HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 2003Draft —Not Approved
MINUTES
EVANSTON PL.NN COMMISSION
WccI tesday, January 8, 2003 / 7:00 p.m.
Evanston Chic Center, City Council Chambers
MEMBERS PRESENT .............................. Sharon Bowie, Douglas Doetsch, Albert Hunter. Steve
Knutson. John L)znan, Alice Rebechini, Larry Widma)rr
MEMBERSABSENT.........................................................................................................Kenneth Rodgers
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT..................................................................................... Richard Cook
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS ABSENT.......................................................................................Steve Samson
STAFF PRESENT.. ............................... Arthur Alterson. Jeffrey Burdick, Dennis Marino, James Wolinski
PRESIDING.............................................................................................................Larry Widmayer, Chair
1. CALL TO ORDER I DECLARATION OF QUORUM
The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:10 p.m. A quorum was present.
II. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 19, 2002.
A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes of the regular meeting of November 19, 2002. The
motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7.0). A motion was also made to appoint Richard Cook
as an Associate Member of the Plan Commission. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
(7-0).
Ili. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
Cass ZPC 03-01-PD i800 EIZin . An application by Optima
Hori:ons L.P. contract purchaser, with permission from Prentiss
Properties Acquisition Partners LA. property owner, for a Planned
Development as a form of special use permit including such
development allowances, modifications to development allowances
and other relief as may be necessary to allow redevelopment of an
area within the DA Downtown Development District. The subject
properly is commonly known as 800 Elgin Road11800 Sherman
Avenue.
The proposed planned development is for a mixed -use development
consisting of retail and other commercial uses; once: parking.
residential uses, and other uses permitted in the D4 District.
Plan Communan .tleeting - January 8, 2003 Page I
Generalh•, the proposed development plan entails construction of a
36-stun building with a defined gross floor .7►ea of approximately
_ 90.06 square feet. containing _ 48 dwellings and apprarimatelt•
5000 square feet of retail floor area. on the rresent surface parking
area nest of the e-risting building, which will remain on the subject
property•. The proposal also includes 5'3 parking spaces.
Chairman Wjdma►er explained the Public Hearing process to those citizens in attendance and swore in
members of the public who wished to speak. He asked t►ir. Da►id Hovey of Optima to present the
proposed development, Mr. Hovey introduced members of the development team and presented in detail
the development proposal through use of three-dimensional models. renderings of elevations, and site
plans. He explained hoµ the proposed development met the standards imposed on development by the
Evanston Comprehensi►e Plan and the Evanston Downtown Plan. He also presented a three-dimensional
model of a building that could be built on the site under the site's existing zoning.
Mr. Hovey called upon fir. Pedersen to speak to how the development would meet Evanston's Planned
Development Standards. Sir. Hovey also asked Mr. Koenig to present the results of his traffic study
regarding this proposed project.
After the project presentation. Chairman Widmayer opened the public testimony. Several members of the
public spoke regarding this proposal. The public testimony reflected the many concerns of citizens
regarding this project. Chief among these concerns were the height of the proposal, the proposal's traffic
generation, the potential precedent set by the approval of this project in terms of height and density. the
possible inability of dos%nto%m Evanston to absorb an increased number of residents, increased crime that
may be generated as result of this proposal, and the potential for real estate speculators buying into the
project. Many citizems commended Optima for the design of the building and the building materials to be
used, but expressed their desire for the height to be reduced or for the building to be built closer to the
central core of downtown Evanston.
Chairman Widmayer noted that this hearing needs to be continued on account of a letter addressed to the
Plan Commission from a resident within 250 feet of the project requesting a continuance in order to allow
time for a rebuttal of the petitioner's testimony. The Plan Commission continued this public baring to
Wednesday, Januan 29.2003 at 7:00 p.m. In a to be determined location within the Evanston Civic
Center.
A rerbatfm tranrscrirpt of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is on file wlrh the Evanston
Zoning Division. The Zoning Division is located in Room 3700 of the Ewunston Civic Center.
V. COMMITTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS
0 Binding Appearance Review Committee
Associate Member Cook noted that he had a copy of the new draft ordinance for Site Plan and Appearance
Review and that the Planning and Development Committee needs to review this draft in the near future.
• Neighborhood Planning Committee
Commissioner Lyman stated that the four subcommittees of the Neighborhood Planning Comminee are in
the process of drafting a report on each of their ideas and proposals. He noted that three of the four
subcommittees would be meeting on the following night. He asked that a new day be selected to hold the
Neighborhood Planning Committee to reduce scheduling conflicts. The Plan Commission decided to shift
their meetings to the third Wednesday of each month. The next Neighborhood Planning Committee
meeting is to be held on %*ednesday, February 19. 2003.
• Zoning Committee
Commissioner Knutson stated that the Zoning Committee has not met but would be talking about the
proposed parking exception at their next meeting.
Plait Commission .tteering - January 8. 2003 Page 2
• Community Development Committee
Commissioner Rodgers was not in attendance and a report was not given.
• Economic Development Committee
Commissioner Rebechini stated that the Economic Development Committee recommended the selling of
the McDougal Littell building to private investors. In addition, there was debate over subsidies to be
offered to Border's for their store relocation. The Economic Development Committee voted to recommend
subsidies for Border's.
0 Parking Committee
Chairman Widmayer stated that the Parking Committee chose to expand the 15-20 minute parking areas in
downtown to support merchants that need customer turnover. The parking committee will examine parking
along Central Street.
• Planning and Development Committee
Associate member Cook stated that Planning and Development did not have a meeting during the holidays
and that there is nothing to report.
VI. OTHER BUSINESS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chairman Widinay-er stated that the Plan Commission would still hold its retreat on Wednesday, January
22, 2003 at 6:00 p.m. in the Aldermanic Library.
Commissioner Lyman stated that the Bicycle Plan is inconsistent in terms of the text and the adjoining
maps. He asked that the Plan be double-checked to assure consistency between the maps and the text of the
Plan.
VI1. ADJOURNMENT
The Evanston Plan Commission adjourned its meeting at 11:05 p.m. The Commission's next meeting is a
continuation of Case ZPC 03-01-PD and is scheduled for Wednesday, January 29, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in the
Civic Center's Council Chambers.
Respectfully submitted.
J49e-)
Jeffrev Burdick General Planner January 24, 2003
Plan Commmlon Afeeang - January 8, 2003 Paw 3
Draft — Xot Approved
MINUTES
EN ANSTON PLAX CONLMISSION
Wednesdav, February 12, ?003 / 7:00 p.m.
Evanston Civic Center, City Council Clxarnbers
MEMBERS PRESENT .............................. Douglas Doctsch, Albert Hunter, Steve Knutson, Alice
Rebechini. Kenneth Rodgers, Larry Widmayer
MEMBERS ABSENT........................................................................................Sharon Bowie, John Lyman
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESEti'T..................................................................................... Steve Samson
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS ABSENT... .................................................................................... Richard Cook
STAFF PRESENT............................................................ Arthur Aherwn, Jeffrey Burdick, Dennis Marino
PRESIDING.............................................................................................................Larry Widmayer, Chair
I. CALL TO ORDER 1 DECLARATION OF QUORV.M
The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:08 p.m. A quorum %-as present.
I1. CONSIDERATION OF N11tiL'TES FOR REGULAR .MEETI.NG OFJANUARY 8, 2003.
A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes of the regular matting of January 8, 2003. The motion
was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0).
III. CONTINVATION OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
Case ZPC 03-01-PD i800 Elgin] .4n application by Optima
Horizons L. P contract purchaser, with permission from Prentiss
Properties .4cquuMon Partners L.P., proper{►• ox•ner, for a Planned
Development as a form of special use permit including such
development allowances, mod fcatiom to development allowances
and other relief ar may be necessary to allow• redevelopment of an
area within the Ds. Downtown Development District. The subject
property is commonly known as 800 Elgin Road-1800 Sherman
Avenue.
The proposed planned development is for a mixed -use development
consisting of retail and other commercial rues; office; parking;
residential uses. and other uses permitted in the D4 District.
Generalh: the proposed development plan entails construction of a
36-story building with a defined gross floor area of approximately
Plan CommissionMeeting - Februan 12. 2003 Pagr 1
• Zoning Committee
Commissioner Knutson shed that the Zoning Committee has ncr met since the last Plan Commission
meeting.
• Community Dnelopment Committee
Commissioner Rodgers sired that the Community Development Comr:.ittee has not met since tit- last Plan
Commission meeting
• Economic Development Committee
Dennis Marino informed tie Commission that the Cim. Council did approve a resolution of intent to
establish a TIF district on Howard Street from the CTA tracks or. the east to Ridge Avenue on the west. An
eligibility study will occur over the next few months and a recotrenerAxdon will be provided to the
Economic Development Committee regarding the feasibility of a TIF district in this location. Also. the
City Council declined to approve a sales tax reimbursement to Border's to help with relocation costs.
Dennis Marino also provided an update on the latest developments regarding the rehabilitation of the Main
Street Plaza shopping cent.
• Parking Committee
Chairperson Widmayer explained that he was not able to attend the last Parking Committee meeting as it
occurred during the Plan Commission Retreat.
• Planning and Development Committee
Chairperson Widmayer stated that the convenience store/open sales lot zoning text amendment was adopted
by the Planning and Development Committee and passed on to City Council.
VI. OTHER BUSINESS/A.iNOUNCEMENTS
Arthur Alterson passed around reading material regarding full service supermarkets in urban and downtown
locations put together by Arlova Jackson. Zoning Planner. He also provided the Plan Commission with
material regarding the proposed marina adjacent to Calvary Cemezen•.
Chairperson Widma} er stated that the Plan Commission is sending a lever of support to Council regarding
the Plan Commission recommendation of October 9.2002 to establish stops along the CTA Yellow line in
Evanston.
VI1. ADJOURISSIENT
The Evanston Plan Commission adjourned its meeting at 7:41 p.m. The Commission's next meeting is
scheduled for Wednesday. March I2, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 2403.
Respectfully s min9d.
4'1
Jeffrey &udiel. General PLumer
March 4.2003
Plan Commission • krang - Fr6rLon 12. 2003 Page 3
:90,000 square feet. containing _4•Y dwellings Ind approximately
;000 square feet of retail vicar area, on the presew surface parking
area x esr of the erestigz f wldtng. which will remjtn on the subject
propery. The proposal also includes S "3 parking spaces
Chairperson Widmayer read a letter from Optima asking the Plan Commission to continue the 800 Agin
Road Planned Development Public hearing to the next regular Plan Commission meeting of Wednesday.
March 12, 2003. Chairperson Widmayer motioned to grant the continuance request. The motion was
seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0).
IV. PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
Case ZPC 03-03 PD 603 Main Street:.4n application b)• Chicago,
.Hain. LLC, property owner. for a Planned Development as a form of
special use permit including such development allowances, exceptions
to development allowances and other relief as mar be necessary to
allow redevelopment of an area within both the B3 Business District
and the Cl a Commercial .lftxed--1: se District. Chicago .Vain. LLC is
a limited liability compam• organized under the laws of the State of
Illinois far the purpose of des elopment, contracting marketing and
selling condominium units and camn.ercial space to be constructed on
the site at 603 Main. F.vanston. Illinois. Chicago .Hain LLC consists
of a consortium of 3fattheK•s Development Corporation, an Illinois
business corporation, Roberr .tlarthexs. President, having offices at
814 N. Franklin Street. Suite 301, Chicago, 11 inois, having a 50%
ownership interest: Esska• Development. LLC, an Illinois limited
liability company. Steven.tfulfins and Kin -in Pearson.Managers.
having offices at 917 Chicago .4ve- Evanston, Illinois. having a 25%
ownership interest, and a group of imrestars not yet having been
certified, also having a 25% ovs-nership interest. The ownership ofthe
land more fully described hereinafter is Esskay Development, LLC.
The proposed planned development is far a mixed -use development
consisting of retail uses: parking: residential uses. and other uses
permitted in the B3 and Cl a Districts.
James Murray. the attorney for the applicant. stated that the applicant is requesting to continue this case's
public hearing to the next regular meeting of March 12. 2003. He also stated that the applicant is
scheduling a public meeting to be held at Lincoln School on Thursday. February 20, 2003, A motion was
made to grant the requested continuance. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0).
V. COMMITTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS
• Binding Appearance Review Committee
Chairperson Widmaver stated that the Planning and Development Committee decided to investigate the
option of requiring developments of a certain size to be planned developments. thus providing the City and
the Plan Commission an opportunity to have binding say over appearance issues. The PIanning and
Development Committee will hold a special meeting to discuss binding appearance review on Monday,
March 31, 2003.
a Neighborhood Planning Committee
Chairperson Widmayer explained that one of the subcommittees of the Neighborhood Planning Committee
would meet tomorrow night, while the rest of the subcommittees will meet on Wednesday, February 19,
2003.
Plan Commission .tfertmA - February I i 003 Page 2
a Zoning Committee
Commissioner Knuu-on stated that the Zoning Committee has not met since the last Plan Commission
meeting.
a Community Dc%elopment Committee
Commissioner Rodzers stated that the Community Development Committee has not met since the last Plan
Commission meettne.
a Economic Development Committee
Dennis Marino informed the Commission that the City Council did approve a resolution of intent to
establish a TIF district on Howard Street from the CTA tracks on the east to Ridge Avenue on the west. An
eligibility study will occur over the next Pew months and a recommendation will be provided to the
Economic Development Committee regarding the feasibility of a TIF district in this location. Also, the
City Council declined to approve a sales tax reimbursement to Border's to help with relocation costs.
Dennis Marino also provided an update on the latest developments regarding the rehabilitation of the Main
Street Plaza shopping center.
a Parking Committee
Chairperson Widmayer explained that he was not able to attend the last Parking Committee meeting as it
occurred during the Plan Commission Retreat.
a Planning and Development Committee
Chairperson Widmayer stated that the convenience store/open sales lot zoning text amendment was adopted
by the Planning and Development Committee and passed on to City Council.
VI. OTHER BI;SINESWANNOUNCEMENTS
Arthur Alterson passed around reading material regarding full service supermarkets in urban and downtown
locations put together by Arlova Jackson, Zoning Planner. He also provided the Plan Commission with
material regarding the proposed marina adjacent to Calvary Cemetery.
Chairperson Widmar er stated that the Plan Commission is sending a letter of support to Council regarding
the Plan Commission recommendation of October 9. 2002 to establish stops along the CTA Yellow line in
Evanston.
VII. ADJOURINNIENT
The Evanston Plan Commission adjourned its meeting at 7:41 p.m. The Commission's next meeting is
scheduled for Wednesday. March 12, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 2403.
Respectfully s4tmittg
Jeffrey Burdick. General Planner
March 4, 2003
Plan Commission Meeting - Februan,12. 2003 Page 3
i
MINUTES
EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION
Wcdnesdav, \larch 12, 2003 / 7:00 p.m.
Evanston Civic Center, Cite Council Ch=becs
MEMBERS PRESENT .............................. Sharon Bowie, Douglas Doetsch, Albert Hunter. John
Lyman, Lain Raffel. Alice Rebechini, Kenneth Rodgers, Larry Widmayer
MEMBERSABSI:N'T............................................................................................................. Steve Knutson
ASSOCIATE :MEMBERS PRESENT..................................................................................... Richard Cook
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS ABSENT.......................................................................................Steve Samson
STAFF PRESEN7............................................................ Arthur Alterson. Jeffrey Burdick, Dennis Marino
PRESIDING............................................................................................................. Larry Widmayer, Chair
1. CALL TO ORDER 1 DECLARATION OF QUORUM
The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:03 p.m. A quorum was present.
11. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 12, 2003.
A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes of the regular meeting of February 12. 2003. The
motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Jeff Burdick introduced Larry Raffel, the new Plan
Commissioner.
III. CONTINUATION OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
Case ZPC 03-01-PD (SW Elgin An application by Optima
Hori;ons LP. contract purchaser. with permission from Prentiss
Properties Acquisition Partners L.R. property owner, for a Planned
Development as a form of special use permit including such
development allowances, modifications to development allowances
and other relief as may be necessary to allow redevelopment of an
area within the D4. Downtown Development District. The subject
property is commonly known as 800 Elgin Road/1800 Sherman
Avenue.
The proposed planned development is for a mired -use development
consisting of retail and other commercial uses; office; parking;
residential uses, and other uses permitted in the W District.
Generally; the proposed development plan entails construction of a
36-story building with a defined gross floor area of approximately
290.000 square feet, containing 248 all-ellings and approximately
Plan Commission Meeting - Morch 12. 2003 Page
i
3000 square feet of retail t?oo► :re.7 on the present furface parking
area ekes: of the existing huddinz %htch will remain on the subject
properr►• The proposal ulv, inciutes 5-3parking spJ:es.
Chairpersar. Widma%cr stated that he received a letter from Optima asking the Plan Commission to
continue the 800 Elgin Road Planned Development Pubic Hearing to the regular meeting of April.
Chairperwe Widmayer motioned to grant the continuance request. The motion was seconded and
passed unanimously. (8-0).
IV. CON'TINUATIOy OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
Case ZPC 03-03 PD 603 Main Strert:.4n application In. Chicago,
.Hain. LLC, property- owner, Jor a Planned Development as a form of
special use permit including such development allowances, erceptionr
to development allowances and other relief as mm• be neeessary to
allow redevelopment of an area %%thin both the 133 Business District
and the CI o Commercial dfixed--0e District. Chicago dtairt LLC is
a limited liability- compam• organ!=ed under the laws of the State of
Illinois for the purpose of development. contracting, marketing and
selling condominium units and commercial space to be constructed on
the site at 603 3fain. Evanston, Illinois. Chicago Main LLC consists
of a consortium of Matthews Development Corporation. an Illinois
business corporation. Robert ,% fattheu j. President, having offices at
814 N. Franklin Street. Suite 301. Chicago. Illinois. having a 50%
ownership interest: Esskay Development. LLC. an Illinois limited
liability, compam: Steven .tfullins and Kivtn Pearson. !!tanagers,
having offices at 9 1 - Chicago .4ve.. Evanston. Illinois, having a 33%
ownership interest, and a group of investors not yet having been
certified. also having a ?S % ownership interest, The ownership of the
land more fully described hereinafter u EWay Development. LLC.
The proposed planned development u for a mixed -use development
consisting of retail uses., parking: resrdentral uses. and other uses
permitted in the B3 and Cl a Districts.
James Murray. the attorney for the applicant, stated that the applicant is requesting to continue the public
hearing to the nck7 regular meeting of April 9. 2003. He explained that this request is to permit the
applicant to conclude the discussions with the neighborhood regarding this project. A motion was made to
grant the requested continuance. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0).
Commissioner L-.man noted that the when the Chicago Avenue Streetscape study was undertaken, there
was a request from small business owners for increased retail space in the area. He asked that the applicant
consider providiz-g retail space as part of the development.
V. COMM17TEE UPDATES AND REPORTS
+ Binding Appearance Review Committee
Jeff Burdick passed around a letter from Corporation Counsel Jack Siegel that included the Planned
Development regulations of Shaumburg and Arlington Heights. This is in response to the previous
Planning and Development meeting inhere Mr. Siegel suggested exploring a planned development
approach to attaining binding appearance review.
• Neighborbood Planning Committee
Commissioner Lyman explained that draft summary reports from three of the subcommittees have been
provided_ Each ofthe subcommittees will meet on March 19 to review each of the draft reports and
determine how to move forward from that point.
Plan Commission .4i,rring -March 12. 2003 Page 2
• Zoning Committee
A report uas not pro%ided.
• Community Development Committee
Commissioner Rodgers stated that the Community Development Committee is meeting the following
Wednesda%.
• Economic Development Committee
Committee member Rebechini stated that the February Economic Development Committee was cancelled.
a Parking Committee
Chairperson Widmayer stated that the Central Street parking study was presented at this meeting and that
he could pro,,ide a copy of the report to the Commission at the next meeting.
• Planning and Development Committee
Chairman Widmayer stated that the Planning and Development Meeting is to hold a special meeting on
March 3 I.2003 to concentrate solely on the issue of binding appearance review. One of the suggestions at
the previous P&D Committee meeting was to require all projects over a certain size to be Planned
Developments as a way of triggering binding appearance review.
VI. OTHER BUSINESS/ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chairperson Widmayer stated that the Plan Commission should hear the 603 Main Street project prior to
any other public hearing case at the April 2003 meeting. Associate member Cook suggested scheduling a
second meeting in April to handle the large volume of public hearings expected in April. Chairperson
Widmayer stated that each of the anticipated public hearings would be scheduled for April 9. but that a
contingency date should be set in April if time does not permit each of these cases to be heard. The Plan
Commission agreed upon Wednesday, April 30 as the contingency meeting date.
Saturday, Slay 31. 2D03 was established as the date for the Plan Commission bus tour.
VII. ADJOUR1tiINIENT
The Evanston Plan Commission adjourned its meeting at 7:44 p.m. The Commission's next meeting is
scheduled for Wednesday. April 9, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in Room 2403.
Respectfully submitted
lefrr urdick. General Planner April 3, 2003
Plan Commission .tfeeting - March 12. 2003 Page 3
MINUTES
1-:VANSTON I'LkN CO\INIISSION
Wednesday, April 1, 2003 / 7:4)0 p.m.
I:ranrton Civic Center, City Council Chambers
MEMBERS PRESENT .............................. Sharon Bowie. Albert Hunter, Steve Knutson.
John Lyman. Larry Raffcl. Alice Rebcchini. Kenneth Rodgers, Larrti- Widmayer
MEIMBERS ABSENT........................................................................................ Douglas Doetsch
ASSOCIATE MENIBERS PRESENT ................................................Richard Cook, Steve Samson
STAFF PRESENT......................................................................... Arthur Alterson, Jeffrey Burdick
PRESIDING............................................................................................... Larry Widmayer. Chair
1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM
The meeting was called to order at approximatel% 7W p.m. A quorum µas present.
If. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2003.
A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes of the regular meeting of March 12, 2003. The motion
was seconded and passed unanimous!}. (6.0).
III. CONTINUATION OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
Case ZPC 03-01-PD 8D0 Elgin t1800 Shermanl* An application by
Optima llorkwivs L. P contrgct purchaser, N•ith permission from
Prentiss Properties Acyuisitinn Partners L.P., property- owner, for a
Planned Den•elupment as aform,)f special use permit including such
development allowances, modi)ications to des•elopmenr allowances
and other relief as may be necema►y to allow redevelopment of an
area m ithin the D4. Dou ntown Development District The subject
property, is commonly known as 600 Elgin Rand 100 Sherman
.d s,enue The proposed planned development is for a mixed --use
development consisting of retail and other commercial uses. office;
parking: residential uses. andother uses permitted in the D4 District.
Generally. the proposed dcn-clopment plan entails construction of a
36-story building with a defined gross fluor area of approximately
290.000 square feet. containing :48 dwellings and approximately
J000 square feet of retail floor area. on the present surface parking
area Kest of the existing building. %hick will remain on the subject
propem•. The proposal also includes J7J parking spaces.
Chairperson Widmayer stated that he received a Inter from Optima asking the Plan Commission to
continue the 800 Elgin Road Planned Development Public Hearing to the regular meeting of May.
Plan Commission .Meeting - .March 12. _rill] Page
Chairperson Widmayer motioned to grant the continuance request. The motion Has seconded and
passed unanimously. (6-0).
IV. CONTINUATION OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
Case ZPC 03-03 PD 900 Chicago A►enue 1603 Main Street:.4a
application fir Chtcxgo .%Jain. LLC. propern• um ner.'(or a Planner!
Development as a jorm re'sl+ecial use permit including such
development allowances erceptions to development allowances and
other relief as mq►• he necessary to allow redevelopment gran area
is Ain both the B3 Business District and the Cla Co►nmercial 3lired
Use District. Chicago .%fain. LLC is a limited liabtlin• company,
organized under the lam s of the .Srate of Illinois for the purpose of
development, +:ontructrngr marketing and selling condominium units
and commercial space to be constructed on the site at 603 .%lain.
Evanuo►t. Illinois. Chicago.Vain LLC consists of a consortium of
Maithews Development Corporation, an Illinois business corporation.
Robert .Vatthem•s. President. having offices at 814 N. Franklin Street,
Suite 301. Chicago. Illinois. having a S0'0 ownership interest: Esakan-
Development, LLC. an Illinois limited liability compam,. Steven
Mullins and Kevin Pears on. Managers, hm-ing offices at 917 L'hi: ago
Ave., Evanston, Illinois, h n•ing a 25% ownership interest, and a
group of investors not ter having been certified. also having a?5%
ownership interest. The ownership of the land more fully described
hereinafter is E.sskat• Development. LLC. The proposed planned
development is for a mcred--use development consisting of retail uses.
parking. residential uses. and other uses permitted in the B3 and Cl a
Districts.
Chairman Widmayer asked `tr. James %Iurra► to present the planned development proposal and swore in
everyone in the audience who wished to speak at this public hearing. Mr. Murray explained that this
proposal has appeared before the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee several times. and that there
ha%e been too neighborhood meetings regarding this proposal. The primary concern of the neighbors at
these meetings consisted of the perceNed height of the proposal. %It. Murray explained that this concern
has been addressed.
He proceeded to call a series of witnesses to testify in regards to the project. These witnesses included
David Brininstool, the project's architect. Robert Matthews. the President of the project's development
company. Mary Summerville, a broker. Michael Werthmann, the project's traffic engineer, and Steve
Lenet. an urban planner and landscape architect.
Chairperson Widmayer opened up the public testimony portion of the hearing. Several members of the
public raised questions and concerns regarding the project. Chief among these concerns were the potential
traffic generation of the projem the possible o►erbuilding of condominium units in Evanston, the density of
the project. parking problems in the Chicago A►enue corridor. the project's impact on the character of the
neighborhood. and the lighting sources to be used as pan of the project.
Chairperson Widmayer thanked the public for their comments and requested questions and comments from
Commission members. Committee member Rebechini asked if the developers made any changes to the
proposal as a result of comments from the neighbors at the two neighborhood meetings. N1r. Aiutray
replied that the entire building was moved back off of the property line. The residential tower was moved
back two feet and the top level was recessed to create the impression of a height of 65 feet rather than 75
feet. Furthermore, the recommendations of the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan were followed.
Commissioner Lyman felt that the developer had gone out of his ►%a► to provide a proposal that meets the
goals of the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan and the perceived desires of the community. He stated that
he is puzzled at the largely negative public response at tonight's meeting. especially among members of the
Plan Commmcwn ticeunF-tfarch 12. _003 Page
Southeast Evanston Association. cors;; Jenrg ;hat this group %%as ins:rurnental in establishing the goals and
objectives of the Chicago Avenue Plan. Commissioner iZ;Tel stated that the architecture of the
building is quite handsome. but that co--:_r of the building at %ia and Chicago could have been more
defined. He encouraged a pecics—ma.- spa:e in this location. He also shared Commissioner Rebechini's
concern regarding value enginecring an14 i•-a d that the building sho-1,11 be built as presented this evening.
Commissioner Rebechini motioned to recommend approval of this project based on the review of
standards for a planned development in both the B and C Zoning Districts. She added to her motion
that the recommendation for approval is based on the specific appearance of the project as presented
to the Commission this evening. Commissioner Rodgers seconded this motion. The Commission
reviewed this project against the tuo set of standards and found that the project met the standards of
a Planned Development in both the B and C Zoning Districts. The motion was approved by a vote of
7-1. Commissioner Hunter voted nor.
A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is onfile le with the Evanston
Zoning Divislom The Zoning Division is located In Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center.
V. ' PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
Case ZPC 03-03 Nt&PD 1100 Clark StreetA 719 Ridge Avenue:
An application ti Thomas Ros.ak, president of TR Ridge Partners.
LLC. with permusion trom The Oak Avenue. LLC and Charles Kling
Family Trust. property ost ners, for an amendment to the City of
Evanston Zoning .Ilap and fnr a Planned Development. The
applicant is the contract purchaser of the properties commonly
known as 1100 Cisrk :nd 1-19 Ridge Avenue. preseneev located
%vithin the Ol Oft: a Zoning District. The applicant requests that the
Ci{v amends the Zoning .+clap. to place the above -mentioned property
within the D3. Dc.," ntoti, n Core Development District or other such
district as the C:n m n- deem appropriate. Further, the applicant
requests that the Cin grant a planned development ac a form of
special use inclu:::ng su:h development allo►, antes and other relief
as may be necessart, to provide the applicant H uh the zoning relief
necessarr to alloH the redevelopment of I100 Clark and 1719 Ridge
.4venue for multi-r�mrh residential ivith accessory parking, and
commercial. 5envi.2 and office uses. Generally. the applicant
proposes to construct a multi -(amity residential complex with the
appearance of 6 buildings, a ith heights from 6 to 20 stories.
Chairman W'idmayer motioned that due to time constraints, the public hearing for this case Would be
continued to the special Plan Commission meeting of April 30. 2003. The motion was seconded and
passed unanimously. (8-0).
VI. ADJOURNMENT
The Evanston Plan Commission adJoumed its meeting at 10:49 p.m. The Commission's next meeting is
scheduled for Wednesday, May 14. 200- at , 00 p.m. in the Cit% Council Chambers.
Respectfully submitted.
Jeffrey Burdt General Planner May 6. 2003
Plan Commission Afeeting -March 12, :6fi3 Page
MINUTES
EVANSTON PLCN COMMISSION
Wednesday, Apnl 30, 2003 / 7.00 p.rn.
Evanston Civic Center, City Council Chambers
MEMBERS PRESENT .............................. Sharon Bowie, Douglas Doetsch, Albert Hunter,
Steve Knutson, John Lyman. Larry RaffeI. Alice Rebechini, Kenneth Rodgers, Larry Widmayer
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ................................................Richard Cook, Steve Samson
STAFF PRESENT......................................................................... Arthur Alterson, Jeffrey Burdick
PRESIDING................................................................................................Larry Widmayer, Chair
1. CALL TO ORDER 1 DECLARATION OF QUORUM
The meeting was called to order at approximately 7-03 p.m. A quorum was present.
II. PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
Case ZPC 03-03 M&PD 1100 Clark Street11719 Ridge Avenue,
An application by Thomas Ros: ak. president of TR Ridge Partners,
LLC. with permission from The Oak Avenue. LLC and Charles !Cling
Family Trust, property owners. for an amendment to the City of
Evanston Zoning Map and,%r a Planned Development The
applicant is the contract purchaser of the properties commonly
known as 1100 Clark and I'19 Ridge Avenue. preseruh• located
within the 01 Office Zoning District. The applicant requests that the
Cir}• amends the Zoning .!tap. to place the above -mentioned property
within the D3. Downtown Core Development District or other such
district as the City may deem appropriate. Further. the applicant
requests that the Chy;grant a planned development as a form of
special use including such development allowances and other relief
as may be necessary to provide the applicant with the rowing relief
necessary to allow the redevelopment of 1100 Clark and 1719 Ridge
Avenuefor multi family residential with accessory parking, and
commercial, service and once uses. Generally, the applicant
proposes to construct a multi -family residential complex with the
appearance of 6 buildings. with heights from 6 to 20 stories.
Chairman Widmayer asked Mr. Thomas Roszak to present the planned development proposal and swore in
everyone in the audience who wished to speak at this public hearing. Mr. Roszak stated that the design of
this proposal would serve to provide a buf ff from the downtown corn to the east and the residential
neighborhood to the west. Heights of the six condo buildings would var) to create visual interest. with
lower heights abutting Ridge Avenue. Architectural setbacks would be used to create terraces and to
Plan Commission .Weeting — April 30. 2003 Page
pro►ide a more relaxed. residential feeling. and to create urban `-ant %ards with a series of landscaped
terraces and gardens. As pre►iousl► mentioned. the developmer.; consists of six buildings. with each
building being setback in a senes of ziggurats opening the de►e1-_—,mert to air. light. and greenery. and
providing large garden terraces Each building. w ith e%ception of the tallest building. would have a rooftop
garden.
All of the parking for condo residents would be pro►ided below k;ade. Parking would be reconfigured
along Oak Avenue and Clara. Street so to allow more parking in the area in a diagonal fashion. The central
courtyard would be finished with special paving. landscaping and lighting. Parking would also be provided
for the office use. which uses the current site for its parking. This parking would be contained in five
levels. two below grade and three above grade. There is also an &,=fordable housing proposal, allocating
IV-0 of the units to be affordable
The project will be built in phases, which would allow for a corrsmative approach to marketing "
propen). Approximatel} 70 units will be built per )car, and the project would take approxmiately four
years to complete. In addition to the planned development request a rezoning request is being sought
This request is for a map amendment changing the underlying zoning from OI to D3. The proposed FAR
of 2.86 is below that of other recent downtown condo developments, which range from 4.0 to 5.5, thus
making the proposed density optimal for a transitional area 'between downtown and residential
neighborhoods to the west.
Mr. Roszak presented Mr. Robert Teska of Teska Associates to speak to land use issues. Mr. Teska stated
that OI Zoning is no longer appropriate for this site and that there has been little to no interest in office
development on this site. He also noted that the proposed 2.86 FAR is appropriate. considering dw it is
Iess than other real estate development occurring in the general vicinit% and that this FAR figure would be
permitted in D3 Zoning with or without a planned development. Finally, Mr. Teska pointed out that a
planned development is appropriate. The area is virtually an entire cir% block. It is under unified
ownership and control. and the site design and building architecture reflect an overall theme and harmony
within the development.
W. Roszak next presented Ms. Kathryn Talty, a senior associate with Douglas Hills Consultants to present
the landscape plan. Ms. Tale spoke in more detail regarding the around landscaping and the rooftop
landscaping themes. Upon completion of Ms. Talq's testimony, Mr. Roszak- introduced Mr. Gary Wass
from Gary 13'iss, Incorporated, the project's civil engineer. Mr. Wiss addressed the issues of the adequacy
of the utilities, specifically sewer and water, and also the stormwater detention. Erik Doersching of Tracy
Cross & Associates, the marketing feasibility consultants for the project addressed certain standards in the
Evanston Zoning Ordinance dealing with the maintenance and enhancement of the desirability and range of
choice in terms of style and price of housing stock, am adverse affect this project could have on adjacent
properties, and the provision and variety of housing types. Mr. Steve Friedman of S.B. Friedman, the tax
and fiscal impact consultant, discussed how the project would utilize creative means of increasing the
property tax base to maintain pro► ision of services or relieving some of the tax burden placed on Evanston
home owners.
Chairman Widmayer recessed the hearing until the regular Plan Commission meeting of May 14. 2003.
E
.4 twrhatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case h on Jilt whir the Evanston
Zonbrg Dlvislon. The Zoning Division is located In Room 3700 of the Evanston Chic Center.
Ill. COMMITTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS
• Binding Appearance Review Committee
Cltaitrrran Widmayer stated that the Planning and Development Commirwe continues to examine Binding
Appearance Review. Currently, there is discussion of requiring Planned Developments for certain sized E
developments in order to trigger a form of mandatory binding appearance review. -
0 Neighborbood Planning Committee
Plan Communion Meeting - .4prd 30.:003 Page
Commissioner Lyman stronghy encouraged all Commission members to attend the next neighborhood
meeting of S!a} 21. '003. The rust iteration of the report regarding the Neighborhood Planning process
Kill be presewzd. Commissioner L)m= asked Commissioner Hunter to step in as chair pro tem of the
Neighborhood Planning Committee during his absence.
V. ADJOMMMEhT
The Evanston Plan Commission adjourned its meeting at 11:02 p.m. The Commission's next meeting is
scheduled for Wednesday. May 14. 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
Respectfully submitted,
r � r-
Jeff ey 13&41S , C�3e %aw Planner June 6. 2003
Plat Cawwwian .herring -April 30, 2003 Page
MINUTES
F.VANSTON PUN COMMLSSION
Wednesday. Mai- 1.. 24'913 / -:00 p.m.
Evanmun Civic Center. Ctn• Council Chambers
MEMBERS PRESENT ............................. Sharon Boy;ie. Douglas Doetsch, Albert Hunter.
Steve Knutson. John Lsman. Larry RalTel. Alice Rebechini. Larr) Widma%er
MEMBERS ABSENT ............................. Kenneth Rodgers
ASSOCIATE ME`1BERS PRESENT ................................................Richard Cook, Steve Samson
STAFF PRESENT......................................................................... Arthur Alterson. Jeffrey Burdick
PRESIDING................................................................................................Larry Widmayer, Chair
1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM
The meeting was called to order at approximate!} ''-1'_ p.m. A quorum ►%as present.
11. PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING (Continuation)
Case ZPC 03-03 M&PD 1100 Clark Street/1719 Ridge A►enue:
.4n applt,-atiun hr Thomas Roszak. president of TR Ridge Partners.
LLC rth permission from The Oak Avenue. LLC and Charles filing
Famrh Trust. propernr ou ners for an amendment to the City of
Et anston Zroui�c .t lap and,b r a Planned Development. The
apphcant fs the eurrtrntc7 purcJ:aser of the properties commonit
knem r. as 1100 Clark and 1-19 Ridge .dvenue. presenttt- locate.!
tttth:n the OI Office Zuniny Drstrtct The applicant requests that the
C !t1 amends the Zoning .Vap. to place the above -mentioned property
x tthin the D.3. Downtown C',i►e Development District ar other such
district at the Cm mete deem appropriate Further, the uppltcHnt
reque•sti that the Cin• grant a pi.rnned develurment as alarm uY
ipectai u,2 including ssich dei rlopment alluwances and other relief
at m.n ;1e necessan, to pros rde the applicant with the zoning relief
neces5ar} to allow the redevel)pmew of 1100 Clark and 1-19 Ridge
At enue.'ur mull+-fa►nilt• residential si iih accessory parking, and
commercial. sen•ice and office uses. Generally, the applicant
proposes to construct a multi -Tamil► residential complex with the
appearance of 6 buildings, ►sith heights from 6 to 20 stories.
Chairman Widma)er continued the public hearing from April 30. 2003. He asked to sear in anyone who
%t fished to speak if they had not been wom in at the pre% ious public hearing. Witnesses were sworn and
Chairman Widmayer asked Tom Roszak to continue ►►nh his presentation. Mr. Roszak introduced Michael
Werthmann. the project'% tmffic engineer. Mr. Werthmann summarized his traffic study. as %tell as the
Plan Cnmmtsston .tleetu:g Slat : = _;r;j Page
studies performed at the request of the Cr:y He as4-tried that the ►cl-me \11traffic generated b►
.n.. r.- 2ect ►►ould be reiuced compared to s+har could be Ce►eJk)pt:d on this site and %%rat is currently being
.-_:ed on this stw t% the e►istinc surface parkin_ km fie stated that. :he proximity of public
tit this proposed residential de►elopmeni could largcl} be rea=on for this traffic
Mr Rc;zak surimarized the proposed affordable housing program. lie intrud,crd Richard Koenig. the
ere_u:..e director of the Housing De►elapment Opporunin Corporation. fir. Kcvnig ran through a series
of d ka:r.ples detailing the comp.-inents of the affordable housing proposal.
Prior to the commencement of the public testimony. Arthur Akerson informed the Commission that he
rccei%ed a petition from the City Clerk's office stating neighborhood opposim.Nn to the proposed map
amtndrnent. fie explained that subsection 6-3-4.6 of the Zoning Ordinance suits that a ►+ritten protest
against any proposed map amendment signed and ackno►►ledged by 30 percent of the owners of properties
chase lot lines are located within 500 feet of the boundarx of area to be amended uwlusi►c of public right-
of-u.3: u ould mandate that the passage of the amendment shall require a favorable ► ote of three-quarters of
ail a:drrman elected to Ciq Council, Mr. Alterson noted that his petition. files: b% Miss Susan Walton.
purports to meet these qualifications.
Chairman Widmaycr opened the public testimony. Several members of the public srvke:
Sue Walton:
Ms. Walton stated that she is concerned with potential difficulties gening in and out of the cast,west alley
that runs along the southem end of the site. She asked Sir. Werthmann if his tragic report addressed this
alley. tiir. Werthmann stated that he studied the alley at Ridge during peak tragic hours. Ms. Walton
stated that the peak hour for this alley is during mid -morning alien the postal truclu arc coming and going.
She asked Mr. Roszak if he could guarantee that these units could be built and sold promptly. M r. Roszak
replied that sales for his other developments are going quite well.
Stanley 11 oznicki:
Mr. %ozricki stated that with this proposed development. there could be 478 living units %&ithin the block
bounded b• Church Street. Oak Avenue, Clark Street. and Ridge Avenue. Fie termed this scenario as the
definition c=f density.
Jonathan Perman:
hlr. Perman discussed the education component of economic development. He stared that ►►hen a project z
such as this one can bring nearly one million dollars to the Evanston schools and raise :.he quality of life of
thousands of families. then that is real economic development.
Dorraine Anderson:
Arts. Ander-Lon strongly encouraged the Plan Commission to take a ►en close look at hoc certain areas of
the City are rezoned or remapped.
Jo. cc Elias -
Ms. Elias informed the Commission of the length of time (four years) it has taken Mr. Raszak to construct
his Chicago A\ enue project and the several disruptions this construction has caused.
Ann Danner:
Ms. Danner stated that the affordable housing component of this project is suitable for those making a
moderate income, but it does not address very low-income individuals. She also noted that the proposed
diagonal parking along Oak Avenue is not practical or safe in that sight lines are reduced for smaller cars.
Jeanne Lindwail:
his. Lindwall stated that a residential mixed -use development is appropriate for this site However. she _
disagreed with the rezoning request. especially considering the fact that the project could be built under the
Plan CoMMITtIrm tftermg Va.). la. _rK13 1 agc
current GI underlying zoning. She also felt that utili?. sued and concrete are not appropriate
building rnate; �a;- far the tape of architecture that is heinL pro,-of-ed
F,litabeth Kari
%is. Furl state,: ;rat she is a big fan of ereenspace and requested that the rise large elm trees on the site be
retained if poss,"-:; She also stated that she ssould like to see c-m space as a priority around the
dc%elopmert %1� Roszak replied that the trees would hass to be cut do%%n to accommodate the
construction of tho project.
Reverend John \onkood;
Reverend Nor%ord of :Mount Zion Missionary Baptist Church stated that he has tried to lead his
congregation to the reality of life. that Evanston is no longer the City it u2s 30 years ago and that change
N%ill happen in L' a neighborhood.
Mimi Peterson:
GIs. Peterson stated that her biggest concern is that this proposal is not within the do►snto%ri core and that
the proposed densr, : is far too great for the underlying zoning. She added that this text amendment is
essentially spot zoning, for a specific project. Ms. Peterson also stated that it is not reasonable to suggest
that there is no impact on traffic related to this project. particularly in the aggregate.
Scott Walton:
Mr. Walton addressed the issue of %hat is the best and highest use of the property. He claimed that a
residential condo proposal is probably the lowest real estate tax generator available and that condo projects
produce virtually no jobs for the community. Mr. Walton suggested that !sir. Roszak and the Commission
look into other proposals that may pros ide more affordable permanent housing and greater real estate tax
re%cnue. such as rental housing.
Scott St% -man:
Mr. St%man felt that the underlying zoning should be changed to R6. and expressed disappointment that the
renderings of the proposal did not include the neighborhoods surrounding the development, especially
considering that there are many historic buildings in the immediate area.
Ater Anon:
Mr. Anon stated that he is opposed to this concept and the idea of dc%cloping the site to this magnitude. He
also stated that the impact of this development could be construed as a personal attack on the City of
Evanston.
Toni Bark:
%ts. Bark expressed concern with the negatise en%ironmental impact of many projects in Evanston. She
suggested using permeable pavers on this site and stated that she %as concerned with the large number of
south facing %indo%s to the proposal. as this +could require more electricity to cool theses condo units in
the summertime.
Chairman Widmayer closed the public testimom portion of the public hearing. He stated that the public
hearing %ould be continued to a special meeting of May 28. 3003 Commissioner Doetsch requested an
opportunity to discuss his opinion on the project since he %%ould not be able to attend the meeting of the
38'. Commissioner L• man interceded. asking Arthur Alterson if it is possible for the proposed project to
be appro%cd %ith the current OI underlying zoning remaining in place. %tr. Alterson replied that it would
require exceptions to the development allowances. but that it is possible for the City Council to adopt an
ordinance granting a planned development permit for this project leasing the underlying zoning as 01.
Commissioner Knutson folio%ed up with a question regarding "hat %ould happen if this planned
development %ere only half built and sold to someone else. Mr. Alterson replied that this would largely
depend on the wording of the planned development ordinance. He stated that many planned developments
ailo►t for the permitted uses of the underly ing, zoning to remain permitted uses in the planned development.
P:,2n Commssion tkdnn,T Val 14, 1)W Page 3
(rommisil:•rt_- r,:K't�, " .._.'+�:. :� = Coerm!iii,.. w'... riis :Clot: m !*:za dint tee rroposal. He stated that
he is aLairt�: *he +'::r:.._ D. ��d,r.►in,: zorsi;,� in: :ersc ,t_:. h `}=.�111eL::�l situation in s.hich the project
is not a3 S_. CCS.ti'. _... - In ,- h 'e c n-v d-% !-:1Zz- P)—a t C ommi.4sion %ould assume
that the un.ae-IN'r L D ap.n-apria:e arc .r7C . _-anct ... 1t Si:e uou'.i. tv do►eloped according to
D3 zoning C•:r-nrr:..:,%f D,%ts:h co-nnencrc %% ccti_,npt: for ie%cral aspects of the proposal.
tncluding :r: a.'�:rZa� t 't:_3" i 3P,� 13t1ta5.?.r11 _ C1Zi Zl,.M -)t cor'ctr'n5 aiih the project. including
the propoitJ 4 r .r.•, _-,e :,,:a:i:y of :he propo;a%: :+u,.,::ng .- :.rr,s.'s iespecialk the utility' brick and the
concrete bandsi. iriZ; zne P:Jiw:hr% of the lands.:.-. r :^ not -.ir.z ;ally realized due to cost constraints.
He stated rhan then: ncct_^: is b: a mechanism su &- the n-opci,.j landscaping is built and maintained, such
as a reser%e•3 lanoas:.x; t !+jdxel that is escroi►ed nd n,:-I towzn d Commissioner Doetsch stated that he
could be in favor of ih.s pr'iect if these concern= vt= add:�se3. Chairperson Widmayer continued the
public hearing to cn me_tirc oI Nlar =S. 200..
.4 i.•erbatlm transeryrt of the proceedings of rhos Pica Commission case is on file with the Evanston
Zoning Divisfom The Zoning Dirision is located in Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center.
III. PROPOSED PL+4ti.%ED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
Case ZPC 03-05 PD 1031 Sberman
.4n t' .%arhan A!r•r_! a h• �, D,r.:d Duyer, contract
pur_n.7ser uuh perntlsst�n N' 1 itr.z+r Rnr:nson proper.,
y owner, %r
a P.arxe.s Dev lopmert as a .ifrm elf special wrie permit including
st.,:n dc•tillopment allowances. cr:e; rtr,rtt to derr.ppment allowances
and other r►hel'as ma%- be nr:css:.n to crluu- redevelopment of an
ard,: N lth:rr the tIL'E. Tr_rur:r: r1l �lar:uja wring-Emplot txent
DLL r-:.i
The ,;, je.:r prorern• is conimt.-o2h kn ,uw m 1031 Sherman 1034
Clr.s:e.• Ci i:.Zga drel heard the Perm.:nent 1"C-nr1f1ta1lon 'ti'trnrben for
real fat purprase: i i -1Q-11 -t101
(;,rrer„1.`t fire prop�rseJ.t,,•t•e1.:-�r',� �•,-,:an i u•,�;Is :nnstrr.-tion ni 3
:.rii trhouse Pipe r-,:1,;:r„3. Tw hutl.:'tngs az the west
ena ; r:he propern- rill h:n'e ° zK elangs each .4 t-uil irng in the
rl:ljal i : c properly a ell h,n a r` t.'M ellings 4 parking ..reu of 13
.Cfr.Xt:f Nlt, • ::ur7}'the• e.iilr • rr -•r ;�7t'� r--r•tr;l Aah a -,:elf r-om
user 41enue. iihlch de,r,l en_! .•A "ra' ear: mast.nortron of the
,,rop r-, s north lot line. The cu..alnv will i+c ", stories tall
A motion was made r,: cort:n:le this public hearing to the special Pisa Commission meeting of May ?$,
2003 due to lack of tirrw. Tit motion was seconded and Massed unanimously.
IV. ADJOURUNNtENT
The Ev-anston Plan Comntiss:-:,r. a4tourned its meeting _t 10:39 p.m The Commission's next meeting is
scheduled for Wcdnes,:_L%. Ltd; _-S. _003 at 7:00 p.m. in tht C in Council chambers.
RespectfullWGcneral
submitted
Jeffrey Banner June 17. 2003
rW
Plan Ctonmisstun.tlre: i7o - : _ Pape
MENCTES
l:VANS7 ON I31_1N CO.M.NII5SION
V.cdncsday. Mai ?S. _"@ 6 - -:00 p.m.
Evaniton Civic Center. C-1~- Councd Chamber
MEMBERS PRESENT ............................. Sharon Bonnie. Douglas Doetsch, Albert Hunter,
Steve Knutson. John Leman. Lam Raffel. Alice Rebechini. Kenneth Rodgers, Larry Widmayer
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS ABSENT .................................................Richard Cook, Steve Samson
STAFF PRESENT......................................................................... Arthur Alterson, Jeffrey Burdick
PRESIDING................................................................................................Larry Widmayer, Chair
1. CALL TO ORDER I DECLARATION OF QL:ORL-.%f
The meetine was called to order at approximatel. 7:10 p.m. A quorum u as present.
It. PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING (Continuation)
Case ZPC 03-03 M&PD 11,00 Clara. Str"0719 Ridge Avenue:
An application by Thomas Ros_ak presiJent of TR Ridge Partners.
LLC. with permmion from The D,:k Avenue. LLC and Charles Kling
Family Trust property- rm sters. for an amendment to the Cin- of
Et-atision Zntung .tlap atid_trjr a Plar,red Det•elopment. The
applicant is the contract purchaser u, riae properties commonly
known as I IOU Clark and 1-19 Ri#e ds•enue. presentir located
is ithin the 01 011tce zoning District The applicant requests that the
00• amends the Zoning .Slap, to phj:e the abore-mentioned properly
vt ithin the DJ. Downiown Core Din e:., ment District or other such
district as the C'in• mat' deem apprupr:.;:e Further. the applicant
requests that the On -grant a plannea .:;i clopmciu as a farm of
special use including such derehipmen:.:lloc+ances and other relief
as mai- he neeessan- it, proi•ide the ur r :::.ant with the _oning relief
necessan- to alloic the redes elrpment cf 1100 Clark and 1719 Ridge
Arettue jor mule-lamih- residential u.:n .a.cesson• parking. and
commercial. sen-ice and office uses Gener.211Y. the applicant
proposes tci comtruct a multt-fainil% residential compler with the
appearance uj 6 buildings. ss ith heights From 6 to a 0 stories.
Chairman 14'idma)er continued the public hearing. He asl.ed if there were any discussion
relative to the proposed zoning change. Bruce Huard stated that the applicant no longer
finds it essential to request an underlying zoning change from 01 to d3. He requested that
the Plan Commission consider the proposal modified in that respect rather going through
the exercise of voting on a change from 01 to D3.
Plan Commusrap .t/eetink ltas 25 —'rdc3 P'Ve
Member Rebcchin: sta:cd that the development allvv.3nces it in OI planned development
v%ouid on(,. nt—r : c nnaximum of 28", units. but »he propu:a' )s t:'lr --IS units. Arthur
A terson the Zoning Ordinance pro%ides for t".- Ci:. Council to grant an
exception:. ,e %-.tIc-prlent allo%%ances. Member Reb_chint s:a:ed that she is concerned
that certain of fact for planned de%eloprnems are not -Min_ rne: by this particular
de%cloprnen% mez: n t_bl% a passible negative cumulati%e effec: or, the Cin brought on by
this developmcnt excess land use densin. Member L ,,rtan countered that this
proposal utll ha%c ; positive cumulative effect on the Cin in 7-ai the affordable housing
issue is beir.. adCretstd. and a current parking lot will be r:4e%cloped as a residential
development -that •►id add vibrancy to the City. Nlember Knutson added that another
positive effect is the provision of parking, which will not be at the City's expensc. Tom
Rosrak stated that :wwµ f fewer units were permitted. then :here L�uld N less of eventhing
else. includir e 3ror:able housing units and landscaping. Number Doetsch stated that
given that this site a transition zone betv%een dov%rno%%n and single-famii% residential, a
20-story building is :o%,- hick.
Member Lyman stattJ hat if the developer were penalized in terms of height and density,
then the qualm of the building could be diminished. He asked chat is more important,
what the building locks like, or a shorter building. !Member Hunttr countered this point by
stating that the Plan Commission should consider the overall cumulative effects of a
development and not look at a project in a singular aspect. He %%as not comfortable with the
notion of a made -off bct%%een density and a quality of a building. Member Knutson stated
that he is not troubled %%ith the density or height of the building. but by the utility brick and
coated concrete being proposed as part of the design. He stated that he would look
favorably on the project if standard -sized brick and limestone %%ere instead proposed.
Member Raffel stated that landscaping is usually the first thing to be cut when budget
constraints occur. and. in this case. if the landscaping is compromised. then this project will
fall apart because such a large pan of the project is predicated on the landscaping. He also
expressed concern reza-ding the possibility of the project failing 3,mri or stalling after one
or two phases. fie could like to see some sort of guarantee that the uncompleted portion of
the project be con%erred to rreertspace if it cannot be completed. Mr. Roszak replied that
he would be happy to provide a guarantee that would be built into the development plan.
that if at any point the proiect v%ere to staff due to economic reasons. the balance of the site
would be landscaped to an agreed upon way.
Member Rodgers stated that he is concerned that if the project %were to stop after a certain
phase: the affordable hc+using component could be affected. Nfr. Roszak stated that the
affordable housing component of the project would be split eyenh through every phase.
He also stated that he could agree to do a limestone edge in place of concrete, but that he
could not construct the entire building a ith smaller brick. just portions of it. Member
Knutson stated chat smaller brick should be used on the entire building. Mr. Roszak
suggested using a Norman size brick, which is the same height as standard brick. but is
longer. Member Knutson stated that this might be acceptable.
Member Raffel requested the inclusion of public art along the Ridlc Avenue side of the
project. Mr. Roszak stated that he talked to the Evanston Friend of the Arts group about
providing public art on tie northeast and southwest corner of the site.
A motion was made to recommend approval of the planned development as a special
use to the Zoning Ordinance. with the underl►Ing zoning of the property remaining In
the 01 District. The following conditions Here Imposed on the approval:
A substantial upgrade to the materials used in the project including the complete
replacement of ail or the utitfty brick originally planned for the exterior with
standard size or %orman brick:
The complete replacement of the concrete and/or metal edging originally planned
for the exterior %ith limestone:
Plancommus,on tfe l.eg tl:.:• :huj face
A mechanism with a bonding or similar requirement as approved by SPARC to
guarantee that the landscape plan presented will be built and maintained
satisfactorily. and in the event of any Bela-s in construction. the balance of the
parcel will be turned into an attractive greenspace amenity covered with sod.
The motion was seconded.
Member Raffel proposed additional amendments to the motion. which included the
following:
• All of the landscaping must be maintained for a minimum of two rears after
substantial completion of the particular phase of construction. The developer
shall post a performance bond of to% of the cost of the landscape supply and
installation that shall be returned upon the acceptance of the landscaping by the
Department of Parks and Forestry;
The landscape plan shall be submitted indicating the construction phasing and the
potential open space landscaped plan as part of the landscape plan construction
documents;
The Public Arts Commission shall approve the selection of sculptures to be placed
at the southwest and northeast corners of the site.
The amendments to the motion were seconded.
Mr. Hurard suggested the use of a letter of credit as opposed to a performance bond
for guarantee of landscaping. This was accepted as part of the amendment.
The landscape amendment was accepted unanimously by the Commission, as was the
public art amendment.
The amended motion was -*otcd on and passed by a rote of 7-2. Members Bowle and
Rebechini toted nay.
The public hearing was adjourned.
A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commtulan case it on file with the Evanston
Zoning Dhvislon. The Zoning Division is located In Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center.
III. PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
Case ZPC 03-05 PD 1031 Sherman
An application 4v Nothan ltipnis o b o David Disyer. contract
purchxer. with permission of l ivian Robinson. property, owner. for
a Planned Development as a form of special use permit including
such development allowances. e-rcepttons to development allowances
and other relief as mm• be necessors• to allots, redevelopment of an
area unhnn the .MU.-. Transitional .Manufacturing-Emplormeni
District
The subiect prnpern, is commonh• knots n as 1031 Sherman 1034
Custer Chicago and hears the Permanent Identification .'umbers for
real estate properly tar purposes - 11-19-117-003.
Generalh•. the proposed development plan entails construction or-3
residential " townhouse" type buildings. Two buildings at the west
end of the property, will have 1 dwellings each. R building in the
middle of the property. will have 6 dwellings. A parking area of 13
spaces will occupy the east portion of the property with access from
Custer .4 venue. which dead ends into the east most portion of the
propem s north lot line. The buildings Brill be 1':- stories tall.
Plan r.-►r usran Meeting - .4tati : 5 :t>ri3 Page
A motion +►as made to continue this public hearing to the flan Commission meeting of June 11. 2003, The
motion ►►as secondea and passed unanimously.
IV. COMMITTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS
• Binding Appearance Res iew Committee
Jeff Burdick notitied the Commission that the Planning and Development Committee has not yet directed
further stud% regarding the Binding Appearance Re►it A. Chair Widmay er requested an oftieial update on
Binding Appearance Revie►► for the next Plan Commission meeting.
• Neighborhood Planning Committee
Member Lyman stated that the previous Neighborhood Planning Committee meeting v►as quite productive.
He expected the prixess to last another three months and that in the fail the matter should be returned to the
full Plan Commission. He also noted that Member Hunter would serve as the chair for the Committee in
.Member Ly man's absence it.. the summer.
• Zoning Committee
Member Knutson stated that the Zoning Committee spent their last meeting talking about the teardown
issue in the 6's ward and that Alderman Moran is considering a moratorium on "monster houses" in the 6m
ward
• Community Development Committee
Member Rodgers stated that there was not a meeting in flay.
• Economic Development Committee
Member Rebechini stated that the Committee approved revenue sharing for the Main Street redevelopment
project at its last meeting. Furthermore. the Howard Street TiF draft was presented to the Committee.
• Parking Committee
Chair Widmayer stated that a temporary parking plan ►►as approved for the construction of the Optima
building at 800 Elgin Road. Additional street parking in the Research Park has been examined by the
Committee, as well as limiting the number of residential parking stickers for a residence to the maximum
amount of residents permitted to live in the particular residence.
• Planning and Development Committee
Chair Widmayer stated that the primary duty of the Planning and Development Committee as of late has
been the review and approval of sideHalk cafes. The proposed development at Main Street and Chicago
Avenue (900 Chicago Avenue is not being taken up until supposed meeting notice issues are resolved.
• Inclusionary Housing Committee
Member Bowie stated that the Committee is working on a too) to require affordable housing through a
possible Zoning Ordinance amendment.
V. OTHER BUSINESS/AN.NOUNCEMENTS =
Dennis Marino reminded the Commission of the Cin bus tour on Saturda}.'Nay 31, 2003. c
VI. ADJOiL'RNNIEN'T
The Evanston Plan Commission adjourned its meeting at 10:10 p.m. The Commission's next meeting is
scheduled for Wednesday. June 11. 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in the Cin Council Chambers.
Respectfully subm' ed.
Je �rdickCeneral Planner August 8.2003
Plan Commission .11eering - tf..z : 5 003 Page
MINUTES
EVANSTON PL.-XN CUNWISSION
Wednesday, June 11, 2003 / :00 p.m.
Evanston Civic Center, Room 2403
MEMBERS PRESENT .............................. Albert Hunter, Steve Knutson, Larry Raffel,
Kenneth Rodgers, Larry Widmayer
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS ABSENT...............Richard Cook, Steve Samson
MEMBERS ABSENT .............................. Sharon Bowie, Douglas Doetsch, John Lyman,
Alice Rebechini
STAFF PRESENT....................................Arthur Aitcrson, Jeffrey Burdick
PRESIDING ..........................................Larry Widmayer, Chair
1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM
The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:07 p.m. A quorum was present.
ll. APPROVAL OF PLAN COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 30, 2003
A motion was made to approve the Plan Commission meeting minutes of April 30, 2003. The motion was
seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0).
Ill. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
Case ZPC 03-05 PD 1031 Sherman
An application by Nathan Kipnis odblo David Dwyer, contract
purchaser, with permission of Vivian Robinson. property owner, for
a planned Development as a form of special use permit including
such development allowances, erceptions to development allowances
and other relief as may be necessary to allow redevelopment of an
area within the AWE Transitional 3lanufacturing-Emp4ment
District.
The subject property• is commonly known as 1031 Sherman/ 1034
Custer Chicago and bears the Permanent 1dentoration Numbers far
real estate property tax purposes: 11-19-117-008.
Generally, the proposed development plan entails construction of 3
residential "townhouse " type buildings. Two buildings at the west
end of rho property• will have 2 dwellings each A building in the
middle of the property will have 6 dwellings. A parking area of 15
spaces will occupy the east portion of the property with access from
Plan Commission Meeting - June 11. 2003 Page
L ;,.:e• -4 venue, x hich deaden,* into the e.:sr most portion &r':he
---.:-ern s north lot line. The : uildings s+i:l be:,: stories tall
The artorney for the 6es eloper. Ste\ a Engleman, asked the Plan Commission to alloy this matter to be
deferred to the rezu.L— PL= Commission meeting of July because of the ongoing dispute with regard to
whether there is permisswr. of the owner for this planned deselopment to most ahead. Without objection,
the Plan Commission deferred this matter to the Jul% Plan Commission meeting.
IV. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMDENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING
ZPC 03-06-T
To _onsider amending Section 6-15-2-2. the test of the =oning
orJznance, by deleting "cultural facility " and 'Aneral services
ercluding on -site cremation "from the list of uses permitted in the 01
District, and to consider amending Section 6-15-2-3, &. deleting
"membership organization "from the list of special cues allowed in
the O/ District.
Herbert Hill. the Ptrn assistant corporation counsel for the City, stated that the proposed amendment
eliminates "cultural facilities" and "membership organizations" from the permitted category of the 01
zoning district. This is being requested in order to make the Ordinance consistent with the order of Judge
Paul Meyer in the Vineyard vs. City of Evanston case. Judge Meyer determined that the Ordinance as
written violates the equal protection clause -- the right for free speech and free assembly provisions upheld
in the federal and store constitutions. He noted that the City does not necessarily agree with the courts
decision. Mr. Hill read a comment from Judge Meyer from the court transcript stating that "it would be a
simple matter for the City to amend its Zoning Ordinance in such a way as to satisfy the equal protection
and free speech concerns at issue in this case." Associate member Samson asked %lr. Hill if it is his
opinion that whatever action is taken here tonight, pro or con will have an impact upon any prospective
appeal. Mr. Hill replied that if the Plan Commission recommends the amendments as suggested it is his
opinion that the City would be in a much stronger position to be successful on the appeal of this decision.
He explained that this amendment would remove the classification problem and treat all the entities, which
are similar in a similar manner.
Member Hunter asked if the Plan Commission originally recommended that churches be included as
permitted uses in the Ol District when the Zoning Ordinance was updated. Mr. Hill replied that the Plan
Commission recommended that churches be a special use in the 01 District and that the City Council did
not follow this recommendation. Member Raffel asked if the action of the Plan Commission regarding this
matter would be viewed as a decision solely based on a particular applicant wanting to be in this district.
Mr. Hill replied that the Court's decision applies to all 01 districts in the City. Member Raffel felt that this
could be a reaction to a particular case. Mr. Hill stated that the Court did not request that the Ordinance be
amended one w•ay or the other. This is an attempt to amend the Ordinance in away that makes it consistent
with the City's argument in the case. Member Raffel asked Mr. Akerson if this amendment would allow
for the appropriate locations of cultural facilities and membership organizations elsewhere in the City.
Chairman Widmayer stated that if the Plan Commission feels that a certain location should not be 01, then
the language of the O 1 District should not be changed. a map amendment should be proposed to change the
zoning of that particular location.
Member Knutson moved that the 01 District is changed so to not include -cultural facility", "funeral
services" and "membership organizations" as permitted or special uses. ,Member Rodgers seconded
the motion. The motion passed 3-2, with Members Hunter and Raffel voting nay. Mr. Burdick stated
that a majority, or five members of the Plan Commission, needs to vote in favor in order for a positive
recommendation to be sent to Council. Chairman W idmayer stated that this item would be continued to the
regular July 9, 2003 Plan Commission meeting and the transcript of this hearing would be sent to the absent
members so they can cast their vote at this next meeting.
Plan Commission Meeting - June 1 /..003 Page
A verbatim m script of thr proceedings of this Plan Commission case is on file 14th the Evanston
Zoning Dtrhiom The Zoning Division is located In Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center.
V. COMMITTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS
• Neighborhood Planning Committee
Commissioner Hunter stated that the Neighborhood Planning Committee will hold its next meeting the
following Wednesday.
• Zoning Committee
Chairman Widmayer stated that the Plan Commission needs to have a recommendation in place regarding
the moratorium on single family construction in the Rl District within the 6"ward by the time the 90-day
moratorium is lifted. Mr. Alterson suggested that the Plan Commission open the public hearing regarding
this issue at its regular July meeting, but then trigger the actual public hearing to take place at the Zoning
Subcommittee level. The Plan Commission agreed to handle the process in this manner. Chairman
Widmayer stated that the Zoning Committee should be able to produce a draft ordinance that deals with
bulk/height limits in the R 1 District. Members of the subcommittee chose Thursday, June 19 at gain as the
next meeting in which this item would be discussed.
• Parking Committee
Chairman Widma?•er stated that the Parking Committee decided to install the parking meters in the
Research Paris.
• Planning and Development Committee
Mr. Altersoe informed the Committee that a proposed moratorium of multi -family development in the 5*
ward is pending and would be reviewed by the Planning and Development Committee in the near future.
Vl. ADJOURNMENT
The Evanston Plan Commission adjourned its meeting at 8:49 p.m. The Commission's next meeting is
scheduled for Wednesday, July 9, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in the Room 2403.
Respectfully submitted.
Jeffrey Burdick. General Planner
Plan Commimion Meeting - June 11. 2003 Page
September S, 2003
MINUTES
EN NISTON PLAN CON IISSION
lWednesday, J4- 9, 2003 / 7:0O p.m.
Evanston Civic Center, Room 1443
MEMBERS PRESENT .............................. Sharon Bowie. Albert Hunter, Steve Knutson,
Larry Raf'f'el. Alice Rebechini. Kenneth Rodgers, Larry Widmayer
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ...............Richar+d Cook, Steve Samson
MEMBERS ABSENT .............................. Douglas Doetsch, John Lyman
STAFF PRESENT....................................Arthur Alterson, Jeffrey Burdick. James
Wolinski
PRESIDING ..........................................Larry Widmayer, Chair
I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF Q4ORi-M
The meeting was called to order as approximately 7.06 p.m. A quorum um present.
II. APPROVAL OF PLAN COMMISSION MEETLNG MINUTES OF P*IAY 14, 2003
A motion was made to approve the Plan Commission meeting minutes of May 14, 2003. The motion was
seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0).
M. CONTI`UATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
Can ZPC 03-05 PD 1031 Shermsu
An application br .Pathan Kipnis o b o Dm•id D►tyer, contract
purchaser, with permission of Nvian Robinson, property oxner, for
a Planned Development as a form of special use permit including
such development allowances, exceptions to development allowances
and other relief as may be necessary to allow rednwlopment of an
area within the YUE, Transitional Manufacturing -Employment
District.
The subject propem• is commonly known as 1031 Sherman! 1034
Custer Chicago and bears the Permanent Identification Numbers for
real estate property tar purposes: 11-19-117-008.
Generally, the proposed development plant entails construction of 3
residential "townhouse "type buildings. Tuo buildings at the %nt
end of the propem• will have 1 dwellings each. A building in the
middle of the property it -ill have 6 dwellings. A parking area of IS
spaces will occupy the east portion of the property with access from
Plant Cammtasnon .1Meetnng — Aulr 9, : DD.3 Page
Cusrcr.Avenue. tit Ott► n dead ends; into the eau most portion aguee
prope>rt•'s north tot hre The buildings it -ill be - : stortes till.
A representain a of the de,. eloper stated that a continuance is being sought. A motion was made to grant a
continuance of this case to the August 1:. 2003 Plan Commission meeting. The motion was t-econded and
passed unanimously. (7-0).
IV. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED ZONING ORDUNANCE TEXT A-tiDE-NDMENT
PUBLIC HEARING
ZPC 03-0b-T
To consider amending Section 6-15-2- 2, the text of the zoning
ordinance, bi• deleting "cultural facility•" and 'funeral sen-ices
excluding on -site cremation "from the list of uses permitted in the Ol
District: and to consider amending Section 6-I S-2-3, by deleting
"membership organisation "from the list ofspecial uses allowed in
the Ol District.
Jeff Burdick stated that the rote regarding this case was held over from the June 11. 2003 Plan Commission
meeting because only five members were present at this meeting and the vote was 3 to 2 in favor of the
amendment. Five -otes are needed to make a recommendation to Council. The transcript of this meeting
was sent to the remaining four members absent at the June meeting with the intention of completing the
vote this evening. Of the four previously absent members, only Members Bowie and Rebechini %we
present.
Member Rebechini asked Arthur Alterson to point out the existing Ol Zoning Districts within E+triton.
She also asked if this amendment would have an affect on the proposed condo development at 1100 Clark
Street. Mr. Alterson stated that it should not. Member Rebechini asked if there are any properties that
would be grandfathered in as a result of their current use if this amendment was to pass. Mr. Alterson
stated that he did not believe so.
Members Bowie and Rebechini voted in favor of the proposed text amendment. The motion carried by ><
vote of 5-2.
A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is on file with the Evanston
Zoning Division. The Zoning Division is located in Roam 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center.
V. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING
ZPC 03-07-T
To consider recommendation to the City, Council of amendments to
the Zoning Ordinance regarding bulk standards jar lots improved
Kith residential sinictures that includes without limitation building
height, yard requirements, lot coverage and floor area ration. Said
amendments may include Chapters 3, Implementation and
Administration; 4. General Provisions: 8. Residential Districts; 13.
Transitional Manufacturing Districts; 15, Special Purpose and
awrlav Districts; 16. Off -Street Parking and Loading; 18, Definitions
and any other related sections q(the Zoning Ordinance.
Chairman Widmayer stated that the Plan Commission will hold the public hearing regarding this case at its .
Zoning Subcommittee meetings. The first Zoning Subcommittee meeting addressing this issue will take ,
place on July 17, 2003 at Sam. However, he im•ited public testimony from present audience members and
officially opened the pubic hearing.
Nate Kipnls:
Plan Commission .Meeting - July 9. 2003 Page
Mr. Kipnts stated that there are unintended consequence -of the imposed b" ward moratorium. in that it has
been imposed during the height cf the building season. Ciatrrtan Widmayer interrupted. noting that the
morawnum is not the concern of the Plan Commission. It has been passed and it is the charge of the Plan
Corrmi-•-ton to look at bulk and Height standards in the RI Zoning District. Mr. Kipniit requested that the
Plan Commission be careful to re%ieuing possible changes to the RI Zoning District and suggested looking
at nearby communities wrth inno►auve regulations that mitigate the negative effects of large infill houses.
A motion w as made to continue this public hearing to the Zoning Subcommittee meeting of July 17,
2003. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0).
.4 verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is on file with the Evanston
Zoning Division. The Zoning Division is located in Room 37, 00 of the Evanston Civic Center.
N*L CO:NILAUTTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS
• Binding Appearance Reriew Committee
Jim Wolinski stated that the Planning and Development Committee has requested that the Binding
Appearance Review Committee be resurrected to examine the current recommendations regarding Binding
Appearance Review. These recommendations include the incorporation of a Planned Development
approach to Binding Appearance Review based on size thresholds and the development of design
guidelines for single family and m-o family residential development.
Member Raffei volunteered to serve on the Binding Appearance Review Committee. The date of Friday,
July 18. 2003 and the time of Sam was set up for the next Binding Appearance Review Committee meeting.
• Neighborhood Planning Committee
Member Hunter stated that this committee would be meeting the following Wednesday evening. The
process of drafting a report is curr=tly ongoing.
• Zoning Committee
The Zoning Committee will hold the Public Hearing regarding bulk standards in the R 1 District on
Thursday July 17. 2003 at Sam.
a Community Development Committee
Member Rodgers stated that the Community Development Committee meeting will meet the following
Tuesday.
Economic Development Committee
Member Rebechini stated that the previous Economic Development Committee meeting was cancelled.
• Parking Committee
Chairman Widmayer noted that the Parking Committee meeting was cancelled.
a Inclusionary Housing Committee
Member Bow-ic stated that the Inclusronary Housing Committee is making progress in developing an
affordable housing requirement. She expected the need for a few more meetings in order to develop a
comprehensive proposal for this requirement.
a Planning and Development Committee
Chairman Widmayer reported that community comment on a proposed S'" ward building moratorium took
up most of the previous meeting. Member Knutson stated that more members of the community seemed to
be against the moratorium than for it.
VIL OTHER BUSINESSIANNOUNCENiENTS
Plan Commission .fleeting - July 4, :003 page 3
Chaunm %k ndnuyer noted that there is a deadline to st:bmit reluc-ts to the RTA for tranV. ortation studies.
lie mcaucaed tfre Plan Commission's recommendation to the Cit) Council the pre►tious year regarding the
addition of at lea.t one CTA station in Evanson along the Yellow Line. He suggested that the City apply
for the RTA stud-..
Vlll. ADJOURNNIL T
The E-.mwzon Plan Commission adjourned its meeting at 6:25 p-m. The Commission's next meeting is
scheduled for Wednesday. August 13. 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in the Rc*m 2403.
Respestfulh• submitted,
Jeffre} Burdick. General Planner September 15, 2003
k
Plan CommLwon Mecmg — July 9. 2003 Pogo
`ZINUTES
EVANSTO` PLC.\ COMMISSION
Wednesday, August 13, 2003 f 7:00 a-m-
Ex-anston Ctv-tc Center, Room 2403
MEMBERS PRESENT . Sharon Bowie, Douglas Doetsch, Albert Hunter,
Lain Raffcl, Alice Rebeclmi,
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT.... Richard Cook
!\[EMBERS ABSEti?. Steve Knutson, John L,--man, Kenneth Rodgers,
Laurance Widmayer
ASSOCIATE MEMBER ABSENT......... Steve Samson
STAFF PRESENT..... ... ............ ..ArthurAltersom Jeffrcr• Burdick
PRESIDING ......... . Douglas DoctschL. Acting Chair
L CALL TO ORDER DECLARATION OF QUORUM
The meeting was called to order at approximate) 7 I4 p.tn A quorum was pre=t.
IL APPROVAL OF PLAN COMMISSION !MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2003
Mzrnber Reberhut stated that her comments mprding the I IDO Chili Suet darlopment
proposal at this meeting v6ere not fully represented Member Hunter also fdt that certain comments he
made at this meeting were not included in the minutes Acting Chair Doasctr requested that the minutes be
amended per these commemG and continued the apprmal of the meeting minuLm to the next regularly
scheduled Plan Commisston meeting of September 10. 2003.
III. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOP%tENT PUBLIC HEARING
Caw ZPC 03-05 PD 1031 Sher msn
.4n application by Vathart Kiprus oib/o David D+nrr. contract
purchaser, with permtsnon of i loran Robinson. FrroperD owner, for
a Planned Development as a form of special use perms including
such development allowances, exceptions to developmart allowances
and other relief as may be necessary to allow redrvelopment of an
area within the 1fF-'F- Transitional kfmwfacrwvw-Employment
Dismct.
The subject property is commonly known as 1031 Sherm m 1034
Custer Chicago and bears the Permanent Iderrttfireao" i umbers for
real estate propertytar purposes.• 11-19-117-008_
Pkw Cas wanon Merting - Aupw 13, 2003 Page l
Generalh•, the proposed do e: opment plan entails construction of 3
residential "rownhouse •' npe : uildings. Two buildings of the west
end of the property- will have : dwellings each..4 building in the
middle of the property- will hmir 6 dw ellings..A parking area of 1.5
spaces will occupy the east portion of the property, w ith access from
Custer Avenue. which dead ends into the east most portion of the
propertv's north lot line. The buildings will be ?': stories tall.
Arthur Altexson notified the Commission that he received an e-mail from the applicant rcgxx Ling a
continuance of this case to the Plan Commission's regularly scheduled meeting of September to. 2003.
Aging Chair Doetsch continued this hearing to that date.
IV. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARLtiG
ZPC 03-07-T
To consider recommendation to the Cary Council of amemdments to
the Zoning Ordinance regarding bulk standards jar lots improved
with residential structures that includes without limitation building
height, yard requirements, lot cmaerage and floor area ration. Said
amendments may include Chapters 3, Implementation and
Administration. 4. General Prmtsions; 8, Residential Districts, 13,
TransitionalAtanufacturing Districts; 15, Special Purpose and
Overlay Districts; 16, Off -Street Parking and Loading; 18, Definitions
and any other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance.
Acting Chair Doetsch stated that this matter is currenth• being heard by the Zoning
Committee Subcommittee of the Plan Commission. The Public Hearing has been continued
to Wednesday, August 20.2003 at 7:00 p.m.
V. PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
ZPC 03-08 PD 80I Chicap
An application by S?S Kedtie, D.LC, property owner, for a Planned
Development as a form of special use permit including such
development allowances, exceptions to development allowances, and
other relief as may be necessary to allow redevelopment of an area
within the Cla Commercial AAwd-l;se District.
Generally, the proposed development plan entails construction of a
7-story structure with a basement and a defined gross floor area of
approximately 46,968 square jeer. containing approximately 45
dwellings and approximately 1, 334 square feet of retail floor area
The maximum absolute height ofthe new bulking would be 72.5 feet.
Acting Chair Doetsch opened the public hearing and sere in those who wished to testify. lames Murray,
attomey for the developer, expressed his conccm regarding the minimal number of voting members presem
at the hearing He proposed that the proponent go forward, make its presentation, and then defer the
ultimate vote and deliberations on this matter to the next Plan Commission mowing of September 10, 2003.
The absent commissioners would be able to read the transcript of this hearing and then participate in the
deliberations. Acting Chair Doetsch stated that he had no objections to this request.
Mr. Murray stated that public meetings were held between the developer and immediate neighbors
regarding this proposal and that the development team has adopted sm-eral of the suggestions and
recommendations that wrre made during the course of these public meetings. He introduced 17a»d
Ha3mes, project architect, as his rust witness. Mr. Ha}mes explained in detail the design specirks and
Plan Commisrian Aloenng —.august 13, 2003 Page 2
rationale for these specifics to the Coranussion Acting Chair Doetsch asked Mr. Haymes if he could
provide a more detailed and developed plan for the proposed coumard on the north side of the proposal for
the September 10. 2DD3 meeting. %ir Hay mes stated that this would be prrnided. Acting Chair Doetsch
asked if other configurations were considered in order to squeeze in the extra parking being required and
preserve the alley setback requirement. Mr. Haymtes replied that no other configurations seemed to work
and that the building has been positioned as far west as possible. Member Raffel expressed concern about
the Imd of traffic on the alley resulting from the cumulative effect of parking of this proposal and the other
residential dc►tlopments utilizing the alley. Member Rebechini pointed out that if the developer were not
seeking the additional units, the building would not be as large and the alley setback requirement could be
accommodated. Mr. Haynes replied that this is true. Member Bouic asked if there could be a designated
area for mail parking. Mr. Haymes stated that there would not be designated mail parking and that the
proposed addition of 1,300 square feet of retail space would not justify the need for retail parking. Member
Hunter asked if the developer considered going down an extra floor for parking. Mr. Haymes stated that
this was not considered due to the great expense of additional uriderground parking.
Mr. Ha%T= stated that his intent was to create a building that was fricridly to the neighborhood, meaning
something that is sensitive to the historical context of the neighborhood, but at the same time creates new
life. The design of the building would consist of a base, middle portion, and top. Associate member Cools
asked if regular sized bricks would be used. Mr. Haymes stated that these sized bricks would be used
Associate nx=bcr Cook stated that the City has had problems with renaissance stone. Mr. Haymus replied
that he would bring in samples of the building materials at the next meeting. Acting Chair Doctsch
requested greater detail as to the appearance of the north fapde of the building. Mr. Murray submitted a
copy of the north facade elevation to the Flan Commission as an vdiibit. Member Rebechini stated that the
design of the building is quite attractive, but suggested that the balcorry material be not such a sharp
juxtaposition with the rest of the materials of the facade, such as curb of masonry. Acting Chair Doetsch
inquired as to the covering of the window s for the second floor garage. Mr. Haymtes stated that the
windows would be covered in translucrrtt gIavng. Acting Chair also asked about a depiction of the alley
elevation. Mr. Haynes replied that these is not an elevation of this facade, but explained that the same
materials are tapped all the way around the entire building.
Mr. Mtmay called his next witness, :veil Ornoff, the developer. Mr. Murray asked if the project would be
feasible if the fifth floor was to be removed from the project. Mr. Ornoff replied that it would not make
economic sense whatsoever, and that every accommodation possible has been tried to douiisize the
proposal and this proposal is as tight as possible for the present site. Member Raffel stated that the
developer needs to carefully consider the details of the proposed courtyard. Mr. Murray stated that the
developer will return to the Commission with a proposed layout of the courtyard.
Mr. Murray called his next witness. Ms. Bonnie Flock. the project's traffic engineer. Ms. Flock stated that
she oonducued a study assessing the impact of the proposed development in regards to traffic generation.
Mr. Murray asked if the 20 foot wide alley was found to be appropriate for the amount of traffic it would
eventually handle. Ms. Flock replied that the alley is wider than standard alleys and can readily handle the
amount of traffic generated. She stated that the results of her study indicate that the existing traffic system
can handle the amount of traffic generated from this proposal in that the increase in traffic resulting from
this project is not significant enough to warrant geometric improvements at the various intersections and
that the levels of service at the various ituerscctions do not change as a result of this proposal. Member
Hunter asked Ms. Flock to provide her professional estimate of what would constitute a significant impact.
He stated that the traffic studies for all of these condo projects always state that there is no significant
impact, but does not address whether there is an impact in a collective sense. Ms. Flock stated that the
Illinois Department of Transportation allows for a minimum Im•el of service D at an intersection. This
project will not lower the level of service of any of the surrounding intersections. She explained that this
level of swim is based on the overall interaction delay, vehicle delay in seconds, and how long one has to
sit at an imcme+ction. Acting Chair Doetsch requested an expanded study that provides information on what
the cumulative impact of the new deyclopments on Chicago Avenue would bc.
Mr. Murray called his next witness. 4ir Steven Lenet, an urban planning and landscape architect eonsultard
to the developer. Mr. Lenet stated that the redevelopment of this property is going to provide a significant
Pltar Commissiew Me etim, — August 13. 2003 Pa re 3
benefit to the adjoining properties, which is an objective of the Evanston Comprehensive General Plan. He
added that the development could maintain a pedestrian environment in the area which fits into the
objective of the Comprehmm-e Plan stating that Evanstons neighborhoods should be maintained while
change is guided. Member Raffel expressed the concern that the market is being oversaturated with
residential that all seems similar in t)pc. Mr. L.enct replied that Evanston is the hottest market in the
Chicagoland area and can readily support this amount of residential development_
Acting Chair Doetsch opened up the public testimony portion of the hearing. The following members of
the audience spoke:
Hans Vija: Mr. Vija presented an in depth power point presentation prodding a rebuttal to the previous
petitioner testimony, He expressed concern with the uurcase in density brought on by this development
and its effect on traffic. He requested a more comprehensive traffic study done by an agency not affiliated
with the developer. He stated that the proposal drastically affects the residents lhing on the south side of
the 811 Chicago Avenue building. in that their views would now consist of a brick wall.
Douglas Geyer, Mr. Geyer questioned the benefits received by the community in exchange for the
-sanances being requested. lie felt that the requested increase in member of units from what is permitted
would not benefit the comnumity.
Jennifer Johnson: Ms. Johnson nerd a letter drafted by Peter 13erkery and Gregory Diggins, neighbors who
were not present at the meeting. The letter stated that the traffic impact of this development alone provided
sufficient basis for ejection of this application. It questioned the traffic study's assertion that the moming
nrsh hour in Evanston is only one hour long. The letter went on to assert that the market has already
factored into its valuation of 811 Chicago Avenue residences the lawful uses of adjacent properties. It is
not reasonable to assume, ho m-cr, that the market takes into account the potential for nonconforming uses
to occur on adjacent properties.
Tim Cronin: Mr. Cronin did not see a reason for Evanston to rush into redeveloping this site. He stated that
Evanston is rushing to consuuct projects that do not meet Evanston standards, but do meet developer
standards.
Sylvia N ichalsei: Ms Michaksri requested that the members of the Plan Commission visit the block in
question to see how an additional 45 units would affect such a small lot.
Nicole Close: Ms Close stated that this proposal would negatively impact the value of adjacent properties.
Michael Green: Mr. Green asked where the dumpsters for the building would be plated. Mr. Haymes
replied that the dumpsters would be placed inside the building.
Jonathan Penman: Mr. Penman deferred his comments to the September 10. 2003 meeting
Nicd Hiltt+ein: Ms Hiltwein stated that she has lived at 820 Hinman Avenue for 31 gars. She informed
the Commission that, in the lass nine years, 82 dwelling units have been built in this one-half block of _
Chicago Avenue. She stated that she was involved with the Chicago Avenue Initiative because she
believed that zoning would be key to saving her neighborhood. However, the decided CIA zoning for the
area can be circumvented thrmgh the use of a planned dcvclopment- Asa result. developerscan propose
buildings that cannot be built under the appropriate C 1 A zoning. After all the work that was done on this
initiative, it turns out the zoning changes made have nursed out to be negotiable. Ms. Hiltwein also stated
that the alley nerds more room and that the required ten foot setback along the alley is imperative for safe
L-affic flow. She stated that a project built as of right would be all that this neighborhood could absorb, and
that there cannot be am beniet in allowing a developtnent that would exceed the cure zoning
requirements.
Pim Conmi=on Meenng - August 13. 2003 Page 4
Maureen Glasoe. `is. Gla_-un stated that she objects to the proposed %ar-inces because a lot of time and
thought went into the creation of a %ision for Chicago Acme. To keep making c-uarptions is not a uise
idea m terms of the long term unpa:t on this area.
Jane Wooley: Ms. Wooley stated that this request could create a dangerm s pecxdent in that developers
would receive the message that they can push zoning linuts She noted dw this dc%rioper purchased this
property after the zoning changes to the area were implemenuui
Claudia Kocitz. Ms. Ko%itz expressed coneem with the petunial for vehicles to head cast on the
residential street of Kedge as a shon cut to Sheridan Road
Acting Chair Doetsch continued this public hearing to the ennening of September 10. 2003
A verbatim transcript of the procem ngs of this Plane Comm duion caw is ow file %*k the Evanston
Zoning DiWslon. The Zoning Di> idm is located in Roam 3700 of the Evdnum Cryk Cerrter.
VI. COMMITTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS
• Binding Appearance Rniew• Committee
Associate member Cook summarized the Binding Api, -►.., Review Soubcommium meeting earlier in the
morning. He stated that the subcommittee will draft a memo to the Plan Cammissioa with its
recom=ndations regarding the Planning and Dnvelopmetu suggestions for Binding Appearance Review.
• Neighborbood Planting Committee
Member Hunter staled that the Neighborhood Planning Committee is tomimiing to draft its report. He
anticipated the draft to be finalized in 2-3 months.
0 Zoning Committee
Acting Chair Doetsch stated that the Zoning Committee will continue the public hearing regarding balk
regulations for the RI District Height and the possibility of initiating an mr- ay district are currently the
maim topics of discussion.
• Community Development Committee
Member Rodgers was not present to report
• Economic Development Committee
Member Rebechird reported that the Economic Develop meat Committee recommended to the City Council
the redevelopment agreement of the Main Street Plaza Shopping Center.
* Parking Committee
Chair Widmayer was not present to report
• Inclusionary Housing Committee
Member Bowie stated that the IncIusiorrary Housing Comadaw meeting should be dc%eloping its
recommendations during their neat scheduled meeting,
• Planning and De•elopmemt Committee
Jeff Burdick stated that the Planning and Development Committee will hold a special meeting the
following night to solely discuss the 1100 Clark Street Piauaod Dmelopmeat proposal_
Vlm- ADJOURNMENT
'file Evanston Plan Commission adjourned its meeting at 1041 p.m. The Commission's next meeting is
scheduled for Wednesday. September 10, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Cornell Cha dxm
PIMCOMMUdarMeenng-.4repw 13. 2w—? pap
■
money BwdicL Genew pL,,.�
SCPU*..,, 2C� 2003
-Aqpw M. 2W3
pw
cp flihT F'Uah� I
MINUTES
EVA STON PLAN COMMISSION
Wednesday, October S. 2003, 7:00 p.m.
Evanston Civic Center
Citv Council Chambers
MEMBERS PRESENT ..................................Douglas Doetsch, Steve Knutson,
John Lyman, Larry Raffel, Alice Rebechini,
Kenneth Rodgers, Lawrence Widmayer
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ........... Steve Samson
MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................Sharon Bowie, Albert Hunter
ASSOCIATE MEMBER ABSENT ..............Richard Cook
STAFF PRESENT:........................................Arthur Alterson, Dennis Marino, Mary Baaske
PRESIDING ..................................................Lawrence Widmayer, Chair
I. CALL TO ORDER 1 DECLARATION OF QUORUM
Lawrence Widmayer, Chair noted a quorum was present and called the meeting to order
at 7: 09 p.m. Chair Widmayer stated that ZPC 03-49-M&T regarding Main and Chicago, ZPC
03-07-T regarding bulk amendments would be continued and not heard tonight. The Proposed
Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment ZPC 03-11-M.&T and Proposed Planned Development and
Unique Use Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment ZPC 03-12 UU & PD 1314 Ridge would be
heard at tonight's meeting.
II. APPROVAL OF PLAN COMMISSION '.MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 9, 2003
AND AUGUST 13, 2003
Kenneth Rodgers moved approval of the Minutes of July 9, 2003. Motion seconded by
Douglas Doetsch. :Notion passed unanimously.
Douglas Doetsch moved approval of the :Minutes of August 13, 2003. Motion seconded
by Larry Raffel. Motion passed unanimously.
111. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED ZONTNG ORDINANCE TEXT
AIMENDIMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 034)9-M&T
To consider arriendments to Chapters 9, "Business Distracts;- 10. "Cmrunereial Districts;" 15.
"Special Purpose and otiwlay Districts; 16, "Off-stivt Puling and t aading," 17. "Landscaping
and Screening:" 18. -Definitions." 3. "Implementation ZrA Administration;" 7, "Zoning Districts and
Evanston Plan Commission
Minutes - October S. 2003
Map;" and an% other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance, to amend the teat andoor the map of
the Zoning Ordinance to affect the regulations of the Zoning Ordinance as applied to that area of the
City presentl% W-ithin the B3 District in the vicinity of Main and Sherman and'or to rerrtap all or parts
of the following indicated area from the 83 Business District into the B2 Business District or the
C I a Cortuttercial Mix Use District or other appropriate zoning district, or to apply the ORD
Redevelopment Overlay Diwict or other appropriate overlay district.
The properties that are the subject of this Plan Commission hearing comprise,
more or less:
• all properties a portion of %hick abuts .fain Street cast of the Union Pacific right of Nay and
Nest of Hinman, and
• all properties a portion of which abuts Chicago Asrnue from a point approsimatety 200 feet
south of the center line of Alain Street to a point approximately 200 feet north of the center line
of Alain Street
These properties, which include all intervening rights of way, are identified by the following stint
addresses
• all Alain Street addresses from 500 .kfam through 603.lain;
• all Chicago Airnue addresses from 933 Chicago to 835 Chicago; and
• all even numbered Hinman Avenue addressesfrom M Hinman to 860 Hinman
Chair Widmayer stated that this item would be continued to the next
regularly scheduled Plan Commission Meeting on November 12. He said it would
be continued in part because the Plan Commission had discussed having the
Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission look at it and take initial testimony.
He said that the Plan Commission might have time to bring it back into the
Commission so if anyone is interested they should contact Arthur Akerson.
IV. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AT
1031 SHERMAN
Chair Widmayer continued this item until the Plan Commission Meeting on
November 12, 2003.
V. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT
AMENDME\'T PUBLIC HEARING
ZPC 03-07-T
To consider recommendation to the City Council of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance regarding
bulk standards for lots improved with residential strictures that includes without limitation building
height.)aril requirements, lot cosrrage and floor area ration Said amendments may include
Chapters 3, Implementation and Administration, J, General Provisions; 8. Residential Districts; 13.
Transitional Manufacturing Districts. 15. Special Purpose and a-erlay Districts; 16. Off -Street
Parking and Loading; 18. Definitions and any other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance.
Chair Widmayer said that the Zoning Committee has met and will be
meeting again on October 21, 2003 at 8:00 am. at which point they hope to
conclude this item. It will also be heard by the full Plan Commission on November
12, 2003.
Paee 2
Evanston Plan Commission
Minutes - October 8, 2003
VI. PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT A.NIENDNIEtiT PUBLIC
HEARING
ZPC 03-1 t-M&T
To consider amendments to Chapters J. "Implementation and Administration; " ', "Zoning Districts
and .1fap: " 8. "Residential Districts; " 15, "Special Pit pose and tXerlay Districts. " 16, "Off -Street
Parlsng and Loading; " 17, "Landscaping and Screening, " 15. "Definitions; " and any other related
sections of the Zoning Ordinance, to amend the test of the Zoning Ordinance to effect the regulations
of the Zoning Ordinance as applied to that area of the Cuy presently within the Ul, University
Housing District in the vicinity of Orringion and Lvwoln, and/or to remap all or parts of the
following indicated area from the Ul University Housing District into the appropriate residential
district or other appropriate coning district, or to apply the appropriate overlay district
The properties that are the subject of this Plan Commission hearing comprise, more or less, all
properties, which include all intenening rights of way. presently zoned UI on the block bounded by
Sherman Ave, Lincoln St., Orrington Ave., and Colfax St
These properties, which include all intenening rights of way, are ideal fed by the following street
addresses 725 thru 735 Colfax; 730 Lincoln; 2351 Shern=n; and 2340 thru 2408 Orrington
Paee 3
James Wolinski, Director of the Community Development Department stated that several
weeks ago City staff had a meeting with the Board of Trustees of Kendall College. At that time,
it was indicated that they wished to move to the Goose Island Property and that their property
may be going up for sale. He thought that this may be why there was a reference from Aid.
Tisdahl.
Arthur Alterson, Zoning Administrator stated that zoning addresses land uses, it does not
address land users. If the Community through its Plan Commission and City Council feels that a
university use is appropriate for this property, then leave it alone. If the Commission and the
Council feel that this property is not properly zoned under its present zoning, then the Plan
Commission should initiate discussions to change it. Zoning should not be used to address users
as opposed to uses. Chair Widmayer said that changing the zoning would not impact the current
user. Mr. Anderson replied that it would render them a legal nonconformance and would have
an impact on whoever bought the property.
Chair Widmayer said that this property was in both the local Northeast Evanston
Historical District and listed in the National Register of Historic Places. Carlos Ruiz, the
Preservation Coordinator for the City of Evanston, stated that under the current Preservation
Ordinance, the purview of the Preservation Commission would be on any exterior work visible
from the public way and the Commission has a binding review in terms of materials, Also, the
Commission has purview on any demolition of any existing buildings in historic districts. The
Preservation Commission does not have purview on the use; they do have advisory review on
zoning variation applications. Mr. Ruiz then read Section 2-9-9: Standards for Review of
Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness.
Member Rebechini moved to recommend that this property be zoned T2. There was no
second.
Evanston Plan Commission
Minutes - October S, 2001
Page 4
Member Liman moved to rezone the subject property to some form of residential,
however further study is necessary to determine a specific zoning district. Kenneth Rodgers
seconded the motion. Motion passed 6-1.
A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is on fde with the Evenstan Zaning Diritlon.
The Zoning Division is located in Room 37,00 of the Etanston Civic Center.
VII. PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND UNIQUE USE ZONING
ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING
ZPC 03.12 UU & PD 1314 Ridge
An application by Asbun Ridge. LLC, property owner, for a Unsque Use and a Planned Development
as o farm of special use permit including such development allowances, esceptiam to development
allowances, and other relief as may be necessary to allow redevelopment ofan area within the RI
Single Famity Residential Datrict Asbury Ridge, LLC is a limited liability company organised under
the laws of the State of Illinois for the purpose ofdeveloping, renovating, and marketing the existing
structures and new- homes on the isle of the former Evansion•Skokie School District 69 property at
1314 Ridge, Evanston. Illinois. Asbury Ridge, LLC consists of bfichael Nl=mand, member and
manager, and t7adinur Nov,akovic, member. The applicant requests that the City grant a unique use
and planned development on the abovr mentioned property to allow for its redevelopment. The
project includes the renovation of the existing mansion and coach house to create six condominium
units and the addition of eleven townhouses.
Generally. the proposed developmenl plan entail i restoration of the Dryden mansion and coach
house, demolition of the EXCA stucco building, and the construction of eleven new row nhouses. Ae
mansion building will be reno►ated to include four condominium units and the coach house will be
renovated to include two condominium units Eight townhouses will be located along Dempster
Street and three will be located at the northwest corner of the property. The floor area and building
height of the existing buildings will remain the same. The height of the new structures will be
approximately 34 jeer
Arthur Alterson read the application into the record. Chair Widmayer asked Mr. Alterson
for an explanation of the term "Unique Use". Mr. Alterson replied that the Zoning Ordinance --T
states -Ae purpose of a unique use permit is to allow a use which is determined by the City
Council, upon recommendation of the Plan Commission, to be an unusual one -of -a -kind use that
is not listed as an authorized use, but would be of substantial land use or economic benefit to the
City; and whose authorization would not be appropriate through a zoning amendment." He
interpreted that as a Unique Use is something that is used on a relatively rare occasion. There is
no need or cause to amend the Zoning Ordinance to include this one of a kind type use among
the permitted use list or special list, but rather to review it in the context of a surrounding zoning and zoning of the property and the principal as established in the Comprehensive General Plan
for appropriate land use decision.
Chair Widmayer said that this application was different in a number of ways. It is a
Unique Use, a Planned Development and it is located in a Historical District. He said that first
the petitioner would give his presentation after which Barbara Gardner, Chair of the Preservation
Commission, will provide the Plan Commission with the findings and recommendation of the
Preservation Commission.—
Evanston Plan Commission
Minutes - October S, 2003 Paee 5
James Murray, attorney for the Proposed PIanned Development applicant, gave his
presentation. He said that during the presentation there would be six witnesses who will attempt
to persuade the Commission of the efficacy of the use: Michael Niazmand, one of the principals;
Scott Prestangen, principal architect; Steven Lenet a land planner/landscape architect; Julie
Siegal landscape architect and landscaper of the project; Bonnie Flock, traffic engineer, and
Patricia Nagar, an appraiser who will offer an opinion relative to this project and surrounding
property.
Mr. Murray said that he and the people he was representing were here tonight requesting
the Plan Commission's recommendation that the proposal for a substantial renovation/restoration
of the Dryden Mansion be permitted to proceed. On the basis that the mansion consists of over
20,000 s.f. of usable area, it represents a substantial acquisition point for a single user.
Therefore, they propose to divide that mansion into four condominiums. The Coach House with
6,500 to 7,000 s.f. is appropriate to consider as a two unit. In addition to those two buildings,
they are proposing to add four buildings consisting of I 1 single-family residences. The four
buildings (I I single-family residences) will be predominantly placed along the Dempster
Avenue side of the property. They propose to demolish the Essca building and build a three -unit
building in its place. Mr. Murray said that they have met with the Preservation Commission and
neighbors of 13I4 Ridge in an attempt to address the issues and provide information to those
people that would be primarily impacted by whatever development would take place at this
location.
Mr. Murray next introduced Scott Prestangen, principal architect for 1314 Ridge Avenue.
Mr. Prestangen gave an overview of the project.
The Court Reporter had to leave at this point (10:40 p.m.) and the meeting was continued
to October 23, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
A verbatim tmnscript of the proceedings of thls Plan Commission care is on fde with the Evanston Zoning
Division. The Zoning Division it located in Room 3700 of the Evanston Chic Castrr.
VIII. COMMITTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS
• Binding Appearance Review Committee
Will be reported in the next minutes.
• Neighborhood Planning Committee
Will be reported in the next minutes.
• Zoning Committee
Will be reported in the next minutes.
Evanston Plan Commission
Minutes - October S. 2003
Pace b
• Community Development Committee
.Member Rodgers said that the hearings for the CDBG applicants will be on October
21 and October 27, 2003. The hearing for the City applications will be heard on
November 4, 2003.
• Economic Development Committee
Member Rebechini reported that the Howard Street TIF is on the way to Council.
• Parking Committee
Chair Widmayer reported that the Parking Committee did not meet.
• Inclusionary Housing Committee
Member not at the meeting to report.
• Planning & Development Committee
Chair Widmayer reported that with all the Planned Developments
• Lighthouse Committee
Will be reported in the next minutes.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, it adjourned at 11:07 p.m.
Respectfully submitted
1/1r. 1Jd/!!1�/ / ! /
MINUTES
EVANSTOti PLAN COM.NfISSION
Wednesday, October 23, 2003 ' 7:00 p.m.
Evanston Civic Center
City Council Chambers
MEMBERS PRESENT..................................Douglas Doetsch, Steve Knutson, Larry Raffel,
Kenneth Rodgers, Lawrence Widmayer
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ........... Richard Cook
MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................John Lyman, Sharon Bowie, Albert Hunter,
........................................................................Alice Rel=hini,
ASSOCIATE M N BER ABSENT ..............Steve Samson
STAFF PRESENT:........................................Arthur Aherson, Dennis Marino, Mary Banske
PRESIDING ..................................................Lawrence Widmayer, Chair
1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORU!4I
Lawrence Widmayer, Chair noted a quorum was present and called the meeting to order
at 7:35 p.m. He explained that this was a meeting continued from October 23, 2003 for
the purpose of reviewing the 1314 Ridge Application. In all likelihood, all the testimony
will not be heard tonight as we will adjourn at approximately at 11:00 p.m. This meeting
will be continued until the Plan Commission meeting on November 12, 2003.
11. PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND UNIQUE USE ZONING
ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING - (CONTINUED FROM
10/08/03) ZPC 03-12 UU & PD 1314 Ridge
An application by Asbury Ridge. LLC, property owner, for a Unique Use and a Planned Development
as o form of special use permit including such development allowances, exceptions to development
allowances, and other nkef at may be necessary to allow redevelopment of an area within the Rl
Single Family Residential District. Asbury Ridge. LLC is a limited liability company organized under
the laws of the State of Illinoisfor the purpose of developing, renovating, and maArting the existing
structures and new, hounes on the site of the former Evanston -Skokie School District 63 property at
1314 Ridge, Evanston,111inots Asbury Ridge, LLC consists of Michael Niarmand. member and
manager, and Yla mur Novakovuc. member. The applicant requests that the City grant a unique use
and planned development on the above mentioned property to allow for its redevelopment. The
project included the renowton of the existing mansion and coach house to create sin condominium
units and the addition of eleven townhouses.
Evanston Plan Commission
Meetine - October 23, 2003 Nee Two
Generally. the proposed detelopment plan entails restoration of the Dryden mansion and coach
house. demolition of the ESM4 stucco building. and the construction of eleven mew townhouses. ?he
mansion building will be renotnted to include four condominium units and the coach house it -ill be
reno,wed to include two condominium uniu Eight townhouses will be located along Dempster
Street and three kill be located at the northwest corner of the property. The floor area and building
height of the eluting buildings will remain the same. The height of the new structures will be
approximately 34 feu
Chairman Widmayer explained the Public Hearing process to those citizens in attendance
and swore in members of the public who wished to speak. He asked Mr. James Murray,
attorney for the Proposed Planned Development applicant, to present the proposed
development. James Murray said that Mr. Niazmand was not able to be here and his wife
would represent him. Marcia Niazmand said that her husband had asked her to apologize
for his absence tonight, his mother was gravely ill. Mrs. Niazmand said that her
husband's goal of purchasing this property has always been to preserve the historic
integrity and the beauty of the main buildings and to make this a development that
Evanston could be proud of. Mr. & Mrs. Niazmand are residents of Evanston and have
been for 17 years.
Mr. Murray introduced members of the development team and presented in detail the
development proposal. Julie Siegal, landscape designer explained the plans for
landscaping and how they would try to keep as many trees possible and replant those that
had to be taken out.
Thomas Harmening, Real Estate Appraiser, explained the results of his appraisal and how
the surrounding homeowners would benefit,
Bruce Shrake, Traffic Engineer, explained his traffic study in detail and also stated that
the new development would only mean an additional eleven or twelve cars during
morning and evening peak rush hours.
Steve Lenet, Landscape Architect/Urban Planner, spoke of the tax benefits the proposed
development would bring to the school district and to the City. After consulting with the
Illinois School of Consulting Services in Naperville, Illinois he projected the number of
children that would be living in the new development would be a total of eight
elementary school students at any one time and four high school students at any one time.
Mr. Lenet told of the deteriorated condition of the mansion and the outbuildings because
of the long periods of negligence. He spoke of the beneficial impact of development at
other sites in Evanston. Mr. Lenet said that the location of this property, the character
and the size of the property and the significance of the main building make this is a
unique site and clearly qualifies as an Unique Use.
Scott Prestangen, architect with Parallel Architecture accepted questions from the Plan
Wi—
Commission. Questions were asked regarding the height of the existing buildings and the
Evanston Plan Commission
Meetine - October 23. 2003
Paee Three
proposed development. Mr. Prestangen showed materials that would be used in the
driveway and pedestrian walknvay.
Barbara Gardner, Chair of the Evanston Preservation Commission reported that the
Commission held four meetings regarding the 1314 Ridge Development. She said that
the Preservation Commission is a body that reacts to a proposal that is brought to them.
They do not suggest anything in terms of design standards to anyone; they may make
some changes or deny it and say they will approve something else. The meetings
involved discussing the proposed development; members of the community came and
spoke about what they would like to see at that site. At the June 11, 2003 meeting,
members discussed the excellent proposed restoration of the property. The Preservation
Commission voted for the restoration of the Dryden Mansion and the Coach House. (The
two votes taken for the restoration of the mansion and coach house were both passed
unanimously with one abstention.) The Preservation Commission had asked the
Developers to save the ESCCA building, but were told it could not be saved. The
members voted in favor of the demolition of the ESCCA building, the motion passed by a
vote of 5 to 2. She wanted to state that the Preservation Commission did not tell the
developers to develop rowhouses. In their discussions, there was one Commissioner that
suggested rote houses at one of the meetings.
After the project presentation, Chairman Widmayer opened the public testimony. Several
members of the public spoke regarding this proposal. The public testimony reflected the
many concerns of citizens regarding this project. Chief among these concerns were the
height and density of the proposal, the proposal's traffic generation, keeping the character
of the historical district, keeping as much green space as possible, the preservation of the
trees currently on the property, the unsuitability of row houses, and a preference for
single family homes. Many citizens commended the restoration of the mansion and
coach house.
Chairman Widmayer noted that this hearing will be continued due to a letter addressed to
the Plan Commission from a resident within 250 feet of the project requesting a
continuance in order to allow time for a rebuttal of the petitioner's testimony. The Plan
Commission continued this public hearing to Wednesday, November 12, 2003 at 7:00
p.m.
A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is on file with the Evanston Zoning
Dbidon. The Zoning Division is located in Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center.
Evanston Plan Commission
Meetina - October 23. 2003
ADJOURNMENT
Page Pour
There being no further business before the Commission, it was adjourned at 10:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Baaske
Planning Division
MINUTES
EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION
Wednesday, November 12, 2003 ' 7:00 p.m.
Evanston Civic Center
City Council Chambers
MEMBERS PRESENT ................................Douglas Doetsch, Steve Knutson, John Lyman,
......................................................................Larry Raffel, Alice Rebechini, Lawrence Widmayer
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ........... Steve Samson
:MEMBERS ABSENT ...................................Sharon Bowie, Albert Hunter, Kenneth Rodgers
ASSOCIATE MEMBER ABSENT ..............Richard Cook
STAFF PRESENT:........................................Arthur Alterson, Dennis Marino, Mary Baaske
,.............................................
I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM
Lawrence Widmayer, Chair noted a quorum was present and called the meeting to order
at 7:10 P.M.
II. APPROVAL OF 1NEETING MINUTES FROM OCTOBER 8, 2003
Member Raffel made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 8, 2003 Plan
Commission meeting. Motion was seconded by Member Rebechini. Motion passed
unanimously.
II1. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND UNIQUE
USE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING
ZPC 03-12 U & PD 1314 Ridge
An application by Asbury Ridge, LLC, property owner, for a Unique Use and a Planned
Development as a form of special use permit including such development allowances, exceptions
to development allowances, and other relief as may be necessary to allow redevelopment of an
area within the RI Single Family Residential District. Asbury Ridge, LLC is a limited liability
company organized under the laws of the State of Illinois for the purpose of developing,
renovating, and marketing the existing structures and new homes on the site of the former
Evanston -Skokie School District 65 property at 1314 Ridge, Evanston, Illinois. Asbury Ridge,
LLC consists of Michael Niazmand, member and manager, and Vladimir Novakovic, member.
The applicant requests that the City grant a unique use and planned development on the above
mentioned property to allow for its redevelopment. The project includes the renovation of the
existing mansion and coach house to create six condominium units and the addition of eleven
townhouses.
Continued until the Plan Commission meeting date of December 12, 2003.
A rerbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is on file with the Evanston ZonLNg
Dirb on. The Zoning Division is located in Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center.
Evanston Plan Commission
Minutes - Novernber 1-1. ?003 Page Two
1%'. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOP1tENT PUBLIC
HEARING ZPC 03-05 PD 1031 Sberman
An application by Nathan Kipnis o/b/o David Dwyer, contract purchaser. with permission
of Vivian Robinson, property owner, for a Planned Development as a form of special use permit
including such development allowances, exceptions to development allowances and other relief
as may be necessary to allow redevelopment of an area vithin the MUE, Transitional
Manufacturing Emplor7nent District.
Plan Commission closed heating upon applicant's withdrawal of petition.
A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commi"ion case is on flle Wuh the Evanston Zoning
Divislom The Zoning Division Is located In Room 3700 of the Eremron Civic Center.
V. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEX-r
AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 03-07-T
To consider recommendation to the City Council of amendments to the Zoning
Ordinance regarding bulk standards for lots improved with residential structures that includes
without limitation building height, yard requirements, lot coverage and floor area ration. Said
amendments may include Chapters 3, Implementation and Administration; 4, General
Provisions; S. Residential Districts; 13, Transitional Manufacturing Districts; IS, Special
Purpose and Overlay Districts; 16, Off -Street Parking and Loading; 18, Definitions and any other
related sections of the Zoning Ordinance.
Plan Commission on a vote of 6-0 recommended City Council approval of text
amendment changing some residential bulk requirements and creating a neighborhood
conservation overlay district.
A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is on file with the Evanston Zoning
Division. The Zoning Division is located in Room 3700 of the Eswoon Civic Center.
V1. Zoning .%carp Amendment Public Hearing ZPC 03-13-M&T (Map Amendment)
To consider amendments to Chapters 8, "Residential Districts;" 17, "Landscaping and
Screening;" 18. "Definitions;" 3, "Implementation and Administration;" 7, "Zoning Districts and
Map;" and any other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance, to amend the map and/or the text
of the Zoning Ordinance to affect the regulations of the Zoning Ordinance as applied to that area
of the City presently within the 6th Ward and zoned within a residential district. This hearing
may include among other considerations a prospective recommendation to the City Council to
place parts or all of the subject area within an overlay district not yet established within the
Evanston Zoning Ordinance, or to apply another appropriate overlay district.
The properties that are the subject of this Plan Commission hearing comprise, more or
less all properties within the City of Evanston presently within the Rl, R2, R3, R4, RS, and R6
zoning districts that tie west of the following described line;
Evanston Plan Commission
Minutes - November 12.2003 Page Three
commencing at Isabella on the north, along Malnut south to Central, along Central
east to Pioneer, along Pioneer southivest and south to Pm ne, along Payne ticest to
McDaniel, and along.11cDanlel southarest to Elgin Road
Chair Widmayer swore in those people wanting to testify at this hearing. Members of the
public spoke regarding the Zoning Map amendment ZPC 03-13-M&T. The public testimony
reflected the manv concerns of citizens regarding this proposal, Their concerns included exactly
replacing the home in case of a casualty, being told what kind of house you can build, and the
fact that it was not the size but the design of the big house that was the trouble. Several citizens
felt that this Ordinance was being proposed by a few people in the sixth ward, not the majority
and urged the Plan Commission to not pass this Ordinance.
The reasons speakers supporting this proposal gave for supporting it were their concerns
for big oversized homes being built in the Sixth Ward, the problem with sewers that a big home
would cause, the flooding that big homes cause on adjoining property, and the big homes
dwarfing the homes next to it and stopping the sunshine from entering the smaller house. Some
speakers commended the City Council, the Plan Commission and Arthur Alterson on their hard
work regarding the moratorium.
Chair Widmayer closed the testimony and thanked the people for speaking.
Arthur Alterson read some additions/changes to the Zoning Ordinance into the record that
he said he had rethought since he wrote the original zoning.
After much discussion among Commission members it was said that this overlay could
be applied to every ward in the City, it would just need the Alderman to come to the Plan
Commission and request it.
Member Knutson moved that the Plan Commission send the text amendment as revised
on November 12, 2003 to City Council with a positive recommendation adding that City Council
at a later time may consider adding expanding the overlay district or extending this throughout
the City. Member Doetsch seconded the motion. All members voted aye passing the motion by
a vote of6-0.
Arthur Alterson reminded the Commission that there is the question of should this apply
to the entire 6`h Ward or to selected areas in the 6's Ward. Chair Widmayer said that this
amendment is applied by streets and if the 6`h Ward changes in two weeks, it will still be defined
by streets. Member Raffel moved to adopt standards for the amendments for the Zoning
Ordinance. He said the wisdom of amending the text of the zoning ordinance or zoning map is a
matter committed to the sound legislative discretion of the City Council and is not controlled by
any one standard in making their determination; however, the City Council should in
determining whether to adopt or deny or to adopt some modifications of the Plan Commission's
recommendation consider among the other factors the following: A) Whether the proposed
amendment is consistent with the goals and objectives and policies of the Comprehensive
Evanston Plan Commission
:Minutes - November 12. 2003 Paee Four
General Plan as adopted and amended from time to time by the City Council; B) Whether the
proposed amendment is compatible with the overall character of the existing development and
immediate vicinity of the subject property; C) Whether the proposed amendment will have an
adverse effect on the value of adjacent properties; and D) The adequacy of public facilities and
services. Having met those standards, member Raffel moved to adopt the amendment standards
and findings which comprise, more or less all properties within the City of Evanston presently
within the Rl, R2, R3, R4, R5, and R6 zoning districts that fie west of the following described
line:
commencing at Isabella on the north, along 9'alnut south to Central, along Central
east to Pioneer, along Pioneer south ►vest and south to Pane, along Payne svesi to
McDaniel, and along McDaniel south►sesr to Elgin Road
member Lyman seconded the motion. Members Doetsch, Knutson, Lyman, Raffel, Rebechini,
and Widmayer voted aye. The Plan Commission voted 6 to 0 to recommend to City Council
placing all residential zoned property in the 6`s Ward into a neighborhood conservation overlay
district.
A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case Is on file with the Evanston Zoning
Division. The Zoning Division is located In Roan 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center.
VII RECOMIMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING BINDING
APPEARANCE REVIEW
The Plan Commission voted 5 to 1 to approve the memo to City Council regarding
binding appearance review and minimum thresholds for planned developments.
A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is on frle with the Evanston Zoning
Division. The Zoning Division is located in Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center.
VIII. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT
AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 03-09-M&T
To consider amendments to Chapters 9, `Business Districts;" 10, "Commercial Districts;"
15, "Special Purpose and Overlay Districts; 16, "Off -Street Parking and Loading;' 17, _—
"Landscaping and Screening;" 18, "Definitions;" 3, "Implementation and Administration;" 7, ---
"Zoning Districts and Map;" and any other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance, to amend
the text and/or the map of the Zoning Ordinance to affect the regulations of the Zoning
Ordinance as applied to that area of the City presently within the B3 District in the vicinity of
Main and Sherman and/or to remap all or parts of the following indicated area from the B3
Business District into the B2 Business District or the C l a Commercial Mix Use District or other
appropriate zoning district, or to apply the ORD Redevelopment Overlay District or other
appropriate overlay district.
Evanston Plan Commission
Minutes -November 12. 2003
less:
Paee Five
The properties that are the subject of this Plan Commission hearing comprise, more or
* all properties a portion of which abuts Main Street east of the Union Pacific right
of way and west of Hinman; and
* all properties a portion of which abuts Chicago Avenue from a point
approximately 200 feet south of the center line of Main Street to a point
approximately 200 feet north of the center line of Main Street.
These properties, which include all intervening rights of way, are identified by the
following street addresses:
* all Main Street addresses from 500 Main through 603 Main;
* all Chicago Avenue addresses from 933 Chicago to 835 Chicago; and
* all even numbered Hinman Avenue addresses from 904 Hinman to 860 Hinman
This was continued to the meeting of December 12, 2003.
A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission case is on file with the Evanston Zoning
Division. The Zoning Division is located in Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center.
This portion of the Plan Commission meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m. All members
voting aye to adjourn.
The regular Plan Commission meeting continued at this point.
IX, COMMITTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS
* Binding Appearance Review Committee
Chair Widmayer stated that the Binding Appearance Review Committee has submitted a
letter to be forwarded to Council in response to Council's request for consideration of
single family and two family residential construction as part of the Binding Appearance
Review. Member Knutson moved that the Plan Commission accept this letter as it is
written without change and send it back to the Planning and Development Committee
(P&D). Motion seconded by Member Doetsch. Chair Widmayer said that it was
understood that this letter would be attached to the original Site Plan & Review Site
Standards and returned to P&D as a package. After discussion by the Plan Commission
the motion was approved 5-0.
* Neighborhood Planning Committee
John Lyman asked members to attend the November 18 Neighborhood Planning
Committee. He said the major issue was how to handle the R5 zoning area of Ald.
Kent's 51h Ward.
• Zoning Committee
* Community Development Committee
* Economic Development Committee
Evanston Plan Commission
Minutes • November 12, 2003
* Parking Committee
• Inclusionary Housing Committee
* Planning & Development Committee
* Lighthouse Committee
X. OTHER BUSINESS
Xl, ADJOURsMI [EN'T
The Commission adjourned at 11:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted
Mary E ke
Planning Division
Paee Six
f
0
MIN"J T £S
EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION
Wednes_ay, Decamher ::. 2Z:3 / 7:0 ^.n.
Evans=cn __.-- Cen_er
Litt' CrJunzi- Zhambers
XEM7 =RS PRESENT Shar :n Bowie Douglas Doetsch,
A_her_ Hunter, Steve Knutson, John
Lyr.an, Larry Raffei, Kenneth
Rcd?ers, Lawrence Widmayer
ASS::ZATD MEMBERS = RESENT
MEMBERS ASSENT
STAFF PRESENT:
Rizha d Cock, Steve Samson,
Alice Rebechini
Arth=r Alterson, Dennis Marino,
Mary Saaske
I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM
Lawrence Widmayer, Chair noted a quorum was present and called
the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
II. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 12, 2003
Richard Cook mc-:ed approval of the minutes of November 12,
2003. ;lotion seconded by Kennet: Rodgers. Motion passed
una':_nousl .
III. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND UNIQUE USE
ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING
ZPC 03-12 U & PD 1314 Ridge
An application by Asbury Ridge, _',LC, property owner, for a
Unique Use and a Planned Devel:,pment as a form of special
use permit inclaiding such development allowances,
exceptions to development allowances, and other relief as
may he necessary to allow redevelopment of an area within
the .._ Single Family Resident al District. The applicant
requests that :he City grant a unique use and planned
development on :he above -mentioned property to allow for
its redevelopment. The project includes the renovation of
the existing mansion and coach house to create six
condominium units and the addition of eleven townhouses.
_ecember
10, 2003
Page "Wo
_.._ Y.. I icant
represented
b:% --_s attorre1 ,
.'_.-, Y-.bray asked
°c: a _t.._-nuance c'
-his case
...___ _: a Jaruar_%
14, 2004
mee__._ the Plan
Commission.
--'-ere being no
objections from
..�s=ion, the
continuance
was =_anted.
A verbati= transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission
case is on file with the Evanston Zoning Division. The Zoning
Division is located in Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center.
IV. CONTINUATION OF PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT
PUBLIC HEARING ZPC 03-09-MST
Tc consider amendments to Chapters 9, "Business Districts;"
,0, "Commercial Districts;" 15, "Special Purpose and
Cverlay Districts; 16, "Off -Street Parking and Loading;"
:7, "L. ndscaping and Screening; " 23, "Defini tions; " 3,
"r:n-7ementation and Administration;" 7, "Zoning Districts
and Map;" and any other related sections of the Zoning
Grd::r_ance, to amend the text anal/or the map of the Zoning
Grdi::ance to affect the regulations of the Zoning Ordinance
as an lied to that area of the C_ ty presently within the B3
ristrw:t in the vicinity of Ma -in and Sherman and/or to
remap all or parts of the following indicated area from the
E-3 Pusiress District into the B2 Business District or the
C:a Cc..-ercial Mix Use District or other appropriate zoning
district, or to apply the oRD Redevelopment Overlay
D:s_r:ct or other appropriate overlay district.
The ^==perties that are the subject of this Plan Commission
:zear_'::g comprise, more or less:
all properties a portion of which abuts ;rain Street
east of the Union Pacific right of way and west of
.._rman; and
all properties a portion of -which abuts Chicago Avenue
f c.m a point approximately 20D feet south of the
cer.-ter Line of Main Street to a point approximately
2v: feet north of the center line of Main Street.
These properties, which include all intervening rights of
way, are identified by the following street addresses:
a_? 1Sain Street addresses from 500 Main through 603
Main;
10, 2C�C
Paae Three
all �hicago Avenue addresses frcm 933 Chicago to 835
and all ever, numbered :?;:.,..a : Avenue addresses from
3C- to 860 ?iir^an
Cont_n-_,Ad to the January 14, 2004 Plan Commission Meeting.
A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission
case is on file with the Evanston Zoning Division. The Zoning
Division is located in Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center.
V. PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING
ZPC 03-14 PD 1100 Clark/1719 Ridge
An a:psication by Thomas Roszak, TR Ridge Partners, LLC,
with per:z_ssion from The Oak Avenue, LLC, property owner,
for a : l arned Development as a form >f a special use permit
including such development allowances, exceptions to
develcp:nenr- allowances, and other relief as may be
necessary to allow the redevelopment of 1100 Clark and 1719
Ridge :•erue for multi -family residential with accessory
parkir.�, and commercial, service, and office uses. The
property is located in the 01 Office District.
Genera_ y, the applicant proposes to construct a multi -
family residential complex with the appearance of 4
buildings each with an eight -story height. The proposal
has t^.e following characteristics:
Approx_mateIy 237 dwelling units (222 apartments/condos &
15 townhouses);
- a hu_lding lot coverage of approximately 76t;
- a =leer area ratio of about 2.1;
- a .,.aximum building height of 7C feet to the top of the
parapet,
- approximately 868 parking spaces, of which about 306
a;e to fulfill the parking requirement for the
o``;ce/commercial building at 1007 Church;
the pro ect, though with some ground level office space,
does rot i.,elude retail or service uses at the ground level
of all pornions that front a dedicated public street; and
the complex as laid out provides yards or setbacks as
follows with neither front nor street side yard being built
inflexibly to the lot line:
- no less than approximately 22 feet along Ridge
- no less than approximately 2 feet along Oak
- no less than approximately 12 feet along Clark
.-...'3-_.. . _an CoiTmisS-....
:'_.._=es - December 2 _ Pale Four
rc less than 0 fcot a l cr._a =he south l o c line, adjacent
to an alley.
A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of this Plan Commission
case is on file with the .Evanston Zoning Division. The Zoning
Division is .located in Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Centex.
The applicant asks for a special use through a planned
develct-mert permit in the C1, office District for multi -family
dwellings, development allowances, and exceptions to development
allowances as to building height, yard requirements, and floor
area ratio.
Chair Widmayer swore in those people wanting to testify at
this hearing. Members of the public spoke regarding the
Prorosed Planned Development - ZPC 03-14 Pd - 1100
Clark/1719 Ridge.
Thomas Roszak, stated that he is the principal at TR Ridge
Partners and at Roszak ADC, LLC. He explained that this will be
the fifth project he has done in Evanston. He introduced his
team of expert witnesses: Bruce Huvard, attorney; Kathryn Talty
from Douglas Hills Associates, landscape architect; Gary Wiss,
civil engineer; Jill. Steen, from S,.S. Friedman & Company,
fiscal impact consultant; Erick Doersching from Tracy Cross
Associates, market analysis Consultant; Michael Workman with
KLCA, traffic engineer; and Don Wollin from Wollin Gomnex, an
associate architect.
Mr. Roszak presented the development proposal in detail.
He explained that there would be a total of 237 units which
includes 222 Condominiums and 15 towrho-mes. There are 336
parking spaces for the office and 362 parking spaces for the
condos, which meets the zoning ordinance requirement. The
condos vary in size from approximately 600 feet, up to 2,600
square feet. Townhomes vary from 1,350 to 2,400 feet. There
are 30 unique floor plans to give homebuyers more choices than
the rest of the market in Evanston. The height of the buildings
is eight stories. He explained the layout of the condos, the
townhomes, and the landscaping. Mr. Roszak said that his themes
are openness, connectivity, pedestrian friendliness and spaces
expending out. A slide presentation showed the proposed
..l. utes ✓�. �G...�J �'� 1. , L _ _
aqe Five
Avelcpmen: building plate7en4, street entrances and exits, and
landscaping. He explained that this development would he done
in phases. The first slide of Prase 1 shows Building A located
in the southeast corner. That building and the associated
parking that goes with the office will be done first. The slide
of Phase is showed that Building B will be on the northeast
corner and Phase Al will be in the southwest corner, and phase
IV will be on the northwest corner. He said that the project
would take about three years for buildout. Other slides showed
building and floor layouts, landscaping, five different water
features, and street placement.
Mr. Roszak showed a sample of the brick that will be used
an the development. The brick is a Norman sized Endicott brick
called Desert Iron Spotlight. Indiana limestone will be used,
as will copper panels.
Mr. Roszak introduced Jill Steen with SB Friedman. Ms.
Steen said that S.B. Friedman & Company completed the fiscal
impact study for the proposed 1100 Clark Street development
based on the revised development program. She said that she
would address the three standards in the Evanston Zoning
ordinance that the project most satisfy for the special ~use and
the planned development approvals Mr. Roszak is requesting.
These included section 63510(b)part 1, Chapter 3, regarding the
housing goals and objectives. The second one is section
6363(g) public benefit in terms of enhancing the local economy
and strengthening the tax base; and the third is section
51519A2(g) regarding the impact on schools, public services and
facilities. in order to estimate the potential fiscal impact of
the proposed project, they estimated annual reoccurring revenues
and expenses that would be generated by the project using the
average cost of revenue approach. Three major taxing
jurisdictions were focused on that would be affected by this
development including the City of Evanston, School District 65
and School District 202. Ms. Steen gave examples of how the
proposed planned development followed the three Zoning ordinance
standards.
Ms. Steen said that she estimated the project would
generate an annual surplus of $800,000 per year for the three
tax districts combined. This included a surplus of over
$140,000 per year for the City of Evanston, $361,000 per year
for School District 65 and $294,000 per year for School District
':_..motes - Dece"::er 10 2 - - - ?aqe Six
2:2. she said t::at overa_! ._a'se :n their analysis she believes
the arc-ert satisi..es - :e .ree standards of the zoning
_c�F that they were aske--4 -address. The project enhances
c. erty values and diver_;:__; cf housing in Evanston; generates
surwlus over expenses which w__1 help relieve the property tax
Buren on property owners; enhances the local economy by
strengthening the tax base and strengthens jobs; and it has a
p,-c-Live impact on public schs=Is and facilities.
Ms. Steer, answered q.:es:.ions from the Plan Commission.
Mr. Roszak introduced Erik Doersching, vice president with
Tracey Cross and Associates. 'fir. Doersching stated that he had
cord•.:cted a market feasibility analysis for the proposed ilea
Clark/1719 Ridge Street development. He said he would address
t'n.e following standards in the Evanston Zoning Ordinance that
their project crust satisfy for the special use and planned
development approval they are requesting: Section 6351 B and D
standards and special uses; Section 63639{e) as related to
public agencies; section 61519'a)2C under planned developments;
and section 61519(b)6 site controls and standards for planned
developments.
Mr. Doersching said that the E'vanston's condominium market
remains very strong and for the first nine months of this year
the :hew construction condo mer., ersh_u is 315 units. The upward
tre..d in activity has occurred, for several reasons. Prices
amcng condominium developments :n Evanston compare Favorably to
the City of Chicago for like product. in the City of Chicago
c,.:rrent condo prices have risen to an average rate of $370 per
square foot, and among new construction alternatives in Evanston
are in the $285 to $300 per square foot average.
He said that the ability of Evanston to attract condominium =-
purchasers from Chicago and the north shore is based on more -
:han .ust price and supply. Evanston has provided a number of
entertainment options, dining chcoces, special use shopping.
1t's gc= a thriving center for b::s ness, professional business.
�t has the environment of a maj:,r university. All of these
faces coupled with the two variables have made Evanston very
appealing to a wide variety of consumers within a reasonable
distance. For the local Evanston consumer, such as the more
mature buyer, the condominium product form provides a very
desirable move -down alternative. Currently Evanston's single
_: ans,:n Plan
.:Y n_tes - ze=e7— .er 1C, 2 : Y _
_aqe Seven
family resales are mc: _ng at an annual We of about 600 units
and at a medium price. T a_'s currently what's occurred over
the last 12 mcntrs. For those consumers who are moving down,
desires of moving down or moving laterally in terms of price are
looking for a maintenance free environment, the condominium
market and new construction condo=iniums provide that product
line and an alternative for that segment of the market.
There's additional support as well for this particular
project and for Evanston ccndomin_um development overall.
Currently Evanston is second only to the City of Chicago as a
24-7 living environment. it has now evolved with the necessary
elements to address work, life and play. Evanston is located
within a reasonable distance of 2.2 million jobs. There's
45,000 jobs within Evanston. Evanston is closer to the center of
employment by half the distance than any of the other developing
areas in the Chicago region, and therefore dust on the basis of
proximity with housing supply, new construction housing supply
being made available, it has a tremendous advantage over other
areas of the region. Mr. Doersching said that there is still
enough demand potential for this area to absorb 300 units
annually. 1_ was his ccnzenticn that the 1100 Clark Street
development would perform well in the Evanston market and would
not negatively effect the housing surrounding the property, but
may possibly increase the value over nearby units over time.
Mr. Doersching then answered questions from the Commission
members.
Mr. Roszak introduced Michael Workman, traffic engineer
with KbOA. bar. 'Workman stated that he is a licensed
professional engineer in the State of Illinois, that he has 13
years of experience and has previously worked in Evanston. The
sections that he addressee included section 63510(b) and (f),
standards for special uses; section 6363(h, public benefits, and
section 615191a), 182(f)planned developments. Most of these
deal with the questions of adequate parking and additional
parking and the impact of traffic on the existing flows in the
area. He said that the project has been reduced by 145 units.
This amounts to a 40% reduction in the number of units and a 40W
reduction in the volume of traffic that the project will
generate. As was discussed the last time, given the proximity of
the development within the downtown area and to the
transportation hub, the volume of traffic that will be generated
7,.3ns_cn Plan
:.:n ':=es - 7--_=e per _ 2 C
rase Eight
hl _h_ de•.e_ _-.ent will ice rec-:ced -more _:en the fact that
peccle :! i use public transportation to CoRm;:te to and from
pork. The 2L32 , the 2000 census data _nd_cates that over 35
percent of Evanston residents either cor.-=,.:te to work or work at
home. They do not drive an autc. And more importantly it's
location in the downtown and thriving dowrtown area. People
will walk tc the restaurants cr walk to shop, which all helps to
reduce the volume of traffic =hat the project will generate.
A comparison of the volume of traffic that this development
will generate compared to the existing 01 office zoning on the
site was done, the project is expected to generate approximately
one-third the volume of traffic that would he generated by the
maximum office development that could be developed on that site.
This is during the peak hours, during the critical times on the
roadway system.
The project will generate approximately 80 to 85 trips in
the peak hours. Office development would generate 250 to 540
trips. As such, you can see the proposed development will have
a far less impact than the office development that could be on
that site by right.
All of the -intersections and roadways within the immediate
vicinity of the site surrounding the site will continue to
operate at an acceptable level of service. There's sufficient
reserve capacity to accommodate the traffic that will be
generated by the site.
Further, per the request o'_ the City he also looked at the
triangle just north, the Ridge Emerson Greenbay triangle. Two
of the three intersections in that triangle currently work at an
acceptable level of service. One of them, Emerson and Ridge is
operating at a 'level service E. However our impact on that is
not significant. There is an approximate two to three percent
increase in traffic and maybe a two to three second increase in
delay. The project will have some impact, but it will not be
that significant.
Access to the site is basically the same as it was in
the previous proposal. The project will have one main drive
that will serve the residential. That will be a two-way drive.
in addition, the parking garage will have two drives, and those
will be one way drives. One way in and one way out, and
�:anSZC ._an
::_n..tes - �ece-��er , 20=3 Pace :sire
rovides some -=.. flexibility ven the minimum volume of
traffic on Cak. ::o separate _eft turn lanes are required to
accommodate this traffic. In addition, there will be an
emergency access at the western end of the site. Emergency
vehicles will ie _hle to drive right through the development if
required.
Regarding parking, the project is providing angled parking
on Oak and Clark Street which will result in approximately 20
additional on -street parking spaces that will serve the area.
The project meets its own needs, meeting the requirements, the
zoning requirements as such.
The impact cn the public alley from the development is
going to be very minimal for a number of reasons. One, there is
direct access to Ridge by going north and then west. One can
also go directly south to Church which gets them right to the
collector roadway system where they want to go.
in conclusion, he said that he believed that the project meets
these standards that were addressed earlier for several reasons.
One of the facts ;s the improvement that is going to be
provided, the G_eenbay merge which reduces the traffic on Oak
and Clark; two is the fact that the number of units has been
reduced by 40 percent on the development; three is the fact that
it's located within a downtown area that will reduce the total
volume of traffic that will be generated; four, the
intersections within the area have the capacity to accommodate
this traffic; five, :he site access system has been designed to
provide safe and efficient access to the site with minimal
interruption on to thru-traffic; and lastly, the projects meets
the parking requirements and is providing the additional parking
on street. Mr. Workman answered questions from the Commission
members.
Mr. Hu-rard introduced Kathryn .alty from Douglas Hills &
Associates. Ms. Talty addressed certain standards of the
Evanston Zoning ordinance that the project must satisfy for the
special use and planned development approvals that is being
requested. First is section 63510(h) it pertains to standards
for special uses. The second is section 6363(C) and (d),
public benefits and the third being section 61519(A)S, planned
developments.
. anS::n Plan Cc-_..ass=cn
M- nu.__ - C=ce„--er !:, 20C3 Page Ten
She gave general c .'ervle:ti o: :he plan ccnce;= and then went
=_t:e of the highlighted features of the plan. She started
wioh t general w er7_ew of the plan concept and showed slides of
e _-c3ect and explained the proposed landscaping more in-
depth. After her presentation, Ms. Talty accepted questions
f rcm Zommission members.
Mr. Roszak introduced Gary hiss, his civil engineer. Mr.
Wiss stated he was president of Gary A. Wiss, Incorporated. He
explained that his is a civil engineering company and that he
wc::ld address some of the specific provisions of the zoning
ordinance as they relate to the special use and the planned
de:•eicpmert approvals. He addressed section 53510E first which
relates to whether the planned development can be adequately
serve: by public facilities and services. Mr. Wiss said that the
protect will provide storm water detention in accordance with
the City ordinance. There will he a couple of large detention
vaults, one of them will be located in the northeast corner and
one in the southwest corner. The vault in the northeast corner
has approximately 25,000 cubic feet of storage and the one in
the southwest corner would have about 12,000 cubic feet of
storage.
Regarding section 6363H, public benefits - Mr. Wiss said
that this project is an efficient use of land ro sulting in more
e=cno:r,ic works of utility, streets, et cetera. The impact on
city facilities will be minimal. The only new facility that
Evanston would be asked to maintain would be a little bit of
extra paving along Clark and along Oak where :he pavement is
slightly expanded. All of the sewer service, the internal
patina, the landscaping, is all privately maintained.
Mr. Wiss addressed section 61519(b), site controls and
standards for planned developments. There is easy public access
through walkways both north and south, east and west and
pedestr:an traffic is totally separated from vehicular traffic.
There are separate walkways along the entry road.
Regarding location and construction of parking/loading
areas and service areas designed to avoid adverse effects on
residential uses within or adjoining the development, Mr. Wiss
felt that with the project's parking being underground, it would
be impossible to have less impact on surrounding areas than
that. He pointed out the loading and unloading areas are in the
Pace Eleven
asset _ __..ts .:ere cc be efficient in
te:r is of traffic Movements.
Mr. Criss added that installation cf utilities will be
underground, there will to no overhead wires of any kind.
Member -:Inter asked Mr. Wiss to address the phasing of this
and the time :^asing. Mr. Rcszak answered that he would like to
start cons_r�ctior, in the spring of 2004, and that the whole
rro�ect s h_.::._� be done ir. _:^.ree years. '''he firs- building
taking apprcxi:.mately 10 to !2 mcntrs, depending on construction,
and each su:^.se:Tjent building have a little overlap, but
approximate----,, nine months .er phase. Mr. Is s and Mr. Roszak
accepted gLpstrons from the Comnmmission -embers.
Mr. Rcszak asked Mr. Bruce Huvard to explain the affordable
housing. Mr. :Huvard gave the Commission mertaers copies of the
affordable housing report '_::eluding the changes. Mr. Huvard
asked that these changes be accepted into the record, included
were the share of net appreciations, the net appreciation
schedule and the year 5 exam le and the ;rear :5 example. He
briefly addressed their affordable housing program for those
Ccrmission m e—,:hers that were not present at the last proceeding.
The goals of the proc.a7: were to design a program that
would provide affordable cousin= in a manner that didn't swing
too far to e;..::er side of _ ne pendulum. Mir. Huvard said that
the goal is to provide 15 year mortgages to qualified buyers.
The qualified h yer -- and :h.eir goal is to limit the buyers to
those who are r.^.come eligi'Cle rased on approximately 80 percent
of the median income. He satJ that they are proposing to
provide 12 affordable units which represents five percent of the
total units.=oszak, , would provide a second loan, second
mortgage loans tc the qualified buyers that essentially are 15-
year mortgaaeS wit;, no currant i= erest pa_rments. At any time
dsr--a the 15 years, if the ^carer sells to a aualif;ed buyers
cur mortgage Stays in place. it doesn't mature for 15 years.
The only reas_n It's triggered is if there's a sale to a
nonqualified b r.•er or after year 1-0, the unit only has the
option to prepay cur mortgage if they so desire. Mr. Huvard
gave the Commission members examples of a unit owner selling
after five or ten years and how that would effect the
appreciation amount of the unit owner. Mr. Huvard and
Paae Twelve
the _.ffcrda:;:e ncusing
_`-n
_S Mr. :._szak's _....»7ary cf :.is-rczcsal.
went giver t standards far the zoning analysis special
deve:=p�m.en t standards and benefits. question number
the ✓ro,ect be compatible with the central character
cf :.he surroun=lnc ne_ghh: orhood with appropriate height, bulk
and scale for section 515-19{a)2 and 615-193; and question two
the projectbe compatible and serve the goals of the
.or--r_re .ensi,:e plat. seczion 63510;b) and sec --ion 515-19 (a) in
ter,'.s ;.f hei cht .
The project is a few feet less in height than the building
a_ _131 Church Street, much less than the 19-stor•f Church Street
_tat_on by Focus Development, 65 feet is the permitted
deveioc:nent allowance on the 01 District. it is within five
fee- of this standard. The project mirrors the height of the
buildings.
_n terms of bulk and scale, the project has fewer dwelling
L- tz_ _ er acre, 83 .:nits per acre, than 1111 Church Street's
which :s ___ dwelling uni=s per acre. .here are fewer
unit-c th.at are allowed in the 01 District for the size. 287 are
cved -:ersus 237 which Rosza{, TR Ridge Partners, LLC is
cr.:__t_ng They are requesting an FAR of 2.03 instead of 2.0,
w=_c__ _s only a difference of 5,COC square feet. The project is
r•�c_. -ess dense that: new residential planned dp-.e'opnents such
az __-.a "Ifews and Church Street Station and some others. The
townhame wrap -around design orovices a pedestrian
f=_en.::y streetscape and excellent setbacks fror. the street in
prcpc:ticn to the building facade. The buildings are then set
ba_Y snd a further setoack is made for the penthouse flccrs.
The- ~ass is divided amncng four build-4ngs that vary in size,
detaii_na and there is ample open space. ^ur
prc_c__ features more open space and public outdoor a-en_ties
than ..ther new planned development in Evanston.
:.der the current comprehensive plan the project is
cor_sidere-4 part of the downtown or downtown bridge, which is on
pace 42. Under the c:,:rprehensive plan and plan for downtown
Eva;.s,:= on page 74, our site is recognized as under developed
and the redevelopment cf our site is encouraged. Under the
Mi:.:tes - De --ember _ _ , 2 - ]3
Pace Thirteen.
cc --=re :Arcs=ve plan development that _tikes advantage of renewed
interest in pedestrian and pedestrian transit orientation is to
be encouraged. The project is a model transit orientated
development.
Question number three, will the project have an adverse
effect on or interfere with the value of adjacent properties,
section 63510(c)and section 63510(d) and section 6519(a)3. The
project's residential development will generate much less
traffic than the office development all -owed as of right on the
site. Our traffic impact will not be appreciably different than
the conditions that were in place prior to August 2002. Prior
to the elimination of left turns or. to Clark from southbound
Greenbay Road. Our traffic study shows little use of the
adjacent alley to the south and adequate capacity at the nearby
intersections. Unlike many other developments, a higher than
average percentage of our residents will only have one car and
use mass transit for work commuting_ due to the project's transit
oriented location.
The project's bulk scale and density are similar or less
than surrounding uses in predominantly residential use will be
compatible with existing development and should lead to an
increase in property values.
Question number four, will the project advance the public
interest by providing public benefits to the surrounding
neighborhood and Cw-y as a whole, enhancing the tax base,
promoting pedestrian uses, and mix use vitality, which is under
section 6363(d), section 6363(e), section 615-19(a)2, section
615-19(a)3, section 615-19(b)l, section 615-19(b)2. Our project
generates only a modest increase in school enrollment, more than
offset by increased real estate tax revenues to District 65 and
District 202 in their respective shares, a recurring net annual
financial surplus of approximately S600,000. The project will
provide 12 affordable housing units with 15 year commitments to
subsidize the cost differential for the price charged for income
qualified buyers and the market list price, a mortgage subsidy
of approximately $1 million dollars, over $1 million dollars.
The project will pay for the cost of reconfiguring diagonal
parking along portions of Clark and Oak, and the cost of
resurfacing the portions of Clark Street and Oak Street that
abut the project. The project will pay for the cost of
Evanston _an Cc'=i_cs__n
Min.ites - !:, 2:=_ :age Fourteen
constructing underground office garage making for the 1007
Church street building and eliminating an underdeveloped surface
parking Ist thereby adding to the City's tax base.
:he landscape arc ttecture for th.e site includes a pocket
park located at the northeast corner of the site, as well as
overall street level accessibility of the development and its
landscaped courtyard plaza, including a piece of public art that
we will work with a loca: affiliated group. The project will
contribute approximately 200 new jobs during construction.
Finally, the last points to consider: Number one, market
need. Our project is needed by Evanston. Based on our market
feasibility research, Evanston has a 300 condo per year market
which is still very deep. Not like Chicago, which is 4,000
units per year with over 4,000 units in inventory.
Next, vital new housing, our project population. Our
project will provide new rousing stock with all the modern
features that will enhance the retail shopping and entertainment
base in downtown. Our project is projected to add about 300
residents to the downtown population.
Children. No adverse school impact. At the same time our
project will have very f-ew school age children. As a result of
the fiscal impact net benefit to the city after subtracting
additional costs to the new population, will yield over $800,000
a year, every year in recurring tar. reve.ues.
Affordable housing subsidy. Our project proposes to
supply approximately $1.1 million in private mortgage subsidy
assistance to new buyers for five percent of the units. Funding
one-third of the purchase price with deferred and soft second
mortgages. Our affordahle housing plan provides a good template
for private programs to provide affordable housing in the city.
Next, transit orientated development. Our project will be
a model of transit orientated development, and have pedestrian
access to major mass transit lines. Less traffic impact than
office development. Our residential use generates less traffic
than any office use. The increase brought about by our
development will not actually bring about more cars on to Oak
-vanstcn Plan -mission
.mutes - Oece-_ ,er 10, 20C_!
..::an what residents in the area had been
recently as 2002, j::st before the
h•!:ic:^. was reconfigured to bock certain
executing left turns on to Clark.
Paqe Fifteen
e.-eryencing as
_e-G_eenbay merge
sc;:t bo::n3 traffic from
Quality architectural details. We are committed to
designing a first rate project. Based on the recommendations of
the Planning Commission we have committed to using Norman -style
brick, limestone details, glass and alumint:-: windows and copper
panels.
Community pocket park. Our project wi:l not be closed off
as a community. At the northeast corner of the property we will
have a community pocket park with public art, benches and a
pergola.
Off -site r>ublic benefits. We are providing off -site
benefits and will pay for the cost of restriping Clark Street
and providing landscaping on the north side cf the street to
increase street parking by 20 spaces and to be inclusive with
the Zion Church to harmonize with our project, rather than
isolate it across the street. We have agreed to resurface Clark
and Oak Streets.
Creative adaptation to recover a lost site. We will solve
a major design problem; how to provide parking for the Hern
Company Office Building. We will construct _G5 structured
parking spaces on the site, while creatincr additional value on
the balance.
Conservative projections. Our project is financially
conservative. By absorption. we made use of state standards
for estimating student populations, but Roszak ADC's projects in
Evanston historically have generated fewer students. Our
projections of financial benefits are likely to be understated
in favor of Evanston.
Responsive to housing needs. Our modular design is unique.
We engineer our buildings to encourage the cc^.bination of
units. We begin with a base unit design of 21-7 units, but our
marketing experts advise us that the final count after units are
combined will be less. A number of our units at Chicago Avenue
Place have been combined, We are unique in offering this floor
Plan
2:.03
Page Sixteen
y to meet the needs of a;l segments of Evanston's
:cus_:.e market.
And finally, cur project is compatible with the surrounding
area. Our FAR is 2.03 for the entire sate versus the much
.higher FAR numbers of nearby developments. We have scaled down
height and number of units to be responsive to the concerns
expressed by neighbors. The 1111 Church Street condo property
with 40 units sighted on .4 acres with approximately 100 units
per acre. Our proposed ratio is 237 units on 2.86 acres or 83
.;nits per acre. :hat includes supplying affordable housing,
stringent parking requirements, modern loading and access areas,
community park areas and office parking for the Hern Office
building. Older properties do not begin to offer the public
benefits and modern planning that our project offers.
Chair Widmayer thanked Mr. Roszak for the summary of his
proposal.
Chair Widmayer then called members of the audience that
wanted to speak about this development.
Sceakers:
S4e Walton, 1111 Church Street
Steve Hillyer, 111 Church Street
Manley Wojnike, !111 Church Street
A:.n Tanner, 1111 Church Street
Joyce Elias, 1210 Sherman
Barbara Stanley, 1828 Asbury
After the project presentation, Chairman Widmayer opened
the public testimony. Several members of the public spoke
regarding this proposal. The public testimony reflected the
-_lowing concerns: wanting a set -back in the alley; addressing
_ e blank wall facing the alley; after the asphalt is removed in
.he parking area, addressing the fear of the neighborhood being
:.-tested with insect vermin; potential exhaust gases in the
underground garages; traffic concerns; follow through on
:andscaping; and heavy equipment damaging nearby buildings.
Member Knutson moved approval of the planned development
presented tonight. He said he would require that this project
be as presented, particularly in terms of landscaping and
Paoe Seventeen
d_. -a_er_ ;_ , an ,d t w_ _t zer___.._y includes the
.cis_: _ He added t..__ t _ project meets the
standards in seo.._ons 12 and S. Motion seconded by
Xember -affe_ . .lotion passed u animcusly.
of the Plan Cc7nmission meeting adjourned at
All members voting aye to adjourn.
The regalar =tar. Commission meeting continued at this
no:.nt .
VI. COMITTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS
Executive Committee Report
Chair widmayer said that the Executive Committee met this
last Monday concerning the organization of the Plan Commission
for the _: ear 2004. Member Lr—mar: stated that the recommendation
of the Executive Committee for ,:ear 2C04 is that the Larry
widmayer will remain as Chair, Do::g Doetsch will remain as Vice -
Chair, Al Hunter will be Chair all the Neighborhood Planning
C=mrnittee, Member Knutson will remain as Chair of the Zoning
Committee, and Member Doetsch will be Chair of the Binding
Appearance Review Committee. '-!emyer Rodgers will remain as
:._aison tc the Housing and Corr-•sn:ty Development Act Committee,
Member Rebechini will remain as __aison to the Economic
Develoomen: Committee, Member Rcacers will be liaison to the
:,ighthouse Committee, Parking Ca+;...yttee is open, and Sharon
Bowie will re -rain as a member c; the Public Names Committee. it
was the . _te of _r.e Executive Cc--�7_ttee that Richard Cook
remains as an associate member s..t_I the end of the binding
appearance review. Cohn Lyman w_--1 remain as an associate member
for the year. Steve Samson will re-ain as an associate member.
The 'cllcwinc Plan Commission -.ewers will com_oose the
Binding Appearance Review Commi_tee: Members Cook, Doetsch, and
Raf fel.
The following Plan Commission members will constitute the
Neighborhood Planning Committee: Xe~.hers Bowie, Hunter, Rodgers,
and Lyman.
m_..__es - De:emhe_ is, 20=1 Page Eighteen
-=---=w-• - Plan -..mmiss__n 7e-w___ will co..st__ate the Zoning
__ .---tee. Xembers Wetsch, Knuzsmn, Raffel , Samson and
Xezber __ Man 7CYed that the proposed slate cf officers as
pr=pcsed by .Xem.!:e _^;an be accepted. Motion seconded by Member
Xnonscn. Motion apt roved unanimously.
Binding Appearance Review Committee
:ember Ccok said that the Committee has to core up with a
fcr-na_ion of how it =s going cc put together the actual review
Cc_'"i_tee itself and when it will meet, so we can give that
information to R&D and that will be accomplished within the next
three months. He said that the Committee wanted architects to
review these ievelz;ments. The meetings would have to be early
in the morning when staff would be available and morning are
also ..ore con•:enient for the members.
Neighborhood Committee
Member Lyman reported that the Neighborhood Committee is in
the process of drafting the final report. Several sections have
been completed, and .arrently the Housing Section is being
reviewed. He said _hat the Committee is focusing on creating a
conservation/his c r_c area to shape developmen,s, possibly give
tax breaks and pcss_V y to monitor the quality and character of
the area. There will. A a meeting Zecember 16, 2CO3 to discuss
this sub4ect. The Committee will also be discussing
neighborhood safety and youth. He said he was hoping to present
a draft to the Plan =mmission b: nhe end of the first quarter
of 2_:4.
Zoning Committee
Member Knitscn stated that the tear -downs will be before
R&D the following Xo^day.
Housing and Community Development Act Committee
Member Rodgers reported that there will be a meeting of the
H&CD Committee the following Tuesday. The Community Development
Block Grant program for 2004-05 was approved at the last
meeting.
Parking Committee
:hair Wid:rayer said that the Parking Committee is
requesting proposals regarding some parking lots in the City.
: anstcn _ _ _n Commission
.._nu,:es - :_=e-~ber 10, 20�.-
Pace Nineteen
.he City xiii sell the parking lots to de -:elopers to develop
properties =n the narking lot and return to the City the same
amount c_-arking it has now.
Inclusionary Housing
Member Bowie stated that the Policy Statement on
=nclusionary Zoning is being referred to P&D. The Housing
Commission is looking for set -asides for affordable housing in
projects that are 5 units or more. She said that there is a
shopping list for what the City could offer in lieu of fee such
as density bonus.
Planning and Development Company
Chair Wid-nayer said that at the special meeting last week
it discussed licensing rental properties of two units or more.
P&D had to -^ove into Council Chambers because of so many people.
Arthur Aiterson mentioned that it is looked at as a regulatory
tool not a revenue tool.
Lighthouse Committee
No report.
OTHER BUSINESS
2004 Plan Commission Meeting Dates
Member Knutson moved to accept the 2004 Plan Commission
Meeting Dates of the second Wednesday of the month. Motion
seconded by Member Lyman. Motion passed unanimously.
Vill. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, it
adjourned at 11:45 p.m.
Respectful__: submitted,
Mary ske
Planning Division