Loading...
05/14/2012DES PLAINES PLAN COMMISSION MAY 14, 2012 MINUTES The Des Plaines Plan Commission held its regularly scheduled meeting on Monday, May 14, 2012, at 7:00 P.M., in Room 102, City Council Chambers, of the Des Plaines Civic Center. PLAN COMMISSION PRESENT: Niemotka, Perez, Yi ABSENT: Lane, Bar Also present was Senior Planner, Scott Mangum, Department of Community and Economic Development. Chairman Niemotka called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. A motion was made by Commissioner Perez seconded by Commissioner Yi to approve the minutes of the April 30, 2012, hearings as submitted. AYES: NAYES: Niemotka, Niemotka, Yi None MOTION CARRIED NEW BUSINESS Chairman Niemotka read a summary of the two matters on the Agenda: Case Number : 12-018-PUD-SUB Address: 2988-3010 Orchard Place and 2967-3003 Mannheim Road Request: Preliminary Planned Unit Development with exceptions and Tentative Plat of Subdivision consisting of six lots. PIN: 09-33-305-002-0000, 09-33-305-005-0000, 09-33-305-006-0000, 09-33-305-009-0000, 09-33- 305-010-0000, 09-33-305-013-0000, 09-33-305-014-0000 Petitioner: TPS Des Plaines, LLC (do TPS Parking Management, LLC) 200 West Monroe Street, Suite 1500 Chicago, IL 60606 Owner: City of Des Plaines 1420 Miner Street Des Plaines, IL 60016 Case Number: 12-023-TA Address: Cit«vide Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 2 Request: Text Amendment to the City of Des Plaines 1998 Zoning Ordinance, as amended, amending Section 11.8-1, to allow Planned Unit Developments to establish a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation Plan. Petitioner: City of Des Plaines, Community and Economic Development Department 1420 Miner Street Des Plaines, IL 60016 Case Number 12-018-PUD-SUB was heard first. Address: 3003 Mannheim Road Request: Preliminary Planned Unit Development with exceptions and Tentative Plat of Subdivision consisting of six lots. Petitioner: TPS Des Plaines, LLC (c/o TPS Parking Management, LLC) 200 West Monroe Street, Suite 1500 Chicago, IL 60606 Owner: City of Des Plaines 1420 Miner Street Des Plaines, IL 60016 The following individuals were sworn in: Kevin Shrier: Petitioner and Chief Operating Officer for The Parking Spot John Lyons: Petitioner and Vice President of Development for The Parking Spot Roger Heerema of Wright Heerma Architects: Architect for the Petitioner Brad Navarro of Walker Parking Consultants: Parking consultant for the Petitioner Javier Millan of Kenig, Lindgren, O'Hara, Aboona, Inc., Traffic consultant for the Petitioner Mariah DiGrino of DLA Piper, LLP: Attomey for the Petitioner Todd Shaffer of Haeger Engineering: Civil engineer for the Petitioner Petitioner Shrier introduced himself as the Chief Operating Officer of the Parking Spot. Commissioner Yi wanted to point out that only half the Commission was present. Petitioner Shrier acknowledged the attendance, and wished to continue as planned. Petitioner Shrier gave a brief overview of the business and a brief introduction to his proposed plan. He said they have 40 properties throughout the country and are excited to be coming to Des Plaines. He said the proposed site would be a flagship for his company. Petitioner Lyons introduced himself. He said the current site plan is very similar to the proposed plan from one year ago when they were selected from the competitive RFP process. He said they are a couple months ahead of schedule from a development standpoint. Petitioner went on to say he wanted a continuation of the amicable relationship that has existed with Des Plaines and the Parking Spot. One of the differences he said they have incorporated in this plan compared to one year ago is a little bit larger of a parking deck with a couple of extra floors on it. Part of that is a better understanding of the market at O'Hare and part of it is a better understanding of getting projects financed in this type of economic climate. At this point, a lot of details have been worked out with Des Plaines. Every issue has not been resolved quite yet, but compared to where some projects are at the Plan Commission point, he feels confident they have been a few steps ahead of the game. He expects all issues to be resolved by the time the final PUD application time comes. He then went on to introduce the other Petitioners. He wanted to point out that the proposed parking area is a little different than traditional parking areas -it is focused on off airport parking use. Based on their traffic analysis, the Parking Spot's peak hours of operation end up being Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 3 around 6:30A.M. and 7:OOP.M on weekdays; it is not on office building schedules. As a result, the load on infrastructure is lightened. Parking shuttle traffic to the airport is available for hotel use for future hotel plans and hotel users. As far as the restaurant development goes, they are investigating a couple of different options for the right user at the proposed site. A restaurant operator has not been chosen yet, but he anticipates that process to move along quite soon. Chairman Niemotka asked if questions should be asked to each Petitioner as they present or if the Commissioners should hold their questions until the end of their presentation. Petitioner Lyons said it would probably save some time if they talked about the generalities first and saved questions until the end. Petitioner Heerema introduced himself. He said he wanted to touch on how the site plan came to be. They wanted to incorporate the site as best they could with the adjacent buildings already in place. By pulling the deck off Mannheim Road, they were able to create a buffer. There are three major ingress and egress points. This allows for a comfortable distance for users to get in, pull off the street, decelerate, and decide what area the user wants to go to. Incidental surface parking is also provided. He said there were some questions as to massing and its relationship to the contextual surrounding, particularly to the expressway and hotel. He showed a 3-dimensional rendering of the proposed site and how it compares to the surrounding area, specifically the Holiday Inn. Petitioner Heerema tumed over the presentation to Petitioner Navarro. Petitioner Navarro introduced himself. He gave a general overview of the functionality of the parking garage. The way it is designed, it is a 2,350 stall garage with 7 levels and meets the city's parking geometries. All the entrances are to the West of the site. There is only one user entrance. The shuttle bus is segregated from the main users. This way the buses and users are comfortably apart to prevent conflict. The shuttle bus entrance is in the Northwest corner. There will be separate parking for valet parking, levels 1 and 2, and self -parking, level 3 and above. The shuttle bus will come from the North to the South and will service both the users of the garage and the airport as well as the users of the hotel. The shuttle bus exit is segregated from the users of the site. Petitioner Navarro said as a team they were now ready for questions. Commissioner Perez asked about the traffic and said it is very important for the citizens not to experience even worse traffic than they already do currently in that area. Petitioner Millan explained the traffic findings. He said currently, there is a plan to widen Higgins Road. He said this will certainly ease congestion citizens currently experience. He reiterated that the peak operation of the proposed site falls outside of normal heavy congestion times. He said there will only be one full ingress/egress access point and the other two access points would be right-in/right-out. Commissioner Perez asked Petitioner Millan if he realized that O'Hare is making a cargo project in the area that will negatively impact traffic. Petitioner Millan said that when they made their calculations, they were aware of this and they accounted for it. They also had growth applied to the traffic in order to project 20-30 years into the future. If the improvements are done today, there would be significant traffic improvement. However, 20-30 years from now, the traffic may come back to its current levels. Commissioner Perez and Petitioner Millan continued to talk about the potential traffic problems and how this proposed site is a best altemative. Commissioner Perez asked Mr. Mangum if it is possible down the road for Petitioners to decide not to use Orchard Place as an exit. Mr. Mangum said the plans that are proposed are for Orchard Place to be the primary exit and from Orchard Place, users would head South to Higgins. Mr. Mangum said there are plans to improve Orchard Place and that this would need to be done by the time the proposed plan comes to fruition. Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 4 Commissioner Perez told Petitioner Milian that when there are special events at the Allstate Arena, traffic gets much worse and asked him if he considered this. Petitioner Millan said for special events, police direct traffic rather than having traffic signals and unfortunately there is nothing they can do about this. Commissioner Perez said the Allstate Arena has special events all the time. Petitioner Millan said he agrees with him, but improvements are being made. Mr. Mangum said it is something to be looked into, and Des Plaines police communications with the Rosemont police could occur. Petitioner Millan said if the proposed site was retail, they would definitely see increased traffic during the times Commissioner Perez spoke about. However, the nature of the garage allows them to operate with minimal impact on current traffic. Commissioner Perez told Mr. Mangum that if the proposed site is approved, he doesn't want to have a big traffic problem for years down the road. Petitioner DiGrino introduced herself and said she would be happy to direct questions that would facilitate the discussion in an easier way. Chairman Niemotka said he looked through the report and asked if anyone went to IDOT. He said Mannheim Road is an IDOT maintained facility. Petitioner Shaffer introduced himself and said when they started the project, Des Plaines made them aware that Mannheim and Higgins were to undergo significant change in the coming future. He said he has been coordinating with IDOT to accommodate all development. IDOT is proposing a barrier median. Chairman Niemotka said the largest problem he sees is having an exclusive lane running right into Petitioners' Northwest driveway. Petitioner Shaffer said this is very similar to the arboretum in South Barrington on Northbound 59. He said the lane would turn into a taper lane. Chairman Niemotka said the volume on Northbound 59 compared to Mannheim Road is like comparing apples to oranges. Petitioner Shaffer said the two are absolutely completely different, but if the access points that Petitioners are proposing were not there, cars would be doing the same thing they are doing now. With the proposed access points, the lane would be extended. Chairman Niemotka said it looks as though it is an exclusive right turn lane. Petitioner Shaffer said studies are still being conducted and nothing is set in stone yet. Chairman Niemotka asked if Petitioners anticipate most of their traffic coming from the South to the North with the restaurant there or if it would be a 50/50 split. Petitioner Lyons took the podium. Chairman Niemotka said if there is going to be a fast food restaurant, there is going to be a lot of drive-thru traffic from the North and likely both directions on Higgins. Petitioner Lyons said the full access point works well for that. Commissioner Yi said he recognized someone in the audience and asked if he saw him before. City Manager Michael Bartholomew took the podium. He said this project is critical to the City of Des Plaines. He said the City of Des Plaines has had a piece of property that has laid dormant for years and he looks forward to it being developed and generating revenue for the people of Des Plaines. Commissioner Yi asked if the City would be the owner of the hotel. City Manager Bartholomew said no. The objective is to transfer the entire property to the Parking Spot. Commissioner Yi asked if the City would be involved in financing the project. City Manager Bartholomew said the City would not. Commissioner Perez asked City Manager Bartholomew if he lived in Des Plaines. Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 5 City Manager Bartholomew said yes. Commissioner Yi said he looked around the area of the proposed site and said there are 4 other hotels there, one of which went into bankruptcy. He said the airport is a long way away and he seemed perplexed that a shuttle service would be provided. Petitioner Shrier said they are in multiple locations throughout the U.S. and they have parking locations that are much further from airports than the proposed site is, but acknowledged that there is not currently a market for the hotel Commissioner Yi questioned the viability of the proposed restaurant. Petitioner Shrier said there are many restaurant operators that are interested. Chairman Niemotka asked if the parking ramp slopes have been used in similar weather conditions as those in the Chicagoland area. Petitioner Navarro said regarding ramps, Petitioners are suggesting a 6% parking ramp and the international building code calls for a maximum of 6 2/3%. Thus, they are under what the building code allows. He said older building codes used to have a 5% limit but that is now gone and it is 6 2/3%. With regard to express ramps, Petitioners are proposing a 10% express ramp slope. When it comes to express ramps, the issue is not the slope, it is the transition from the bottom of the slope to the flat. In Chicago, they use 16% ramps, and this is much less. The express ramps will be under cover so icing will not be a problem. Chairman Niemotka asked Petitioner Heerema if the Holiday Inn will be taller than the proposed facility. Petitioner Heerema said the Holiday Inn will be taller. Chairman Niemotka asked Petitioner Shaffer if he had contacted the Corps of Engineers regarding replacing the bridge. Petitioner Shaffer said he has already started the process and is working with staff to come up with the best approach. Commissioner Yi said the variations that are asked are almost twice as great as what is currently allowed and asked if the City of Des Plaines is okay with this. Mr. Mangum said that staff is recommending approval. The previous PUD was a similar height and the proposed development fits the surrounding area. Chairman Niemotka said after the staff report is read, questions can be directed toward Mr. Mangum to hopefully clarify these matters. Chairman Niemotka asked Mr. Mangum to read the applicable staff report into record, as follows: Issue: A Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) is requested under Section 3.5 of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow for construction of a 7-level, approximately 768,800 square foot commercial parking garage via a Conditional Use Permit, an approximately 4,000 square foot restaurant (which may be a Class B Restaurant and may have a drive -through facility, both of which will also require approval of a Conditional Use Permit) and a 9-story, approximately 105,000 square foot, 180-room hotel with PUD exceptions for (1) building heights of approximately 86'-2" for the commercial parking garage and 90' for the hotel, instead of not more than 45' in height; (2) a front -yard setback of 5' instead of not less than 25' and rear -yard setback of 0' instead of not less than 5' for Lot 1; (3) greater than 25% of collective (off -site) parking for the proposed restaurant and hotel uses; (4) an increase in the allowable projection of a roof overhang for the commercial parking garage from four feet instead of the permitted maximum of two feet, (5) parking ramp and access ramp slopes that are 6% and 10%, respectively, instead of ramps that are no more than 5% and 8%, respectively; (6) number of off-street loading spaces; (7) landscaping (8) the size and projection of canopies; and (9) such other items as may be identified at the public hearing. A Tentative Plat of Resubdivision of existing lots is requested to result in a total of six lots with subdivision variations to: (1) Section 13-2-5.R of the City Code for lots with a depth of less than 125' (Lots 3, 4, 6) and for a lot Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 6 with double frontage (Lot 5); (2) Section 13-2-5.N of the City Code regarding rear yard easements; (3) Section 13-2- 5-W of the City Code regarding the burial of overhead utility lines; and (4) to such other sections of the City Code as may be identified at the public hearing. Analysis: Preliminary Planned Unit Development Report Owners: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 (Properties under Redevelopment Agreement with Petitioner) Petitioner: TPS Des Plaines, LLC (c/o TPS Parking Management, LLC), 200 West Monroe Street, Suite 1500, Chicago, IL 60606 Case Number: 12-018-PUD-SUB Real Estate Index 09-33-305-002-0000,09-33-305-005-0000, 09-33-305-006-0000, Numbers 09-33-305-009-0000,09-33-305-010-0000, 09-33-305-013-0000, 09-33-305- 014-0000 Existing Zoning C-3, General Commercial Existing Land Use Car rental facility/Vacant land Surrounding Zoning North: C-3, General Commercial South: C-3, General Commercial, Village of Rosemont East: R-1, Single Family Residential, C-2, Limited Office Commercial West: Village of Rosemont Surrounding Land Use North: I-90 Jane Addams Tollway South: Willow Creek/ Commercial (McDonald's) East: Vacant (Rosemont Park District), Canadian National Railroad West: Hotel and Restaurant within Village of Rosemont Street Classification Mannheim Road is a four -to -six lane regional arterial street under IDOT jurisdiction. Orchard Place is a two-way local street under City of Des Plaines jurisdiction. Comprehensive Plan Entertainment is the recommended use of the property. Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 7 Development Schedule Project Description Start — Late 2012 (Parking Garage), 2014 (Restaurant), 2015 (Hotel) Finish — Mid 2014 (Parking Garage), Mid 2014 (Restaurant), 2017 (Hotel) Three land uses are proposed as a part of the Preliminary Planned Unit Development. The developer proposes a seven -level, approximately 768,800 square foot, commercial parking garage via a Conditional Use Permit, an approximately 4,000 square foot restaurant (which may be a Class B Restaurant and may have a drive -through facility, both of which will also require approval of a Conditional Use Permit) and a 9-story, approximately 105,000 square foot, 180-room hotel on the approximately 4.9 acre site which is currently owned by the City of Des Plaines. The City entered into a Redevelopment Agreement with the petitioner in February 2012 following a Request for Proposals to develop the site that was issued in 2011. Demolition of all existing structures on site, with the exception of the billboard, is proposed. The principal use on the site would be an approximately 2,350 space commercial parking garage that would operate 24-hours per day to serve passengers from O'Hare International Airport. The parking garage would offer long-term valet and self-service parking and shuttle transportation to the airport. Additional proposed uses include a 4,000 square foot restaurant, which may be a Class B (fast food) type restaurant with a drive -through facility, and an 180- room hotel. Based on assumptions about the potential uses, the petitioner has developed a parking matrix estimating that 137 of the 180 required parking spaces for the restaurant and hotel would be provided within the parking garage with the remaining 43 spaces available in the surface parking lots. Tenants have not been identified for either of these uses, so the plans are conceptual at this point. However, the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the restaurant and drive -through that would be considered along with the Final PUD. Staff has identified concems with the drive -through orientation and circulation and has forwarded comments to the traffic consultant for further evaluation or plan revisions (see conditions). The petitioner anticipates that construction of the restaurant would be completed along with the parking garage, but that development of the hotel may lag behind depending on market conditions. Vehicular access to the site will be provided via Mannheim Road (three curb cuts) and Orchard Place (two curb cuts). The main vehicular ingress for all three uses is proposed for Mannheim Road. The primary vehicular egress for hotel and restaurant users is also on Mannheim Road, where parking garage users would exit onto Orchard Place. A Traffic Study has been prepared by Kenig, Lindgren, O'Hara, Aboona, Inc. (KLOA) and has been reviewed by City Engineering. Proposed signage would exceed the limits established in the Zoning Ordinance by number, location, and size of wall signs and height of monument signs. A proposed text amendment would allow a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation Plan (LASRP) to be requested for planned unit development. The LASRP would be heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals and City Council as a Conditional Use. The proposed parking garage would be located towards the rear of the site with frontage on Orchard Place. The garage is a seven level, 86-foot 2-inch concrete structure that would exceed the height of the of the adjacent Tollway grade by Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 8 approximately 55-60 feet based on the topographical survey. A mesh screen of the exterior of the parking structure is proposed that would contain the black and yellow polka dot logo of The Parking Spot. A canopy is proposed to cover the ground level space between the parking structure and hotel entrance. The one- story restaurant and nine -story hotel are proposed to be located along Mannheim Road. Architectural design of these structures is conceptual at this point, but would be reviewed by the Architectural Commission in the future. PUD Findings As required, the proposed development is reviewed below in terms of the findings contained in Section 3.5-5 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 3.5-1: Comment: The proposed plan is consistent with the stated purpose of Section 3.5-1 of the Zoning Ordinance in so far as the proposed parking garage/hotel/restaurant development would allow for efficient use of land resulting in more economic networks of utilities, street and other facilities not be possible under the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance based on the proposed density of commercial development on the site. B. The extent to which the proposed plan meets the prerequisites and standards of the planned unit development regulations: Comment: The proposed Planned Unit Development meets all PUD requirements contained in Section 3.5-2 of the Zoning Ordinance as it would be located in a zoning district (C-3) that permits PUDs, it meets the minimum size standard of two acres, as it is 4.9 acres in size, and is under contract to be under the unified control of TPS Des Plaines, LLC. 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 development meets or exceeds the following applicable zoning regulations as proposed for the C-3, General Commercial District: • Minimum size for PUD; Two acres are required; the site is 4.9 acres; • Front yard, side and rear yard setbacks for the hotel and restaurant buildings; • Maximum building coverage (Not applicable in C-3, General Commercial); • Minimum distance between buildings (15 feet is required and all structures would be exceed the requirement, with the exception of the canopy that would cover the ground level access connecting the parking garage and the hotel); • Compatibly with surrounding properties; and • Traffic (Adequate provision for safe ingress and egress and minimal traffic congestion) Planned Unit Development exceptions are requested for: • (1) Building heights of approximately 86'-2" for the commercial parking garage and 90' for the hotel, instead of not more than 45' in height. The proposed building heights are consistent with multi -story hotel and office buildings to the west and south of the site in the Village of Rosemont. Approval from the Federal Aviation Administration is required due to the proximity to O'Hare Airport. • (2) A front -yard setback of 5' instead of not less than 25' and rear -yard setback of 0' instead of not less than 5' for Lot 1. The 25' front yard setback is required due to the site being adjacent to R-1 zoned properties to the east of the site across Orchard Place. While the properties are within the R-1 Zoning Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 9 District they are owned by the Rosemont Park District and are not anticipated to be developed as residential properties. The parking garage is also proposed with a 0' rear yard setback with the adjoining common lot (#2) within the PUD which will provide parking and vehicular access for the parcels. • (3) Greater than 25% of collective (off -site) parking for the proposed restaurant and hotel uses. The off -site parking will be accommodated within the PUD in the parking garage. The increased amount of off -site parking allows the site to be developed in a denser and more efficient manner decreasing the amount of surface parking by utilizing the adjacent seven level parking structure. • (4) An increase in the allowable projection of a roof overhang for the commercial parking garage from four feet instead of the permitted maximum of two feet. The applicant believes that the increased overhang enhances the design of the structure. The Architectural Commission will review the project design. • (5) Parking ramp and access ramp slopes that are 6% and 10%, respectively, instead of ramps that are no more than 5% and 8%, respectively. The ramp slope requirements in the Zoning Ordinance stem from a previous building code that has since been revised. The proposed project will be required to comply with current building code requirements. • (6) Number of off-street loading spaces. Deliveries for hotel and restaurant uses must either be managed during off-peak hours or plans revised to incorporate loading spaces. • (7) Landscaping. Per the Landscape Summary on sheet L-101, proposed landscaping would exceed all code requirement with the exception of the number of parkway trees along Mannheim Road (9.4 required, 9 proposed) and the number of perimeter parking lot trees along the north parking lot (1.5 required, 1 proposed). However, this deficit of one shade tree is compensated by an additional 9 trees proposed in the South parking lot. • (8) Size and projection of canopies. The canopy is proposed to be larger than allowed in the Zoning Ordinance in order to provide a covered walkway to connect the parking garage and the hotel. As previously noted, required hotel parking will be provided in the parking garage. 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: After reviewing the petitioner's preliminary building and site improvement plans; it appears, that for the most part, the proposed development is making adequate provision for the necessary infrastructure including sewers, water main and right-of-way dedication to rebuild and expand the adjacent Orchard Place roadway (see preliminary engineering plans). Comments and conditions from the Public Works and Engineering Department further address this issue. Pedestrian access to the site would be provided by the sidewalk network along Mannheim Road. No open space is proposed on site, but vacant land located across Orchard Place is under the ownership of the Rosemont Park District. Potential future recreational enhancement of this open space along Willow Creek could provide better pedestrian access to the site from the east. The control of vehicular traffic is addressed by the petitioner's professional traffic study, which was performed by KLOA of Rosemont, IL. The study concludes, "The proposed development is well situated with respect to the area roadway system. The proposed improvements by IDOT to the intersection of Higgins Road and Mannheim Road will provide additional capacity and help traffic operations in the area. The site will be provided with a flexible access system via two right-in/right-out access drives and one full ingress/egress access drive on Mannheim Road and via outbound only access drives on Orchard Place. With the recommended modifications, southbound left-tums from Mannheim Road at the main access drive will be accommodated via the corrugated mountable median. The third northbound through lane on Mannheim Road should be extended terminating as a right-tum lane at the northerly access drive." The City's Engineering Division has reviewed the traffic study. The site is served directly by one PACE bus route (#250) which connect the site to the O'Hare Kiss-N-Fly Automated Transportation System Station and the Metra Union Pacific Northwest Line's Des Plaines Station. The Metra North Central Line O'Hare Transfer Station is located approximately 1/3 mile to the south in Rosemont. Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 10 Additionally, there could be another potential commuter rail station adjacent to the site as a part of Metra's proposed STAR Line along I-90. The site will also be served by The Parking Spot shuttles operating to and from O'Hare Airport. E. The extent to which the relationship and compatibility of the proposed development is beneficial or adverse to adjacent properties and neighborhood: Comment: At full build -out the proposed development would consist of a seven -level parking garage, restaurant, and nine -story hotel. There are already a number of low -and mid -rise hotels, restaurants and office buildings in the adjacent and surrounding area. Additionally, O'Hare International Airport is located southwest of the site. The project site itself is relatively isolated from residential uses with the closest residentially developed area separated from the site by both the Canadian National Railroad tracks and the Jane Addams Memorial Tollway (I-90). Thus, the proposed commercial structures should be compatible with the existing commercial character. The parking garage will exceed the grade of I-90 by approximately 55-60 feet, providing a high degree of visibility for vehicles travelling on the Tollway. The proposed signage is greater in scale than either allowed by the Zoning Ordinance or present in the surrounding area. However, the proposed text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance would allow the development, as a PUD, to apply for a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation Plan per Section 11.8 of the Zoning Ordinance. 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 site is largely vacant with a rental car operation operating on a portion of the site. If the development is built as proposed with the commercial parking garage, hotel, and restaurant, the assessed valuation of the property may increase, which will result in an increase in property tax revenue for the City of Des Plaines and thus enhance the economic well-being of this city. In addition to property tax revenues, the City will generate revenue from the development through parking, hotel, food and beverage, and sales taxes. Of course, once the parking garage, hotel, and restaurant are built and occupied, there will be greater demands on city services, city streets and other public facilities. It is assumed, though, that the city's current public services and public facilities will be able to handle the increased need for services at this location without being overburdened. G. The extent to which the proposed plan is in conformity with the recommendations of the 2007 Comprehensive Plan: Comment: The proposed restaurant and hotel generally conform to the Entertainment land use recommended in the 2007 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed parking garage would fulfill an Objective of the economic portion of the Comprehensive Plan to capitalize off the proximity to O'Hare Airport. The proposed development also would be in harmony with other surrounding land uses, which are mainly hotels and office buildings ranging in height from 3-to- 11 stories and one-story restaurants and bars. PUD Issues/Considerations: 1. The restaurant and hotel would be located toward the Mannheim Road frontage and should be designed to address the street with entrances. The Architectural Commission will review proposed building designs, including materials. 2. The orientation and configuration of the potential drive -through facility shall be evaluated and/or revised per staff comments prior to consideration of conditional use approval as part of the Final Planned Unit Development. 3. Provide information on any proposed sustainable elements of the project including shuttle vehicles, pavement materials, roof materials and coloring, and operational characteristics. Tentative Plat Report Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 11 Name of Subdivision: TPS Des Plaines PUD Address: 3003 Mannheim Road Request: Approval of a Tentative Plat of Subdivision consisting of six lots. Total Acreage of Resubdivision: 4.9 acres General Information Lot Descriptions and Construction Plans: The Tentative plat shows the existing 6 parcels being combined and resubdivided into six lots: Lot #1 (2.78 acres) would have approximately 499 feet of frontage on Orchard Place and is proposed to be developed with the parking garage; Lot #2, (.99 acres) would front on Mannheim Road and is proposed as a common lot providing vehicular access to all lots and a portion of the parking for the proposed restaurant and hotel uses; Lot #3 (.23 acres) would have approximately 84 feet of frontage on Mannheim Road and contain the proposed restaurant use; Lot #4 (.41 acres) would have approximately 187 feet of frontage on Mannheim Road and contain the proposed hotel use; Lot #5 (.31 acres) is proposed by the developer to be retained by the City of Des Plaines as a linear lot that would be unbuildable as it is within Willow Creek; Lot #6 (.12 acres) would also be retained by the City of Des Plaines as it contains an existing billboard, but would provide surface parking to the restaurant use through an easement. Subdivision variations are requested to: (1) Section 13-2-5.R of the City Code for lots with a depth of less than 125' (Lots 3, 4, 6) and for a lot with double frontage (Lot 5); (2) Section 13-2-5.N of the City Code regarding rear yard easements; (3) Section 13-2-5-W of the City Code regarding the burial of overhead utility lines; and (4) to such other sections of the City Code as may be identified at the public hearing. The subdivision ordinance does not differentiate between residential and commercial lots, however, many of the standards appear to be intended to address single family residential development. While the lot depths for the commercial parcels are shallower than normally allowed the developer believes that they will allow for viable development of a restaurant and hotel, particularly with off -site parking agreements with the parking garage. Lot #5 would front on both Mannheim and Orchard Place (double frontage), however, the lot is unbuildable due to the presence of Willow Creek. Five foot rear yard easements, typical in residential development, are not necessary due to the location of utilities and proposed configuration of the lots. All new utilities will be buried on site, however, there are existing overhead utility lines along the north and east property boundaries that would remain. Signatures are required from public utilities and the municipality approving the location of easements for the Final Plat of Subdivision. Subdivision Plat Issues/Considerations: 1. Lot #5 is proposed to be owned by the City of Des Plaines, but is located within Willow Creek. If that portion of the site is agreed upon to be owned by the City of Des Plaines, the property should be dedicated to the City as opposed to being created as a separate lot. 2. The Public Works and Engineering Department has recommended that the water main be designed to serve full development and constructed in phases to comply with the site's fire flow requirements. Tentative Plat Comments 1. If approved, the Final Plat must show the Name of the Owner(s) and notarized signatures; 2. The Final Plat must show the proper easement provisions and signature lines and have them signed by all the public service utilities; 3. On the Final Plat, the petitioner shall sign the owner certificate(s) and have them notarized. 4. The Final Plat must show Municipal Boundaries. 5. The Final Plat must show building lines and easements including dimensions. 6. The Final Plat must show a statement of land dedication for public use. 7. The Final Plat must show a complete legal description. 8. The Final Plat must include Certificates from the Finance Director, Director of Public Works and Engineering, and Director of Community and Economic Development; 9. The Final Plat must show all existing structures that will remain after the subdivision including the billboard. 10. The Final Plat must show all subdivision regulation variances. Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 12 Plan Commission Procedure The Plan Commission may vote to grant or deny approval of the Tentative Plat. If approved, the petitioner's next step is to submit final engineering plans to the Public Works and Engineering Department and return to the Plan Commission with a corrected plat for Final Plat consideration. Stall Recommendations: • The Department of Community and Economic Development recommends approval of the Preliminary Planned Unit Development and approval of the Tentative Plat, provided all conditions of approval are met as shown below. • The Public Works and Engineering Department recommends approval of the Preliminary PUD, subject to conditions #5 - #17 listed below. The Engineering Division has reviewed the Tentative Plat of Subdivision, Preliminary Engineering plans and the Traffic Study and is recommending approval subject to the conditions and comments below. • The City of Des Plaines Fire Department recommends approval of the Preliminary PUD, and approval of the Tentative Plat of Subdivision, subject to conditions #18 —#25, as listed below: Conditions: 1. The petitioner must prepare a Final Planned Unit Development Plat that meets all the requirements of Appendix A-4 (Minimum Submittal requirements for PUDs) of the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance and a Final Plat of Subdivision that meets all the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations and the comments in this report and submit it to the Community and Economic Development Department. 2. Provide written proof of Final Engineering approval from the City of Des Plaines Public Works and Engineering Department; 3. The petitioner shall pay all applicable building permits and related fees. 4. Consider adding secured bicycle parking for employees and customers within 50' of the building entrances. 5. Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD), Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), and Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) permits will be required. 6. Prior to approval of the Final PUD the water main shall be designed to serve the full development (may be constructed in phases) to comply with the site's fire flow requirements to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and Engineering. 7. Sanitary sewer under garage must be ductile iron. 8. Show exact location and size of gas main along north property line. Verify with gas company that they can maintain their pipe in a 5' easement. 9. Orchard Place should be improved from the northern most egress to Higgins Rd. Since The Parking Spot vans will be using this road to get back in to the garage when Mannheim Rd is backed up (from an event at the Allstate Arena), and the Fire Department may use this road for fire fighting, two way traffic on this road is mandatory. There is also a question of the structural stability of this existing old 16' wide arch bridge. This existing bridge should be removed and replaced with one that will have the capacity for two way traffic (28' back of curb to back of curb with a 5' wide public sidewalk). Storm sewer, a 5' wide public sidewalk and street lighting should be added to the street. 10. Dedicate Orchard Place to the City of Des Plaines. Lot #5 is proposed to be owned by the City of Des Plaines, but is located within Willow Creek. If that portion of the site is agreed upon to be owned by the City of Des Plaines, the property should be dedicated to the City as opposed to being created as a separate lot. 11. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approval will be required the parking garage and hotel. 12. Revise plans or address concems about the location and function of the conceptual restaurant drive-thru regarding safe vehicular access, stacking, and lack of a breakout lane. Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 13 13. Consider the potential move of the restaurant building to the east and south (better presence along Mannheim, direct pedestrian access from Mannheim sidewalk, and clear front entrance to the restaurant) and shift the drive-thru to the east side of the building. 14. When reconfiguration of the drive-thru is investigated, consideration should be given to providing a direct pedestrian crossing between Lot 4 (hotel) and Lot 3 (restaurant) rather than the 3-leg jog shown on the concept plans. 15. The traffic study should include an analysis of the typical drive-thru demand for a restaurant of this size. 16. The traffic study should include an analysis of the adequacy of the proposed Hotel drop off area. 17. Consider eliminating the extra west -side entrance/exit of the Lot 6 Parking Lot to reduce the number of conflict points at the northernmost site driveway. 18. Parking structure will be required to be fully sprinklered. 19. Class I manual dry standpipes are allowed in open parking garages that are subject to freezing temperatures, provided that the hose connections are located as required for Class II standpipes. Class II standpipe hose connections shall be accessible and shall be located so that all portions of the building are within 30 feet of a nozzle attached to 100 feet. 20. The minimum fire -flow and flow duration for buildings is required as specified in Table B105.1 of the 2006 International Fire code. 21. A reduction in required fire -flow of up to 75 percent, as approved, is allowed when the building is provided with an approved automatic sprinkler system. The resulting fire -flow shall not be less than 1,500 gallons per for the prescribed duration as specified in Table B105.1. Fire flow and sprinkler flow requirements should be added together to arrive at the total water demand. 22. Plat shows water main on Mannheim appears to be a 6" main. Verification will be needed to ensure that this main will meet fire flow needs for the garage and any future hotel/restaurant expansion. 23. Approved fire apparatus access roads shall be provided. Buildings exceeding 30 feet in height access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway. Fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet 24. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus. 25. Where a bridge or an elevated surface is part of a fire apparatus access road, the bridge shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with AASHTO HB-17. Bridges and elevated surfaces shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry the imposed loads of fire apparatus (approx.87, 0001bs.). Plan Commission Procedure: The Plan Commission may vote to recommend approval, approval with modifications, o Council has final authority over the Preliminary PUD. disapproval. The C Commissioner Yi asked if was unreasonable for him to ask for a 2 week delay in the approval. Board is present and he would feel much more comfortable if the full Board was there to make especially if the Petitioners are ahead of schedule. Chairman Niemotka said he can ask for it but it would kind of be unfair to Petitioners. ty He said only half the this approval Commissioner Perez said the Board just got the packets Friday, and he has not had a chance to read it with an eye to detail. Chairman Niemotka deferred to Mr. Mangum. Chairman Niemotka said he cannot think of a time when a decision had been delayed other than when there was not a full quorum. However, they had a full quorum and he did not know of any precedent. Mr. Mangum said there is a quorum and the Board has the ability to make a decision tonight. If the Board felt it did want to delay, it had the ability to delay to a date certain. That said, the Board could make a recommendation with conditions to address concerns prior to the Final PUD submittal. Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 14 Commissioner Yi asked Petitioners if a 2 week delay would be unreasonable given the fact that they are ahead of schedule. Petitioner Shrier said they are not ahead of schedule and are on a tight deadline when it comes to approval. He said that Petitioner Lyons may have been speaking about construction deadlines when he said they were ahead of schedule, but from the standpoint of everything being approved, they are not ahead of schedule. Commissioner Perez asked if the construction would be precast or concrete. Petitioner Navarro said it would be precast construction. Commissioner Perez asked Petitioner Navarro if they have a general contractor yet. Petitioner Perez said they do not. He further stated that they have not begun the in depth engineering documents yet. Petitioner DiGrino said the comments she hears tonight relate to very technical issues that Petitioners plan to continue to work with staff on. She said that as of that moment, they are in the preliminary stages and there will be an opportunity with more specific plans to come before the Board to be considered. Commissioner Perez said he still was not satisfied with the traffic report. Petitioner DiGrino said the development being proposed is much different in character in terms of the traffic consequences than a typical commercial development. The difference here does not aggravate a condition that already exists. Commissioner Perez guaranteed that traffic would be worsened. Petitioner Millan said that in terms of the traffic that this project would generate, it would be less than 5%. He reiterated that this project generates most of its traffic outside of peak business hours. Commissioner Perez said there is an Enterprise Rent-A-Car car rental in the area as well as hotels and restaurants. He said the residents of Des Plaines already face a lot of traffic due to this. Petitioner Millan said when they counted traffic, they accounted for all the surrounding businesses and they further applied a growth factor. Mr. Mangum said tab number 9 in the binder contains both a traffic study as well as comments from the City of Des Plaines Traffic Engineering. He said Petitioners responded to these comments in the binder. Petitioner Lyons said the prior PUD on the site had higher facilities than the ones currently being proposed. The previous PUD had an encroachment onto Orchard Place. In those two respects, this proposal is less intrusive. He went on to say that in terms of timing, he was talking more to the collaboration with the City of Des Plaines. Commissioner Yi asked why the size of the restaurant was decreased. Petitioner Lyons said that based on site configuration and the fact that the hotel was to be a more critical, the hotel consumes more of the Westem portion of the site. They also received input from many users that they preferred a more compact restaurant. Commissioner Yi said he would withdraw his previous statement of a 2 week delay based on the fact that the Board would get additional opportunities to discuss this project at future dates as the project progresses. Mr. Mangum said this is a preliminary planned unit development. He went on to say that if there are any particular issues at this point, they could be addressed now and conditions could be put in place. Chairman Niemotka asked for any other questions. City Manager Bartholomew said there is another chance at a public hearing during the City Council meeting and after that, this project would come back to the Plan Commission for another hearing. He said the City Council will make a commitment to reach out to all the Plan Commissioners to ensure that they are in attendance for that meeting and that they understand that their attendance is critically important. Additionally, after this goes back to the Plan Commission a second time, it will go back to City Council for another public hearing. He said the proposed plan is consistent with what City Council wanted to see developed on this land. Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 15 Chairman Niemotka asked Petitioner Shrier how the Parking Spot competes. Petitioner Shrier said typically airports are developed with garage and long-term parking. He said the Parking Spot's structure is always priced cheaper than the airport's garage parking and the Parking Spot can usually get a premium from the long-term surface lots. Commissioner Perez said people could also use the Parking Spot for events at the Allstate Arena if it's cheaper. Petitioner Shrier said that it would be a possibility but they underwrote the project to succeed with only airport parking. Chairman Niemotka asked for a motion Mr. Mangum said it would be best to make two separate motions: one for the preliminary PUD and another motion has to do with the tentative plat. A motion was made by Commissioner Perez seconded by Commissioner Yi to grant approval of the Tentative Plat, subject to the comments listed in the Staff Report and to recommend approval of the Preliminary Planned Unit Development with exceptions, subject to comments and conditions in the Staff Report. AYES: NAYES: Niemotka, Perez, Yi None Case Number 12-023-TA was heard next. Address: Citywide Request: MOTION CARRIED Text Amendment to the City of Des Plaines 1998 Zoning Ordinance, as amended, amending Section 11.8-1, to allow Planned Unit Developments to establish a Localized Altemative Sign Regulation Plan. Petitioner: City of Des Plaines, Community and Economic Development Department 1420 Miner Street Des Plaines, IL 60016 Chairman Niemotka asked Mr. Mangum read the applicable staff report into record, as follows: Issue: Text Amendment to the City of Des Plaines 1998 Zoning Ordinance, as amended, amending Table 7.3.1, Commercial Districts Use Matrix, to allow for a Commercial Parking Garage as a Conditional Use in the C-3, General Commercial District. Analysis: Text Amendment Report Petitioner: City of Des Plaines, Community and Economic Development Department, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Address: Citywide Case Number: 12-006-TA Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 16 Background Information The City of Des Plaines, as applicant, is requesting the text amendment in order to allow a Commercial Parking Garage as a conditional use within C-3, General Commercial zoned areas in the southem portion of the City. In February 2012 the City entered into a Redevelopment Agreement with a developer to construct a parking structure, restaurant(s), and hotel on a city owned site near the intersection of Mannheim and Higgins Roads. The Zoning Ordinance defines a Commercial Parking Garage as "a privately or publicly owned and used structure used for parking or storage of automobiles, generally available to the public and involving payment of a charge for such parking or storage." The proposed text amendment (see attachment 3) would amend the Commercial Districts Use Matrix (Table 7.3.1) by adding "Commercial Parking Garage" as a Conditional Use within the C-3 District with a proposed footnote that would state "When located south of Touhy Avenue." Currently a Commercial Parking Garage is permitted by right within the C-5, Central Business Commercial District, but is prohibited in all other Zoning Districts. However, staff believes that a commercial parking garage use is an airport supportive use that should also be considered in areas proximate to O'Hare Airport (south of Touhy Avenue). If the amendment is approved by the City Council as proposed, any Commercial Parking Garage would be required to apply for a Conditional Use Permit that would be considered on a case -by -case basis with the ability to attach conditions to mitigate potential impacts. To properly evaluate the text amendment request, the standards below, which are contained in Section 3.7-5 of the Zoning Ordinance, must be employed. Following is a discussion of those standards: A. Whether the proposed amendments are consistent with the goals, objectives and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan: Comment: The City of Des Plaines Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the City Council in 2007, does not specifically address the proposed use. However, an objective of the economic portion of the Comprehensive Plan is to capitalize off the proximity to O'Hare Airport. B. Whether the proposed amendments are compatible with the current conditions and the overall character of existing developments in the immediate area: Comment: The Zoning Ordinance states that the purpose of the C-3 General Commercial District is to accommodate a variety of businesses in locations to serve the community of Des Plaines. The amendment would allow a commercial parking garage in an area of the City that would serve the community and even more so the region. The southem portion of the community, where the amendment would apply, already is home to a number of visitor serving uses such as hotels, restaurants, and a major entertainment facility. C. Whether the amendments are appropriate considering the adequacy of public facilities and services available to the property: Comment: The proposed amendment to allow a Commercial Parking Garage as a conditional use should not have a direct affect on public facilities or services. As a conditional use, adequacy of public facilities and potential impacts such as traffic could be evaluated on a case by case basis. D. Whether the proposed amendments will have an adverse effect on the value of properties throughout the jurisdiction: Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 17 Comment: The proposed amendment would allow an additional land use for properties within the C-3, General Commercial Zoning District. This may improve the value of these properties and should not have an adverse effect on properties as a whole, particularly with the ability to place conditions on operations through the Conditional Use Permit process. Additionally, potential Commercial Parking Garages could generate additional revenue to the city. E. Whether the proposed amendments reflects responsible standards for development and growth: Comment: This zoning text amendment does not appear to conflict with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the official policy guide to future land use, development, and conservation with the community. Therefore, the proposed text amendment would not appear to be in conflict with responsible standards for development and growth. Recommendation: Based on the above analysis, the Community and Economic Development Department recommends approval of the requested text amendment regarding Commercial Parking Garages. The C-3, General Commercial Zoning District within the southem portion of the City may be an appropriate location for an airport supportive land use. Plan Commission Procedure: Under Section 3.7-4 of the Zoning Ordinance (Amendments) the Plan Commission may vote to recommend approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval. The City Council has the final authority on Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. ChairmanNiemotka asked if the Commissioners had any questions. Commissioner Perez asked Mr. Mangum if this would be applicable to all parts of the City of Des Plaines. Mr. Mangum said yes. Chairman Niemotka asked if there were any other questions or comments. There were none. A motion was made by Commissioner Yi seconded by Commissioner Perez to recommend approval of the requested text Amendment to the City of Des Plaines 1998 Zoning Ordinance, as amended, amending Section 11.8-1, to allow Planned Unit Developments to establish a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation Plan. AYES: NAYES: Niemotka, Perez, Yi None MOTION CARRIED Commissioner Yi asked when the next meeting would be. Mr. Mangum said the next scheduled meeting would be one day after Memorial Day, but there are no scheduled items for that agenda. Commissioner Perez made a motion to adjoum the meeting. Commissioner Yi seconded. Meeting adjourned at 8:40P.M. Sincerely, RobertNiemotka, Chairman Des Plaines Plan Commission Case #12-018-PUD-SUB Case #12-023-TA May 14, 2012 Page 18 cc: City Officials Aldermen Plan Commission Petitioner