Loading...
10/25/2016Case #16-065-V- 1883 Orchard St Case #16-071-TA- Electronic Message Signs and PUD (R-1) Regulations Case #16-054-TA- Public Open Space October 25, 2016 Page 1 • �D I A PLAINES 1LLI NO15 DES PLAINES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING October 25, 2016 MINUTES The Des Plaines Planning and Zoning Board Meeting held its regularly -scheduled meeting on Tuesday, October 25, 2016, at 7 p.m. in Room 102 of the Des Plaines Civic Center. ZONING BOARD PRESENT: Bader, Saletnik, Hofherr, Schell, Szabo, Catalano, Green ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: Johanna Bye, Senior Planner/Community & Economic Development Lauren Pruss, Economic Development Coordinator/Community & Economic Dev. Manuela Ramirez, Secretary/Community & Economic Development Chairman Szabo called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and read this evening's case. Roll call was conducted. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by Board Member Saletnik, seconded by Board Member Hofherr, to approve the minutes of September 13, 2016, as presented. AYES: Bader, Saletnik, Hofherr, Schell, Szabo, Green NAYES: None ABSTAIN: Catalano ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** PUBLIC COMMENT There were no comments. NEW BUSINESS 1. Addresses: 1883 Orchard Street Case 16-065-V The petitioner is requesting a Standard Variation pursuant to Section 12-8-1.C.3 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit the construction of a detached garage 2'3" from the side property line, when a 5' setback is required. PIN: 09-28-117-048-0000 Petitioner: Malgorzata Bronkowski, 1883 Orchard Street, Des Plaines, IL 60018 Case #16-065-V- 1883 Orchard St Case #16-071-TA- Electronic Message Signs and PUD (R-1) Regulations Case #16-054-TA- Public Open Space October 25, 2016 Page 2 Owner: Malgorzata Bronkowski, 1883 Orchard Street, Des Plaines, IL 60018 Chairman Szabo swore in Malgorzata Bronkowski, 1883 Orchard St, Des Plaines, IL. Ms. Bronkowski explained that the garage could not be 5' from the fence because of the way the driveway is situated. She would not be able to drive her car and park it in her garage. She bought the home in January 2016. Commissioner Green asked if the Petitioner when the garage was built. Ms. Bronkowski explained the garage was built in August 2016. Chairman Szabo explained this is an after the fact variation. Questioned if she talked to her neighbors and if anyone objected. Ms. Bronkowski stated that from what she knows, Yes. Chairman Szabo asked Staff to provide the Staff Report which Senior Planner Johanna Bye did: Issue: The petitioner is requesting a Standard Variation pursuant to Section 12-8-1.C.3 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit the construction of a detached garage 2'3" from the side property line, when a 5' setback is required. Analysis: Owners: Malgorzata Bronkowski, 1883 Orchard Street, Des Plaines, IL 60018 Petitioner: Malgorzata Bronkowski, 1883 Orchard Street, Des Plaines, IL 60018 Case Number: 16-065-V Real Estate Index Numbers: 09-28-117-048-0000 Ward: #6, Malcolm Chester Existing Zoning: R-2 Two -Family Residential Existing Land Use: Two -Family Residential Surrounding Zoning: North: Two -Family Residential South: Two -Family Residential East: Two -Family Residential West: Two -Family Residential Surrounding Land Use: North: Residential South: Residential East: Residential Case #16-065-V- 1883 Orchard St Case #16-071-TA- Electronic Message Signs and PUD (R-1) Regulations Case #16-054-TA- Public Open Space October 25, 2016 Page 3 West: Residential Street Classification: Orchard Street is a local street Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site Low Density Multi -Family In reviewing this variation request, staff has considered the following information: The approximately 3,865 square -foot property has 29 feet of frontage on Orchard Street. The property is 133.3 feet deep. Though the lot area is conforming (2,800 square feet per dwelling unit is required), the property does not meet the minimum required lot width of 45 feet for new lots created in this zoning district today. The property is improved with a brick, two-story single-family attached residence of approximately 836 square feet and a side driveway that leads to the rear of the property. The variation requested is to permit a detached garage to be located 2 feet, 3 inches from the side lot line, whereas a 5-foot setback is required. The structure has already been built, without benefit of a permit. The structure is 320 square feet (20 feet by 16 feet) and 12 feet tall at the highest point. It is located 10 feet from the principal structure and 10 feet from the side property line to the north. There are several existing rear -yard garages in this neighborhood that have less than the required 5-foot setback from the side lot lines. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the above -requested side setback variation based on review of the information presented by the applicant and the standards and conditions imposed by Section 3.6-8 (Findings of Fact for Variations) as outlined by the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: The Planning and Zoning Board may vote to approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove. Chairman Szabo questioned who built the garage and why she didn't get a permit. Ms. Bronkowski stated that her husband's friends built the garage and she was told she could get a permit after the fact. Commissioner Hofherr asked how she got caught and if she was issued a ticket or a fine. Ms. Bronkowski stated that she got a letter from the inspector and came in to apply for the permit. She did not receive a ticket or a fine. She has not received a permit, because she needs this board approval first. Commissioner Green questioned how we know the garage was built to code if a permit has not been issued. Ms. Bye stated that the homeowner did submit for permit and reviews have begun. Ms. Pruss indicated that full reviews and inspections will occur and the garage will be built to code. Commissioner Hofherr asked if the framing is all visible. It is indeed still visible. He indicated that as a board he would like to recommend a citation be issued for the construction of a garage without a permit. The contractors know that permits are required for the demolition of the previous structure and the new garage. Commissioner Saletnik questioned Staff about how many existing garages in the neighborhood are non- conforming. Ms. Bye indicated that she saw many garages in the neighborhood that are closer than 5' from Case #16-065-V- 1883 Orchard St Case #16-071-TA- Electronic Message Signs and PUD (R-1) Regulations Case #16-054-TA- Public Open Space October 25, 2016 Page 4 the property lines, including the property directly north and the property across the street. The surrounding area is zoned R-2 and the lots are very narrow, much more narrow than what we would allow today. Chairman Szabo asked if anyone in the audience had questions. He swore in Mr. Ronald Carlow, the next door neighbor at 1887 Orchard St. Mr. Carlow stated that the garage was built on Saturday, July 23, 2016. He stated that when he saw the gentleman building the garage 2' away from the fence, he asked the contractor if they had received a variation. The contractor said they always build them 2' away from the property line. Mr. Carlow indicated that the garage was finished in two days. He stated that he called his alderman on Saturday and he said he didn't know what the variation was, and waited until Monday to call the building department. He doesn't care that the garage is there, as long as she puts gutters on it. The downspouts need to go on her property line and not his. Commissioner Saletnik stated that the downspouts will need to be directed towards the front and rear of her property and not directed towards her neighbor's property. Ms. Bronkowski stated that her neighbor at 1887 Orchard directs his downspouts towards her property and has three sheds in his yard. She stated that her downspouts will be directed towards the north of her property and not on her neighbors. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has further questions. Chairman Szabo asked if there were any questions. He asked the audience if anyone is in favor or objects to this proposal — no one responded. A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr that includes the conditions that the gutters must be installed with the downspouts aimed towards the petitioner's property and that the code enforcement department be notified to issue a citation for the violation, seconded by Board Member Green, to grant the standard variation request. AYES: Schell, Hofherr, Saletnik, Bader, Szabo, Green, Catalano NAYES: None ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** 2. Addresses: Citywide Case 16-071-TA City initiated Text Amendments are proposed to amend the sign regulations for electronic message boards (Section 12-11-6), and to permit a planned unit development in the R-1 zone (Section 12-3-5.B.3.a), of Title 12 of the Des Plaines City Code (the City of Des Plaines 1998 Zoning Ordinance, as amended). Petitioner: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Owner: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Ms. Pruss explained the three difference amendments in the code. Please see staff report below. Case #16-065-V- 1883 Orchard St Case #16-071-TA- Electronic Message Signs and PUD (R-1) Regulations Case #16-054-TA- Public Open Space October 25, 2016 Page 5 Analysis: Zoning Code Text Amendment Report PIN: Citywide Petitioner: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Owner: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Project Description: An Amendment is requested to the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance to change the Text as follows. 12-3-5. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS A. No Change B. Prerequisites: Location, Ownership And Size: 1. Planned Unit Developments are authorized in each of the following zoning districts of this title subject to the regulations of this section. 2. The site of a Planned Unit Development must be under single ownership and/or unified control. 3. The minimum size of a Planned Unit Development shall be not less than: a. In the R-1 R-2, R-3, and R-4 zoning districts: Two (2) acres; b. In the C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 zoning districts: Two (2) acres; c. In the C-5 zoning district: One acre; d. In the C-7 zoning district: Ten (10) acres; and e. In the M-1, M-2, M-3 and I-1 zoning districts: Two (2) acres. (Ord. Z-14-15, 7-6-2015) 12-11-6.B.: Commercial, Manufacturing And Institutional Districts (Signs by type): Electronic message boards Electronic message boards shall not exceed 5030 percent of the total sign area, or 32 square feet, whichever is less. Only 1 electronic message board will be permitted per lot. In the event that a single business exists on multiple lots or in the case of a business park or retail center, only 1 electronic message board will be permitted overall. Location: The animated face of an electronic message board sign shall be a minimum of 250 feet away from a residence in the R-1, R-2, and R-3 residential districts and shall be arranged to prevent direct glare onto any adjacent properties. Case #16-065-V- 1883 Orchard St Case #16-071-TA- Electronic Message Signs and PUD (R-1) Regulations Case #16-054-TA- Public Open Space October 25, 2016 Page 6 1. Institutional district is exempt from this standard. 2. LED illumination of the numerical pricing component of gasoline station signs are exempt from this standard. The changeable copy may not be animated, however graphics of stationary objects with no movement or animation shall be allowed. The copy may be changed no more than once every 10 seconds. The changeable copy shall be specific to the business in which the sign was intended. No sounds will be permitted. Automatic dimming. Electronic message board signs shall be equipped with light sensing devices or a scheduled dimming timer which automatically dims the intensity of the light emitted by the sign during ambient low light and nighttime (dusk to dawn) conditions. The signs shall not exceed 500 nits of intensity as measured at the sign surface during nighttime and low light conditions and 5,000 nits during daytime hours. Standards for Zoning Code Text Amendment: The proposed amendment is a part of the effort to streamline the approval process for residential Planned Unit Developments (PUD) and does not conflict with the City's comprehensive plan, the official policy guide to future land use. A PUD process that is flexible will not only facilitate new developments but also reduce the administrative burden for both the City and the developer. To analyze this text amendment request, the standards for amendments contained in Section 12-3-7(E) of the Zoning Ordinance are used. Following is a discussion of those standards. 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 City of Des Plaines Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the City Council in 2007, does not address these changes in detail. 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; Virtually every permit that is submitted for an electronic message board exceeds the current 30 percent, or 32 square foot maximum for this type of sign, requiring a lengthy public hearing process for approval. This amendment retains limitations on the amount of electric messaging allowed, but will provide greater flexibility in the requirements for electronic message boards. 3. Whether the proposed amendment is appropriate considering the adequacy of public facilities and services available to this subject property; The proposed amendment is not anticipated to have a significant effect on public facilities or services. Case #16-065-V- 1883 Orchard St Case #16-071-TA- Electronic Message Signs and PUD (R-1) Regulations Case #16-054-TA- Public Open Space October 25, 2016 Page 7 4. Whether the proposed amendment will have an adverse effect on the value of properties throughout the jurisdiction; and The proposed amendment is not substantive in nature and should not have an adverse effect on the value of the properties. 5. Whether the proposed amendment reflects responsible standards for development and growth. (Ord. Z-8-98, 9-21-1998) The proposed amendment is a part of the effort to streamline the approval process for the City's business community Recommendation: The Community and Economic Development Department recommends approval of the proposed text amendments to the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended. Planning & Zoning Board Procedure: Pursuant to Sections 12-3-7.D.3 of the Zoning Code, the Planning and Zoning Board may vote to recommend approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval. The City Council has final authority over the Text Amendment. Commissioner Schell questioned if this is in conformance with other surrounding communities. Ms. Pruss indicated that is going to be more stream -lined and all communities are different. We should allow for the option of more formal land planning in the PUD process. Two -acres is already in the code for our other Residential zones. Chairman Szabo asked if there were any additional questions from the board or the audience. A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr, seconded by Board Member Catalano, to approve the Text Amendments as presented in the staff report. ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** OLD BUSINESS 1. Address: Citywide Case Number: 16-054-TA The Planning and Zoning Board will hold public hearing on amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and the Subdivision Regulations necessary to require developers of residential developments that create new demand for additional Public Open Space specifically and uniquely attributable to the developments to either contribute land or pay a fee in lieu of land for use by the Park District to provide the necessary additional Public Open Space within the City. Petitioner: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Owner: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 At the August 25, 2016 the Planning and Zoning Board voted to continue the hearing to tonight. Staff needs some additional time before we present to the board. This text amendment is continued to November 8, 2016. A motion was made by Board Member Green, seconded by Board Member Saletnik, to continue to November 8, 2016. ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** Case #16-065-V- 1883 Orchard St Case #16-071-TA- Electronic Message Signs and PUD (R-1) Regulations Case #16-054-TA- Public Open Space October 25, 2016 Page 8 ADJOURNMENT A unanimous motion was made by the Planning and Zoning Board to adjourn the meeting at 8:15 p.m. AYES: NAYES: Sincerely, Schell, Hofherr, Saletnik, Bader, Szabo, Catalano, Green None Lauren Griffin Executive Secretary ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** cc: City Officials, Aldermen, Zoning Board of Appeals, Petitioners