Loading...
07/11/2017Case #17-044-CU – 200 Jarvis Avenue – Conditional Use Permit Case #17-045-APL – 1692 Whitcomb Avenue – Appeal Case #17-051-CU-V – 1017 Graceland Avenue – Conditional Use Permit, & Variation July 11, 2017 Page 1 DES PLAINES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING JULY 11, 2017 MINUTES The Des Plaines Planning and Zoning Board Meeting held its regularly-scheduled meeting on Tuesday, July11, 2017, at 7 p.m. in Room 102 of the Des Plaines Civic Center. ZONING BOARD PRESENT: Bader, Green, Hofherr, Saletnik, Szabo ABSENT: Catalano, Schell ALSO PRESENT: Johanna Bye, AICP, Senior Planner/Community & Economic Development Lauren Pruss, Economic Development Coordinator/Community & Economic Development Gale Cerabona/Recording Secretary Chairman Szabo called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. and read this evening’s case. Roll call was conducted. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr, seconded by Board Member Green, to approve the minutes of June 27, 2017 as submitted. AYES: Hofherr, Green, Bader, Saletnik, Szabo NAYES: None ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** PUBLIC COMMENT There were no comments. PUBLIC HEARING NEW BUSINESS 1. Address: 200 Jarvis Avenue Case 17-044-CU The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use under Section 12-11-8 of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation to allow for 343 square feet of wall signage, instead of not more than 125 square feet, in the M-2 General Manufacturing District. PIN: 08-25-400-006-0000 Case #17-044-CU – 200 Jarvis Avenue – Conditional Use Permit Case #17-045-APL – 1692 Whitcomb Avenue – Appeal Case #17-051-CU-V – 1017 Graceland Avenue – Conditional Use Permit, & Variation July 11, 2017 Page 2 Petitioner: Connie Sylvester, Ozinga Ready Mix Concrete Inc., 19001 Old LaGrange Rd., Mokena, IL 60005 Owner: TRUST, Ozinga Ready Mix Concrete Inc., 19001 Old LaGrange Rd., Mokena, IL 60016 Chairman Szabo swore in Greg Vander Velde, Vice President – Strategic Development, Ozinga Ready Mix Concrete, Inc., 19001 Old LaGrange Rd., Mokena, IL & Chad Herst, 13N816 Burlington Rd., Hampshire, IL 60140. Mr. Vander Velde advised they are seeking signage on the southern elevation for visibility from Touhy. Board Member Hofherr asked if there is a future plan to have a sign visible from the tollway. Mr. Vander Velde advised – it has been considered; we will wait for final tollway plans. Chairman Szabo asked Staff to share the Staff Report which Senior Planner Bye did Analysis: Address: 200 W. Jarvis Avenue Owners: TRUST, Ozinga Ready Mix Concrete, Inc., 19001 Old Lagrange Road, Mokena, IL 60448 Petitioner: Connie Sylvester, 19001 Old Lagrange Road, Mokena, IL 60448 Case Number: 17-044-CU Real Estate Index Number: 08-25-400-006-0000 Ward: #8, Mike Charewicz Existing Zoning: M-2 General Manufacturing Existing Land Use: Industrial Surrounding Zoning: North: M-2 General Manufacturing South: M-2 General Manufacturing; Unincorporated Cook County East: M-2 General Manufacturing West: M-2 General Manufacturing Surrounding Land Use: North: Tollway; Industrial South: Industrial East: Industrial West: Industrial Street Classification: W. Jarvis Avenue is a local road Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site Industrial The applicant, Connie Sylvester of Ozinga, has requested a Conditional Use Permit for a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation in order to install one wall sign totaling 343 square feet in area, when 125 square feet is permitted, at 200 W. Jarvis Avenue. Ozinga, the owner and user of the site, is nearing completion of Case #17-044-CU – 200 Jarvis Avenue – Conditional Use Permit Case #17-045-APL – 1692 Whitcomb Avenue – Appeal Case #17-051-CU-V – 1017 Graceland Avenue – Conditional Use Permit, & Variation July 11, 2017 Page 3 a modernization of their concrete facility on the 5.10 acre site. The site is accessed by two curbs cuts off of Jarvis Avenue. The petitioner proposes to install one wall sign on the south façade of the facility that totals 343 square feet in area. The City Council has the authority to approve sign variations; however, no variation may be granted which increases any dimension (height, length, width or area) to an amount over fifty percent (50%) of the corresponding dimensions normally permitted, which in this case would be 187.5 square feet. As a result, the petitioner is requesting a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation (a Conditional Use) to allow the wall sign to total 343 square feet in area. 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: A Localized Alternative Sign Regulation is a Conditional Use, as specified in Section 12-11-8 of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended. B. The proposed Conditional Use is in accordance with the objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan: Comment: The 2007 Comprehensive Plan recommends an industrial use for the site. The proposed wall sign will enhance the appearance of the industrial-style building by providing a clean, sleek and modern addition to the exterior. The petitioner has stated that the style and location of the proposed wall sign is in keeping with the City’s goal of revitalizing the industrial base, as stated in the Comprehensive Plan. 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: Comment: The surrounding area is industrial in nature with many of the neighboring buildings having large, exterior signs with a company name or logo. D. The proposed Conditional Use is not hazardous or disturbing to existing neighboring uses: Comment: The proposed wall sign will be securely affixed to the building and does not contain any offensive or objectionable content, nor will it emit any noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. 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 proposed wall sign will have no effect on essential public facilities and services. 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: Case #17-044-CU – 200 Jarvis Avenue – Conditional Use Permit Case #17-045-APL – 1692 Whitcomb Avenue – Appeal Case #17-051-CU-V – 1017 Graceland Avenue – Conditional Use Permit, & Variation July 11, 2017 Page 4 Comment: The proposed wall sign would not create a burden on public facilities nor would it be a detriment to the economic well-being of the community. The surrounding land uses are industrial. 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 wall sign is not anticipated to create additional traffic or noise that could be detrimental to surrounding land 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 wall sign will not create an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares and will only be visible form Jarvis Avenue. 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 wall sign would not cause the destruction, loss, or damage of any natural, scenic or historic features of major importance. The building to which the wall sign will be affixed holds no historic significance, nor does the area it is located in have any historic value. J. The proposed Conditional Use complies with all additional regulations in the Zoning Ordinance specific to the Conditional Use requested: Comment: Approval of the proposed Conditional Use for a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation will allow the petitioner to exceed the maximum allowed area for wall signs. The petitioner is proposing 343 square feet of wall signage, when 125 square feet is permitted. Recommendation: I recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation in order to install one wall sign totaling 343 square feet in area, when 125 square feet is permitted, based on 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. The size of the site and operation, as well as the location of the facility (surrounded by the M-2 General Manufacturing District), warrants a larger wall sign than allowed per the 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 Permit for a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation in the M-2 General Manufacturing District. The City Council has the final authority on the proposal. Chairman Szabo asked if anyone is in favor of this proposal. One person came forward: • Jose Alfaro, Mgr – Operations Fed Ex Case #17-044-CU – 200 Jarvis Avenue – Conditional Use Permit Case #17-045-APL – 1692 Whitcomb Avenue – Appeal Case #17-051-CU-V – 1017 Graceland Avenue – Conditional Use Permit, & Variation July 11, 2017 Page 5 Mr. Alfaro asked if there is a safety issue for drivers. Staff provided plans of the proposed signage. Petitioner illustrated same. Mr. Alfaro advised there are no issues after reviewing. Chairman Szabo asked if anyone is against this proposal. No one responded. A motion was made by Board Member Green, seconded by Board Member Hofherr, to recommend approval as presented. AYES: Green, Hofherr, Bader, Saletnik, Szabo NAYES: None ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** Chairman Szabo advised a recommendation for approval would be submitted to City Council. 2. Address: 1692 Whitcomb Avenue Case 17-045-APL The petitioner is appealing the Zoning Administrator’s denial of a Minor Variation under Sections 12-9-6 and 12-7-1(C) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow an 11’-wide parking pad in a front yard and a 3’6”-wide sidewalk, instead of not more than 3’, in the R-1 Single Family Residential District. PIN: 09-21-303-027-0000 Petitioner: Shafee Baig, 1692 Whitcomb Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018 Owner: Shafee Baig, 1692 Whitcomb Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018 A motion was made by Board Member Saletnik, seconded by Board Member Green, to continue this matter to the next PZB meeting on July 25, 2017 & asked Staff to contact the Petitioner as he is not present. AYES: Saletnik, Green, Hofherr, Bader, Szabo NAYES: None ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** Chairman Szabo advised a recommendation for approval would be submitted to City Council. 3. Address: 1017 Graceland Avenue Case 17-051-CU-V The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use under Section 12-3-4 of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow a Trade Contractors Establishment in the C-3 General Commercial District and a variation to Section 12-10-8(B)1 of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow 0% interior parking lot landscaping, instead of not less than 5% interior parking lot landscaping. PIN: 09-20-207-006-0000; 09-20-207-007-0000 Case #17-044-CU – 200 Jarvis Avenue – Conditional Use Permit Case #17-045-APL – 1692 Whitcomb Avenue – Appeal Case #17-051-CU-V – 1017 Graceland Avenue – Conditional Use Permit, & Variation July 11, 2017 Page 6 Petitioner: Edwardo & Arcelia Nevarez, 2235 Webster Lane, Des Plaines, IL 60018 Owner: Lisa Hutchison, Independent Administrator of the Estate of Buddha Mayani, Deceased, c/o Steve Dallas, Esquire, 20 N. Clark Street, #1103, Chicago, IL 60602 Chairman Szabo swore in Arcelia Nevarez, 2235 Webster Lane, Des Plaines, IL, Daniel J. Dowd, Attorney at Law, Dowd, Dowd & Mertes, Ltd., 701 Lee Street, Suite 700, Des Plaines, 60016 & Charles P. Riesterer, AIA, The Civic Opera Building, 20 N. Wacker, Suite 2418, Chicago, IL. Mr. Dowd advised the site is approximately 15,000 sq. ft., is currently vacant, and currently in need of upgrading; the proposed used for the site is a local landscaping business in existence 18 years. There are 8 employees, 8 trucks. Hours of operation are: 7 a.m. – 4 p.m. The property is surrounded by commercial Uses on the east side of the street and residences across the street on Graceland. Mr. Riesterer stated the required 5% of interior parking lot landscaping cannot be provided; however, an 8 ft. chain-link fence can be erected; 18% of landscaping of total site intended. Board Member Green asked if the south side is 7 ft. of landscaping. Mr. Riesterer advised – yes, the site is tight; this is a better solution (to provide perimeter landscaping instead of interior parking lot landscaping). Chairman Szabo asked: • if there is new landscaping around the site. Petitioner advised – yes, around the west, south, and east • what type of plantings there will be. Mr. Riesterer advised – Arborvitae • how many employees will there be. Ms. Nevarez advised – 8 • if the property will be leased to other tenants. Ms. Nevarez advised – no Board Member Hofherr asked: • if the second level will be used. Ms. Nevarez advised – yes, for storage • if the fence could be widened. Mr. Riesterer advised – they are more concerned with trucks backing up • if trees will be trimmed. Mr. Riesterer advised – yes, along the train tracks • regarding the driveway where there is blacktop at west and rear elevations, if it will be blacktopped. Mr. Riesterer advised – it would be paved. Chairman Szabo asked Staff to share the Staff Report which Senior Planner Bye did: Analysis: Address: 1070 Graceland Avenue Owners: Lisa Hutchison, Independent Administrator of the Estate of Buddha Mayani, Deceased, c/o Steve Dallas, Esquire, 20 N. Clark Street #1103, Chicago, IL 60602 Petitioner: Edwardo and Arcelia Nevarez, 2235 Webster Lane, Des Plaines, IL 60018 Case Number: 17-051-CU-V Real Estate Index Number: 09-20-207-006-0000; 09-20-207-007-0000 Case #17-044-CU – 200 Jarvis Avenue – Conditional Use Permit Case #17-045-APL – 1692 Whitcomb Avenue – Appeal Case #17-051-CU-V – 1017 Graceland Avenue – Conditional Use Permit, & Variation July 11, 2017 Page 7 Ward: #2, John Robinson Existing Zoning: C-3 General Commercial District Existing Land Use: Commercial (vacant at present) Surrounding Zoning: North: C-3 General Commercial District South: C-3 General Commercial District East: C-3 General Commercial District West: R-1 Single-Family Residential District Surrounding Land Use: North: Commercial South: Commercial East: Railroad; Commercial West: Residential Street Classification: Graceland Avenue is an arterial road Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Community Commercial The petitioners, Edwardo and Arcelia Nevarez, have requested a Conditional Use Permit for a Trade Contractors Establishment and an interior parking lot landscaping variation to operate Alfredo’s Landscaping Inc. at 1017 Graceland Avenue. The 14,970 square foot property is currently improved with a one- and two - story brick building with a partially-paved parking area to the south. The petitioners propose to operate a landscaping business, Alfredo’s Landscaping Inc., from the existing building and site. The company has been in business for 18 years and services offered include: lawn maintenance (grass mowing, weeding, fertilizing, etc.), hardscape (patios, driveways, etc.), and flatwork (concrete). The petitioners have identified that in the winter, they also offer snow removal services; however, snow plows are not proposed to be kept on site. The business has eight employees is open 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM Monday through Friday. As part of the proposed Conditional Use, the petitioners plan to improve the site with the addition of a paved parking lot with 16 parking spaces, which is the minimum amount required per the Zoning Ordinance for the use. The parking spaces will be big enough to accommodate the largest trucks used by the business. No interior parking lot landscaping is proposed for the new parking lot, prompting the variation to allow for 0% interior parking lot landscaping, when 5% is required. The petitioners propose to install an 8-foot, chain link fence with screen netting along the east, west and south property lines and will also provide additional landscape screening in these areas. A request to waive the traffic study requirement was granted after review by staff based of the proposed site plan and size of the operation. 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 regarding the proposed Conditional Use under Section 12-3-4 of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow a Trade Contractors Establishment in the C-3 General Commercial District: Case #17-044-CU – 200 Jarvis Avenue – Conditional Use Permit Case #17-045-APL – 1692 Whitcomb Avenue – Appeal Case #17-051-CU-V – 1017 Graceland Avenue – Conditional Use Permit, & Variation July 11, 2017 Page 8 A. The proposed Conditional Use is in fact a Conditional Use established within the specific Zoning district involved: Comment: A Trade Contractors Establishment is a Conditional Use in the C-3 General Commercial District, as specified in Section 12-7-3(K) of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended. B. The proposed Conditional Use is in accordance with the objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan: Comment: The 2007 Comprehensive Plan recommends a Community Commercial use for the site. 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: Comment: The proposed Trade Contractors Establishment is a commercial use similar to those along the east side of Graceland Avenue on this block. The petitioner proposes to clean up the site by installing a new parking lot, fencing and landscape screening so as to improve the appearance of the lot and block. D. The proposed Conditional Use is not hazardous or disturbing to existing neighboring uses: Comment: The proposed Trade Contractors Establishment is a commercial use similar to those along the east side of Graceland Avenue on this block. The petitioner proposes to clean up the site by installing a new parking lot, fencing and landscape screening so as to improve the appearance of the lot and block. 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: Based on the plans submitted, the proposed Trade Contractors Establishment would be served adequately by essential public facilities and would not overburden existing public services. 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: Based on the plans submitted, the proposed Trade Contractors Establishment would appear to have adequate public facilities; it would not create a burden on public facilities nor would it be a detriment to the economic well-being of the community. 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: Based on the plans submitted, the proposed Trade Contractors Establishment is not anticipated to create significant traffic or noise that could be detrimental to surrounding land uses. The petitioners’ plan of operation states that the hours of operation are 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM Monday through Friday and that the business’s vehicles leave in the morning and come back in the afternoon; there is not a heavy amount of back and forth traffic. Case #17-044-CU – 200 Jarvis Avenue – Conditional Use Permit Case #17-045-APL – 1692 Whitcomb Avenue – Appeal Case #17-051-CU-V – 1017 Graceland Avenue – Conditional Use Permit, & Variation July 11, 2017 Page 9 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 Trade Contractors Establishment is proposed to be located along an existing thoroughfare with commercial uses on the east side and residential uses on the west side. Based on the plans submitted and the number of vehicles identified for the business, staff does not find evidence for potential interference with traffic patterns. The applicant has submitted a request for a waiver of the traffic study. 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 Trade Contractors Establishment would utilize an existing brick structure. The proposed plan would not cause the destruction, loss, or damage of any natural, scenic or historic features of major importance. J. The proposed Conditional Use complies with all additional regulations in the Zoning Ordinance specific to the Conditional Use requested: Comment: The proposed new parking lot plan for the Trade Contractors Establishment requires a variation for interior parking lot landscaping, as none is provided for. Per Section 12-10-8(B)1 of the Zoning Ordinance, a minimum of 5% interior parking lot landscaping is required. Recommendation: I recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for a Trade Contractors Establishment, based on 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, subject to the conditions listed below. The petitioner proposes to make significant improvements to site, including the installation of a solid, 8-foot fence and landscaping, that will improve the site and surrounding neighborhood. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: Under Sections 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 Permit for a Trade Contractors Establishment in the C-3 General Commercial District. The City Council has the final authority on the proposal. Conditions: 1. The fence proposed for the west and south borders of the site be constructed of solid wood as opposed to chain link with a screen netting. 2. All business and personal vehicles park on-site. 3. The petitioners work with the City of Des Plaines Engineering Department to ensure that the proposed new parking lot meets all storm water management requirements. 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. In reviewing these standards, staff has the following Case #17-044-CU – 200 Jarvis Avenue – Conditional Use Permit Case #17-045-APL – 1692 Whitcomb Avenue – Appeal Case #17-051-CU-V – 1017 Graceland Avenue – Conditional Use Permit, & Variation July 11, 2017 Page 10 comments regarding the proposed variation to Section 12-10-8(B)1 of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow 0% interior parking lot landscaping, instead of not less than 5% interior parking lot landscaping: 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: The petitioners have stated that the parking lot is rectangular in shape and has insufficient width and area to provide the 5% interior parking lot landscaping required along with the number of parking spaces needed per code. 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 petitioners have stated that if the requirement for 5% interior parking lot landscaping is imposed, they will be unable to provide the parking that is required per code and would not be able to utilize the site as intended. 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 building and lots are existing and the petitioners propose to improve the site with a paved parking lot and perimeter landscaping. 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: The petitioners have stated that others with the same land configuration would likewise be unable to provide the interior parking lot landscaping required. Additionally, if the interior parking lot landscaping is required, fewer parking spaces can be provided which would result in the need for a parking variation. 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: Any addition of interior parking lot landscaping would result in the loss of parking spaces which are required by code. 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 Case #17-044-CU – 200 Jarvis Avenue – Conditional Use Permit Case #17-045-APL – 1692 Whitcomb Avenue – Appeal Case #17-051-CU-V – 1017 Graceland Avenue – Conditional Use Permit, & Variation July 11, 2017 Page 11 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 petitioners have stated that the parking lot will be screened with an 8-foot fence and additional landscaping. Recommendation: I recommend approval of the variation to Section 12-10-8(B)1 of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow 0% interior parking lot landscaping, instead of not less than 5% interior parking lot landscaping, in the C-3 General Commercial District. The addition of interior parking lot landscaping would result in a loss of parking spaces, which are required per code. Additionally, the petitioners have proposed landscape screening for the perimeter of site. Plan & Zoning Board Procedure: Under Sections 12-3-6(G)2 (Procedure for Review and Decision for Variations) of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning & Zoning Board may vote to recommend approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval of the proposed variation. The City Council has final authority over the variation requested. Chairman Szabo asked if anyone in the audience is in favor of this proposal. No one responded. He asked if anyone is against the proposal. The following came forward: • Santiago Munoz 1034 Graceland Mr. Munoz stated he has been a resident for 28 years and is concerned about: o Parking; where 8 employees will park o Early-morning noise Chairman Szabo asked how long the property has been vacant. Mr. Munoz advised – years. Mr. Dowd stated a Condition by Staff is to have 16 parking spaces; this will be more than necessary. There are 6-10 vehicles leaving at 7 a.m. and returning between 4-5 p.m. He advised neighbors would be amenable; other uses may provide more noise, etc. Mr. Munoz advised the trucks would be loud when starting up. He asked if there would be plowing. Ms. Nevarez advised – no, the timeline is March-November. Chairman Szabo offered the site plan to Mr. Munoz who asked if the trucks return after hours, what his recourse is. Chairman Szabo advised if this exceeds the noise ordinance, to notify City Staff. Mr. Riesterer stated employees receive their orders and leave. Mr. Munoz advised the neighbors are not happy about this. Ms. Nevarez advised, right across from this property, there is a landscaper at 1017 Graceland. Mr. Dowd stated the property would be gated and closed; it is a commercial use. Chairman Szabo asked if anyone else in the audience is in favor or objects to this proposal. No one responded. He asked if the Board has further questions. Board Member Green stated, regarding the west face of the property, it looks poor. Mr. Reisterer stated the chain-link fence would be placed with landscaping in front. Mr. Green advised this will help Mr. Munoz’ concern. A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr, seconded by Board Member Bader, to recommend approval to City Council with Conditions as proposed by Staff. Board Member Hofherr asked Petitioners if they are Case #17-044-CU – 200 Jarvis Avenue – Conditional Use Permit Case #17-045-APL – 1692 Whitcomb Avenue – Appeal Case #17-051-CU-V – 1017 Graceland Avenue – Conditional Use Permit, & Variation July 11, 2017 Page 12 aware of the Conditions. Mr. Dowd replied in the affirmative, and stated they believe the chain-link fence is better and more durable. Chairman Szabo concurred. Board Member Hofherr stated he alters one Condition from wood to a chain-link fence. AYES: Hofherr, Bader, Green, Saletnik, Szabo NAYES: None ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** Chairman Szabo advised a recommendation for approval would be submitted to City Council. ADJOURNMENT On a voice vote, Chairman Szabo adjourned the meeting at 7:44 p.m. Sincerely, Gale Cerabona, Recording Secretary cc: City Officials, Aldermen, Zoning Board of Appeals, Petitioners