HomeMy WebLinkAboutVILLAGE BOARD - 03/09/1961 - VILLAGE BOARD MD49ES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE•
RJ� PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE VILLAGE OF ELK GROVE VILLAGE,
V J ILLINOIS, HELD ON MARCH 9, 1961
At the request of Trustees Frank Dillon, James Young, and Charles Smith, the-
following notice was sent .to. the President and Trustees of the Village of
Elk Grove Village, on March 3, 1961: "Pursuant to a request by Messrs.
Frank Dillon, James Young, and Charles P. Smith, you are hereby notified of
a Special Meeting to be held at the Ira L. Rupley school on Thursday, March 9,
1961, at 8:00 P.M. for the purpose of discussing the Bolger lawsuit."
The Village Clerk called the roll at the Ira L. Ruple y School in said Village
at 8:05 P.M., at which time the following Trustees answered "Present:"
James L. Carrooll, Francis J. Dillon, Robert E. Hartshorn, Leonard A. Schar-
ringhausen, Charles P. Smith, James R. Young; "Absent:" President Hodlmair.
It was moved by Trustee Dillon and seconded by Trustee Young that
Trustee Leonard A. Scharringhausen be appointed President pro tem for this
mesting, in the absence of President Charles A. Hodlmair. Upon the roll
being called, the following Trustees voted "AYE:" Carroll, Dillon, Harts-
horn, Scharringhausen, Smith, Young; "NAY:" None. Whereupon Trustee
Scharringhausen took the gavel.
Trustee Dillon reported a recent conference comprised of Messrs. J. Young,
Charles Smith, H. Stoffels, John Bolger and his attorney Mr. Daley, and F.
Dillon - at vh ich the pending litigation wasthoroughly discussed. Trustee
Dillon then introduced Mr. Stoffels, special attorney for the Village, and
requested that he conduct a presentation of the facts in this case.
Mr. Stoffels outlined the history leading up to the suit instigated by Mr.
Bolger (i.e. the property in question, zoned residential, is improperly
zoned - rezoning to B-1 should be permitted) which has been heard before
Master Montelione. Mr. Stoffels stated that in his opinion the original
decision would be in favor of Bolger, in which case the Village could appeal
it - with a high chance of losing in the appeal, in Which case the Village
would have no control over the use of the land. At this time, Mr. Stoffels
related, the Special Committee appointed by the Board of Trustees, met with
Mr. Stoffels, Mr. Bolger and his attorney and agreed on a compromise in the
form of a "declaratory judgment decree" in which there is given to Mr. Bulger
the restricted right to construct a shopping center substantially the same
as one sketched in a drawing, path the terms that if he does not accomplish
this within a reasonable time (two years), the Court reserves the jurisdiction
to revert the land back to its former zoning (Residential). Mr. Stoffels
pointed out to the Board the fact that this decree would cover 82 Acres,
encompassing both the Tonne and Holzhauser lands. Mr. Stoffels then read
the drafted decree, copy of which is attached and made a part of these minutes.
It was moved by Trustee Dillon and seconded by Trustee Young that
the Board approve the proposal submitted by the Special Committee as a result
of its conference with Mr. Bolger involving property on the Northwest corner
of Tonne and Devon Avenues and consisting of 82 Acres, more or less, and that
Mr. Stoffels, Special Counsel, be authorized to consent to the entry of a
decree of the type presented by him this evening. The President pro tem asked
that the roll be called on the motion and upon theroll being called the fol-
lowing Trustees voted "AYE:" Carroll, Dillon, Hartshorn, Scharringhausal,
Smith, Young; "NAY:" None. Whereupon the President pro tem declared the motion
i carried.
It was moved by Trustee Smith and seconded by Trustee Young that the
Village Officials be authorized to enter into an agreement, prepared by Mr.
Stoffels (special counsel), with Mr. Bolger, ft9esup gement and embody the
terms of the consent decree. The Presidentasked tat the roll be called on
the motion and upon the roll being called the following Trustees voted "AYE:"
Carroll, Dillon, Hartshorn, Scharringhausen, Smith, Young; "NAY:" None.
I Whereupon the President pro tem declared the motiol carried.
I It was moved by Trustee Young and seconded by Trustee Dillon that
the meeting be adjourned. The motion was vote.; upon by acclamation; whereupon
the President pro tem declared the :notion carried and the meting was adjourre d
at 9:GO P.M.
Approved: Delores L. Oberg, Village Clerk
President -1- (Spec.) 3/9/61
Draft of Consent Decree, read by Attorney Herbert Stoffels at meeting of 3/9/61
C 0 P
STATE OF ILLINOIS)
SS
COUNTY OF COOK )
IN THE C IRC UIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY
CHICAGO TITLE & TRUST COMPANY, as Trustee under )
Trust Agreement dated April 25, 1960, and known )
as Trust No. 42169, Plaintiff, )
vs. � N�. 60 C 11807
VILLAGE OF ELK GROVE, a Municipal Corporation, )
Defendant )
DECLARATCRY JUDGMENT DECREE
This cause coming on to be heard on the Amended Complaint hereto-
fore filed herein, the answer of the defendant thereto, and said cause having
been referred to Master Samuel L. Montelione to take testimony and to report
his conclusions of law and fact herein; and the Court being fully advised in
the premises, FINDS:
1. That this Court has jurisdiction of the parties hereto and of
the subject-matter hereof.
2. That the plaintiff is the owner of the following described real
estate located within the corporate boundaries of the Village of Elk Grove, Cook
County, Illinois
Parcel 1
(legal description)
Parcel 2
j (legal description)
3. That the above parcels of real estate., each adjoining the other,
comprise one tract of l<.nd lwated on the Northwest corner of Devon Aveme and
Tonne Road, and is irregular in shape, and that said property has approximately
feet of frontage adjacent to Devon Avenue and approximatelry feet
of frontage adjacent to Tonne Road; that said premises are classified under the
Zoning Ordinance of the Village of Elk Grove Village as residential district,
and under said ordinance the use thereof is restricted to residential use.
4. That the plaintiff herein proposes to construct on said property
a shopping center in accordance with the general plan and design as submitted
by Cone& Dornbusch, architects, and substantially in accordance with the Per-
spective and Plot Plan of said preposed shopping center which is attached to the
Amended Complaint heretofore filed herein.
5. That the above entitled cause has heretofore been referred to
the Hon. Samuel L. Montelione, one of the Masters in Chancery of this Court,
and that testimony has been offered and received in hearings conducted by him,
but that said hearings have not been completed by reason of the fact that during
the conduct of the same the parties hereto have agreed to settle their dif-
ferences, and for that purpose have agreed to the entry of this Decree.
6. That prior to the filing of the Complaint herein by the plain-
tiff, the plaintiff had attended hearings conducted by a Zoning Commission of
the Village of Elk Grove and has presented at said hearings and at hearings of
the Board of Trustees of said Village tentative plans for the development of
said premises for shopping center purposes, which said plans, however, were
acceptable to said Zoning Commission but rejected by said Board of Trustees.
7. That following the institution of this cause, plaintiff has sup-
ported its proposal to develop a shopping center on said premises with further
assurances that said shopping center can be and will be completed substantially
in manner and form as depicted in the photograph of said proposed development
attached to plaintiff's Amended Complaint.
8. That by reason of such representations and submissions so made
by the Plaintiff, the Board of Trustees of the defendant Village have deter-
mined by appropriate resolution adopted by said Board in a duly constituted
meeting thereof, that the erection of such a shopping center substantially as
shown in said exhibit and completed in accordance ,d th the general phis and
Copy of proposed consent decree -la_ (Spec) 3/9/61
to be attached to minutes of
I
Draft of Consent Decree, read by Attorney Herbert Stoffels at meeting of 3/9/61
(cont'd) C 0 P Y
design as reflected in said exhibit, Am said premises; consisting of eight and
one-half acres more or less, is to the best interests of the public and would
constitute the highest and best use of said premises, and that the development
of the subject property with such a shopping center would have no detrimental
effect whatsoever on the public health, welfare, morals and safety of the citi-
zens of the Village of Elk Grove.
9. That the municipal authorities of the Village of Elk Grove have
consented to the entry of a decree embodying the provisions, findings and orders
herein contained, and providing also that this Court retain jurisdiction d the
cause, to the end that said premises be, in fact, developed substantially as in
these findings set forth.
10. That by reasin of the agreements entered into between the parties
hereto and by reason of the entry of this Judgment Order, there exists no fur-
ther need for the presentation of further testimony before the Hon. Samuel L.
Montelione, and that the reference of said cause to him may, therefore, be
recalled, it appearing that the plaintiff has paid to said Muer in Chancery
his reasonable charges for the hearings heretofore conducted by him.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows:
1. That the order of reference heretofore entered herein, re-
ferring said cause to the Hon. Samuel L. Montelione, one of the Masters in
Chancery of this Court, be and the same is hereby recalled and that said Master
in Chancery is hereby authorized to cease to conduct further hearings herein,
and to refrain from rendering any report or recommendations herein, it appear-
ing that all matters in controversy have been amicably adjusted between the parties
2. That the premises described herein, consisting of two adjoining
parcels, and constituting eight and one-half acres of land, more or less, have
as their highest and best use the development of a shopping center of type and
magnitude as set forth in the Amended Complaint heretofore filed herein by the
plaintiff, and as depicted in the exhibit attached to said Complaint, being a
photograph of such proposed development.
3. That the Ordinance of the Village of Elk Grove which prevents
the plaintiff from developing said premises in manner and form as above pro-
posed is unreasonable and arbitrary and bears no direct relationship to public
health, safety, comfort, or morals of said community.
4. That the plaintiff be permitted to build and develop a shopping
center cn the above described premises, substantially in accordance with the
plans and specifications submitted by it to the municipal authorities of the
Village of Elk Grove and substantially in accordance with the Perspective and
i the Plot Plan attached to said Amended Complaint heretofore filed herein by the
Plaintiff.
5 That the Village of Elk Grove, its servants and agents, includ-
ing its Building Commissioner, are hereby ordered and directed to approve the
plaintiff's application for the erection and establishment of a shopping center
of the style and design as reflected in the Perspective marked Exhibit A and
the Plot Plan marked Exhibit B, both attached to the Amended Complaint herein.
6. The defendant, Village of Elk Grove, its officers, agents,
servants and employes, are enjoined from in any way interfering with the plain-
tiff in using the said premises of the plaintiff for the maintenance and opera-
tion of said shopping center.
7. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiff shall build and develop
upon said property a shopping center of the style and design reflected in
Exhibit A, attached to the Amended Complaint herein, and Exhbit B, attached to
the Amended Complaint herein, and that the Village of Elk Give shall issue all
permits necessary for the fulfillment of this Order.
8. JurisdictiPn is re2erved3 hcwever, to make such further orders
as may be needful, directed either against the Village of Elk Grove, its agents,
servants or employes, or against the plaintiff, as may be required to carry out
the provisions of this Decree.
ENTER:
JUDGE
Dated:
Copy of proposed consent decree -lb- (Spec.) 3/9/61
to be attached to minutes of