • There are agricultural properties in the vicinity that have farm-related equipment and vehicles visible on the property. Petitioner presented photos of the property at 3606 S. Cameron Lane which lies south of the Rose Estates subdivision. The photos show an unscreened cab and what appears to be an animal trailer and RV/camper trailer on the property. However, no evidence was presented that those vehicles were commercial vehicles subject to home occupation special use regulations versus being utilized solely for agricultural or personal use. Also, there is a large barn in the photos, and no evidence was presented as to whether the vehicles were or could be stored indoors. • Petitioner presented additional photos of other properties further from the subject parcel, including 4305 S. Cameron Lane, with unscreened equipment and vehicles. However, no evidence was presented that those vehicles were commercial vehicles subject to home occupation special use regulations versus being utilized solely for agricultural or personal use. • The photos and evidence submitted with respect to 5610 N. Townhouse Rd. in Brimfield are irrelevant to this inquiry, as that property is approximately 12 miles from the subject parcel and thus too remote to be considered with respect to the community character of 221 the immediate vicinity of the parcel, and further, there is no evidence that it was next to a residential subdivision. • There is conflicting testimony regarding the number of trips taken with Petitioner’s commercial equipment. Although Petitioner testified that he makes 2 ½ trips per month, Doug Hopwood testified that Petitioner makes several trips per week. • The ZBA finds that the affidavit of Robert Leenerts and testimony presented at hearing regarding prior use for a trucking business are irrelevant to the current inquiry. No evidence was presented that any prior commercial use was County-sanctioned, and a prior use in violation of ordinances does not alter the character of the surrounding vicinity. • Objectors have voiced concerns that the proposed special use will alter the character of the community. Fifty-eight residents of Rose Estates object to the special use, including Doug Hopwood and James Morris, Jr. Adjacent property owner Chris Matarelli also objects. The objectors content that the property is an eyesore for surrounding properties, and inconsistent with the residential properties in the neighborhood. • James Morris, Jr., testified that there is a commercial business in one of the properties immediately south of his property, and it provides no screening. However, no evidence was presented as to whether that property is subject to a special use permit, was the subject of any complaints, or that any vehicles are parked there permanently in conjunction with a business. Mr. Bateman made a motion to approve the findings for Standard #2 and was seconded by Mr. Fletcher. Six affirmative votes; (6-0). Mr. Bateman made a motion that Standard #2 had been met and was seconded by Mr. Bailliez; A voice vote was taken and the motion was denied; (2-4) (Mr. Bateman, Mr. Bailliez, Mr. Heinz, and Ms. O'Brien all voted to deny.) Standard #2 was determined not to have been met. Standard No. 3: The Board evaluated whether the design of the of the proposed use would minimize adverse effects, including visual impacts on adjacent properties, except for land splits in the A-2 District and individual mobile homes; • Petitioner does not intend to store the equipment in a designated accessory structure, which means that a cab and two trailers will be exposed on the property. • According to the site plan, the north and east sides of the proposed parking would not include enough landscaping to meet the point requirements of Section 20-7.6. According to the petition, more landscaping along these property lines is impossible, so the Petitioner proposes to install a 7 foot privacy fence along the north and east sides of the parking area. The fence would mitigate some, but not all, visual impacts on the parcels to the north and east. 222 • Per the staff report, on the south side of the parking area, there are already deciduous trees, and Petitioner proposes to add 23 evergreen trees to buffer the parcel to the south. On the west side 18 evergreen trees will be used to screen the property. Along the south and west sides the required number of points and evergreen species would be obtained, provided the proposed trees are 6 feet or taller at time of planting. The site plan, however, says that the trees to be planted are 4 to 6 feet. No evidence was presented that all trees would meet the 6 foot requirement at the time of planting. • The inclusion of numerous evergreen trees will provide some year-round screening in addition to the existing deciduous trees. However, that does not mean that the proposed plantings will provide adequate screening. • Although the proposed fence would mitigate some visual impacts, the large equipment proposed to be stored on the property may exceed the fence height. The petitioner also intends to keep a farm equipment path which will result in unscreened views, according to the petition. • In its current state, nearby landowners have submitted objections raising concerns over the adverse visual and noise impacts caused by the proposed use. • Matarelli’s May 8, 2017 correspondence indicates that the proposed landscaping plan is insufficient in that the evergreens will not effectively hide the exposed commercial vehicles, and the solid 7-foot fence will only further degrade the appearance of the property. • Doug Hopwood testified that the landscaping screening is inadequate due to the elevations of the property. The Board finds that the height of the deciduous trees will not provide adequate visual screening so as to justify varying from the points requirements. • James Morris Jr. testified that if the proposed landscaping is planted and the evergreens continue to grow, it would eventually block most of what he can currently see. Mr. Heinz made a motion to approve the findings for Standard #3 and was seconded by Mr. Fletcher. Six affirmative votes; (6-0). Mr. Bateman made a motion that Standard #3 had been met and was seconded by Mr. Bailliez; A voice vote was taken and the motion was denied; (0-6) (All members voted to deny.) Standard #3 was determined not to have been met. Standard No. 4: The Board evaluated whether the development has been reviewed and approved by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources with regard to the presence of endangered species, and archaeological and/or historical resources, if applicable; • The proposed special use does not require IDNR approval, thus, approval standard #4 is not applicable. 223 Mr. Bateman made a motion to approve the findings for Standard #4 and was seconded by Mr. Heinz. Six affirmative votes; (6-0). Standard No. 5: The Board evaluated whether the proposed use would comply with all additional standards imposed on it by the particular provisions of these regulations authorizing such use and by all other applicable requirements of the ordinances of the County. • Conflicting evidence was presented as to whether Petitioner is currently in compliance with zoning requirements. The ZBA questions whether Petitioner is currently keeping commercial vehicles on the property, as well as whether the alleged agricultural vehicles on the property are being used for commercial purposes, and questions whether there was past compliance. Given these questions, the ZBA does not feel that the evidence is sufficient to prove that Petitioner’s special use will comply with any additional standards that the Board may impose. Mr. Bateman made a motion to approve the findings for Standard #5 and was seconded by Ms. O'Brien. Six affirmative votes; (6-0). Mr. Bateman made a motion that Standard #5 had been met and was seconded by Ms. O'Brien; A voice vote was taken and the motion was denied; (0-6) (All members voted to deny.) Standard #5 was determined not to have been met. A motion to approve the Petition for Special Use with restrictions was made by Mr. Bateman, and seconded by Ms. O'Brien. Upon a roll call vote, the motion failed (0-6). As such, the Board recommends DENIAL of the special use request. Mr. Bailliez made a motion to dismiss Variance Case 030-17-V as moot because it was made in conjunction with the Special Use request, which was denied. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bateman. A voice vote was taken and all members voted to approve the motion; (6-0). Mr. Bailliez made a motion to adjourn and was seconded by Mr. Fletcher. Six affirmative votes; (6-0). Meeting adjourned 4:54 p.m. The Board has made available for public inspection this written decision setting forth its determinative reasoning in accordance with the Illinois Open Meetings Act, 5 ILCS 120/2(c)(4). A copy has also been forwarded to counsel for the Petitioner. Respectfully submitted, Ellen Hanks ZBA Administrative Assistant 224 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Land Use Committee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution: RE: Approval of Special Use, Petition of Marshall Bailey RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the County of Peoria has enacted a Unified Development Ordinance, Chapter 20 of the Peoria County Code; and WHEREAS, said ordinance allows for a m ajor home occupation, when the lot is less than 5 acres in size and/or is located within a platted subdivision by Special Use in the "A-2" Agricultural use zoning district.; and WHEREAS, said ordinance allows for variations from the standards of home occupations individually by Special Use in the "A-2" Agricultural use zoning district.; and WHEREAS, staff recommended approval of the special use with the following restrictions 1. The Special Use shall be void should there be a change in ownership of the property or should there be a change in management of the trucking business. 2. The Special Use shall be void should the petitioner cease to reside at the property. 3. No more than one commercial vehicle and two trailers may be stored as part of the major home occupation. Said trucks and equipment may be parked outdoors. 4. All permitted vehicles and equipment for the major home occupation must be parked in the designated areas corresponding with the site plan. 5. No materials or goods acquired as part of the major home occupation may be transported to or from the property. No materials or goods acquired as part of the major home occupation may be stored on the property. 6. In order to screen off-street parking from the view of adjacent landowners to the north and east, a solid privacy fence of at least 6 feet in height shall be installed and maintained in good and sound condition along the north and east property lines. Such fence, at a minimum, must extend 186 feet along the north property line and extend 96 feet along the east property line, which is consistent with the fence shown on the site plan. 7. In order to screen off-street parking from the view of adjacent landowners, the major home occupation shall be required to install a transitional bufferyard which must meet or exceed the number and type of plant material shown on the approved site plan. 8. All required plant materials must be maintained in a healthy, vigorous growing condition in order to fulfill the purpose for which they were established. Plant materials shall be replaced as necessary and kept free of refuse and debris. 225 9. Required fence must be installed within 30 calendar days of the special use approval by the Peoria County Board. To allow for planting into early autumn, the required plant material must be installed no later than 120 calendar days after the special use approval by the Peoria County Board; and WHEREAS, a hear ing on s aid Special Use was held before the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) on May 11, 2017 in Case No. 029-17-U; and WHEREAS, a special hearing for deliberation on said Special Use was held by the ZBA on May 15, 2017, a copy of the deliberation minutes of said hearing and a l egal description of the subject property are attached; and WHEREAS, the ZBA deliberated its decision on May 15, 2017, and voted to deny the Special Use; a copy of the ZBA’s findings of fact is attached; and WHEREAS, your Committee met on May 22, 2017 to consider the ZBA’s recommendation, and voted to defer the vote to June 8, 2017; and WHEREAS, your Committee met on June 8, 2017 and voted to accept the ZBA's recommendations of denial of the Special Use. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED, by the County Board of Peoria County, that the Special Use in Case No. 029-17-U is hereby denied. NOTICE: Approval of this special use does not constitute approval of wells or septic systems for the property required by the Peoria City/County Health Department. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, LAND USE COMMITTEE 226 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Public Safety & Justice Committee LINE ITEM: MEETING DATE: POLL VOTE AMOUNT: ISSUE: For RESOLUTION: Appointments to the Chillicothe Community Fire Protection District BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Last month, the Board appointed two initial members to the newly created Chillicothe Fire Protection District. As a refresher, there was a referendum question on the April 4, 2017 General Consolidated Election ballot to create the Chillicothe Community Fire Protection District. The referendum passed by a vote 836 to 377. The newly created District covers parts of both Peoria and Marshall Counties. The referendum had been previously ordered onto the ballot by the 10th Judicial Circuit of Illinois (16 MR 850). Based upon the results of the referendum, the Court ordered the creation of the Fire Protection District. Pursuant to the Fire Protection Act (70 ILCS 705/4). After the appointments last month, the newly created District Board met and drew lots for length of terms. The attached resolution sets the terms for the two trustees you appointed last month. The District has also requested, as they foreshadowed last month, the appointment of two additional Trustees. Just as was the case last month, Chairman Rand has declared a real or perceived conflict of interest with making said appointments. In consultation with State's Attorney Brady, the Committee is to forward the names of the two appointees to the County Board for ratification. The two names before the Committee, Steven F. Meister, and Kevin L. Peterson, are as requested by the District Fire Chief. Both meet the residency requirement. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: N/A COMMITTEE ACTION: Approved via Poll Vote 6/5/17 (5-0) PREPARED BY: Scott A. Sorrel, County Administrator DATE: June 2, 2017 227 228 229 230 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS ) Your Public Safety and Justice Committee does hereby recommend passage of the following Resolution. Re: Appointments to the Chillicothe Community Fire Protection District RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Peoria County Board previously appointed Harry Miller, Jr. and Mark Molleck for their initial appointments to the newly created Chillicothe Community Fire Protection District; and WHEREAS, the District was created by voters (836 for the creation of the District and 377 against) in Chillicothe and portions of unincorporated Peoria County and Marshall County in a referendum on the April 4, 2017 Consolidated General Election, and; WHEREAS, based on the election results the 10th Judicial Circuit of Illinois in case 16-MR-850 has ordered the creation of the Chillicothe Community Fire Protection District, and; WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 4 of the Illinois Fire Protection Act (70 ILCS 705/4), the Peoria County Board Chairman with the advice and consent of the Peoria County Board shall appoint residents of the District to serve as trustees of the District, and; WHEREAS, the terms of the initial trustees appointed May 11, 2017 shall be staggered at one, two, or three years as determined by lot at the Board of Trustees' first meeting with Harry Miller, Jr. serving through the first Monday in May 2020 or May 3, 2020 and Mark Molleck serving through the first Monday in May 2019 or May 6, 2019, and; WHEREAS, the District has requested an additional two residents be appointed to the Board of Trustees, which is permissible, and; WHEREAS, the Peoria County Board Chairman has a real or perceived conflict of interest in being able to appoint to trustees, and; WHEREAS, the Peoria County Board's Public Safety and Justice Committee hereby recommends the two residents of the District as requested by the District's Chief and hereby attached hereto. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Peoria County Board appoints the following residents to the Chillicothe Fire Protection District: Steven F. Meister Kevin L. Peterson 20407 N Blue Ridge Road 21203 N Blue Ridge Road Chillicothe, IL 61523 Chillicothe, IL 61523 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, PUBLIC SAFETY AND JUSTICE COMMITTEE 231 AGENDA BRIEFING COMMITTEE: Infrastructure LINE ITEM: 034-2-034-5-514-54303 MEETING DATE: June 8, 2017 AMOUNT: $234,192.72 ISSUE: Resolution for a Construction Engineering Agreement with Millennia Professional Services for the Lancaster Road Bridge Project. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Peoria County Highway Department employee assigned as Resident Engineer of the Lancaster Road project has submitted his resignation, effective June 23, 2017. The Highway Department does not have another employee available to take over the project, and must therefore contract with a consultant to perform Resident Engineer duties. Highway Department Administration reached out to colleagues in the industry, and Millennia Professional Services was recommended due to their experience with this type of project. Additionally, Millennia Professional Services has an experienced employee that can start on the project prior to June 23. This will allow the current Resident Engineer to bring the new Millennia Resident Engineer up to date. The Highway Department was granted Federal Major Bridge Funding for the Construction Engineering work using County staff for the Lancaster Road project. However, now that a consultant is being hired, there is a question if the County Bridge Fund will be reimbursed federal funds for construction engineering, because there is not enough time to perform a true Quality Based Selection (QBS) to choose the consultant, as required for federally funded engineering work. Highway Administration is working with IDOT to determine if federal funding will still be allowed to reimburse the County for construction engineering performed by Millennia. If it is deemed that the Construction Engineering work is ineligible for federal funds, the fee to the consultant will be paid out of the County Bridge Fund, and may delay funding for a future project. COUNTY BOARD GOALS: INFRASTRUCTURE STEWARDSHIP STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Resolution COMMITTEE ACTION: PREPARED BY: Jeffrey D. Gilles DEPARTMENT: Highway DATE: May 31, 2017 232 233 234 235 236 Local Agency Consultant Peoria County, IL L Millennia Professional Services O C County C O Address Peoria A N 850 N. Main St. Section City L S 13-00049-01-BR Morton U Project No. Construction Engineering State BR S-0389 (105) A L IL G Services Agreement T Job No. For Zip Code C-94-118-14 E A 61550 Federal Participation Contact Name/Phone/E-mail Address N N Contact Name/Phone/E-mail Address Jeff Gilles / 309-697-6400 C T Steve Dietz / 309-321-8141 [email protected] Y [email protected] THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of , between the above Local Agency (LA) and Consultant (ENGINEER) and covers certain professional engineering services in connection with the PROJECT described herein. Federal-aid funds allotted to the LA by the state of Illinois under the general supervision of the Illinois Department of Transportation (STATE) will be used entirely or in part to finance engineering services as described under AGREEMENT PROVISIONS. WHEREVER IN THIS AGREEMENT or attached exhibits the following terms are used, they shall be interpreted to mean: Regional Engineer Deputy Director Division of Highways, Regional Engineer, Department of Transportation Resident Construction Supervisor Authorized representative of the LA in immediate charge of the engineering details of the PROJECT In Responsible Charge A full time LA employee authorized to administer inherently governmental PROJECT activities Contractor Company or Companies to which the construction contract was awarded Project Description Name Lancaster Road Bridge Route 389 Length .489 mi Structure No. 072-3153 Termini Sta 140+34.66 to Sta 166+16.01 Description: Replace the bridge carrying West Lancaster Road over West Branch Lamarsh Creek Agreement Provisions I. THE ENGINEER AGREES, 1. To perform or be responsible for the performance of the engineering services for the LA, in connection with the PROJECT hereinbefore described and checked below: a. Proportion concrete according to applicable STATE Bureau of Materials and Physical Research (BMPR) Quality Control/Quality Assurance (QC/QA) training documents or contract requirements and obtain samples and perform testing as noted below. b. Proportion hot mix asphalt according to applicable STATE BMPR QC/QA training documents and obtain samples and perform testing as noted below. c. For soils, to obtain samples and perform testing as noted below. d. For aggregates, to obtain samples and perform testing as noted below. NOTE: For 1a. through 1d. the ENGINEER is to obtain samples for testing according to the STATE BMPR “Project Procedures Guide”, or as indicated in the specifications, or as attached herein by the LA; test according to the STATE BMPR “Manual of Test Procedures for Materials”, submit STATE BMPR inspection reports; and verify compliance with contract specifications. Page 1 of 8 BLR 05611 (Rev. 11/21/13) Printed on 6/1/2017 4:24:33 PM 237 e. Inspection of all materials when inspection is not provided at the sources by the STATE BMPR, and submit inspection reports to the LA and the STATE in accordance with the STATE BMPR “Project Procedures Guide” and the policies of the STATE. f. For Quality Assurance services, provide personnel who have completed the appropriate STATE BMPR QC/QA trained technician classes. g. Inspect, document and inform the LA employee In Responsible Charge of the adequacy of the establishment and maintenance of the traffic control. h. Geometric control including all construction staking and construction layouts. i. Quality control of the construction work in progress and the enforcement of the contract provisions in accordance with the STATE Construction Manual. j. Measurement and computation of pay items. k. Maintain a daily record of the contractor’s activities throughout construction including sufficient information to permit verification of the nature and cost of changes in plans and authorized extra work. l. Preparation and submission to the LA by the required form and number of copies, all partial and final payment estimates, change orders, records, documentation and reports required by the LA and the STATE. m. Revision of contract drawings to reflect as built conditions. n. Act as resident construction supervisor and coordinate with the LA employee In Responsible Charge. 2. Engineering services shall include all equipment, instruments, supplies, transportation and personnel required to perform the duties of the ENGINEER in connection with the AGREEMENT. 3. To furnish the services as required herein within twenty-four hours of notification by the LA employee In Responsible Charge. 4. To attend meetings and visit the site of the work at any reasonable time when requested to do so by representatives of the LA or STATE. 5. That none of the services to be furnished by the ENGINEER shall be sublet, assigned or transferred to any other party or parties without the written consent of the LA. The consent to sublet, assign or otherwise transfer any portion of the services to be furnished by the ENGINEER shall not be construed to relieve the ENGINEER of any responsibility for the fulfillment of this AGREEMENT. 6. The ENGINEER shall submit invoices, based on the ENGINEER’s progress reports, to the LA employee In Responsible Charge, no more than once a month for partial payment on account for the ENGINEER’s work completed to date. Such invoices shall represent the value, to the LA of the partially completed work, based on the sum of the actual costs incurred, plus a percentage (equal to the percentage of the construction engineering completed) of the fixed fee for the fully completed work. 7. That the ENGINEER is qualified technically and is entirely conversant with the design standards and policies applicable to improvement of the SECTION; and that the ENGINEER has sufficient properly trained, organized and experienced personnel to perform the services enumerated herein. 8. That the ENGINEER shall be responsible for the accuracy of the ENGINEER’s work and correction of any errors, omissions or ambiguities due to the ENGINEER’S negligence which may occur either during prosecution or after acceptance by the LA. Should any damage to persons or property result from the ENGINEER’s error, omission or negligent act, the ENGINEER shall indemnify the LA, the STATE and their employees from all accrued claims or liability and assume all restitution and repair costs arising from such negligence. The ENGINEER shall give immediate attention to any remedial changes so there will be minimal delay to the contractor and prepare such data as necessary to effectuate corrections, in consultation with and without further compensation from the LA. 9. That the ENGINEER will comply with applicable federal statutes, state of Illinois statutes, and local laws or ordinances of the LA. 10. The undersigned certifies neither the ENGINEER nor I have: a) employed or retained for commission, percentage, brokerage, contingent fee or other considerations, any firm or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above ENGINEER) to solicit or secure this AGREEMENT; Page 2 of 8 BLR 05611 (Rev. 11/21/13) Printed on 6/1/2017 4:24:33 PM 238 b) agreed, as an express or implied condition for obtaining this AGREEMENT, to employ or retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out the AGREEMENT or c) paid, or agreed to pay any firm, organization or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above ENGINEER) any fee, contribution, donation or consideration of any kind for, or in connection with, procuring or carrying out the AGREEMENT. d) are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal department or agency; e) have not within a three-year period preceding the AGREEMENT been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain or performing a public (Federal, State or local) transaction; violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements or receiving stolen property; f) are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a government entity (Federal, State or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (e) of this certification; and g) have not within a three-year period preceding this AGREEMENT had one or more public transactions (Federal, State or local) terminated for cause or default. 11. To pay its subconsultants for satisfactory performance no later than 30 days from receipt of each payment from the LA. 12. To submit all invoices to the LA within one year of the completion of the work called for in this AGREEMENT or any subsequent Amendment or Supplement. 13. To submit BLR 05613, Engineering Payment Report, to the STATE upon completion of the work called for in the AGREEMENT. 14. To be prequalified with the STATE in Construction Inspection when the ENGINEER or the ENGINEER’s assigned staff is named as resident construction supervisor. The onsite resident construction supervisor shall have a valid Documentation of Contract Quantities certification. 15. Will provide, as required, project inspectors that have a valid Documentation of Contract Quantities certification. II. THE LA AGREES, 1. To furnish a full time LA employee to be In Responsible Charge authorized to administer inherently governmental PROJECT activities. 2. To furnish the necessary plans and specifications. 3. To notify the ENGINEER at least 24 hours in advance of the need for personnel or services. 4. To pay the ENGINEER as compensation for all services rendered in accordance with this AGREEMENT, on the basis of the following compensation formulas: Cost Plus Fixed Fee Formulas FF = 14.5%[DL + R(DL) + OH(DL) + IHDC], or FF = 14.5%[(2.3 + R)DL + IHDC] Where: DL = Direct Labor IHDC = In House Direct Costs OH = Consultant Firm’s Actual Overhead Factor R = Complexity Factor FF=Fixed Fee SBO = Services by Others Total Compensation = DL +IHDC+OH+FF+SBO Specific Rate (Pay per element) Lump Sum Page 3 of 8 BLR 05611 (Rev. 11/21/13) Printed on 6/1/2017 4:24:33 PM 239 5. To pay the ENGINEER using one of the following methods as required by 49 CFR part 26 and 605 ILCS 5/5-409: With Retainage a) For the first 50% of completed work, and upon receipt of monthly invoices from the ENGINEER and the approval thereof by the LA, monthly payments for the work performed shall be due and payable to the ENGINEER, such payments to be equal to 90% of the value of the partially completed work minus all previous partial payments made to the ENGINEER. b) After 50% of the work is completed, and upon receipt of monthly invoices from the ENGINEER and the approval thereof by the LA, monthly payments covering work performed shall be due and payable to the ENGINEER, such payments to be equal to 95% of the value of the partially completed work minus all previous partial payments made to the ENGINEER. c) Final Payment – Upon approval of the work by the LA but not later than 60 days after the work is completed and reports have been made and accepted by the LA and the STATE, a sum of money equal to the basic fee as determined in this AGREEMENT less the total of the amounts of partial payments previously paid to the ENGINEER shall be due and payable to the ENGINEER. Without Retainage a) For progressive payments – Upon receipt of monthly invoices from the ENGINEER and the approval thereof by the LA, monthly payments for the work performed shall be due and payable to the ENGINEER, such payments to be equal to the value of the partially completed work minus all previous partial payments made to the ENGINEER. b) Final Payment – Upon approval of the work by the LA but not later than 60 days after the work is completed and reports have been made and accepted by the LA and STATE, a sum of money equal to the basic fee as determined in this AGREEMENT less the total of the amounts of partial payments previously paid to the ENGINEER shall be due and payable to the ENGINEER. 6. The recipient shall not discriminate on the basis on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex in the award and performance of any DOT-assisted contract or in the administration of its DBE program or the requirements of 49 CFR part 26. The recipient shall take all necessary and reasonable steps under 49 CFR part 26 to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of DOT- assisted contracts. The recipient’s DBE program, as required by 49 CFR part 26 and as approved by DOT, is incorporated by reference in this agreement. Implementation of this program is a legal obligation and failure to carry out its terms shall be treated as violation of this agreement. Upon notification to the recipient of its failure to carry out its approved program, the Department may impose sanctions as provided for under part 26 and may, in appropriate cases, refer the matter for enforcement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 and/or the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 (31U.S.C. 3801 et seq.). 7. To submit approved form BC 775 (Exhibit C) and BC 776 (Exhibit D) with this AGREEMENT. III. It is Mutually Agreed, 1. That the ENGINEER and the ENGINEER’s subcontractors will maintain all books, documents, papers, accounting records and other evidence pertaining to cost incurred and to make such materials available at their respective offices at all reasonable times during the AGREEMENT period and for three years from the date of final payment under this AGREEMENT, for inspection by the STATE, Federal Highway Administration or any authorized representatives of the federal government and copies thereof shall be furnished if requested. 2. That all services are to be furnished as required by construction progress and as determined by the LA employee In Responsible Charge. The ENGINEER shall complete all services specified herein within a time considered reasonable to the LA, after the CONTRACTOR has completed the construction contract. 3. That all field notes, test records and reports shall be turned over to and become the property of the LA and that during the performance of the engineering services herein provided for, the ENGINEER shall be responsible for any loss or damage to the documents herein enumerated while they are in the ENGINEER’s possession and any such loss or damage shall be restored at the ENGINEER’s expense. 4. That this AGREEMENT may be terminated by the LA upon written notice to the ENGINEER, at the ENGINEER’s last known address, with the understanding that should the AGREEMENT be terminated by the LA, the ENGINEER shall be paid for any services completed and any services partially completed. The percentage of the total services which have been rendered by the ENGINEER shall be mutually agreed by the parties hereto. The fixed fee stipulated in numbered paragraph 4d of Section II shall be multiplied by this percentage and added to the ENGINEER’s actual costs to obtain the earned value of work performed. All field notes, test records and reports completed or partially completed at the time of termination shall become the property of, and be delivered to, the LA. 5. That any differences between the ENGINEER and the LA concerning the interpretation of the provisions of this AGREEMENT shall be referred to a committee of disinterested parties consisting of one member appointed by the ENGINEER, one member appointed by the LA, and a third member appointed by the two other members for disposition and that the committee’s decision shall be final. 6. That in the event the engineering and inspection services to be furnished and performed by the LA (including personnel furnished by the ENGINEER) shall, in the opinion of the STATE be incompetent or inadequate, the STATE shall have the right to supplement the engineering and inspection force or to replace the engineers or inspectors employed on such work at the expense of the LA. Page 4 of 8 BLR 05611 (Rev. 11/21/13) Printed on 6/1/2017 4:24:33 PM 240 7. That the ENGINEER has not been retained or compensated to provide design and construction review services relating to the contractor’s safety precautions, except as provided in numbered paragraph 1f of Section I. 8. This certification is required by the Drug Free Workplace Act (30ILCS 580). The Drug Free Workplace Act requires that no grantee or contractor shall receive a grant or be considered for the purpose of being awarded a contract for the procurement of any property or service from the State unless that grantee or contractor will provide a drug free workplace. False certification or violation of the certification may result in sanctions including, but not limited to, suspension of contract or grant payments, termination of a contract or grant and debarment of contracting or grant opportunities with the State for at least one (1) year but no more than five (5) years. For the purpose of this certification, “grantee” or “contractor” means a corporation, partnership or other entity with twenty-five (25) or more employees at the time of issuing the grant, or a department, division or other unit thereof, directly responsible for the specific performance under a contract or grant of $5,000 or more from the State, as defined in the Act. The contractor/grantee certifies and agrees that it will provide a drug free workplace by: (a) Publishing a statement: (1) Notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession or use of a controlled substance, including cannabis, is prohibited in the grantee’s or contractor’s workplace. (2) Specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violations of such prohibition. (3) Notifying the employee that, as a condition of employment on such contract or grant, the employee will: (A) abide by the terms of the statement; and (B) notify the employer of any criminal drug statute conviction for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than five (5) days after such conviction. (b) Establishing a drug free awareness program to inform employees about: (1) the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; (2) the grantee’s or contractor’s policy of maintaining a drug free workplace; (3) any available drug counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance program; and (4) the penalties that may be imposed upon an employee for drug violations. (c) Providing a copy of the statement required by subparagraph (a) to each employee engaged in the performance of the contract or grant and to post the statement in a prominent place in the workplace. (d) Notifying the contracting or granting agency within ten (10) days after receiving notice under part (B) of paragraph (3) of subsection (a) above from an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction. (e) Imposing a sanction on, or requiring the satisfactory participation in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program by, any employee who is convicted, as required by section S of the Drug Free Workplace Act. (f) Assisting employees in selecting a course of action in the event drug counseling, treatment and rehabilitation is required and indicating that a trained referral team is in place. (g) Making a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug free workplace through implementation of the Drug Free Workplace Act. 9. The ENGINEER or subconsultant shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex in the performance of this AGREEMENT. The ENGINEER shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR part 26 in the administration of DOT-assisted contracts. Failure by the ENGINEER to carry out these requirements is a material breach of this AGREEMENT, which may result in the termination this AGREEMENT or such other remedy as the LA deems appropriate. Page 5 of 8 BLR 05611 (Rev. 11/21/13) Printed on 6/1/2017 4:24:33 PM 241 Agreement Summary Prime Consultant: TIN Number Agreement Amount Millennia Professional Services 20-0886076 $234,192.72 Sub-Consultants: TIN Number Agreement Amount n/a $0.00 Sub-Consultant Total: $0 Prime Consultant Total: $234,192.72 Total for all Work: $234,192.72 Executed by the LA: Peoria County, IL (Municipality/Township/County) ATTEST: By: By: Clerk Title: (SEAL) Executed by the ENGINEER: Millennia Professional Services ATTEST: By: By: Title: Title: Page 6 of 8 BLR 05611 (Rev. 11/21/13) Printed on 6/1/2017 4:24:33 PM 242 Exhibit A - Construction Engineering Route: FAS 389 (Lancaster Road) Local Peoria County, IL *Firm’s approved rates on file with (Municipality/Township/County) Bureau of Accounting and Auditing: Section: 13-00049-01-BR Project: BR S-0389 (105) Overhead Rate (OH) 170.00 % Job No.: C-94-118-14 Complexity Factor (R) 0.00 Calendar Days Cost Plus Fixed Fee Methods of Compensation: Fixed Fee 1 14.5%[DL + R(DL) + OH(DL) + IHDC] Fixed Fee 2 14.5%[(2.3 + R)DL + IHDC] Specific Rate Lump Sum Cost Estimate of Consultant’s Services in Dollars Element of Work Employee Services by In-House Classification Man- Payroll Payroll Costs Overhead Fixed Fee Others Direct Costs Total Hours Rate (DL) (OH*DL) (FF) (SBO) (IHDC) Project Manager Senior PM 64.00 $64.90 $4,153.60 $7,061.12 $11,214.72 Resident Engineer Technician IV 1734.00 $37.00 $64,158.00 $109,068.60 $173,226.60 Inspector Technician II 585.00 $24.00 $14,040.00 $23,868.00 $37,908.00 Vehicle Days $65/day*65days 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,225.00 $4,225.00 Vehicle Mileage 0.535*14240 mi 0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $7,618.40 $7,618.40 Totals 2,383.0 $82,351.60 $139,997.72 $11,843.40 $234,192.72 Page 7 of 8 BLR 05611 (Rev. 11/21/13) Printed on 6/1/2017 4:24:33 PM 243 Exhibit B Engineering Payment Report Prime Consultant Name Address Telephone TIN Number Project Information Local Agency Section Number Project Number Job Number This form is to verify the amount paid to the Sub-consultant on the above captioned contract. Under penalty of law for perjury or falsification, the undersigned certifies that work was executed by the Sub-consultant for the amount listed below. Sub-Consultant Name TIN Number Actual Payment from Prime Sub-Consultant Total: Prime Consultant Total: Total for all Work Completed: Signature and title of Prime Consultant Date Note: The Department of Transportation is requesting disclosure of information that is necessary to accomplish the statutory purpose as outlined under state and federal law. Disclosure of this information is REQUIRED and shall be deemed as concurring with the payment amount specified above. For information about IDOTs collection and use of confidential information review the department’s Identity Protection Policy. Page 8 of 8 BLR 05613 (Rev. 11/21/13) Printed on 6/1/2017 4:24:33 PM 244 Phase III Services Lancaster Road Bridge, Peoria County 2017 & 2018 PERIOD ENDING Total Billing Total 6/17/2017 6/24/2017 7/1/2017 7/8/2017 7/15/2017 7/22/2017 7/29/2017 8/5/2017 8/12/2017 8/19/2017 8/26/2017 9/2/2017 9/9/2017 9/16/2017 Hours Rate Labor Avg Hrly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly Classification Role Rate period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) multiplier (2.7) Senior Project Manager MPS PM $ 64.90 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 $175.23 $4,906.44 Technician IV MPS RE $ 37.00 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 700 $99.90 $69,930.00 Technician II MPS Inspector $ 24.00 45 45 45 45 180 $64.80 $11,664.00 0 Vehicle Mileage 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 5600 Vehicle Days 5 5 5 5 20 $86,500.44 PERIOD ENDING Total Billing Total 9/23/2017 9/30/2017 10/7/2017 10/14/2017 10/21/2017 10/28/2017 11/4/2017 11/11/2017 11/18/2017 11/25/2017 12/2/2017 12/9/2017 12/16/2017 12/23/2017 Hours Rate Labor Avg Hrly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly Classification Role Rate period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) multiplier (2.7) Senior Project Manager MPS PM $ 64.90 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 22 $175.23 $3,855.06 Technician IV MPS RE $ 37.00 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 40 40 40 40 40 650 $99.90 $64,935.00 Technician II MPS Inspector $ 24.00 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 405 $64.80 $26,244.00 0 Vehicle Mileage 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 5600 Vehicle Days 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 45 $95,034.06 PERIOD ENDING Total Billing Total 12/30/2017 1/6/2018 1/13/2018 1/20/2018 1/27/2018 2/3/2018 2/10/2018 2/17/2018 2/24/2018 3/3/2018 3/10/2018 3/17/2018 3/24/2018 3/31/2018 Hours Rate Labor Avg Hrly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly Classification Role Rate period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) multiplier (2.7) Senior Project Manager MPS PM $ 64.90 2 2 2 2 8 $175.23 $1,401.84 Technician IV MPS RE $ 37.00 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 72 $99.90 $7,192.80 Technician II MPS Inspector $ 24.00 0 $64.80 $0.00 0 Vehicle Mileage 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 720 Vehicle Days 0 $8,594.64 PERIOD ENDING Total Billing Total 4/7/2018 4/14/2018 4/21/2018 4/28/2018 5/5/2018 5/12/2018 5/19/2018 5/26/2018 6/2/2018 6/9/2018 6/16/2018 6/23/2018 6/30/2018 7/7/2018 Hours Rate Labor Avg Hrly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly (Hrs in weekly Classification Role Rate period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) period) multiplier (2.7) Senior Project Manager MPS PM $ 64.90 2 2 2 6 $175.23 $1,051.38 Technician IV MPS RE $ 37.00 8 8 8 8 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 312 $99.90 $31,168.80 Technician II MPS Inspector $ 24.00 0 $64.80 $0.00 0 Vehicle Mileage 80 80 80 80 400 400 400 400 400 2320 Vehicle Days 0 $32,220.18 Labor $222,349.32 Direct Costs $11,843.40 $234,192.72 Estimate of Direct Costs Estimate of Direct Costs Item Units Qty Unit Cost Total Vehicles Mileage 14240.0 0.535 $7,618.40 Vehicles Veh-Days 65.0 $65.00 $4,225.00 Total: $11,843.40 245 TO THE HONORABLE COUNTY BOARD ) ) COUNTY OF PEORIA, IL ) Your Infrastructure Committee does hereby recommend the passage of the following Resolution: RE: CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT RESOLUTION RESOLUTION WHEREAS, your Infrastructure Committee, having considered the economic effects of the following project, believes that the best interests of Peoria County will be served by the approval of a Construction Engineering Services Agreement using the County Bridge Fund for: Construction engineering for the Lancaster Road Bridge Replacement, designated as Section 13-00049-01-BR, at a cost not to exceed $234,192.72, with Millennia Professional Services. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the engineering agreement be approved and that the County Administrator be designated as the officer to sign the agreement with Millennia Professional Services for construction engineering for the Lancaster Road Bridge Replacement, designated as Section 13-00049-01-BR; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the sum of two hundred thirty four thousand one hundred ninety two and 72/100 dollars ($234,192.72) be appropriated from the County Bridge Fund for construction engineering for the Lancaster Road Bridge Replacement, designated as Section 13-00049-01-BR; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Treasurer is hereby authorized to issue checks from the County Bridge Fund in payment for construction engineering services for Section 13-00049-01-BR. Respectfully Submitted, Infrastructure Committee 246