The URL can be used to link to this page

06/22/2021 PZB Full Packet Community & Economic Development 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 P: 847.391.5392 | W: desplaines.org Planning and Zoning Board Agenda June 22, 2021 Room 102 – 7:00 P.M. Call to Order: Roll Call: Approval of Minutes: June 8, 2021 Public Comment: For matters that are not on the Agenda Old Business: None New Business: 1. Address: 10 S. River Road and 1415 Redeker Road Case Number: 21-025-FPLAT Public Hearing The petitioners are requesting a Final Plat of Subdivision to re -subdivided certain legal lots of record under Section 13-2 of the Subdivision Regulations. PIN: 09-17-200-022-0000; -044-0000; -045-0000; -051-0000 Petitioner: Peter Damiano, Damiano Service Center and Damiano Properties, LLC, 10 S. River Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 and 1415 Redeker Rd, LLC, 1415 – 1419 Redeker Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Owner: Carol A. Damiano and Peter S. E. Damiano, 10 S. River Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 and 1415 Redeker Rd, LLC, 1415 – 1419 Redeker Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 2. Address: 1041 North Avenue Case Number: 21-017-TSUB-V Public Hearing The petitioner is requesting the following items: (i) a Tentative Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2-2 of the Subdivision Regulations to split an existing lot into two new lots of record; (ii) a Standard Variation under Section 12-7-2(J) of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow a lot width of 50-feet where a minimum lot width of 55-feet is required in the R-1 zoning district; and the approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary. PINs: 09-17-302-003-0000 Petitioner: Helen Roman, 5734 W. Warwick Ave, Chicago, IL 60634 Owner: Helen Roman, 5734 W. Warwick Ave, Chicago, IL 60634 3. Address: 994 Hollywood Avenue Case Number: 21-022-V Public Hearing The petitioner is requesting the following items a Standard Variation under Section 12-7-2(J) of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow a n accessory structure to be constructed within 2’ of the property line when 5’ is required and the approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary. PIN: 09-17-301-020-0000 Petitioner: Erin Johnson, 994 Hollywood Ave, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Owner: Erin Johnson, 994 Hollywood Ave, Des Plaines, IL 60016 4. Addresses: 1050 East Oakton Street Case Number: 21-019-PPUD-TSUB-MAP-CU 1090-1100 Executive Way, 1555 Times Drive Public Hearing The petitioner is requesting the following items: (i) a Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) under Section 12-3-5 of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended; (ii) a Conditional Use for a Planned Unit Development under Section 12-3-4 of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance as amended; (iii) Tentative Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2-2 of the Subdivision Regulations; and (iv) a Map Amendment under Section 12-3-7 of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance as amended to rezone the subject property from C-3, General Commercial District to R- 3, Townhouse Residential. PIN: 09-20-316-020-0000; -021-0000; -023-0000; -024-0000; -025-0000; -026-0000; 09-20-321-005-0000; 09-20-322-001-0000 Petitioner: Marc McLaughlin, M/I Homes of Chicago, LLC Owner: 1090-1100 Executive Way, LLC; Times Drive, LLC; Oakton Mannheim LLC Next Agenda –July 13, 2021 City of Des Plaines, in compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act, requests that persons with disabilities, who require certain accommodations to allow them to observe and/or participate in the meeting(s) or have questions about the meeting(s) or facilities, contact the ADA Coordinator at 847-391-5486 to allow the City to make reasonable accommodations for these persons. The public hearing may be continued to a further date, time and place without publication of a further published notice such as this notice. Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 1 DES PLAINES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING June 8, 2021 MINUTES The Des Plaines Planning and Zoning Board Meeting held its regularly-scheduled meeting on Tuesday, June 8, 2021, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 101 of the Des Plaines Civic Center. Chairman Szabo called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and read this evening’s cases. Roll call was established. PRESENT: Catalano, Fowler, Hofherr, Saletnik, Veremis, Szabo ABSENT: Bader ALSO PRESENT: Jonathan Stytz, Planner/Community & Economic Development Wendy Bednarz/Recording Secretary A quorum was present. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no Public Comment. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr, seconded by Board Member Fowler, to approve the minutes of May 11, 2021, as presented. AYES: Hofherr, Fowler, Catalano, Saletnik, Veremis, Szabo NAYES: None ABSTAIN: None ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 2 OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 1. Address: 69-79 Broadway St Case Number: 21-009-CU Public Hearing The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use under Section 12-7-3(K) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to locate a Commercially Zoned Assembly Use at 69-79 Broadway Street in the C-3 zoning district, and approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary. PINs: 09-07-418-016-0000; -017; -018; -019 Petitioner: Steven Bonica, 732 W. Algonquin Road, Arlington Heights, IL 60005 Owner: Gerald J. Meyer, 108 W. Sunset Road, Mount Prospect, IL 60056 Chairman Szabo swore in Steven Bonica, Arlington Heights, who provided an overview of the request. The Petitioner stated that the request is for a Romanian Heritage Center, which will focus on social and cultural values, as well as a gathering space. The Center will provide youth programs and provide the general community with additional programs for college preparedness. The Petitioner stated that the Center will also host large events throughout the year (approximately 1-3 per month, on weekends). Parking is a general concern of the center, but the Petitioner stated that he is in process and has arranged parking agreements with neighboring properties for alleviate some of the parking issues. The Petitioner provided a revised parking plan, which depicted 14 spaces at the rear of the property. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board had any questions. Member Fowler inquired about the maximum capacity of the multipurpose room, the net floor area of 2,300 square feet. The Petitioner stated that the capacity will comply with the assessment given by the Fire and Building Departments. Mr. Stytz stated that the according to the materials submitted, the library will be used to tutor 12 students during the week and have 2-3 staff present. The Petitioner reiterated that there is a twelve-student maximum, based on efficiency. Mr. Stytz also stated event attendance is estimated between 50-100 people per event. Member Fowler also inquired about parking, the Petitioner stated that the Center is also considering valet parking options for events and a parking agreement with the Romanian Church. Member Catalano inquired about the traffic study. Mr. Stytz stated that staff did not feel a traffic study was necessary and the requirement was waived. Member Veremis was impressed with the number of classes offered, and inquired about the types of programs that are available at the Niles School. The Petitioner stated that the school in Niles is a private Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 3 school, offering education to students in kindergarten through twelfth grade. While the school offers after school activities, the cultural center could not commit to something permanent. There was additional discussion regarding parking for large-scale events including shuttling individuals from an off-site parking location and valet options, including valet location. The Petitioner also stated that they have looked into a Police presence for safety during events (crossing streets safely). Chairman Szabo recommended that formal lease agreements be entered prior to hosting events. Chairman Szabo also inquired about the affiliation with the Romanian Church, the Petitioner stated that they are currently not members of the Romanian Church, but have shared interests and meet with Church leaders twice per year. Member Saletnik reiterated the sentiment that parking is paramount and parking agreements are necessary. Mr. Bonica agreed with the statement and stated that he is looking at additional parking options and has reached out to his insurance provider to provide a certificate of insurance to properties. Chairman Szabo asked if there were any questions or comments from the audience. The following comments were provided: Edna Graef, 635 Yale Ct, stated that most of her concern stems from the current parking problems caused by commercial businesses, and inquired about how the Petitioner plans on preventing parking on residential streets. Ms. Graef also commended on the location of valet pick-up/drop-off. Ms. Graef said commented that she represented the neighbors of the area, and has tried to work with commercial owners regarding parking. Chairman Szabo stated that some of the concerns that she has should be addressed by the Police Department. Member Fowler also stated that she has business in the area several times during normal business hours and parking has not been an issue. The Petitioner stated that he also has a standby agreement to purchase an open lot near the clinic on Golf Rd; however, prior to purchase there is a temporary agreement for parking. The Petitioner stated that he appreciates the concerns regarding parking, but is actively looking for additional parking options. Chairman Szabo asked that the Staff Report be entered into record. Planner Stytz provided a summary of the following report: Issue: The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use under Section 12-7-3(K)(3) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow a Commercially Zoned Assembly use in the C-3 zoning district at 69-79 Broadway Street. Analysis: Address: 69-79 Broadway Street Owners: Steven Bonica, 732 W. Algonquin Road, Arlington Heights, IL 60005 Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 4 Petitioner: Harriet Denisewicz, Chicago Title Land Trust Company, 10 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 2750, Chicago, IL 60604 Case Number: 21-009-CU Real Estate Index Numbers: 09-07-418-016-0000; -017; -018; -019 Ward: #7, Alderman Patsy Smith Existing Zoning: C-3, General Commercial District Existing Land Use: Vacant Building Surrounding Zoning: North: C-3, General Commercial District South: C-3, General Commercial District East: R-1, Single Family Residential District West: C-3, General Commercial District Surrounding Land Use: North: Vacant Building South: Multi-Unit Residential Building East: Single Family Residences West: Electrician (Commercial)/Vacant Building Street Classification: Broadway Street is classified as a Local Street. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as Higher Density Urban Mix with Residential. Project Description: The petitioner, Steven Bonica, has requested a Conditional Use Permit to operate a Community Center, Romanian Heritage Center NFP, at 69-79 Broadway Street. A community center is classified as a Commercially Zoned Assembly use, which is a conditional use in the C-3, General Commercial District. The subject properties are located within the C-3 zoning district, along Broadway Street between Cumberland Circle and the Cumberland Metra Station. The four subject properties contain a multi-unit, one-story building spanning all four lots, each with a separate PIN, with on-street parking in the front and a small accessory parking area at the rear as shown in the Plat of Survey for 69-73 Broadway Street, the Plat of Survey for 75-79 Broadway Street, and the following table. Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 5 Address PIN Zoning District 69 Broadway Street 09-07-418-019-0000 C-3, General Commercial 73 Broadway Street 09-07-418-018-0000 C-3, General Commercial 75 Broadway Street 09-07-418-017-0000 C-3, General Commercial 79 Broadway Street 09-07-418-016-0000 C-3, General Commercial The petitioner plans to completely remodel the interior of the existing building to locate a library/multi- purpose room, office areas, inaccessible Romanian heritage exhibit areas, conference room, kitchen area, restrooms, and storage areas based on the Floor Plan. The petitioner’s proposal does not include any changes to the outside of the building with the exception of new landscaping and signage at the front of the building. The dumpster for this suite will be stored inside the building except on trash collection days. The Romanian Heritage Center NFP will be open on Monday through Friday from 8 am to 7 pm as a research and tutoring center, as denoted in the Proposed Activities, Programs, and Parking Plan and the Proposed Schedule of Activities. A maximum of two to three employees will be on site at a given time hosting a maximum of eight to ten sessions throughout the week with up to twelve students per session. This location will host evening meetings for the Board of Directors and Leadership Advisory Council with up to 20 people and various events once or twice a month. The proposed events include fellowship groups, commemorative and cultural events, exhibitions, concerts, community meetings, conferences, and seminars that are coordinated with the nearby Romanian Baptist Church of Chicago located at 484 E. Northwest Highway. See the Project Narrative for more details. The following parking regulations apply to this request pursuant to Section 12-9-7 of the Des Plaines zoning Ordinance: • One parking space for 200-square feet of gross activity area for community centers, banquet halls, and membership organizations; and • One parking space for every 250-square feet of gross floor area for office areas. Thus, a total of 19 off-street parking spaces are required including one handicap accessible parking space. The Site Plan shows the proposed parking area at the rear of the building, which is designed to accommodate 13 parking spaces and one handicap parking on the subject property. The petitioner intends to utilize a portion of the parking lot at the nearby Romanian Baptist Church of Chicago located at 484 E. Northwest Highway to accommodate the remaining required spaces and for monthly or bimonthly events. The proposal also includes the utilization of a valet service to address parking concerns, especially during events where 50-100 patrons could be in attendance. Staff has added a condition that the petitioner must obtain, execute, and submit a collective parking agreement with the nearby Romanian Baptist Church to Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 6 staff to address all parking requirements pursuant to Sections 12-9-3 and 12-9-7 of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan The proposed project, including the proposed site improvements, addresses various goals and objectives of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan including the following aspects: • Future Land Use Plan: o This property is designated as Higher Density Urban Mix with Residential on the Future Land Use Plan. The Future Land Use Plan strives to create a well-balanced development area with a healthy mixture of commercial and residential uses. While the proposed use does not have a retail component, the petitioner will enhance the subject property by renovating the existing vacant building to make it an asset in the City of Des Plaines as a whole. o The subject property is located along Broadway Street near the defined Northwest Highway and Golf Road commercial corridors in Des Plaines surrounded by commercial and residential development. The request would transform the existing vacant building into a community center that could help bridge the gap between the residences and commercial development in this area and bring benefits to the community as a whole. While the aforementioned aspects represent a small portion of the goals and strategies of the Comprehensive Plan, there is a large emphasis on improving existing commercial developments throughout Des Plaines. Conditional Use Findings: Conditional Use requests are subject to the standards set forth in Section 12- 3-4(E) of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended. In reviewing these standards, staff has the following comments: A. The proposed Conditional Use is in fact a Conditional Use established within the specific Zoning district involved: Comment: The proposed community center is classified as a Commercially Zoned Assembly use. A Commercially Zoned Assembly use is a conditional use in the C-3 zoning district. Please see the petitioner’s responses to Standards for Conditional Uses. B. The proposed Conditional Use is in accordance with the objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan: Comment: The proposed community center repurposes an existing vacant building, which helps to achieve the goal of the Comprehensive Plan to foster and improve commercial developments. This proposal can also provide another asset to the community through the promotion of cultural diversity, which the Comprehensive Plan strives to preserve and foster. Please see the petitioner’s responses to Standards for Conditional Uses. C. The proposed Conditional Use is designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity: Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 7 Comment: The proposed community center will not redevelop the existing vacant building in a way that would not be harmonious and appropriate in appearance to surrounding development since the petitioner does not plan to alter the building’s exterior. Instead, the proposal includes additional landscaping in front of the building and parking area improvements at its rear to improve the aesthetic appearance of the property. Please see the petitioner’s responses to Standards for Conditional Uses. D. The proposed Conditional Use is not hazardous or disturbing to existing neighboring uses: Comment: The proposed community center will not be hazardous or disturbing to the existing neighborhood uses since all of its operations will take place inside the building. The petitioner has proposed off-street parking spaces at the rear of the building and will provide a collective parking agreement with the nearby Romanian Baptist Church to utilize a portion of their parking spaces to meet parking standards and handle any overflow parking during events. Please see the petitioner’s responses to Standards for Conditional Uses. E. The proposed Conditional Use is to be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer, and schools; or, agencies responsible for establishing the Conditional Use shall provide adequately any such services: Comment: The existing building is adequately served by essential public facilities and services through property access from a rear alley, on street parking in the front, and municipal services. Staff does not feel that the proposed community center will alter the existing service of this property. Please see the petitioner’s responses to Standards for Conditional Uses. F. The proposed Conditional Use does not create excessive additional requirements at public expense for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic well-being of the entire community: Comment: The existing building does not create excessive additional requirements at the public expense for public facilities and services. Staff does not feel that the proposed community center will create excessive additional requirements for public facilities and service, as the size and location of the existing building remain the same. Please see the petitioner’s responses to Standards for Conditional Uses. G. The proposed Conditional Use does not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke fumes, glare or odors: Comment: The proposed community center operations will not produce excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke fumes, glare, or odors since all operations will take place inside the building and consist of smaller groups of people. The anticipated events that will occur on occasion once or twice during the month will be scheduled and planned in coordination with the Romanian Baptist Church to ensure adequate parking is provided. Please see the petitioner’s responses to Standards for Conditional Uses. H. The proposed Conditional Use provides vehicular access to the property designed so that it does not create an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares: Comment: The proposed community center will have parking and property access concentrated at the rear of building with some parking in the front of the building. Staff feels that the proposed parking and access to the site is sufficient during normal operations, but has required a collective parking agreement Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 8 to be established and executed between the proposed Romanian Heritage Center NFP to accommodate events with larger vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The proposal includes the use of a valet to allow patrons to drop off their vehicle on site and have it parked in the existing Romanian Baptist Church parking lot during events. Please see the petitioner’s responses to Standards for Conditional Uses. I. The proposed Conditional Use does not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of natural, scenic, or historic features of major importance: Comment: The proposed community center will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of natural, scenic, or historic features since the property is already developed with the building and parking area. In addition, the subject building is not listed as a historic significant structure. Please see the petitioner’s responses to Standards for Conditional Uses. J. The proposed Conditional Use complies with all additional regulations in the Zoning Ordinance specific to the Conditional Use requested: Comment: The proposed community center will comply with all other regulations in the Zoning Ordinance. The conditional use for the Commercially Zoned Assembly use will be the only entitlement necessary for the proposed community center request as presented. Please see the petitioner’s responses to Standards for Conditional Uses. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit for a Commercially Zoned Assembly use at 69-79 Broadway Street based on a review of the information presented by the applicant and the findings made above, as specified in Section 12-3-4(E) (Standards for Conditional Uses) of the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: Under Section 12-3-4(D) (Procedure for Review and Decision for Conditional Uses) of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning and Zoning Board has the authority to recommend that the City Council approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny the above-mentioned conditional use for a Commercially Zoned Assembly use at 69-79 Broadway Street. The City Council has final authority on the proposal. A motion was made by Board Member Saletnik, seconded by Board Member Hofherr, to recommend approval of the Conditional Use under Section 12-7-3(K) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to locate a Commercially Zoned Assembly Use at 69-79 Broadway Street in the C-3 zoning district , with the key condition of executed parking agreements, as presented: AYES: Saletnik, Hofherr, Catalano, Fowler, Veremis, Szabo NAYES: None ABSTAIN: None ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 9 2. Address: 1418-1424 Webford Ave Case Number: 21-014-TPLAT-V Public Hearing The petitioner is requesting the following items: (i) a Tentative Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2-2 of the Subdivision Regulations to split an existing lot into two new lots of record; (ii) a Standard Variation under Section 12-7-2(J) of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow a lot width of 50-feet where a minimum lot width of 55-feet is required in the R-1 zoning district; and the approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary. PIN: 09-19-405-009-0000 Petitioner: Daniel Beniek, Skycrest Homes, 26303 W. Merton Road, Barrington, IL 60010 Owner: Daniel Beniek, Skycrest Homes, 26303 W. Merton Road, Barrington, IL 60010 Chairman Szabo swore in Daniel Beniek of Barrington, IL, representing the Petitioner, Skycrest Homes. Mr. Beniek provided an overview of the request, indicating that he was not asking for special treatment since several of the lots in the area do not meet the 55-foot width requirement. The Petitioner also stated that this request was initially presented on 2006, but never completed. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board had any questions. Member Hofherr inquired about the use of the property. The Petitioner stated that there are plans to build a single family home, one on each lot. Member Hofherr also inquired about the construction schedule, the Petitioner stated that construction would begin as soon as possible once the request is approved. Member Hofherr also inquired about the lot to the north of the subject properties, the Petitioner stated that he does not represent that property, but he believes that the current owner was not interested in selling the lot only. The Petitioner also stated that Skycrest Homes is highly regarded and has a great reputation. The homes that will be built will have an approximately $700K price point, which is on par for the area. The Petitioner also stated that the first home is roughly 2,700 square feet, with a main floor master suite. The homes will be large, but not at the maximum lot size. Member Veremis inquired about how many other homes Skycrest has built in Des Plaines, the Petitioner stated that this will be the first home to be built by Skycrest in Des Plaines. Chairman Szabo asked if were any questions or concerns form the public. Cassandra Faber of 1430 Wedgewood Ave, had a few questions. Ms. Faber had a concern about the driveway, requesting that the driveway was not shared or too narrow, especially with the concern of shared on-street parking. Mr. Beniek responded that potential buyer has requested a long driveway, approximately 40 feet, and will meet all the zoning requirements. Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 10 Ms. Faber also asked about the ComEd easement, Mr. Beniek stated that he was familiar with the easement and plans will meet the requirements. Chairman Szabo asked that the Staff Report be entered into record. Planner Stytz provided a summary of the following report: Issue: The petitioner is requesting: (i) Tentative Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2 of the Subdivision Regulations to subdivide the existing vacant lot into two lots of record; (ii) a Standard Variation under Section 12-7-2(J) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow for a lot width of 50- feet where a minimum of 55-feet is required; and (iii) the approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary. Analysis: Address: 1418-1424 Wedgewood Avenue Owner: Daniel Beniek, Skycrest Homes, 26303 W. Merton Road, Barrington, IL 60010 Petitioner: Daniel Beniek, Skycrest Homes, 26303 W. Merton Road, Barrington, IL 60010 Case Number: 21-014-SUB-V Real Estate Index Number: 09-19-405-009-0000 Ward: #3, Alderman Sean Oskerka Existing Zoning: R-1, Single Family District Existing Land Use: Vacant Lot Surrounding Zoning: North: R-1, Single Family Residential District South: R-1, Single Family Residential District East: R-1, Single Family Residential District West: R-1, Single Family Residential District Surrounding Land Use: North: Single Family Residence South: Single Family Residence East: Single Family Residence West: Single Family Residence Street Classification: Wedgewood Avenue is classified as a local street. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Single Family Residential. Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 11 Project Description: The petitioner, Daniel Beniek, is requesting a Tentative Plat of Subdivision and Standard Variation for lot width for the property located at 1418- 1424 Wedgewood Avenue. The subject property is 19,984-square feet (0.459 acres) in size and is comprised of one unimproved lot as shown in the Plat of Survey. A request to subdivide the subject property was approved in 2006 and addresses 1418 and 1424 Wedgewood were assigned. However, the Final Plat of Subdivision was never recorded. Thus, the petitioner is requesting a new Tentative Plat of Subdivision and a variation for lot width for this site. The petitioner is proposing to subdivide the existing vacant lot into two lots of record for future single- family home development. However, this proposal does not include the immediate development of the two proposed lots at this time. Both lots will be 10,000-square feet in size and measure 50-feet in width with a 30-foot front building setback. There are five-foot public utility easements proposed for the sides and ten-foot public utility easements proposed for the front and rear of each lot as shown in the Tentative Plat of Subdivision. There is also a variation request for lot width, as the proposed lots will not meet the minimum 55-foot lot width requirement for properties in the R-1 district pursuant to Section 12-7-2(J) of the Zoning Ordinance. Tentative Plat of Subdivision Report Name of Subdivision: Skycrest Subdivision Address: 1418-1424 Wedgewood Avenue Requests: Approval of Tentative Plat of Subdivision & Variation Total Acreage of Subdivision: 0.459 acres Lot Descriptions and Construction Plans: The petitioner’s Tentative Plat shows the subdivision of the existing lot into two 10,000-square foot, 50- foot wide lots with a 30-foot building setback. The proposed public utility easements are five feet on the sides, ten-feet on the front, and ten-feet on the rear of each property. Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 12 Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan There are several parts of the 2019 Des Plaines Comprehensive Plan that align with the proposed project. Those portions are as follows: • Under Overarching Principles: o The Comprehensive Plan seeks to promote a wider range of housing options and to encourage the reinvestment and preservation of established Des Plaines neighborhoods through the addition of new housing to fit diverse needs. The proposal seeks to reinvest in this vacant lot and provide additional housing options in this established neighborhood. • Under Land Use Plan: o A primary goal of the Comprehensive Plan is to preserve and enhance established single-family neighborhoods while also expanding newer housing options. The proposal matches the existing character of the neighborhood and provides modern housing options that are prevalent in the immediate vicinity. • Under Future Land Use Map: o The property is marked for Single-Family Residential land uses. These areas are designated for detached single-family residences to maintain and improve housing options for residents. The proposed use will transform an existing residential lot with one residence and provide an additional single-family housing option for the community as a whole. While the aforementioned bullet points are only a small portion of the Comprehensive Plan, there is a large emphasis on maintaining detached single-family zoning areas and promoting the expansion of these developments to increase housing options for residents. The petitioner is proposing to take a 0.459-acre vacant parcel for future development of two new residences for the community. Variation Findings: Variation requests are subject to the standards set forth in Section 12-3-6(H) of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended. 1. Hardship: No variation shall be granted pursuant to this subsection H unless the applicant shall establish that carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this title would create a particular hardship or a practical difficulty: Comment: Requiring the petitioner to adhere to the minimum 55-foot lot width requirement would limit development on this property to one residence and would not meet the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan to foster growth of residential areas and provide additional housing options. Furthermore, surrounding properties in the area have similar lot widths as the proposal. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 2. Unique Physical Condition: The subject lot is exceptional as compared to other lots subject to the same provision by reason of a unique physical condition, including presence of an existing use, structure, or sign, whether conforming or nonconforming; irregular or substandard shape Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 13 or size; exceptional topographical features; or other extraordinary physical conditions peculiar to and inherent in the subject lot that amount to more than a mere inconvenience to the owner and that relate to or arise out of the lot rather than the personal situation of the current owner of the lot: Comment: The existing property was platted with its current dimensions before the code was updated from a minimum lot width of 50-feet to 55-feet. Under the previous code, the property would have met the standards for a subdivision. However, the property is land-locked so it cannot be expanded to meet the requirements. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 3. Not Self-Created: The aforesaid unique physical condition is not the result of any action or inaction of the owner or its predecessors in title and existed at the time of the enactment of the provisions from which a variance is sought or was created by natural forces or was the result of governmental action, other than the adoption of this title: Comment: The unique physical condition is not the result of the current owner or previous owners as the property was platted long before the zoning code update to change the minimum lot width required from 50-feet to 55-feet. Additionally, there is not a way for the petitioner to widen the lot to the meet the 55-foot lot width requirement. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 4. Denied Substantial Rights: The carrying out of the strict letter of the provision from which a variance is sought would deprive the owner of the subject lot of substantial rights commonly enjoyed by owners of other lots subject to the same provision: Comment: Carrying out the strict letter of the code would prevent the petitioner from subdividing the existing property for use of two single family residences as many of the surrounding properties have done, which would deny them the substantial rights of neighboring property owners. A majority of the existing lots in this area are less than 55-feet wide and do not meet the current minimum 55-foot lot width requirement. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 5. Not Merely Special Privilege: The alleged hardship or difficulty is neither merely the inability of the owner or occupant to enjoy some special privilege or additional right not available to owners or occupants of other lots subject to the same provision, nor merely the inability of the owner to make more money from the use of the subject lot: Comment: The variation request would not provide the petitioner with any special privilege that is not already enjoyed by many of the surrounding property owners or allow him to make more money from the property. The petitioner does not plan to develop these lots at this time, but rather to subdivide them for future development. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 6. Title And Plan Purposes: The variation would not result in a use or development of the subject lot that would be not in harmony with the general and specific purposes for which this title and the provision from which a variation is sought were enacted or the general purpose and intent of the comprehensive plan: Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 14 Comment: The proposal would result in the future development of this site that would be in harmony with the specific purposes of Section 12-3-6 of the Zoning Ordinance or the Comprehensive Plan. This proposal sets to develop this vacant property into two separate lots to add residential options in Des Plaines. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 7. No Other Remedy: There is no means other than the requested variation by which the alleged hardship or difficulty can be avoided or remedied to a degree sufficient to permit a reasonable use of the subject lot. Comment: There is no way that the petitioner can alter the dimensions of the property to meet the 55-foot minimum lot width requirement, as the property is land-locked by developed properties. The variation is required for the petitioner to create two residential lots and expand housing options in Des Plaines. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 8. Minimum Required: The requested variation is the minimum measure of relief necessary to alleviate the alleged hardship or difficulty presented by the strict application of this title. Comment: The variation request is the minimum measure of relief necessary to allow the petitioner to create two residential lots out of the large existing vacant lot. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the request for a Tentative Plat of Subdivision pursuant to 13-2 of the Des Plaines Subdivision Ordinance and the Standard Variation request for lot width pursuant to Section 12-3-6 of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: Under Section 13-2-7 (Approval of Tentative Plat By Planning and Zoning Board) of the Subdivision Ordinance and Section 12-3-6 (Approval of Variations), the Planning and Zoning Board has the authority to approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny the above-mentioned Tentative Plat of Subdivision and Standard Variation request for the property at 1418-1424 Wedgewood Avenue. A motion was made by Board Member Catalano, seconded by Board Member Fowler, (i) a Tentative Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2-2 of the Subdivision Regulations to split an existing lot into two new lots of record; (ii) a Standard Variation under Section 12-7-2(J) of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow a lot width of 50-feet where a minimum lot width of 55-feet is required in the R- 1 zoning district; and the approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary , as presented. AYES: Catalano, Fowler, Hofherr, Saletnik, Veremis, Szabo NAYES: None ABSTAIN: None ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 15 3. Addresses: 1316 Webford Ave Case Number: 21-016-V Public Hearing The petitioner is requesting a Major Variation under Section 12-8-1(C) of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow for the installation of an 897-square foot detached garage where the maximum detached garage area is 720-square feet in the R-1 zoning district, and the approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary. PIN: 09-17-306-028-0000 Petitioner: Chris Colldock, 1316 Webford Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018 Owner: Chris Colldock, 1316 Webford Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018 Chairman Szabo swore in Chris Colldock and Michelle Daniel, property owners and Petitioners for the property located at 1316 Webford, Des Plaines. The Petitioners provided an overview of the request, stating that they are requesting a larger garage to provide additional privacy, a noise barrier and to square off the garage to get rid of the L-shape. The Petitioners stated that this is their third year in the house and fell in love with the character of the home. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board had any questions. Member Saletnik asked in the option the Petitioners are requesting is “Option B”, the box shaped garage. The Petitioners stated that Option B is the option they are requesting; the Petitioner stated the front elevation will match the character of the home, and went over the characters that will be removed. Further, Member Saletnik, inquired why the Petitioners presented architectural plans of a fully conforming garage and proposing a different garage. The Petitioners stated that the new garage would have some of the same elements and provide additional storage and privacy. The Petitioners also stated that the garage will only be used as storage and to enhance privacy, and not be used as a work shop. Member Fowler commended the Petitioners on the renovation of the home and adding value to the property. Member Veremis stated that the driveway will also need to be paved with a hard surface (currently gravel). The driveway resurfacing is currently a condition of the variance request. Chairman Szabo asked if were any questions or concerns form the public. There were no questions from the public. Chairman Szabo asked that the Staff Report be entered into record. Planner Stytz provided a summary of the following report: Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 16 Issue: The petitioner is requesting a Major Variation under Section 12-8-1(C) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow the construction of a 897-square foot detached garage at 1316 Webford Avenue where the maximum area permitted for a detached garage in a residential zoning district is 720-square feet. Analysis: Address: 1316 Webford Avenue Owner: Chris Colldock, 1316 Webford Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Petitioner: Chris Colldock, 1316 Webford Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Case Number: 21-016-V PIN: 09-17-306-028-0000 Ward: #3, Alderman Sean Oskerka Existing Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residential District Existing Land Use: Single Family Residence Surrounding Zoning: North: C-3, General Commercial District South: R-3, Townhouse Residential District East: R-3, Townhouse Residential District West: R-3, Townhouse Residential District Surrounding Land Use: North: Walgreens (Commercial) South: Single Family Residences East: Single Family Residences West: Single Family Residences Street Classification: Webford Avenue is classified as a local street. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Residential. Project Description: The petitioner, Chris Colldock, is requesting a major variation to allow for an 879- square foot detached garage in the R-1, Single Family Residential District at 1316 Webford Avenue where a maximum area for a detached garage in a residential zoning district is 720-square feet. The subject property is located along Webford Avenue near Downtown Des Plaines and backs up to the Metra railroad. The property is 13,650-square feet (0.31 acres) in size and currently consists of a one-story residence, patio area, detached garage, and driveway area as shown on the Plat of Survey. The existing one-car detached garage is approximately 337-square feet in size, is located 3.67-feet from the east property line, and is setback approximately 33.37-feet from the north property line. Pursuant to Section 12-8-1(C), the maximum area for a detached garage in a residential zoning district is 720-square foot. The petitioner is proposing to construct a one-story, 897-square foot detached garage with an 18-foot wide garage door. The proposed garage will be setback 5’-6” off the east property line and 19’-2” off the north property line to meet the minimum five-foot setback requirement for detached garages as shown in the Site Plan. The petitioner is requesting the over-sized detached garage to accommodate additional vehicles, yard equipment, seasonal furniture, and personal workbench for residence maintenance on the Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 17 property in an enclosed structure, which is not possible in the existing one-car garage. The proposal would replace the existing detached garage with the new 879-square foot detached garage setback further from the property lines but without any changes to access as shown in the Site Plan. Please note that while the driveway surface on the Site Plan does not reflect the design, setback, and dimensions that the petitioner proposes to install on the property, the petitioner intends to conform with all required driveway regulations. The petitioner has provided garage plans to illustrate the overall design, layout, and elevations of the proposed garage as shown in the Garage Plans. It is important to note that the garage plans depicted in the architectural drawings do not reflect the exact shape and dimensions of the current detached garage proposed, but rather are included for illustrative purposes for what the proposed rectangular detached garage will look like when completed. The existing gravel driveway leading from the front property line to the existing detached garage does not comply with current code. If approval is recommended for this request, staff is adding a condition that the gravel driveway is improved with a dust-free hard surface. Pursuant to Section 12-8-1(C)(5) of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, the maximum area of a detached garage shall be seven hundred twenty (720) square feet or less. The petitioner’s request to allow for a detached garage that exceeds the 720-square foot maximum for accessory structures in Des Plaines constitutes the need for a major variation to Section 12-8-1(C) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance. Variation Findings: Variation requests are subject to the standards set forth in Section 12-3-6(H) of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended. 1. Hardship: No variation shall be granted pursuant to this subsection H unless the applicant shall establish that carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this title would create a particular hardship or a practical difficulty: Comment: Staff finds that there is no hardship or practical difficulty preventing the petitioner from complying with the 720-square foot maximum area allowance for detached garages in residential districts as a 720-square foot space does allow for the storage of multiple vehicles, equipment, and workbench area depending on design. Additionally, the zoning code allows for two accessory structures for each property so a shed could be added to accommodate additional storage as needed. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 2. Unique Physical Condition: The subject lot is exceptional as compared to other lots subject to the same provision by reason of a unique physical condition, including presence of an existing use, structure, or sign, whether conforming or nonconforming; irregular or substandard shape or size; exceptional topographical features; or other extraordinary physical conditions peculiar to and inherent in the subject lot that amount to more than a mere inconvenience to the owner and that relate to or arise out of the lot rather than the personal situation of the current owner of the lot: Comment: Staff finds that there is no unique physical condition on the subject property than differs from any other property along this street as there are several other properties backing up to the Metra train tracks that share the same conditions. While detached garages and other accessory structures inevitably may provide some semblance of privacy and noise reduction, this is not their intended purpose. Additionally, there is ample room to install landscaping as a natural Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 18 barrier to address the noise and privacy concerns posed by the petitioner. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 3. Not Self-Created: The aforesaid unique physical condition is not the result of any action or inaction of the owner or its predecessors in title and existed at the time of the enactment of the provisions from which a variance is sought or was created by natural forces or was the result of governmental action, other than the adoption of this title: Comment: While the subject property’s location, size, and close proximity to the Metra train tracks may not be a result of any action or inaction of the property owner, the subject property was purchased with the understanding of these attributes and conditions. As such, staff does not find these physical conditions of the subject property warrant the approval of a variation for an over-sized garage, whether for privacy, noise dampening, or additional storage, since other properties along this street deal with similar circumstances. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 4. Denied Substantial Rights: The carrying out of the strict letter of the provision from which a variance is sought would deprive the owner of the subject lot of substantial rights commonly enjoyed by owners of other lots subject to the same provision: Comment: Staff finds that carrying out the strict letter of this code to permit a 720-squae foot detached garage would not deprive the existing property owner of substantial rights enjoyed by other owners of similarly zoned lots since this regulation in enforced for all residentially-zoned properties regardless of size, location, and composition of the property. All new detached garages are held to the same standards under Section 12-8-1(C) of the Zoning Ordinance so enforcing the maximum detached garage area would not prevent the property owner from any substantial rights enjoyed by other single family residential properties. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 5. Not Merely Special Privilege: The alleged hardship or difficulty is neither merely the inability of the owner or occupant to enjoy some special privilege or additional right not available to owners or occupants of other lots subject to the same provision, nor merely the inability of the owner to make more money from the use of the subject lot: Comment: Staff finds that the granting of this variation for density would, in fact, provide a special privilege for the property owner not available to other single family residential properties as it would give the petitioner preferential treatment over owners of other single family residences. Additionally, it could create a precedence for additional over-sized garage requests for single family residential properties that do not meet the standards for variations and may not have the available space or justifiable need for an over-sized detached garage. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 6. Title And Plan Purposes: The variation would not result in a use or development of the subject lot that would be not in harmony with the general and specific purposes for which this title and the provision from which a variation is sought were enacted or the general purpose and intent of the comprehensive plan: Comment: Staff finds that the proposed over-sized detached garage would not be harmonious with the surrounding single family residential development in this area or for other single family Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 19 zoned properties in Des Plaines and does not meet the standards for variation in Section 12-3-6 of the Zoning Ordinance. Additionally, the zoning code requires a minimum of two off-street parking spaces, which a 720-square foot garage can meet and exceed depending on design. The request for the oversized detached garage would not support the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan as this does not benefit other residents or the City of Des Plaines as a whole. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 7. No Other Remedy: There is no means other than the requested variation by which the alleged hardship or difficulty can be avoided or remedied to a degree sufficient to permit a reasonable use of the subject lot. Comment: Staff finds that there are ways to avoid the requested variation for an oversized garage. Aside from the fact that the allowable 720-sqare foot size for a detached garage can accommodate multiple vehicles, equipment storage, and work area depending on its design, the zoning code allows up to two accessory structures for each property up to 150-square feet in size. Thus, a shed could be added on the property as a second accessory structure to accommodate additional storage as needed totaling 870-square feet, which is near the area that the petitioner is requesting for the detached garage. An additional alternative if more space is needed is constructing an addition on the existing residence, in conformance with all applicable codes, since there is ample room in the rear yard. In essence, there are other available options aside from the variation to remedy the petitioner’s posed concerns. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 8. Minimum Required: The requested variation is the minimum measure of relief necessary to alleviate the alleged hardship or difficulty presented by the strict application of this title. Comment: Staff finds that the approval of this variation request for an oversized garage is not the minimum measure if relief to address the petitioner’s concerns, but rather the installation of mature landscaping at the rear of the property to reduce noise, add privacy, and allow for outdoor space. In addition to that, the zoning ordinance allows properties that abut a railroad right-of-way to install an eight-foot tall fence along the side that abuts the alley, which could assist in the privacy and noise reduction measures. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the request to allow the construction of an 879-square foot detached garage in the R-1 zoning district at 1316 Webford Avenue based on review of the information presented by the applicant and the standards and conditions met by Section 12-3-6(H) (Findings of Fact for Variations) as outlined within the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended. If the request is recommended for approval, staff recommends adding a condition that the existing gravel driveway shall be improved with a dust-free hard surface in conformance with all applicable City of Des Plaines codes within 60 days of City Council approval. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: Under Section 12-3-6(F) of the Zoning Ordinance (Major Variations), the Planning and Zoning Board has the authority to recommend that the City Council approve, approve subject to conditions, or disapprove the above-mentioned variance for detached garage area within the R-1 Zoning District at 1316 Webford Avenue. The City Council has the final authority on the proposal. Case 21-009-CU 69-79 Broadway St Conditional Use Case 21-014-TPLAT-V 1418-1424 Wedgewood Ave Tentative Plat of Sub/Standard Var Case 21-016-V 1316 Webford Ave Major Variation June 8, 2021 Page 20 A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr, seconded by Board Member Catalano, to approve a Major Variation under Section 12-8-1(C) of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow for the installation of an 897-square foot detached garage where the maximum detached garage area is 720-square feet in the R-1 zoning district, and the approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary, with the additional condition that revised plans be presented to City Council depicting the new garage characteristics. AYES: Hofherr, Catalano, Fowler, Veremis, Szabo NAYES: Saletnik ABSTAIN: None ***MOTION CARRIES *** ADJOURNMENT The next scheduled Planning & Zoning Board meeting is Tuesday, June 22, 2021. Chairman Szabo adjourned the meeting by voice vote at 8:13 p.m. Sincerely, Wendy Bednarz, Recording Secretary cc: City Officials, Aldermen, Zoning Board of Appeals, Petitioners 8 COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1420 Miner Street Des Plaines, IL 60016 P: 847.391.5380 desplaines.org Date: June 9, 2021 To: Planning and Zoning Board From: Jonathan Stytz, Planner Cc: Michael McMahon, Community & Economic Development Director Subject: Consideration of Final Plat of Subdivision at 10 S. River Road, Case 21-025-FPLAT (1st Ward) Issue: The petitioner is requesting a Final Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2 of the Des Plaines Subdivision Regulations to resubdivide and absorb a portion of 1415 Redeker Road located at 09-17-200- 044-0000 in the M-1 zoning district at 10 S. River Road. Analysis: Address: 10 S. River Road Owner: Carol A. Damiano Trust & Peter Damiano Trust, 10 S. River Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Petitioner: Peter Damiano, Damiano Service Center & Damiano Properties, LLC, 10 S. River Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Case Number: 21-025-FPLAT Real Estate Index Number: 09-17-200-022-0000; -044 Ward: #1, Alderman Mark A. Lysakowski Existing Zoning: M-1, Limited Manufacturing District Existing Land Use: Automotive Repair Shop Surrounding Zoning: North: C-3, General Commercial District South: C-3, General Commercial District MEMORANDUM Page 1 of 14 East: R-1, Single Family Residential District West: M-1, Limited Manufacturing District Surrounding Land Use: North: Commercial (Retail Store) South: Commercial (Retail Store) East: Cook County Forest Preserve West: Manufacturing (Multi-tenant industrial building) Street Classification: River Road is classified as an arterial road and Redeker Road is classified as a local street. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Commercial Industrial Urban Mix. Project Description: The petitioner, Peter Damiano, is requesting a Final Plat of Subdivision resubdivide and absorb a portion of 1415 Redeker Road located at 09-17-200- 044-0000 in the M-1 zoning district at 10 S. River Road. The subject property is 10,862-square feet (0.249 acres) in size and is comprised of one lot, which is improved with a single building and parking area as shown in the Plat of Survey (Attachment 4). The building on the subject property contains a 100-square foot office area, 3,906-square foot shop/storage area, and a separate 280-square foot mechanical area with restrooms. The petitioner also currently holds a Land Lease with ComEd to park within the ComEd right-of-way located south of the properties at 24 River Road and 1415 Redeker Road. The petitioner is proposing to resubdivide and absorb a portion of 1415 Redeker Road (Parcel 09-17-200-044-0000) located west of the subject property and behind the properties located at 20 River Road and 24 River Road shown as Lot 2 on the Final Plat of Subdivision (Attachment 5). Lot 2 is 12,684-square feet (0.291-acres) in size and is comprised of one lot, which is improved with a portion of the multi-tenant manufacturing building located on 1415 Redeker Road and a gravel drive aisle/parking area. The petitioner proposes to improve Lot 2 with a paved, dust-free hard surface and utilize it to access the leased parking area within the ComEd right-of-way as shown in the Select Final Engineering Plans (Attachment 6). Given the proposed acquisition of Lot 2 by the petitioner, this portion of the building, denoted as the East Annex on the Existing Floor Plan (Attachment 7), will be demolished as part of this request within a year of City Council approval. The petitioner recently submitted an application for a Tentative Plat of Subdivision and Major Variations for building setbacks and lot area, which was approved by Ordinance Z-30-21. Final Plat of Subdivision Report Name of Subdivision: Damiano-Merchandise Resubdivision Address: 10 S. River Road Requests: Approval of Final Plat of Subdivision Page 2 of 14 Total Acreage of Subdivision: 0.541 acres Lot Descriptions and Construction Plans: The petitioner’s Final Plat of Subdivision shows the resubdivision and transfer of ownership of the Lot 2 parcel to the subject property. Lot 2 will have an area of 10,807-square feet and Lot 3 (subject property) will have an area of 8,520- square feet. The Plat shows the existing 8-foot non-exclusive easement on Lot 2, a new 24-foot ingress and egress easement on Lot 2 for use of Lots 1 and 3, and a new parking easement on Lot 2 for use of Lot 3. Recommendation: Staff is not making a recommendation of the request for a Final Plat of Subdivision pursuant to 13-2 of the Des Plaines Subdivision Ordinance. If approval of this request is sought, staff recommends adding the following conditions. Conditions of Approval: 1. The Lot 2 property identified on the Final Plat of Subdivision to be acquired by the owner of 10 S. River Road shall be only utilized for the ingress/egress to the 10 S. River Road property and the parking of vehicles to be serviced. No equipment, materials, or other items shall be stored in this location. 2. All existing structures located in Lot 2 property identified on the Final Plat of Subdivision shall be demolished and replaced with a dust-free hard surface within a year of City Council approval. 3. The Lot 2 property identified on the Final Plat of Subdivision shall be demolished and replaced with a dust-free hard surface within a year of City Council approval. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: Under Section 13-2-5 (Approval of Final Plat By Planning and Zoning Board) of the Subdivision Ordinance, the Planning and Zoning Board has the authority to recommend approval, approval subject to conditions, or denial the above-mentioned Final Plat of Subdivision request for the property at 10 S. River Road. Attachments: Attachment 1: Project Narrative Attachment 2: Location Map Attachment 3: Plat of Survey Attachment 4: Existing Floor Plan Attachment 5: Final Plat of Subdivision Attachment 6: Select Final Engineering Plans Attachment 7: Site and Context Photos Page 3 of 14 City of Des Plaines FINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 10 S. RIVER ROAD/EAST ANNEX DAMIANO FPS Application 10 SOUTH RIVER – EAST ANNEX PROJECT NARRATIVE Damiano Service Center (“Damiano”) is an auto and truck service & repair business with hours of operations from 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. At any given time during business hours there are 5 employees on the premises; at most 6 customers on any given day are anticipated; most days only 1 customer. With Damiano’s acquisition of the East Annex property from 1415 Redeker LLC, 10 South River Road will utilize the East Annex for ingress & egress access to the 10 S. River Road property, for the parking of vehicles being serviced, and for storage. Upon the City of Des Plaines’ final approval of the Final Plat of Subdivision, Damiano will close on the acquisition of the East Annex from 1415 Redeker LLC—before closing Damiano will (a) remove/block off all egress from the 1415 Redeker Building into the East Annex structure, will not occupy the East Annex structure for any reason, (b) terminate all utilities (gas, electric, plumbing, etc.) for the East Annex structure—after closing (c) will demolish the structure within one (1) year of the City of Des Plaines’ approval of the Final Plat of Subdivision; all the while Damiano will obtain all necessary permits to accomplish (a), (b) and (c). Upon the demolition completion Damiano will pave the gravel area with a dust-free hard surface. Attachment 1 Page 4 of 14 0 50 100 ft Disclaimer: The GIS Consortium and MGP Inc. are not liable for any use, misuse, modification or disclosure of any map provided under applicable law. This map is for general information purposes only. Although the information is believed to be generally accurate, errors may exist and the user should independently confirm for accuracy. The map does not constitute a regulatory determination and is not a base for engineering design. A Registered Land Surveyor should be consulted to determine precise location boundaries on the ground. 10 S. River Road Notes Attachment 2 Page 5 of 14 Attachment 3 Page 6 of 14 V T I W 0H F K D Q L F D O V 6 W D L U V V T I W 6K R S 6 W R U D J H VTIW2IILFH At t a c h m e n t 4 Page 7 of 14 V T I W %D W K U R R P V 0H F K V T I W 2I I L F H V V T I W : D U H U K R X V H V T I W $ Q Q H [ : D U H K R X V H F R X Q W H G Z L W K 6 5 L Y H U % O G J At t a c h m e n t 4 Page 8 of 14 At t a c h m e n t 5 Page 9 of 14 SI T E I M P R O V E M E N T S A T LO T 2 I N D A M I A N O - M E R C H A N D I S E R E S U B D I V I S I O N CI T Y O F D E S P L A I N E S , I L L I N O I S C1 C2 C3 C4 Sheet 1 of 2 Sheet 2 of 2COVER SHEET EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPOSED SITE PLAN GRADING PLAN DES PLAINES STANDARD DETAILS DES PLAINES STANDARD DETAILS LO C A T I O N M A P DES PLAINES BENCHMARK #67 CHISELED SQUARE ON THE SOUTH FACE OF THE CONCRETE SIGNAL BASE WITHOUT A MAST ARM LOCATED AT THE N.W. CORNER OF GOLF (IL 58)AND RIVER ROADS (US 45)ELEVATION=640.71 At t a c h m e n t 6 Page 10 of 14 At t a c h m e n t 6 Page 11 of 14 AD A m a r k i n g s o n bo t h s i d e s At t a c h m e n t 6 Page 12 of 14 At t a c h m e n t 6 Page 13 of 14 10 S. River Road – Public Notice 10 S. River Road Avenue – Looking North at Proposed Lot 2 10 S. River Road Avenue – Looking South at Front of Site 10 S. River Road Avenue – Looking South at Proposed Lot 2 A t t a c h m e n t 7 P a g e 1 4 o f 1 4 8 COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1420 Miner Street Des Plaines, IL 60016 P: 847.391.5380 desplaines.org Date: June 9, 2021 To: Planning and Zoning Board From: Jonathan Stytz, Planner Cc: Michael McMahon, Community and Economic Development Director Subject: Consideration of Tentative Plat of Subdivision and Standard Variation at 1041 North Avenue, Case 21-017-TSUB-V (3rd Ward) Issue: The petitioner is requesting: (i) a Tentative Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2 of the Subdivision Regulations to subdivide the existing lot into two lots of record; (ii) a Standard Variation under Section 12-7- 2(J) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow a lot width of 50-feet where the minimum lot width permitted in the R-1 zoning district for an interior lot is 55-feet; and (iii) the approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary. Analysis: Address: 1041 North Avenue Owner: Helen Roman, 5734 W. Warwick Avenue, Chicago, IL 60634 Petitioner: Helen Roman, 5734 W. Warwick Avenue, Chicago, IL 60634 Case Number: 21-017-TSUB-V Real Estate Index Number: 09-17-302-003-0000 Ward: #3, Alderman Sean Oskerka Existing Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residential District Existing Land Use: Vacant Lot Surrounding Zoning: North: M-2, General Manufacturing District South: R-1, Single Family Residential District MEMORANDUM Page 1 of 18 East: R-1, Single Family Residential District West: R-1, Single Family Residential District Surrounding Land Use: North: Manufacturing (Multi-tenant industrial building) South: Single Family Residences East: Single Family Residences West: Single Family Residences Street Classification: North Avenue is classified as a local street. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Single Family Residential. Project Description: The petitioner, Helen Roman, is requesting a Tentative Plat of Subdivision and Standard Variations for lot width for the property located at 1041 North Avenue. The subject property is 14,161-square feet (0.325 acres) in size and is comprised of one lot, which was improved with a single-family residence, detached garage with driveway, sidewalk, and shed as shown in the Plat of Survey (Attachment 4). However, the single-family residence has since been demolished as noted in the Existing Conditions Diagram (Attachment 5). The petitioner is proposing to subdivide the existing lot into two lots of record measuring 50-feet wide and 7,070.50-square feet in area. The existing detached garage, shed, and other pavement on the subject property will be removed as part of this request. There is a ten-foot public utility easement proposed for the rear of each lot as shown in the Tentative Plat of Subdivision (Attachment 6). However, staff will require minimum five-foot public utility easements on the common line in between the proposed lots as part of the Final Plat of Subdivision submittal. There is a variation request for lot width, as the proposed lots will not meet the minimum 55-foot lot width requirement for interior lots in the R-1 district pursuant to Section 12-7-2(J) of the Zoning Ordinance. Tentative Plat of Subdivision Report Name of Subdivision: Helen Roman Subdivision Address: 1041 North Avenue Requests: Approval of Tentative Plat of Subdivision & Variation Total Acreage of Subdivision: 0.325 acres Lot Descriptions and Construction Plans: The petitioner’s Tentative Plat shows the subdivision of the existing lot into two 7,070.50-square foot, 50-foot wide lots. A ten-foot public utility easement is proposed for the rear of each property. Note that the Preliminary Engineering Plans (Attachment 7) are conceptual and have not been approved by staff. All engineering comments will be addressed in the Final Engineering Plans at time of the Final Plat of Subdivision. Page 2 of 18 Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan There are several parts of the 2019 Des Plaines Comprehensive Plan that align with the proposed project. Those portions are as follows: • Under Overarching Principles: o The Comprehensive Plan seeks to promote a wider range of housing options and to encourage the reinvestment and preservation of established Des Plaines neighborhoods through the addition of new housing to fit diverse needs. The proposal seeks to reinvest in this vacant lot and provide additional housing options in this established neighborhood. • Under Land Use Plan: o A primary goal of the Comprehensive Plan is to preserve and enhance established single- family neighborhoods while also expanding newer housing options. The proposal matches the existing character of the neighborhood and provides modern housing options that are prevalent in the immediate vicinity. • Under Future Land Use Map: o The property is marked for Single-Family Residential land uses. These areas are designated for detached single-family residences to maintain and improve housing options for residents. The proposed use will transform an existing residential lot and provide an additional single- family housing option for the community as a whole. While the aforementioned bullet points are only a small portion of the Comprehensive Plan, there is a large emphasis on maintaining detached single-family zoning areas and promoting the expansion of these developments to increase housing options for residents. The petitioner is proposing to take a 0.325-acre parcel for future development of two new residences for the community. Variation Findings: Variation requests are subject to the standards set forth in Section 12-3-6(H) of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended. 1. Hardship: No variation shall be granted pursuant to this subsection H unless the applicant shall establish that carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this title would create a particular hardship or a practical difficulty: Comment: Requiring the petitioner to adhere to the minimum 55-foot lot width requirement would limit development on this property to one residence and would not meet the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan to foster growth of residential areas and provide additional housing options. Furthermore, some of the surrounding properties in the area have similar lot widths as the proposal. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 2. Unique Physical Condition: The subject lot is exceptional as compared to other lots subject to the same provision by reason of a unique physical condition, including presence of an existing use, structure, or sign, whether conforming or nonconforming; irregular or substandard shape or size; exceptional topographical features; or other extraordinary physical conditions peculiar to and inherent in the subject lot that amount to more than a mere inconvenience to the owner and that relate to or arise out of the lot rather than the personal situation of the current owner of the lot: Comment: The existing property was platted with its current dimensions before the code was updated from a minimum lot width of 50-feet to 55-feet. Under the previous code, the property would have met the standards for a subdivision. However, the property is land-locked so it cannot be expanded to meet the requirements. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. Page 3 of 18 3. Not Self-Created: The aforesaid unique physical condition is not the result of any action or inaction of the owner or its predecessors in title and existed at the time of the enactment of the provisions from which a variance is sought or was created by natural forces or was the result of governmental action, other than the adoption of this title: Comment: The unique physical condition is not the result of the current owner or previous owners as the property was platted long before the zoning code update to change the minimum lot width required from 50-feet to 55-feet. Additionally, there is not a way for the petitioner to widen the lot to the meet the 55-foot lot width requirement. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 4. Denied Substantial Rights: The carrying out of the strict letter of the provision from which a variance is sought would deprive the owner of the subject lot of substantial rights commonly enjoyed by owners of other lots subject to the same provision: Comment: Carrying out the strict letter of the code would prevent the petitioner from subdividing the existing property for use of two single family residences as many of the surrounding properties have done, which would deny them the substantial rights of neighboring property owners. A majority of the existing lots in this area are less than 55-feet wide and do not meet the current minimum 55-foot lot width requirement. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 5. Not Merely Special Privilege: The alleged hardship or difficulty is neither merely the inability of the owner or occupant to enjoy some special privilege or additional right not available to owners or occupants of other lots subject to the same provision, nor merely the inability of the owner to make more money from the use of the subject lot: Comment: The variation request would not provide the petitioner with any special privilege that is not already enjoyed by many of the surrounding property owners or allow him to make more money from the property. The petitioner does not plan to develop these lots at this time, but rather to subdivide them for future development. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 6. Title And Plan Purposes: The variation would not result in a use or development of the subject lot that would be not in harmony with the general and specific purposes for which this title and the provision from which a variation is sought were enacted or the general purpose and intent of the comprehensive plan: Comment: The proposal would result in the future development of this site that would be in harmony with the specific purposes of Section 12-3-6 of the Zoning Ordinance or the Comprehensive Plan. This proposal sets to develop this vacant property into two separate lots to add residential options in Des Plaines. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 7. No Other Remedy: There is no means other than the requested variation by which the alleged hardship or difficulty can be avoided or remedied to a degree sufficient to permit a reasonable use of the subject lot. Comment: There is no way that the petitioner can alter the dimensions of the property to meet the 55- foot minimum lot width requirement, as the property is land-locked by developed properties. The variation is required for the petitioner to create two residential lots and expand housing options in Des Plaines. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. 8. Minimum Required: The requested variation is the minimum measure of relief necessary to alleviate the alleged hardship or difficulty presented by the strict application of this title. Comment: The variation request is the minimum measure of relief necessary to allow the petitioner to create two residential lots out of the large existing vacant lot. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations. Page 4 of 18 Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the request for a Tentative Plat of Subdivision pursuant to 13-2 of the Des Plaines Subdivision Ordinance and the Standard Variation request for lot width pursuant to Section 12-3-6 of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: Under Section 13-2-7 (Approval of Tentative Plat By Planning and Zoning Board) of the Subdivision Ordinance and Section 12-3-6 (Approval of Variations), the Planning and Zoning Board has the authority to approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny the above-mentioned Tentative Plat of Subdivision and Standard Variation request for the property at 1041 North Avenue. Attachments: Attachment 1: Project Narrative Attachment 2: Responses to Standards Attachment 3: Location Map Attachment 4: Plat of Survey Attachment 5: Existing Conditions Attachment 6: Tentative Plat of Subdivision Attachment 7: Preliminary Engineering Plans Attachment 8: Site and Context Photos Page 5 of 18 Civil Engineers Specializing In Drainage & Grading Plans 1018 Busse Highway • Park Ridge, Illinois 60068 • Phone (847) 823-3300 • Fax (847) 823-3303 B C I May 6, 2021 May 5, 2021 City of Des Plaines Community and Economic Development Department RE: Project Narrative Proposed 2-Lot Subdivision 1041 North Avenue Des Plaines, IL 60016 To Whom It May Concern, The owner of this property wishes to subdivide the existing lot into two new, separate lots using Des Plaines’ two-step process for subdivision development. Both parcels would be vacant and available for development of a single family residence. A variation will be requested as well due to the proposed lot widths (50’ each) being below the minimum lot width (55’) for the R-1 zoning district as outlined in the City’s zoning code. Multiple existing properties on the block are below the minimum lot width as well. The vacant lots resulting from the subdivision will provide the opportunity for a builder or user to purchase the vacant lots and construct new homes. This would add quality new construction to the neighborhood, evincing confidence in the area and supporting investment in existing homes. There is no immediate plan to develop the vacant lots. The site plan included in the submittal is not specific to particular proposed structures, but the structures shown were sized to be about the maximum building size for the lots so that the subdivision engineering design would be for the maximum. When the lots are proposed for development, the site plan and landscaping proposed in conjunction with the construction of the single family homes would have to comply with the City of Des Plaines ordinances. The owner, Helen Roman, will also be the petitioner. Attached with this letter you will find copies of the preliminary engineering drawings and tentative plat of subdivision for the project. BONO CONSULTING, INC. Attachment 1 Page 6 of 18 Civil Engineers Specializing In Drainage & Grading Plans 1018 Busse Highway • Park Ridge, IL 60068 • Phone (847) 823-3300 • Fax (847) 823-3303 Page 2 If you have any questions regarding the drawings, please contact me at (847) 823-3300 or whepburn@bonoconsulting.com. Sincerely, Will Hepburn, E.I.T. Engineer II Attachment 1 Page 7 of 18 STANDARDS FOR VARIATIONS In order to understand your reasons for requesting a variation, please answer the following items completely and thoroughly (two to three sentences each). Variation applicants must demonstrate that special circumstances or unusual conditions prevent them from following the specific regulations of their zoning district. Applicants must prove that the zoning regulations, in combination with the uncommon conditions of the property, prevents them from making any reasonable use of the land. Keep in mind that no variation may be granted that would adversely affect surrounding properties or the general neighborhood. 1.Hardship: No variation shall be granted pursuant to this subsection H unless the applicant shall establish that carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this title would create a particular hardship or a practical difficulty. 2.Unique Physical Condition: The subject lot is exceptional as compared to other lots subject to the same provision by reason of a unique physical condition, including presence of an existing use, structure, or sign, whether conforming or nonconforming; irregular or substandard shape or size; exceptional topographical features; or other extraordinary physical conditions peculiar to and inherent in the subject lot that amount to more than a mere inconvenience to the owner and that relate to or arise out of the lot rather than the personal situation of the current owner of the lot. 3.Not Self-Created: The aforesaid unique physical condition is not the result of any action or inaction of the owner or its predecessors in title and existed at the time of the enactment of the provisions from which a variance is sought or was created by natural forces or was the result of governmental action, other than the adoption of this title. 4.Denied Substantial Rights: The carrying out of the strict letter of the provision from which a variance is sought would deprive the owner of the subject lot of substantial rights commonly enjoyed by owners of other lots subject to the same provision. 1420 Miner Street Des Plaines, IL 60016 P: 847.391.5306 desplaines.org Attachment 2 Page 8 of 18 5. Not Merely Special Privilege: The alleged hardship or difficulty is neither merely the inability of the owner or occupant to enjoy some special privilege or additional right not available to owners or occupants of other lots subject to the same provision, nor merely the inability of the owner to make more money from the use of the subject lot. 6. Title And Plan Purposes: The variation would not result in a use or development of the subject lot that would be not in harmony with the general and specific purposes for which this title and the provision from which a variation is sought were enacted or the general purpose and intent of the comprehensive plan. 7. No Other Remedy: There is no means other than the requested variation by which the alleged hardship or difficulty can be avoided or remedied to a degree sufficient to permit a reasonable use of the subject lot. 8. Minimum Required: The requested variation is the minimum measure of relief necessary to alleviate the alleged hardship or difficulty presented by the strict application of this title. Attachment 2 Page 9 of 18 0 150 300 ft Disclaimer: The GIS Consortium and MGP Inc. are not liable for any use, misuse, modification or disclosure of any map provided under applicable law. This map is for general information purposes only. Although the information is believed to be generally accurate, errors may exist and the user should independently confirm for accuracy. The map does not constitute a regulatory determination and is not a base for engineering design. A Registered Land Surveyor should be consulted to determine precise location boundaries on the ground. Print Date: 6/16/2021 1041 North Avenue Notes Attachment 3 Page 10 of 18 At t a c h m e n t 4 Page 11 of 18 N O R T H A V E N U E BL O C K 1 2 HE L E N R O M A N S U B D I V I S I O N TE L . ( 8 4 7 ) 9 0 4 - 7 6 9 0 ; I N F O @ G S U R V E Y . N E T 20 0 W A U K E G A N R O A D , G L E N V I E W I L 6 0 0 2 5 G E O D E T I C S U R V E Y , L T D . FI L E N O . 2 1 - 0 4 3 - S PR E P A R E D B Y : 2 N D A V E N U E At t a c h m e n t 5 Page 12 of 18 N O R T H A V E N U E BL O C K 1 2 HE L E N R O M A N S U B D I V I S I O N TE L . ( 8 4 7 ) 9 0 4 - 7 6 9 0 ; I N F O @ G S U R V E Y . N E T 20 0 W A U K E G A N R O A D , G L E N V I E W I L 6 0 0 2 5 G E O D E T I C S U R V E Y , L T D . FI L E N O . 2 1 - 0 4 3 - S LO T 1 LO T 2 PR E P A R E D B Y : 2 N D A V E N U E At t a c h m e n t 6 Page 13 of 18 35 2 3 2 6 ( ' / 2 7 6 8 % ' , 9 , 6 , 2 1 2 ) ( ; , 6 7 , 1 * 5 ( 6 , ' ( 1 7 , $ / / 2 7 6, 7 ( ' ( 9 ( / 2 3 0 ( 1 7 3 / $ 1 1 2 5 7 + $ 9 ( ' ( 6 3 / $ , 1 ( 6 , / / , 1 2 , 6 35 ( / , 0 , 1 $ 5 < 3 / $ 1 6 1257+$9(352326('/2761'$9(67$9(+2//<:22'$9(352326('/27 %( 1 & + 0 $ 5 . , 1 ) 2 /( * ( 1 ' 35 2 3 ( 5 7 < / , 1 ( 6$ 1 , 7 $ 5 < 6 ( : ( 5 / , 1 ( :$ 7 ( 5 / , 1 ( 67 2 5 0 6 ( : ( 5 / , 1 ( 67 2 5 0 0 $ 1 + 2 / ( 6$ 1 , 7 $ 5 < 0 $ 1 + 2 / ( &2 0 % , 1 ( ' 6 ( : ( 5 &2 0 % , 1 ( ' 0 $ 1 + 2 / ( &$ 7 & + % $ 6 , 1 ,1 / ( 7 :$ 7 ( 5 9 $ / 9 ( 9 $ 8 / 7 :$ 7 ( 5 9 $ / 9 ( *5 $ ' ( '5 $ , 1 $ * ( ' , 9 , ' ( &8 5 % * 8 7 7 ( 5 &/ ( $ 1 2 8 7 '2 : 1 6 3 2 8 7 5 2 2 ) ' 5 $ , 1 6 :$ 7 ( 5 % % 2 ; 75 ( ( 3 5 2 7 ( & 7 , 2 1 ) ( 1 & ( &2 1 6 7 5 8 & 7 , 2 1 ) ( 1 & ( ,1 / ( 7 ) , / 7 ( 5 % $ 6 . ( 7 75 $ ) ) , & ' , 5 ( & 7 , 2 1 3 $ 9 ( 0 ( 1 7 0$ 5 . , 1 * ), 5 ( + < ' 5 $ 1 7 &2 %%'6 (; , 6 7 , 1 * 35 2 3 2 6 ( ' Z &) '6 9 6(&7,2172:16+,31 5$1*((3,16 72 3 2 ) & 8 5 % %2 7 7 2 0 2 ) & 8 5 % 72 3 2 ) & 8 5 % %2 7 7 2 0 2 ) * 8 7 7 ( 5 :$ / . %2 7 7 2 0 2 ) : $ / . 7 & ; ; ; ; ; % & ; ; ; ; ; 7 & ; ; ; ; ; % * ; ; ; ; ; : ; ; ; ; ; % : ; ; ; ; ; '( 6 3 5 ( 6 6 ( ' & 8 5 % %2 7 7 2 0 2 ) * 8 7 7 ( 5 02 8 1 7 $ % / ( & 8 5 % %2 7 7 2 0 2 ) * 8 7 7 ( 5 ' & ; ; ; ; ; % * ; ; ; ; ; 0 & ; ; ; ; ; % & ; ; ; ; ; '(63/$,1(6'5$,1$*(67$7(0(17727+(%(672)285.12:/('*($1'%(/,()7+('5$,1$*(2)7+(6 85)$&(:$7(56 :,//127%(&+$1*('%<7+(&216758&7,212)7+,6352-(&725$1<3$577+(5(2)2 5 7+$7,)'5$,1$*(:,//%(&+$1*('5($621$%/(3529,6,21+$6%((1 0$'()25 &2//(&7,21$1'',9(56,212)68&+685)$&(:$7(56,17238%/,&$5($625'5$,16 $33529(')2586(%<7+(',5(&7252)38%/,&:25.6$1'(1*,1((5,1 *$1'7+$768 &685)$&(:$7(56$5(3/$11(')25,1$&&25'$1&(:,7+*(1(5$//<$&&(37('(1*,1((5,1*35$&7,&(662$6725('8&(7+(/,.(/,+22'2)'$0$*(72$'-2,1,1*3523(57,(6%(&$86(2)7+(&216758&7,212)7+,6'(9(/230(17BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 5(*,67(5('352)(66,21$/(1*,1((5 BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 2:1(5 BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6($/ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB $''5(66 5( 7 $ , 1 , 1 * : $ / / : 5 $ , / , 1 *   &%,$(5,$/0$3 1 1 %$,2 1 //,6((9 +,7 ,,5- At t a c h m e n t 7 Page 14 of 18 1 2 5 7 + $ 9 ( 1 8 ( / 2 7 %/ 2 & . 2) 3 / $ 7 2 ) 7 2 3 2 * 5 $ 3 + < & 2 1 6 7 5 8 & 7 , 2 1 $ 1 ' / $ 1 ' 6 8 5 9 ( < 2 5 6 *( 2 ' ( 7 , & 6 8 5 9 ( < / 7 ' 7( / ) $ ; : $ 8 . ( * $ 1 5 2 $ ' * / ( 1 9 , ( : , / 35 ( 3 $ 5 ( ' % < LQ I R # J V X U Y H \ Q H W Z Z Z J V O D Q G V X U Y H \ L Q J F R P 1 ($57+:25.(526,21 6(',0(17$7,21&21752/ $OOFRQVWUXFWLRQDFWLYLWLHVWKDWLQYROYHHDUWKZRUNVKDOOPHHWWKH1DWLRQDO3ROOXWDQW'LVFKDUJH (OLPLQDWLRQ6\VWHP3KDVH,,UHTXLUHPHQWVD 6XEPLWWDORID1RWLFHRI,QWHQW12,WR,(3$E 3RVVHVVLRQRIDFRPSOHWHGDQGVLJQHG6WRUPZDWHU3ROOXWLRQ3UHYHQWLRQ3ODQ6:333DQGDJUDSKLF (URVLRQDQG6HGLPHQW&RQWURO(6&SODQF ,PSOHPHQWDWLRQRIWKH6:333G 6XEPLWWDORIDQ,QFLGHQFHRI1RQFRPSOLDQFH,21LIDQHYHQWRFFXUVH :HHNO\UHSRUWVDIWHUò´UDLQIDOORU´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³,OOLQRLV3URFHGXU HVDQG6WDQGDUGVIRU8UEDQ6RLO(URVLRQ DQG6HGLPHQWDWLRQ&RQWURO´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  &%, At t a c h m e n t 7 Page 15 of 18 1 2 5 7 + $ 9 ( 1 8 ( /2 7 %/ 2 & . 68 0 0 , 7 6 6 0 , 1 % % 2 ; 0 , 1   &%, 1 At t a c h m e n t 7 Page 16 of 18 1 2 5 7 + $ 9 ( 1 8 ( /2 7 % / 2 & . 1   &%, At t a c h m e n t 7 Page 17 of 18 1041 North Avenue – Public Notice 1041 North Avenue – Looking Southwest at Site 1041 North Avenue – Looking South at Front of Site 1041 North Avenue – Looking Southeast at Site A t t a c h m e n t 8 P a g e 1 8 o f 1 8 COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1420 Miner Street Des Plaines, IL 60016 P: 847.391.5380 desplaines.org Date: June 9, 2021 To: Planning and Zoning Board From: Jonathan Stytz, Planner Cc: Michael McMahon, Community and Economic Development Director Subject: Consideration of a Standard Variation request to allow the installation of an accessory structure setback two-feet from the property line in the interior side yard at 994 Hollywood Avenue, Case #21-022-V (3rd Ward) Issue: The petitioner is requesting Standard Variations under Section 12-8-1(C) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow the installation of an accessory structure setback two-feet from the property line and located in the interior side yard at 994 Hollywood Avenue where the minimum setback for accessory structures in the R-1 Zoning District is five-feet and accessory structures are only permitted within the rear yard and buildable area. Analysis: Address: 994 Hollywood Avenue Owner: Erin Johnson, 994 Hollywood Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Petitioner: Erin Johnson, 994 Hollywood Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Case Number: 21-022-V PIN: 09-17-301-021-0000 Ward: #3, Alderman Sean Oskerka Existing Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residential District Existing Land Use: Single Family Residence Surrounding Zoning: North: R-1, Single Family Residential District South: R-1, Single Family Residential District East: R-1, Single-Family Residential District MEMORANDUM Page 1 of 11 West: R-1, Single Family Residential District Surrounding Land Use: North: Single Family Residence South: Single Family Residence East: Single Family Residence West: Single Family Residence Street Classification: Hollywood Avenue and Second Avenue are classified as local streets. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Single-Family Residential. Project Description: The petitioner, Erin Johnson, is requesting Standard Variations to allow the installation of an accessory structure setback two-feet from the property line and located in the interior side yard at 994 Hollywood Avenue where the minimum setback for accessory structures in the R-1 Zoning District is five- feet and accessory structures are only permitted within the rear yard and buildable area. This 7,333-square foot, 51.95-foot wide property contains a one- story residence with a deck, private front walk, driveway, and existing 81.60- square foot shed as shown on the Plat of Survey (Attachment 3). The existing development is located at the very north portion of the on the subject property and the existing shed is located approximately 0.2-feet from the west property line straddling the interior side yard and buildable area of the subject property. The petitioner is requesting the new 17’-1/4” long by 7’-10” wide prefabricated shed (133.33 sq. ft.), as noted in the Shed Specifications (Attachment 5), to replace the existing shed that is in disrepair and is not functional for their use. The proposed shed is intended to be located two-feet from the west property line in between the existing deck area and the property line as shown on the Site Plan (Attachment 4). Pursuant to Sections 12-7-1(C) and 12-8-1(C), accessory sheds may only be located in the rear yard and may be located no closer than five-feet from side and rear lot lines. The petitioner’s request to allow a shed in the interior side yard that is located less than five-feet from the side and rear property lines constitutes the need for variations to Sections 12-7-1(C) and 12- 8-1(C) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance. Staff has spoken to the petitioner regarding alternative locations for the proposed shed that do not require the request variations. However, the petitioner is requesting to locate the proposed shed in a location that is not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Staff does not find a hardship with the land or unique circumstance with the property to warrant such variations. Variation Findings: Variation requests are subject to the standards set forth in Section 12-3-6(H) of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended. 1. Hardship: No variation shall be granted pursuant to this subsection H unless the applicant shall establish that carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this title would create a particular hardship or a practical difficulty. Comment: There are no found practical difficulties or particular hardship with the subject property to warrant the extent of the variance requests. There is ample room on the subject property within the buildable area to install the proposed shed to avoid the variation requests. Please see the petitioner’s responses to variations. Page 2 of 11 2.Unique Physical Condition: The subject lot is exceptional as compared to other lots subject to the same provision by reason of a unique physical condition, including presence of an existing use, structure, or sign, whether conforming or nonconforming; irregular or substandard shape or size; exceptional topographical features; or other extraordinary physical conditions peculiar to and inherent in the subject lot that amount to more than a mere inconvenience to the owner and that relate to or arise out of the lot rather than the personal situation of the current owner of the lot. Comment: There are no unique circumstances to this property as compared to any other lot on the block and compared to any other corner lot within the City. Even with the existing development mostly contained within the northern portion of the lot, there is still ample space in the buildable area for the proposed shed that would not be affected by any unique physical condition of the site. The requested variations to deviate from the location requirements for an accessory structure alleviates a personal situation versus a unique physical condition associated with the subject property. Please see the petitioner’s responses to variations. 3.Not Self-Created: The aforesaid unique physical condition is not the result of any action or inaction of the owner or its predecessors in title and existed at the time of the enactment of the provisions from which a variance is sought or was created by natural forces or was the result of governmental action, other than the adoption of this title. Comment: The requested variances are self-created as the subject property already contains a deck, room addition on the principle structure, and other lawn features that reduce the available space for the proposed shed given their placement. Additionally, the petitioners have an option to remove the existing shed and install, with a permit, a shed size and orientation that could be accessible to the property owners and meet required accessory structure location requirements. Please see the petitioner’s responses to variations. 4.Denied Substantial Rights: The carrying out of the strict letter of the provision from which a variance is sought would deprive the owner of the subject lot of substantial rights commonly enjoyed by owners of other lots subject to the same provision. Comment: No property rights will be diminished with the denial of these variation requests. The property owner has existing spaces to utilize as storage or has the option to replace the existing shed structure with a new shed with a size and orientation that can be better accommodated on the site and still fits within the guise of the Zoning Ordinance requirements. All single-family residences are governed by the same size, location, and setback requirements for accessory structures. Please see the petitioner’s responses to variations. 5.Not Merely Special Privilege: The alleged hardship or difficulty is neither merely the inability of the owner or occupant to enjoy some special privilege or additional right not available to owners or occupants of other lots subject to the same provision, nor merely the inability of the owner to make more money from the use of the subject lot. Comment: Granting the two variances for the shed will create a special privilege for the subject property owner compared to all other homes on this block and within the City who have code compliant sheds. The owners have the capability to utilize the buildable area of their property for storage purposes while still complying with the Zoning Ordinance. There is no alleged hardship or practical difficulty with the subject property to warrant the variances. Please see the petitioner’s responses to variations. 6.Title And Plan Purposes: The variation would not result in a use or development of the subject lot that would be not in harmony with the general and specific purposes for which this title and Page 3 of 11 the provision from which a variation is sought were enacted or the general purpose and intent of the comprehensive plan. Comment: The existing 81.60-square foot shed located in the interior side yard is not in harmony with the surrounding residential development in the area and does not match the goals and objects outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. Accessory structures in line with the size and location requirements specified in the Zoning Ordinance are prevalent throughout the surrounding area and the City as a whole. Allowing a shed in the current location and in violation of these code requirements will set a precedent for excessive shed requests in potentially unsafe locations. Please see the petitioner’s responses to variations. 7.No Other Remedy: There is no means other than the requested variation by which the alleged hardship or difficulty can be avoided or remedied to a degree sufficient to permit a reasonable use of the subject lot. Comment: There are other remedies available, aside from the variations, which permit a reasonable use of the subject lot. One remedy would be to utilize existing unobstructed space on the site to locate the proposed shed. Another remedy could be the replacement or alteration of the existing obstructions in the area where the shed is proposed to meet the location requirements pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance. Please see the petitioner’s responses to variations. 8.Minimum Required: The requested variation is the minimum measure of relief necessary to alleviate the alleged hardship or difficulty presented by the strict application of this title. Comment: The minimum extent for the proposed variations have not been met. The subject property currently contains ample room within the buildable area to sufficiently accommodate the proposed shed without any variations. The alleged hardship raised by the property owner is a personal hardship, not a physical hardship with the subject property. The extent of the requested variances are not warranted given the opportunity to fully utilize the available space on site and still meet the current zoning regulation. Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested variations based on review of the information presented by the applicant and the standards and conditions met by Section 12-3-6(H) (Findings of Fact for Variations) as outlined within the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, for the proposed variations at 994 Hollywood Avenue. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: Under Section 12-3-6(F) of the Zoning Ordinance (Standard Variations), the Planning and Zoning Board has the authority to approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny the above-mentioned variances for the installation of an accessory structure located within the interior side yard and located less than five-feet from the property line at 994 Hollywood Avenue. Attachments: Attachment 1: Petitioner’s Standards for Variation Attachment 2: Location Map Attachment 3: Plat of Survey Attachment 4: Site Plan Attachment 5: Shed Specifications Attachment 6: Site Photos Page 4 of 11 1. We bought our home in 1995 and it included an outdoor storage shed that was erected less than 5 ft from our property line. This shed, now over 30 years old, has become quite unsightly, rusty, leaks when it rains or when snow melts and is losing its functionality. We would like to replace this shed with one that will suit our needs, will improve the curb appeal of our home and add to its value. 2. We are on a corner lot and the house was built near the back property line. Realistically, there is no other location on the lot that would be aesthetically pleasing. 3. The shed we have now sits on an angle. The northwest corner is 7 inches from the lot line and the southwest comer is 3 inches from the lot line. We will position the shed so there will be 2 feet on either side to accommodate spring andfall cleaning. 4. The shed is falling apart. There are no doors and there are holes in the structure. A new modem shed would be more appealing from the neighbors view and from any passing vehicles. 5. We are not looking for any special concession. We are replacing what is falling apart and keeping the shed in the same location. 6. The variance we are requesting is to erect a new shed 2 feet from our lot line as ogr crurent shed is merely inches. Our property does not include a backyard or any side yards to which we could move or erect a new shed. The location we want to use is the only practical location for it on our properfy. 7' our house is set back on the lot. Locating a shed anywhere else would damage the view of our front yard from inside our house. The present shed is behind the deck and mostly out of sight from the street. 8' As mentioned in item one above, we want to erect our new shed at the same distance from ourproperty line as is the shed that is there now. We would not come any closer to that properfy linethan what has been the case for approximately 30 some years. Adding to the distance or erectingit in another location in our front yard would be impracti cal andcause a significant hardship for us. Attachment 1 Page 5 of 11 0 150 300 ft Disclaimer: The GIS Consortium and MGP Inc. are not liable for any use, misuse, modification or disclosure of any map provided under applicable law. This map is for general information purposes only. Although the information is believed to be generally accurate, errors may exist and the user should independently confirm for accuracy. The map does not constitute a regulatory determination and is not a base for engineering design. A Registered Land Surveyor should be consulted to determine precise location boundaries on the ground. Print Date: 6/16/2021 994 Hollywood Avenue Notes Attachment 2 Page 6 of 11 Attachment 3 P a g e 7 o f 1 1 \ ct1 . -. . . li rndnes A q rnit^res fitn^ U\e- + ,-. Chuk lpsol dwiptiin" fuildino tt"ii mn ai&iix atOt filz Po) Torrans-C*drtcaie'and reprt iley dix*ta;,m.'ikm4;glet!. .; onPnRNo.,'"'ll=ri11' ln:'lz' STATE OF ILTJNOIS I COLJNTY On M"nENnyl o .l'I [il.sE$, t. ',.r.t.'. \,'i. ! ',] l, I!$mai; M . Shpe,s an. lllinois Profensiontt tand Sua.. hcrft.by.cortiff thal I lw8 etruued.Uw abow daqibqi m' .atd llillfui abuie plat.ia a cma.raprumtntin of saih:: ..i. . 'j.,..: -... . FE!eR.21, tges ..: H#itt&y. Ittidnie . -,.su*,uiii$*lrnr i'no. :'IITWEYAttachment 4 Page 8 of 11 5t18t2021 Lifetime 17.5 Ft. x 8 Ft. Outdoor Storage Shed DESCRIPTION Homeowners need the right solution to keep their space organized. Lifetime's 17.S-foot x 8-foot Sheds offer a huge amount of extra space to store anything from larger items like lawn mowers, kayaks, and bikei, to smaller tools like shovels, rakes, and watering cans. This shed features steel- reihforced double-wall panels as well as roof trusses for ultimate strength and durability. Lockable doors (lock not included) provide extra security. The height adjustable shelves give you better control over your space and maximize your storage options. The large skylights and windows provide exceilent interior lighting while the screened vents provide airflow and keep out pests. Find ihe perfect storage space for all your belongings with Lifetime's 17.5-foot x 8-foot Shed. FEATURES . High-Pitched Roof Allows for Quick Drainage of Rain and Snow. 10-Year Limited Warranty. Full-Length Ridge Skylight for Natural lnterior Lighting. Lockable Steel-Reinforced Doors for Added Security (Lock Not lncluded). Weather-resistant Construction. Dual-wall High Density Polyethylene Panels. Attractive Appearance and Design. Adjustable Shelving and Storage System. Steel-reinforced Structure and Roof Trusses for Greater Strength. Heavy Duty Shed Floor. UV-protected to Prevent Fading. Snow Load Kit included. Easy to Clean, Low Maintenance Material. Stain Resistant Floors and Walls SPECIFICATIONS Model Windows Footprint Eave Depth Cubic Feet Square Feet lnterior Dimensions lnterior Headroom (truss to floor) 60213 Two (2) 16.5 in. W x 16.5 in. H Polycarbonate Wir 17 ft.3 in. x 7 ft. 10 in. (525,8 cm x 238,8 cm) 1.85 in. (4,7 cm) 754.5 tts (21,4 m3) 127.5 tt2 (11,84 m2) 7ft. 6 in. W x17 ft.D x 5ft. 10 in. - 7ft. 10 in. H ( 80 in. (2,03 m) hftps://wwwlifetime.comflifetim+602'l 3-17-$ft-x-&ft-outdoor-storage"shed 1t3Attachment 5 Page 9 of 11 5t18t2021 Tool Corral Compatible Max Wind Resistance Nominal Dimensions Door Opening Dimensions Tool Pouch Tool Storage Pouch Warranty Exterior Dimensions Exterior Roof Dimensions Roof Pitch California Residents Lifetime 17.5 Ft. x B Ft. Outdoor Storage Shed No 65 mph (104,6 kph) 8 ft. x 17.5ft. (2,43 m x 5,33 m) 4 ft. 10 in. W x 6 ft. 4 in. H (1,473 cm x 1,93 cm) One (1) Tool Pouch for Easy Access to Hand Too One (1) Tool Storage Pouch 10-Year Limited 17 ft.3 in. Lx7ft. 10 in. Wx7ft. 10 in. H (5,258 8 ft. W x 17 fl. D (2,438 cm x 5,334 cm) 6:12 Click Here for Proposition 65 Warning ASSEMBLY & MANUALS REVIEWS '* c.t 71 Reviews Search topics and reviews 7L Reviews 113 Questions L46 Answers Write A ReviewReviews RATING SNAPSHOT Select a row below to filter reviews. https://www.lifetime.com/lifetim e-60213-17-S-ft-x-8-ft-ouidoor-storage-shed 2t3Attachment 5 Page 10 of 11 944 Hollywood Avenue – Public Notice 994 Hollywood Avenue – Looking West at Existing Shed 994 Hollywood Avenue – Looking Northeast at Front of Site 994 Hollywood Avenue – Looking East at Site A t t a c h m e n t 6 P a g e 1 1 o f 1 1 COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1420 Miner Street Des Plaines, IL 60016 P: 847.391.5380 desplaines.org Date: June 15, 2021 To: Planning and Zoning Board (PZB) From: John T. Carlisle, AICP, Economic Development Manager Jonathan Stytz, Planner CC: Michael McMahon, Community and Economic Development Director Subject: 1050 East Oakton Street – Case #21-019-PPUD-TSUB-MAP-CU Consideration of a Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD), Tentative Plat of Subdivision, Conditional Use for a PUD, and Map Amendment for a proposed a 125-unit attached single-family (townhouse) development in the current C-3 zoning district (proposed R-3 district). Issue: The petitioner is requesting the following under the Zoning Ordinance: (i) a Preliminary PUD under Section 12-3-5; (ii) a Conditional Use for a PUD under Section 12-3-4; and (iii) a Map Amendment to rezone the subject property from C-3, General Commercial District to R-3, Townhouse Residential under Section 12- 3-7. The petitioner also requests a Tentative Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2-2 of the Subdivision Regulations. Finally, under Section 8-1-9 of the Municipal Code, the petitioner will seek a Vacation of Public Streets to be approved by the City Council. Owner: 1090-1100 Executive Way, LLC; Times Drive, LLC; Oakton Mannheim, LLC Petitioner: Marc McLaughlin, M/I Homes of Chicago, LLC Case Number: 21-019-PPUD-TSUB-MAP-CU PINs: 09-20-316-020-0000; -021-0000; -023-0000; -024-0000; -025-0000; -026- 0000; 09-20-321-005-0000; 09-20-322-001-0000 Ward: #5, Carla Brookman Existing Zoning: C-3, General Commercial District Existing and Historical Land Use: Vacant; site formerly contained Grazie restaurant and banquet hall, which was demolished in 2013, as well as office buildings and surface parking MEMORANDUM Page 1 of 54 Surrounding Zoning: North: R-1, Single-Family Residential South: C-3, General Commercial and C-4, Regional Shopping East: C-3, General Commercial, and C-4 Regional Shopping West: C-3, General Commercial Surrounding Land Use: North: Single-family detached homes South: Restaurants and retail goods East: Services (Vision Care), restaurants, retail goods (Jewel-Osco grocer) West: Post office Street Classification: Oakton Street is classified as an arterial roadway. Times Drive and Executive Way are local roadways. Comprehensive Plan Illustration The Comprehensive Plan illustrates this property as commercial. Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) Project Summary: The petitioner is proposing a full redevelopment of 11.2 contiguous acres of vacant property at 1050 East Oakton Street, 1090-1100 Executive Way, and 1515 Times Drive. The proposal is for a residential-only development of 125 townhouses, tentatively branded as Halston Market. Seven townhouses would have two bedrooms, and 118 would have three bedrooms. The units would be horizontally connected to each other and spread across 23 separate buildings. Each building would be three stories with each unit having a ground-floor, two- car, rear-loaded garage (i.e. facing inward, not toward public streets or private drives). Walkways would connect unit front doors to public and private sidewalks. Each building will also have balconies and include landscaped grass front yards. However, the amount of private open space per unit is minimal, as the concept is built around shared open space. Centrally located on the site would be a landscaped common plaza area of 14,000 square feet with benches, plantings, walkways, and open green space. There is also a 10,605-square-foot common area oriented north-south between the buildings in the southwest portion. In the southeast portion, a stormwater retention area (“dry” basin, not a pond) of approximately 69,050-square feet (1.6 acres) is shown, with 12 adjacent surface parking spaces. Fifteen additional spaces intended for visitors are interspersed through the development for a total of 277, which would meet the parking minimum of Section 12-9-7. The Building Design Review requirement under Section 12-3-11 would apply. In general, the applicant is proposing that for the elevations that would face public streets, the primary material is face brick on all three stories with projections of complementary vinyl. Elevations that would not face public streets contain face brick only on the ground floor, and where garage doors are shown, the brick is interrupted. Considering the large scale of the redevelopment, the proposal is somewhat restrained in tree removal. According to the petitioner, healthy trees in the Page 2 of 54 existing row at the north lot line will be preserved and augmented where necessary. Together, these plantings along with existing and proposed fencing should serve as effective screening and separation between the development and the single-family residential neighborhood to the north and the commercial development to the east. New plantings throughout the development appear to provide both functional and aesthetic benefits. At this time, the petitioner is requesting the following bulk exceptions under Section 12-3-5 from the regulations for the proposed R-3 district. The following exceptions would be required: -Minimum lot area: Seventy-nine units are proposed with a lot area of 923 square feet, and 46 units are proposed at 1,038 square feet. The proposed lot area for each unit includes only the livable space inside the building and a small landscaped front yard. All other area in the development (e.g. open space, driveways, stormwater retention) is allocated not to dwelling units but instead to the development overall. The minimum lot area per dwelling unit is 2,800 square feet. -Minimum rear yard (north): A setback of 20.63 feet is proposed where the minimum rear yard setback is 25 feet. Regarding streets and access, the petitioner proposes that the north-south portion of Executive Way – where it connects to Oakton and borders the post office – would remain a public street. However, at the curve it would become a private drive, which requires a public street vacation of approximately 21,000 square feet. Similarly, a portion of Times Drive (approximately 7,700 square feet) would also be vacated and become private. This does not align with the submitted Tentative Plat of Subdivision (see vacation discussion on Page 5). The attached traffic statement discusses the parking and trip generation for the proposed townhouse development in more detail (Attachment 8). The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT), citing existing signalized intersections at Lee Street and Webster Lane (1,600 feet apart), does not support the creation of an additional signalized intersection at Oakton. For pedestrians this will require using the north side of Oakton before reaching a marked crossing, approximately 700-800 feet in each direction (three-to-five-minute walk for an able-bodied person). Map Amendment & Conditional Use Request Summary: The petitioner has requested a map amendment to rezone the subject property from C-3 General Commercial to R-3 Townhouse Residential. Although the site is illustrated as commercial in the 2019 Comprehensive Plan, the 2009 Oakton-Elmhurst Plan sets forth a vision with residential occupying much of the site – albeit with some commercial fronting Oakton Street. Nonetheless, R- 3 is present about 1,000 feet to the west and does directly border Oakton Street (Fairmont Place development). Page 3 of 54 In general, residential is necessary proximate to commercial areas to support their vitality, and while this project would front Oakton Street, it would not front Lee Street, which would preserve commercial use at the main intersection of the Oakton-Lee area. The creation of the Oakton-Lee TIF district, as well as the City’s vision to establish a Metra commuter train station at Oakton and the North Central Service line, calls for adding residential units in the vicinity and activating vacant sites through unsubsidized development to raise the assessed value of the TIF. Improving the vacant land with this proposal would accomplish those goals. Other than the listed exceptions under Preliminary Planned Unit Development on Page 2, the proposed development would meet all other R-3 bulk regulations as excerpted in the table to follow: Bulk Regulations for R-3 Townhouse Residential Yard Required Min. Proposed Min. Front Yard (South) 25 Feet 25 Feet Rear Yard (North)* 25 Feet About 21 Feet Side Yard (East) 5 Feet 22 Feet Corner Side Yard (West) 10 Feet 21 feet Building Height 45 Feet Three stories (estimated 35-40 feet) *An exception would be required to the minimum required rear yard. A conditional use is required in R-3 by virtue of the proposed PUD. Tentative Plat of Subdivision Request Summary: The petitioner is requesting a Tentative Plat of Subdivision to resubdivide the subject property. Under Section 13-3-1 the Subdivision Regulations require improvement of adjacent rights-of-way, which means, for example, that Executive Way next to the Post Office will receive new curb, gutter, and resurfacing. Further, under Section 13-4 the Subdivision Regulations require park land dedication and/or fee-in-lieu, although proposed private open space could provide a partial offset. The existing property contains eight lots, which would be divided into lots for each individual townhouse unit (125), plus six lots for common areas, private drives, and the stormwater retention area for a total of 131. The new subdivision will encompass the entire 11.2-acres as shown in Attachment 6. The petitioner’s Tentative Plat shows that the size of each townhouse parcel will vary from 923 square feet in size for interior units to 1,038 square feet in size for end units. The Tentative Plat also shows the following existing easements: (i) a 13-foot Public Utility Easement and 20-foot building line on both sides of Executive Way throughout the development; (ii) a 13-foot Public Utility Easement and 20-foot building line on both sides of Times Drive throughout the development; (iii) a 20-foot building line along Oakton Street on the south side of the lot; (iv) Page 4 of 54 a ten-foot electric and telephone easement and 24-foot ingress, egress, and driveway easement behind the commercial development on the south side of the lot; (v) a 23-foot public utility easement along the existing drive aisle east of the proposed detention area; (vi) a 15-foot public utility easement along the east property line of the development; and (vii) a five-foot public utility easement located along the north property line of the development. The proposal includes vacating a portion of Executive Way and Times Drive with their respective easements, which is described in more detail below. Vacation of Public Streets Request Summary: As described in the Project Summary on Pages 2-3, the applicant will seek vacations of public streets. It is unclear in the submission if the private drives will be gated at the point they intersect with public street segments (for example, at the Executive Way curve). Furthermore, regarding Times Drive, the commercial property at the northeast corner of Times and Oakton relies on Times for access, so it is recommended the City retain the southernmost approximately 110 linear feet, with the redevelopment agreement stating that townhouse owners will be responsible for maintenance of this segment. The City is in the process of appraising the right-of-way areas, and staff recommends that executing the agreement(s) and recording the corresponding plat is a condition for approval. Alignment with the 2019 Comprehensive Plan •Under Overarching Principles: o The principle to “Provide a Range of Housing Options” mentions “high-quality townhomes” in general and recommends, “For the Oakton Street Corridor, it is recommended that the City update … zoning … to permit townhomes, rowhomes, and mixed-used development.” •Under Land Use & Development: o The Future Land Use Plan illustrates the property as commercial. While the proposal does not align, it may be seen as a reasonable concept to support nearby commercial uses and the theme that the Oakton-Lee intersection should be anchored by commercial. •Under Housing: o There is a recommendation to “Ensure the City has several housing options to fit diverse needs.” Townhouses appeal to a wide range of potential households and provide a middle ground between the heavy supply (proportionally) of single-family detached homes and apartments/condominiums. Page 5 of 54 Alignment with the 2009 Oakton Street/Elmhurst Road Corridor Plan •This proposal coincides with the vision to develop a portion of a large site with residential, although the plan calls for multifamily and the proposal is for single-family attached. However, because residential would occupy the entire site, it is likely the number of units envisioned in the general area is more or less aligned. •However, the proposal does not include any commercial, and the plan called for both residential and commercial (mixed use). In the concept sketch, generally small, standalone commercial buildings akin to Vision Care, Dunkin Donuts, and Charcoal Delights are shown at the Oakton frontage. Alignment with the 2019 Oakton Station Feasibility Study •The study includes the subject site in the proposed station area because it is within a half-mile radius (10-minute walk). The study suggested that a new Metra station could attract transit-oriented development (TOD) in the form of multifamily, office, and retail. However, TOD tends to follow after the transit operator has formally committed to the station or after it is operational. •While not as dense as the multifamily residential typically found next to Metra stations, this proposed townhouse residential development would add an estimated 300 residents to the area (based on the resident projections in the Subdivision Regulations). These new residents would grow the market of potential riders and bolster the City’s case for having a station. PUD and Conditional Use Findings As required, the proposed development is reviewed below in terms of the findings contained in 12-3-4 and 12-3-5 of the Zoning Ordinance: A.The extent to which the Proposed Plan is or is not consistent with the stated purpose of the PUD regulations in Section 12-3.5-1 and is a stated Conditional Use in the subject zoning district: Comment: A PUD is a listed conditional use in the C-3 zoning district. The proposed project meets the stated purpose of the PUD. Additionally, the redevelopment of the subject parcels will enhance the neighboring area, but also be cognizant of nearby land uses. Please also see the responses from the applicant. B.The extent to which the proposed plan meets the prerequisites and standards of the planned unit development regulations: Comment: The proposed development will be in keeping with the City’s prerequisites and standards regarding planned unit development regulations. Please also see the responses from the applicant. C.The extent to which the proposed plan departs from the applicable zoning and subdivision regulations otherwise applicable to the subject property, including, but not limited to the density, dimension, area, bulk, and use and the reasons why such departures are or are not deemed to be in the public interest: Comment: The proposed project is in-line with the intent of a PUD as there are exceptions being requested to accommodate the specific design of this mixed-use development, which allocates much of its land to common areas to appeal to households to whom it is marketed. Please also see the responses from the applicant. Page 6 of 54 D.The extent to which the physical design of the proposed development does or does not make adequate provision for public services, provide adequate control of vehicular traffic, provide for, protect open space, and further the amenities of light and air, recreation and visual enjoyment: Comment: All provisions for public services, adequate traffic control and the protection of open space are would be accommodated in the proposed development. Please also see the responses from the applicant. E.The extent to which the relationship and compatibility of the proposed development is beneficial or adverse to adjacent properties and neighborhood: Comment: The proposed development serves as a transition between single-family development to the north and corridor commercial development to the south and east. Additionally, considerations will be made to mitigate impact on the nearby residential uses from light and noise pollution. Please also see the responses from the applicant. F.The extent to which the proposed plan is not desirable to physical development, tax base, and economic well-being of the entire community: Comment: The proposed project will contribute to an improved physical appearance by removing a large, vacant, visually unappealing property. Such a significant improvement will contribute positively to the tax base – of the City overall and the Oakton-Lee TIF – and economic well-being of the community. Please also see the responses from the applicant. G.The extent to which the proposed plan is in conformity with the recommendations of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan: Comment: The proposed development meets general goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Please also see the responses from the applicant. Map Amendment Findings As required, the proposed development is reviewed below in terms of the findings contained in 12-3-7 of the Zoning Ordinance: A.Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan, as adopted and amended from time to time by the city council: Comment: The proposed amendment is consistent with general guidance and vision, if not the property illustration future land use map. Please also see the responses from the applicant. B. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with current conditions and the overall character of existing development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property; Comment: Townhouse residential is already present on the north side of Oakton in the vicinity and would be complementary to and bolstering of desired commercial character nearby. Please also see the responses from the applicant. C.Whether the proposed amendment is appropriate considering the adequacy of public facilities and services available to this subject property; Comment: Public facilities and services must be made available to the subject property, even after public street vacations. Please also see the responses from the applicant. Page 7 of 54 D. Whether the proposed amendment will have an adverse effect on the value of properties throughout the jurisdiction; and Comment: The amendment would likely lead to redevelopment and the elimination of a large, vacant property that is a drag on property value. To that end, it would be an enhancement of property value. Please also see the responses from the applicant. E. Whether the proposed amendment reflects responsible standards for development and growth. Comment: The proposed development complements existing development and is a good first step in achieving the revitalization desired through the Oakton-Lee TIF and Oakton train station feasibility study. Additionally, screening considerations, particularly at the north lot line, will be made to reduce any impact on the nearby residential uses from light and noise pollution. Please also see the responses from the applicant. Recommendation: Staff supports the Preliminary PUD; Conditional Use for PUD, Map Amendment from C-3 to R-3, and Tentative Plat of Subdivision subject to the following conditions: 1) The necessary redevelopment agreement and Plat of Vacation should be negotiated with and approved by the City prior to recording of any Final PUD Plat or Final Plat of Subdivision. All preliminary or tentative plats should be revised, if necessary, to reflect the agreed-upon vacations. 2) The governing documents for the subject parcels will be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to the recording of any Final PUD Plat or Final Plat of Subdivision. 3) All proposed improvements and modifications shall be in full compliance with all applicable codes and ordinances. Drawings may have to be modified to comply with current codes and ordinances. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: The Planning and Zoning Board may vote to recommend approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval. The City Council has final authority over the Preliminary Planned Unit Development, the Conditional Use, the Map Amendment, the Tentative Plat of Subdivision, and the Vacation of Public Streets requests for 1050 East Oakton Street. Attachments: Attachment 1: Project Narrative Attachment 2: Petitioner’s Responses to Standards Attachment 3: Location Map Attachment 4: ALTA Survey Attachment 5: Preliminary Planned Unit Development Plat Attachment 6: Tentative Plat of Subdivision Attachment 7: Preliminary Engineering Drawings 1 Attachment 8: Traffic Report2 Attachment 9: Site and Context Photos 1 Overall drawings only. Full drawings available upon request to City staff. 2 Without appendices. Full report available upon request to City staff. Page 8 of 54 M/I Homes Halston Market Redevelopment of +/- 11 Acres at Northeast Corner of Executive Way and Oakton Street, Des Plaines, Illinois Project Narrative Applicant, M/I Homes of Chicago, LLC, requests consideration and approval of a Map Amendment and a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development in the R-3 zoning district for the property consisting of approximately 11 acres located at the northeast corner of Executive Way and Oakton Street in Des Plaines, Illinois (the “Property”). Applicant proposes a new 125-unit townhome residential development on the Property with associated amenities and open spaces (the “Project”). The Project will involve the construction of 23 new residential townhome buildings on the Property. Each will be a three-story building containing two-car rear-loaded garages. Each building will also have balconies and will include tastefully landscaped grass front yards. The Project will include substantial open spaces for recreation as well as for stormwater management. The Property is currently zoned C-3 General Commercial. Applicant requests consideration and approval of a Map Amendment to modify the zoning of the Property to R-3 Townhouse Residential. Applicant also requests consideration and approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development to reflect the creative design and the future ownership structure of the Halston Market community. This development would not be possible under the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance. As a PUD, the Project will provide maximum choice in the types of environment available to the public, as recommended in the Zoning Ordinance, with efficient and prudent planning of both residential and recreational spaces. The Property is bounded by R-1 Single Family Residential to the north, C-3 General Commercial to the west, south and east, and C-4 Regional Shopping to the east. The construction of townhomes on the Property will serve as a logical transition from the single family homes north of the Property to the commercial areas south and east of the Property. The Project will achieve the City’s goals relative to the beautification, redevelopment and improvement of an underutilized property along the Oakton Street corridor. The Comprehensive Plan specifically recommends the revitalization of the Oakton Street corridor to address vacancies, to beautify property having an outdated appearance and to attend to property with otherwise limited redevelopment potential. The Property consists of several parcels, all of which are currently vacant, having previously been improved with surface parking lots and office buildings that have been razed. The Project will eliminate these unsightly vacant parcels of land, will modernize and enhance the portion of Oakton Street adjacent to the Property with modern townhomes and landscaping, and will generally improve and revitalize a long- underutilized portion of the City’s Oakton Street corridor. This Project will appeal to current and future Des Plaines residents at all life stages, from millennials to empty nesters. New townhome developments, such as this Project, are a desirable housing alternative that is encouraged by the Comprehensive Plan. The Project will provide moderate density multi-family housing, which will strengthen the residential base of the City, create a safe and pleasant pedestrian environment and promote the adaptive reuse of underutilized land. Attachment 1 Page 9 of 54 Halston Market Des Plaines, Illinois Responses to Standards for Map Amendments 1.Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan, as adopted and amended from time to time by the City Council. The Map Amendment rezoning the Property as R-3 PUD will serve to allow the type of development needed to achieve the City’s goals set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. The Project will achieve the City’s goals relative to the beautification, redevelopment and improvement of an underutilized property along the Oakton Street corridor. The Property consists of several parcels which Applicant has assembled, of which Applicant is the contract purchaser, and which qualify for consideration as a Planned Unit Development under the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan. The Property is currently vacant, having previously been improved with surface parking lots and office buildings that have been razed. The Comprehensive Plan recommends the revitalization of the Oakton Street corridor to address vacancies, to beautify property with outdated appearance and to attend to property with otherwise limited redevelopment potential. This Project will eliminate vacancies, will modernize and beautify the portion of Oakton Street adjacent to the Property and will redevelop and revitalize a long-underutilized parcel of land. The construction of townhomes on the Property further serves as a logical transition from the single family homes north of the Property to the commercial areas south and east of this parcel. In addition, Section 3.2.1 of the City’s Comprehensive Plan states that multifamily development could be appropriate along the Oakton Street corridor and that new development should front Oakton Street with parking located in the rear where possible. This Project satisfies each of the foregoing objectives. The Project will also achieve many of the City’s objectives for housing as described in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes that aging residents prefer smaller, multifamily units to continue an independent lifestyle while minimizing the obligations associated with owning larger properties, and that many millennials prefer compact housing units in higher density areas with proximity to transportation, employment centers and amenities. This Project will help retain existing residents while attracting new residents at various stages in their lives as recommended by the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan specifically identifies new townhome developments, such as this Project, as a desirable housing alternative that is to be encouraged. The Project will provide moderate density multi-family housing, which will strengthen the residential base of the City, create a quality pedestrian environment and promote quality development. 2.Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with current conditions and the overall character of existing development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The Map Amendment is compatible with current conditions. The Property is bounded by R-1 Single Family Residential to the north, C-3 General Commercial to the west, south and east, and C-4 Regional Shopping to the east. The R-3 zoning district is a logical and sensible transition from less dense single family uses to more intensive commercial uses. 3.Whether the proposed amendment is appropriate considering the adequacy of public facilities and services available to this subject property. Attachment 2 Page 10 of 54 All public facilities and services are readily available and will be provided to residents of the Project. The Project will include all necessary infrastructure in order that it may be served by public facilities and services. The Project has been designed to provide all necessary utilities, roadway access, drainage and refuse disposal to residents. Applicant will be responsible for the payment of impact fees to the local school district and park district as required by the Zoning Ordinance in order that residents will be able to benefit from the location of the Project within such districts. 4. Whether the proposed amendment will have an adverse effect on the value of properties throughout the jurisdiction. There will be no adverse effect on property values in the jurisdiction as a result of the Map Amendment. Rather, property values are likely to increase as a result of their proximity to the adaptive reuse of this formerly underutilized and unsightly property. The redevelopment of the Property with quality modern townhomes and abundant landscaping will have a positive impact on the viewsheds in the community and on property values in the surrounding neighborhood as a whole due to the replacement of the former commercial buildings and surface parking lots with contemporary townhomes and landscaping. 5. Whether the proposed amendment reflects responsible standards for development and growth. The Map Amendment reflects the highest standards of sustainable development and smart growth. Not only does the use of the Property as a residential townhome development serve as a prudent use of this vacant parcel, it also satisfies the objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan as noted in the response to standard (1) above. Attachment 2 Page 11 of 54 Halston Market Des Plaines, Illinois Responses to Standards for Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Section 12-3-4(E) of the Zoning Ordinance 1. The proposed conditional use is in fact a conditional use established within the specific zoning district involved. A planned development is a conditional use established within the R-3 Townhouse Residential District as set forth in Section 12-7-2 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The proposed conditional use is in accordance with the objectives of the City’s comprehensive plan and this title. The Project conforms with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. The Project will achieve the City’s goals relative to the beautification, redevelopment and improvement of an underutilized property along the Oakton Street corridor. The Property consists of several parcels which Applicant has assembled, of which Applicant is the contract purchaser, and which qualify for consideration as a Planned Unit Development under the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan. The Property is currently vacant, having previously been improved with surface parking lots and office buildings that have been razed. The Comprehensive Plan recommends the revitalization of the Oakton Street corridor to address vacancies, to beautify property with outdated appearance and to attend to property with otherwise limited redevelopment potential. This Project will eliminate vacancies, will modernize and beautify the portion of Oakton Street adjacent to the Property and will redevelop and revitalize a long-underutilized parcel of land. The construction of townhomes on the Property further serves as a logical transition from the single family homes north of the Property to the commercial areas south and east of this parcel. In addition, Section 3.2.1 of the City’s Comprehensive Plan states that multifamily development could be appropriate along the Oakton Street corridor and that new development should front Oakton Street with parking located in the rear where possible. This Project satisfies each of the foregoing objectives. The Project will also achieve many of the City’s objectives for housing as described in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes that aging residents prefer smaller, multifamily units to continue an independent lifestyle while minimizing the obligations associated with owning larger properties, and that many millennials prefer compact housing units in higher density areas with proximity to transportation, employment centers and amenities. This Project will help retain existing residents while attracting new residents at various stages in their lives as recommended by the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan specifically identifies new townhome developments, such as this Project, as a desirable housing alternative that is to be encouraged. The Project will provide moderate density multi-family housing, which will strengthen the residential base of the City, create a quality pedestrian environment and promote quality development. 3. The proposed conditional use is designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity. The Project has been designed and will be constructed, operated and maintained in a manner that is harmonious and appropriate with existing properties in the general vicinity, and specifically, will Attachment 2 Page 12 of 54 be harmonious and appropriate with the intended character of the vicinity as described in the Comprehensive Plan. Please see response to CUP standard (2) above. 4. The proposed conditional use is not hazardous or disturbing to existing neighboring uses. The Project poses no hazards, will not create unpleasant sights, sounds or smells and will not disturb existing neighboring uses. 5. The proposed conditional use is to be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer, and schools; or the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed conditional use shall provide adequately any such services, The Project will include all necessary infrastructure in order that it may be served by public facilities and services. The Project has been designed to provide all necessary utilities, roadway access, drainage and refuse disposal to residents. Applicant will be responsible for the payment of impact fees to the local school district and park district as required by the Zoning Ordinance. 6. The proposed conditional use does not create excessive additional requirements at public expense for public facilities and services and not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Applicant will be solely responsible for the expense of public facilities associated with the Project. The Project will have a positive impact on the economic welfare of the community by providing additional property tax revenues and a broader consumer base for local businesses. 7. The proposed conditional use does not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. The Project will not involve any of the foregoing. 8. The proposed conditional use provides vehicular access to the property which will be designed so as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares. The Project will provide vehicular access via Executive Way and Times Drive (each of which will be renamed). The volume of traffic entering and exiting the Property will be low and will not create substantial interference with traffic on Oakton Street or other public thoroughfares. 9. The proposed conditional use does not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. There are no natural, scenic or historic features on the Property that will be destroyed, lost or damaged as a result of the Project. 10. The proposed conditional use complies with all additional regulations in this title specific to the conditional use requested. The Project will comply with the Zoning Ordinance in all respects, as modified pursuant to the proposed Planned Unit Development. Attachment 2 Page 13 of 54 Halston Market Des Plaines, Illinois Responses to Standards for Planned Unit Development a. The proposed Halston Market redevelopment is consistent with the stated purpose of the planned unit development regulations set forth in Zoning Ordinance Section 12-3-5(A). Specifically, subsection A states that planned unit developments may be permitted in order to provide: i. A maximum choice in the types of environment available to the public by allowing a development that would not be possible under the strict application of the other sections of this title. The Project will provide additional choices in the types of residences available to prospective residents of the City by delivering quality alternatives to single-family housing and rental housing for individuals and families at all stages of their lives. ii. Permanent preservation of common open space and recreation areas and facilities. The Project will deliver common open space throughout the Property including grassy areas, landscaped areas and sidewalks for pedestrian use. iii. A pattern of development to preserve natural vegetation, topographic and geologic features. The Property currently consists of surface parking lots and former building sites. The landscaping to be installed at the Project will be new and of excellent quality with an eye to longevity. Topographic and geologic features will not be substantially impacted other than typical mass grading. iv. A creative approach to the use of land and related physical facilities that results in better development and design and the construction of aesthetic amenities. The Project involves a creative and adaptive reuse of a former commercial parcel that currently lies vacant with only surface parking lots. The design maximizes the architectural interest of the Project by ensuring that the front of the townhomes is outward-facing and street-facing. The design incorporates green space, significant landscaping and walking paths and will be a radical improvement over the mass of paved areas that currently occupies the site. v. An efficient use of the land resulting in more economic networks of utilities, streets and other facilities. The Project will function as an efficient use of the 11 acres of land with a well-designed layout of homes, streets and green spaces. Residents will enjoy easy access to modern homes combined with vastly improved green spaces and landscaped areas. vi. A land use which promotes the public health, safety and general welfare. The use of the Property as a residential townhome development will promote the public health, safety and welfare by providing safe, quality housing at a price point that is appealing to a wide Attachment 2 Page 14 of 54 variety of Des Plaines residents. The Project will provide low maintenance housing for residents who wish to age in place in Des Plaines without the burden of single family homeownership and will provide an entry into real estate ownership for younger buyers. b. The Project meets the requirements and standards of the planned unit development regulations, with the proposed modifications set forth in this application. Specifically: i. Bulk exceptions: In accordance with Section 12-3-5(C) of the Zoning Ordinance, Applicant is requesting exceptions to the bulk regulations for the R-3 zoning district. Specifically, Applicant proposes that the townhome units will be individually platted with zero setbacks around the sides of each such platted lot. All areas around the townhome buildings will constitute common area outlots that will be subject to maintenance by the townhome owners’ association. In order to provide this low-maintenance lifestyle for homeowners, and because the units are attached, it is not possible or necessary within this development to have lot widths beyond the exterior walls of the units. Zero setbacks and lot widths also ensure that the Association will have full responsibility for exterior home and lot maintenance, thereby assuring consistency and quality. ii. Perimeter yards: Please see response to PUD standard (b)(i) above. iii. Compatibility: The Project will not have a detrimental influence upon surrounding properties. Rather, it will improve the condition of the overall community and will have a positive impact on the Oakton Street corridor and the greater neighborhood. iv. Parking: The Project meets Zoning Code requirements for the R-3 zoning district by providing two parking spaces per dwelling unit plus one guest space for every four dwelling units. v. Traffic: The Project has been designed to provide for safe ingress and egress from the community and from the homes within the community. The project has been sensibly designed to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets by providing for two points of ingress and egress. vi. General design: The PUD shall not be designed as to be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare. The use of the Property as a residential townhome development will promote the public health, safety and welfare by providing safe, quality housing at a price point that is appealing to a wide variety of Des Plaines residents. The Project will provide low maintenance housing for residents who wish to age in place in Des Plaines without the burden of single family homeownership and will provide an entry into real estate ownership for younger buyers. The project has been designed to offer modern architectural with spacious and extremely functional interiors, enhanced landscaping and abundant open space. Attachment 2 Page 15 of 54 c. The extent to which the proposed plan departs from the zoning and subdivision regulations otherwise applicable to the subject property, including, but not limited to, the density, dimension, area, bulk and use and the reasons why such departures are or are not deemed to be in the public interest. Please see responses to PUD standard (b) above. The departures from R-3 regulations contribute to both the design of the community and the townhome ownership structure. The townhome owners will own their individually platted residence, and all areas outside of their residence will be common area outlots that are to be maintained by the townhome owner’s association. This structure is in the best interest of the residents of the community because it eliminates the burden of maintenance for residents who either lack time or ability to maintain these areas. d. The extent to which the physical design of the proposed plan does or does not make adequate provision for public services, provide adequate control over vehicular traffic, provide for and protect designated common open space, and further the amenities of light and air, recreation and visual enjoyment. The Project provides for all necessary public services, from utilities to traffic. The project includes all infrastructure required to provide utilities and services to residents. Each unit will have access to common open space and will enjoy abundant light and air. The Project has been designed for residents to enjoy outdoor recreation both on the many interconnected sidewalks within the community and in the greater vicinity, as well as within the outlots. The Project will provide visual enjoyment both via the architectural interest of the townhomes and the abundant landscaping. e. The extent to which the relationship and compatibility of the proposed plan is beneficial or adverse to adjacent properties and neighborhood. The Project will be tremendously beneficial to adjacent properties and the neighborhood. The Property is currently underutilized and is an eyesore. The redevelopment of the Property with quality modern townhomes and abundant landscaping will have a positive impact on the viewsheds in the community and on property values in the surrounding neighborhood as a whole due to the replacement of the former commercial buildings and surface parking lots with contemporary townhomes and landscaping. f. The extent to which the proposed plan is not desirable to the proposed plan to physical development, tax base and economic well-being of the entire community. The Project will vastly improve the physical condition of the Property, which will have a corresponding positive impact on the entire community. As noted above, the property tax base will increase as a result of having additional homes in the community, and the new residents will provide an additional consumer base for local businesses. In combination, these factors will have a positive economic impact on the community. g. The extent to which the proposed plan is not in conformity with the recommendations of the comprehensive plan. Please see response to CUP standard (2) above. Attachment 2 Page 16 of 54 0 250 500 ft Disclaimer: The GIS Consortium and MGP Inc. are not liable for any use, misuse, modification or disclosure of any map provided under applicable law. This map is for general information purposes only. Although the information is believed to be generally accurate, errors may exist and the user should independently confirm for accuracy. The map does not constitute a regulatory determination and is not a base for engineering design. A Registered Land Surveyor should be consulted to determine precise location boundaries on the ground. Print Date: 6/14/2021 1050 Oakton Street NotesAttachment 3 Page 17 of 54 Attachment 4 Page 18 of 54 Attachment 4 Page 19 of 54 Attachment 5 Page 20 of 54 Attachment 6 Page 21 of 54 Attachment 6 Page 22 of 54 Attachment 6 Page 23 of 54 Attachment 6 Page 24 of 54 Attachment 7 Page 25 of 54 Attachment 7 Page 26 of 54 Attachment 7 Page 27 of 54 Attachment 7 Page 28 of 54 Attachment 8 Page 29 of 54 Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Attachment 8 Page 30 of 54 Site Location Figure 1 SITE Attachment 8 Page 31 of 54 Aerial View of Site Figure 2 SITE Attachment 8 Page 32 of 54 Attachment 8 Page 33 of 54 Figure 4 Attachment 8 Page 34 of 54 Attachment 8 Page 35 of 54 Tables 1 4 Type of Crash Frequency Year Angle Overturned Object Rear End Sideswipe Turning Ped Total Total 6 1 2 24 2 34 4 76 Avg. 1.2 <1.0 <1.0 4.8 <1.0 6.8 <1.0 15.2 Attachment 8 Page 36 of 54 Type of Crash Frequency Year Angle Head On Object Rear End Sideswipe Turning Other Total Total 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 Avg. 0 0 0 0 0 <1.0 0 <1.0 Type of Crash Frequency Year Angle Head On Object Rear End Sideswipe Turning Ped Total Total 1 0 0 1 1 4 1 8 Avg. <1.0 0 0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.6 Attachment 8 Page 37 of 54 Type of Crash Frequency Year Angle Head On Object Rear End Sideswipe Turning Other Total Total 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 Avg. 0 0 0 0 0 <1.0 0 <1.0 Attachment 8 Page 38 of 54 Figure 5 Table 5 ITE Land Use Code Weekday Morning Peak Hour Weekday Evening Peak Hour Daily Type/Size In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total Attachment 8 Page 39 of 54 Attachment 8 Page 40 of 54 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Attachment 8 Page 41 of 54 Attachment 8 Page 42 of 54 Attachment 8 Page 43 of 54 Attachment 8 Page 44 of 54 Tables 6 9 Attachment 8 Page 45 of 54 Pe a k Ho u r Ea s t b o u n d We s t b o u n d No r t h b o u n d So u t h b o u n d Ov e r a l l L T R L T R L T R L T R Y e a r 2 0 2 0 B a s e T r a f f i c V o l u m e s We e k d a y Mo r n i n g Pe a k Ho u r We e k d a y Ev e n i n g Pe a k Ho u r Y e a r 2 0 2 6 N o - B u i l d T r a f f i c V o l u m e s We e k d a y Mo r n i n g Pe a k Ho u r We e k d a y Ev e n i n g Pe a k Ho u r Y e a r 2 0 2 6 P r o j e c t e d T r a f f i c V o l u m e s We e k d a y Mo r n i n g Pe a k Ho u r We e k d a y Ev e n i n g Pe a k Ho u r Attachment 8 Page 46 of 54 Weekday Morning Peak Hour Weekday Evening Peak Hour Intersection LOS Delay LOS Delay Oakton Street with Times Drive Oakton Street with Oakton Place Oakton Street with Executive Way Attachment 8 Page 47 of 54 Weekday Morning Peak Hour Weekday Evening Peak Hour Intersection LOS Delay LOS Delay Oakton Street with Times Drive Oakton Street with Oakton Place Oakton Street with Executive Way Attachment 8 Page 48 of 54 Weekday Morning Peak Hour Weekday Evening Peak Hour Intersection LOS Delay LOS Delay Oakton Street with Times Drive Oakton Street with Oakton Place Oakton Street with Executive Way Attachment 8 Page 49 of 54 Attachment 8 Page 50 of 54 o o Attachment 8 Page 51 of 54 Attachment 8 Page 52 of 54 Site and Context Photos 1050 E. Oakton Street – Facing East from Times Drive 1050 E. Oakton Street – Facing North from Executive Way Attachment 9 Page 53 of 54 Site and Context Photos (continued) 1050 E. Oakton Street – Facing Southeast from Executive Way curve 1050 E. Oakton Street – Facing South from Executive Way curve Attachment 9 Page 54 of 54