The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes 2007APPROVED MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, January 10, 2007 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT..................................James Woods (Chair), Stuart Opdycke, (Vice ........................................................................Chair), Albert Hunter, Doug Doetsch, Alice ........................................................................Rebechini, Lawrence Widmaycr, David Galloway, .............................. .......................................... Coleen Surrus MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................Sharon Bowie STAFF PRESENT.........................................James Wolinski, Dennis Marino, Tracy Norfleet COURT REPORTER............................CheryI Sandccki 1. CALL TO ORDER 1 DECLARATIOti OF QUORUM Chair Hunter determined that a quorum was present and began the meeting at 7: I Spm. II. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FROM DECE.%iBER 13, 2006 The December 13, 2006 minutes were approved unanimously. III. REPORT ON DECEMBER 19, 2006 EXECUTIVE COM.NiTTEE MEETING Chair Widnmyer summarized the 2007 recommendations from the December 19, 2006 meeting of the Executive Committee. He then nominated Member Woods as the Chair and Member Opdycke as the Vice Chair, and both members accepted the nominations. Member Burrus seconded the nominations, and the vote was unanimous (8-0). IV. CONTINUATION OF PRELIMINARY PHYSICAL PLALNS AND ZONItiG RECONIIIENDATIONS FOR THE NVEST EVANSTON PHYSICAL PLANNING AND URBAN INFILL DESIGN STUDY AREA (SUB -AREAS 1, 2, AND 3) Pursuant to an RFP process conducted last spring, taro urban design consultants have been working with community members. sta j^and elected orTtcials on updating the ph►-sical planning and lard use regulations which apply t►i:hin and adjacent to the West Evanston TtLr Increment Financing (T1F) District. The lull stutli-area was divided into a totil offive l i suh-areas, three oj'trhich have been the subject of this first phase of revicx: The updated ►naster plans anti coning regulations are intended for use in refvienving new development proposals which emerge in and around the TIFDistrict. In developing their planning and coning recommendations, the consultants it -ere to prat• particular attention to creativel►' integrating new developments with aristing neighborhoods, encouraging sustainable, well -designed streeiscapes and architecture, Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — January 10, 2007 Paee Two promoting lively, walkable neighborhood centers for economic and community activity% considering alternative modes of transportation, and creating opportunities for public and private green spaces. At the Iasi meeting, the Plan Commission heard public comment in support and in opposition to the proposed recommendations and began discussion. Tonight, following Plan Commission deliberation, Member Widmayer made a two-part motion: • Recommend approval to the Planning & Development Committee for the master plan components for subareas 1, 2. and 3; and • Refer zoning recommendations for all subareas to the Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission to begin public hearings. Member Doetsch seconded, and the vote was unanimous (8-0). Chair Woods noted that the planning and zoning recommendations for the study area arc consistent with the Comprehensive General Plan and the West Evanston neighborhood plan. Member Hunter added that development in proximity to the study areas should reflect the spirit of the proposed recommendations. - A eerbarim transcript of the proceedings of dus Plan Co—ission case is aswilable fro►n the City of Evanston's xeb site. The proposal and rramrripts can be viewed at Ae Downto Pow Library's .34 floor reference desk or at the Civic Center in the Planning Dirision or Zoxirq Division during business hours. V. PROPOSED PL-kNNED DEN'ELOPNIENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 06-13 PD 9,59 Dobson Street An application b'v Robert Birk. o hit Group A Architects, with permission front Thomas, ,tlatheos. and George Douvikas, property ou-ners, for a Planned Development. The applicant is the architect for the propertn c amtttonl • knou•►t as 959 Dobson Street, prc_cen:h• located within the R J General Residential District. The applicant requests that the Cin• grant a planned development as a_tarnt of special use permit including such development alloat antes. exceptions to dtn elopment alloiranee.s, and other relief as ma'v he necessary to alto,-v redevelopment of 959 Dohso►t Street for multi j mil►' residential uses ivirlt accessory parking. Generc►Il•, rye applicant proposes to construct a new structure to 959 Dobson Street :0di the j(-,:;owing characteristics: al Approximately 33 dxelling units: h) A maximum defined hui'ing height of 60' to the average pitch ofthe root: and ci irpro-rimerte'h• 45 enclosed ivithin the building. The applicant is requesrink� special u3t, appro, .:lc• the follou-ing development allnx•ances and erc�'Ptions to (helop meet allu.•. anc•e c ft)r : t:e regulator- concerns listed he.'low. and such other relief cis mar he necessan to alloit r= development of'959 Dobson Street for multi- familti• residential ►►ith acce•.rsun parking: runther of units, lot size, lot coverage. impervious surface. height. Yard requirements, balconies, and fence.. At the last meeting, the applicants completed their presentation of the proposed planned development. Tonight, cross-examination and testimony in support and in opposition to the Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — January 10.2007 Paee Three proposal were completed. The Plan Commission then deliberated. Member Rebechini noted a poor correlation between actual pricing and what is recommended in the market analysis that is part of the planned development application. Member Hunter suggested reducing the number of units by five to allow for larger units and less traffic, while also reducing the number of variations requested. There being no further discussion. a straw poll was taken in which all members voted to approve the project. Member Doetsch then motioned to recommend approval of the project as presented and read into the record the findings and standards. Member Galloway seconded, and the vote was unanimous (8-0). A wrbarim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is avallable from the Gap of Esanston's wrb site. The proposal and transcripts can be viewed at the Downtown Library Is .;4 floor reference desk or at tie Civic Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Division during business hours. VI. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING 7.PC 06-10 PD 1001 Chicago Avenue An application by Gregon• Greif, olhb Greif Properties, Inc., propern- oliwer, for a Planned Developntent. The applicant is they current owner of the propern• commonly known as 1001 Chicago Avenue, presently located within the Cla Commercial ,Wred- Use District. The applicant requests that the Cin•grant a planned development as a form of special use permit including such development allowances, arceptions to development allowances, and other relief as may he necessan- to alloss- redevelopment of 1001 Chicago .-I venue for a multi fancily residential building with accessory parking and ground floor retail. Generaliv, the applicant proposes to construct a new structure at 1001 Chicago : l venue with thefollowing characteristics: a) Appro.litnaieli, 65 dwelling units: b1 Approximately 3,650 square fret ofretail commercial space: c) .4 defined gross floor area (arcluding parking loading. storage, mechanicals, and rises accesson, to they building) of approxintatelt• 87,015 .square feet, resulting in a floor area ratio of shout 3,46: d) .4 predominant murinrum building height afapproximatelt, 67feet: and e) Approximately 91 offstreet parking spaces enclosed withirt (lie budding. The applicant requests grunt of a special use as authorised by � 6-10-3-3 for a planned development and fora use that e.rceed '1).000square f et. 416-10-1-90) establishes the mandaton- planned development thresholds for a project located in the Cla Commercial .%fired -Use District. The subject property• at 1001 Chicago .-lrenue is located on a lot that is approrintutely 25.185 square feat in si_e. In addition. the project will result in the development ol-65 near- residential trnirs. Roth characteristics trigger a mandaton- planne d e tivloprizent request to ohiain approval for they proposed project. At the November 29 meeting, the development team completed their presentation of the proposed planned development, and a representative for persons %vith a legally protected interest requested a continuance to tonight's meeting to allow time to review the evidence. There being no new evidence to be presented tonight, cross-examination began. Continued due to lack of time to February 1.1, 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — January 10. 2007 Paue Pour A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is anailablefrom the Ch), of Evanston's %rb site. The proposal and transcripts can be riewed at the Downtown Library's 3" loor reference desk or at the Civic Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Division during business hours. VIT. COMMITTEE REPORTS Due to lack of time, no committee reports were prox ided. VIII. ADJOURNMENT The Plan Commission adjourned at 11:20pm. The next regular Plan Commission meeting is scheduled for Wednesday. February 14, 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norflect Planning Division APPROVED MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, January 17, 2007 / 9:3 0 a.m. Ey-anston Ci,. is Center, Room 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT..................................James Woods (Chair), Stuart Opdycke, (Vice ........................................................................Chair), Lawrence Widmaycr, Da% id Galloway, ........................................................................Colcen Burros MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................Sharon Bowie, Albert Hunter, Doug Doetsch, Alice ........................................................................ Rebechini STAFF PRESENT.........................................James Wolinski. Dennis Marino. Tracy Norfleet ............ 1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Woods determined that a quorum was present and began the meeting at 9:30am. IL REVIEW OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO PLAN COMMISSION RULES: FOCUS ON PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS (ARTICLE \I, SECTION (0)) Ms. Norfleet summarized a memo outlining staffs proposed streamlining of Article X1, Section (0). Now that the Klacren court ruling no Ionger applies, the intent of this rules revision is to streamline the public hearing process but allow for flexibility- for the Chair to add structure as needed for controversial cases (e.g., separating out support/opposition, allowing for comment on revised proposals, etc). Following discussion, the proposed changes to Article \l, Section (0) are as foliows: (0) Public hearings shall ordinarily proceed in the following order, except that Plan Commission members can ask questions at any time during the public hearing: 1. Open public hearing with call to order and determination of quorum 2. Admit public notice. application m ateriais. and staff report into the record 3. Initial presentation: a. By the applicant dcvelopm�nt team for planned development Public hearings b. By Zoning Committee Chair and or staff for zoning ordinance text amendment public hearings 4. Staff comment 5. Period for citizen comment and questions Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — ]anuary 17. 2007 Page Three a. At the discretion of the Chair, citizen comment can be split into support and opposition. but questions arc allowed at any time b. At the discretion of the Chair, citizen questions and comments that are redundant, harassing, or irrelevant will not be allowed b. Admit written citizen comments into the record (handwritten letters, cmails, etc) 7. At the discretion of the Chair, a continuance may be granted to a date certain under the folio%ing circumstances: a. To allow time for the applicant/development team to review comments and suggestions b. To allow time for citizens to review the record and prepare questions and comments c. To allow time for Plan Commission members to review the accord prior to dzliberation d. To continue proceedings to a date certain due to a lack of time S. Plan Commission deliberation to determine recommendation 9. Motion and vote 10. Close public hearing In addition to these changes, it was proposed that Article X. Section 3 be removed since it pertains to the Klacren case, which no longer applies. Staff will review the rules once more for other Klaeren-related changes. III. ADOPTION OF CHANGES AND REPLACEMENT OF APPROPRIATE SECTIONS IN THE PLAN COMMISSION RULES (AS ADOPTED 12/14/05) Member Widmaycr motioned to modify the rules by adopting staff's recommended changes to the procedures for public hearings, as amended at tn.iav's meeting. and other changes as discussed today. 'Member Bun -us seconded, and the vote was unanimous. IV. ADJOURNMENT The Plan Commission adjourned at 10:13am. The next regular Plan Commission meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 14. 2007 at "a Z+m in the Civic Center. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Joint Meeting of Planning & Development Committee, Evanston Plan Commission, Economic Development Committee And Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Notes of January 24, 2007 Evanston Civic Center, Room 2404 — 7:00 p.m. Planning & Development Committee ,Members Present; S. Bernstein. D. Holmes, L. Jean -Baptiste, E. Moran, A. Rainey. E. Tisdahl, C. Wollin, M. Wynne Plan Commission Members Present: S. Bowie, C_ Butrus, D. Galloway, A. Hunter, L. Widmayer, J. Woods (Chair) Economic Development Committee Members Present: R. Creamer, E. Moran, A. Rainey, M. Wynne (Chair), L. Jean -Baptiste, M. Juliar. M. Norkett, E. Tisdahl Zoning Board of Appeals Members Present: R. Creamer (Chair), M. Rodgers, L. Summers, D. Wilson Staff Present: J. WolinskL J. AielIo. C. Brzezinski, J. Carroll. K. Cox, A. Jackson, V. Jones, D. Marino, T. Norflect. M. Robinson, J. Brownlee Presiding OMcial: Alderman Jean -Baptiste CALL TO ORDER Chair Jean -Baptiste called the meeting to order at 7:14 p.m. and had everyone in attendance introduce them self. (List of attendees attached) PURPOSE OF THE MEETING .fr. Wolinski thanked everyone for coming out this evening and stated that this meeting is for the purpose of an open and joint discussion between governing bodies regarding issue that are critical not only for development in Evanston but also the development process. SUNIMARV OF COMMUNICATION'S Mr. Wolinski summarized over the cc mmunications attached to the agenda; three memorandums from Tracy NOrile:t regarding the P:an Commission Status and schedule timeline for planned developments and zoning issues, a comparison table of Plan Commission recommendations and P&D Council decisions for Planned D:velopments from 2002 to present (bringing attention to the impressive number of 25 planned &—velopment proposals). He went into further detail the contents of the memorandum. Also inl:ludcd is a revision to the Plan Commission Procedures for Public Hearings. The specific revision is to Article \I, Section (0) to streamline the public hearing process but add flexibility at the Chair's discretion for controversial cases. Also there is a Joint Mtg. u! PSD Comm.. ZRA Plan Comm . & EDC January 24. 2007 page 2 copy of the Rules of Procedure for the Planning & Developrrsent Committee of the City Council for Consideration of Recommendations from the Zoning Board of Appeals, Plan Commission, and Preservation Commission, and Certain Appeals_ Mr. Wolinski said that one of the issues of concern for discussion this evening is to gather a consensus and opinion of how satisfied everyone is with the concept of the mandatory planned development. if the majority is satisfied then there would be no need to change the process at this time. This princess does give the City Council the ultimate control on development in this community and it also gives Council the right to request public benefits through the planned development (PD) process. He also pointed out, however, to a certain point it undermines the underling zoning and it creates a process where all of the PD's must go through the Plan Commission then subsequently before City Council, which many have voiced concerns about taking three or five months to get through the process. Chair Jean -Baptiste asked if there were any questions from the Committec's/Board on the Rules of Procedure. He noted that the City is no longer under the Klacren Rules, which has burdened the process since its commencement. \Sr. Wolinski brought to attention that the ZBA will be updating their Rules as well to rid themselves of any Klacren rulings. \Ir. Creamer agreed and responded that the ZBA is general happy with their rules other than that point. \fr. Woods said that for the Plan Commission obviously in their view a big thing that held them back from being able to deal with projects in an efficient manner was the Klacren Rules. The Rules created mounds of repetition in terms of questions and answers, presentations, etc. He said the fact that the City is back to operating the process without Klacren Rules he believes will make for a far better process. Mr. Creamer responded that the ZBA's Rules that existed prior to Klacren Ruling, for the most part %vere compliant with Klacren in the first place. REPORT BY EACH CO\IMITTFF/CO\I�IISSIO\IBOARD A. Planning and Development Committee Current Workload. nroiection fo:- 2(k)7 Chair Jean -Baptists reported &.it the general consensus of the Committee is that their agenda workload is zoinz to become r o-r manageable since 2005's workload. Fle noted that the Central Street project is before P&D now with other planned developments in the expected to come before them to the near future. however none that would burden the Committee's schedule at this time. Issues of Concern in 2006 Chair Jean-Bzptistt said that tl:e Committee received many cases from the Plan Commission and Zoning Board. several of wh,:h were very extended, lengthy and burdensome on everyone's schedule am a their agenda's. T?tcrc was the need for marry special meetings to be scheduled throughout _1:X16 because of the ---%eral large planned developments and projects. B. Plan Commission Current Workload. nroiection for 200" Mr. Woo& said currently ZBA hats one case. I001 Chicago Avenue, that has been on their last few agenda's, which the will finish up within the next few meetings. ZBA has two projects that Joint %Itg. % PSD Comm.. ZBA Plan Comm.. S EDC January. 24.1007 page 3 have been noticed for February 14d, 1890 Maple and 1200 Davis. He said the only other case that they know of that has been in the "pipeline" in SP.kkRC is 310 Sheridan Road, however this case has not yet filed their Planned Development application. Mr. Woods informed that there are a number of zoning issues the Plan Commission is loo;ang at including the MUE district review, a number of text amendments, the issue of substandard lot developments, west Evanston zoning issues. He noted a couple of ether issues are with regards to special uses that should questionably run with the land and he believes the solar panel issue a -ill be returning back to the Commission as well. Mr. Woods said a few future zoning issues to come is the upcoming downtown plan and some technical zoning issues that need to be addressmL There is also the Downtown Planning Process that Will be on -going and the Commission uzal eventually need to address the Central Street planning issues. Issues of Concern in 2006 Mr. Woods said the Plan Commission's biggest issue of concern last year was the Klaeren Rules in terms of slowing down processes with hearings. He further noted there are three issues of concern they are facing with 2007: l) technical zoning types of issues. 2) speeding up the Downtown Planning Process as they have been req•.xcsted to do, and 3) will have four (4) vacancies that are coming up this year. Ald. Moran recalled a past reference to the Plan Comrission to review the R5 districts adjacent to R1 zoning and requested that this be considered fic review sometime this year. Also Aid. Tisdahl's reference to review the B13 zoning district. which she understands has been delayed until after the Central Street Planning. ,Ms. Aiello confirmed that the zoning issues will be reviewed upon acceptance of the Central Street Plan to be consistent. Mr. Wolinski also noted that one of the issues that the Plan Commission faces is lack of time to deal with the "smaller' Zoning Ordinance issues because their agcmii's are totally full with planned developments projects. lie said that perhaps once the planned developments slow down this year, although it does not seem likely at this time, then the Commission will have more time. He mentioned that the Plan Commission did eery well last year with trying to make accommodations by scheduling: many special and extra meetings. One thing the Commission has been doing is scheduling 2-3 cases per meeting and giving each case a few hours so as to keep things flowing. Ald. Bernstein said historically, the City had a Zontrc Amendment Committee which largely responsible for the "smaller" zoning issues that are wing referred to here. lie questions if it might be advantageous at this tire.: to go back to caving such a Committee with the Plan Commission's constant workload at this time. %is. Carroll stated that she Ntould like to see the Dou-.town Plan done first before looking into review of any Zoning Ordinance tssues. She agm: d that looking into forting a separate Committee to handle Zoning Ordinance amendments --ould be probably be beneficial, however at this time Council needs to let star?- and advisory boards kno,.v w hat they would like prioritized. Nis. Aiello added that it would be h.lpful to look at r,_:Lhborhoods and get input as to what the community %%ould like to sec in _`Xir vicinity. T,_ s input could be blended into the text amendments rather than just creatir.2 a zoning change :and being out of context. She said this is ere of the reasons the Zoning Amer..:.ment Committee lapsed into the Plan Commission so that zoning could be lokked at within tl : context of nhat% changing or developing in a certain area. Ms. Aiello said that staff has been looking at some cf these technical issues that they believe could really be handled adminis--ratively. Mr. Fantcr informed that the Neighborhood Subcommittee of the Plan Commission is currently wccking with the Neighborhood Planner. Sue Guderley, who is beginning a review of neighborhoo,.5s. Mr. Marino explained that within the Joint Sttg, w/ P&D Comm.. ZBA Plan Comm., & EDC January 24,2007 page 4 downtown area, they are releasing Request for Proposals by the end of this week that essentially request proposals to do a pilot project for downtown. The focus is on the three traditional areas that the Plan Commission has designated within the downtown and also two core downtown blocks and one transitio:tsl area. Mr. Hunter continued that the Plan Commission will eventually in the future get to all the neighborhoods and will keep the Alderman of the Ward informed. fie explained in further detail the aspects of the studies. Aid. Bcrostein stated that the mandatory PD process is in lieu of Binding appearance Review and he questions whether this has really been successful or if it has helped to provide more pleasing projects with allowing more Committee involvement. Ms. Summers responded that part of the lack of successfulness is that the PD hears from three different places, three different opinions and requirements. She said this lack of consensus does not allow the developer to grasp a clear picture of what is expected of them. He asked how- others felt on this matter. Members of the Plan Commission felt extremely overworked in 2006 from all the Planned Developments they heard. Discussion and comments on the Planned Development process followed. Mr. Wolirtski noted that out of the_5 projects since 2002 that most would have qualified as planned developments anyways but the fact of them now bttng mandatory has certainly added to the burden of the Plan Commission. ?►]d. Tisdahl raised a question for those that have been on the Committee and advisory boards longer than she has if making projects PD's has made developers come in with a request for more %ariances than they would if PD's were not mandatory. The majority re-sp nsc was yes. Mr. Widmayer (") responded that from a real estate aspect the answer is yes, in part because of the assumption for some n"otiation. At other times they have given the opportunity to justify and to explain why something exceeds the zoning is worthy. He noted that the Plan Commission look at projects not only at tht moment they are being built but what kinds of impact will the project have 20-25 years or more in the future. On the other hand. Mr. Widmayer said that if the City did not have the PD process they would be limiting therr.:-elves in what is offered to the community. Mr. Hunter feels that there is a need for more demand for public contributions from these PD developers. He said that developers should view thew building here as a privilege not a right to proceed in Evanston. Ald. Wynne agreed with Mr- Hunter's point on demanding more public benefits. especially when many developers view extra tax rev enue as a major public benefit. Binding Appearance R:+-iew• discussion ensued. Mi Brzezinski explained to the group what a general meeting is n-:ically for SPAARC and the r commentary- often is based on sound architectural principals_ which are exemplified in the Desizt Guidelines. Site noted that SPAARC's comrnenta_n and recommendations are not bindinc but is a collaborative effort instead to make the pre>>ect better. She said in tenrs of ha\3ng Binding Appearance Review or the mandatory PD process. in her opinion conttnunit:.-s that do have BAR do not have any better designs or projects th-- Evanston. Aid. Rainey cox: lrmerted the work done by SP.A.aRC and takes their recommen.' -eons and opinions very scno�=1}- µi .n each project_ The consensus from the members of the F.= Commission \gas that the,- are -I:isfcd «:,h the communication and minutes from SPA.-kRC and take their rzcommenda::on _, a pro forma given. 1lie consensus from the members of t_jc ZBA's was that the major.:% of tim.- SPAARC's recontmen dations are followed and adhered to. Members from the P[_-i Commission asked what P'anninQ & Development Committee needs from them. Currently :he P&D Committee receives he transcript and findings of fact. For the Central Street case, a i:de letter was sent that reflect-. d the thoughts on this project from the Plan Joint %Itg. u/ P&D Comm.. ZBA Plan Comm., & EDC January 24, 2007 page 5 Commission. Would P&D Committee prefer a report concept versus a vote; would this be a vehicle that would allow the Committee to make a more informed decision on projects. Aid. Bernstein referred to the Virchow Krause Report and noted that Evanston is one of the few communities where staff is not more involved throughout the entire process from application to final outcome. He said the VK Report refers to staff being a "Shepard" through the process giving leadership and guidance to developers from the inception until applying for permits if approved. He supports this process and feels it would be very helpful in avoiding situations like what happen with the Ferris Development as mentioned by AId. Wollin where they were given different directions from dilTercnt advisory boards and committees. Aid. Rainey responded that she would like to continue to receive a recommendation from the Plan Commission versus just a report because the deliberations and hearings and outcome of vote she finds very informative. She also agrees that there is a need to look at public benefits as they relate to different areas of Evanston and what would benefit that neighborhood most. C. Economic Development Committee Current Work -load. P oiection for 2007 Mr- Marino took the lead at the request of the Chair, Aid. Wynne. Mr. Marino said there are three particular issues of importance that the Economic Development Committee (EDC) started in 2006 and will focus on in 2007. 1) The Downtown Planning Process and wanting to accelerate on this along with the Plant Commission. EDC would like to work through this within the next seven months versus the anticipated twelve months. In addition. EDC will provide periodic reports as recommendations emerge rather than waiting until the end of the process. He stated the idea here is that this would help the P&D Committee and other bodies as they consider any future developments. 2) Revitalization of West Evanston and establishment of the TIF approximately 1 '/? rears ago and now the West Evanston Planning Process which is almost completed. 3) A continuing focus on Howard Street which began long before the establishments of the Howard Stint TIF. \fr. Marino noted the EDC and Plan Commission were both involved in stimulating much of the neighborhood planning processes that occurred there but most recently the EDC has made recommendations to Council to establish a TIF District back in 2005. EDC then worked through the Bristol Project in terms its development agreements relating to the TIF. Therefore, as they look at 2007. the revitalization of Howard Street, including the development of the Bristol project, is a priority to EDC but also continuing revitalization of Howard Street to the west. Mr. Marino added that continued business retention and attraction continue to be priorities of UDC as well as stall In addition, they also work very closely with EVNIARK. Chamber of Commerce, and Evanston Adventures in terms of partnership opportunities and then new issues that :merge from those relationships. :old. Jean -Baptiste said that he would assume that work on the West Side Plan will probably go beyond the next year especially in the soutltuest designated area. Mr. Manno agreed. Aid. Rainey brought up the area west on Oak -ton for future development proposals and also the 2404 Bain Street project and working through the development process of this site with the developer. Mr. Marino also concurred and note,J the long history with EDC in working with the de%eloper of 2400 Main Street. and on Oakton essentially the redevelopment agreement a nth Ilom; Depot project and Rustoleum site. Ile yid th.- also want to stimulate other attractive developments along that corridor. Issu:s of Concern in 20K)6 Mr. Marino said the main issue of concern expressed by EDC members was expediting the downtown Planning Process and Ire believes they have taken action to do this in 2007 in a timelier manner. Joint Mtg. al page 6 P&D Comm., ZBA Plan Comm.. & EDC January 24, 200 D. Zoning Board of Appeals Current Workkud, Projection for 2007 Mr. Creamer stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) has two kinds of cases that come before them. 1) Cases where they are the recommending body to City Council. These cases include Special l_'>es p-imarity as ►►ell as off-street parking variations. He noted that special uses cases, for example frequent type 2 restaurants, account for approximately 20% of the ZBA's workload in an averacc year. 2) Cases inhere the ZBA is the determining body. These cases include request for major variations and appeals from the Zoning Administrator, He said these particular cases account for the approximate 801/6 remaining ZBA caseload. He informed that between 2003 and 2003 the ZBA averaged appioximately 67 cases per year and in 2006 they had 74 cases, therefore the trend appears to be upward in Evanston's business. Ho%%ever, \ir. Creamer proudly- inforned tall that with ZBA's current calendar, they have no cases scheduled for February 6, ;007. issues of Concern in 2&-'t6 Mr. Creamer felt the ZBA's most problematic issue in 2006 was Board attendance. By statute the ZBA needs four members present to have a qualifying vote. Ile noted that with 19 meeting, the ZBA had to cancel d meetings due to lack of quorum. The reason for lack of quorum w-as an unusually large turnover in members reaching the end of their term. However. the mayor and Council gave the BA re-enforcements in a timely manner and their attendance issue since July 2006 has been resolved for the most part. \fr. Creamer commended the two tier' members who are present, its. Lori 5L--nmcrs and Mr. Don Wilson whose attendance has been over 9019 since their appointment. Mr. Creamer said that ZBA's second area of concern is with special uses and the Boards position as a recommending body for these cases. He stated that the ZBA members generally feel their recommendations for se►rral cases have been challenged even though the make their findings as required by the standards that are listed in the Zoning Ordinance. lie stated that in consideration of the fact that the ZBA :a bound by and closely folto►, the rules that they arc governed by with the Zoning Ordinance standards, he strongly feels it would be very helpful to have some feedback and guidance from Court.] on whatever it is to accommodate their needs and priorities. Another area ZBA ►>.-outd app=-zie Council guidance is wit'[ the issue of affordable housing Mr. Creamer informed that snera] applicants for major variations in the past year and a half have claimed affordable hou5tng as justification for seeking truly significant variations, usually asking for more units or too mast' density. This raises two concerns for the ZBA: 1) they belie►e as a matter of policy that the ZBA is not the appropriate body to deal with the affordable housing policy and 2) lie feels th this is an irrelevant issue that comes before ZBA for deliberation and reiterates, that it is not a„ropriate in dealing with zoning, Lengthy discussion followed; the majority agreed wet': fir Creamer and that the Z.13A should not have to deal %knh commerce issues. Aid. Bemste:a sta_:d that the ZBA's Job is to interpret the Zoning Ordinance, x.hich they are bound by. and their findings and then pass oma) City Council for any further deliberations Aid. Rainey mentior..d ti:_ cumulative negative effect is a ►Cry important issue with restaurant special uses and beinz a la: -;a impact on the surrounding area. Mr. Creamer agreed and also feels that special use runrinc a.tli the land is another big concern that needs to be addressed \fr. Wolinski said the issue staff has asked the Plan Commission to look at is with the special use Joint \itg,. u P & D Ccrnr e., ZETA Plan Conv.t., &: EDC Janus.-N 24, 2007 page 7 running with the land, however if the special use is abandoned for a period of time, a netts• owner come in and open the sane type of establishment. The question staff raises is if the City wants to continue this practice or whether the abandonment of the special use extinguishes initiating the owner to come in for a nca• special use. Ms. Summers pointed out that sometimes when the ZBA is considering things they have to consider the fact that the special use could approve or allow other operations that the - might not care for at that particular location. Also, on the idea of terminating the special u_&e after abandonment, this could result in change in the special use that might even be signilic=L Ald. Bernstein said a way to address this is by adding conditions, which is the City's responsibility under the special use ordinance, therefore the future type and use of a special use if ahndoned, can be controlled. He recalled in the past there were many different types of special :sse categories; does the City want to go back to having these options? Nis. Summers responded :'tat more definitions is not necessary, but maybe the necessity to come back for review any time a change in ownership is made to evaluate the new use and what is involved. STREAMLINING PROCESS Chair Jcan-Baptiste stated that it appears that the Plan Commission is the most burdened and challenged and the mernbt:s for their feedback on ideas for streamlining the process. Mr. Woods responded that the rule ch.mrges will be very helpful with the exclusion of the Klacren Rules. The Commissioners also feel that more documentation presented to them with stipulations defined from staff would be helpfJ for review before hearings, for example: traffic and parking issues, loading berths, civil engzhi —rring issues, etc. that should be documented in sonic type of staff report. This would avoid such unnecessary testimony. Mr. Hunter suggested that a set of Rules for Developers would help. especially in terms of expectations from the City of Evanston as a whole including Council, staf. etc. Mr. Wohnski revisited his previous question regarding the Mandatory Planned Development and if there is a consensus tha: this conccpt/process is working. Afler some discussion, the general sieupoint expressed invol+ed around time factor concerns and public benefits. Ald. Wynne suggested that unless they '-�ccomc bogged down again by the process, which she envisions to start easing up, they could revisit the issue as it occurs. Ald. Holmes asked if staff has any tecommeadations regardinz the Planned Development process. Ms. Brrerinski responded that she would like to find a ua; to eliminate repeat testimony and recommr11d,ui0n; from different bodies to the des eloper. S'r.,. suggest considering joint meetings in the future for any of the larger planned development appiu_ Joni. Stab' agrees with all the comments made earlier regarding; the chminano-J. of the Klacren R-les a ill case a lot of frustration and time consuming testimony. In closing. Chair Jean-Bap,:�ste felt this was a very successful meeting with valuable dialogue amongst the P&:D Conimit-=_. Plan Commission. ZBa and EDC. He ♦sould like to meet again in the near :: ure and feels tr;-e is a need to continue these meetings an a periodic basis. All in anendancr azreed. ADJOURNMENT The mceLmv was adjourned _ 9. IS p.m. Respectf0y submitted, Jacqueline E. Brownlee Joint Mtg. u; P&D Comm_. ZBA Plan Comm., & EDC January 24. 2007 Others in Attendance: Bill Smith, Evanston Round Table Steve Freidland, Evanston Citizen Ann Dienner, Preservation Commission Sue Caldwell, League of Women Voters Member from liinman'Grove Neighbors Jeanne Lindwall, Northwestern Neighbors Judith Treadway, NAACP Anna Smith, Citizen Jonathan Perman. Evanston Chamber of Commerce Barbara Dk-rshin. Central Street Neighbors Assoc. Marge Anderson, Central Street Neighbors Assoc. Margaret Hughes, Central Street Neighbors Assoc. Member from 6d' Ward Neighborhood Assoc. Mary Rosinski, Central Street Neighbors Assoc. Neighborhood Watch Coordinator forMcCullough Pant Neighborhood Joan Stafford, Church Street Neighbors Margaret Williams, Evanston Citizen Ron Fleckman, Evanston Developer D. Garrison, Evanston Citizen page 8 APPROVED MINUTES EVAINSTON PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, Fcbniary 1.1, 2007 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT..................................James Woods (Chair), Stuart Opdycke, (Vice ....................................................................Chair), Albert Hunter, Doug Doetsch, Alice ............................... ................................... ...Rebechini, David Galloway, Colcen Burrus MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................Sharon Bowie ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ........... None ASSOCIATE 1NLE.4IBERS ABSENT.., ......... Lawrence Widmayer STAFF PRESEN-T .........................................Arlova Jackson, Tracy Norileet, Susan Guderley COURT REPORTER............................Meeting taped and uun-scribed I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION' OF QUORI:; .-*i Chair Woods det=ined that a quorum was present and began the meeting at 7:20pm. Lawrence Widmaver was confirmed as an Associate Member. IL APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES The January 10 and January 17 minutes were approved unanimously. III. REVIE%X_ AND ADOPTION'OF REVISED RULES FROM JANUARY 17 Chair Woods sur--narized the changes to the rules, tt'hich are as follows: Revisions ,o the Procedure for Public Hearings (:article XI, Section (0)) were adopted at the Januar-. 17, 2007 Plan Commission meeting. Now that the Klaeren ruling no longer applies, tl•._ intent of this revision is to streamline the public hearing process but have flexibility :o add structure at the Chair's discretion for contra,. ersial cases (e.g., separatin out support'opposition. allowing for questions and comments on revised proposak..tc I. • In consulta:ion with the Lain Department following the January 17, 2007 Plan Commissi-on meeting, an addition was made to Article X1, Section (0) 7b pertaining to the timinc and number of requests for a continuance by MUMS: MS: Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - February 14. 2007 Pace Two At the discretion of the Chair, a continuance may be granted to a date certain under the following circumstances: a. To allow time for the applicant/development team to review comments and suggestions b. To allow time for citizens to re-tzew the record and prepare questions and comments i. Only one continuance of this type may be requested and should be made following the initial presentation, except in the case of a re%ised proposal in which case one additional continuance may be requested for the purpose of rcriewing the revisions only c. To allow time for Plan Commission members to review the record prior to deliberation d. To continue proceedings to a date certain due to a lack of time • Finally, Klaeren language throughout Articles X and XI has been revised to be more legislative in nature (changes begin on page 9). Following deliberation, Member Opdycke motioned to approve the revised rules, Member Galloway seconded, and the vote -was unanimous (7-0)_ IV. CONTINUATION OF ZONING ORDINA. CE TEXT AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 06-0--T NiU/NlUF District Review - To consider amendments to Chapters 3, -Implementation and administration; " 4, "General Provisions." 13, "Transitional.11anufacturing Districts: " 16, "Off -Street Parking and Loading; " 17, "Landscaping and Screening, " 18. "Dcf tnitions; " 7. "Zoning Districts and :11ap: " and an other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance, to amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance: 1 t to glfect the regnilations of the Zoning Ordinance as applied to those areas within the .11U. Transitional.11anufacturing District. and ANC'£. Transitional Manufacturing - £mpinvment District of the Cin . and/or 2) to estahlish nent- transitional manscjacturing zoning districts increasing the maximum floor area ratio. transitional yard requirements. and permitted uses. The spec f e modifications which the Plan Commission will consider include, without limitation, lot requirements, building height. hard requirements. floor area ratio. and use. The Plan Cotmnission rill consider measures to a) broaden the list of permitted uses in the.VU and ,WUE Districts to include residential, retail. and other uses, h) increase the maximum floor area ratio in the JfL' and 31C'£ Districts, and ci revise the currentYard requirements for transitionalYards in the .11L' and _tlC'£ Districts. ZPC 06-12-NI&T NIU/MUE Nian and Text Amendment To consider amendments to Chapters 3, "Implementation and administration; " 4, "General Provisions," 13. "Transitional .1lanufacturing Districts; " 16, "Off -Street Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — Febntary 14, 2007 Pace Three Parking and Loading; " 17. "Landscaping and Screening; " 18, "Definitions; " 7. "Zoning Districts and APap; "and any other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance, to amend the map and 6r tet7 of the Zoning Ordinance: 1) to establish a new mired use zoning district; and _) to remap all or parts of the following indicated areas front the'AW Transitional.%lanut:2cturing and the AlUE Transitional Alanufac•turing Emph�vmenf districts into one of ' said rre'w coning district or other appropriate zoning district or overla}' district. The properoes that are the subject of potential ntap amendment recommendations fi� this Plan Commission hearing consist c f more or less, all properties currenth• within the ,%W Transitional Atanufacturing and AIUE Transitional Afanufacntring EmplQvm nt Districts. The specific modifications which the Plan Commission will corvUder includes, without limitalion, lot requirements, building height, yard requirements. floorarea ratio, use, numberafalloived di ellings, limitations on gross floor area far a given use, and/or an amendment to the zoning map to place all or parts of this area xithin an appropriate zoning district. The Plan Commission is current1v reviewing the existing teal of the ifU and hfUE districts as a part of ZPC 06- 05-T. Member Doetsch, Zoning Comminee Chair, briefly summarized the history of MU/MUE district review. Ms. Jackson, Interim Zoning Administrator briefly summarized proposed changes to the zoning ordinance and zoning map that resulted from related Zoning Committee hearings on this issue. Follo%%ing deliberation, Member Opdycke motioned to approve the text and map amendments, \Immber Doestch Bonded, and vote was unanimous (7-0). A verbatim rranscript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is avallable from the Cozy of Evanston's xeb site. The proposal and trasescr4m can be viewed at the Downtown Libraly 's.14floor reference drsk or at the Civic Center in the Planning Distisiow or Zoning Dh siou during business hours. V. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 06-IO PD 1001 Chicago Avenue An application hi- Gregon• Greif, o h%u GreifPropertie:s. Inc., proptrtt• oit-ner, fora Planned Developrr:c•nt. The applicant is the current owner of the propert'v commonly known as 1001 C%rcago Avenue, presently located within the Cla Conunfercial.11ired- Use District. The applicant requests that the Citti•grant ct planned developnretnt as a form ofspecial tine permit including such development allowances, exceptions to development alloicanees, and other relief its rm{y be necessat y to al/mv redevelopment of 1001 Chica,,o Avcnue_r;,r a multi-litntih• residential building with accesson• parking and grounc:.!loor rer.;.:. the- applteant proposes to construct it new structure at 1001 Chica i) Aierut :;;th the 1ri11mvini: characteristics: a) :ipprosimatelY 65 divelling units: h) Approxirratel-, :.6 it) squareJ� er of retail/c•ottttnereial space; c) :1 defined gross floor area ferclud ng p,Irking loadin . alorage, mec•hanicals, and uses acc•e sson. to they building) of approximx lv 87.015 square feet, resulting in a flour area ratio of ahout 3.46: d) A predominant maximum building height of approximately 67feet; and e) Apprarimatelt• 91 o-street parkingspaces enclosed within the huilding. The applicant Evanston PIan Commission Minutes — February 1.1. 2007 Page Four requests grant of a special use as authori: ed by §6-10-3-3 for a planned dCl elopment and for a use that exceeds 30,000 square feet. §6-10-1-9(D) establishes the mandaton, planned development thresholds for a project located in the Cla Commercial ,ifired-Use District. The subject property at 1001 Chicago avenue is located on a lot that is approximately 25,185 square feel in size. In addition, the project will result in the development of 65 new residential units. Both characteristics trigger a mandator}, planned development request to obtain approval jar the proposed project. At the January 10 meeting, cross-examination began. At tonight's meeting, cross-examination resumed, followed by testimony. Opposing parties provided information on the rich architectural history of the neighborhood and stated concerns that mostly pertained to traffic (e.g., alley width, sightlines for traffic exiting the proposed building). lack of guest and retail parking, and loss of sunlightlprivacy for residences across the alley from a building of this proposed height. Zoning questions were also raised, as well as the issue of construction at the adjacent site (Autobarn). Plan Commission Members then ofTcrcd comments, which arc summarized as follows: • Member Galloway thanked the citizens for their press mations and made the following information requests: o Staff: plans for the Autobam and minutes of the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee for Autobarn and the proposed planned development at 1001 Chicago (especially comments regarding traf3ic,'engineering). a Development team: detailed large-scale elevations showing materials and window type/operation, verification of the model's scale and addition of the Autobarn proposal to the model, vehicle use;'access diag:rams for retail, residential, and loading, roof plans, and revision of floor plans 2-6 to show adjacent properties. • Member Burrus suggested that the public benefits be re-examined. She also suggested that the developers work with the neighbors. since this produced a good result for the proposed planned development at 959 Dobson. • Member Rebechini thought the building was designed from the inside out and was market -iris en. resulting in a structur: that is architecturally disappointing. She thought that creative solutions needed to be aer lied. especially for the alley issues. She also thought that the retail depth was too saIlov, and that the retail space ,vould not be viable. • Member Doetsch did not think this proposal was in keeping with streetszape goals for Chicago Avenue and suggested that stibacks be reconsidered. In addition, he supported a four -stony height for this location wits` better design. an alley setback, and a more desirable strectscape along Chicago A% enue. • Member Opdycke noted that the Cla coning district ends mid -block and did not agree with the C I a zoning designation for th—, site. • Chair Woods commended the architectural history presentation by one of the neighbors. He thought that the top and bottom of the proposed building did not relate to the middle and rather, the design needs to look Iike one building. He did not think the green space on Lee was appropriate, considering the alley issues. He suggested that the building be at Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — l:ebruary 14. 2007 Pace Five the lot line on Lee and set bark along the alley to push the mass of the building away from the single family residences across the alley. a Member Hunter supported a four-story hei0t with an alley setback and perhaps five stories closer to Chicago avenue as a tradt�iff. Continued at the request of the developer to March 14, 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. A wrbatim transcripw of the proceedings of this Plan CommUssion cast is a►uilable from the GV of Evansion's MYb site. The proposal and transcripts can be viewed at the Downtown Library's .14 floor reference desk or at the Civic Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Division Jzring business hours Vl. CO.NTINUATIO. OF ZO. ING ORDINANCE TEXT A.NiENDINIENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 0&11-T (Suhstandard Lots) An applic.2tion hr Afichael O'Connor to consider amendments to Chapters 4, "General Provisior_c, " 8. "Residential Districts" : 18. "Definitions;" and any other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance, to amend the teat of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant requests a tart amendment to affert those regulations regarding the minimum lot sire allowed for single famili• residential dwelling runts, including though not limited to amending §6-4-1-7.- JUNI.t10f LOT SIZE, §6-4-1-8: GENERAL. LOT AND BULK CONTROLS. and the list of special uses in all of the residential districts. Tire Plan Commission is -ill consider specific modifcirions and additions to the teat of the Zoning Ordinance antL'or the Cin- Cade to include the addition of development of single-family dx-elling units on suhstandird lots to the li_<s of special uses in residential districts. Continued without discussion to March 14, 2007 ai 7pm in the Civic Center. V11. CONINIITTEE REPORTS Due to lack of time, no committer' reports were pro -tided. VIll. ADJOURNMENT The Plan Comm,_.sion adjourned at 11:1 Opm. Upc-oming meetings: Plan Commission 7pm, Council Chambers Februar. 21 March 1.3 April 11 Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Downtown Plan Committee Sam, Room 2404 Marc 1 Zoning Committee See time/room below March 8 (7pm, room 2200) Starch 14 (Gpm, room 2200) APPROVED MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, February 21, 2007 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT..................................Stuart Opdycke, (Vice Chair), Albert Hunter, Doug ........................................................................Doetsch, Alice Rebechini, David Galloway, Coleen ........................................................................Burrus, Sharon Bowie MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................James Woods (Chair) ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ........... Lawrence Widmayer STAFF PRESENT.........................................Arlova Jackson, Tracy Nortleet, John Burke, Rajeev ........................................................................Dahal, Dennis Marino COURT REPORTER............................Laura Bernar ........... �, ..��.sA... I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM As Chair Woods was absent. Vice Chair Opdycke was selected to chair the meeting. He determined that a quorum was present and began the meeting at 7:15pm. 11. APPROVAL OF.NIEETING MINUTES Minutes from the February 14, 2007 meeting were approved unanimously. III. PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 07-01 PD 1890 N12ple avenue An application hti' Robert King, o.'h o Carroll Properties, Inc. contract purchaser, with permission from 189011aple. LLC property- o►t-ner. jor a Planned Deti-elopntent. The subject properiv. comntonh• known as 1890 Alaple. is present1v located within tine RP Research Park Zoning District. 77ze applicant requests that the City grant a planned development as a form ofspecial use permit includint, such development allowances. arceptions to det-elopment allowances, and other relic as nzaY he necessary to allow redevelopment of 1690.1faple 1-Or a niived-use development with accesson, parking. Generally. the applicant proposes to construct a netit ,rnrcture (it 189011aple to develop a multi-Jarnily residential building it ith the fallowing characteristics: a) approximately 152 dwelling units: fir approximate1v 40.000 square Pt et of retail/commercial space; c) a defined gross floor area (arcluding peaking loading. storage, mechanicals. and uses accessor3- to the building) of approximately 183.927 square feet, resulting in a floor area ratio of about 4.93, d) a ntarintum defined building height of approximately 158 feet; and e) approximately 313 parking spaces (269 off-street Nrk-ing spaces enclosed within the Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — February 21. 2007 Pace Two building and 44 of -street parking spaces provided off -site). The applicant is requesting spacial use approval, development allouxinces. and erceptions to development allowances for the followirg regulator, concerns: 1) The applicant requests grant of a special use as authori_ed f?v ,16-13-'-3 for a planned development. ?) The subject propert), at 1890 Alaple is located on a lot that is appro_rimately 37,283 square feat in size. In addition, the project will result in the development of apprarimately 152 new residential units. Both characteristics trigger a mandatory planned development request to obtain approral for the proposed project. §6-12-1-8 establishes the marimunt building height for properties within the RP district as 85 feet. The applicant is proposing to construct a building with a defined marimum building height ofopproximatel)- 158. The applicant requests an exception to a planned development site development allowance under $6-f?-1-7 (C) 1 allowing this height. Member Doutsch recused himself because a law partner is representing a party in interest (who is opposed to the project). Mr. David Reifman, attomey for the applicant, introduced the development team. Mr. Lawrence Okrent, planning consultant, summarized the history of the site and surrounding area leading to its current context. Mr. Randall Deutsch, architect, described the design of the mixed use building, including ground floor entail, setbacks, and proposed streetscape enhancements at the %Iaplt'Emcrson corner. Proposed price points are pending the completion of a market study. \!r. Erik Russell, traffic consultant~ summarised the traffic impacts of the proposed project and used a computer model to help visualize key points. Discussion followed on options for addressing traffic flow on Emerson (e.g., removing on -street parking in certain parts of Emerson, signal improvements, etc) and how- such measures may affect pedestrians and the viability of proposed ground floor retail. At the conclusion of the presentation, questions were taken, followed by comments from citizens in support of and in opposition to the project_ Due to lack of time, comments in opposition will resume at the next meeting. Several Members offered comments for the applicant before the next meeting: Member Galloway requested the following items: o More detailed site plan (showing retail parking. turning radii, adjacent properties, cab stands, and related activities at adjacent buildings), o Floor plans that show the green roof and elevators- stairs. o Revised traffic study that e\un—ds to Asbury or Wesley, o More detail on design and matchals te.g., glazing. window frames, colors for concrete, balconies. etc) • \iembcr Burrus requested that a shadow- study be done. • Member Rebechini requested clarification on courtyard circulation details. • Member Opdycke requested material samples. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — Febntary 21, 2007 Paee Three • Member liunter requested a landscape plan and information on bow the building is anticipated to meet LEED requirements.. He asked if affordable housing could be addressed next time. There being no further comments, the hearing was continued due to lack of time to Wednesday, March 14, 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. A Verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is arailable from the City ofEvanston Is website. The proposal and transcripts can be vieN•ed ar the DoN•ntawn Library's r loor reference desk or at the Civic Center in the Planning Die -Won or Zoning Dhvisioa during business hours. IV. PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPtiIENT PUBLIC HEARING 7_PC 07-02 PD&M 1200 Davis Street An application by the General Board of Pension and Health Benefits of The United .11ethodisr Church, owner of the subject property' commonh' known as 1200 DavLV (the "Subject Propery, "), for a Planned Development and a .%lap Amendment. The Subject Property is presently located within the 01 Office Zoning District. 71te applicant requests that the City grant a planned development as a form of special use permit including such development allowances. exceptions to dcvelopment allowances, and other relief as may be necessan' to allow redevelopment of the Subject Property and the Park Parcel (as defined herein) with an office building that will contain accessory parking. In addition, the applicant requests that approximately 8.859 square feet of the northern portion of Alerander Park (the "Park Parcel ') be rt_oned front the OS Open Space District to the 01 Office District. Generally. they applicant proposes to construct a new office building at 1200 Davis Street and the Park Parcel with the following characteristics: a) approximate)• 100,00') square feet of o f rce space; b) a defined gross floor area (ercluding parking loading►, storage, ntechanicals, and uses acce'sson� to the building) of approximarel 94.195 .square feet, resulting in a jlcxrr area ratio of about 0.92: c) a mcLrimum defined building hei hi o(approximarely 64.25 ' ro they top csitheflat roofof the building: and d) approximate"%parking spares. The applicant is requesting special use and neap approval, de%elopment allowances. e-rceptions to development allo+s-ances. and other relief that may be necessan- for the following regulatory concerns: 1) The u_=t liccurr requests grant (it a special use as aulhori:ed hti § f,-15-'- 3for a planned de . clopme'nt. ?) 6-15-1-9 (D) establishes the mandaton, planned development thresho.J.v for a project located in the OI Office District. The subject pro perry at 1200 D,;vis Street (including that portion located on the Park Parcel) is located or, a lot that is af-,^roxintatel• 10 J85 square feet in size. nds characteristic triggers a mandwon• planned development request to obtain approval for the propcice'd project. Continued without discussion at the request of the applicant to Wednesday, April 11, 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - February 21. 2007 V. CONBUTTEE REPORTS Due to lack of time, no committee reports were pro,% ided. VI. ADJOURNMENT The Plan Commission adjourned at l 1:20pm. Upcoming meetings: Plan Commission Tom. Council Chambers March 14 Ann] I I Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfieet Planning Division Downtown Plan Committee Sam. Room 24W March t :March L' Page Four Zoning Committee Set timelroom below March S (7pm. room 2200) Much 14 ftnL room 2200) APPROVED MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, March 1.1, 2007 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT..................................James Woods (Chair), Stuart Opdycke, (Vice ........................................................................Chair), Albert Hunter, Alice Rebechini, David ........................................................................Galloway, Coleen Burrus MEMBERS ABSENT ..................................Doug Doctsch, Sharon Bowie ASSOCIATE MEMBERS ABSENT ............Lawrence Widmayer STAFF PRESEN7.........................................Arlova Jackson, Tracy Norfleet, Dennis Marina COURT REPORTER............................Denise Andras I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Woods determined that a quorum was present and began the meeting. II. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES Minutes from the February 21, 2007 meeting were approved unanimously. III. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLXNN£D DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 06-10 PD 1001 Chicago Avenue An application by Gregon• Greif o'b'o Greif Properties, Inc., property oss'ner. fora Planned Development. The applicant is the current owner of theproperty commonly known as 1001 Chicago Avenue. presently located within the Cla Commercial Mired - Use District. The applicant requests that the City grant a planneddevelopment as a form of special use permit including such development allowances, arceptions to development allowances, and other relief as mad• he necessan• to allow redevelopment of 1001 Chicago Avenue for a multi _r.amily residential building svith accc rson- parking and groun,ifloor retail. Gen•rallY, the applicant proposer to construct it new structure at 1001 Chicago.•;venue with tre_1011 v ng characteristics: al Approximately 65 divelling units: hl .-lpproxintately 3,6 in square ftet ofretail. comntercial.spaee: c) A deftted gross floor area (cxcluling parking loading, storage, mechanicals, and uses accesson-to the building) of approxitnalely 8 -.015 squuare feet. resulting in a floor area ratio of about 3.46: dl A predominant tnarimuni building height ofapprorintately 67feet: and e1 Apprarimately 91 off-street parking spaces enclosed within the building. The applicant requests grant of a special use as authorized by }j6-10-3-3 for a planned development and Evanston Plan Commission Minutes -- March 14. 2007 Pace Two for a use that exceeds 20.000 square feet. §640-1-901 establishes the mandatory planned development thresholds for a project located in the Cla Commercial Wred-Use District. I7tey subject propert - at 1001 Chicago Avenue is located on a lot that is apprarimately 25.185 square feet in size. In addition, the project will result in the development of 65 neit, residential units. Both characteristics trigger a mandator), planned development request to obtain approval for the proposed project. Mr. Murray, attorney for the applicant, requested a continuance without discussion to the April 11, 2007 meeting. Ms. Cutillo, citizen, stated that an expert witness who has testified will be out of town but could be available by phone. Staff %k ill try to accommodate the witness by speaker phone at the next meeting. A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is aw lable front the City of Eranslox's web site. The proposal and transcripts can be ►•ie%Yd at the Downtown Library's 3'e floor reference desk or at Nee Civic Center in the Planning Dirision or Zoning Dis lion during business hours. IV. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING T.PC 07-01 PD 1890 .Nlanle Avenue An application fir Robert King, o1h,'o Carroll Properties. Inc. contract purchaser, with permission from IS90.%Iaple. LLC, propel-4- ou-ner, for a Planned Development. The subject property, common1v known as 1890 ,ifaple, is presently located ivithin the RP Research Park Zoning District. The applicant requests that the Cit}• grant a planned development as a form ofspecial use permit including such development allowances, e-rceptions to development allowances, and other relief as may he ne'eessar}• to allow redevelopment of 1890 .Vaple fnr a mixed -use den-elopme►tt ivith accessorti• parking. Generally. the applicant proposes to construct a neu- structure at 1890.%laple to develop a multi -family residential building ivith the_following characteristics: al approxi►natel}, 152 dti,elling units: h) approximately -i0.000 square,tcet of retaillcornmercial space; c1 a de'rned gross floor area te.rcludin�� parking loading storage. mec•hanirals. and uses accessary to the building) of approximately 183.92 " square feet. resulting in a floor area ratio of ahow 4. 93: d) it maximum defined building ;:eight of approximately 1 S8 ftet: and e) approxi.ntateli• 313 parking spaces t269 offstreet pirking spaces enclosed within the building, and 44 oil"street parking spaces proi•ided -T-sited. The applicant is reque sting special use approval. development allowances. and e_ rceptions to development allowarces fnr the t«llowing regularon- concerns: I i The applicant requests grant of a special use as sari ,,ri_cd hi c(�-1'-=-3 tc,r a planne.: den-clopiyietit. ) Thesubject proper:' at 189rt tfaple is locaie�d im a lot that is at ^ro.ri► wtelr 3 �3 square feet in size. Ir. ad ition, the project will result ir, the deve,' _amen ol'approximarely 152 new residemial units. Both characteristics tri�gera mardaton• planned development request to obtain approval for the proposed project. $6-12-2-8 e:stahlishe:s they maximum building height for properties within the RP district as 85 fee:. The applicant is proposing to construct a building with a dcflned maximum building height ofapprorimately 158'. The Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — March 14, 2007 Page Three applicant requests an erception to a planned development site development allowance trader :6-11-1-7 (0 1 allowing this height. Mr. David Reifman, attorney for the applicant, stated that he would like to begin .with responses to requests from Plan Commission members at the last meeting. %fr. Deutsch, architect, presented material samples and a landscape plan. He also described how the project will meet LEED-NC requirements (the goal is to be LEED certified). Mr. Fitzgerald, architect, presented the results of shadow study. Mr. Russell, traffic consultant, presented additional traffic and parking information. Additional testimony in support was then taken, followed by testimony in opposition and Plan Commission deliberation. Several members liked the design and commended the development team for seeking LEED certification, but they were concerned about the proposed height. One member asked Mr. King, developer, if it is too late to look at both parcels together to get a better product, such as an L-shaped building of moderate height with a courtyard. Mr. King stated that it is too late. Another member thought that a height precedent had been set by the approval of 1SS1 Oak and felt that it .was difficult to vote on 1890 Maple, which otherwise has good design. Other member concerns included: • Public benefits arc not compelling (more information was requested). • Courtyard circulation is problematic. • Whether there is a market for rental units. • Whether residential in this location makes un:crtain the future of office/commercial uses. • Retail space may be too large to be viable. Nis. Jackson, Interim Zoning Administrator, stated that in response to questions raised at the last meeting regarding the public notice mailing for 1881 Oak, the City's historical postage data supports the City's Certificate of Mailing for this project. The matter was continued due to lack of time to the April 11, 2007 meeting. A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case k asnilable from the Cit)• of EswAston'I web site. The proposal and transcripts can be riexwed at the Downtown Library's Xd floor reference desk or at the Civic Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Division during business hours. V. CONTINUATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AME`DNIENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 06-11-T (Substandard Lots) An application by Michael O'Connor :o conceder a"iendments to Chapters 4. "General Provisions. " S. " Residenrial District+ " : 18. "Definitions: " and any other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance, to amend the test of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant requests it tart amenrhnent to ajJ ci those regulations regarding the minitntrm lot size allowed jor sink>le Jamihv residential chvelling units, including though not limited to amending §6-4-1-7: ,kfLVI.%fUV LOT SIZE. ;64-1-8: GENERAL LOT.IND BULK CONTROLS, and the list ofspecial uses in all of the residential districts. The Plan Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — March 14. 2007 Pace Four Commission u-ill consider specific modifications and additions to the te-rt of the Zoning Ordinance and'or the City Code to include the addition of do-elopment of single famil}• dticelling units on substandard lots to the list of special uses in residential districts. Continued %%-ithout discussion to the zoning Committee meeting scheduled for April 11, 2007 at 6pm. A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is available frost the City of Evanston's web site- The proposal and mmscripts can be viewed at the Downtown Library s P floor reference disk or at the Civic Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Division during btainess hours. V1. COMMITTEE REPORTS Due to lack of time, no committee reports were pro,6ded. VI1. ADJOURNMENT The Plan Commission adjourned at l 1pm. Upcoming meetings: Plan Commission 7flm. Council Chambers April I I %lay 9 Respectfully submitted, Tracy \orflect Planning Division Downtown Plan Committee Zoning Committee gam, Room 2404 Sec tlmrlroom below April 20 April t I (5:*m, room 2200) APPROVED MINUTES EVA,N'STON PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT..................................James Woods (Chair), Stuart Opdycke (Vice ........................................................................Chair), Alice Rebechini, Sharon Bowie, David ........................................................................Galloway, Coleen Burrus MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................Albert Hunter, Doug Doetsch ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ........... Lawrence Widmayer ASSOCIATE MEMBERS ABSENT ............None STAFF PRESENT.........................................Arlova Jackson, Tracy Norfleet COURT REPORTER ............................LA Reporting I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Woods determined that a quorum was present and began the meeting. 11. APPROVAL OF 11EETING MINL;TES Minutes from the March 14. 2007 meeting were approved unanimously. III. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 0640 PD 1001 Chk2go Avenue An application ht• Gregon• Greif. o/h'o Greif Properties. Inc., property owner. fora Planned Development. Ae applicant is the currant oit-ner of the property, commonly known as 1001 Chicago Avenue. presentlt- located within the Cla Commercial Afire:d- Gse District. The applicant requests that the CitY grant a planned derrlopment as a form oj'tnecial use permit including such development allowances. exceptions to dei-elopment allowances, and otn: r relief as ma he necessari, to allow redevelopment of 100; Chicago .4venue fc)r a multi-fandlt• residential huilding ►vith accessort, parking and ground floor retail_ Generallt% the applicant proposes to construct a new structure at 1001 Chicago A%-enue with the following characteristics- a) .approrimatelt• 65 dwelling units: b) Approximaieh' 3.650 square feet of retail/commercial space: c) A defined gross Moor area (ercluding parking loading. storage, mechanicals. and uses accessor), to the building] of apprarimately 87,015 square fart, resulting in afoor area ratio of about 3.46: d) A predominant maximum building height ofapprorimately 67feet; and e) Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — ADril I l , 2007 Pate Two Approximately 91 off-street parking spaces enclosed xzthin the building. The applicant requests grant of a special use as authorized by §6-10-3-3 jar a planned development and for a use that erceeds 30,000 square feet. §6-10-1-9(D) establishes the mandaton- planned de-welopment thresholds fora project located in the Cla Commercial.hired-Use District. The subject propene, at 1001 Chicago Avenue is located on a lot that is approximately 25.185 square feet in size. In addition, the project will result in the development of 65 neiv residential units. Both characteristics trigger a mandaton. planned development request to obtain approval for the proposed project. Mr. Murray, attorney for the applicant, asked to extend the continuance without discussion to the meeting scheduled for May 9, 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. A verbadm transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is asniiable from the CZry of Eswnston's web site. The proposal and transcripts can be viewed at the Downtown Librwy's .it floor rrference desk or at the Civic Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Division during business hoar. IV. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELO!"MEN'T PUBLIC HEARING 7.PC 07-01 PD 1890 Maple Avenue An application by Robert Ding, o.,b,'o Carroll Properties. Inc. contract purchaser, with permission front 1890.11aple. LLC propern- owner, for a Planned Development. The subject properriv, commonl v known as 1890 3hiple, is presently located within the RP Research Park Zoning District. The applicant requests that the City grant a planned development as a form of special use permit including such development allowances, exceptions to dei-elopment allowances. and other relief as may be necessan- to allow redevelopment of 1890 .Maple ji)r a mired -rose development with accesson• parking. Generalh: the applicant proposes to construct a neiv structure at 1890 Staple to develop a multiJLzmil' residential building with the follois-ing characteristics: at approximately 152 divelling units: h) approxint.ttely 40.000 square feet of"retail/commercial space: e) a defined gross floor area tc'rcludin); parking loading, storage, mechanicals, and uses accessorti to the buildings of appro_tinrattely 183.927 square Meet, resuhing in a floor area ratio of alwut 4.93: (l) a nrarimum dtTned building height of approxiinjzely 158 feet. and e) approximately 313 parking spaces (:69 off-street parking spaces enclosed within the building and 44 offstreet parking spaces provided of site). Ae applicant is requesting special use approval, development allowances. and exceptions to development alloti+ands for the jnllatw ing re— gulatory concerns: li The° applicant requests grant ofa special L,—, c as autltori_ed iY : h-1:- :- 3 for a planneal del elopnretrt.:) T re subject propern at 189tl.tlatple is hwatcd on a lot that is appro.rimarely 37,:,i- squarejeet in size. In addition. the project it all result in the development of approrim zielr 15' new residential units. Both characteristics trisggcr a Ynandaion- planned det-clopment request to obtain approval for the proposed project. ,i6-12-:-S establishes the marimum building height for properties within the RP district as 85 feet. The applicant is proposing to construct a building with a defined marimum building height of appraximately 158'. Tire Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — Anril 11.2007 Pace Three applicant requests an exception to a planned de--Wopment site development allowance under o6-12-1-7(C) 1 allowing this height. Mr. Reifman, arortley for the applicant, stated that the development team met with Evanston North►vestern Healthcare (ENH) to discuss their concerns as an immediately affected neighbor. He acknowled-ed recent correspondence from the representative for ENH, Mr. Ivan Kane, which included live points of concern. In response, a revised -site plan was presented that showed changes to traffic circulation and access. Other issues; moditications were then discussed (e.g., noise vibrations). A member of the public who wished to speak then offered her comments. There being no one else who wished to speak, the Plan Commission deliberated. Member Galloway then motioned to recommend approval, and Siember Bowie seconded. Mcmber Rebechini amer,.ied the motion to include Mr. Kane's five suggested conditions, as amended by Mr. Reifman during tonight's discussion. 4icmber Galloway accepted the amendment and read into the record the findings and standards. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). .a verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission cast is available from the 00, of E wnston's %vb sites The prof%nat and transcripts can be viewed at the Do+Mown Library's r floor reference drsh or at the Cis-ie Center in the Planaing Division or Zoning Division durixr business hours V. PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 07-02 PD&.N1 1200 Dwis Street Ali application h-v the General Board of Pension anti Health Benefice of The United :Methodist Crurch. owner of the suhject proper:)- cominonh• known as 1300 Davis (the "Subject Pro,.-+c rti'" J, for a Planned Developmtnz and a ,flap Amendment. The Subject Prnpemv is pre -month- located within the 01 01—lice Zoning District. The applicant requests zhur the Cin• grant a planned development as a forin of special use pe'rmil including such development allowances, excep:sons to developnsent allowances, and other re!ie f a-< coati• he necessary to allow redetielopment of the Subject Property and the Park Parcel t,ts c>i ined hereinl With an office ,-uilding= that will contain accesson' parking. In addition. the applicant requests th.:1 approximateh• 8,859 square feet of the northern portion of.4larander Park (the "Porn Parcel ") he retuned jram the OS Open Space Dsrric: to the 01 Ojjice DistriN. Gener--llr, the applicant proposes to construct a new ojFice 1*u.lding at 1'l1(J Dati-is Street and tt_• Park Parcel with they following charac:eristi; c: a1 approxima0v 1(1(J,000 squ.;re 1 cl of nljic'e space: h) a defined gross floor arcs (,:� :eluding parking loading. storage. rne°chanicals, and users accessory to the building) qr ,�pproxinlate'ly 94.193 square jeer. resulting in aPoor area ratio of about 0,92; c, .: Ir.:rinllun dt ineel hudding height nr" :nprc>rinscltclt 64.25 'to the top ofthe flag TUUfe3I :^c' ^:.:lc�l/1g; ,tl]fl (11 t1l+pro.ril11t1te'Iti' _'_'Jrt;n�� _rp�lces. Tileapplicant i_e reques:.rg use and rlslp amendment ur ^roval. development allowances. eeceptions it; development ulkni anew. and otr:t•r reliefthai mav he neressar►• for the following re_ �rlatorti• conce'rm: 1 J The applicant re ueSts grant of a special use as authorLcd b--. ( -1 i-'-3 for a planned develof mcnt. 21 6-15-1-9 (D) e:slahlishes the manda.on thresholds fvr a project located in the 01 Oy1ce District- The subject property at 1200 Davis _15,7eer (including that portion located on the Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — Anril l 1.2007 Pace Four Park Parcel) is located on a lot that is approximately 102,03S square feet in ske. This characteristic triggers a mandaton• planned det•elopment request to obtain approval for the proposed project. Continued without discussion at the request of the applicant to Wednesday, June 13, 2007 at 7pm in the Ci%ic Center. VI. CONTINUATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 06-11-T (Substandard Lots) An application hti• ,%fichael O'Connor to consider amendments to Chapters 4, "General Prot•isions," 8. "Residential Disrricts" : 18, "Definitions." and any other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance_ to amend the tart of the Zoning Ordinance. 71re applicant requests a tart amemlme.v to affect those regulations regarding the minimum lot sice allowed for single jandly rt,ddential dwelling units, including though not limited to amending §6-4-1-7: MINIMUM LOT SIZE. $6-4-1-8: GENERAL LOT AND BULK CONTROLS, and the list ofspecial uses in all of the residential districts. The Plan Commission will consider specific modifications and additions to the teat of 1he Zoning Ordinance and/or the City Code to include the addition of det-elopment of single family dYrelling units on suhslandard lots to the list aj special uses in residential districts. Continued without discussion to the Zoning Committee meeting scheduled for IN -fay 9, 2007 at 6:45pm. A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Pfau Comsefssion ease is a►wilable from the Clq• of Etwnston's web site. The proposal and transcripts can be vi~d at Ike Downtown Llbraq's 34 loor reference desk oral the Civic Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Dnrsiow during business hours. VII. ADJOURN\iENT The Plan Commission adjourned at 8:20prm Upcoming meetings: Plan Commission 7pm. Council Chambers %lay 9 June 13 Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norileet Planning Division Downtown Plan Committee Zoning Committee Sam. Room 2404 See timefroom below A-ni 20 %lay 9 (6:45pm. room 2200) APPROVED MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday. May 9, 2007 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Ci%ic Center, Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT..................................James Woods (Chair), Stuart Opdycke (Vice ........................................................................Chair), Alice Rebechini, David Galloway, Coleen .......................................................................Bums, Doug Doetsch MEMBERS ABSENT...................................Albert Hunter, Sharon Bowie ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ........... Lawrence Widmayer ASSOCIATE MEMBERS ABSENq ............None STAFF PRESENT........................................Arlova Jackson, Dennis Marino, Tracy Norflect COURT REPORTER............................Taped for transcription by LA Reporting 1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Woods determined that a quorum was present and began the meeting. I1. APPROVAL OF '%IEETING MINUTES Minutes from the April 11. 2007 meeting -were approved unanimously. Ill. CONTINUATIONOF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 06-10 PD i001 ChieaVo Avenue An application by Gregory Greif, o h'a Greif Properties, Inc., property owner, for a Planned De►velor rent. The applic.znt is they current owner of1he prnpertt- commonly known as 1001 Chicago Avenue, presentl►• located ►+•ithin the Cla Commercial ltfired- Use District. II:t applicant requests that the City grant a planned development cis a form ofspecial use per'►:it including su: h developinent allowances. exceptions 10 development allowances, anti ; her relief as m.:,- he r6cces.cun• 10 allow redevel(p►nent of 1001 Chicago Avenue .-�,r a multi-fimi.% residentiul building isdill accessory parking and ground floor rera:l. Generally, the applicant proposes 10 constnicv a new structure at 1001 Chicago Atertut it -it): thefv.':owing characteristics: al Approximately 65 dwelling units; h) Approxr m.aicl►' 3,650 square fc°et of retaitconunercial space; c) A defined gross floor area (erclu.:ing parking loa2ing. storage, inec•hanical s, and uses accessory to the building) of approximatel►• 87,01: square feet, resulting in a floor area ratio of about 3.46. d) A predominant maritnum building height of approximately 67fect; and e) Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — Mav 9, 2007 Page Two Appraximately 91 off-street parking spaces enclosed t«thin the building. The applicant requests grant of a special use as authori_ed b}' §6-10-3-3 jar a planned development and fora use that erceeds 20,000squarefeet. §6-10-1-90) establishes the mandator, planned development thresholds for a project located in the Cla Conttnercial .hired -Use District. The suhjeci propem- at 1001 Chicago Avenue is located on a lot that is approrimatel}, 25,185 square feet in size. In addition, the project ~rill result in the development of 65 new residential units. Both characteristics trigger a mandator) - planned development request to obtain approval for the proposed project. Continued without discussion to the meeting scheduled for July 11, 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is available from the City of Evanston's kvb site. The proposal and transcripts can be viewed at the Dowrntow-n Library's .14 floor reference desk or at the Civic Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Division during business hours. IV. CONTINUATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT A.MENDMEN'T PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 06-11-T (Substandard Lots) An application hv Alichael O'Connor to consider amendments to Chapters 4, "General Provisions." 8. "Residential Districts" . 18, "Definitions, " and any other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance. to amend the tart of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant requests it text amendment to affect those regulations regarding Ilse minimum lot size allowed for single jumily residential duelling units, including though not limited to amending §6-4-1-7:MINIMUM LOT SIZE, §644-8: GENERAL LOT AND BULK CONTROLS. and the list of special uses in all of the residential districts. The Plan Commission is -ill consider specific modifications and additions to the tart of the Zoning Ordinance and/or the Citv Code to include the addition of development of single-familt' duelling units on substandard lots to the list of special ices in residential districts. To summarize the issue, Member Doetsch stated that there have been some instances inhere substandard lots are still buildable, but the buildings that have beer constructed have not been eery contextual. The Zoning Committee has studied this issue and recommends a self-regulating mechanism where depending on lot size, a proportional reduction in height must be taken. If the owner wishes to go taller than the rule allows, then they may have to appear before the Zoning Board of Appeals_ The committee has taken public comment on this recommendation. There being no one who wished to speak tonight. the Plan Commission members deliberated. Member Doetsch then motioned to appro% e the Zoning Committee recommendation and read into the record the tindinas and standards. Member Bumps seconded. and the vote was unanimous (6-0). A verbatim transcript of the proceedings ofthis Plan Commission case is availablefrom the Cin- of,Evanston's mvb site. The proposal and transcripts can be viewed at the Downtown Library's 34 loor reference desk or, at the Civic Center In the Planning Division or Zoning Division during business hovers. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — Mav 9, 2007 V. CONI\IITTEE REPORTS Payee Three • Downtown Plan Committee Member Widmayer stated that the committee has adopted the Guiding Principles (see attached), which the Plan Commission has received for discussion tonight. For principle C2, Member Doetsch asked if the office market is recovering, and Member Widmayer stated that it is. Members then discussed the proposed traditional and transitional areas, per principle A 1. Ms. Ann Dienner, audience member, suggested that the map be amended to include the Women's Club as a traditional area (northwest corner of Church and Chicago). Members noted that it is a landmark, which is addressed by principle A5. Chair Widmayer stated that a committee of the Presm-ation Commission has identified buildings that contribute to downtown character, and he commended them for this important work. Member Rebechini stated that traditionally, the northern downtown boundary was Emerson. She was concerned about extending it to include the properties on the north side of Emerson and the impacts this could have on the Garnett Place neighbors. Member Widmayer stated that the committee is considering not allowing planned developments in the proposed district for this area, TRS-I, which would give the area more protection than it has under current RG zoning. Member Rebechini thought that this proposed subarea could change if 1881 Oak and'or 1890 Maple is not built, specifically, there could be an opportunity to bring the boundary back to Emerson and establish a softer transition from the downtown. Member Doetsch was concerned about the proposal for average heights, specifically, that it puts less emphasis on the absolute height of tall buildings. Member Woods stated that the committee is considering combining average height with a maximum height and only allowing planned de\ clopmerrts in the downtown core. Member Widmayer stated that a consultant will be hired to help look at all of the zoning options, and stalYs rt:nmmendation for a consultant will be discussed at a special meeting of the Planning &: Deg elopment Committee on May 10. Mr. Marino, Planning Division Director, stated that the recommended team is comprised of Duncan Associates (the lead on City of Chicago's new zoning ordinance). the Lakota Group, 180 Design Studio, KLOA. and Goodrr.an Williams. The scope of work is for a revised downtown plan, zoning recomm.ndations. preparation and testing of a berm based code, a real estate analysis (residential, retail, offiice 1. a field study of parking in nc\\,ly constructed buildings, and faciliw ion of a public process. There being no furth.r discussion nor audience members who wished to speak, Member Doetsch motioned to adopt the Guiding Principles. Member Rebechini seconded, and the vote was unanimous (6-0). Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — \1av 9. 2007 Payee Four Zoninc Comminee The committee is waiting for the West Evanston plan and Central St plan to be approved before scheduling public hearings for each plan's zoning recommendations. Mr. Marino stated that the West Evanston plan is scheduled for discussion at the May 14 Planning & Development Committee meeting. and the final draft of the Central St plan is expected to be scheduled for the Plan Commission's June 13 meeting. Member Opdycke asked if there will be a plan for Chicago Ave. Mr. Marino stated that a plan was done 8-10 years ago that is still used today. It is more of policy -oriented than a physical plan, although there are some zoning recommendations. Member Woods asked about the status of the solar panels zoning ordinance text amendment. Ms. Arlova Jackson. Zoning Planner, stated that there has not been a response from the person who opposes the amendment. Ms. Jackson stated that a new Zoning Administrator has been hired, Bill Dunkley. His most recent experience is with the City of Atlanta. GA. + Economic Development Committee Member Rebechini stated that the committee has approved several budget items (Chicago's North Shore Convention & Visitors Bureau, grants for neighborhood business improvement districts). The committee also has discussed downtown planning and a parking utilization study, and they have had an Executive Session to discuss the Fountain Square proposal. Parkine Committee Member Galloway stated that the committee is considering modernizing and integrating the computer systems for the three downtown parking garages to make them more efficient and profitable and to direct motorists to spaces. In response to complaints about tv-,o-hour meters on nights and weekends, they are discussing options that will addms the issue but not lead to reduced revenues (e.g., three-hour meters, extending to lOpm). Neiehborhood Committee Mr. Marino stated that the committee is researching neighborhood boundaries, per the Strategic Plan goal. • Community Development Commiree Member Burrus stated that a new CDBG Grants Administrator, Sarah Flax, %vas hired last fall_ .-among other things, Ms. Rix is working to streamline the fall application process. The committee is also working to resolve issues with a current grantee. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — Mav 9, 2007 Page Five Other Plan Commi&sion Business: Recruitment Member Doetsch noted that the second term for himself and Member Rebechini will expire on July 15, 2007, and Member Widznayer's vacancy has not yet been filled. Member Woods asked the Members for assistance with recruitment. VI. ADJOURNMENT The Plan Commission adjourned at 8:15pm_ Upcoming meetings: Plan Commission 7pm, Council Chamber% June 13 JUN II Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norflcct Planning Division Downtown Plan Committee "Zoning Conimhtee Sam, Room 2404 See timelroom below May 16 No meeting scheduled at this time DOWNTO«'N PL%N COMMITTEE GUIDLNG PRINCIPLES FOR DOWNTOWN EVANSTON ADOPTED BY DO H NT01CjV PLAN CO.1M9TTEE: MARCH 22. 2007 PLAN COMMISSIO.Y. MA F 9, 2007 Downtown Evanston is an increasingly vibrant urban center, alive with Evanston residents and people from throughout the North Shore and the North Side of Chicago. It has a special character which includes a healthy synergy of residential, retail, restaurants, entertainment, office and institutional uses. In addition, the downtown has a walkable scale with increasingly distinct districts that are pedestrian oriented, and traffic circulation and parking options also serve its residents and visitors, which range in age from students to retirees and every stage of life in between_ Substantial new development in the past ten years has achieved the goals of the 1989 DoNvntowzr Plan. Residential development on former commercial sites has attracted many new residents and visitors, and blighted and vacant structures have been eliminated. Combined, these efforts have infused the downtown with numerous new retail, entertainment, and restaurant uses to complement existing successful businesses in the downtown. Today, the downtown works. As it continues to evolve, a vision for the future is needed that has clear criteria for redevelopment, including an appropriate development envelope and public space standards. which will ensure that the City achieves its desired goals through best practices. This will strengthen existing amenities that enhance the quality of life white also ensuring economic competitiveness --locally, regionally, and globally. The following draft of guiding principles represents an attempt to summarize for discussion purposes the th��sghts of the Downtown Plan Committee of the Plan Commission in the initial phase of the downtown planning; effort that began in 2006. All meetings of the Committee have been open to the public, and the Committee has carefully reviewed materials from the 2004 Downtown Vis:,:tin,= public process. A. Phvsical Planning and Policv 1. Designate sub -areas for physical planning and policy as follows: al Conservation of traditional districts, especially height, scale, and pedestrian nature. Traditional areas of downtown are character -giving due to lower height and density. the architecture of existing buildings, and pedestrian orientation. Buildings were constructed in the early to mid-1900s and tend to have smaller ground Moor retail and service uses on the ground floor, with office and/or residential uses on upper floors. The traditional scale and character of these buildings should be conserved through adaptive reuse and fagade improvements. Any new development should be compatible in height, scale, and pedestrian orientation (e.g., ground floor storefronts with glass that activate the street, set backs for µ-ider sidewalks and greenery). The new building constructed by the Dads Street Land Company at 622 Davis is an example of appropriate redevelopment in these districts due to its design, scale, and materials. Refer to the enclosed map for the location of traditional districts. b) Establish transitional districts which represent appropriate reduction in scale from the downtown core as residential neighborhood districts are approached at the periphery. Transitiotul areas are located at the fringe of downtown. Architecture, height, and density vary in the transitional areas, but they are part of the gradient that starts in the higher density downtown core and continues to surrounding lower density residential neighborhoods. Redevelopment should reflect their purpose as a transition from the downtown core to surrounding lower density residential neighborhoods. Mid -rise development is most appropriate in these areas, while encouraging variety in height and design. For example, along the Emerson transitional corridor, the Downtown Plan Committee stated a preference for new development of 6-8 stories (2/7/06 minutes). Refer to the enclosed map for the location of transitional districts. c) Encourage density in core blocks of the downtown where it Is most appropriate. The downtown core is comprised of the blocks that arc not included in the traditional or transitional areas. These blocks arc: in the heart of downtown and are easily accessed by public transit. As such, they arc better suited to density than the traditional and transitional areas. If sited and designed carefully, with immediate access to public transit, density can be an asset to downtown's continuing revitalization. Density can provide space for new desired retail and service uses on the ground floor and neµ• residents and/or office users on upper floors, who in turn µill patronize existing and new retail and service uses. Refer to the enclose map for the location of the downtown core. 2. Consider shifting development review emphasis from individualized planned developments to form based code, where appropriate. Focusing exclusively upon individual planned developments can be a liability if there is not consistency with a comprehensive vision of the downtown's future that guides development on a block by block basis. The downtown plan and form b: ,ed code should work together to achieve redevelopment objectives (e.g_ quality design and materials, public benefits), while also being flexible in responding to :hanging market conditions. 3. Continue implementing the Design Guidelines for Planned Developments. The Design Guidelines for Planned Developments ar; one tool for achieving one of several redevelopment objectives, specifically, quality design and materials (e.g. glass storefronts at the ground level, no blank µails, s:reen parking and loading, provide landscaping, encourage adaptive reuse and green LEED certified rehabilitation and new construction). Form based codes should incorporate the design guidelines and apply them universally. 3. Continue encouraging adaptive reuse of existing buildings and sreen/LEED certified buildings. Numerous successful adaptive reuse projects 1-ve been undertaken in Evanston, and the City encourages these types of projects. The City also encourages green and LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certified rehabilitation and new construction projects. Green retrofits to existing buildings, greenfLEED rehabilitation and adaptive reuse, and green LEED construction projects should include environmentally friendly techniques that are sustainable and reduce waste, such as improving water and energy etticiency, using recycled and Iocally available materials, and providing natural ventilation and light. Innovations in green/LEED design and material -use are encouraged but should consider the compatibility with existing adjacent structures and the City's Design Guidelines for Planned Developments. 5. Continue protecting downtown's historic landmarks. There are 5.everal Iandmarks in the downtown, most notably the former Marshall Fields building. Landmarks contribute to the character of the downtown due to their attractive architectural detailing, pedestrian scale, and historical development perspective. B. Public Participation and Stakeholder Outreach 1. Foster strong public and private sector involvement In planning and implementation of the new downtown plan and form based code.,A•here appropriate. Involving stakeholders throughout the planning and implementation process is critical to insuring the continued success of downtown. This includes participation by Evanston residents (downtown and from throughout Evanston), business owners, property owners, civic organizations, developers, and institutions. 2. Encourage collaboration among stakeholders. The City, Evmark. Chamber of Commerce, Evanston Public Libran% Northwestern University. Evar_�-,ton Inventure, commercial property owners. other institutions. an.i residents have Et--n partnering to continue the revitalization of the downtown and enhance its vitality. In particular, greater interaction between the City and Northwestern University, &.- largest employer, in capital improvement planning, master planning, and cross -selling entertainment, cultural, and recreational opportunities will convey benefits to all stakeholders. C. Business and Retail Environment 1. Retain and attract Evanston employers, provide enhanced employment opportunitim and recruit Evanston residents for Evanston jobs. Wi h approximately 20,000 employees, downtown is one of the major employment centers in the north suburban region. Evanston residents from throughout the city are working in the downtown, but continued growth in local job capture is desirable, especially by young adults and non -college bound youth. 2. Maintain and enhance a diverse mix of residential, office, restaurants, retail, and service uses. These uses are essential to downtown residents and visitors. They are also mutually supporting and essential to continue the positive aspects of economic growth in the downtown. Attracting and retaining diverse retail that include comparison goods shopping opportunities is a priority of the City_ Attracting and retaining office space also is a priority of the City, but concentrations of ground floor office uses and other uses that do not activate the street or generate sales tax revenue are discouraged. 3. Maintain a balance of locally owned independent retail and service uses and regional and national chains. Downtown's retail ambience is characterized by a mix of locally owned independent retail and seryi;e wx-s and several regional and national chains. Locally owned retailers contribute to the uniqueness of downtown Evanston and pro%ide economic development opportunities for Evanston owners. Strategies to retain and attract these type; of businesses are highly encouraged. In addition, continued attraction of national brand retailers that meet the needs of Evanston residents is also desirable. 4. Support continuation of the functions of Evmarl:, the downtown special service district. Business improvement districts have been used successfully throughout the nation to improve the quality of life of do%%mto ATts through infrastructure improvement, extraordinary maintenance, marketing, and recruitment to strengthen the retail and cultural amenities of downtown. Evmark has played this role in Evanston and can accelerate efforts to meet growing demands and opportunities to maintain and enhance the vitality of downtown. D. Public Transit and Parking Sunph', Management. and Access 1. Encourage more residents and visitors to use transit to.1from the downtown. Advocate for continued improvements of rapid transit, including improving operations and maintenance, si_nage. etc. 2. Enhance and maintain desirable vehicle, pedestrian. and bicycle circulation to ensure reasonable access within and to, from the downtown. Current multi -modal circulation in the downtown is satisfactor How ever, traffic modeling techniques are desirable to enable decision makers to evaluate the cumulative and synergistic impacts of multiple new developments, including current proposals and those that have been approved but not vet constructed oecupieL_ A% ai ble parking for cars and bicycles contributes to improved access and circulation. 3. Conduct a usage study of required parking in multi -family residential developments that have been constructed since 2000 and are located near transit. if the study finds that the number of vacant parking spaces in new multi -family residential buildings exceeds national averages for comparable buildings, the Cite will consider adjusting parking requirements for new buildings —including parking maximums —given the proximity to public transit. For buildings with consistently high levels of vacant spaces, the City may consider partnering with owners to explore parking management strategies (e.g., shared parking arrangements, employee parking, incentives, etc). E. Physical Conditions: Streetscape. Parks/Open Space, Conn ectivitV/%N'av-finding, and Environmental Concerns. Create activated public spaces and new opportunities for open space — such as a new Fountain Square and new plazas with greenery — that enhance the quality of life and balance density. Programmatic initiatives are needed to enhance and maintain existing open space and to explore new opportunities. Outdoor cafes have been a successful method for achieving this, but winter activities are needed, as well as public spaces that provide additional options for socializing and enjoying the outdoors. 2. Preserve and enhance access and ambience through downtown capital improvements. Capital improvement projects are essential to the continued vitality of downtown. Projects that would improve ambiance and access may include enhancing the streetscape, plantings, and benches; expanding sidc%valks where possible (e.g. movie theater); screening Iights on west side of Sherman Avenue parking garage; providing opportunities for public art; improving Fountain Square; and maintaining existing infrastructure. 3. Improve cleanliness, maintenance, and beautification. The City is responsible for maintaining sidewalks, street furniture, streets, and related infrastructure. Beautification initiatives for consideration may include such things as seasonal flowers in planters and landscaped medians. 4. Enhance down town way -finding for Evanston residents and visitors. The City has improved way -finding in the past ten years but more needs to be done, especially for public parking garages, bicycle parking, and transit stations (note: Tetra is currently working %%ith the City to imprr-vc signage directing users to its stations). Signs should use international symbols for parking and other uses. Directional signace also may be desired for uses outside of downtown, such as the lakefront, Northwestern University, and historic districts. To enhance way -finding for pedestrians, kiosks may be installed in transit stations, public parking garages, and other locations as desired. F. Public art and CulturatlRecreational Programming I. Promote and install public art at appropriate locations. The City has committed to increasing public an in the downtown. Accelerating this process with the development and siting of exceptional public art is an important quality of life amenity. 2. Encourage more cultural and recreational programming in the downtown. The City and various organizations have sponsored numerous significant activities in the downtown which attract residents, employees, and visitors. Thcre may be additional activities which could be appealing to all age groups, but especially younger residents and employees who are part of the creative class segment of the population. Such activities during winter monu:s, particularly after the holiday stason, may enhance downtown vitality during that time of year. Cultural and recreational activities may be advertised through various means within the do%%nto%%-n (e.g., kiosks on the street and/or in transit stations and parkin_ garages). Pr000sed Downtown and Sub -Areas. Proposed Downto & Subareas \ tseti. �I f 1= a J P j l �Ij e Downtown Subareas Downtown Tracit*nal Transitional Building Foolpnnt Tax Parcel. !15 y Vi-. LFJL i - ram �r t �+-4 t� A Evanston - Ft tY1�R17V1,.Y.d��]f ^-._ - 1�1 :�' � -'A y_ ! TrOF_ q ff w!'CiI �Ya'ClS G� Y� •N ieK tw ?Y-'!'�='6t'f' 4SrT'4.ndCirC1'R'� b/ rYJt 1'bP1Y■6UR Z� 0 0 n 8 fj APPROVED MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, June 13, 2007 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Ci%ic Center, Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESE'N'T..................................Albers Hunter, Sharon Bowie, James Woods ........................................................................ (Chair), Stuart Opdycke (Vice Chair), Alice ........................................................................Rct=hini, David Galloway, Colccn Bun -us, .......... .............................................................Johanna Nyden MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................Doug Doetsch STAFF PRESENT .........................................Dennis Marino, Tracy Norflect COURT REPORTER ............................LA Reporting I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Woods determined that a quorum was presort and began the meeting. II. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES Minutes from the May 9, 2007 meeting were approved unanimously. HI. RECOGNITION OF OI:TGOING 'MEMBER The Plan Commission Chair and Members recognized outgoing Member Rebechini and thanked her for her sen-ice on the Plan Commission. IV. INTRODUCTION OF NEW \IE\IBER Chair Woods introduced a new PIan Commission member, Johanna Nyden, Member Nyden grew up in Evanston and has a Master's of Urban Planning and Policy from the University of Illinois at Chicago. V. PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING 7_PC 07-02 PDSN1 1200 Davis Street The Plan Commission closed the public hearing Ex-,-ause the application was withdrawn on May 30, 2007. Vl. DISCUSSION ITEM: PUBLIC .-ART AT FIRE STATION #5 (CENTRAL ST) Mr. Jeff Cory, Cultural Arts'Arts Council Director. presented the two finalists for public art at Fire Station n5 on Central Street. He stated that comment cards would be available in the lobby after the meeting. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - June 13.2007 Pate Two V11. CENTRAL ST FINAL PLAN AN-D STREETSCAPE DESIGN The City of Evanston has completed a muster plan and streetscape study for Central Street, with assistance from The Lakota Group. Ge►valt Hamilton associates, and Infrastructure Engineering. Communin• rc_vidents, businesses, institutions, and other properly owners have participated throughout the process and provided their ideas for development and streetscape improvements. The final product -a plan and conceptual streetscape design - brill be used by the Cin, to help betide future dei-elopment along Central Street. A draft of the f nal product is now ready for Plan Commission consideration and citizen comment. Mr. John LaMotte, consultant, summarized progress on the Central Street plan and strectscapr- design since the last meeting on April 12, 2007. Plan Commission members then heard citizen comment and discussed the project. Follov%7ng a closing statement by Mr. LaMotte, the Plan Commission deliberated next steps for the plan and zoning recommendations. Slember Rebechini made a motion that the Plan Commission recommend to the Planning & Development Committee of the City Council that the Central Street Master Plan be adopted as a policy document, with particular notice of the priority projects outlined therein. She added that the matters of zoning contained in the document should be referred to the Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission for further consideration in appropriate public hearings. Member Bowie seconded, and the vote was unanimous("). Member Woods stated that the Zoning Committee will hold a pre -hearing discussion about the zoning recommendations on July 11, 2007 at 6pm in the Civic Center. A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is aswllable from the Clay of E► nsw's web site. The proposal and n-anscripts can be vL-%Yd at the Downtown Library's r floor reference desk or tat the Clile Center In the Planning Division or Zoning Division during business hours. V111. ADJOURNMEN—T The Plan Commission adjourned at 11:30pm. Upcoming meetings: Plan Comtniv�sion 713m. Council Chambers JUIV I Au=st & Respectfully submitted. Tracy Norflect Planning Division Downtown Plan Committee Zoning Committee Sant, Room 2404 See tlmdroom below July 26 July I 1 APPROVED MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN CO.M.MISSION Wednesday, August 8, 2007 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center. Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT_ ................................ Albert Hunter, James Woods (Chair), Stuart .......................................................................Opdycke (Vice Chair), David Galloway, Coleen ........................................................................Burros. Johanna Nvdcn. Robin Schuldenfrei MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................Sharon Bowie ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ........... Lawrence Widmayer STAFF PRESENT.........................................Judith Aiello, Bill Dunkley, Tracy Norileet COURT REPORTER............................LeGrand Reporting I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Woods determined that a quorum was present and thgan the meeting. 11. APPROVAL OF MEETING M Ni:T£S Minutes from the June 13 , 2007 meeting were approved unanimously. 1I1. RECOGNITION OF OLTGOI�G MEMBER The Plan Commission Chair and Members recognized outgoing Member Douglas Doetsch and thanked him for his service on the Plan Commission, IN'. INTRODUCTION OF NEW MEMBER Chair Woods- introduced a new Plan Commission member. Robin Schuldenfrei. Member Schuldenfrei is an Assis:ant Professor of Design History at UIC. A PhD candidate at Harvard's Graduate School of Design, she relo-zated from Cambridge, MA in 2006. V. UPDATE: ZONING COMMITTEE MEETING SCHEDULE FOR WEST £VANSTON AND CENTRAL STREET ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS Chair Woods stated that :he folio%%ing Zoning Committee meetings have been scheduled: DATE ! TIME I LOCATION 8/ 15 6pm I Council Chambers 8122 6pm 1 Council Chambers j TOPIC Central St Plan %X'est Evanston Plan/Central St Plan In addition, the Do►vnto%%zn Plan Committee will meet on August 14 at Sam in room 2404. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — August 8. 2007 Page Two \'I. CON-TI\UAT1ON OF PROPOSED PLA.\'.NED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 06-10 PD 1001 Chicago Avenue .\fr. lames Murray, attorney for the applicant, requested that the Plan Commission close the public hearing because the application was ,.vithdranzt on August 3, 2007. Member Burrus motioned to accept the request and close the hearing, and Member Galloway seconded. The motion passed (6-0-1). Member Schuldenfrei recused herself because she testified as an expert witness during the public hearing. A vYrhatim tmnscripr ofthe procerdings ofthis Plan Commission cast is assailable from the City of Evanston's ov eb site. The proposal and transcripts can be riewed at the Downtown Library's O floor reference desk or at the Citie Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Division during business hours. V11. PROPOSED PLANNED DEN'ELOPNIE\T PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 07-04 PD&NI 708 Church Street An applications h}• 700 Church Street. LLC the contract purchaser of the subject propen}- commonl• known as 708 Church Street (the "Subject Propern' ), for a Planned Development and a 3fap,-intendment. The Subject Propert3• is pre.cently localed is�it/tin the D? Downtown Retail Core Zoning District. The applicant requests that the Ctl}' grant a planned den-elopmeni as a form of special use permit including such den•elopment allowances, arceptions to development allowances, and other relicfas may be necessary to allow redevelopment of the Subject Property• with a mired use multi family residential, retail, anti office building that is -ill contain accessory parking. /to addition, the applicant requests that subject propertt• be rezoned from the D2 Downtown Retail Core District to the D3 Downtown Core Development District. Generally, the applicant proposes to construct a new building it-ith multi J�mil• residential, retail, and office uses at 708 Church Street with the follossing characlerisrics: a) Approrimate'lt' 218 divelling units; b) Approrimately 28,6 50 square feet qf retail.. car}ice space: c) A defined floor area (excluding parking loading, storage. m:echaricals, and uses ac•c•essor►' to the building) of approrimatelt• 457, 7S_ square feet, resulting in a floor area ratio of about 13.77, (l) A nttzrimuma building he ighi ul'appro.rim-ile1v 5,:3 ' io the top ofthe rogfof the building; and e) .4pprorimatelv 234 parking spaces. Mr. Steve Friedland, attorney for the applicant_ introduced the development team. Mr. lames Klutznick and Tim Anderson, developers. gave an overview of the project. Mr. George Halik, architect, de::.ribed the desizn, including ground floor retail, the parking structure. and the residential tower. A model uas presented. Mr. Neil Kenig. tragic consultant. summarized the traffic imparts and used a computer model to help %isualize key points. 'I'lie development team summarized the development _goals for the pra;ect and public benefits. Following the presentation, the Plan Commission asked questions and the public comment period began. Continued due to lack of time to Wednesday. September 12, 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. : t verhadin traxscript of the procredings of this Plan Commission case is asnilable from the Cif}• of Evanston's herb site. The proposal and transcrim can be r"-ed ar the Downtown Library's 1'4 floor referenct desk or at the Cisic Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Division during business hours. Evanston Plan Commission 'Minutes — August 8. 2007 Page Three VIII. ADJOURNMENT The Plan Commission adjourned at I Ipm. The next regular Plan Commission meeting is scheduled for WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. Upcoming meetings: Plan Commission 7pm, Council Chambers 4'12,07 10 1007 Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Do,Anto%n Plan Committee gam, Room 2404 8/14 Zoning Committee Sec time/room below 8!15 07 (6pm. Council Chambers) S12107 (6pm, Council Chambers) APPROVED MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COINUMISSION Thursday, September 20, 2007 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Council Chambers NI —MBERS PRESENT..................................Albert Hunter. James Woods (Chair), Stuart ..-.....................................................................Opdycke (Vice Chair), David Galloway, Caleen .____........................... ........................................Burrus, Johanna Nyden, Robin Schuldenfrei MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................Sharon Bowie STAFF PRESENT.........................................Judith Aiello. Bill Dunkley, Tracy Norfleet COURT REPORTER............................LeGrand Reporting L CALL TO ORDER I DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Woods determined that a quorum was present and began the meeting. IL APPROVAL OF MEETING MINti TES Minutes from the August 8, 2007 meeting were approved unanimously. IIL UPDATE: ZONING COMMITTEE MEETING SCHEDULE FOR WEST EVANSTON AND CENTRAL STREET ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS Chair Woods stated that the following meetings have been scheduled: Plan Commission Downtown Plan Zoning Committee 7pm, Council Chambers Committee See time below Sam, Room 2404 10/10 07 + 103 07 9 26,07 (Central Street, 7pm) 10 3 07 (Central Street, 7pm) 1 1/14 07 11 7 07 (West Evanston, 6pm) IV. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 07-04 PDSNI 708 Church Street An application h1- 7O0 Church Str«t. LLC. the con.xt purchaser t y'the subject property commonhv known as 708 Church Street tthe " Subjec: Propern•"/, for a Planned Development and a .%Mp Aine'ndnze'nt. The Subject P�-r perty is presently located within the D2 Downtown Retail Core Zoning District. Ae ,:3pplicant requests that the City grant a planned development as a form of special use permit including such development allowances. arceptions to development allowances. and other relief as may be necessary Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — Sentember 20, 2007 Pace Two to allow redevelopment of the Subject Property- with a mired use multi family residential. retail, and oyce huilding that ►rill contain accessory parking. In addition, the applicant requests that subject property• be re--oned from the D2 Downtown Retail Core District to the D3 Downtown Core Development District. Generalh•, the applicant proposes to construct a new building t+ith multi family residential, retail, and nice° tuses at 708 Church Street with the fvlloxving characteristics_ a) Approximately 218 dwelling units; b) Approximate& 28,650 square feet of retail/of ce space; c) A definedfloor area (excluding parking loading, storage, nrechanicals. and uses accessory to the building) of approximately 457.752 square feet, resulting in a floor area ratio of about 15.77; (l) A maximum building height of approximate) y 523 ' to the top of the roof of the building. and e) Approximate h, 234 parking spaces. The development team presented revised renderings and additional information that was requested at the last meeting. Following questions and comments from the PIan Commission members, public comment was heard. Continued due to lack of time to Wednesday, October 10. 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. A verbatim transcript of the proereddings of this Plan Commission case Is atwilable froth the City of Etwnston's web site. The proposal and transcripts can be viewed at the Downtown Library's .i`'Jloor reference desk or at the Civic Center In the Planning Division or Zoning Division during business hours V. ADJOURNMENT The Plan Commission adjourned at 1 I pm. The next regular Plan Commission meeting is scheduled for Ni'EDNFSDA)'. OCTOBER 10. 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. Upcoming meetings: Plan Commission 7pm, Council Chambers 10.E 10 07 11/145 07 Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norflcet Planning, Division Downtown Plan Committee Sam, Room 2404 10!N07 Zoning Committee See time below 9/26 07 (Central Street, 7pm) 10/107 (Central Street, 7pm) 11/7j07 (West Evanston, 6pm) APPROVED MI\'UTES EVANSTON PLAN COIWMISSION Wednesday, October 10, 200717:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center. Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT..................................Colcen Burris, David Galloway, Albert Hunter, ............... _...................................................... Johanna Nyden, Stuart Opdycke (Vice Chair), ........................................................................Robin Schuldenfrei. Charles Staley MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................James Woods (Chair), Sharon Bowie ASSOCLATE MEMBERS PRESENT ........... La%vTrnce Widmaycr STAFF PRESE\rT .........................................Dennis Marino. Bill Dunkley, Tracy Norfleet, John ........................................................................Burke, Rajec %, Dahal COURT REPORTER............................LeGrand Reporting L113J1. • • • • • • • . • 41lLLLJ.11.,� a llL 11,LA w.. tJJ1iaLJAL.[ll I. CALL TO ORDER 1 DECLARATION OF QUORUM Vice Chair Opdycke determined that a quorum was present and began the meeting. 11. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES Minutes from the September 20, 2007 meeting were approved unanimously. Ill. UPDATE: ZONING COMMITTEE MEETING SCHEDULE FOR %VEST EV ANSTON AND CENTW%L STREET ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS The following committee meetings have been scheduled: Plan Commission Downtown Plan Zoning Committee 7pm. Council Chambers Committee See time below Sam. Room 2404 11 14/07 10 lS 07 10 17'07 (Central Street, Gpm) 12 12107 11 ~ 07 (West Evanston. Gpm) IN'. INTRODUCTION OF NEW NIENIBER Vice Ch_.,r Opdycke introduced a new Plan Commission member. Charles Staley. Member Staley his lived in Evanston for 40 years and has served on several boards and committees (e.g., District 65 Boar of Education, Ethics Committee, Board of Directors of the .McGaw YMCA and its commutteea)_ lie is an attorney with offices in Chicago, and his areas of practice are commercial and residential real estate and general contract Iaw. He is a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Chicago Law School. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - October 10, 2007 Paae Two V. PRESENTATION OF TRAFFIC 4fODEL FOR DOWNTOWN Mr. ltajeev Dahal, Senior Traffic Engineer, introduced the consultant team for the updated downtown traffic model. Mr. John LaPlante, a consultant with TYLin International, presented the model, which was created in 2004 and has been updated with recent planned developments (approved and proposzd, including 708 Church). He also summarized preliminary recommendations based on their analysis of the updated model. VI. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PI-ANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 07-04 PD&NI 708 Church Street An application by 700 Church Street, LLC. the contract purchaser of the subject property common!►• known as 708 Church Street ithe "Subject Propert},"),for a Planned Development and a Map Amendment. The Subject Propern. is present!►, located within the D 2 Downtown Retail Core Zoning District. The applicant requests that the Cie}' grant a planned development as a form ofspecial use permit including such dtwelopment allowances, ezrceptions to development allowances. and other relief as Haire' be necessarJ, to allow redevelopment of the Subject Propers►• with a mired use multi family residential, retail, and office building that it -ill contain accesson• parking. In addition, the applicant requests that subject propene, be rezoned front the D 2 Downtown Retail Core District to the D3 Downtown Core Development District. Generalh•. the applicant proposes to construct a new building with multi family residential, retail, and office uses at 708 Church Street wills the following characteristics: a) .-lpprorinuttely 218 dwelling units: b) Approximately 28.650 square feet of reraiUofflce space: cl A deftned floor area (e_rcluding parking loading, storage, mechanicals. and uses accesson, to the building) of apprarimateh• 4?7. 75 2 square feet, resulting in a floor area ratio of shout 15.77; (1) A maximum building height of approximate Ir 523 ' to the top of the roof of the building: and e) Approxintateh• 23.1 parking spaces. The development team responded to issues rais:d at the last meeting. They also presented revised renderings and additional information that %ar requested at the last meeting. Following questions and comments from the Plan Commission members. public comment was heard. Continued due to lack of time to Wednesday, Novernber 14. 200- at 7pm in the Civic Center. A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is "vilable from the City of Evanston's xeb site. The proposal and rranscripts can he viewed at rhr Downtown Librasy's 3"floor reference desk or at the Civic Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Division durv+g business hours. VII. ADJOURNMENT The Plan Commission adjoumed at 1 1pm. The next regular Plan Commission meeting is scheduled for WEDti ESDAY. NOVEMBER 141. 2&}7 at %pm in the Civic Center. Upcoming meetings: Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — October 10. 2-007 Plan Commission 7pm, Council Chambers 11/14 07 12/ 12 07 Respectfully submine%L Tracy Norflect Planning Division Pace Three Downtown Plan Zoning Committee Committee See time below Sam. Room 2404 10/18/07 10/17/07 (Central Street, 613m) 1117/07 ( West Evanston. 6pm) APPROVED MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN CO.NiMISSION Wednesday, November 14, 2007 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT.................................James Woods (Chair), Coleen Burrus, David ........................................................................Galloway, Albert Hunter, Johanna Nyden, Stuart ........................................................................Opdycke (Vice Chair), Charles Staley tiEMBERS ABSENT ...................................Sharon Boµic, Robin Schuldenfrei ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ........... Lawrence Widmaver STAFF PRESENT........................................Judith Aiello, Dennis Marino, Bill Dunkley, Tracy ........................................................................Norflcct COURT REPORTER............................LeGrand Reporting I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair N%Toods determined that a quorum was present and began the meeting. II. APPROVAL OF NIEETING MINUTES Minutes from the October 10, 2007 meeting n-crc approved. III. RECOGNITION OF OUTGOING MEMBER The Plan Commission Chair and Members recognized outgoing Member Albert Hunter and thanked him for his ser%ice on the Plan Commission. IV. UPCOMING MEETING SCHEDULE • DRAFT DONN1TONN'N PLAN o Special Plan Commission meeting on l 1r27 (7pm, Council Chambers) • NVEST EVANSTON ZONING OVERLAY o Zoning Committee meeting on 12/5 (6pcn. Council Chambers) • 2008 PI—A-X COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULE o Schedule of regular meeting dates was adopted as amended: li9, 2/13, 3/12, 4i9, 51I4, 6'11, 7/9, 8J13. 9 10, 10/15 (date change from 10`8 due to Yom Kippur), 11 / 12, 12/ 10 o All meetings are scheduIei for 7pm in Council Chambers Evanston PIan Commission Minutes — November 14. 2007 Paee Two V. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLAINKNED DEVELOPAIE`'T PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 07-04 PD&SI 708 Church Street .4n application by 700 Church Street, LLC, the contract purchaser of the subject properly commanly known as 708 Church Street (tile "Subject Propert)'' j, for a Planned Development and a .t p Amendment. 77te Subject Property is presently located within the D' Downtown Retail Cora Zoning District. 77te applicant requests that the City grant a planned development as a form of special use permit including such den•elopinent allowances, exceptions to development allowances. and other relief as may be necessary to allow redevelopmeri of the Subject Properly with a mired use multi family residential, retail, and office building that frill contain accessory parking. In addition. the applicant requests that subject property be rc=one'd from the D? Downtown Retail Core District to the D3 Downtown Cora Development District. Generally, the applicant proposes to construct a neat- building with multi-fctntily residential, retail, and oFice uses at 708 Church Street ivith thefollowing characteristics: a) Appravimately 18 duelling units; b) Apprarimately 28,650 square feet of relailloffice space. c) A defined floor area (excluding parking loading, storage, mechanicals, and uses accessory to the building) of apprarimately 45 7,752 square feel. resulting in a floor area ratio of about 15.77; d) A marimum building height of apprarimatel y 523 ' to the top of the roof of the building; and e/ . tpprorimateh• 234 parking spaces. The development team responded to issues raised at the Iast meeting and presented revised renderings and additional information, Public comment was then heard. When there was no else who wished to speak, Chair Wcods closed the public comment portion of this Plan Commission public hearing and stated that additional comments may be heard at the Planning & Development Committee meeting. Plan Commission members then offered their comments. Continued due to lack of time to NVednesday. De`ember 12, 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. A verbatim transcript of the proceedixgs of this Plan Commission case is atnilablefrom the City of Ewnsion Is web site. The proposal and transcripn can be viewed at the Downtown Library's 3"t)loor reference desk or at the Civic Center in the Planning Divitioo or "Zoning Division during business hours. VI. ZPC 07-05-'1I&T Central Street Zoning Review To consider atnendmews to Chapters 8, "Residential Districts; " 9, "Business Districts'; 10. "Commercial Distracts. 15. "Special Purpose and Overlay Districts ". 17. "Landscaping and Screening: " IS, "Dc linitiotts; " 3. and .3dmir.Wration, " -. " Z, :ing Distracts and .clap; " and anY other related se ciions of the Zoninc Ordinance•. The urpose t�r'.his he'arini� is to arnend the neap and the tart of the Zoning Ordinance in ui=� ,1 111c' rem a'ations of the Zoning Ordinance as applied to that area of the City present:: within the Central Street .Vaster Plan :Irea. This hearing mat, include. among other cf,r_cideratior c• a prospective recommendation to the City Council to place parts or all of t,:e subject area within a dii erew _oning district, within an overlay district not yet esi tblished :5 ithin the Evanston Zoning Ordinance. or to apply another appropriate over!vy district. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — November 14. 2007 Paee Three Bill Dunkley. Zoning .administrator, presented an overnzew• of the Zoning Committee's rccommendation for zoning changes along Central St, per the recently approved master plan and comments heard at the Zoning Committee public hearing. Additional public comment %vas then heard. When there was no else who wished to speak, Chair Woods closed the public comment portion of this Plan Commission public hearing and stated that additional comments may be heard at the PIanning & Development Committee meeting. Continued due to lack of time to Wednesday, December 12, 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. VII. ADJOi R MEN-F The Plan Commission adjourned at 1 Ipm. The next regular Plan Commission meeting is scheduled for WEDNESDAY. DECEMBER 12, 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division APPROVED AS AMENDED MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, December 12, 200717:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center. Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT..................................James Woods (Chair), Stuart Opdycke (Vice ............................... I ........................................ Chair), Coleen Burrus, David Galloway, Sara ........................................................................McMurray, Johanna Nydcn, Robin Schuldenfrei, .......................................................................Charles Staley MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................Sharon Bowie ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ........... Law-rence Widmayer STAFF PRESENT.........................................Dennis Marina, Bill Dunkley, Arlova Jackson, ........................................................................Tracy Norllect COURT REPORTER............................LeGrand Reporting ........ I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Woods determined that a quorum was present and began the meeting. 11. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES Minutes from the November 14. 2007 meeting were approved. Ill. INTRODUCTION OF NE«' NIENiBER The Plan Commission Chair introduced ne►t• Siernber Sara McMurray. who is an attorney specializing in real estate from a number of different perspectives, from condominium development here in Chicago to oil and gas leases and wind farms in Michigan. She moved to Evanston with her family in 2000. IV. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 07-04 PD&NI 708 Church Street An application hr• 700 Church Street. LLC. the contract purchaser r f the subject property commonh knost-n as 70S Church Street tthe "Subject Propern,' ), for a Planned Dcvelopment and a .flap Amendment. Toe Subject Propem• is presently located within the D' Downtown Retail Care Zoning District. The applicant requests that the Cin. grant a planrcd developmem as a j'orm of spacial use permit including such development allo►►•ances, arceptions to development allowances. and other relief as maY be necessary Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — December 12. 2007 Pace Two to allow redevelopment of the Subject Propery kith a mired use multi -family residential and retail building that will contain accessor3, parking. In addition, the applicant requests that subject propem, be re--oned from the D? Dossntoun Retail Core District to the D3 Downtown Core Development District. Generally, the applicant proposes to construct a new building Kith multi family, residential and retail uses at 708 Church Street iviih ihefttllosring characteristics: a) Approximately 218 dwelling units; b) Appraeimaleh• 28.650 squarefeet of retail space; c) A defined floor area (arcluding parking loading, storage, mechanical.. and uses accessors• to the building) of approximaiciv 457.752 squarefeet, resulting in a floor area ratio ofabout 13.77: d) A maximum building height of approximately 523 ' to the top of the roof of the building; and e) Approximately 234 parking spaces. The development team responded to issues raised at the last meeting and presented revised renderings and additional information. Plan Commission members then discussed and deliberated the project, and several Members read statements that they had prepared. Member Staley motioned to recommend appnn•al of the map amendment, and Member Galloway seconded. The motion passed with Members Burrus, Schuldenfrci, and Nyden voting 'nay' and Memb!x McMurray abstaining from the vote (4-3-1). Chair Woods motioned to recommend conditional approi.-al of the planned development (refer to the transcript for conditions). Member Staley seconded. The motion passed with Members Burrus, Schuldenfrei, and `ryden voting `nay' and Member McMurray abstaining from the vote (4-3-1). The members voting 'nay' indicated that they uiIl file a minority report, per the Plan Commission rules. To allow time to prepare findings of fact, the matter vvas continued to Wednesday. December 12, 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is availablefrom the Civ of EVWWon Is weh site. The proposal and transcripts can be rie%-ed at the Downtown n Library's r loor reference desk or at the Civic Center in the Pruning Division or Zoning Division during business hours. V. ZPC 07-05-NI&T Central Street Zoning Review To consider.:mendments to Chapters 8. "Residential Districts; " 9. "Business Districts 10. "Comm,: rrial Districts, 15. "Special Purpose and Overlav Districts ", 17. " Landscapirg and Screening: " 18. "Definitions: " 3. "Implementation and Atlntinistration: " 7. "Zoning Districts antl Hap: " and ,anv other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance. The purlx)se• of this hearing is to amend the neap and the tew of the Zoning Ord:.►_,ance it) u11e'ct the re'qulations of the Zoning Ordinance as applied to that area of the C:nv presenter it•itrin the Central Street .Vaster Plan .4re'a. This hearing ma}, include. umx..;g tether c onsider„ lions, a pro.+pet-tis•e recwnr►tentlation to the City Council to place par_,, or all gfthe sttl*icct area within a fl{t i rent =oning district. within an overlav distract not ve't established within the Evanston Zoning Ordinance:, or to apply another appropriate over/qv district. Bill Dunkley, Zonin_ Administrator, summarized changes recommended by the Central Street Neighbors Association in a memo received since the last meeting. FolloAing discussion, Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — De%:cmber 12, 2007 Page Three Member Galloway motioned to recommend approval of the Central Street zoning amendments, which are part of the implementation of the Central Street Master Plan. Member Opdycke seconded. The motion passed unanimously (8-0). A verbatim transcrilu of the proceedings of this Plan Commission cast is available froth the Cite of Evanston's w•eb site. The proposal and transcripts can be vtiew•ed at the Downtown library's Pfloor reference desk oral the Civic Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Division during business hours. VI. CONTINUATION OF ZO`ING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING Z.PC 06-02-T Solar Panels To consider amendments to Chapters 4, "General Provisions", 18, "Defnitions."and anv other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance, to amend the test of the Zoning Ordinance to affect those regulations regarding passive energy and consen•ation devices, including though not limited to amending■ 4s6-4-6-?: GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR ACCESSORY USES.4A`D STRUCTURES and §6-4-6-3: ALLOWABLE ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES (DETACHED FR0,%t PPJVCIPAL STRUCTURE). 77te Plan Commission is -ill consider specific modifications rind additions to the teat of the Zoning Ordinance to address the location. si_e, and appearance of solar panels and other passive en� rgs• devices in efforts to ensure their compatibility with the principal structure and the surrounding neighborhood. Continued due to lack of time to January 9, 2008 at 7pm in the Civic Center. VIL ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT A.%fE'%D.%1ENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 07-06-T BI District ISnecial Uses) To consider amendments to the tcrt of the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 9, "Business Districts " (and am- other related sections), to affect those regulations regarding the BI Business District, including, though not limited to, amending §6-9-2-3: SPECIAL USES. The Plan Commission rill consider.spec•{fic modifications and additions to the tart of the Zoning Ordinance rand (or the Croy Code) to add the "single jtniih' residential- use to the list of alloirable spacial use's in the BI Business District. The sing■le family residential i4w is not curre ntls allowed in the BI district. either as a permitted use or as a special use. Special Uses are allowed bt• application and approval of the City Council. Referred to the Zoning Committee meting scheduled for January 9, 2008 at 6pm in the Civic Center. VIII. ADJOURNMENT The Plan Commission adjourned at I I pm. The next regular Plan Commission meeting is scheduled for WEDNESDAY. DECEMBER 19. 2007 at 7pm in the Civic Center. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet, Planning Division APPROVED AS AMENDED MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT..................................James «'odds (Chair), Stuart Opdycke (Vice ........................................................................Chair), Coleen Burrus, Da%id Galloway, Sara ........................................................................McMurray, Johanna Nyden, Robin Schuldenfrari, .......................................................................Charles Staley MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................Sharon Bowie ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ........... Lawrence Widmayer STAFF PRESENT .........................................Julia Carroll, Judith Aiello, James Wolinski, Dennis ........................................................................Marino, Bill Dunkley, Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norflect COURT REPORTER............................LeGrand Reporting I. CALL TO ORDER 1 DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Woods determined that a quorum was present and began the meeting. I1. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 07-04 PD&.%i 708 Church Street An application by 700 Church Street. I.I.C. the contract purchaser of the subject property comtnottly known as 708 Church Street (the "Subject Properly "), for a Planned Development and a .lap Amendment. 17te Subject Property is presenth• located isithin the D? Downtown Retail Core Zoning District. The applicant requests that the City grant a planned development as a farm ofspecial use permit including such development allowances, exceptions to development allowances. and other relief as ma_t' be necessan, to allotiv redevelopment of the Subject Propern• with a mired use multi family residential and retail building that will contain accessory parking. In addition. the applicant requests that suhfcct property he rezoned from the D? Downto►s-n Retail Core District to the D3 Dotcnt0 J%n Core Development District. Generally, the applicant proposes to construct it neat- building ►vith multi _lantiN residential and retail uses at 70S Church Street with the following characteristics: al .-4pprorintatel• 218 dwelling units; bl Approximately 61WO square° feet of retail space; c) A definedfloor area (excluding parking loading, storage, mechanicals. and uses accessory to the buildirj of approximately 457. 75? square feet. resulting in alloor area ratio of about 15.77. d) A Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — December 19, 2007 Paee Two marimam building height of approximately S23' to the top of the roof of the building. and cal Approxintatelr 234 parking spaces. James Wolinski. Community Development Department Director, and Fire Chief Alan Berkowskv responded to questions raised at the last meeting about the building code, fire suppression measures, and related issues for high-rises. There being no further comments or questions. Chair Woods read the findings into the retard. Member Opdycke motioned to adopt the findings, and Member Galloway seconded. Prior to voting, all Members certified that they had been present at meetings or read the transcripts and that they did not have a conflict of interest. The motion passed with Members Burrus, Srhuldenfrei, and Nyden voting `nay' and Member McMurray abstaining from the vote (4-3-1). Member Burrus then read aloud the minority %Tom and Members Schuldcnfrei and Nyden read the minority findings into the record. .4 verbatim traxs- r of the proceedings of this Plan Cowveeission case is asuilable front the City of Bswnstow's web site. The proposal and transcripts can be viersYd at the Downtown Library's Y a floor reference desk or ar the Chic Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Division dur*X business hovers. Ill. CONTINUATION — DRAFF DO%Vti?O%i :\ PLAN AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS The Lk)ivntown Plan Committee of the Plan Commission has been leading a downtox-r planning process. Residents, businesses. institutions, and other property owners hati•e participated throughout the process and hm-e provided their ideas for the future of downtown. .4 draft downtown plan • has been prepared by Duncan Associates and their partners The Lakota Group. 180 Degrees Design Studio. Goodman Williams Group, and ALO.-E_ The draft is now reatit' for Plan Commission consideration and citizen comment. The anticipated meeting format is below. A. Additional Comments i Questions B. Plan Commission Discussion The draft plan and supplemental intbrmation are available online at ti+�+�+ ri: nt�� un cton.r�rt� 'dn+� nte�titi'n. Hard copies of the draft plan may he viewed at the following locations: Evanston Public Lihran 1703 Orrington Ave.. third floor Reference Desk: North Branch Lihran•. 2026 Certral S._: South Branch Lihran', 949 Chicago Ave. The pL;n can also he i-icis-ed beniven S:: 0 a.m. to S p.m. at the City Clerk's Office. Room 1200, .:nd in the Planning Di+•ision, Rr:.-,m 3 -(). The Plan Com-mission and stag discussed the pablic process for the drag plan and the Plan Commission's role and responsibilities. Member Schuldenfrei requested that the Preservation Commission be contacted for their input on the draft plan. Public comment was then heard. Due to lack of time, the matter was continued to WednesJay, January 16. 2008 at 7pm in the Civic Center. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — December 19. 2007 Pace Three A verbatim transcript of the pr,viceedings of this Plan Commission case is available front the City of Evanston Is web site. The proposal and rr6nscr4m can be siewed at the Downtown Library's 34floor reference desk or at the Civic Center in the Planning Division or Zoning Disision during business hours. Iv. ADJOUR-NNIEN-T The Plan Commission adjourned at 1 1pm. The next regular meeting is scheduled for WEDNESDAY. JANLARY 9. 2008 at 7pm in the Civic Center. A special meeting is scheduled for WFDNFSDAY. JANUARY 16. 2008 at 7pm in the Civic Center. Respectfully submitted. Tracy Norileet Planning Division