Administrator Haley reviewed the hearing process and said the notice read aloud by Clerk Rowe summarizes what the public hearing is about. This public hearing is one of the many requirements under the terms of the IEPA loan that we have applied for. Mr. Haley briefly discussed the June 2000 heavy rainfall and of a failure of our sanitary sewer collection system in some of the older areas of the village due to the infiltration of storm water into our sanitary sewer system. Administrator Haley also discussed the engineering study, environmental concerns and the secured approval by the DNR, Department of Historical Preservation and NIPC. As stated in the public notice, the cost of the IEPA that will be repaid from the debt service that was included in the amended sewer and water user fee ordinance that was approved on March 18, 2000.

Trustee Porch asked when the Village will know if the loan has been approved.

Administrator Haley said that he does not have a date, but he anticipates to have an answer within the next few months.

Trustee Pierce said the public notice stated there’s an intersection of Hazelwood Drive and Cedarwood Drive and asked if that intersection can be identified. Trustee Pierce knows where Hickory and Cedarwood Drive intersect, but is unsure where Hazelwood Drive and Cedarwood Drive is located. Mr. Pierce wanted to make sure the public notice was correct.

Attorney Long asked if the project is going to take place in the area of Hazelwood Drive and Cedarwood Drive. Administrator Haley indicated that a lot of the project is taking place in that general area.

Attorney Long said the notice is generally identifying the roads that the project will be along and he believes the public notice is close enough, even if for some reason those roads are parallel and don’t intersect.

Mayor Maravelas asked if there were any more questions. Hearing none, a motion was made by Trustee Foresta, seconded by Trustee Pierce to close the public hearing at 7:45 p.m.. On roll call, the vote was:

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 4; Larson, Caulfield, Foresta and Hanson.

NO: 1; Pierce.

PASS: 1; Porch

THE MOTION CARRIED.

Trustee Porch thanked Mr. Watkins and Mr. Foresta for their years given to the Village.

The Mayor and Board of Trustees recessed the meeting at 7:50 p.m. to serve coffee and cake in honor of Trustee Foresta and retiring Police Chief Charles Watkins.

The Mayor and Board of Trustees re-opened the regular meeting at 8:10 p.m.

Mr. Horan also said the flight for life helicopter landed in the area, but since the fence is installed, he doubts they will continue to do so. He said that he can’t get to his property because of the fence, and he is requesting the village saw cut the curb and give him a driveway access as he requested when they poured the curb originally, and that didn’t happen. Trustee Hanson said the Arbor Day Committee did something beautiful with an area of the park. He said, that he doesn’t have all the particulars regarding the road easement, but a few years back the board decided to install walking trail. Trustee Hanson said that based on his discussions with the Village Attorney, we should put this item in committee so we can research this. Public Works Superintendent Bill Smith said that as far as curb cutting, he can do whatever the Board directs him to do. In the past, contractors did their own driveways that included the curb cut. He said that he understands what Mr. Horan is saying and that he was given access verbally by the prior administration. The water problem would not be an issue because he’s sure the curbs can be cut in such a way that the water can get down in the storm sewer right there, (just a little bit north of Mr. Horan’s property). Mr. Horan said a remedy would be for someone to cut the curb so he can enter on his own property.

A motion was made by Trustee Hanson, seconded by Trustee Pierce to place Mr. Horan’s request regarding the fence and curb cut into committee. Trustee Pierce suggested that while this is in committee, the public works committee can look at the drainage situation for Osmond Park and the possibility of some sort of bridge to allow residents from Woods of Antioch to use the park. On roll call the vote was:

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

Attorney Long said that since the bids are non-binding and we can ratify it at the next meeting. A motion was made by Trustee Larson, seconded by Trustee Foresta to authorize the Village Engineer to advertise for bids for the SCADA System. On roll call, the vote was:

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

Mr. Dziki and Mr. Turner indicated they would place this request on the next School Board agenda’s for discussion. Mayor Maravelas said that he’s willing to meet with the Boards or he can appoint someone from this Board to participate in a meeting and we can go on from there.

The Combined Planning and Zoning Board conducted a hearing on March 13, 2003 following notification as required by Illinois State Law and Village Ordinance.

Petitioner The Village of Antioch, Department of Planning, Zoning and Building. George Sakas, Senior Planner: the zoning issues having apparently been caused by an error on the part of the village. Co-petitioner Frances Van Haecke, having executed a power of attorney to her son - Elmer Van Haecke to act on her behalf.

Site Premises are classified under the Zoning Ordinance as R2 Two-family dwelling district in the front approximately 174 feet (North to South), and then R2 Single-family dwelling in the back approximately 90 feet (North to South), thus creating a “split-zoning” classification. This limits construction to the least restrictive zoning, in this case, R2 Single-family. Owner is prohibited from building R4 Two-family dwelling as zoned in the front of the parcel. There is currently a single-family residence on the lot.

Village of Antioch Planning & Zoning Department research has yielded no ordinance, resolution, or legal action that allows or mandates this “split-zoning”. It has been declared a zoning map error. There is every indication this is an error and the village has intended this parcel to be zoned R4 residential.

Adjacent and nearby properties are zoning B3 Business, R4 Two-family Dwelling, and R5 Multi-family Dwelling.

Adjacent property values would increase because R4 zoning would make feasible the demolition of the current aged residence and new residential construction.

The subject property has frontage on North Avenue, a busy arterial road with multi-family and business uses, and is well suited for r4 construction and land use.

Proposal Re-zone the entire property R4 Two-family Residential.

Review of Supportable Reasons for a Zoning Change The existing uses and zoning of nearby property along North Avenue are business, two-family and multi-family residential; property values will increase with this zoning change; maintaining the “split-zoning” would impose hardship upon the individual property owner and subjected the Village of Antioch to legal scrutiny; and the parcel is suitable for R4 Two-family residential use.

Audience There were citizen comments from the neighbors on Alima Terrace. They expressed dissatisfaction with the maintenance and nuisance of the existing single-family home’s tenants. There were concerns with the “transitional zone” allowance for R4 two-family zoning applicable to this lot - because there is B3 Business, Service and Wholesale zoning immediately across the street, this parcel is allowed a single residential structure of 2, 3, or 4 dwelling units.

Staff Review Senior Planner George Sakas recommended approval of the rezoning, citing the adjoining properties’ zoning, use, and the lack of any evidence this lot was ever intended any other zoning than R4.

Recommendation Following discussion, Kyle LaReese moved, Margaret Cole seconded, a motion to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the zoning change. AYES: 4; Cole, LaReese, Johnson, Baba*; NAYS: 2; McCarty, Ipsen; ABSTAIN: 1; Baba; ABSENT: 1; Keller.

*The Ayes and Nays were tied 2-2, requiring the chairman’s vote. The chairman voted “aye”, carrying the abstaining vote with the prevailing party. The Motion Carried.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

Administrator Haley said this is a cash flow issue, last year at this time we had a cash flow in the amount of $446,000 in the general fund and $56,000 in the water and sewer fund we had $102,000. This year, we have in the water and sewer fund $1,032,000 and in the general fund $537,000 with a total cash flow of $1,500,000. We are doing this transfer because we have been told by the County that the tax bills are going to be late and we anticipate an extremely late receipt of the tax revenue that goes into our general fund. He said that after discussing this with the Finance Chairman and with our auditor, we decided in order to approve cash flow in the general fund, which he wants to reiterate that it has $500,000 in it and a year ago it had $50,000. Administrator Haley said that cash flow, of course, is not the barometer for the financial health of the village, we still are walking a tight line, but we’re going in the right direction, and at least we don’t have to cash in any CD’s in order to pay our bills. Mayor Maravelas would like to review the situation again in July. The Finance Chair agreed to revisit this item in July.

On roll call the vote was:

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

Mr. Ballis said that he has brochures that includes information for residents such as how to identify areas around their homes, information about West Nile Virus and information about the mosquito control program. The brochures will be can be at Village Hall for distribution and used in the newsletter.

Trustee Porch asked Mr. Ballis if they are the contractor for Lake County. Mr. Ballis said that they are the contractor for the Lake County Forest Preserve. When asked if they are working with the Township, he said they are not currently working with the Township. Trustee Pierce said this information has been forwarded to the Township. Trustee Foresta asked if the proposal includes another site within the village instead of the Forest Preserve test site as indicated in the proposal. Mr. Ballis said that it does not. He indicated those traps generally run about 6800 hours which is almost a quarter of our entire program, so they will be using the traps located in the Forest Preserve area as a cost saving method for the village. He said they would be more than willing to have a trap within the village, but that would also have to be budgeted for. Trustee Foresta asked how big of an area does the trap cover, and is it a significant area. Mr. Ballis said that they’re looking at over two and one-half miles for that trap. Mayor Maravelas asked Mr. Ballis about the four different types of schedules. He said, “say in July it doesn’t work, does Clark Mosquito come back and re-do it”? Mr. Ballis said it all depends on what doesn’t work. The larva siting, the actual treatment of the standing water, that’s ongoing during the entire season. Mr. Ballis said catch basin areas would be redone if there’s a flooding situation. He said the first inspection would occur about the third week in May, and the first larva siting treatment of the catch basins would actually occur during the first week in June. The payment schedule is prior to the work, but it also catches up very quickly because most of the work actually occurs in June, July and August. Mayor Maravelas told Mr. Ballis that May is too early and he asked if we can use that twice in July instead. Mr. Ballis said they have three adult control treatments that can be used at anytime during the season. The larva siting, treatment of the standing water, will occur all year round and most of the inspections occur from June through August. Mr. Ballis said Clark Mosquito will be checking in after every inspection and every application. The Village will also be getting monthly reports. Trustee Larson asked for an explanation of the application process. She said her concern is that the public is aware of what’s happening and they can choose to stay inside if necessary. Mr. Ballis said there are two different aspects of the program; 1. The larva siting program is the treatment of standing water that is treated during the day. Trustee Larson asked if this a dangerous situation. Could putting the chemical in the standing water be harmful to people who came in contact with it? Mr. Ballis said it is not a dangerous, the product that they are using is a soil bacteria, that’s actually already found in the ground soil and it only affects the mosquito larva. This will be going on all season long. 2. Treating catch basins and the open street drains will be done twice in June and July under the recommendations used by the state health department. He said the same chemical will be used but in a different formulation. They will be using right-hand drive vehicles so they can actually place the chemicals into the catch basins as they drive down the streets. Once again there is no exposure. He also said for adult control, they will be spraying for mosquitos. Clark Mosquito will have a call notification list, which allows people to call the 800 number for those residents, if for any reason, would like to be notified prior to an application. They will call them prior to the application so they can take whatever precautions they feel necessary. Trustee Larson asked if Clark Mosquito does a mailing or do we notify the community through our community newsletter. Mr. Ballis said the village newsletter would be used for notification. Trustee Larson asked who is at risk because of spraying and when will they be doing the spraying. Mr. Ballis said the spraying is for use in residential and recreation areas. So, it can be exposed to people without undue risk to humans. That is how the EPA labels it. Those who have asthma or are allergic to small particle size would be at the highest risk. Not to say that if they come into exposure with the product, there would be any issues, but what happens is the droplets that come out are very small. He said it’s not actually being allergic to the product traditionally, it’s being allergic to the small particle size. Trustee Larson asked if the spraying is done at night. Mr. Ballis said all adult applications occur during the evening hours. After dusk and before dawn. Typically in the village situation, it’s usually after 10:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. Treatment times are based upon what would be the most effective use of the treatment. For example, later in the season, when the sun goes down around 6:00 p.m., there may be a need to go out and spray earlier.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

Trustee Porch left the Board Room at 9:20 p.m. and returned at 9:23 p.m.

A motion was made by Trustee Larson, seconded by Trustee Hanson to allow the Antioch Junior Women’s Club to sponsor a Cancer Walk-A-Thon on May 10, 2003. On roll call the vote was:

YES: 5; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta and Hanson.

NO: 0.

ABSENT: 1; Porch

THE MOTION CARRIED.

First Reading: Ordinance approving a zoning variance allowing for a unified design to build multi-family structures across interior lines. The ordinance, with PUD exhibits, will be placed on the next Village Board agenda for consideration.

Attorney Long suggested that Board Members get their comments to him and he will funnel them back to our attorneys that are writing the bond issues.

A motion was made by Trustee Hanson, seconded by Trustee Foresta to table until the next Village Board meeting the following ordinances:

An ordinance amending ordinance 02-09-38 (An ordinance establishing Village of Antioch Special Service Area Number One)

An ordinance amending ordinance 02-09-39 (An ordinance establishing Village of Antioch Special Service Area Number Two)

An ordinance providing for the issuance of not to exceed $12,000,000 Village of Antioch Special Service Area Number One Special Tax Bonds, Series 2003 (Deercrest project) and providing for the levy of a direct annual tax on taxable property in such Special Service Areas for the payment of and interest on such Bonds

An ordinance providing for the issuance of not to exceed $15,000,000 Village of Antioch Special Service Area Number Two Special Tax Bonds, Series 2003 (Clublands project) and providing for the levy of a direct annual tax on taxable property in such Special Service Areas for the payment of and interest on such Bonds

On roll call the vote was:

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

Trustee Caulfield asked if there was a set number of meetings attended established. Trustee Pierce said he thought it was for formal or regularly scheduled meetings of the Board they’re appointed on. He said it’s the responsibility of the Village Board to monitor those meetings to make sure they are not frivolous. Trustee Larson said that there is Planning and Zoning Board member in attendance at tonight’s meeting and she doesn’t believe that person expects the Village to compensate them for being at the village board meeting. If they’re at a meeting that they are a board member of, and it’s a regular scheduled meeting they should be compensated. Trustee Caulfield said he agreed with Trustee Larson, but he doesn’t see that written in the resolution.

On roll call the vote was:

YES: 5; Pierce, Larson, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 1; Caulfield.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Porch, Hanson and Turner.

NO 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Porch, Hanson and Turner.

NO 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.

YES: 6; Pierce, Larson, Caulfield, Foresta, Porch and Hanson.

NO: 0.

THE MOTION CARRIED.