The URL can be used to link to this page

2020.07.14 PZ&B Meeting Packet Community & Economic Development 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 P: 847.391.5392 | W: desplaines.org Planning and Zoning Board Agenda July 14, 2020 Room 102 – 7:00 P.M. Call to Order: Roll Call: Approval of Minutes: June 23, 2020 Public Comment: For matters that are not on the Agenda Public Hearing: Old Business: New Business: 1. Address: 942 Hollywood Avenue Case Number: 20-024-V The petitioner is requesting a Standard Variation under Section 12-7-2(J) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow a second story addition on a portion of a single-family residence that is located 2.75-feet from the west property line where a minimum of five feet is required in the R-1 zoning district, and approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary. PINs: 09-17-301-021-0000 Petitioner: Ronald J. Lanam, 942 Hollywood Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Owner: Ronald J. Lanam, 942 Hollywood Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Adjournment: Next Agenda –July 28, 2020 City of Des Plaines, in compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act, requests that persons with disabilities, who require certain accommodations to allow them to observe and/or participate in the meeting(s) or have questions about the meeting(s) or facilities, contact the ADA Coordinator at 847-391-5486 to allow the City to make reasonable accommodations for these persons. The public hearing may be continued to a further date, time and place without publication of a further published notice such as this notice. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 1 DES PLAINES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING June 23, 2020 MINUTES As the City of Des Plaines continues to follow social distancing requirements and Governor Pritzker’s Restore Illinois Order, the Planning and Zoning Board Meeting on Tuesday, June 23, 2020 was held virtually, via Zoom, beginning at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was live-streamed via: http://desplaines.org/accessdesplaines and played on DPTV Channel 17. ZONING BOARD Chairman Szabo called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. and read the following statement: ORAL DECLARATION REGARDING IN-PERSON MEETINGS OF SUBSIDIARY BOARD AND COMMISSIONS OF THE CITY OF DES PLAINES Pursuant to recently adopted amendments to the Illinois Open Meetings Act included in Public Act 101- 0640, public bodies may, in certain circumstances, hold entirely virtual public meetings without a quorum physically present in any one location. On March 19, 2020, Mayor Mathew Bogusz issued a Declaration of Emergency pursuant to the authority granted by the City Code, the Illinois Municipal Code, and the Illinois Emergency Management Agency Act to address the health threat posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. On May 29, 2020, Governor Pritzker issued a Disaster Proclamation that declared in-person attendance at public meetings of more than ten people at the regular public meeting location to be infeasible, in accordance the Open Meetings Act, as amended by Public Act 101-0640. On June 15, 2020, Mayor Bogusz executed a written determination that given the on-going emergency associated with the COVID-19 pandemic in-person meetings of the City Council are not practical or prudent at this time and until further notice. In accordance with the Governor’s Disaster Proclamation and the Village President’s, Declaration of Emergency and Determination regarding meetings of the City Council, I, as Chair of the Des Plaines Planning and Zoning Board, hereby determine that in-person meetings of the Planning and Zoning Board are not practical or prudent at this time and until further notice. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 2 Roll call was established. PRESENT: Bader, Catalano, Fowler, Hofher, Saletnik, Szabo & Veremis ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Michael McMahon/Director/Community & Economic Development Patrick Ainsworth, Coord., Devel. Mgr./Community & Economic Development Jonathan Stytz, Planner/Community & Economic Development Stewart Weiss/Legal Counsel Wendy Bednarz/Recording Secretary A quorum was present. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no Public Comment on matters that were not listed on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by Board Member Fowler, seconded by Board Member Catalano, to approve the minutes of March 10, 2020. AYES: Bader, Catalano, Fowler, Saletnik, Szabo & Veremis NAYES: None ABSTAIN: Hofherr ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** Chairman Szabo asked Patrick Ainsworth to read through the agenda and go over the order of the meeting with all those attending. Mr. Ainsworth read the agenda and provided information on the format of the public comments. NEW BUSINESS 1. Address: 150 N. East River Rd Case Number: 20-002-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-11-17 and Z-25-19 for a sign plan and approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary. PINs: 09-09-402-009-0000; -010; -012 Petitioner: Paul Langdon, 8301 Maryland Avenue, Suite 350, Clayton, MO 63105 Owner: Vanguard Des Plaines Apartments, LP and First American Properties, LLC, 8301 Maryland Avenue, Suite 350, Clayton, MO 63105 Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 3 Planner Stytz presented the staff report with a PowerPoint presentation going over the property and the signage requests which is as follows: Issue: The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use for a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation Plan under Sections 12-3-4 and 12-11-8 of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow for an increase in signage on the property located at 150 N. East River Road. Analysis: Address: 150 N. East River Road Owners: Vanguard Des Plaines Apartments, LP and First American Properties, LLC, 8301 Maryland Avenue, Suite 350, Clayton, MO 63105 Petitioner: Paul Langdon, 8301 Maryland Avenue, Suite 350, Clayton, MO 63105 Case Number: 20-002-LASR CU PIN: 09-09-402-009, -010, -012 Ward: #1, Alderman Mark A. Lysakowski Street Classification: North East River Road is classified as an Arterial Road. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Multi-Family Residential. Project Description: The applicant, Paul Langdon on behalf of Vanguard Apartments, LP and First American Properties, LLC, has requested a Conditional Use Permit for a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation (LASR) in order to allow for increased signage on the property located at 150 N. East River Road. The subject property is located near an I-294 exit ramp and the intersection of Golf Road and East River Road. The main entrance to the property is off East River Road, but there is also access from Golf Road. The subject property is 7.46 acres in size and is developed with a four-story, 236-unit apartment building, which was approved by City Council as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) in 2017. Pursuant to Section 12-11-8 of the Zoning Ordinance, Planned Unit Developments may establish a LASR plan for their property subject to review and approval from the Planning and Zoning Board pursuant to the procedures for conditional uses. Note that without the PUD designation, the subject property would not be permitted to install wall signage. The existing building currently contains no signage. The petitioner is requesting five total signs as part of the LASR application: one wall sign, two monument signs, two directional signs, and two window vinyl signs. The wall sign is proposed for the east building elevation facing I-294 to provide adequate visibility to motorists traveling on and exiting from the interstate. It would also serve as effective building identification for individuals utilizing the local roadways and walkways. The two monument signs are proposed for the entrances onto the property, one adjacent to East River Road and the other one next to Golf Road. The monument sign for the East River Road entrance will be solely for the Monarch apartment complex whereas the monument sign for the Golf Road entrance will be shared with the future occupant of the 2200 Golf Road property, which is located just south of the subject property at the corner of the East River Road and Golf Road intersection. A draft sign easement and restriction agreement has been prepared to detail the ownership and use of the shared monument sign. The two Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 4 proposed directional signs will be located near both entrances to the property and will assist in directing residents and visitors to the leasing office and garage parking areas. The two proposed window vinyl signs will be placed on the front doors of the apartment complex facing east to direct residents and visitors to the leasing center. All proposed signage is summarized below: 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 the multi-family residential land use. The apartment complex will be able to increase visibility and take advantage of existing, well-traveled public roadways, such as I-294, with the approval of the proposed LASR request. • Under Economic Development: o The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the economic vitality of the subject property and its benefit to the surrounding area. The existing development of this site provides additional housing options for the region as a whole and continues development trends already established in this area. While the aforementioned bullet points are only a small portion of the Comprehensive Plan, there is a large emphasis on developing and enhancing our residential corridors and underutilized properties. This new apartment complex is adding additional housing for the community and further enhancing the East River Road and Golf Road corner. The proposed signage will assist in the promotion of the new development for residents and visitors while also potentially attracting new development proposals in the future. 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: Sign Type Location Area of Signage Wall East Building Façade 41.10 SF Monument East Property Entrance 42.00 SF Monument South Property Entrance 58.30 SF (shared) Directional Near both Entrances 2 SF each Window Vinyl Leasing Office Doors 1.22 SF each TOTAL 147.84 SF Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 5 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 use of the site is multi-family residential. This land use consists of large townhome and apartment complexes throughout the city. The development of the subject property and its location in close proximity to I-294 allows for higher density residential development opportunities. The proposed signage for the site is intended to help identify the apartment complex and assist both residents and visitors alike in navigating 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 Conditional Use for a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation requests minimal signage to assist in the identification of the apartment complex and help both residents and visitors navigate the property. The petitioner has designed the sign plan to match the character of the apartment complex building and blend with the existing character of the development within the surrounding area. 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 and help 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. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 6 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 but rather establish building identification for both motorists and pedestrians. 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 has already been 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. Recommendation: I recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation at 150 N. East River Road, based on a review of the information presented by the applicant and the findings made above, as specified in Section 12-3-4(E) (Standards for Conditional Uses) of the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, subject to the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: 1. A three-foot landscape bed in all directions be provided at the base of all freestanding signs, per the standards set forth in Section 12-11-4(G). This landscaping shall be comprised of low-lying evergreen shrubs, perennials, and annuals. 2. That structural design plans shall be provided for all signage at time of permit. 3. The applicant shall provide sight line analysis for vehicle-to-vehicle sightlines and vehicle-to- pedestrian/bicycle sightlines showing that the sign position does not intrude upon the AASHTO Green Book sight triangles for the two monument signs proposed at the roadway driveways. The location of the monument signs may have to be slightly adjusted to comply with AASHTO site triangle clearance. 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 at 150 N. East River Road. The City Council has final authority on the proposal. Chairman Szabo swore in Paul Langdon, 8301 Maryland Ave, Clayton, MO. The Petitioner presented a PowerPoint which provided an overview of the sign images. Mr. Langdon provided rationale for sign location, the location of the sign is intended to grab the attention to the commuting public and entice commuters with the convenience of living in Des Plaines. The location or size of the signage is not changing, signs will be halo lit, free-standing and recessed into the building. The sign will span 41 square feet and each letter will be individually mounted. The signs are meant to be readable but not project light Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 7 onto adjacent properties. The small directional signs (entrance/office/garage) will not be illuminated, but will be reflective. The large shared sign will have a different finish to accommodate both tenants. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has any questions. The following questions were asked: Member Saletnik asked the Petitioner if he was aware of the conditions of approval. Petitioner Langdon replied that yes, he was aware of the conditions and had no issues. Member Hofherr inquired about signage of the north blocking southbound traffic on River Rd. The Applicant stated that standard traffic signage would be installed with City approval. Member Saletnik commented that the presentation was nicely done and the proposed signage is quite elegant. Chairman Szabo asked if there are any members of the public within City Hall that wish to speak on this matter. None were present. Chairman Szabo asked if there were any members attending the meeting virtually that wish to speak on this matter. None were present. Chairman Szabo asked staff to read any written comments into the record that were sent in via email. No written comments were received. Chairman Szabo asked for a motion for recommendation. A motion was made by Board Member Saletnik, seconded by Board Member Hofherr to recommend approval to City Council as presented. AYES: Bader, Catalano, Fowler, Hofherr, Saletnik , Szabo & Veremis NAYES: None ***MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY *** This item will be on the July 20, 2020 City Council meeting agenda. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 8 2. Address: 1714 S River Rd Case Number: 20-020-CU The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use under Section 12-7-3(F)(3) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow for an auto service repair use in the C-3 zoning district, and approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary. PINs: 09-28-114-008-0000; -009; -010; -011 Petitioner: Bozena Gawlik, 7025 W. Windsor Avenue, Norridge, IL 60706 Owner: Bozena Duriusz Puchlerz, Derek’s Auto Body, 7025 W. Windsor Avenue, Norridge, IL 60706 Chairman Szabo asked Planner Stytz to provide the Staff Report: Issue: The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use under Section 12-7-3(F)(3) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow for an auto service repair use in the C-3 zoning district. Analysis: Address: 1714 S. River Road Owners: Bozena Duriusz Puchlerz, Derek’s Auto Body, 7025 W. Windsor Avenue< Norridge, IL 60706 Petitioner: Bozena Gawlik, 7025 W. Windsor Avenue, Norridge, IL 60706 Case Number: 20-020-CU PIN: 09-28-114-008-0000; -009; -010; -011 Ward: #6, Alderman Malcolm Chester Existing Zoning: C-3, General Commercial Existing Land Use: Vacant Building Surrounding Zoning: North: C-3, General Commercial District South: C-3, General Commercial District East: R-1, Single Family Residential District West: R-1, Single Family Residential District Surrounding Land Use: North: Commercial (Landscaping Business) South: Commercial (Restaurant) East: Recreational (Cook County Forest Preserve) West: Single Family Residences Street Classification: River Road is an arterial street and Riverview Avenue is a local road. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Commercial. Project Description: The petitioner, Bozena Gawlik, has requested a Conditional Use Permit to operate an auto service repair Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 9 facility, Derek’s Auto Repair, at 1714 S. River Road. The subject property is located within the C-3, General Commercial district and auto service repair is a conditional use with the C-3 zoning district. The subject property contains a stand-alone building with a parking area and pole sign as shown in the Plat of Survey. The subject space was last occupied by M&T automotive, which left in 2018. However, the subject property has been vacant for over a year and requires a new conditional use for the proposed auto service repair use. The subject property is accessed by a curb cut off Riverview Avenue from the north and a shared curb cut with 1724 S. River Road from the east. There is a current cross-access easement between the subject property and 1724 S. River Road that was recorded in 1974 to allow both properties to utilize the shared driveway. The existing one-story, 2,444-square foot building is made up of six service bays. However, only four service bays will be utilized – a condition will be placed with staff recommendation that only four service bays are to be used for the life of the business. The building also contains a 118-square foot customer area, 81-square foot office space, break area, and storage space as shown on the Floor Plans. The petitioner’s proposal includes minor interior and exterior aesthetic improvements to the building, and the addition of landscaping throughout the site as indicated in the Landscape Plan. The petitioner does not plan to make any changes to the building dimensions at this time. Auto service repair facilities are required to provide two parking spaces per service bay and one space for every 200 square feet of accessory retail. Thus, a total of nine off-street parking spaces are required. The Site Plan proposes ten total parking spaces on the property, including a handicap accessible space. However, one of the ten parking spaces proposed at the southeast corner of the building blocks the access to the existing dumpster enclosure. Staff has added a condition that the Site Plan is updated to remove this parking space and resubmitted to staff within 60 days of City Council approval. Derek’s Auto Repair will be open from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday and 9:00 am to 2:00 pm on Saturday. Their services will include general vehicle mechanical repair such as brakes, oil changes, alignments, A/C repairs, engine repairs, and tune-ups. A maximum of two employees will be on site at a given time. Please see the Project Narrative for more details. Note, due to the small lot and prominent location conditions are being recommended by staff to enhance the property and minimize any visual impacts. 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 This property is designated 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 and residential uses. While the current use is commercial, the petitioner will work to enhance the property, which currently contains a vacant building, with a new commercial business that is comparable to neighboring commercial properties. All activities and items stored will be conducted inside to reduce any negative impacts. o The subject property is located along the defined River Road commercial corridor with single-family residential to the west and commercial development to the north and Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 10 south. The subject property is one of the larger commercial developments along River Road near Oakton Street. The request would assist in the retention of new commercial business as well as improve the property from a functional and aesthetic standpoint. • Landscaping and Screening: o The Comprehensive Plan seeks to encourage and actively pursue beautification opportunities and efforts, including the installation of landscaping, street furniture, lighting, and other amenities, to establish a more attractive shopping environment and achieve stronger corridor identity in Des Plaines. o The proposal seeks to add planter boxes along River Road for southern half of the length of the parking area and along the north side of the building to provide a more pronounced buffer between the street, building, and parking areas. The addition of landscaping in these areas is intended to capitalize on available space for screening of the property. o The proposal also includes the replacement of the existing fence section along the south property line with a six-foot solid wood fence and the addition of an eight-foot solid wood fence along the west property line to buffer the proposed use from surrounding properties. 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. 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: Auto service repair is a Conditional Use, as specified in Section 12-7-3(K) of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, for properties 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 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 on the River Road corridor and is surrounded by a mixture of commercial and residential along a major commercial corridor. The addition of the auto service repair use at the subject property falls within the Commercial use category. C. The proposed Conditional Use is designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity: Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 11 Comment: The property and existing building has been designed for an automotive repair use and was previously occupied by an automotive service repair shop. The petitioner proposes to revitalize one of the two vacant tenant spaces in the building for an auto service repair use. The current building blends well with the surrounding commercial uses and structures. The petitioner does not purpose to alter the height or footprint of the existing building. D. The proposed Conditional Use is not hazardous or disturbing to existing neighboring uses: Comment: The existing automotive repair use located within this building is not hazardous or disturbing to existing neighboring uses. The proposed auto repair facility will not create an environment that is hazardous or disturbing to the neighboring uses. The footprint, height, and appearance of the existing building will remain the same. However, minor interior and exterior aesthetic changes to the building are proposed to better suit the needs of Derek’s Auto Repair and the installation of landscaping on the site is proposed to improve the overall appearance of the property to neighboring uses. The auto service repair use is consistent with and complementary to other commercial uses in the area. 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 previous auto service repair use on this site was adequately served by essential public facilities and services. Staff does not have concerns that the proposed auto service repair use will also be adequately served by essential public facilities and services. H. 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 previous auto service repair use did not create a burden on public facilities or become a detriment to the economic well-being of the community. There is no anticipated burden for public facilities or detrimental to the community as a result of the Conditional Use Permit for a new auto service repair use. I. 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 auto service repair use is not anticipated to create additional traffic compared to the previous auto service repair use. 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 auto service repair use will not create an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares. There will be no changes to the existing two access points onto the property from Riverview Avenue and River Road utilized by the previous auto service repair business. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 12 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 auto service repair use would not cause the destruction, loss, or damage of any natural, scenic or historic features of major importance. The building and site were already developed for this use. The petitioner plans to add landscaping and screening to improve the aesthetics of the property. J. The proposed Conditional Use complies with all additional regulations in the Zoning Ordinance specific to the Conditional Use requested: Comment: The proposed auto service repair use meets all other requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for the C-3 General Commercial District. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit for auto service repair use at 1714 S. River Road based on a review of the information presented by the applicant and the findings made above, as specified in Section 12-3-4(E) (Standards for Conditional Uses) of the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, subject to the following conditions: 1. An 8-foot solid wood fence along the west property line shall be added, unless written authority from ComEd prohibits such fencing. 2. The damaged, partial fence that is on the south property line shall be replaced with a six-foot solid wood fence. 3. Paint the parking spaces on the property to match the approved Site Plan. 4. Add planter boxes along River Road that spans at least half the length of the parking area. The planter boxes shall be filled and maintained with live plantings. The dimensions of the planter boxes shall be at least 12-inches high and 12-inches wide to accommodate the live plantings. 5. No damaged or inoperable vehicles are allowed outside at any time. 6. No vehicles shall be stored within the required parking spaces or drive aisles at any time. 7. Only four service bays shall be allowed for the life of this conditional use. 8. No auto body related activities are permitted at any time. 9. That the Site Plan drawing shall be updated so as to remove the proposed parking space on the southeast corner of the building blocking the existing trash enclosure area and resubmitted to staff within 60 days of City Council approval. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: Under Section 12-3-4(D) (Procedure for Review and Decision for Conditional Uses) of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning and Zoning Board has the authority to recommend that the City Council approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny the above-mentioned conditional use for a new auto service repair use at 1714 S. River Road. The City Council has final authority on the proposal. Chairman Szabo swore in Bozena Gawlik, 7025 W Windsor Ave, Norridge, IL and Colleen Doherty, lawyer for the applicant. The property located at 1714 S River Rd was previously an auto body repair shop, but the conditional use has lapsed. The Applicant stated that the property is currently zoned C-3 and is vacant. There are no major changes being made to the existing building. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 13 The auto body repair shop will be open 8:00 am -5:00 pm, Monday – Friday, from 9:00 am – 2:00 pm on Saturday and closed on Sunday. There will be two employees on site at all times. The applicant is aware of the eight conditions, several of which refer to the aesthetics of the property. The applicant stated that this is a new business and is improving the area. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has any questions. The following questions were asked: Member Hofherr inquired about the body shop south of the location. Ms. Doherty responded that the location at 1714 S River Rd is only for an auto repair shop only, not a body repair shop. The body repair shop will remain at the current location. Member Hoherr also asked about the number of parking spaces. The applicant stated that the maximum number of vehicles allowed for repair will be four vehicles. No vehicles will be stored on the property. Member Fowler inquired about planter boxes and any other improvements. Ms. Gawlik stated that there will be new signage, painting, lighting and landscaping (planter boxes along building). Member Fowler asked staff about the traffic flow between this building and Paradise Pup. Coordinator Ainsworth stated that the cross-access easement already exists and staff did not have any suggested changes to the existing easement document. Member Hofherr commented about the wooden fence between the properties. Member Saletnik asked about the planter boxes. Coordinator Ainsworth explained the due to the size of the drive aisle, the dimensions of the flower boxes are limited. Landscaping is required in certain areas. Member Saletnik reiterated that the 30-inch planter boxes will be required on Riverview, the planter boxes in front of parking stalls will be 12 inches wide. Member Hofherr inquired about the process of when a tow truck driver drops off a vehicle in need of repair, especially after business hours. All cars will be taken into the building as soon as feasible, the City will work with the applicant on a case by case basis, but cars in disrepair will not be allowed on site. Member Veremis asked about changing the sign. Ms. Gawlik responded that the sign will include a name change and a new paint job. Chairman Szabo asked if there are any members of the public within City Hall that wish to speak on this matter. None were present. Chairman Szabo asked if there were any members attending the meeting virtually that wish to speak on this matter. None were present. Chairman Szabo asked staff to read any written comments into the record that were sent in via email. No written comments were received. Chairman Szabo asked for a motion for recommendation. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 14 A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr, seconded by Board Member Veremis, to approve as presented. AYES: Bader, Catalano, Fowler, Hofherr, Saletnik , Szabo & Veremis NAYES: None ***MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY *** This item will be on the July 20, 2020 City Council meeting agenda. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 15 3. Address: 290 Cornell Avenue Case Number: 20—021-SUB-V The petitioner is requesting: i) Tentative Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2 of the Des Plaines Subdivision Regulations to allow for a consolidation of three separate lots into two lots; and ii) a Minor Variation under Section 12-7-2(J) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow an existing single-family residence that is located 8.63-feet away from the corner-side yard property line where a minimum of ten feet is required in the R-1 zoning district, and approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary. PINs: 09-07-302-012-0000; -013; -023 Petitioner: Gary M. Rizzo, 1537 Ammer Road, Glenview, IL 60025 Owner: Lisa Burman, 606 Rambler Lane, Highland Park, IL 60035 Chairman Szabo asked Planner Stytz to provide the Staff Report: Issue: The petitioner is requesting: i) Tentative Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2 of the Des Plaines Subdivision Regulations to allow for the consolidation of three separate lots into two lots; and ii) a Minor Variation under Section 12-7-2(J) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow an existing single-family residence that is located 8.63-feet away from the corner-side yard property line where a minimum of ten feet is required in the R-1 zoning district. Analysis: Address: 290 Cornell Avenue Owner: Lisa Burman, 606 Rambler Lane, Highland Park, IL 60035 Petitioner: Gary M. Rizzo, 1537 Ammer Road, Glenview, IL 60025 Case Number: 20-021-SUB-V PIN: 09-07-302-012-0000; -013; -023 Ward: #7, Alderman Don Smith Existing Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residential District Existing Land Use: Single Family Residence Surrounding Zoning: North: R-1, Single Family Residential District South: R-1, Single Family Residential District East: R-1, Single Family Residential District West: R-1, Single Family Residential District Surrounding Land Use: North: Single Family Residence South: Single Family Residence East: Single Family Residence Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 16 West: Single Family Residence Street Classification: Cornell Avenue and Stone Street are local roads. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Single Family Residential. Project Description: The petitioner Gary M. Rizzo, on behalf of Lisa Burman, is requesting a Tentative Plat of Subdivision and Minor Variation for the Beverly Burman estate located at 290 Cornell Avenue. The subject property is 19,256-square feet (0.440 acres) in size and is comprised of three lots, which is improved with a single- family home on the north side of the property as shown in the Plat of Survey (Attachment 4). The petitioner proposes to consolidate the three lots into two lots and construct a new single-family home on the new southern lot as shown in the Proposed Site Plan (Attachment 6). The existing home on the property will remain as is. However, the width of the northern corner lot with the existing single- family home will increase to 59.78-feet and the southern interior lot will have a width of 60-feet as shown on the Tentative Plat of Subdivision (Attachment 5). There is one minor variation request for the corner-side yard setback with this application, as the existing lot does not meet the minimum ten-foot corner side yard setback requirement for properties in the R-1, Single-Family Residence district. Staff is addressing the pre-existing non-conforming corner-side yard setback requirement as a formality. Generally, minor variations are reviewed by the Zoning Administrator, but this request is being paired with the Tentative Plat of Subdivision under the same application. Tentative Plat of Subdivision Report Name of Subdivision: Jay and Beverly Burman Resubdivision Address: 290 Cornell Avenue Requests: Approval of Tentative Plat of Subdivision & Variation Total Acreage of Subdivision: 0.440 acres Lot Descriptions and Construction Plans: The petitioner’s Tentative Plat of Subdivision shows the existing 19,256-square foot property being consolidated from three lots into two lots. The northern corner lot will have an area of 10,807-square feet and the southern interior lot will have 8,520-square feet. The Tentative Plat of Subdivision shows a 5-foot public utility easement and drainage easement at the rear, a five-foot public utility easement and drainage easement on the sides, and a 30-foot private building line in the front of each proposed lot. Note that the Preliminary Engineering Drawings are conceptual and have not been approved by staff. All engineering comments will be addressed in the Final Engineering Plans at time of the Final Plat of Subdivision. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 17 Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan There are several parts of the 2019 Des Plaines Comprehensive Plan that align with the proposed project. Those portions are follows: • Under Overarching Principles: o The Comprehensive Plan seeks to promote a wider range of housing options and to encourage the reinvestment and preservation of established Des Plaines neighborhoods through the addition of new housing to fit diverse needs. The proposal seeks to reinvest in this vacant lot and provide additional housing options in this established neighborhood. • Under Land Use Plan: o A primary goal of the Comprehensive Plan is to preserve and enhance established single-family neighborhoods while also expanding newer housing options. The proposal matches the existing character of the neighborhood and provides modern housing options that are prevalent in the immediate vicinity. • Under Future Land Use Map: o The property is marked for Single-Family Residential land uses. These areas are designated for detached single-family residences to maintain and improve housing options for residents. The proposed use will transform an existing residential lot with one residence and provide an additional single-family housing option for the community as a whole. While the aforementioned bullet points are only a small portion of the Comprehensive Plan, there is a large emphasis on maintaining detached single-family zoning areas and promoting the expansion of these developments to increase housing options for residents. The petitioner is proposing to take a 0.440-acre parcel with one residence and add another residence for the community. Recommendation: I recommend approval of the Tentative Plat of Subdivision pursuant to 13-2 of the Des Plaines Subdivision Ordinance and the Minor Variation request pursuant to Section 12-3-6 of the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: Under Section 13-2-7 (Approval of Tentative Plat By Planning and Zoning Board) of the Subdivision Ordinance and Section 12-3-6 (Approval of Variations), the Planning and Zoning Board has the authority to approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny the above-mentioned Tentative Plat of Subdivision and Minor Variation request for the property at 290 Cornell Avenue. Chairman Szabo swore in Gary M Rizzo, 157 Ammer Road, Glenview, IL 60025. The Petitioner represents the owners of the property. The Petitioner stated that the current home needs some maintenance. The Petitioner stated that the property owner is intending to subdivide the current three lots into two Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 18 buildable lots; the property owner will put the property for sale and the developer will provide additional detail on the type of home on the property. The new lot will be 60 feet wide by 142 feet deep. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has any questions. There were no questions from the Board. Chairman Szabo asked if there are any members of the public within City Hall that wish to speak on this matter. Those present did not have any questions. Chairman Szabo asked if there were any members attending the meeting virtually that wish to speak on this matter. Chairman Szabo swore in the following members from the public: • Paul Johnson, 300 Cornell Ave, Des Plaines, Il 60016 • Ronny Rodriguez, 287 Cambridge Ave, Des Plaines, IL 60016 • Mike Skibbe, 268 Cornell Ave, Des Plaines, IL 60016 • Tim Dadabo, 293 Cambridge Rd, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Paul Johnson stated that he was opposed to the subdivision of the property. He stated that there are already issues with flooding in the area and requested to see a topographical map of the property. Mr. Johnson mentioned that there were four other neighbors that are not present but are also in opposition of subdividing the property. Ronny Rodriguez had some concerns over flooding and water, but had no additional comments. Tim Dadabo stated that he and his wife, Mary Kay, have lived in his current house for over 25 years. Mr. Dadabo stated that he is opposed to putting another house on the property. The current home at 290 Cornell Ave is not well maintained and he has concerns over water issues. Member Saletnik had a question for those neighbors that were present and referenced page 11 of the informational packet. Those in attendance expressed concern over engineering design and water drainage. Coordinator Ainsworth stated that the drawings were routed to the Engineering Department for comments but reminded everyone that the case is reading a tentative plat of subdivision. If the case moves forward, it will be reviewed in greater detail by the Engineering Department to meet modern engineering standards. Mr. Johnson stated that during the last major rainstorm on May 19th, Stone & Cornell Ave had almost two and a half feet of water, the storm sewers did not handle the overflow until later in the day. Member Catalano is professional engineer by trade and suggested that what the Engineering Department would require upgrades to the infrastructure on-site. Member Catalano stressed that the City has a responsibility to improve the situation versus making it worse. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 19 Coordinator Ainsworth clarified that the subdivision process is a two-step process, tentative and final, and final engineering would be required as part of the final plat of subdivision. Following the application for final plat of subdivision, the case would be on the agenda at a Planning & Zoning Board meeting and voted on by the City Council. Following City Council approval the applicant/builder would submit for building permits. The public has additional opportunities to see the details of these plans at the public hearing for the final plat of subdivision as well as at the City Council meeting. Member Fowler inquired about the standard lot size of properties in the area. Coordinator Ainsworth replied that the minimum lot size is 55 feet wide by 125 feet deep, the proposed lot exceeds the minimum lot size requirements. Member Fowler inquired about the type of house that will be built. The Petitioner stated that the type of home will addressed by the developer. Neither he nor the owner intends to build on the subdivided lot. Member Fowler asked about the existing home on the property. The Petitioner stated that the home and future lot would be sold separately. Mr. Dadabo inquired about lot lines and setbacks. Coordinator Ainsworth clarified that the City of Des Plaines does not allow 0-foot setback lot lines for residential homes. The minimum setback from the front property line is 25 feet and the side yard setback is 5 feet. Those in attendance discussed the storm sewer and overflow catch basins. Director McMahon stated that the current system is a combined system (storm and sanitary sewer). Member Hofherr clarified that the new home built on the lot would not be a combined system; there would be a separate storm sewer and sanitary sewer connection. Member Saletnik stated that all new homes need to provide their own stormwater drainage. Member Saletnik also stated that when the current homes were originally built there were no code requirements in regards to drainage. Chairman Szabo and Coordinator Ainsworth reiterated that the case is regarding a tentative plat of subdivision. Final engineering would be presented if the petitioner chose to move forward with the subdivision process. The Petitioner, Mr. Rizzo, was appreciative of the Board’s understanding of the situation. Mr. Rizzo called attention to home sizes in the neighborhood and the lot sizes. He mentioned that homes directly across from the property at 290 Cornell Ave have similar lot sizes and would be accommodating to the neighborhood. Mr. Skibbe inquired about the property maintenance issues. Coordinator Ainsworth stated that the standard operating procedure is to have the case routed to all departments including Code Enforcement to ensure that there are no outstanding issues. Mr. Skibbe noted a concern over the tree stumps, Coordinator Ainsworth stated that he would follow up with Code Enforcement on the issue. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 20 Mr. Johnson stated that the property has been in disrepair and vacant for over a year and a half. The Petitioner, Mr. Rizzo stated that he would like a party to rehabilitate the home; he mentioned the concern between neighbors and owners. Chairman Szabo asked staff to read any written comments into the record that were sent in via email. Coordinator Ainsworth read the following comments into record: Received via email on June 8, 2020 Hello, I am writing concerning to the public hearing on Tuesday June 23 where 290 Cornell is petitioning. I live next door and want you to know that a flood sewer sits between the two lots with a depression in the yard. When it rains all the water from surrounding property goes there. I want to make sure this sewer is secured, repaired or moved when a new build comes. Can you tell me the law? Thanks. Mary Kay Dadabo 293 Cambridge Rd Des Plaines John LaBerg, P.E., CFM provided the following response via email on June 8, 2020 with an attachment titled “Pages from 290 Cornell Ave site plan – Preliminary Engineering Plans”. Mary Kay, We are aware of that catch basin. It currently connects to the combined sewer, so it will be removed and plugged, and new drainage structures in the rear and side of the proposed house will be installed, that connect to the storm sewer. Please see attached. Thank you, John La Berg, P.E. CFM Civil Engineer II City of Des Plaines 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 P. 847.391.5385 W. desplaines.org The following comment was received via email on June 23, 2020: The following are comments I'd like to enter for the June 23 meeting, related to agenda item 3: Case 20- 021-SUB-V. Please acknowledge receipt. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 21 The subdivision should not be granted for the following reasons: 1) The current area that is planned for a single family home is depressional storage with a storm inlet in the middle. Properties from the south and from the west drain into this area. I see that the plans include rerouted storm sewer, but no accommodation for the current storage volume. Also, overland flow is not great currently, so care needs to be taken to allow overflow, as there will always be a bigger rain that overwhelms any designed pipe. Please do not accept prior to complete engineering evaluation, it is not a simple vacant lot. 2) The current density is such that a new 8,000+ sqft home will ruin the look and feel of the existing neighborhood. Being a corner lot, 290 Cornell currently has an open backyard space equivalent to nearby homes. A new home in this backyard would leave two homes with no backyards, as it is not a vacant lot. 3) The current homeowners haven’t maintained the existing home to a minimum level. The house is in poor shape, abandoned, is uninhabitable, and has had various ordinance violations issued against the house and the property over the last two years. The City should withhold approval until compliance is reached. Mike Skibbe 268 Cornell Ave Des Plaines, IL The following comment was received via email on June 23, 2020: SUBJECT The following are comments I'd like to enter for the June 23 meeting, related to agenda item 3: Case 20-021-SUB-V. Please acknowledge receipt. 1 This proposal will have a density much greater than the neighbors. 2 Building a house on below standard setbacks, adds to water adds to water runoff. I understand this property currently has depressional storage with a city storm inlet in the middle of the storage area. I hear the plans call for taking away the depressional storage and rerouting the storm sewer, how do we know this will not cause the existing residences more water problems. 3. I had hoped that the city had learned their lesson in the 1990’s with all of the oversized houses being built on undersized lots. Not only did they look terrible if you follow housing values, they did not hold values. Spot zoning never works. Thank you Don & Judy Rosedale 250 Stratford Road Des Plaines IL. 60016 Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 22 Chairman Szabo asked for a motion for recommendation. A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr, seconded by Board Member Saletnik, to approve as presented. AYES: Bader, Catalano, Hofherr, Saletnik , Szabo & Veremis NAYES: Fowler ***MOTION CARRIED *** Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 23 4. Address: Citywide Case Number: 20-018-TA The City of Des Plaines is requesting Text Amendments to the following sections of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, and Title 13, Subdivision Ordinance: (i) Section 12-7-2.J, to update the note section of the Residential District Bulk Matrix, (ii) Sections 12-7-3.K, and 12-7-4.G to add Semi- Permanent Tent Structures as a Conditional Use in the C-3, C-4, M-1 and M-2 zoning districts, adding Specialty Foods Stores as a permitted use in the C-6 zoning district, and adding Food Processing Establishments as a permitted use in the C-3 zoning district under certain circumstances; (iii) Section 12- 8-11.C.10 to add and amend regulations regarding tents; (iv) Section 12-11, to amend various regulations to the Sign Chapter regarding exempt signs, electronic message board signs, pole signs, monument signs and temporary signs; (v) Sections 12-7-2.I. and 12-7-3.K to add “Single-family detached dwellings” as a Conditional Use in the R-2, R-3, R-4, C-2 and C-3 zoning districts; (vi) Sections 12-7-3.H.6, and 12-9-7, adding Specialty Foods Stores to the Off Street Parking Regulations and the Supplemental Off Street Parking Regulations for the C-5 Zoning District; (vii) Section 12-7-3.K to add Accessory Off-Site Parking Lots as a conditional use in the C-3 zoning district; and (viii) Section 12-13-3 to add the definition of “Structure, Semi-Permanent Tent”, and “Accessory Off-Site Parking Lot” and amend the definitions of “Sign, Monument” and “Sign, Pole”; and approval of any zoning text amendments as may be necessary. PINs: City-wide Petitioner: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Owner: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Chairman Szabo asked Coordinator Ainsworth to present to the following staff report: Issue: The City of Des Plaines is requesting Text Amendments to the following sections of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, and Title 13, Subdivision Ordinance: (i) Section 12-7-2.J, to update the note section of the Residential District Bulk Matrix, (ii) Sections 12-7-3.I.2, 12-7-3.K, and 12- 7-4.G to add Semi-Permanent Tent Structures as a Conditional Use in the C-3, C-4, M-1 and M-2 zoning districts, adding Specialty Foods Stores as a permitted use in the C-6 zoning district, and adding Food Processing Establishments as a permitted use in the C-3 zoning district under certain circumstances; (iii) Section 12-8-11.C.10 to add and amend regulations regarding tents; (iv) Section 12-11, to amend various regulations to the Sign Chapter regarding exempt signs, electronic message board signs, pole signs, monument signs and temporary signs; (v) Sections 12-7-2.I. and 12-7-3.K to add the use of “Single- family detached dwellings” as a Conditional Use in the R-2, R-3, R-4, C-2 and C-3 zoning districts (for existing structures only); (vi) Sections 12-7-3.H.6, and 12-9-7, adding Specialty Foods Stores to the Off Street Parking Regulations and the Supplemental Off Street Parking Regulations for the C-5 Zoning District; (vii) Section 12-7-3.K to add Accessory Off-Site Parking Lots as a conditional use in the C-3 zoning district; and (viii) Section 12-13-3 to add the definition of “Tent”, and “Accessory Off-Site Parking Lot” and amending the definitions of “Sign, Electronic Message Board”, “Sign, Monument” and “Sign, Pole”; and approval of any zoning text amendments as may be necessary. Analysis: PIN: Citywide Petitioner: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 24 Case Number: #20-018-TA Project Description: The City of Des Plaines is proposing several text amendments to the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, which are as follows: • Amending the regulations to allow semi-permanent tents as conditional uses in certain districts • Amending certain regulations on tents in the Accessory, Temporary, and Specific Use Chapter • Clarifying the notes section of the Residential District Bulk Matrix; • Adding Accessory Off-Site Parking Lot as a conditional use in the C-3 zoning district; • Adding Food Processing Establishments as a permitted use in the C-3 zoning district with certain circumstances; • Amending certain regulations in the Sign Chapter regarding: o Electronic message board signs, o Pole signs, o Monument signs, and o Temporary signs; • Adding Specialty Food Stores to the Off Street Parking Requirements Table; • Amending regulations to the Zoning Ordinance to allow existing, lawfully constructed single family detached homes as a conditional use in the R-2, R-3, R-4, C-2 and C-3 zoning districts; and • Adding or Amending the Definition Chapter of the Zoning Ordinance with the following terms: o Adding Tent, o Amending Sign, Electronic Message Board, o Amending Sign, Monument, o Amending Sign, Pole, and o Accessory Off-Site Parking Lot This staff report will be covering various topics in the City’s ongoing Zoning Ordinance modernization and text amendment efforts. The items below will be elaborated on in their own respective subsections for ease of following. Clarifying an Element in the Residential Bulk Matrix The Residential Bulk Matrix, specifically the minimum lot size for R-4 zoned properties and how the minimum lot size is determined. The proposed text amendment below only changes a few words, but it clarifies on how the minimum lot size for R-4 zoned lots are calculated which will assist any future development or subdivision within this zoning district. Add/Amend 12-7-2.J: TABLE 2 - RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS BULK MATRIX Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 25 Notes: 2. The minimum lot area per dwelling unit for a zoning lot in the "R-4 Central Core Residential District" shall be either 10,000 square feet or shall be determined by the number of total sum of the required minimum lot area of each dwelling unit on the zoning lot bedrooms in the dwelling unit in accordance with the following table, whichever is greater: Number Of Bedrooms Minimum Lot Area (Square Feet) Efficiency dwelling unit 600 1 bedroom 700 2 bedrooms 800 3 bedrooms 1,000 More than 3 bedrooms 1,500 The change above clarifies that the lot area for a property in the R-4 zoning district will be determined by the total number of units times the number of bedrooms or the particular R-4 zoned lot will have to contain a minimum of 10,000 square feet. The former text appeared to be in error as it stated that the minimum lot area per dwelling unit was both determined by a 10,000 square foot minimum and the chart listed above. The proposed text amendment above fixes the error. Updating Certain Sections of the Zoning Ordinance for Semi-Permanent Tents Currently, there are three adopted codes that regulate tents, the International Fire Code, the International Building Code and the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance. Each code refers to different aspects on the use, proximity, duration, construction and inspection of the tents. The Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance generally regulates tents for use, time and general location (zoning district). The current regulations do not necessarily provide adequate means to permit a tent structure to be utilized in a rational manner due to the strict time limits and the costs incurred to set up and take down large tent structures. For example, tent structures are being used as outside venues and to cover outside seating areas during inclement months. They are not being used all the time; however, our Zoning Ordinance requires these tent structures to come down after 10 days. This creates a logistical hardship for some tents to be constructed and taken down in that amount of time. With this notion, CED staff is proposing to create an opportunity for long-term tents as a conditional use in the C-3, C-4, M-1 and M-2 zoning districts. This conditional use approval process will come paired with a more rigorous inspection regiment and an annual license renewal to ensure maintained compliance with all regulations. The proposed text amendments below reflect this new process of approval: Add/Amend 12-7-3.K. TABLE 3 COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS USE MATRIX Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 26 Uses C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 C-5 C-6 C-7 Semi-Permanent Tent Structure C C 12-7-4.G. TABLE 5 MANUFACTURING DISTRICTS USE MATRIX Uses M-1 M-2 M-3 Semi-Permanent Tent Structure C5 C5 5. Semi-Permanent Tent Structures are subject to the restrictions set forth in Section 12-8-11.C.10 of this Code. Add/Amend 12-8-11.C.10 – Temporary Uses, Tents A. Tents Generally: All tents must be constructed of fire-retardant material and erected securely. Guywires, states or other supports must be clearly marked and secured. B. Temporary Tents: In any district, temporary tents may be permitted in connection with any permitted, accessory, temporary, special event license or conditional use. No temporary tent shall be allowed to remain for a period of more than two (2) days longer than the period during which the use with which was permitted it is associated is allowed to remain or, in the absence of any such period, a maximum of ten (10) days. Unless waived by the zoning administrator, every tent shall comply with the bulk, yard, duration, and space requirements applicable to the district in which it is located. C. Semi-Permanent Tents: Semi-permanent tents, permitted as a conditional use directly serving a class A restaurant or a commercially zoned assembly use in certain districts, may remain in place longer than a temporary tent; provided, however, the permitted time period will be specified in the conditional use permit. Such conditional use approval shall be renewed on an annual basis and be subject to periodic life safety inspections. Unless waived by the zoning administrator, every tent shall comply with the bulk, yard, duration, and space requirements applicable to the district in which it is located. The maximum allowable size for said improvement is 25% of the floor area of the principal building. Add 12-13-3: - DEFINITIONS Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 27 Tent: A membrane structure supported by cables, guy wires, frames, or an air support system that is accessory to a primary use and is intended to cover a designated area for gatherings, sales, outside seating, festival events and other similar purposes. Adding Certain Permitted Uses to the C-3 General Commercial and C-6 Casino District and Definitions to the Zoning Ordinance Over the past couple of years, staff has come across several uses where the Zoning Ordinance has deterred some businesses from opening up or staff has found businesses operating while the Zoning Ordinance does not match their previously approved use. The proposed amendments below look to add certain businesses as permitted in the C-3, C-6 and C-7 zoning districts, but the additions will be added in a responsible manner. The proposed amendments are as follows: Add/Amend 12-7-3.I.2 I. C-6 Casino District: 1. Purpose: The purpose of the C-6 casino district is to encourage the orderly development of a licensed casino and certain related uses in accordance with an approved plan of development. 2. Permitted Uses: The uses permitted in the C-6 casino district are by development plan, requiring city council approval, and shall include the following: Casino Class A restaurants, taverns and lounges Hotels Specialty food stores Add/Amend 12-7-3.K.: - COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS USE MATRIX Uses C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 C-5 C-6 C-7 Accessory Off Site Parking Lots C Food processing establishment C P14 Specialty food stores P P P P P P P Notes: 14. When the total space/use is up to 2,500 square feet. Any total space/use that is over 2,500 square feet must obtain a conditional use permit. Food Processing Establishments Based on the Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance definition, food processing establishments include catering companies. Given the City’s strategic location to O’Hare Airport and a large office population, several Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 28 catering companies exist in Des Plaines, but prospective catering companies are turned away from opening up in Des Plaines due to the notion of this business being a conditional use in the C-3 zoning district. Obtaining a conditional use may take up to three months from the date of turning in a conditional use application to obtaining an ordinance. Most prospective catering businesses are small operations, less than 2,500 square feet in size. As such, staff is recommending making this use permitted in the C-3 zoning district up to 2,500 square feet in size. Any use that is larger than 2,500 square feet in size has to obtain a conditional use. This size regulation already exists for artisanal retail uses where any such use larger than 2,500 square feet has to obtain a conditional use to ensure compatibility with the surrounding area. Specialty Foods Stores Specialty food stores is a use that includes coffee shops, bagel shops, ice cream shops, etc. Staff is recommending adding this use as a permitted use in the C-6 as this use already exists within Rivers Casino. This addition will help the existing business and other future use as part of Rivers Casino’s expansion plans. Accessory Off Site Parking Lots Accessory off site parking lots are a use that could assist with decreasing the intensity of auto-oriented uses by allowing a parking lot as the primary use for one particular zoning lot of record, but the parking lot is used solely for one entity such as medical centers, auto dealerships and office complexes. Such parking lots already exist within Des Plaines including the accessory parking lot located on the 1000 block of Lee Street that serves O’Hare Honda (the dealership is located on River Road). Staff is proposing to add this use to the matrix above to set such land uses on a path to follow the Zoning Ordinance as there are no such regulations pertaining to these off site parking lots. This use will be an allowable conditional use in the C-3 zoning district only, which will require any future applicant to receive approval from City Council. With this proposed use now being introduced to the Zoning Ordinance, there will need to be a definition added to help with differentiating this use versus other parking lots as a primary use. The proposed definition is as follows: Add 12-13-3: - DEFINITIONS: ACCESSORY OFF SITE PARKING LOT: A lot of record used for off street vehicle parking or storage that does not abut the lot of record on which the primary use is located. The accessory off site parking lot and the lot on which the primary use is located must be under the same ownership. Such use shall only be utilized for establishments located within the City of Des Plaines. “Accessory off-site parking lot” shall not include any use that is otherwise listed specifically in a zoning district as an allowable conditional use. No signage shall be allowed on an accessory off site parking lot except for a 24- square-foot ground sign identifying the off site primary use. Such sign shall not exceed four feet in height and may be internally illuminated. Adding Off Street Parking Regulation for Special Food Stores As mentioned in the sub-section above, the use of specialty food stores include coffee shops, bagel shops, ice cream parlors and other similar uses. However, there is no specific parking regulation for such Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 29 a use in Zoning Ordinance Sections 12-7-3.G.6 and 12-9-7. The text amendments below add this land use to the Zoning Ordinance and closes the gap on uncertainty for off street parking for such new businesses. Add 12-7-3.H.6: 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 Specialty Food Stores 1 space per 300 square feet of floor area 12-9-7: OFF STREET PARKING REGULATIONS Commercial Uses Specialty Food Stores 1 space per 200 square feet of floor area Since coffee shops, bagel shops and ice cream parlors are not full service restaurants, but they contain large amounts of customers within certain time frames, staff finds it necessary to require slightly more parking for such a use than general retail uses (except in the C-5 district), but less parking required compared to full service restaurants. However, if a specialty food store use is located within a shopping center, then that use will take on the parking ratio of shopping centers, which is three spaces per 1,000 square feet. In essence, this text amendment will not impede on the ability to open up such a use within a shopping center. This parking regulations will mostly come into play when a free-standing specialty food store use opens or is constructed. Updating Certain Elements to the Sign Chapter City staff’s ongoing clean-up efforts results in a slight modernization and enhancement of the Sign Chapter, Chapter 11. This modernization and clean up touches on clarifying language on electronic message board signs, temporary signs, enhancing and/or amending the definitions of certain sign related terms and an applicant’s choice to utilize either a monument sign or a pole sign. The proposed amendments are categorized below to assist with each specific topic. Exempt Signs The current Sign Chapter does not cover “Now Hiring” signs which would be used for businesses that are proposing to place a sign on private property advertising available jobs. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 30 Add/Amend 12-11-3.G.: EXEMPT SIGNS 15. Employment Opportunity Signs. Signs advertising available positions for the business on the subject property may erect one sign on private property, but it shall not exceed four feet in height and 16 square feet in size. Electronic Message Board Signs Electronic message board signs that staff reviews in building permits contains elaborate details for electronic message panels (video panels) that are not accurately reflected in the current Sign Chapter. Essentially, the changes below are to omit antiquated language from the portion of the Sign Chapter regulating electronic message boards and provide clear, modern text to reflect the sign technology that property owners are constructing on their properties. The proposed text amendments are as follows: Add/Amend 12-11-5: SIGN STANDARDS BY SIGN TYPE: G. Electronic Message Boards: 1. Electronic Message Board Requirements And Limitations: Electronic message boards shall be permitted only when incorporated within a new or existing pole sign or monument sign (this shall not include billboards except as permitted in accordance with subsection H of this section). The overall sign must comply with all existing standards and regulations as set forth in this chapter regarding pole signs and monument signs. Electronic message boards incorporated into an approved sign shall be subject to the standards and regulations as set forth in section 12-11-6 of this chapter. 2. Electronic Message Board Standards: Monument or pole signs containing electronic message boards shall be subject to the same standards as set forth in subsections A, "Pole Signs", and B, "Monument Signs", of this section. 3. Permitted Types: Video display signs. The following types of electronic message boards shall be allowed: a. Flashing sign. b. Illusionary movement sign. 4. Prohibited Types: The following types of electronic message boards shall be prohibited: a. Animated sign. b. Flashing sign. 12-11-6.B. REGULATIONS BY DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION Sign Type Number, Area, Height, And Other Limitations Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 31 Electronic message boards Electronic message boards shall not exceed 50% of the total sign area. Only 1 electronic message board will be permitted per lot. In the event that a single business exists on multiple lots or in the case of a business park or retail center, only 1 electronic message board will be permitted overall. Location: The animated face of an electronic message board sign shall be a minimum of 250' away from a residence in the R-1, R-2, and R-3 Residential Districts and shall be arranged to prevent direct glare onto any adjacent properties. 1.Institutional District is exempt from this standard. 2.LED illumination of the numerical pricing component of gasoline station signs are exempt from this location standard. The changeable copy may not be animated, however graphics of stationary objects with no movement or animation shall be allowed. The copy may be changed no more than once every 10 seconds. Video display signs are permitted. The changeable copy shall be specific to the business in which the sign was intended. No sounds will be permitted. Automatic dimming: Electronic message board signs shall be equipped with light sensing devices or a scheduled dimming timer which automatically dims the intensity of the light emitted by the sign during ambient low light and nighttime (dusk to dawn) conditions. The signs shall not exceed 500 nits of intensity as measured at the sign surface during nighttime and low light conditions and 5,000 nits during daytime hours. Add/Amend 12-13-3 DEFINITIONS SIGN, ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD: A. Electronic Message Board: A sign whose informational content can be changed or altered by manual or electric, electromechanical or electronic means. B. Animated Sign: A sign, or display, manifesting either kinetic, or illusionary motion occasioned by natural, manual, mechanical, electrical or other means. This sign type is prohibited. C. Flashing Sign: An illuminated sign exhibiting a preprogrammed repetitious cyclical interruption of illumination from one or more sources in which the duration of the period of illumination (on phase) is either the same as, or less than, the duration of the period of darkness (off phase), and which the intensity of illumination varies from zero (off) to one hundred percent (100%) (on during the programmed cycle). This sign type is prohibited. D. Illusionary Movement Sign: An illuminated sign exhibiting the illusion of movement by means of a preprogrammed repetitious sequential switching action in which illuminated elements of the sign are Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 32 turned on or off to visually simulate the impression of motion characteristic of chasing, running, blinking, oscillating, twinkling, scintillating or expanding and contracting light patterns. Video Display Sign: A sign, or display that utilizes full motion video technology or other electronic means to create the illusion of movement. Properties Eligible for a Pole Sign and a Monument Sign Add 12-11-6: REGULATION BY DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION: B. Commercial, Manufacturing And Institutional Districts: It shall be unlawful for any person to construct or maintain a sign in any commercial district, manufacturing district, or the I-1 Institutional District, except as follows. For the purposes of providing sign uniformity A property may incorporate both wall and monument signs or wall and pole signs however, the use of monument signs in conjunction with pole signs is prohibited. The use of monument signs in conjunction with pole signs is prohibited; provided, however, if a property is eligible to contain two pole signs or two monument signs, then the property may construct a combination of a pole sign and a monument sign as long as each sign is at least 200 feet apart. Monument or pole signs containing electronic message boards shall be subject to the same standards as set forth in this subsection, except that only one electronic message board will be permitted per lot. In the event that a single business exists on multiple lots or in the case of a business park or retail center, only one electronic message board will be permitted overall. Distinguishing Between a Monument Sign and a Pole Sign CED staff is taking this opportunity to provide some clarity in the Sign Chapter regarding the difference between a pole sign and a monument sign. Despite the common knowledge between a monument sign and pole sign, there is no difference between a pole sign and monument with regards to the base in the Zoning Ordinance. If an applicant wants a 28’ tall pole sign (which is allowed by code in certain situations) and they want the base of the pole to be as wide as the side, then the applicant would be allowed to construct such a sign. This may present a traffic safety concern as large sign bases can obstruct vision sight triangles for vehicles even if it meets our sign setback requirements. As such, the two definitions amendments below address the lack of regulation on the sign base for each type of signage. Add 12-13-3 DEFINITIONS: SIGN, MONUMENT: Any sign, other than a pole sign placed upon or supported by the ground independently of any other structure. The width of the base of a monument sign shall be at least 75% of the width of the sign face to which it is attached. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 33 SIGN, POLE: A sign erected and maintained on a freestanding mast or pole and not attached to any building, but not including monument signs. The pole or mast supporting such sign shall not exceed two feet in width per pole or mast unless otherwise directed by a licensed structural engineer. Amending Duration for Temporary Signage Given the unprecedented amount of time that certain businesses had to close for the COVID-19 pandemic, staff is proposed to amend the amount of time a temporary sign can be maintained for a prolonged time period. The current regulation is to allow temporary signage for 30 days. Staff is recommending to allow businesses to keep temporary signs up for 60 days. Additionally, such business would only need to keep their temporary sign down for a 30-day period before they would be allowed to apply for a new permit. The proposed amendment is as follows: Add 12-11-5.F. TEMPORARY SIGNS 1. Duration: No temporary sign shall be erected and maintained for a period in excess of thirty (30) 60 days. At the expiration of said thirty (30) 60 days, no sign shall be erected or maintained on the premises for a period of sixty (60) 30 days. Providing a Path of Lawful Establishment for Single Family Detached Homes City staff’s ongoing clean-up efforts results in assisting dozens of lawfully constructed single family homes that are now in zoning districts that do not allow for such use. Currently, single family detached houses are only permitted in the R-1, Single Family Residential District. Homes constructed in the early 1900s through 1950 were lawfully established, but are now in a zoning district that does not allow for such use. This creates a unique situation for the property owners of these homes as they would not allowed to expand their house or may even experience issues with insuring the property due to the non- conforming status. With this situation identified, staff is proposing to add single family dwelling detached dwelling units as a conditional use, but only under circumstances of protecting existing lawfully constructed houses. The Planning and Zoning Board as well as the City Council will have to evaluate each request through the conditional use process. This is a more ideal path to assist these properties coming into compliance with the Zoning Ordinance as compared to rezoning back to R-1 as such a rezoning may conflict with the Future Land Use Map found in the 2019 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendments are as follows: Add/Amend 12-7-2.I. TABLE 1 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS USE MATRIX Uses R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 Dwellings, single-family detached P C2 C2 C2 Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 34 Notes 2. Only single-family detached dwellings that were lawfully constructed prior to August 17, 2020 and are located in a zoning district other than R-1 are eligible to apply for a conditional use. Add/Amend 12-7-3.K. TABLE 3 COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS USE MATRIX Uses C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 C-5 C-6 C-7 Dwellings, single-family detached C21 C21 Notes 21. Only single-family detached dwellings that were lawfully established prior to August 17, 2020 and are located in a zoning district other than R-1 are eligible to apply for a conditional use. 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 proposed text amendments are consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan as the amendments include creating opportunities for lawfully constructed houses to come back into conformity through the conditional use process, tents that are used to serve businesses will now have enhanced capabilities to maintain such semi-permanent structures in a safe manner, correcting the way that minimum lot areas are calculated in the R-4 zoning district and ensuring that the uses in the commercial district matrix has a matching off street parking regulation and definition and several regulations in the Sign Chapter have now been clarified and enhance. Modernizing the Zoning Ordinance will advance the 2019 Comprehensive Plan to ensure that development trends and existing conditions coincide in a logical manner. 2. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with current conditions and the overall character of existing development; The proposed text amendments are mainly based off of the conditions and overall character of existing development. There are single family detached houses that were lawfully constructed several decades ago, but now they are in a zoning district where such use is not permitted, allowing them to remain lawful through the conditional use process will help the overall character of existing development. The signage and tent text amendments are all in an effort to assist current conditions and clarify the Zoning Ordinance in comparison to existing conditions. All of the proposed text amendments are in an effort to modernize the 22-year old Zoning Ordinance and make it easier to use for existing and future users. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 35 3. Whether the proposed amendment is appropriate considering the adequacy of public facilities and services available to this subject property; The proposed amendments are appropriate when considering the adequacy of public facilities and services throughout the City of Des Plaines. The Des Plaines Fire Department Prevention Division was consulted with on this text amendment. 4. Whether the proposed amendment will have an adverse effect on the value of properties throughout the jurisdiction; and The proposed text amendments will not have a negative adverse effect on property values throughout the City. Opposite, the regulations proposed should assist with enhancing opportunities to improve one’s property which in turn may assist with raising property values. 5. Whether the proposed amendment reflects responsible standards for development and growth. The proposed amendments reflect responsible standards for development and growth as all text amendments aim to either regulate aspects in development that are not covered in the Zoning Ordinance or to adjust a regulation to ensure that there are fair requirements for the users and property owners. 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- 2.J, to update the note section of the Residential District Bulk Matrix, (ii) Sections 12-7-3.K, and 12-7-4.G to add Semi-Permanent Tent Structures as a Conditional Use in the C-3, C-4, M-1 and M-2 zoning districts, adding Specialty Foods Stores as a permitted use in the C-6 zoning district, and adding Food Processing Establishments as a permitted use in the C-3 zoning district under certain circumstances; (iii) Section 12-8-11.C.10 to add and amend regulations regarding tents; (iv) Section 12-11, to amend various regulations to the Sign Chapter regarding electronic message board signs, pole signs, monument signs and temporary signs; (v) Sections 12-7-2.I. and 12-7-3.K to add the use of “Single-family detached dwellings” as a Conditional Use in the R-2, R-3, R-4, C-2 and C-3 zoning districts (for existing lawfully established structures only); (vi) Sections 12-7-3.H.6, and 12-9-7, adding Specialty Foods Stores to the Off Street Parking Regulations and the Supplemental Off Street Parking Regulations for the C-5 Zoning District; (vii) Section 12-7-3.K to add Accessory Off-Site Parking Lots as a conditional use in the C-3 zoning district; and (viii) Section 12-13-3 to add the definition of “Tent”, and “Accessory Off-Site Parking Lot” and amend the definitions of “Sign, Electronic Message Board”, “Sign, Monument” and “Sign, Pole”; and approval of any zoning text amendments as may be necessary. 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. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has any questions. The following questions were asked: Director McMahon provided clarification on the current tent standards. The current Building Code allows for tents to be installed for up to 180 days, while the Zoning Code allows for 10 days. The new Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 36 text amendments will allow restaurants/banquet halls to have tents up all year long, with an approved conditional use and appropriate conditions. Member Hoffherr inquired if it made more sense to build a permanent structure. Director McMahon stated that venues have expressed a want to have tents, many people like to have events such as weddings in tents as opposed to indoors. Member Hoffherr stated that there is a correction on page 3. “guidelines”. Member Veremis inquired about any opposition from the neighbors. Director McMahon stated that he has not heard any comments, but no amplified music, DJ’s or bands, will be allowed in the tents. Member Saletnik inquired about noise complaints. Director McMahon stated that if there is a noise complaint, the Police Department may be called to mitigate the issue. Chairman Szabo asked if there are any members of the public within City Hall that wish to speak on this matter. None were present. Chairman Szabo asked if there were any members attending the meeting virtually that wish to speak on this matter. None were present. Chairman Szabo asked staff to read any written comments into the record that were sent in via email. No written comments were received. Chairman Szabo asked for a motion for recommendation. A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr seconded by Board Member Fowler to approve as presented. AYES: Bader, Catalano, Fowler, Hofherr, Saletnik , Szabo & Veremis NAYES: None ***MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY *** This item will be on the July 20, 2020 City Council meeting agenda. Case 20-002-LASR-CU 150 N. East River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-020-CU 1714S River Rd Conditional Use Case 20-021-SUB-V 290 Cornell Ave Tentative Plat of Subdivision/Variation Case 20-018-TA Citywide Text Amendments June 23, 2020 Page 37 ADJOURNMENT The next meeting is scheduled for July 14, 2020. There is one case scheduled for the July 14th Planning & Zoning Board agenda; the meeting will be held in accordance with all social distancing guidelines. Chairman Szabo adjourned the meeting by voice vote at 9:03 p.m. Sincerely, Wendy Bednarz, Recording Secretary cc: City Officials, Aldermen, Zoning Board of Appeals, Petitioners COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1420 Miner Street Des Plaines, IL 60016 P: 847.391.5380 desplaines.org Date: July 6, 2020 To: Planning and Zoning Board From: Jonathan Stytz, Planner Cc: Patrick Ainsworth, AICP, Economic Development Coordinator Subject: Consideration of Variance Request to Allow a Second Story Addition onto a portion of an existing Single Family Residence That is Located 2.75-feet from the Property Line Where a Minimum of 5-feet is Required in the R-1 Zoning District (3rd Ward) Issue: The petitioner is requesting a Standard Variation under Section 12-7-2(J) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow for a second story addition onto a portion of an existing single-family residence that is located 2.75-feet from the property line where a minimum of 5-feet is required in the R-1 zoning district. Analysis: Address: 942 Hollywood Avenue Owner: Ronald J. Lanam, 942 Hollywood Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Petitioner: Ronald J. Lanam, 942 Hollywood Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016 Case Number: 20-024-V PIN: 09-17-301-021-0000 Ward: #3, Alderman Denise Rodd Existing Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residential District Existing Land Use: Single Family Residence Surrounding Zoning: North: R-1, Single Family Residential District South: R-1, Single Family Residential District East: R-1, Single-Family Residential District West: R-1, Single Family Residential District Surrounding Land Use: North: Single Family Residence MEMORANDUM Page 1 of 10 South: Single Family Residence East: Single Family Residence West: Single Family Residence Street Classification: Hollywood Avenue is classified as a local street. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Single-Family Residential. Project Description: The petitioner, Ronald J. Lanam, is requesting a Standard Variation to allow for a second story addition onto a portion of an existing single-family residence that is located 2.75-feet from the property line where a minimum of 5-feet is required in the R-1 zoning district at 942 Hollywood Avenue. This 7,057-square foot, 50-foot wide property contains a one and one half-story residence with a deck, private front walk, and 450-square foot detached garage accessed from the street as shown on the Plat of Survey (Attachment 3). The existing residence’s setback from the west property line varies from 2.75-feet at the front of the residence to 3.27-feet at the rear of the residence. The new second story addition is proposed for the south portion or front of the existing residence. Since the addition is proposed to match the existing setback of the first floor, staff notified the petitioner that a standard variation would be necessary. The petitioner is requesting the 717-square foot second story addition to address structural concerns with the original construction of the house and to remodel the existing upper story to create a full second floor for the use of three bedrooms and a bathroom. The footprint of the second story will match the footprint of the first story and the height of the roof will be increased to accommodate the additional square footage. The proposed addition would match the design and materials of the existing residence as shown in the Floor Plans & Elevations (Attachment 5). The petitioner aspires to construct the proposed 26.95-foot wide by 26.60-foot deep addition directly on top and flush with the existing first level of the residence without any changes to the building footprint as shown in the Site Plan (Attachment 4). The petitioner does intend to remodel the interior of the first level of the existing residence. However, the building footprint will remain the same. The petitioner’s request to add a second story addition that will be located less than five-feet from the side property line for single-family residences in Des Plaines constitutes the need for a standard variation to Section 12-7-2(J) 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 marked for the Single Family Residential land use. The Future Land Use Plan strives to create a well-balanced development area with a healthy mixture of commercial and residential uses. The petitioner strives to make structural improvements to the property to address structural concerns that were present when the home was originally constructed. While the aforementioned aspects represent a small portion of the goals and strategies of the Comprehensive Plan, there is a large emphasis on encouraging reinvestment in residential properties in order to enhance the Page 2 of 10 residential corridors throughout Des Plaines and to increase the quality of life for residents. 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 existing residence was constructed less than 5-feet from the side property line and setting the second story addition 5-feet away from the property line would affect the building envelope and create structural concerns. Requiring the petitioner to position the proposed second story addition could create a financial and physical hardship for the petitioner. 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 unique size and shape of this property create a particular hardship for the petitioner. The property width is 50-feet and is narrower than many of the lots surrounding it. The existing one and one half-story portion of the house already contains a partial dwelling space and the petitioner is addressing the existing structural concerns to adequately support this space. 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 size and shape of the property have not changed due to any action of the petitioner. The unique physical constraints of the property are unavoidable because the property is land-locked. 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 of the strict letter of the Zoning Ordinance would not allow the petitioner to address the existing structural issues and improve the structural integrity of the existing one and one half-story portion of the house. The petitioner strives to make the structure safe for its inhabits and to remodel the residence as a whole to make necessary improvements. In this case, the required 5-foot setback on the property for a principle structure in conformance to the Zoning Ordinance denies the owner substantial rights commonly enjoyed by owners of surrounding lots under the same provision. 5. Not Merely Special Privilege: The alleged hardship or difficulty is neither merely the inability of the owner or occupant to enjoy some special privilege or additional right not available to owners or occupants of other lots subject to the same provision, nor merely the inability of the owner to make more money from the use of the subject lot. Comment: The approval of this variation would not provide the petitioner with any special privilege or additional right not available to owners or occupants of surrounding lots under the same provision. The proposal would allow the petitioner to make improvements to an existing property and address the structural integrity of the residence as a whole. Page 3 of 10 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 approval of this variation would result in the construction of an addition to an existing residence that would be in harmony with the general and specific purposes of this title and meet all other zoning regulations. It would also encourage reinvestment and retention of single-family neighborhoods, which the Comprehensive Plan strives to accomplish. 7. No Other Remedy: There is no means other than the requested variation by which the alleged hardship or difficulty can be avoided or remedied to a degree sufficient to permit a reasonable use of the subject lot. Comment: There is no means other than the requested variation that the alleged hardship or difficulty can be avoided given the current physical orientation of the property. The location of the existing residence does not conform to the required setback regulations and prevents the petitioner from conforming to all regulations for accessory structures in the Zoning Ordinance. 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 approval of this variation would be the minimum measure of relief for the petitioner to overcome the existing physical hardship on the property, address current structural issues, and make necessary improvements to 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 following conditions: 1. That no portion of the second floor is located any closer than 2.75-feet from the side property line. 2. The west wall of the addition is less than 3-feet from the lot line. Pursuant to 2015 International Residential Code, Table R302.1(1) Exterior Walls, any new portions of this wall will be required to be fire-rated. Additionally, new wall openings less than 3-feet from the lot line are not allowed. These details will be required at time of permit. 3. That the petitioner submits a structural report stating that the existing foundation wall is structurally adequate to support additional loads imposed by the second addition. This report will be required during the building permit review process. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: Under Section 12-3-6(F) of the Zoning Ordinance (Standard Variations), the Planning and Zoning Board has the authority to approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny the above-mentioned variance for a second story addition onto an existing residence at 942 Hollywood Avenue that does not meet the minimum side yard setbacks required for a principle structure. Attachments: Attachment 1: Petitioner’s Standards for Variation Attachment 2: Location Map Attachment 3: Plat of Survey Attachment 4: Site Plan Attachment 5: Floor Plans & Elevations Attachment 6: Site Photos Page 4 of 10 1. The house has been here for over 100 years. I am not changing any setback on any side as to what it currently is. 2. The home was constructed incorrectly. Its more of a safety issue than a inconve- nience. The home has been specked as 2 bedrooms upstairs. but the structure does not support upstairs dwelling. 3. I am not sure of the processes of granting a permit 100 years ago was or if there was a process. But the house was built with the current set backs. There was also a permit issued within the last 20 years to build a addition that is also in line with the current house and current set backs. There are 2 AC units for the home. There was a furnace and AC unit added for the addition. This 2nd AC unit has a setback of 3ft 9 in. 4. Many homes in the area have second floors additions built and dormers built. I would imagine all homes that are over 100 years old in this area also have the same issues as my current project. I’m sure some have also had to go through this procedure 5. I am not changing the square footage. I am increasing the height a little with a 12-4 pitch. Right not the home has steep cross gable roof that is not supported correctly. I have no plans of selling after construction is complete. 6. This will remain a residence and the purpose would be to correct the construction and make it a safe home. 7. Set backs of the current structure have been in place for over 100 years. I am not changing the set backs. I am rebuilding the structure to be safe and add headroom. Square footage is not changing. 8. Yes, a zoning variance to complete the permit process to repair the home to be safe is the minimum need to obtain permits. Attachment 1 Page 5 of 10 Attachment 2 Page 6 of 10 Attachment 3 P a g e 7 o f 1 0 At t a c h m e n t 5 Page 8 of 10 At t a c h m e n t 5 Page 9 of 10 942 Hollywood Ave – Public Notice & Front of House 942 Hollywood Ave – Side of House Looking NorthEast 942 Hollywood Ave – Side of House Looking Northwest 942 Hollywood Ave – Looking Northwest at Front Yard A t t a c h m e n t 6 P a g e 1 0 o f 1 0