Loading...
02/11/2020Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 1 DES PLAINES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2020 MINUTES The Des Plaines Planning and Zoning Board Meeting held its regularly-scheduled meeting on Tuesday, February 11, 2020, at 7 p.m. in Room 101 of the Des Plaines Civic Center. ZONING BOARD Chairman Szabo called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. and read this evening’s cases. Roll call was established. PRESENT: Bader, Fowler, Hofherr, Saletnik, Szabo, & Veremis ABSENT: Catalano ALSO PRESENT: Patrick Ainsworth, Coord., Devel. Mgr./Community & Economic Development Jonathan Stytz, Planner/Community & Economic Development Gale Cerabona/Recording Secretary PUBLIC COMMENT There was no Public Comment. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr, seconded by Board Member Fowler, to approve the minutes of January 28, 2020. AYES: Hofherr, Fowler, Bader, Saletnik, Szabo, & Veremis NAYES: None ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** NEW BUSINESS 1. Address: 855 Rand Road Case 19-081-V The petitioner is requesting Major Variations under Section 12-8-1(C) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended and approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 2 relief as may be necessary, to allow for two 800-square foot carports to remain on the property which exceed the 720-square foot maximum area and quantity for carports. PIN: 09-08-301-008-0000 Petitioner: Anthony Baroud, Jidd Motors, 855 Rand Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Owner: Jidd Holdings and Adam Jidd, 855 Rand Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Chairman Szabo swore in Anthony Baroud, Adam Jidd, & William G. Hutul/Attorney, Jidd Motors, 855 Rand Road, Des Plaines, IL. Mr. Baroud said there is an existing building with a 20x40 aluminum carport. A site plan was shown. Another same-size structure is in the rear. Vehicles will be stored in these carports. Elevations were shown. Salt is stored. This is a roof structure. Chairman Szabo asked if these are attached to the building. Mr. Baroud stated – no, they are free- standing (one adjacent to the building and one along the rear property line). Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has questions. Board Member Hofherr asked why these were constructed without City permits. Mr. Baroud stated – they did not realize they were needed; he believe that there was a miscommunication on what was need and apologized. Chairman Szabo asked if the City has inspected them. Mr. Baroud advised – yes; staff inspected the carports and found no issues other than a permit being required. Chairman Szabo asked that the Staff Report be given which Planner Stytz provided: Issue: The petitioner is requesting major variations under Section 12-8-1(C) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow: i) two 800-square foot carports that are in excess of the 720-square foot maximum area permitted for carports; and ii) two detached accessory structures for parking when only one is permitted at 855 Rand Road in the C-3, General Commercial zoning district. Analysis: Address: 855 Rand Road Owner: Anthony Baroud, 855 Rand Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Petitioner: Jidd Holdings and Adam Jidd, 855 Rand Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Case Number: 19-081-V Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 3 PIN: 09-08-301-008-0000 Ward: #7, Alderman Don Smith Existing Zoning: C-3, General Commercial District Existing Land Use: Car Dealership (Jidd Motors) Surrounding Zoning: North: C-3, General Commercial District South: R-1, Single Family Residential District East: C-3, General Commercial District West: R-1, Single Family Residential District Surrounding Land Use: North: Commercial (Restaurant) South: Single Family Residences East: Commercial (Car Dealership) West: Single Family Residences/Cumberland Elementary School Street Classification: Rand Road is classified as an arterial street. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Commercial. Project Description: The petitioner, Anthony Baroud, on behalf of Jidd Motors, is requesting major variations to allow: i) two 800-square foot carports that are in excess of the 720-square foot maximum area permitted for carports; and ii) two detached accessory structures for parking when only one is permitted at 855 Rand Road in the C-3, General Commercial zoning district. This 3.74-acre property currently contains a one-story car dealership with a mezzanine and showroom. Staff met with the petitioner on November 5, 2019 to discuss the request for the installation of the two carports and discovered that the carports were already installed on the subject property. The two carports were installed without a permit and are currently located in the rear of the property— one alongside the west building elevation and the other alongside the west property line—as shown in the Site Plan (Attachment 4). Staff informed the petitioner at the meeting that two major variations would be required for the carports since they exceed the maximum area permitted for carports and the maximum number of detached accessory structures for parking. The petitioner has requested two major variations for a carport Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 4 exceeding 720-square feet and detached garage to serve as a second detached accessory structure for parking at 1313 Rand Road (Case 19-082-V) for storage purposes. The petitioner proposes to maintain the use of both carports on the property for equipment storage and vehicle shelter from the elements during service mechanic inspections—neither of the carports will be utilized for auto service operations related to Jidd Motors. See the Project Narrative (Attachment 1) for more information regarding the need and use of the carports on the property. The existing carports are 20-feet wide by 40-feet long and are just over 12-feet in height as shown in the Architectural Plan (Attachment 5). The following sections of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance apply to this case: • Pursuant to Section 12-8-1(C)(4), there shall be no more than one garage or carport (attached or detached) per property. • Pursuant to Section 12-8-1(C)(5), the maximum area of a carport shall be 720-square feet or less. The petitioner’s request to allow 800-square foot carports in excess of the 720-square foot maximum for carports and two detached accessory structures for parking when only one is permitted per property constitutes the need for major variations to Section 12-8-1(C) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan The proposed project, including the proposed the site improvements, address various goals and objectives of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan including the following aspects: • Future Land Use Plan: o The property is identified for Commercial on the future Land Use Plan. The Future Land Use Plan strives to create a well-balanced development area with a healthy mixture of commercial uses. The current use is an established business within the City and the requests will allow the existing business to improve its operations in Des Plaines without expanding the principal building. o The subject property is located along a defined arterial corridor containing a mixture of residential, commercial, and industrial uses. The request would Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 5 provide some screening between the subject property operations and the single- family residences located behind it. While the aforementioned aspects represent a small portion of the goals and strategies of the Comprehensive Plan, there is a large emphasis on improving existing commercial developments and enhancing commercial corridors throughout Des Plaines. Variation Findings: Variation requests are subject to the standards set forth in Section 12-3-6(H) of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended. 1. Hardship: No variation shall be granted pursuant to this subsection H unless the applicant shall establish that carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this title would create a particular hardship or a practical difficulty. Comment: The subject property is occupied by the car dealership with space constraints, which creates a hardship on the petitioner to operate his business. The property is fully built out and covered storage space on the property is minimal. The petitioner is proposing the 800-sqare foot carports to provide additional covered area on site for vehicle inspections done by service mechanics, insurance adjusters, and customers as well as to protect the vehicles from the elements. The petitioner is utilizing the carports as an alternative to adding an expansion onto the existing building as a covered area for inspecting vehicles is important to help minimize rusting of damaged vehicles. The regulation permitting only one 720-square foot carport per property limits the space that can be utilized to store vehicles for inspection and does not provide adequate room for the car dealership use present on this property. 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 subject property is unique in shape and can present difficulties with the development of the property given the required bulk regulations in the C-3 district. The petitioner strives to maintain the two carports on the property as they integrate well with the existing configuration, circulation, and access of the property. An expansion of the existing building on the property to accomplish additional covered storage space on site could be costly, could potentially effect the circulation and access of the property, and could add to additional space constraints for the petitioner given the existing property characteristics. Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 6 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 petitioner did not create the physical characteristics that exist on the property. However, the petitioner is looking to improve the organization, circulation, and overall appearance of the property from an aesthetic and functional standpoint. 4. Denied Substantial Rights: The carrying out of the strict letter of the provision from which a variance is sought would deprive the owner of the subject lot of substantial rights commonly enjoyed by owners of other lots subject to the same provision. Comment: Carrying out the strict letter of the zoning ordinance would limit the petitioner’s ability to provide adequate covered storage area for the site and may affect the petitioner’s ability to utilize the property. Covered storage on the property allows the petitioner to adequately operate his business. 5. Not Merely Special Privilege: The alleged hardship or difficulty is neither merely the inability of the owner or occupant to enjoy some special privilege or additional right not available to owners or occupants of other lots subject to the same provision, nor merely the inability of the owner to make more money from the use of the subject lot. Comment: Granting the variances for the two carports will not create a special privilege for the subject property owners compared to the surrounding properties in the area. The petitioner is requesting the variations to improve the functionality of the property and to avoid increasing pavement area. 6. Title And Plan Purposes: The variation would not result in a use or development of the subject lot that would be not in harmony with the general and specific purposes for which this title and the provision from which a variation is sought were enacted or the general purpose and intent of the comprehensive plan. Comment: The variation granting the use of the two carports would be in harmony with the surrounding development. One carport is located along the west elevation of the building and the other is located along the rear property line in between the rear parking area and the residential development located to the south of the property. The request would match the character of the existing commercial and industrial development and partially increase the buffer between the subject property and the residential development. 7. No Other Remedy: There is no means other than the requested variation by which the alleged hardship or difficulty can be avoided or remedied to a degree sufficient to permit a reasonable use of the subject lot. Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 7 Comment: There are no other remedies available, aside from the variations, which would allow the petitioner to provide adequate covered storage for use of the car dealership. The installation of the two carports will not increase any impervious surfaces on the site or create any disturbance. 8. Minimum Required: The requested variation is the minimum measure of relief necessary to alleviate the alleged hardship or difficulty presented by the strict application of this title. Comment: The granting of the requested variations is the minimum measure of relief necessary to address the existing covered storage concerns for the car dealership. The petitioner does not have any plans to construct any other structures on the property. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested variations based on review of the information presented by the applicant and the standards and conditions met by Section 12-3- 6(H) (Findings of Fact for Variations) as outlined within the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, with the one condition: 1. That no auto service operations shall be conducted inside either carport structure at any time. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: Under Section 12-3-6(G) of the Zoning Ordinance (Major Variations), the Planning and Zoning Board has the authority to recommend approval, approval subject to conditions, or denial of the above-mentioned variances for two carports in the C-3 Zoning District at 855 Rand Road to the City Council. The Des Plaines City Council has final authority over the proposal. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has any questions. There were none. He asked if anyone in the audience is in favor of this petition or against it. No one responded. Board Member Saletnik asked if Petitioner is aware of the Condition. Petitioner advised they are. A motion was made by Board Member Saletnik, seconded by Board Member Hofherr, to approve as presented. AYES: Saletnik, Hofherr, Bader, Fowler, Szabo, & Veremis NAYES: None ***MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY *** Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 8 2. Address: 1313 Rand Road Case 19-082-V The petitioner is requesting a Major Variation under Section 12-8-1(C) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, and approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary, to allow for a 1,200-square foot detached garage/carport structure to remain on the property which exceeds the 720-square foot maximum area for a detached garage/carport. PIN: 09-17-202-007-0000 Petitioners: Anthony Baroud, Jidd Motors, 855 Rand Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Owner: Jidd Holdings and Adam Jidd, 855 Rand Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Petitioners were already sworn in above. Mr. Baroud stated two structures are being erected; two units on rear of property. Same purpose – to shelter vehicles and store bobcat and salt. Chairman Szabo asked if there were any questions from the Board. There were none. He asked Staff to provide the Staff Report which Planner Stytz did: Issue: The petitioner is requesting Major Variations under Section 12-8-1(C) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow: i) an 800-square foot carport structure that is in excess of the 720-square foot maximum area permitted for carport structures; and ii) a 400- square foot detached garage as a second detached accessory parking structure at 1313 Rand Road in the M-2, General Manufacturing district. Analysis: Address: 1313 Rand Road Owner: Anthony Baroud, 855 Rand Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Petitioner: Jidd Holdings, LLC, 855 Rand Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Case Number: 19-082-V PIN: 09-17-202-007-0000 Ward: #7, Alderman Don Smith Existing Zoning: M-2, General Manufacturing District Existing Land Use: Car Dealership (Jidd Motors) Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 9 Surrounding Zoning: North: M-2, General Manufacturing District South: M-2, General Manufacturing District East: C-3, General Commercial District/M-2, General Manufacturing District West: M-2, General Manufacturing District Surrounding Land Use: North: Manufacturing (Multi-Tenant Warehouse Center) South: ComEd Substation East: Commercial (Rand Manor), Manufacturing (M&M Limousine and Maine Scrap Metal) West: Manufacturing (Multi-Tenant Warehouse Center) Street Classification: Rand Road is classified as an arterial street. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Commercial. Project Description: The petitioner, Anthony Baroud, on behalf of Jidd Motors, is requesting Major Variations to allow: i) an 800-square foot carport structure that is in excess of the 720-square foot maximum area permitted for carport structures; and ii) a 400- square foot detached garage as a second detached accessory parking structure at 1313 Rand Road in the M-2, General Manufacturing district. This 3.67-acre property currently contains a one-story car dealership with a mezzanine and showroom. Staff met with the petitioner on November 5, 2019 and discovered that a detached garage and carport structure had already been installed at 1313 Rand Road. Both structures were installed without a permit and are currently located less than a foot away from each other in the rear of the property along the rear property line as shown in the Site Plan (Attachment 4). Staff informed the petitioner at the meeting that major variations would be required for the carport structure since it exceeds the maximum area permitted for carports and the detached garage since it is a second detached accessory parking structure on the property where only one parking structure is permitted. The petitioner has also requested two major variations for the use of two carports exceeding 720-square feet at 855 Rand Road (Case 19-081-V) for storage purposes. The petitioner proposes to maintain the use of the detached garage for vehicle storage and the carport for equipment storage Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 10 and salt material storage—neither the detached garage nor the carport structure will be utilized for auto service operations related to Jidd Motors. See the Project Narrative and Standards for Variation (Attachment 1) for more information regarding the need and use of the detached garage and carport on the property. The detached garage is 20-feet wide by 20-feet long and the carport is 20-feet wide by 40-feet long as shown in the Architectural Plan (Attachment 5). The following sections of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance apply to this case: • Pursuant to Section 12-8-1(C)(4), there shall be no more than one garage or carport (attached or detached) per property. • Pursuant to Section 12-8-1(C)(5), the maximum area of a carport shall be 720-square feet or less. The petitioner’s request to allow an 800-square foot carport in excess of the 720-square foot maximum for carports and a 400- square foot detached garage to serve as a second parking structure constitutes the need for two major variations to Section 12-8-1(C) of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan The proposed project, including the proposed the site improvements, address various goals and objectives of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan including the following aspects: • Future Land Use Plan: o The property is identified as Commercial on the Future Land Use Plan. The Future Land Use Plan strives to create a well-balanced development area with a healthy mixture of commercial uses. The current use is an established business within the City and the request will allow the existing business to improve its operations in Des Plaines without expanding the principal building. o The subject property is located along a defined arterial corridor containing a mixture of commercial and industrial uses. The request would provide some screening of existing outdoor storage on the property and improve the property from an aesthetic and functional standpoint. While the aforementioned aspects represent a small portion of the goals and strategies of the Comprehensive Plan, there is a large emphasis on improving existing commercial developments and enhancing commercial corridors throughout Des Plaines. Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 11 Variation Findings: Variation requests are subject to the standards set forth in Section 12-3-6(H) of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended. 1. Hardship: No variation shall be granted pursuant to this subsection H unless the applicant shall establish that carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this title would create a particular hardship or a practical difficulty. Comment: The subject property is occupied by the car dealership with space constraints, which creates a hardship on the petitioner to effectively operate and grow his business. The property is fully built out and covered storage space on the property is minimal. The petitioner is proposing the 400-square foot detached garage and 800-square foot carport to provide additional covered area on site for vehicle, equipment, and salt material storage. The petitioner is utilizing both structures as an alternative to adding an expansion onto the existing building as a covered area for storage is important to the petitioner to protect equipment and materials from the elements. The regulation allowing each property a maximum of one 720-square foot parking structure, detached garage or carport, limits the space that can be utilized to store equipment and materials and does not provide adequate room for the car dealership use present on this property. 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 subject property is unique in shape and can present difficulties with the development of the property given the required bulk regulations in the M-2 district. The petitioner strives to maintain the detached garage and carport on the property as they integrate well with the existing configuration, circulation, and access of the property. An expansion of the existing building on the property to accomplish additional covered storage space on site could be costly, could potentially affect the circulation and access of the property, and could add to additional space constraints for the petitioner given the existing property characteristics. 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. Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 12 Comment: The petitioner did not create the physical characteristics that exist on the property. However, the petitioner has previously done remodeling work on the existing building to make improvements to the property and building from an aesthetic and functional standpoint. 4. Denied Substantial Rights: The carrying out of the strict letter of the provision from which a variance is sought would deprive the owner of the subject lot of substantial rights commonly enjoyed by owners of other lots subject to the same provision. Comment: Carrying out the strict letter of the zoning ordinance would limit the petitioner’s ability to provide adequate covered storage area for the site and may affect the petitioner’s ability to utilize the property. 5. Not Merely Special Privilege: The alleged hardship or difficulty is neither merely the inability of the owner or occupant to enjoy some special privilege or additional right not available to owners or occupants of other lots subject to the same provision, nor merely the inability of the owner to make more money from the use of the subject lot. Comment: Granting the use of the detached garage and carport will not create a special privilege for the subject property owners compared to the surrounding properties in the area. The petitioner is requesting the variations to improve the functionality and aesthetics of the property and to avoid increasing pavement on the property. 6. Title And Plan Purposes: The variation would not result in a use or development of the subject lot that would be not in harmony with the general and specific purposes for which this title and the provision from which a variation is sought were enacted or the general purpose and intent of the comprehensive plan. Comment: The variation granting the use of the detached garage and carport would be in harmony with the surrounding development. The request would match the character of the existing commercial and industrial development and partially increase the buffer between the residential development located to the south of the property. Additionally, the structures are located in the rear of the property, which has minimal impact on surrounding properties. 7. No Other Remedy: There is no means other than the requested variation by which the alleged hardship or difficulty can be avoided or remedied to a degree sufficient to permit a reasonable use of the subject lot. Comment: There are no other remedies available, aside from the variations, which would allow the petitioner to provide adequate covered storage for use of the car dealership. The installation of the detached garage and carport will not increase any impervious surfaces on the site or create any disturbances. Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 13 8. Minimum Required: The requested variation is the minimum measure of relief necessary to alleviate the alleged hardship or difficulty presented by the strict application of this title. Comment: The granting of the requested variations is the minimum measure of relief necessary to address the existing covered storage concerns for the car dealership. The petitioner does not have any plans to construct any other structures on the premise. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested variations based on review of the information presented by the applicant and the standards and conditions met by Section 12-3- 6(H) (Findings of Fact for Variations) as outlined within the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, with one condition: 1. That no auto service operations shall be conducted inside the detached garage or carport structure at any time. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: Under Section 12-3-6(G) of the Zoning Ordinance (Major Variations), the Planning and Zoning Board has the authority to recommend approval, approval subject to conditions, or denial of the above-mentioned variances for a detached garage and carport in the M-2 Zoning District at 1313 Rand Road to the City Council. The Des Plaines City Council has final authority over the proposal. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has any questions. There were none. He asked if anyone in the audience is in favor or against this proposal. No one responded. A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr, seconded by Board Member Fowler, to approve as presented. AYES: Hofherr, Fowler, Bader, Saletnik, Szabo, & Veremis NAYES: None ***MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY *** Coordinator Ainsworth advised this petition would be on City Council’s March 2, 2020, agenda. Before the next item was considered, Board Member Bader recused himself of this next item as he has direct interest in the matter at hand. Board Member Bader departed the meeting at 7:20 p.m. 3. Address: 2350 Mannheim Road 20-008-LASR-CU The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use for a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation for the existing Planned Unit Development as per Ordinances Z-15-17 and Z-24-17 for a sign plan under Section 12-11-8 of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, and approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary. Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 14 PIN: 09-29-403-010-0000 Petitioner: Aleksandr D. Vaysman, Pancor Construction & Development LLC, 2175 Point Boulevard, Elgin, IL 60123 Owner: Mannheim Hotel, LLC, 2175 Point Boulevard, Elgin, IL 60123 Chairman Szabo swore in Aleksandr D. Vaysman, Vice President, Pancor Construction & Development LLC, 2175 Point Boulevard, Suite 125, Elgin, IL. Mr. Vaysman stated they are proposing signage on the hotel; standard Marriott signage and within the PUD ordinance. Elevations were shown. Signs are as follows: o on post of porte-cochere o on hotel (Sign A); top elevation facing north o on south elevation (Sign D) o sign facing east There is no signage on west side of hotel. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has any questions. There were none. He asked that the Staff Report be given which Coordinator Ainsworth did: Issue: The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use for a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation, under Code Section 12-3-4, of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Code, as amended, to provide signage within an existing PUD. Analysis: Owner: Mannheim Hotel LLC, 2175 Point Blvd, Elgin, Illinois 60123 Petitioner: Aleksandr D Vaysman, 2175 Point Blvd, Elgin, Illinois 60123 Case Number: 20-008-CU-LASR Real Estate Index #s 09-29-403-010-0000 Existing Zoning C-3, General Commercial, PUD Existing Land Use Hotel/Restaurant Surrounding Zoning North: C-3, General Commercial South: Commercial (Village of Rosemont) East: Railroad, M-2, General Manufacturing West: C-2, Limited Office Commercial Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 15 Surrounding Land Use North: Banquet Hall South: Restaurant East: Railroad; Industrial West: Office Street Classification Mannheim Road – Arterial Street Comprehensive Plan Designation Commercial Project Description: The petitioner, Aleksandr Vaysman, on behalf of United Hospitality and Mannheim LLC received approval from the Des Plaines City Council in 2017 for a PUD to construct a new 136- room hotel, Fairfield Inn and Suites. The petitioner is now requesting a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation (LASR) to install four new wall signs on a new five-story Fairfield Inn and Suites that is currently under construction. The total site is approximately 5.81 acres and also contains a 246-room Wyndham Chicago O’Hare hotel and a 5,500 square foot LongHorn Steakhouse restaurant. The proposed signage was designed in accordance with Marriott project standards and will provide the hotel with an appropriate amount of visibility and commercial exposure. Given the unique position of the property and its location between two existing facilities (the Wyndham Hotel and Fountain Blue Banquets), staff finds the request necessary in order to provide visibility for users coming from multiple directions. LASRs are allowed when the subject property(s) is/are within a Planned Unit Development. This property is located in a PUD with the Wyndham and LongHorn Steakhouse restaurant via Ordinance Z-24-17. LASRs generally allows more signage and flexibility as compared to the Zoning Ordinance due to the size of the property, the configuration of buildings and the variety of uses. In this case, the hotel building location does not allow the same direct means to identify the use as compared to a hotel that is on a corner. Additionally, the east elevation is the street facing elevation, but it is also one of the narrowest elevations which limits the way Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 16 that signage can be placed on the building and allow potential customers to identify the business. Four wall signs are proposed on the façade of the hotel: two on the north elevation of the building and one on the south and east elevations. With regards to the north elevation, one wall sign is on the north elevation of the building and the other wall sign is one the supporting wall column at the front lobby drop off area. This wall sign will assist passing motorists coming from the north as this particular hotel will not contain a monument sign. All signs identify the Fairfield Inn and Suites logo and will be internally illuminated. The wall signage square footage will total 259.75 square feet and the proposed breakdown of the wall signage is as follows: Elevation Area of Signage North 101.13 SF (both signs combined) East 93.78 SF South 64.84 SF TOTAL 259.75 SF Note, the petitioner is proposing an alternative location for the wall sign on the south elevation near the southeast corner of the building as the location shown on the elevation drawing would be blocked by the existing Wyndham Hotel building. The area of the sign might be reduced due to the smaller span of wall space to accommodate this wall sign. Staff has no concern if the proposed wall sign will be smaller than what is approved; Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 17 however, the relocated sign cannot be larger than what is being proposed on the attached elevation drawing. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan There are several parts of the City of Des Plaines’ 2019 Comprehensive Plan that align with the proposed project. Those portions are as follows: • Under Future Land Use Map: o The property is marked for commercial land use. The proposed hotel will take advantage of a well-located site with nearby tourism generators including O’Hare International Airport, Allstate Arena, and Fountain Blue Banquets. • Under Economic Development: o The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the economic vitality of the surrounding area and its importance to the broader region. The proposed development of this site would be in keeping with prior development efforts. While the aforementioned bullet points are only a small portion of the Comprehensive Plan, there is a large emphasis on developing and enhancing our commercial corridors and underutilized properties. This new hotel is contributing to the increased enhancement of the Mannheim Road and Touhy Avenue corridors and the added signage will assist with ensuring that the hotel is adequately advertised for their customers. 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, in the C-3 General Commercial District. B. The proposed Conditional Use is in accordance with the objectives of the City’s Comprehensive Plan: Comment: The use of the site is Commercial. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Commercial. The Comprehensive Plan strives to foster growth and redevelopment of existing commercial corridors to retain existing businesses and attract new businesses to locate within Des Plaines. This property is positioned along a major commercial corridor and the addition of the hotel use at the subject property falls within the Commercial use category. Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 18 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 signage complements design of the Fairfield Inn and Suites and is consistent with the appearance of surrounding properties. D. The proposed Conditional Use is not hazardous or disturbing to existing neighboring uses: Comment: The proposed signs are not hazardous or disturbing to the existing neighboring uses. All signs will meet all required performance standards as outlined in Section 12-11-6(B) of the Zoning Ordinance. 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 signs 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: Comment: The proposed signs would not create a burden on public facilities nor would they be a detriment to the economic well-being of the community. The signs are intended to share information that enhances economic development in the area while helping customers safely and easily access the site. 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 signs will not 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 signs will not create an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares. Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 19 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 new signs would not cause the destruction, loss, or damage of any natural, scenic or historic features of major importance. The signs will be used to enhance a site that is being developed. J. The proposed Conditional Use complies with all additional regulations in the Zoning Ordinance specific to the Conditional Use requested: Comment: All signs do comply with setback requirements as stated in the Zoning Ordinance. Recommendations: I recommend the approval Conditional Use for a localized Alternative Sign Regulation (Case #20-008-CU) at 2350 Mannheim Road, 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 following conditions: 1) That any structural raceway be painted at time of installation to match the exterior wall color to which each wall sign is attached. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: The Planning and Zoning Board may vote to recommend approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval. The City Council has final authority over the PUD Amendment and the Conditional Use Localized Alternative Sign Regulation Amendment. Chairman Szabo asked if anyone in the audience is in favor or against this proposal. The following came forward: • Therese McDonnell 1400 E. Touhy, IMV Suite 250 Ms. McDonnell asked for clarity on east signage and its size. Mr. Vaysman stated east signage is Sign C on the top of building. Ms. McDonnell stated she currently sees the sign on the east side of the building. Mr. Vaysman said the elevation doesn’t show depth. He noted some building elements such as the lobby entrance canopy protrude forward 15 ft.;. Ms. McDonnell asked if the sign on the east side would be lit. Mr. Vaysman said it is backlit; all signs are backlit and on only at night. She asked how close to the street the Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 20 sign is on the porte cochere column. Mr. Vaysman stated 35 ft. though it won’t be lit. Ms. McDonnell had no concerns with the signage. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has questions. There were none. A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr, seconded by Board Member Veremis, to recommend approval to City Council as presented. AYES: Hofherr, Veremis, Fowler, Saletnik, & Szabo NAYES: None ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** Chairman Szabo advised a favorable recommendation would be submitted to City Council. Board Member Bader returned to the meeting. 4. Address: Citywide Text Amendment Case 20-006-TA The City of Des Plaines is requesting a Text Amendment to the following sections of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Code, as amended: (i) Section 12-7-3.H.6, to update the Supplemental Parking Requirements for multiple-family dwellings uses; (ii) Section 12-9-7, to update certain regulations for Off Street Parking Requirements pertaining to dwellings, multiple-family and two-family; and townhouses (single-family attached); (iii) Section 12-3-5-1, to update certain parking regulations for Mixed Use Developments and (iv) approval of any zoning text amendments as may be necessary. PIN: Citywide Petitioners: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Owner: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 The Staff Report is as follows: Issue: The City of Des Plaines is requesting Text Amendments to the following sections of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Code, as amended: (i) Section 12-7-3.H.6, to update the Supplemental Parking Requirements for multiple-family dwelling uses; (ii) Section 12-9-7, to update certain regulations for Off Street Parking Requirements pertaining to multiple-family dwellings, and two- family/townhouses (single-family attached); and (iii) Section 12-3-5-1, to update certain parking regulations for Mixed Use Developments. Analysis: Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 21 PIN: Citywide Petitioner: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Case Number: #20-006-TA Project Description: The City of Des Plaines is proposing several text amendments to the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, which consists of amending the off street parking regulations for multiple-family and single family attached uses in certain zoning districts. Updating the Off Street Parking Regulations for Multi-Family Dwelling Units in Certain Districts For the past 12 years, the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance has required two off street parking spaces for every multi-family dwelling unit. The Zoning Ordinance does not differentiate between an efficiency apartment unit and a three bedroom townhome so all units require the same two off street parking spaces per unit. This is an inefficient land use policy given much of the multi- family, transit-oriented development (TOD) projects are occurring near the City’s two Metra train stations. The 2019 Des Plaines Comprehensive Plan touches on this specific land use regulation and recommends lowering this requirement for compact developments near transit stations. Additionally, there is only one development that was constructed in downtown Des Plaines that met the current parking requirement, Opus’ Ellison Apartments. Staff is recommending to amend this parking regulation to be in-line with other communities with established TOD projects and to capture more redevelopment opportunities. Staff is recommending new regulations for the C-5, R-4 and C-3 PUD zoning districts in the table below. Note, staff recommends keeping the parking regulation for all multi-family units at two spaces per unit in the R-3 zoning district as this district is not generally near multi-modal transportation facilities. To help understand off street parking regulations in TOD areas, it is pertinent to showcase other municipalities within the Chicagoland area and their corresponding TOD parking regulations. The table below identifies the off street parking regulation for three nearby communities as well as two other communities with established transit-oriented downtowns. Municipality with TOD Zoning District Parking Regulation Park Ridge (B-4 Uptown Business District) 1 parking space for efficiency and one bedroom units and 1.5 spaces for all other multi-family units Mount Prospect (B-5 Central Commercial District and the B-5C Core Central Commercial District) 1 parking space for efficiency and one bedroom units, 1.5 spaces for two-bedroom units and two spaces for three-bedroom multi-family units Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 22 Arlington Heights (B-5 Downtown District) 1 parking space for efficiency and one bedroom units, 1.25 spaces for two-bedroom units and 1.5 spaces for three-bedroom multi-family units La Grange 1.5 parking spaces for each dwelling unit (applies throughout the entire community) Downers Grove 1.4 parking spaces for each dwelling unit (applies throughout the entire community) Additionally, Attachment #1 shows the off street parking provided in TOD projects throughout the Chicagoland suburbs. This chart highlights the notion that the City’s parking requirement is not in keeping with other downtowns containing established TOD developments. With this information presented, staff is proposing to amend the off street parking requirement for our transit-oriented development areas. The proposed text amendments are geographically specific and ensures the reduced parking will be supplemented by multi-modal transportation options. As such, the proposed text amendments are as follows: 12-7-3.H.6: Supplement Parking Requirements (For the C-5 Central Business District) Add/Amend: 6. Supplemental Parking Requirements: The following parking requirements shall supersede the requirements of chapter 9 of this title for the uses listed below. In recognition of central business district density patterns, the first two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet of a use within the C-5 central business district shall be exempt from off street parking requirements. Uses Parking Requirements Medical and dental clinics and laboratories 1 space per 300 square feet of floor area Multiple-family dwellings 2.0 spaces per dwelling unit Efficiency and one-bedroom dwelling units 1 space per dwelling unit Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 23 One-bedroom plus den and two- bedroom dwelling units 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit Dwelling units with three or more bedrooms 2.25 spaces per dwelling unit Offices 1 space per 500 square feet of floor area Retail goods and services establishments 1 space per 300 square feet of floor area Taverns and lounges 1 space per 100 square feet of floor area 12-3-5-1: MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS (For C-3 PUD zoned lots) : Add/Amend: F. Parking Requirements (Mixed Use Developments): 1. General Requirements: The parking requirements for mixed use developments shall be determined on a case by case basis analyzing the parking demand for each use and how sharing the parking spaces shall be used to ensure that times of maximum usage will not overlap. The following evaluation criteria shall apply: a. Section 12-9-7, "Off Street Parking Requirements", of this title. b. In no case shall the required parking be less than 75% of the base parking requirement of the uses as required collectively. c. Of the total spaces provided, at least two reserved spaces per residential unit must be provided; provided, however, when the subject property is within 2,500 feet of an operational or proposed passenger rail train station or an operational rapid transit bus platform, the following off street parking regulations shall apply. Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 24 Uses Parking Requirements Efficiency and one-bedroom dwelling units 1 space per dwelling unit One-bedroom plus den and two- bedroom dwelling units 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit Dwelling units with three or more bedrooms 2.25 spaces per dwelling unit Two-family; and townhouses (single- family attached) 2 spaces per dwelling unit plus one common guest space for every four dwelling units d. Availability of off site public parking within three hundred feet of the proposed use shall be considered in determining the commercial parking requirement. 12-9-7: OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS: Add/Amend: Residential uses: Dwellings, single-family detached 2 spaces per dwelling unit Efficiency and one-bedroom units in the R-4, C-5 and C-3 Mixed-Use PUD lots1 1 space per dwelling unit One-bedroom plus den and two-bedroom units in the R- 4, C-5 and applicably zoned C-3 Mixed-Use PUD lots1 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 25 Multi-Family dwelling units with three or more bedrooms in the R-4 and C-3 Mixed-Use PUD lots1 2.25 spaces per dwelling unit Dwellings, multiple-family in all districts approved for such use, except the R-4, C-5, and C-3 Mixed-Use PUD lots1 2 spaces per dwelling unit Two-family; and townhouses (single-family attached) 2 spaces per dwelling unit plus one common guest space for every four dwelling units Notes 1. C-3 Mixed-Use PUD zoned lots that are within 2,500 feet of an operational or proposed passenger rail train station or an operational rapid transit bus platform may follow the lowered parking requirements for residential dwelling units. Otherwise, all residential units shall follow the two spaces per dwelling unit requirement. The proposed text amendments above will assist new developments with providing adequate parking for lots that are near designated rapid bus or passenger rail. Additionally, the proposed text amendment are sensitive to the intensity of each type of dwelling unit. Applying a unilateral parking requirement for different types of multi-family and townhouse developments is not an efficient utilization of land near multi-modal transportation options. Standards for Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment: 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 new 2019 Comprehensive Plan specifically discusses the reduction of the City’s two spaces per multi-family developments near mass transit (Page 75 under Housing recommendation section). The Comprehensive Plan identifies the City’s future growth opportunities around mass transit including the Cumberland Metra Train Station and the Downtown Des Plaines Metra Train Station. However, land is scarce and two off street parking spaces per multi-family unit is not in keeping with the compact development patterns found around mass transit stations. Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 26 2. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with current conditions and the overall character of existing development; The proposed text amendments are compatible to current conditions and the overall character of existing development as all but one TOD project within the City of Des Plaines C-5 district contains less than two off street parking spaces per unit. Amending the off street parking regulations will assist with bringing this code provision in-line with historical development patterns. 3. Whether the proposed amendment is appropriate considering the adequacy of public facilities and services available to this subject property; All proposed amendments are not anticipated to impact public facilities and available services, but rather enhance public transportation facilities within Des Plaines. 4. Whether the proposed amendment will have an adverse effect on the value of properties throughout the jurisdiction; and All proposed amendments will not have an adverse effect on property values throughout the City. Lowering the off street parking requirement to encourage TOD projects around mass transit will assist with enhancing property values around our public transportation nodes and collectively assist property values throughout the City. 5. Whether the proposed amendment reflects responsible standards for development and growth. The proposed text amendments work towards responsible standards for development and growth. Specifically, reducing the off street parking requirement near mass transit will encourage compact development versus development projects that contain large parking lots/structures and results in a less cohesive development pattern. Recommendation: The Community and Economic Development Department recommends approval of the proposed text amendments to the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended: (i) Section 12-7-3.H.6, to update the Supplemental Parking Requirements for multiple- family dwelling uses; (ii) Section 12-9-7, to update certain regulations for Off Street Parking Requirements pertaining to multiple-family dwellings, and two-family/townhouses (single-family attached); and (iii) Section 12-3-5-1, to update certain parking regulations for Mixed Use Developments. Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 27 Planning & Zoning Board Procedure: Pursuant to Sections 12-3-7.D.3 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning and Zoning Board may vote to recommend approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval. The City Council has final authority over the Text Amendments. Coordinator Ainsworth offered a presentation including: • Proposed Parking Amendments • Mixed-Use Developments • Off-Street Parking Requirements • Parking Comparisons with nearby suburbs Chairman Szabo stated this seems very well thought out; very good. Board Member Fowler asked where additional guest parking would be. Coordinator Ainsworth stated there are no requirements for guest parking except for townhomes since each unit has single garages. Ms. Fowler stated she believes there should be guest parking and parking for businesses too. Coordinator Ainsworth stated a developer (150-200+ units) could add guest parking. He noted overnight parking is available in designated City lots. The parking lot at 701 Lee Street is being opened up to downtown employees soon through lease negotiations. Board Member Saletnik agrees with guest parking concerns. He stated visitor parking spots should be designated as such. Coordinator Ainsworth stated requiring developers to build parking spaces only for visitors is an inefficient land use as parking spaces dedicated to visitors will not be utilized all the time and again lead to underutilized parking spaces. The City is proactively working on new parking arrangements such as the renegotiations of both parking garages. Board Member Saletnik asked if the Code addresses assigned and non-assigned parking spaces. Coordinator Ainsworth advised that the parking spaces for private developments are being managed by on-site staff. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has further questions. Board Member Veremis asked if the Ellison building is full. Coordinator Ainsworth stated it is over 60% leased, but their garage is no 60% utilized. Other buildings were identified. Board Member Saletnik said we need to keep in mind the revitalization of downtown; need ample City parking. Coordinator Ainsworth reminded a new Text Amendment was introduced for sublease/collective parking. There will be over 2,000 public parking spaces in the downtown after the new Civic Center Garage is constructed. A motion was made by Board Member Saletnik, seconded by Board Member Hofherr, to recommend approval to City Council as written. AYES: Saletnik, Hofherr, Bader, Fowler, Szabo, & Veremis Case 19-081-V 855 Rand Road Major Variations Case 19-082-V 1313 Rand Road Major Variation Case 20-008-LASR-CU 2350 Mannheim Road Conditional Use Case 20-006-TA Citywide Text Amendment February 11, 2020 Page 28 NAYES: None ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** 5. Presentation from Staff – Providing Project Updates Coordinator Ainsworth offered a presentation and explained same: • 1700 W. Higgins • Billboard at Mannheim/Pratt (Phase II of Orchards at O’Hare) • 946 North Avenue • Former Huntington Bank property • 2100 S. Wolf Road • 1600 Sherwin • Des Plaines Theatre • Wine bar • Bubble Tea • Domino’s Pizza • Produce store (formerly Joe Caputo’s) • Kmart ADJOURNMENT The next meeting is scheduled for February 25, 2020. Chairman Szabo adjourned the meeting by voice vote at 8:43 p.m. Sincerely, Gale Cerabona, Recording Secretary cc: City Officials, Aldermen, Zoning Board of Appeals, Petitioners