Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1999k MINUTES Planning & Development Committee December 13, 19" Room 2403 - 7:00 p.m Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, S. Engelman, J. Kent. A. Newman, M. Wynne Staff Present: J. Wolinski, J. Aiello, A. Alterson, E. Szymanski, J. Brownlee Others Present: D. Anderson, A. Dienner, S. Feigon, B. Siedenberg Presiding Official: Alderman Kent DECLARATION OF OUORUM Chairman Kent noted a quorum present and called the meeting to order at 7:18 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 22.19" MEETING Aid. Wynne moved appro%-.d of the November 22nd minutes, seconded by Ald. 40 Engelman. The minutes were approved 5-0. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION (16) Ordinance 143-0A9 — Special Use & Variance for 430 Asbury Avenue Chairman Kent announced that this item has been pulled with his understanding that there are some language issues that the attorney's are going over. This item will be put back on the agenda for the next meeting. ( 19) Ordinance 1.10-0-99 — SReciai Use for 2924 Central Street Chairman Kent stated that this item was introduced at Council on November 22nd and referred back to Committee. He said it is his understanding tha the ZBA ruled regarding the appeal time and asked staff for feedback on this. Aid. Bernstein added that there was also a question on complaints received in the past regarding Casteel Coffee which was in his ward. He noted that those received other than by him as alderman of the ward, were not substantial enough to warn any problems with the special use, as he stated before. Mr. Wolinski informed the Committee that the ZBA did rule that they did not have standing for the appeal due to the time that passed in filing. With no further comments from the Committee, Aid. Engelman moved approval of Ordinance 140-0-99, seconded by Ald. Bernstein. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the • motion. P&D Conuninee Mtg. Minutes of 12/13/99 Page 2 (17) Ordinance 145-0-99 — Planned Develomnent — Sherman Plaza Chairman Kent acknowledged Mr. Da%id Dolan, architect for the project, as being present for comments and to answer questions. He also acknowledged Ms. Sharam Feigon and a Ms. Gladys Bryer, who have signed up to speak on this matter. Ms. Ado was called over from the A&PW meeting. Ms. Aiello informed the Committee that they do not have a formal presentation and the project has not changed from the time that it was presented to the Council several mon&s ago or from the presentation to the Plan Commission. She said that the project is sul] taking the full square block with the exception of 2 or 3 parcels, bounded by Shetmasa. Davis, Benson and Church Streets. She said the City garage will a tom down in addition to the properties on this square block with exception of the bank and architects building next to the bank. Ms. Aiello explained that in its place will be a Sears store, other retal space, a new city garage with approximately 1.386 spaces. Aid. Newman questioned the notice requirements for a planned development of this type — who exactly receives notice. Mr. Alterson responded that property o%mers/tax payers within 1,000 feet receive notice. Aid. Newman expressed concern for the business owners renting within that radius or residents renting in the Fields building that did not receive notice. He asked what the time frame is for this planned development to be approved. Ms. Aiello responded that the idea time line for approval of this planned development would be approval from P&D this evening to be introduced at Council and . then passed at the next City Council meeting if they can show evidence of the land control, which is one of the requirements that will be a condition for adoption of this ordinance. This will be subject to the redevelopment agreement, which they are still in the process of negotiating. Aid. Newman assumed that realistically with negotiations still in progress for the redevelopment agreement, the earliest time frame for approval would be in February. Ms. Aiello had to agree with this assumption. Ald. Newman stated with that time frame in mind, that it could do no harm and would be helpful in his mind, if notice was sent out to those downtown renters, business and residential, regarding the consideration of this planned development. He feels that just notice to taxpayers is not enough for such a major development, all should have an opportunity to be knowledgeable of this change since it will effect everyone in the downtown area and all should be given a opportunity to comment on this project. Aid. Newman suggested a letter could be distributed in time before the meeting in January. Ms. Aiello said that Evmark and the Chamber of Commerce have received several presentations from the developer, in addition to the Economic Development Committee. She also noted that both the Review and the roundtable have carried write-ups on the presentation of the planned development. She assured Aid. Newman that and additional notice could be distributed if necessary. Aid. Newman said that he was referring to direct notice to be given and he would feel more comfortable with this type of notice to assure it is received - He pointed out tha tone of the implications is that the parking that many of the stores have depended on will be radically changed due to this development. He said that presently there is an entranceway tot he parking garage on Sherman Avenue that will no longer be there if this development goes through. Aid. Newman noted that he is P&D Committee M,g. Minutes of 12/13/99 Page 3 definitely in favor of going forward with this project because he feels this %►-ill be a major addition to the downtown. His concern lies with all effected by this development to be notified and to give all a fair opportunity to comment and to be knou.3edgeable of what's going on. He added that many property owners and taxpayers do not take the responsibility of informing their tenants of municipal issues that "till effect them. Ma. Aiello responded that staff could hand out a written notice to the b sinesses within the 1,000-foot radius. Ald. Newman requested that the residential rs in the Marshall Field building is given notice as %vell. Nls. Aiello agreed and sugges"- that an ideal time to hand out notices would be after January 1" when it is more liken- to have full-time staff at the businesses and for more residents to be home from zhe holidays. The Committee agreed to this. Chairman Kent noted that the architect, Mr. Dolan is present to respond to any questions or concern by the Committee and citizens Ms. Sharon Feigon said that she is a member of the Plan Commissioa and she came this evening to highlight some of the concerns that were mentioned rcgarding this project. She noted that while the Plan Conunission was unanimous in support of the project overall, there was discussion and concerns raised by the public at their meeting and by the Commission. She said this concern was with the pedestrian access on Benson Street. Ms. Feigon noted that Benson is the main street for people using the CTA and public transportation to downtown Evanston and the %%ay the project is presently construed, is dangerous for pedestrians and Benson Street offers no entrance into the development for the commuters. She pointed out that the way the project is currently conceptualized is for CTA pedestrians to either go around to Davis or Church Street with no access directly through the development. She noted that there will be retail at the south end of Benson Street but most people tend to cross directly in the middle of Benson because of the way the CTA terminal and bus depot is designed. Ms. Feigon informed the Committee that at one time there was talk about a pedestrian bridge crossing or a stoplight to accommodate safe crossing and to promote pedestrian access into the development on through to Sherman Avenue. Ms. Feigon requested, from all she mentioned above, that the Committee takes this important matter into consideration and stipulates the concerns and safety issues before granting approval of this project. She can not understand why the developers would not promote or make as easy access as possible to the mass majority of pedestrian and commuter population who shop in downtown Evanston. She pointed out the importance of offering accessibility to Sherman Avenue through this developmem also. Ms. Feigon stressed the importance of accommodating all shoppers, especially pedestrian, for the economic success for businesses downtown. Ms. Feigon raised another concern that lies with the truck entrance being located on Benson. She pointed out the concern with the trucks turning south off Church Street onto Benson and then into the garage. She noted that these will be large delivery trucks that will add to the congestion on the small street, adding concern to the safety issue with 0 pedestrian crossing. C P&D Committee Mt& Minutes of 12/13/99 Page 4 Aid. Bernstein asked about the pedestrian walkway from the CT 3 to the development on Benson, he recalled that initially this was considered but was withdrawn because ft developers were told of safety issues and concerns by Ciny staff. Ms. Andermw responded that from this time the designs were originally presented in public meetings; when this came before the Plan Commission, it wras noted that thoe pedestrian crying is the middle of Benson Avenue, %,,as eliminated because of the delivery trucks is addidGe to a safety concem by the Police Department with those types of %%ulkways. Ms. Aiello added that in the initial planning, the walkway was shoun on private property owned by the bank. She said that the developers were optimistic that they could cork out am arrangement with the bank to do such a walkway, however. this did not go through. Sic also noted the question of accommodating the zoning re-quirements for the truck docks and the particulars of the automobile traffic and it became apparent that there would lac too much conflict with pedestrian safety issues. Ms. Aiello added that from the planneas perspective, it is preferable to control the pedestrian traffic from the street level wits encouragement for crossing at the streetlights and not in the middle of Benson Avenge. She noted that the Traffic Engineer has concern with adding a crossing light in the middle of Benson because of the shortness of the street. She informed the Committee that staff has recently engaged Kenig, Lindgren, O'Hara, Aboona, Inc. (KL.OA) as their traffic consultant on this matter to go back a particularly look at the Benson Avenue traffic flow and to look at the concerns on pedestrian safety issues as well as concerns that were raised by the Bank and other retailers on maintaining parking access for their customers. Ms. Aiello stressed tha the main goal is for safety- and preference is to promote • pedestrians from the CTA to go to either street corner and cross at the traffic lights. She would hope that with the crossing at Church and Dmis that pedestrians would be drawn into the retail stores as they go around the perimeter of the project. Aid. Newman asked that with the way the project is configured, do they actually assume that people are not going to cross in the middle of Benson — this does not seem logical in his mind. Ms. Aiello responded that she realizes the possibility of continued pedestrian crossing in the middle of Benson but they would hope to promote a plan to encourage crossing at the traffic signals. Aid. Newman pointed out that there is the entrance into the parking garage in the middle of Benson for vehicles and in reality many commuters that park in the garage will continue to cross in the middle of the block directly across from the parking garage entrance, he says this from his own experience. He asked about the elevator service to parkers in the garage for access into the development. Mr. Doian responded that access directly in to the development would be available to people paricing in the garage. Ms. Aiello said that this will only be available for commuters using the parking garage but not accessible directly from the street for pedestrians from Benson Avenue. As mentioned before, pedestrians will be encouraged to go the street comers for crossing and entering into the development from Church or Davis Street — not through the parking garage structure. Aid. Neuman stressed that it should not make a difference to the developer as far as who the consumer is — whether they park in the parking strucwm or whether they came by public transportation. 0 P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 12/13/99 Page 5 Ms. Feigon said, in addition to Ald. Newman's comments, that the retail stores that am • planned for the development, are and µill be directly oriented to+vards the people who currently shop in do%%mto%%m Evanston; a large population are CTA, Metro and public transportation users who are not driving. She stressed and reiterated her concerns for consideration to be given to the projects ability to be pedestrian friendly because the current configuration is lacking in the sector. Ald. Ne«man agues with Ms. Feigon's concerns which coincide -. ith his own. He directed these concerns to the architect for his comments on the matter. Mr. Dolan responded that from this understanding, these exact issues are being studied by the traffic consultants that staff has obtained. Ms. Aiello backed Mr. Dolan's response and added that if the results of the consultant's study support the need for an additional traffic signal in the middle of Benson, then this will be considered for the planned development project. Ald. Newman commented on the concern with the existing configuration of Benson Avenue and the CTA traffic plus regular automobile traffic to this small street section. He stressed his concern with the addition of the planned development, current CTA pedestrian traffic, planned access for delivery trucks and the continued commuter parking plus shopping traffic within the parking structure; all accessed from Benson Avenue. He said that pedestrian traffic safety is a very important issue in consideration of this development. He feels this is another incentive to provide access through the development from Benson to Sherman as a means order to keep the pedestrian traffic flowing. Ald. Bernstein agrees with Ald. Newman's concerns as well as the concerns stated by 40 Ms. Feigon. He pointed out the parking a garage entrance from Benson Avenue for commuters and shoppers going into the development, noting the access for these people into the retail shopping development. He further noted that with Sears being the anchor retailer, it would seem that they would want to promote and welcome all shoppers whether walking or driving to the facility. He would think Sears would especially want the high volume of pedestrian shoppers that are the majority in do%mto►m Evanston. He pointed out that there is no pedestrian entrance into Sears from Benson Street and he finds it hard to believe that they would not provide this access. Ald. Bernstein feels that this lack of pedestrian friendly. access to their store will turn highl} needed pedestrian traffic shoppers away from this establishment if they are forced to walk % block around the development in order to enter into the stores. Ald. Bernstein stressed his concern for this development Aithout more consideration and accommodation given to the important element of pedestrian consumer taken into place. Ald. Wynne suggested that some type of traffic control be considered in similarity to the airports where heavy pedestrian crossing takes place. She said that in those areas, blinking or flashing lights with traffic stop sighs are provided to give preference and first serve to pedestrian crossing. She felt that this might be a more logical consideration in comparison to an additional traffic light to be added to such a small throughway. She feels that with proper planning and consideration by the Traffic Engineer and traffic consultant, that this could be a source of control for pedestrian crossing in the middle of 0 Benson Avenue. In addition, AId. Wynne questioned the accessibility to the retail VIC P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 12/13/99 Page 6 development from the garage. Her understanding is that once you park in the garage, it will be necessary to take the elevator to a certain floor in order to access the retail levels of the development. Mr. Dolan responded that the connection from the garage is to go to the 1 " . 2"' . or 3rd levels of the parking structure to access Sears store from any level of the parking structure. Ms. Feigon questioned what a pedestrian would have to do to access the Sears store from Benson Avenue. Ms. Aiello responded tha they would have to walk around to Church Street and access from there_ Ms. Feigon pointed out the unfairness to pedestrians not to be able to access the store from Benson Avenue. Ms. Aiello responded that they do not want to promote pedestrian traffic on foot to walk through the parking structure. which tend to be a safety hazard. Ms. Anderson stressed the fact that there is no way to stop the pedestrian crossing in the middle of Benson Avenue from the CTA terminal, people have been crossing in that area since the bus and train terminal have been there and people have walked through the City parking garage since its existence also. She suggested the only way to stop the crossing in the middle of the street would be to locate two 24-hour police squad cars and each end of the block, which is not logical. Ms. Anderson said she would tend to agree with Aid. Wynne's suggestion of putting up striping in the street and a flashing crosswalk to slow vehicular traffic down to give right-of-way to pedestrian traffic. She said from years of experience that she has rode the CTA train for many years and existed off at Davis Street. She understands the developers trying to sway commuters to walk around the development with the hopes of attracting this crowd to window-shopping and eventually entering the retail shops. From her experience, the majority of commuters after a long • day at work, are not going to be interested in window shopping, so this argument does not work and %rill not persuade commuters to walk all the way around to Church Street in order to enter into the development. Ms. Anderson said that more thought should be given to accommodating the commuters for easement into the development directly from the CTA terminal. She said out of practicality, in considering most individuals train of thought after a full day's work, if they are going to shop for anything, they want to get in and out of a store with the greatest of ease. Ms. Anderson questioned if there is anyway within the present configuration of the parking structure on Benson, for CTA commuters to access the development to get to Sherman Avenue without having to walk all the way around to either Church or Davis Streets. Mr. Dolan pointed out from a diagram how the current proposed parking structure is configured and where the lobby will be located. He illustrated where the elevators are located within the structure for ingress into the development to the various levels or retail shopping. As currently configured, he said there is no way to access through the development for pedestrians from the Benson Avenue side. Ms. Anderson pointed out that it appears the only way to enter the development for retail shopping from Benson is for individuals using the parking lot who will be able to access the elevator tower within the structure. Mr. Dolan confirmed this, explaining the developer wishes for this configuration, which has much to do with safety situations for pedestrians. Ms. Anderson stated that she considers this as being a lack in pedestrian friendliness and finds this to be a great weakness in the plans. P&D C.ommittee Mtg. Minutes of 12/ 13/99 Page 7 • Aid. Bernstein agreed full heartedly -►-ith Ms. Anderson's comments as well as the ocher Committee members. Aid. Newman recalled hearing that this matter regarding pedestrian traffic, was discussed in Site Ptan Review• and that there were safety concerns that were addressed. leis. Aiello responded that there were safety concerns for pedestrians crossing Benson and entering the development through the parking structure, for many reasons. She said one being with the truck delivery traffic as well as vehicle traffic flow in and out of the parking structure. She said that at one point there was the idea of some land being accommodated from the bank for a walkway but this idea was not desirable due to the possible conflict of people using the area where the bank provides parking for their customers. Aid. Newman stated that he has a problem with providing a 1,300+ parking struettme with this development and only providing convenience for entry into the development for this crowd. He can not understand why the developer would not make it convenient for pedestrians and commuters, which make a large population of the shoppers and consumers for Evanston. He said that this deveiopment appears totally unappealing for their shopping convenience or for easement in accessibility to Sherman Avenue from Benson, especially when the weather is bad Aid. New -man said that we want to promote public transportation to get to this development and all of downtown Evanston. He added that this is what should make this particular location so attractive as a site and it would seem most logical to accommodate CTA and !Metro commuters to promote their desire to want to shop at the new development. Aid_ Newman suggested that even with the noted expertise of the Site Plan Committee. that the comments and ideas of the ordinary citizens of the Plan Commission should be taken into serious consideration. He requested and would like to see the architect go back to the developer with thug suggestions and come back with more options for Benson Avenue and try to amike the project more pedestrian friendly in this area, The Committee members agreed. Aid. Bernstein pointed out ? issues of concern for him. He realizes the obvious safety concerns for pedestrian crossing in the middle of Benson but suggested that they go back and consider a pedestrian crosswalk across Benson into the development. if this option is not available, then there needs to be an entrance from the ground floor on Benson for pedestrians and commuters to access the development. He reiterated his feelings that it is too inconvenient for shoppers on foot to «-alk all the wa} around the building to enter into the development or to access Sherman Avenue from the commuter train and bus depot. He suggested that the current proposed configuration is just not logical or fair to pedestrian traffic. Ms. Aiello responded that they could ask the Site Plan Committee to look at this again and see if they can come up with some options. She pointed out to the Committee that one of the issues was with the Police Department's concern for enclosed walkways and the type of possible dangerous individuals that tend to lair in around those locations. She said the police are always concerned, even with glass walkways, being able to help someone or reach some one in time if they are in danger. • IV � P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 12' 13199 Page 8 Aid. W}Tune pointed out that dismissal of any retail shops along Benson or at the comet of Benson and Davis should also be reconsidered. She feels that the long blank wall is also an unfriendly site in welcoming and attracting CTA pedestrian shoppers. Ald. Newman added, in looking at the street level retail shops and the blank wall along Benson, that this is what happens when you try, and do too much on the site; it gives the appearance of being "boxed in" as much as possible. He said that in this situafkxt. something may have to give in order to make the project work for all involved that Hvodd and could utilize this development and an important element is the commuter pedestrian traffic. Aid. Engelman asked howl tall the Sears store would be. Mr. Dolan responded the store will be 3 stories and approximately 52' in height. Ald_ Engelman asked how ritzy stories from the garage could access Sears_ Mr. Dolan responded access into Sears could go the 5`s level of the parking structure. Aid. Engelman pointed out from his observation, that there are 12 levels in the parking structure, 7 levels above Sears and the residential tower will be 20 stories. He noted that th€ parking structure is proposed in length fmm Davis to % of the block along Benson and will be built to the tot line. His point being, to demonstrate the excessive usage of this block for the development. Ms. Gladys Bryer said that she represents the Evanston Inter -Religious Sustainability Circle which is a group of 14+ congregations here in Evanston interested in tlbe sustainability of our local community. She said they are particularly interested in public transportation and bringing people to downtown Evanston on something other than cars. She stated that their concern is also with the apparent un-attractiveness of the entry at Benson for commuters and pedestrian shoppers. Ms. Bryer pointed out the appearance of a "jail -like" look from the CTA platform. She stressed that from a CTA and Metra commuter and pedestrian view, this development is not pedestrian friendly. She said from her organizations point of view, the most attractive offer would be to provide a walkway across Benson from the train station to the development. She understands the banks lack of cooperation to give up their parking facilities to provide such a walk%%av and suggested that the developer look at the possibility of giving up some of the area with the parking structure to provide a walkway. She feels it should be a small sacrifice to the developer to give up in view of the large population of commuters and pedestrian shoppers that will utilize this project. Ms. Bryer also pointed out the importance of providing easier access for handicapped wheelchair accessibility individuals who also use public transportation. She concluded by requesting that the developer address these important concerns and the Committee before any consideration be given to approving this planned development. Ms. Bryer said that it has been mentioned that these issues will be looked into but pointed out that some time has elapsed since this proposal was presented to both the Plan Commission, Council and Site Plan Review. She questions when all these issues will actually be addressed in hopes that they will be addressed before any approval of the plan is given. 'pis. Aiello responded that as she indicated before, their consultant is beginning to talk to the various entities and will be addressing these concerns with them. She said that they will be bringing back this item at the January I Od' meeting and hope to have some answers or conclusions from the consultant by then. Ms. Anderson stated that her personal feeling is not to waste taxpayer dollars on P&D Comminee hltg. Minutes of 12/13/99 Page 9 KLOA or any other consWtant with a traffic study on the possibility of putting a sty light in the middle of Benson. She feels this is a ridiculous solution to the traffic problaua on Benson and would only add to any traffic congestion problems for that area. Site reiterated considering the suggestion of adding a crosswalk with stripping and flashinst for pedestrian crossing. \9s. Anderson also suggested that pedestrian entry from Benson into the development is an important factor that should be considered for the success of this project, whether by ground floor or a pedestrian walkway from the CTA terminaL The Committee members agreed with Ms. Anderson. Aid. Newman felt that with all that has been discussed and the concerns noted, that this item should be held in Committee. It was the consensus of the members to bold this item in Committee_ The Committee felt there is sufficient time to address the concerns stated plus give additional notice to business owners and residential tenants who are renting within the 10001 notification radius. This item will be held in Committee and remain on the agenda for the January 106 meeting, ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION (PD2) Multi -Family Rental Residential Licensing Chairman Kent noted those in attendance for discussion on this item such as W. Heiberger and other property managers. He also noted Aid. Rainey's involvement on this issue and requested her presence for discussion. He requested staff commentary on the memo submitted in Council packets. Mr. Wolinski explained that from previous discussion, the Committee requested information on what other communities are doing who have substantial rental property and have experienced similar problems as Evanston and who are now currently doing some type of licensing. He said the memo addresses this information which was collected from the communities of Aurora, Peoria, Elgin and Oak Park, DeKalb and Champaign. He said staff tried to get a cross-section of both communities that are both local to the Chicago area and also have a University within their City limits. Mr. Wolinski further summarized the individual study of each community. He said that Aurora initiates licensing of multi -family rental properties of 3 or more units. Peoria has a similar housing stock to Evanston with approximately 19,000 rental units. They do not license these properties but do require registration, which must be renewed every time the building is sold. He said Elgin is one of the communities close to our situation with just obtaining and passing their licensing program in 1995 with a similar amount of rental housing units as Evanston. He further noted that Elgin has experienced a multitude of problems with their rental housing before licensing. He noted this year that they had 68 licenses revokes and 165 suspended and the housing officials have stated that they feel now that they are developing a handle on many of their problems within their rental unit buildings. Aid. Newman asked what was the basis of some of their revocations. Mr. Wolinski responded that most were due to criminal activity in some units and the owners were doing nothing about the situation. He said Elgin has administrative adjudication in place and these cases went through that process. He said administratively, the license is i P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 12/13/" Page 10 revoked or suspended and the owner can appeal this decision to the adjudicator and ono to the Circuit Court. Aid. Newman asked if upon revocation, is the tenant made to leave &C building. Mr. Wolinski confirmed. He added that the Building Administrator in Ellin has indicated to him that there has been a great deal of success with this program and leas helped clean up some of the problems buildings owned by faulty landlords. AB& Newman expressed his approval of this program by what he has heard so far and wound support the licensing program if it foresees resolving some of Evanston's landlord problems. Aid. Engelman questioned if the tenant is removed upon notice or is there some time lapse involved before they are removed. He questions how the tenant is actually e8icttd Mr. Wolinski responded that his is not exactly positive how the process is obtained to remove the tenant but be assumes there is some type of notification process involved witfi a normal time lapse period for evictions or with criminal activity involved, the unit is probably shut down by the police. Ms. Haynes, Director of Human Relatiom commented that she could not see how they can justifi, how they actually throw the tenant out upon sudden notice. She questions Elgin's process in legally succeeding in quick removal of the tenant upon revocation of the owner's license without risk of interfering with tenant rights. The Committee questioned this process also of removal of the tenants of a building where the owner's Iicense has been revoked. Mr. Wolinsld explained that there is usually a suspension process for the landlord to give notice to the tenant and proceed with eviction process noting his eventual revocation of his license He said if an entire building needs to be evacuated, then there would be the necessity of relocating all the tenants. He said there is a probationary period for the landlord to clean up the building and obtain eviction of problem tenants. Aid. Engelman noted the 60-day period for that problem tenant situation. His concern is where the license of the building owner is revoked for the entire building where the tenants are living in deplorable conditions — how would you go about relocating all the tenants, especially if the existing housing stock is short and being able to relocate all tenants to a building with similar rental rates. Aid. Rainey agreed with Aid. Engelman's concerns. She stated this is why it is so important to regulate all City regulations for maintenance of decent housing and to be able to reach compliance of any violations in the quickest manner possible. She noted her disapproval of the current system and the obvious existence of too much time lapsing in order to reach compliance for buildings with substantial numbers of violations and the wasted time experienced by the Property Maintenance Inspectors who are required to go to court numerous times for one case. Aid. Rainey stressed her feelings that the current system is not working in favor of the City in reaching timely compliance for problem buildings and it gives the landlord too much time to sit on the problem. In the meantime, buildings are left boarded up or in deplorable conditions where the tenants have to stiffer living in. She stated that the City needs to adopt a licensing program because she feels it will assist in getting some of the faulty landlords to move more promptly in snaking repairs of violations cited. 0 P&D Committoe Mt& Minutes of 12/13/99 Page 11 Mr. Wolinski said that be has met with Mr. Heiberger and other properly managers and he suggest that it might be helpful to meet with members of the EFOA and others to get a is consensus of a number of property managers and landlords on how they feel about a licensing program. He said some property managers feet it would result in an unfair situation for the good landlords and building owners who take care of their properties are suddenly stuck with a bad tenant. Ald. Rainey noted that the City of Chicago has a process in place where the Judge can appoint a receiver for a building where the landlord fails to bring a building into compliance — this way the landlord would not collect any rent until after the cost of repairs of the violations on the building have been covered. The Committee discussed Aid. Rainey's suggestion of looking into a receivership program. They noted the obvious issues of fairness and the risk of the City being sued in some situations. After discussion, it was the consensus of the Committee to direct staff to look further into the results of the current registration or licensing programs in effect is the other communities that were studied. The Committee also requested that staff collect information on the receivership program that the City of Chicago utilizes. Staff agreed to bring back the requested information to the Committee for future discussion. ADJOURNMENT iThe meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ,�1.1LnM� Jac elin E. Brownlee 0 NIENUTES Planning & Development Committee November 22,1999 Room 2403 - 7:30 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, S. Engelman, J. Kent, A. Newman, M. Wynne Staff Present: J. Wolinski, A. Alterson, R. Schur, E. Szymanski, J. Brownlee Others Present: D. Anderson Presiding Official: Alderman Engelman DECLARATION OF OUORUM Chairman Engelman noted a quorum present and called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF NOVEMBER S, 1999 MEETING AId. Wynne moved approval of the November Sth minutes, seconded by Aid. Kent. The . minutes were approved 5-0. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION (11) HOME Fund Reouest Chairman Engelman acknowledged Ms. Roberta Schur, Housing Planner, and asked her for background on this request. Ms. Schur announced that Ms. Yvonne Dickerson of the Housing Commission are present for any questioning by the P&D Committee. She also acknowledged Mr. Richard Koenig, Director of Interfaith Housing Development Corp, and Mr. Ron Taylor from Interfaith Housing being present for any comments also. AId. Kent pointed out 2 issues that he questions -- 1) On the agenda data sheet it states that the target market for these units will be for moderate income buyers (80% of median income) and 2) in the letter to Ms. Schur it states that the building will be developed for low to moderate income households. He questions the difference in statements. Mr. Wolinski responded that he believes the letter from Mr. Koenig has the correct information. Mr. Koenig elaborated further explaining that they are referring to targeting people in the upper range of low income to moderate income households. Aid. Kent stated that he has confidence in Interfaith to follow through on targeting to households '.Vithin this income range because he definitely would not vote in favor of this if this project were for moderate income and above. He does not want to see the outcome of this development to end up with no low-income households in the 13 units of the building and only moderate - income households. He added that he does not want to hear that the low-income families did not qualify because of poor credit history. He feels these programs should be P&D Mtg. Minuccs of November 22. 19" Page 2 designed to aid and assist these households in obtaining a moag2ge under all pa=ible S measures. AId. Kent said that he did send a reference to the Housing Commission regarding this matter and although he appreciates their response that there are Diner programs available to low income residents. he feels this answer .does not suffice_ He reiterated that the City programs and funding pro%ided for rehabilirion of building with low income residents that are converted into condos. should be designed to assist low- income residents who would have normally occupied the building. Mr. Wolinski responded to Aid. Kent that in staffs discussions •-%ith Sir. Koenig, and Interfaith staff members, they talked about the fact that with this b ilding they hoped to retain as many residents as possible into become owners. He stud that if this meant granting those individuals a deeper subsidy of the SI30.0W. then they would do so_ He stressed that this is not intended to be a clearing of the building and :.heir intentions :tee to aid and try to make affordable the units to the present tenants. He noted that there are a number of problem tenants in the building but there are several good tenants that they would like to retain. Mr. Wolinski gave the Committee history of 319-21 Custer explaining that the building was purchased in a foreclosure sale a few years ago b% a lady that did not ha%c the funding to keep the up the maintenance of the building. He said dLW eventually the gas was shut off and the City stepped in and paid the bill for approximately S7,500 2 months ago. He added the building is also in arrears wit the water bill in the amount of approximately $13.000 which the City also stepped in and made provisions for. He said that staff asked Interfaith to look at this building for their consideration in taking over as a rescue measure. He said the tenants were suffering from the owner's lack of management ability and staff recognized Interfaith's ability and history of taking over buildings in this type of situation. Mr. Wolinski said that upon Interfaith's inspection of the building, they agreed that it was a good prospect for them and felt that all they needed was gap financing on this program due to the cost that would be involved in the rehabilitation and acquisition of the building. Aid. Kent expressed his appreciation for that background information and is glad that Interfaith has agreed to do this. He questioned the fact that there are currently tenants living in the building with the condemned back porch and the roof in a condition that won't make it through the winter. If approved. would this situation be rectified immediately? Mr. Koenig responded that these repairs would be fixed as soon as possible; he has already had contractors ota to give estimates for the work. He hopes that within days after closing to begin working on the repairs needed. Aid. Kent reiterated his concern due to past experience. that he wants to see this conversion for the benefit of low-income residents as the priority targeted market for ownership of the units. He added that he has confidence in Interfaith to see to it that this is accomplished, especially for the present tenants who should have first chance in applying for a unit. Mr. Wolinski assured that this is the intention of Interfaith's interest in the building and that is why staff seeked them out for consideration of taking over this building. He informed the Committee that the owner had recently applied for City rehab funds to repair the building but the City pulled back after realizing the risk with the E� • owner's situation. He said without Interfaith's involvement, the City would be forced to vacate the building due to the dangerous nature of the repairs needed, use City ftmds to fix the repairs and then put a lien on the building. Mr. Koenig added reassurance that Interfaith will provide every assistance possible to the current tenants in trying to receive a mortgage for purchase of a unit. Aid. Kent moved approval of the request by Interfaith Housing Development Corporation for 5130,000 in HOME funds, seconded by Aid. Wynne. Aid. Bernstein abstained his vote due to his involvement in representing the owner of the property. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. Mr. Koenig requested to set out picture of Interfaith's recent rehab project that involved City funds on the building at Dobson and Brummel that was approved by Council last year. The Committee welcomed those photos for re%icw and were pleased to be able to see the results of the rehab project. (12) Resolution 89-R-99 - Parkins Lease Agreement Aid. Newman moved approval of Resolution 89-R-99 to authorize the City Manager to enter into a parking agreement with 1880 Oak Avenue as landlord and City of Evanston as tenant, seconded by Aid. Wynne. With no further discussion, the vats was taken 5-0 in favor of the motion. • (13) Ordinance 138-0-99 - Intergovernmental Agreement re: Homebuvers Program_ Chairman Engelman acknowledged Mr. David Rasch for Gates Capital Corporation. He also acknowledged that Gates Capital has been before the Committee in the past and they are again requesting an agreement to execute revenue bonds financed for the First Time Home Buyers program they administer. Mr. Rasch explained that they are taking a change in one aspect of the program by offering a conventional product that has the same loan payment assistance but will work better for the City's program. Aid. Kent asked if this program is still specifically to help moderate -income first time homebuyers and also he requested information on how this program benefits Evanston recipients. ti1r. Rasch responded that this program is still designed for moderate -income households. He said to date, thev have utilized just under % of a million dollars and the average loan size is just over 51-0,000. He assured that from that figure, the program is targeted to assist the moderate -income constituents. He feels that with the conventional format in place, the average will go up. Ald. Kent suggested that the next time this request comes before the Committee for consideration, that those figure, be included for review of the statistics. Aid. Bernstein asked if this program is specifically for Evanston residents and Evanston property. I'vIr. Rasch responded that this is for Evanston residents and/or families and individuals moving into Evanston; so all funds are expended on the purchase of Evanston property. Aid. Bernstein moved approval of the recommendation to approve and sign the • Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement to execute the revenue bonds, seconded by Ald. Kent. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion. Chairman Engelman asked the x consensus of the Committee with regards to the Ordinance needing t« pass by No%*snber 3e because the closing of the loan for the issuance of the bonds by Aurora, Kane. W`[i I and DuPage counties is scheduled to take place on December 2"d. 1999. He suggested amending the motion to suspend the rules to introduce and pass this item through Council this evening. The consensus of the Committee was to suspend the rules for passW of this item this evening. Ala. Bernstein amended his motion to include this suspension, seconded by Ald. Wynne. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the amended motion. (14) Ordinance 140-0-99 — Snecial Use for 2924 Central Street Mr. Wolinski noted that this item is marked for introduction on the Council agenda tonight for the special use. He further explained that this is a situation where the original determination of this use is being appealed to the Zoning Board of appeals becatzc of the Zoning Administrator's decision. The appeal is that the Zoning Administrator erromd in his determination that this was a retail use. He stated that this appeal is going before the ZBA tomorrow night. He said it is up to the Committee to determine whether they want to discuss the facts of this case tonight or wait until the Zoning Board makes their determination on the appeal. Chairman Engelman requested comment from Ms. Szymanski on this matter. tits. Szymanski stated that with respect to the certificate of zoning complaint, she requested knowledge of when the Zoning Administrator's decision was issued. It was noted that the date of that decision %%as June 3rd, 1999. . U. Szymanski recognized that date as the one she was notified of and referred to the City Code, as discussed with the Corporation Counsel, with respect to Section 6-3-9-8 that stated giving 45 days from the date of either the Zoning Administrator's decision or the issuance of a building permit for an appeal. She said that if the facts are, as she understands them, which would render the decision of the Zoning Administrator non - appealable and therefore. the appeal before the ZBA as being stale and having no jurisdiction. The Committee members questioned when the appeal was made; was it within 45 days of the Zoning Administrator's decision and just now being heard. Someone from the audience stated that the appeal was made November 2id. Mr. John Haves stated that he is the individual that filed the appeal. He claims that he submits that the permit issued for this business stated nothing to the effect of what will actually take place with the operation of this business; specifically, nothing indicating the roasters that will be used and nothing indicating the fact that a new gas line will be installed and nothing indicating the wholesale operations. He claims that Ms. Szymanski was made aware of these facts from the conversations he had with her informing her of those facts. ,yir. Haves said that he .ti-ould like to address the City on the fact that there are obsious problems with the issuance of permits and the manner in «,hick the public is notified of permits issued that affect surrounding homeowners and the neighborhood. He stated the application for zoning was published without knowledge of the neighboring properties. He says this because he lives within 250' of the subject property and he did not receive a copy of notification of the proposed business for that location. Therefore he does not feet this to be proper and that the notification process was not complied by. J . Mr. Hayes noted that he submitted his appeal uptin su;ggcstion by Cite swY. after he was fully aware of what was going on and what %%w .approved for under the pemut for operation of the proposed business for that location. He said that from discussions he has had with Mr. Alterson and zoning stag, he feels pmc%:dcncc is being created by issua= of this zoning certificate for this business when he &-%-.Is a special use ordinance for the operation of the business is what should have be= required, and that is where is argument lies. He clarified that his argument does not lie with the Bezark's who have done everything to try and work with the neighbors and follow all City Codes and requirements at the same time. Mr. Hayes further c: aboruted on his objections to the roasters and the environmental issues involved effecting the neighborhood such as possible contaminates and pollution's. He feels the CPA should inspect such environmental issues before granting any application for a business so close in proximity to residential properties. He claims that there w er: some complaints filed on the operation of this business when it was located on Ma-;Ma-;n Street involving environmewal issues with the roasters. Mr. Hayes informed the Committee that there is no mention of the wholesale operation of this business and also the lack of mentioning that the roasters will actually be located at 2922 Central instead of 2,924 Central where the wholesale operation will be located. He feels a separate special use request should be applied for the operation at 2922 Central also. Mr. Hayes commented on the 30-day occupancy requirement, noting that he would hope the Bezark's would not be held accountable during this ordeal and should be extended for their sake indefinitely. He explained that when he rnade his initial appeal, which was late in date, the Building Department Inspector who asked him if he had any problem with the owners occupying the business or operating the business contacted him. He responded to the Building Inspector that he has no problem and no"- that he was actually surprised that the owners were given 30 days to operate the business or risk some type of forfeiture during the appeal process. He reiterated that he does not wish the Bezark's to experience this inconvenience for their business and stresses that his appeals is to the zoning decision for approval of the operation of the business in conjunction with the roaster and wholesale operation; not the sale and service of their business. Aid. Newman commented on his concern for the appeal process, reminding the Committee of a case in his ward involving the W'iegal's and the complaints received with that case on the 45-day rule on appeals. He said that at that time he did not favor the 45- day appeal ruling, but has since then, from discussion %&ith Corporation Counsel, realizes the importance and good reasoning for the 45-day r-J, e. fie stated the reasoning is because when a building permit is issued, automaticall-. at that point the property owner who has gone through the system, has invested major d,::lars based on the Cit-,•'s issuance of their permit. Aid. Newman stated that under the Coy::., the building owner knows that for a period of 45 days after the issuance of their permit that the decision is still subject to the possibility of an appeal. He feels this matter should weigh in favor of the applicant considering all the cost and obligation put forth by thern and after the 45-day appeal time is up, the applicant has already been subject to financial expenses. Aid. Newman stressed his concern for this aspect of the appeal process and feet/ what needs to happen is that the ZBA be advised of the IegaI situation involved if the appeal is upheld due to the liability . jg faced by the applicant who has invested their time and money on a project approved by the City and then subsequently questioned or denied after they followed all procedures required of them. Aid. Newman suggested from all considered, that the LegaJ Department needs to look at all the issues related to the June 3Td date of the Zoning Administrator's decision and when the appeal was issued. He acknowledged Mr. Hayes position because of his claim that City staff told him to file an appeal but the 45 day appeal ruling is an important factor that should be adhered to. :old. Newman reiterated that fact that this situation qualifies for Legal staffs investigation in this matter. He said that if it is found that the appeal is not timely, then it should not be upheld but on the other hand, if there is any legality to this appeal, then there is question and requirement for direction on how to address this appeal at this time. Chairman Engelman recalls 3 issues in this matter. 1) Being the question in the appeal regarding the fact of whether this is a retail establishment or a manufacturing establishment. 2) If this is a retail sen ice establishment and can sell coffee, which is allowed, then it goes forward except for the issue of whether you can buy coffee and sit down in the premises, which would come under a special use. Therefore, the 3`d issue is whether or not the appeal is filed, the applicant may choose not to manufacture the coffee on the premises and still be a retail services establishment. Aid. Bernstein recalls that Starbucks was actually a "specialty food store" which was a different category. He stated that for this Committee to make any decision, what so ever in effect pre judges the Zoning Board. He feels it is not up to the Committee to determine the jurisdiction of the Zoning Board. Chairman Engelman agreed because the Zoning Board may choose to decide to consider that there can be more than one principal use on the same premises. He requested comment from legal staff. Ms. Szymanski responded she just had the opportunity to review the documents given with regards to the turn around time and she assures it to be a cursory review. However. she does have some concern of whether this would be two principal uses on the same property, which if this turns out to be true, here recollection would be that this need not go back to the ZBA and at the Council level, they can grant a variation and take steps to resolve the situation. Chairman Engelman called on Aid. Moran for comments on this case considering that it is in his Ward. Aid. Moran was called over from A&PW for his comments. Aid. Moran addressed the Committee stating that it is his understanding that what is before P&D this evening is the request for special use with regards to whether Casteel Coffee can have 4 stools in their business to operate as a type 2 restaurant. He does not see this specific request as impacting on any other aspects or issues regarding the business and what is before the P&D Committee is all that should be taken into consideration this evening. He said there is a serious question about the lateness of this appeal that was filed here in connection with the initial issuance of the permit for this business. Aid. Moran noted, in consistence %with Aid. Ne%vman's comments on questions of estoppel and there might be other due process questions with theoretical defects in the issuance of the permit for this business and the interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance. He stressed that what is definite and knowledgeable is that we have an applicant before the P&D committee tonight that has a simple, clear cut request for consideration for approval by the Council and that x request is for a type 2 restaurant status. Aid. Moran noted that the appeal will be heard by the ZBA tomorrow night and the purview of that appeal issue is not under consideration tonight by the P&D Committee or Council. He referred to Mr..-Uu=sm's memo to the Committee, which is before them. as being very comprehensive, but fmm reading it is pointed out that one of the objectives set forth in the Zoning Ordinance with respect to D2 districts is to encourage those kinds of commercial enterprises in such neighborhoods. Aid. Moran noted that the applicants have invested a lot of time, money and effort and he would like to see the P&D Committee consider those efforts and vote tonight only on the issue of the special use set before them. He feels the ZBA will address the appeal issues tomorrow night and he feels there should be not further delay on the special wse issue. He further noted that there should be no further delays on behalf of the Legal Department's review and opinions to be obtained Aid. Moran expressed his concern for the timing of the appeal process and the legalities involved with that matter. Aid. Bernstein stated that he too does not wish to delay the applicants any furtbicr, agreeing with Ald Moran's comments. He informed the Comminee that this business is moving from his Ward and he does not recall any complaints received on the roasters or odors stemming from the operation of this business. The Committee members discussed in further detail the appeal issues versus the special use request before them. They still remained with the question of when the actual appeal was filed after the Zoning Administrators decision and the obvious timing difference beyond the 45-day period. Mr. Hayes gave further comments and explanation of his timing for appeal. Aid. Nevkmm elaborated on the 45-day appeal process ruling but he noted that the applicant did follow through on the Zoning Ordinance requirements. He does point out the problems that evolve around the notification process and what is actually stated in the notice; he is concerned with the notices not being fully informative of what is involved with a permit or zoning relief issue. He stressed that staff needs to address this issue and look into it for correction and elimination of any further or future confusion with the notification process. He said from past experience. this has happened before and it is obviously a serious situation that needs to be addressed. Mrs. Carol Bezark. applicant and co-o%%ner of Casteel Coffee. explained their request for adding stools in their store to be considered for type 2 restaurant status, is to accommodate their customers who usually come in to make purchases and sometimes sample a cup of coffee. Mr. Alan Bezark added that he wanted to clarify. that they are not the normal type ? restaurant establishment because they do not offer food, do not have kitchen facilities; they only request type 2 status to offer stools for seating for their customers. He said that 90% of their business is for sale of coffee beans or coffee and tea appliances. Chairman Engelman explained to Mr. & Mrs. Bezark that it is not just the addition of stools that . create their business as being a type 2 establishment, but it is the fact that they sell cups of coffee for carryout business. Mrs. Bezark stated that 90% of what they sell is coffee x beans for take home and approximately 60116 is selling cups of coffee consumed by customers. She compared their business operation with Whole Foods which dot not operate as a restaurant but provide seating for their customers who want to sit down and sample the food they purchased. She said their main business is retail sale of coffee beans, tea and accessories for such. Chairman Engelman pointed out that this is another case where the operation of the business could be considered as an accessory use. Mr. John Molarkey, Attorney for the applicants, stated that when the Bezark's filed for their application, they did disclose that their business was wholesale and retail, primarily retail. He stressed that the Bezark's did state their additional wholesale operation and roasters when they applied for their permit. Aid. Newman asked Mr. Hayes how it would improve his situation as far as the appeal if the Committee were to deny this special use. HE noted his agreement with Aid. Moran's comments as far as what they special use entails and that is what is specifically before the Committee at this time. Mr. Hayes responded that the addition of the stools and type 2 status for the business is not his concern, his concern is for the additional special use that should be required for the operation of the roasters and wholesale operation %bich he feels was not properly addressed or notified to the surrounding neighbors. Chairman Engelman stated that the Committee is not considering a special use for the roaster nor for the consideration of the retail or wholesale of the roaster operations, only for the type 2 status for the business. Mr. Haves responded that the environmental factors and compliance should be considered before any approval of full operation is considered. Chairman Engelman informed Mr. Hayes that staff will enforce the environmental issues and it is not a condition or subject of this special use request. NIT. Haves pointed out that Legal staffs opinion should still be addressed before final decision on this matter and he requested that this item should be held or tabled until such opinion is obtained. Ald. Newman noted that the appeal will go before the ZBA tomorrow and the outcome of that decision, if negative to the appeal, %% li go before the Circuit Court - not before this Committee or Council. The Committee agreed the appeal issue is separate and not within Council's jurisdiction with regards to this special use request. Aid. Newman moved approval of the ZBA recommendation to grant approval of the special use for a type 2 restaurant to Casteel Coffee with the conditions stated by the ZBA, seconded by Aid. Wynne. Chairman Engelman suggested that as part of the motion that this matter be sent back to P&D so as to receive the findings of the ZBA from tomorrow nights meeting before the final vote by Council at the December 13* meeting. Aid. Newman accepted the amendment to the motion as stated by Chairman Engelman, seconded by Aid. Wynne. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the amended motion. Aid. Ne%vman requested that staff review the notice issue that 'sir. Hayes raised with notice of the findings given to NIT. Hayes after investigation. He noted that this same issue has been raised 3 times during his 8 years in office and he feels this issue worthy of revising and coming to some resolution or understanding. Aid. Newman also stressed that legal issues need to be addressed with the applicant before any continuance of zoning matters are pursued. He sees this as a matter that must be addressed within staff boundaries, specifically between Legal and Zoning staff before the applicant experiences any delays, confusion or excessive cost. Aid. Newman strongly suggest that staff deal with this issue and he informed staff that this matter has been brought up with the City Manager during his review by the Council. He gave a final suggestion that Legal staff and Zoning staff meets together and responds to the Committee in writing on agreed suggestions in resolving their cornmuni cation issue. ( 1 5) Millennium Si¢n Chairman Eneelman acknowledged Mr. Ira Golan, applicant and member of the Evanston Millennium Committee of Evmark. Mr. Golan requested that the Committee take notice of the change in the millennium sign that was forwarded to them. He said this second design is the one they propose to install on the north face of the Fountain Square building. He noted that the proposed sign is in compliance with the Sign Ordinance regulations. Mr. Golan informed the Committee that the owner of the property has given them permission to put the sign on his building. He said the all expenses for this project will be paid by voluntary community contributions and that they are requesting no funding from the City of Evanston. The Committee questioned how the sign would be installed • on the wall. Mr. Golan responded that the sign will be painted on outdoor canvas and will be attached to the building with by screws. He informed the Committee that they plan to display the sign to the public and install it at midnight on December 31" 1999 so noting the time constraint that they are under for this project. Aid. Newman moved approval of the request to place a millennium sign on the Fountain Square building, seconded by Aid. Kent. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION All items will be forwarded to the December 13'h agenda for discussion. COMMUNICATIONS All items listed will be forwarded to the December 13'h agenda for acceptance. ADJOURNMENT 0 The meeting %w adjourned at 8:43 p.m. 2 NUNUTES Planning & Development Committee November 8, 19" Room 2403 - 7:00 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein. S. Engelman, J. Kent. A. Newman, M. Wynne Staff Present: J. Wolinski, J. Aiello. E. Szymanski, J. Brownlee Presiding OfGeial: Alderman Engelman DECLARATION OF OUORUM Chairman Engelman noted a quorum present and called the meeting to order at 7:27 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINTTTES OF OCTOBER 25.1999 MEETING Aid. Wynne moved approval of the October 25th minutes, seconded by Aid. Kent. The minutes were approved 5-0. . ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION J 13) Resolution 67-R-99 — Amendment to Redevelopment Agreement for 1890 Oak Avenue Chairman Engelman acknowledged the mnised redevelopment agreement amendments and parking lease included in the Council packet. Aid. Bernstein noted the letters from Scribcor and Shaw and the correspondence from Northwestern. He questions Northwestem*s language in their letter in regarding wording that states they will consider allowing parcel 07 to be utilized but seem to state many questions that they still have regarding the entire parking issue. He asked whether we need Northwestern's participation and what the status is. Nis. Aiello responded that we do not need their participation at this point for parcels #3 and 46. She described where those lots are located and added that those 2 lots under the valet parking system will provide use with 300 spaces which is adequate for the Scribcor and Shaw needs. She said that if parcel 46 is requested to be taken down for development, then the consideration of other parcels would have to be required. In discussion with the University, she said that it was stated that they would consider using parcel #7 under the valet system but they couldn't commit to that today for several reasons: I) because of large Iot #20 being closed and (2) the parking needs of Byrl_ its. Aiello said that in monitoring that lot, she witnessed that there has rarely been a day where no more than the first 2 rows of parking were being used. She reiterated that if parcel #6 is taken down i P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 1 1/08/99 Page 2 then parcel #7 would be considered because this lot could easily accommodate both the needs of the City and the B)TI building. 0 Aid. Bernstein asked about grading and asphalting and drainage, if these items have been contemplated. Ms. Aiello informed the Committee that they have received an estimate from Dave Jennings, who is proceeding to lay asphalt laid on parcel #6, of less than S 10,000. Aid. Wynne moved Approval of Resolution 67-R-99, seconded by Chairman Engelman. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion. (14) Resolution 68-R-99 - Amendment to Parking Lease Aid. Wynne moved approval of Resolution 68-R-99, seconded by Aid. Bentstefo. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion. Chairman Engelman explained to Mr. Kardell that these items will be on the Council's consent agenda for this evening following this meeting. COMMUNICATIONS Memorandum discussing Anneal of the Zonino Administrator's Decision - Fee Process Mr. Wolinski explained that staff is looking for direction and request the Committee's recommendation. He said that whenever there is an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's decision, this appeal goes before the ZBA. He said that there have been approximately 5 within the last year. Mr. Wolinski noted that he and Mr. Alterson have discussed the S100 fee paid by the appellant and both feel that if the person making the appeal is upheld by the ZBA stating that that Zoning .administrator did incorrectly interpret the ordinance, then the $100 could be considered a hardship by the appellant_ He said that staff' s recommendation to this Committee is dot if the appeal is upheld a-, the ZBA, then the money should be returned to the applicant_ but on the otherhand, if the ZBA supports the decision of the Zoning Administrator then the $100 fee should go into the City's general fund. He further stated that staff felt this situation to be a matter of equity and fairness. Aid. Bernstein said the S100 fee in itself should be considered because many appeals are with regards to fences where the appeal fee is quite Iarger than the permit fee, which results in people not going forward, if they want to appeal the decision. He suggested a sliding scale for appellate fees be considered based on the severity of the variation requested. Mr. Wolinski said that this is something that could be considered according to the variation requested because he does agree with Aid. Bernstein's feelings on the appellant fee being approximately 3 times more than the fence fee itself. However, he noted the paperwork and processing of addressing the appeal by administration can be costly in the timing it takes to do so. He said that all this together needs to be addressed. Aid. Bernstein stated that if this appeal fee were considered a fee for sevice, then S100 Is P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 11/0&199 Page 3 hardly touches the amount of time in hours spent by Zoning staff and legal to process the appeal; in actually the fee would be more if considered a fee for service. Aid. Newman feel that what staff is requesting now is fine and the S100 fee shoufd remain the same. He said that what staff is offering of refunding the S100 if the appellants is correct is appropriate and fair. He is not in favor of reducing the fee_ Ald. Wyn= asked how many appeals on average come before the ZBA. Mr. Wolinski responded tirt3tt there is one pending currently concerning Casteel Coffee on Central Street. He said om average, there are approximately 2-3 appeals per year. Aid. Wynne agrees with staff and AId. Newman, especially with the low number of appeals per year. Aid. Newman fiuther suggested and supports the fact that anyone who wants a fee waived can come before d= P&D Committee to request this waiver, he said that anyone has this right. After all discussion, Chairman Engelman ascertained that the consensus of the Committee is the suggestion to have a mechanism in place to refund the fee for successful appellant, agreeing with staffs proposal. Mr. Wolinski replied that staff would prepare an ordinance with this language as suggested. ITEMS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION The Committee reviewed each reference on the list one -by -one to contemplate when the item can be on their agenda and what it entails. Consideration of creating a aolicv for idling trucks (Aid. Wynne) Chairman Engelman asked Aid. Wynne why this was referenced to P&D when he feels it should be on A&PW's agenda. Aid. Wynne agreed and requested to re -word the reference to A&PW to read "a policy for limiting the time on trucks being idled in alleys." Chairman Engelman motioned to send this reference from Aid. Wynne to the A&PW Committee to consider creating a policy for limiting the amount of time that trucks may idle on the public streets, private property and alleys. Aid. Wynne seconded this motion and the vote was 5-0 in favor. Consideration of Licensine for Multi-Familv Rental Buildings (Aid. Rainey) The Committee requested the status of gathering information for this reference. Mr. Wolinski responded that staff is still awaiting some of the information from neyhbodag. communities. He assured that this item could be ready for the November 22 agenda - He informed the Committee that he ran into Mr. Heiberger from Evanston Bond & Mortgage who spoke before P&D against this ordinance. and he asked if informatiom could be brought forth from communities that had licensing and saw this as a failure and subsequently discarded the program. He told Mr. Heiberger at the time that he did not: know of any communities where this has happened but if he were familiar with any, theta staff would research it. 40 P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 11/0&99 Page a This item will be ready for the November 22id agenda. Ordinance 44-0-98 - .Amendment to Special Use Procedure This recommendation was from the Plait Commission to amend the Zoning Ordinance section which relates to the control of special uses. Mr. Wolinski explained that the language in the ordinance did not meet the Legal Department's approval and that staff needs to do more work on this. He said that he and Mr. Alterson will work together on this before sending it back to Legal. He said that this reference has beers put on hold for some time however this is an important issue that needs to be addressed. Aid. Newman requested to include in the review of this item - substitution of special uses. Consideration of the request that Townhouses front on a dedicated street (Ald. Engelman) Chairman Engelman said that although this item is his reference, this actually came from the Plan Commission. He recalled that this situation was discussed wfien the Committer was reviewing the amended Zoning Ordinance and it, -vas mentioned at that time whether or not they wanted to deal with the issue at that time. He further recalled the argument that if townhouses were turned perpendicular to the street then their backyard becomes someone else side yard, which can create problems. :did. Kent retailed the issue of problems with City- services because of the way the homes were situated on the lot requires side streets or alleys that could not be plowed or remain easily accessible. Mr. Wolinski used as an example of this situation the newlN developed townhouses at Crain and Dodge. Chairman Engelman suggested that staff supply examples of where this situation is effected. He also requested that the P&D Committee minutes of the Zoning Ordinance meetings be provided for review. Aid. Newman further requested for staff to research what other communities are doing for this, including Chicago and other suburbs. Consideration to develop a nolicv for camaaien signs and City actions on Election Dav (Aid. Newman) Chairman Engelman asked Ald. Newman if he wanted this policy to cover more than just where the signs are placed within the public right-of-way. Ald. Newman affirmed and said that he feels that on Election Day police should not go around picking up signs in the parkway because this should be allowed during that day. He said that his problem is with enforcement because he does not want to see campaign signs regulated on election days and he would like to amend the code to stage this. He feels the government should not ix - involved on Election Day and regulating campaign signs. He said that he does not want to have signs in the parkway for the 45 days prior to Election Day; this policy would only be on that day. Ald. Bernstein recalls that the genesis of this was his request to the City- Manager to get all the signs off the parkway but ended up not being enforced until Election Day. The Committee discussed and decided that all signs should be removed within 24 hours of the election. Ald. Newman requested that staff put this in ordinance form and brings back before the Committee at the next meeting. Chairman Engelman suggested P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 1 Ilog;99 Page S that staff also fends the section that prohibits obstructions in the parkway and amend this. He :asked legal staff if their are safety issues in relation to this. Ms. Szymanski felt that there might be safety issue with this and suggested that this be discussed and reviCwrd by Dave Jennings, Traffic Engineer. Chairman Engelman requested that this be put on the November 22ed agenda but make sure tbat ,%Ir. Jennings reviews this issue. Consideration of the establishment of an Evanston Housine Authority (Mayor Morton) Chairman Engelman suggested including discussion of this issue with licensing of multi- family rental buildings. Ald. Kent added that he hoped to include or leave off' with the discussion and progress that had already begun by meeting with Gary Jump of HUD and the number of section 8 clients in surrounding communities, etc. He requested that updated information be obtained since the Committee's last discussion of this item and that continued dialogue remains with the section 8 office and HLO regarding this matter. Mr. Wolinski suggested that depending on what happens with the licensing issue, if the Council were to pass the licensing ordinance he feels the issue of a Housing Authority would go along with distancing themselves from establishing Evanston's own housing authority. He said that if the Council were to not establish a licensing ordinance, then he feels this issue would come back even stronger. Aid. Kent agreed and feels that this is a huge matter to take on and requires a lot of administrative time and work. Aid. Newman feels that from the research and information they have received so far. he has an ideal of what having Evanston's own housing authority would entail. He said that problem is whether or not Evanston would be able to control the certificates that have already been issued; and the answer that has been received so far is that they would not be able to have this control. He said the overall issue, in his mind, is how does the City deal with some of the problems that exist with section 8 tenants when there is crime involved or with buildings and apartments that are not being kept up. With that in mind. Aid. Newman feels that this issue does combine with the licensing issue. Consideration to review- the siLn ordinance concernine amortization (Aid. Engelman) Chairman Engelman noted that the amortization period is in 2002 and although there still remains some time to deal with this issue, it should be dealt with in a timely manner in order to give proper notice to those that this would effect. The Committee agreed that this is not a top priorin item at this time but should be dealt with in the near future. Mr. Wolinski said that he would like to bring this back to the Committee in January. Chairman Engelman asked if staff planned to send out notices after the Committee discusses this issue or before. Mr. Wolinski responded that his plan is to bring this back to the Committee to see if any further discussion is necessary due to the fact that ordinance was passed a number of years ago, if so, give the Committee time to elaborate on the matter and then send out notices after that. Chairman Engelman suggested notices be sent in ample time before the amortization date. so that Committee needs to get this on the agenda for discussion in the early pan of next year. Aid. Kent recalled the discussion on providing some type of education to the business public regarding the sign amortization issue before the year 2002. P&D Committee Mt& Minutes of 1 I/09/99 Page 6 This item will be on the agenda in January 2000 for discussion. • Consideration of creating a aolicv on the makine of oavrnents in lieu of taxes Aid. Newman said that he has wanted to follow through on this issue for some time. He informed staff that there are many memorandums that have been put out by Jack Siegel on this issue. He requested that staff retrieve these memo's for the Committee's review and to provide a list of all the cases in Evanston were the City has accepted a payment in lieu of taxes. Aid. Newman noted that staff does attend conferences with colleagues in the same field and he requested that staff get a sense of how other administrative officials feel on this matter. He stressed that there is no sense of urgency on this matter but would like staff to be ready to address this issue some time in early 2000. The Committee and staff agreed to have this item on the agenda some time after March 1, 2000. Amendment to Property Standards Code orohibitine olvwood on buildings for more than 7 days Mr. Wolinski informed the Committee that staff could get back to them on this issue by meeting in December. Aid. Newman asked what the alternative is to having plywood on buildings especially in the event of a fire; the building must be boarded and secured until proper rehabilitation of the buildings can be done. Chairman Engelman pointed out that it depends on why the building is boarded such as being abandoned due to being unkept by the owner versus a fire where the owner has to wait for their insurance claim or similar situation. L�vtr. Wolinski further noted that Property Standards along with the Police Department has always taken into mind to immediately have abandoned properties boarded up because they become a target for criminal acti%zty such as robberies, rapes and drugs. He said that Aid. Rainey had concerns about some landlords that keep their properties boarded up for impracticable time periods to avoid the problem of replacing the windows and repairing damages. Aid. Newman said that he would be willing to discuss this matter if someone can come up with a better alternative and expectation of the landlord. Ald. Bernstein recommended that the possibility of economic hardship be included in the discussion for this item. The Committee and staff agreed to put this item on the agenda for the second meeting in January. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:14 p.m. Respectfully submitted. Ja41ellne E. Brownlee • 44 • MINUTES Planning & Development Committee October 25,1999 Room 2403 - 6:00 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, S. Engelman, J. Kent, A. Ne%-mm M. Wynne Staff Present: J. Wolinski, J. Aiello, A. Alterson, E_ Szymanski, J. Terry, J. Brownlee Others Present: D. Anderson, A. Dienner, Ma}nor Morton Presiding Official: Alderman Engelman DECLARATION OF OUORUM Chairman Engelman noted a quorum present and called the meeting to order at 7:09 p.m. For the record, he announced that the first item on the agenda is a public hearing for the Homeless Shelter at 607 Lake Street on behalf of the "Connections for th Homeless", which is conducted annually. He stated that this public hearing will be included in the 10 normal order of business on the agenda and included in the minutes for this meeting_ APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 27, 19" MEETING Ald. Kent moved approval of the October 11 th minutes, seconded by Ald. Bemstein. The minutes were approved 5-0. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION (10) Public Hearing for Exemation from Snecial Use Provisions for Homeless Shelter Chairman Engelman began the hearing with acknowledging the individuals who signed up to speak with regards to the shelter. First on the list was Ms. Shirley Doby. Ms. Doby stated to the Committee that she was a resident of the shelter at various times in the pat. From her experience, she stressed the need to see more resources provided and available for the homeless to provide them with the necessary training and education to assist them in becoming useful citizens in the community so as to avoid homelessness in the future and dependency on shelters. Ald. Bernstein asked Ms. Doby exactly what she expected from the shelter as far as providing more resources. k1s. Doby suggested that the shelter provide motivation classes and helpful job training and daily living skills to better the homeless individuals and their families. She said that the mentality of the • homeless is desperation resulting in low or no self esteem and they need the assistance to help overcome that feeling. She stressed that fact that she is not putting down most of the P&D Committee Mtg. October 23, 1999 4>90 Page 2 shelter's efforts that they provide, noting the different situations in which people beconrc homeless and the types assistance that are needed. However, no one who come to the shelter should be intimidated any further by comments from the staff that matte you feel lower than how you are already feeling. Ms. Doby said that the shelter does provide counseling but there seems to be conflict between the counseling and administrative staff that leaves the homeless recipient in a hard -rock situation. She informed the Committee that she has experienced situations herself and have witnessed situations on others where housing has been denied due to conflicts between what a counselor has advised versus administrative staffs decisions. She feels that such decisions, if negative or result in denial of a homeless recipient for care, should not override what a counselor has recommended. She added that she has witnessed several occasions where you might have shelter one night and be denied the very next day. Aid. Newman stated that he is not sure if the internal operations of the shelter are before the Committee at this hearing. He pointed out that this hearing is strictly for the consideration of the renewal of the exemption from the special use for another year. However, the issues stated by Ms. Doby should be forwarded to the CDBG Committee who provide funding for the operation of the shelter. Aid. Berstein agreed and stressed the importance of these claims, suggesting that the appropriate departments should further investigate them. Mr. Clint Bradford backed Ms. Doby's comments and statements because of his own personal experiences. He informed the Committee that he too was a resident of the shelter and was turned own due to a seemingly conflict in administrative staffs decisions. W. Bradford further explained that he was ill and hospitalized during residency at the shelter and he was instructed by staff to fill out certain forms that he felt were inappropriate because the particular forms seems to declare that his illness was due to a mental condition when in fact he w-as suffering from pneumonia. He claimed that when he refused to sign the forms, he was denied any further shelter. Mr. Bradford said that it seems that the staff of the shelter tends to put a block on the necessary steps it takes to better themselves to move ahead or transition back into society. He further stated that he has experienced being treated and feeling less than human by shelter staff. He reiterated Ms. Doby's comment that the homeless already feel less worthy and lack self esteem and pride and they do not need to be reminded of that by the very sources that they come to for help. Aid. Newman asked how long has Mr. Bradford lived in Evanston_ :fir. Bradford stated that he has lived here since December, 1979 and that his first residency was at the YMCA. Aid. Newman stressed his feeling has always been that long time Evanstoniaas should received the most benefits. of any Evanston funds that support any program, including this shelter. He noted that he understands that rules and regulations need to be followed, but insists that if there is anyway to help and provide assistance to Evanston residents. then the care should be provided. Aid. Kent also noted lw1s. Doby's lifetime roots in Evanston. • P&D Committee Meg. October 25, 1999 Page 3 Aid. Newman asked the shelter staff if they have heard the complaints and comments made by these shelter residents before this meeting. his. Marguerite Norton, outreach worker from Hilda's Place and working on behalf of the Center, claims that they have always put Evanston residents first over other recipients of the shelter because they were instructed to do so and feel that to be the proper thing to do. She explained that for all the recipients of the shelter, there are definite rules and guidelines that must be followed in order to receive the benefits the shelter has to offer. %Is. Norton stressed that they must be able to form a trusting relationship «Zth the client and if a counselor recommends mental, alcoholic or drug abuse treatment for a client, then they must adhere to this. If not, then there is no trusting or dependable relationship to go by. She said this is very important in order of the counselors, administrative staff and outreach workers to provide dependable and safe assistance for all recipients of the shelter. Mr. David Myers, Executive Director of the shelter, added that he has heard and responded to the concerns and experiences stated by both his. Doby and Mr. Bradford and have tried to deal with their needs. He reiterated Ms. Norton's statement that all rules and guidelines strut be followed in order for the shelter to continue assistance for a client. Aid. Kent noted that the Committee has held this public hearing for many years and this is the first time he can recall hearing from people who have lived in the shelter. The Committee members agreed and thanked Ms. Doby and Mr. Bradford for their comments. Aid. Kent suggested that their comments be forwarded to the Human Services staff for further review. Aid Newman asked the outreach workers about their work in the downtown area, where their target areas tend to be and what procedures they use to get the homeless person to utilize the shelter or recommended assistance. Ms. Norton responded that since her organization has opened up services in Evanston on January I", they have served approximately 380 people, which far exceeds the expectations. She explained that the first desire when they encounter a homeless person on the street is to leave them with the appropriate service for their particular need. She reiterated that they have always prioritized Evanston residents but stressed the importance that they must follow the guidelines in order to receive any assistance. She said that many are not ready for the shelter because they have mental conditions or drug andior alcohol abuse problems. If the homeless individual is in need of psychiatric or detox treatment, and then the outreach worker will refer them to locations that handle those problems. some of these locations are on the northside in Chicago. She said that they mostly work in the downtown area because the homeless tend to congregate there however, they do make rounds to other areas in the city. Aid. Wynne pointed out the areas in her ward such as Main & Chicago Avenue and asked if the outreach workers have contact with the beat officers who regular encounter the homeless. Iris. Norton responded that they have been in that area and have assisted several individuals. She noted one particular individual that frequently panhandled in front of a store on Main Street who now has a job. She said that they do sit in on the Homeless Task Force with the Police Department and member of EVMARK and other organization. She noted that her co%vorker, Burt Johnstone, frequently sits in . on Police beat meetings also. Ms. Norton said that the outreach workers regularly target in on train stations and vestibules and behind certain buildings where the homeless tend P&D Committee Mtg. October 25, 1 "9 Page 4 to congregate. Aid. Nm-man suggested that it would be helpful to see some type of annual report from the outreach staff to be reviewed by the Committee for this hearing. Ms. Norton stated that they are in the process of putting together all the data they have collected and will be able to supply that information in the future. Aid_ Kent conveyed his negative feelings on having to refer Evanston residents to Chicago shelters, although he understands that rules and guidelines must be followed; this does not sit well in his mind. Aid. Newman stressed his opinion that because of the commitment that City Officials make with public funding, he feels their greatest interest should be in having the benefit of this funding go to long time Evanston residents. He understands and respects the Center's mission, however, he still would like to pass on the importance of making sure Evanstonians are served first and far most. Mr. Myers assured the Committee that it is the Center's policy to serve Evanston residents first and they make every effort to do so. He said they are aware of the amount of funds received with the understanding that Evanston residents be served fist with such funds. Mr. Wolinski informed the Committee that he has received a call from Mr. Paul Gidding, _ . who has stated his support for the Center and noted the good work that has been done under the direction of Mr. Myers. Aid. Newman moved approval of the one year extension of the exemption from the . special use provisions as stated in Ordinance 49-0-86, seconded by Aid. Wynne. Aid. Newman commented that the City sent out notices and this is the first hearing where neither no one from the neighborhood is present for comments nor were any letters received. He said that this indicates that the outreach program is having a positive impact. He noted his appreciation for all the outreach workers and the Center staff s efforts and hopes their good work continued in this same manner. Ms. Norton extended an invitation to Aid. Newman to join them on one of their rounds to shot., them what they actually do. Aid. Newman accepted the invitation to join them on a Saturday night. Ald. Kent seconded Aid. Newman's acknowledgement of the Center's good work and about this being the first time they have received no public complaints or letters from the neighbors. On the other hand, this is the first time they have had comments and complaints from individuals that have actually lived in the shelter. He pointed out the different perspective those people give versus what the Committee believes. noting the apparent success of the shelter. He noted that since the complaints expressed were said to have been heard by Center staff, he questioned if there is a compliant process set up for shelter recipients to go by -;here they feel their concem are being addressed. �Mr. Myers responded that the Center does have a complaint process set up and at some point at the end of the complaint process, he as Executive Director, must make a decision for the continuance of services. He said the complaints stated have been heard and went through the process resulting in a final decision. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion 0 P&D Committee Mtg. October 25, 1999 Page 5 {Il) Resnhition 67-R-99 — Amendment to Redevelopment Agreement for 1880 Oak v nue ( 12) Rmnlution 68-R-99 — Amendment to Parkins Lease Chairman Engelman stated that in the 2 week interim since the last P&D meeting, in addition to the opinion that was given to the members of the Committee in response to the request, there have been a series of discussions between representatives of the Charles Shaw Co., Scribcor and City of Evanston staff. He requested that Ms. Aiello update the Committee on what has occurred from those discussions and what recommendation staff now has. Ms. Aiello responded that since the last meeting, Mr. Herb Hill has reN iewed the documents as to the legal issues. She said that Mr. Kysiak as convened a meeting with Mr. Crum, Mr. Dave Jennings and herself on behalf of the City, as well as Mr. Kardel from Scribcor, Mr. LaVoy from the Shaw Co. and a Chief representative from Northwestern. She said there were also 2 representatives from System Parking, Inc. She said the purpose of the meeting was to have everyone involved all together to discuss the parking situation during construction between now and November 2000 when the expected completion of the Maple Street garage is due and what other possibilities there _ are in parking, resources. Nis. Aiello stated that it as a ver% productive meeting and they came up with several options. She said a noted fact was that once construction on the garage is underway, we basically have to provide parking for approximately 300 cars; that number represents the Shaw Co. parking leases for their 3 buildings and the 100 spaces for the Scribcor buildings. She explained that Shaw- currently Ieases from the City 192 spaces as a zoning requirement. She further explained Scribcor entered into a redevelopment agreement with the City to build a building with the option to build a second building on lot 93 and also entered into a parking lease agreement with the City for 100 spaces to meet their zoning requirement. Ms. Aiello stated that the accommodation of these required spaces was the basis for the meeting. Ms. Aiello said that the 2 main lots, #3 and s:6. would basically meet the required parking spaces needed. She stated that they presented to the University the possibility to look at their lot #7 which is a lot that was sold to them, to see what additional parking we might use from them because from experience. that lot is not in use to its fullest. She said that realization is the case because up until today, their employees of Byrl building have been parking in lot 920. Nis. Aiello claimed that the University has expressed a i&illingness to look at parcel #7 once they can assess the demand now that lot "20 is closed to see if there are any extra spaces. She said another possibility that the Universiry is willing to took at is the use of Engelhart parking lot to add to the supply. Nis. Aiello stated that the primary parking supply the are looking at are parcel 43 and #6. In addition, they have looked at with the Parking Committee. are some additional street parking on Oak Avenue and University Place and also a strip of land north University PIace behind the townhouses that they have been discussing mith the CTA to use and are in the process of developing a formal proposal to them. She said that in addition to the CTA parcel, they are discussing the possibility of using the area behind the Byrl building to add some parking for approximately 20-25 spaces. P&D Committee Mtg. October 25. 1999 Page 6 Ms. Aiello said that in consideration of the above stated of possibilities, it appeared to be the consensus from both the Shaw Co. and Scribcor, that they would be wiling to consider these parking options. She explained the valet parking as stated in the memo where an attendant would park the cars fender to fender to best utilize the available parking spaces. She said that valet parking on lots #3 and #6, it was verified by the valet parking co. that they could easily accommodate 300 spaces. Ms. Aiello said that the issue has related to the selling of the land to Scribcor and their use for parking was reviewed afterwards with Shaw and it is realized that Shaw would lave to sign off on this. She said that staff has put before the Council tonight a letter that they received from the Shaw Co. indicating that they would be willing to consider the parking arrangement s long as they have people access to the parking. in addition, the Shaw Co. encourages the council not to sell the land until the garage is open. Ms. Aiello claims that she has discussed with Mr. Kardel the issue that if the City sold the land in January, 2000 as originally anticipated, would they agree to lease this land back to the City so that we would control parcel #3 to be used for parking. She said that discussion with the Parking Committee would be engaged regarding this valet parking and what _ concept should be followed. She said that both Scribcor and Shaw would utilize this assisted parking. She said once the garage is built in November, 2000, all parking would go into the garage and parcel #3 and #6 would still be under the control of the City. She said that hopefully lot -6 would be under way of development, but under no circumstances would Scribcor have an advantage of using lot #6 for parking over Shaw. She stated that she briefly discussed with representatives of Shaw late today and they relayed this if this is something Scribcor can live with then they could also agree to this. She acknowledged the need to put all this in writing to have all parties involved sign off on an agreement before the sale of the land can go forward. Ms. Aiello concluded that staff feels the options serves several purposes: 1) this will recede in the number of total required parking spaces needed. 21 It gives the City the infusion of cash immediately to assist in the cost of the garage construction and, 3) It assures the City that come November, 2000 when the garage is ready to open, that 300 parking spaces on demand are covered. Aid. Newman noted that it was well worth the time in holding this matter over the additional 2 weeks considering all the discussions and alternatives for parking that progressed from those meetings. He stated that the concern he has is from everything he has read and from what he has heard this evening, seems to be a contradiction. He pointed out several different statements and apparent agreements that were mentioned in the memo dated October 20ei versus what they are hearing this evening. He noted that it appears that the City does not want to lease or option parcel 03 or #6 until completion of the garage. He pointed out that parcel #3 was optioned originally for development, not parking. Aid. Newman further pointed out an additional memo before the Committee that clearly. sets out that if they go forward with the Scribcor deal, then the City of Evanston has a potential liability situation ►kith the Shaw Co. He feels this potential liability case to be a very important issue. He said it is also important to get the Scribcor r P&D Committee Mtg. October 25. 1999 Page 7 #2 building developed sooner rather than later because the cash flow is needed from the taxes. He questioned if there is any consideration from all he has heard, to the reverter deed because his issue as far as selling the parcel to Scribcor, that be was told by a member of staff that if Scribcor didn't develop the parcel by a certain time then the City would get the property back. Ms. Aiello responded that she believes that this deed was in the original amendment that was part of the earlier packet, Ald. Newman questioned where the agreement is which states the sale of the land back to the City for 51.00. his. Aiello stated that it is clear that all these options that has been mentioned and under consideration need to be put in writing for any final agreement. She noted that within the last 2 weeks there have been numerous meetines conducted and staff has made trips to Atlanta and Washington to make these negotiations. She exclaimed that the best staff could do was put all of the alternatives together and bring them before the Committee to receive feedback, then finalize in writing for sign -off from the parties involved. Ms. Aiello noted that the expectation from staff to the Committee was to receive some confirmed direction in order to accommodate Mr. Karl to conclude his negotiations with his perspective tenant. She stated that they need a clear decision on what the parking situation will be during the interim period before the Maple St. garage is _ built. This conclusive direction from Council is crucial and Sir. Kardel is in need of an answer this evening. The Committee asked Mr. Kardel for comments. Mr. Kardell explained that Scribcor . needs 100 parking spaces and they need verification of where they are going to be so they can give their tenant a definitive answer. He said that a simple answer is needed from the City and they have not been able to get a confirmed response. He said that they could further compound the parking situation by going ahead with the development of the second building but this would not be in anyone's best interest at this point. He said the big concern at this time until the garage is built, is to provide adequate parking for both their tenant and the Shaw Co. Aid. Newman asked for clarification as to what is needed for his perspective tenant's agreement at this point; the knowledge of where the provided parking will be or if it is necessary to know whether or not the option parcel has been purchased. Mr. Kardell noted that he has documentation that states for him to exercise his option up until March. 2000 to purchase the option parcel. He said to help this parking situation, he is willing to work this option into the agreement. In response to a question. Mr. Kardell assured that he interested in purchasing parcel =3. Aid. Newman noted that this extends the agreement that a building «ill be developed on parcel #3 by March, 2001, clarifying the concurrence of a reverter deed that even with the building of the garage, they would still be required to develop the property by that date or risk the property going back to the Cite. Mr. Kardell responded that he is aware of this clause but noted that there is a requirement listed that they have within 120 days of !larch 1 st that the property would go back into the hands of the City. Aid. New -man feels that from everything that has transpired from the meetings and from what he has heard this evening from tits. Aiello and Mr. Kardell that this appears to be on the right track of what needs to be accomplished. He noted that all this needs to be put in writing to solidify what has been agreed on. Ms. Aiello agreed but the need at this P&D Committee Mt& Ocu)ba 25, 1999 Page S moment is a desire to receive a sense from the Committee to report to Council, to be able is to give a sense of the vote or opinion duu all stated is on the right track and that they are in favor of this alternative. Aid. Newman pointed out that the unfortunate part of this is that Council is curable to review or go out and visit the parcel's :order consideration for alternate parking. He noted that one of his main concerns is the possibility of a law suit against the City of Evanston with the Shaw Co. but it is important that both Scribcor and Shaw come to an agreement which it appears has been done. He said they now need reassurance that Shaw will sign off on this agreement. Discussion took place between the Committee members. staff and Mr. Kardell regarding the time frame that is needed to put all this in writing versus the time Mr. Kardell has to respond back to his tenant. Mr. Kardell reiterated what he needs this evening from the Council in order to respond back to his tenant as soon as possible. During this conversation, Ms. Anderson inquired as to the status of the Peyton property and if any further efforts have been made to settlement of this parcel. The Committee noted that in any case this alternative would be an expensive one that the City of Evanston does not wish to take on at this time. Mr. Kardell informed the Committee and staff that he has made several efforts to contact Ms. Peyton and has left several messages on a recording _ with no response to date. Ald. Newman said that he would be content with seeing documentation in writing stating the Scribcor is going to by the property, lease it back to the City for $1.00, the City will see the price and terms of exactly when the property will have to be developed, inclusion of a provision of the reverter deed and lastly, the sign -off by Shaw. The Committee asked Mr. Kardell if he could wait for the paperwork to be completed before going ahead with negotiation with his tenant. Mr. Kardell responded that 2 weeks ago at the last P&D meeting, he was asked to wait up until this meeting for a response. He stated that he is not willing to wait unless he can get some type of vote or assurance from the Council this evening as to what sense or direction they will take: either in favor or against this proposed alternative for parking. Ald. Newman pointed out that there is an obvious good -faith effort to accommodate everyone to resolve these issues; many of these problems have been negotiated within the last 2 weeks. Chairman Engelman addressed'vir. Kardell with the option of a motion that could suffice for the time being until all documents have been drawn up. He noted the direction of agreements declared from the meetings held and discussed this evening before the Committee. Mr. KardeIl acknowledged all that has been said and has been assured by representatives of Shaw that such documentation would be signed -off by them. He stated that he needs something from this Committee in terms of stating that this to be subject to an agreement, as outlined, with the Shaw Co. Chairman Engelman suggested a motion to recommend to the Council that direction be given to staff to come back to the P&D Committee, and then Council. with documentation establishing an agreement amongst the three parties. He asked Mr. Kardell if this would suffice for his tenant. Aid. Newman pointed out that although there is a desire to satisfy this perspective tenant who is claiming to bring 150 jobs to P&D CommWee Mtg, Ocwber 25, 1999 Page 9 Evanston, it is just as important to realize satisfying, the Shaw Co. in order to axoid a lawsuit against the City. Mr. Kardell responded that in a more positive thought, this agreement would satisfy both his new tenant and the Shaw Co as well. It was reiterated that all parties are working in a good faith effort to fulfill the needs of all involved Chairman Engelman motioned to recommend to the Council that they direct suffto come back with wording of an agreement for the Council's approval that win facilitate or muse the sale of parcel #3 to Scribcor, an extension of their obligation to construct on the parcel until 120 days After the garage in the Research Paris has been completed. In the meantime, Scribcor shill lease the land to the City of Evanston for 51.00 and the City will use that land with valet parking, plus whatever other land is available and agreed upon for parking in the Research Park, for providing 100 spaces for Scribcor and 193 for the Shaw Co. He said that if Scn"bcor fails to build within 120 days (inclusion of the reverter deed) that the land would be sold back to the City. Aid. Newman added that an updated letter be received from Shaw that reflects the conversation that Ms. Aiello had with them this afternoon in concurrent with the agreement. Aid. Newman seconded this motion and the vote was 5-0 in favor. This motion is in lieu of Resolutions 67-R-99 and 68-R-99. f 13) Ordinance 117-0-99. Amendin¢ the BOCA Provem• Maintenance Code 1996 Chairman Engelman recalled that this item was introduced at the last Council meeting and that the Committee had asked staff to give them the information about expanding • these kinds of dumpster restrictions to commercial properties as well. He said that staff has requested that this item be voted on tonight as presented so as to move ahead with the present ordinance to begin regulating. He said that staff would need more time to come back in the near future with the needed information for inclusion of commercial properties. The Committee members concurred and agreed to vote on this item on Council floor. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jacqu ine Brownlee 0 4 - MINUTES Planning & Development Committee October 11, 1999 Room 2403 - 6:00 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, S. Engelman., J. Kent, A. Newman, M. Wynne Staff Present: J. WolinsK A. Alterson, D. Marino C. Ruiz, J. Brownlee Presiding Official: Alderman Engelman Chairman Engelman noted a quorum present and called the meeting to order at 6:12 p.m. Ald. Wynne moved approval of the September 27th minutes, seconded by Ald. Kent. Without comment, the minutes were approved 5-0. (121 Resolution 70-R-99. Study of Downtown Evanston Trans2grtation Needs Chairman Engelman called on Mr. Dennis Marino. Asst. Director of Planting, to brief the Committee with background information on the study. Mr. Marino explained the objectives of this project. He began by informing the Committee that this resolution authorizes the City to participate in a study with the RTA of the downtown transit needs and opportunities and it also authorizes the use of $ 10,000 of City funding from the Economic Development Fund. He said this joint effort with the RTA will also lead to a closer working relationship with the transit authorities which will benefit the City. He further explained the additional funding provided by the RTA and several Evanston corporations and economic development groups within the joint effort_ Mr. Marino informed the Committee that this study will be conducted by a consultant retained by the RTA and he explained the broad objectives of what the study will entail. He noted that this study will give an analysis of current transit usage and will help to identify fature transit needs of the existing and anticipated office, retail and residential uses. He said the study will also help identify needed improvements of the mass transit services available to downtown Evanston plus help to better recognize needed improvements in pedestrian, auto and bicycle circulation within the downtown core. In conclusion, Mr. Marino said that the study will basically give the City and the RTA a basic platform and analysis to begin improvements for the overall transportation flow for E ri, P&D Committee Mtg. October 11, 1999 Page 2 downtown Evanston and surrounding community. Mr. Marino stated that from a platr>zYng perspective, he considers this study to be particularly important at this time as the City experienm significant growth in the downtown area. Aid. Wynne asked where the study Merated from; the City, RTA or as a mutual decision. She feels this study is an excellent idea. Mr. !Marino said that the idea came from several sources, first being a group that formed at the beginning of the Arthur Hill project out of concern for the potential impact on our current transit availability. This particular group raised many questions and looked into providing stronger transportation intemonnections to assist the anticipated impact on the downtown with the upcoming project. He said through these discussions, it triggered mutual concern from the City and RTA. He said the RTA at that time, came to the conclusion that Evanston's downtown should be a priority for this type of funding and study analysis because of the expected economic development growth. Aid. Wvnne asked if the City has ever done any study's similar to this in the past. N r. Marino responded that to his knowledge there have been some transit studies done in the past but not to this level. Aid. Wynne questioned what the RTA's relationship is in connection with the CTA and Metra. Mr. Marino responded that the RTA has an authoritative role over both organizations and are more affiliated with various federal and transportation guidelines and available funding. He Added that the RTA is respected and adhered to by both CTA and metra and have regional authority. Aid. Wynne asked how long is the study anticipated to take. Mr. Marino estimated that the study should be completed in a 6 month period, according to RTA. Aid. Bernstein asked to staffs knowledge, is the RTA planning to add additional lines as a result of this study. Mr. Marino responded no and explained that he believes that the RTA is looking for involvement in significant urban development and keeping up and being able to provide sufficient service to those areas for the growth need, such as Evanston. He added that staff is particularly interested in weekend transit service and improving that area of transportation to the community. Ald. Bernstein questioned if the $20.000 has been generated by the Evanston Inventure. Mr. Marino affirmed that to be true and noted the Evanston Inventure's invol,-ement and interest in this study. With no further questions from the Committee, Aid. Bernstein moved approval of Resolution 70- R-99, seconded by Aid. Wynne. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion. (13) Resolution 67-R-99 - Amendment to Redevelopment Aereement_for 1880 Oak Avenue (141 Resolution 68-R-99. ZBA 99-49SUfRL Special Lise fo;a T= 11 Rgstaurant at 711 Church Street Chairman Engelman combined these mo items due to their combined relationship. Since Ms. Aiello was not present at this time for questions, he asked Aid. Newman for any comments or information he could provide the Committee on this matter and questioned if this was reviewed by the Parking Committee. Aid. Newman assured that this matter did not come from the Parking Committee but he does have some concerns that he feels should be addressed. He feels that what Scribcor wants P&D Committee «tg. October 11, 1999 Page 3 to do is not fair to the Shaw buildings because the City has an interim parking agreement with them that says we will Fco%ide surface parking for the 3 buildings in the Research Park. From what he understands, the size that Scribcor wants to put 100 parking spaces on will mean that the 3 Shaw buildings will only have approximately 100 spaces left on lot 6 for parking. He said in essence, the Scribcor Co. wants to provide the same interim parking for their new tenant, as what the City was providing for the Shaw buildings. He informed the Committee that he was told by someone that is renting space in one of the Shaw buildings, that parking was offered to them in that same lot during construction. Ald. Neuman concluded that this demonstrates that this agreement ww not properly negotiated. He said to his knowledge, the agreement the City had with Scribcor w•as that a condition of their options was that they would develop the property within 120 days of purchase. He said that it appears they want :o alter that option, so in his -view-, they no longer have the same option and the purpose of the option was to get a building up and were willing to sacrifice parking in order to accomplish this. AI.; Neuman said that he has a concern with parking for those tenants in those 3 buildings. He feels that the tenants should at least receive notice that the City is contemplating the sale of lot 3 to Scrib*. or and what this company is planning for the Iot. During Aid. Newrnan's comments, representatives from Scribcor entered the meeting. Chairman Engelman acknowledzed them and updated them on Aid. Newman's concerns he expressed earlier. Aid. Newman added that the City has a contractual arrangement with the Shaw Company that obligates to provide surface parking to the tenants in those buildings until there is a permanent parking solution. He said there has been no analysis done because he checked prior to this meeting by our legal staff . as to whether or not go forward with this sale would place the City in potential violation of the original agreement with Shaw Company. LIr. Steven Kardel, President of Scribcor, explained that in marketing the space, it has been very difficult to address to the respective tenants as to what the specific parking situation is going to be. He noted that they have a tenant who has given a letter of intern and they have already gone through considerable negotiations with the lease and this agreement for parking is the final negotiation. He said that their current parking agreement calls for them to receive 100 spaces in the Sherman Street garage which until such time, other options must be considered. He told the Committee that this tenant is a new entity to Evanston and bringing 150 jobs, thcr, are affiliated with Ace Hardware. He expressed his desire to have them as a tenant and feels they -Aould be good for the City also. Ivlr. Kardel stated that they do have the right to take down the second parcel and to start a second building. He said looking at the current environment with pari✓mg, this would further exasperate the problem by taking parking away during the construction period. he explained that Scribcor's plan is to take down the option parcel for one year to provide parking. He said they are currently parking approximately 100 cars in the normal open parking Iot type arrangement. He said that it would be their intention to keep this availability of parking plus fit additional spaces. Aid. Newman stated th :a he does not have a problem in looking at the parking creeds that Scribcor is proposing; he does have a problem with seemingly unfair to the Shaw Company because of the original agreement where Scribcor was to develop a building within 120 days. He said that it is his k P&D Committee Mtg. October 11, I999 Page 4 preference that this agreement be abided by even with the noted parking problems that this would create. He understands the desire to accommodate this tenant but he feels the process in which this is being done is not appropriate. Aid. Newman questioned if this will cause a lawsuit in which the City will be sued and he also questions the entitlement of notice to the 3 Shaw buildings who may want to purchase the property for a higher price. He reiterated that a tenant in one of the Shaw buildings was told that they would be able to park on the property in question. Ald. Bernstein noted that if in fact Scribcor entered the option to construct the building within 120 days, it would appear that either way there would be no parking available on that lot for the Shaw Co. regardless. He said it seems that the City is in jeopardy of the original agreement in both cases. Aid. Newman explained that it appears that the City is choosing one developer over another and the difference would be having a building built on the site in 120 days versus parking and the generated revenue that the building would bring. He said the issue is the original agreement and what was to be expected. He suggested that Northwestern could possibly consider providing parking on thcir 50,000 square feet or provide parking at Engelhart for the interim. He said, regardless, there needs to be a parking plan in place before considering any amendment to the agreement. Ald. Bernstein agrees that this matter does need to be referred back to legal for their opinion. He also questions whether at the time the City granted the option for them to construct the building within 120 days, was this parking issue analyzed then. Chairman Engelman asked for clarification that as part of the development agreement that is in place, Scribcor has a parking agreement with the City that requires the City to provide at least 100 spaces in Sherman Avenue garage and then subsequently in the Maple Avenue garage. Mr. Kardel responded that they are required to receive a certificate of occupancy to purchase 100 parking passes and the parking agreement says that those Kill be utilized at the Sherman Avenue garage. Chairman Engelman stated that if the Sherman Avenue garage is torn down before completion of the building, then the City would be in violation of the agreement with Scribcor. Mr. Kardel agreed. Aid. Neuman assured that he doubts the Sherman Avenue garage will be torn down anytime in the near future that would jeopardize that agreement. Chairman Engelman asked how many spaces are needed for the 1880 building. Mr. Kardel responded that at least 100 spaces would be needed. Chairman Engelman commented that Scribcor is depending on the 100 spaces in the Sherman Avenue garage. Mr. Kardel noted that the garage is approximately 7 blocks away and not very convenient to the building, this is another reason for wanting to provide the open space parking within close proximity. The Committee agreed to hold further discussion on this item until Dave Jennings and Herb Hill could be called over from the A&PW meeting. Judy Aiello and Mr. Jennings entered the meeting for response. Chairman Engelman briefed them on what had been discussed and informed that the issue has come up as to whether the Sha%v Co. Has rights on parcel #3 that they could enforce or the Cit} would be in violation to if they were to agree to sell this land for parking purposes. Aid. Neuman asked if there has been any review by the legal staff about selling this property to Scribcor • AA P&D Committee Nftg. October 11, 1999 Page S and if this would impact the City's obligation or whether or not wz have any exposure. Ms. A CI30 responded that if you look back at all the City's obUgations related to parting, it has been known tbW once we continue to develop the parcels, that in the short term there would be a parking deficit. She said that is why they have brought this issue to the Parking Committee to address some of the situations of changing some of the requirements agreed to in sonic parking arrangements. She reiterated that there was always going to be a parking deficit and it is going to come down to where everyone involved is going to have to give and take_ Ms. Aiello informed the Committee that staff is discussing this with the Kysaik people to identify some additional spaces that could be utilized solely for Shaw but this has not yet been accomplished yet. She is under the impression that these negotiations with Shaw will all be included int ch agreement and staff would not have to be involved. Aid. Newman stated that he would like to hear from legal if they have reviewed the interior parking agreement because he recalls some of the language which %%-as vcr} specific about surface parking. He recalls that it could be interpreted that construction of the parking structure was to be completed before all surface parking was depleted. Ms. Aiello said that it has been known that would not be the case and further stated that through the lease with Scribcor, the City is obligated to provide thetas parking for their building in the Sherman Street garage. She noted that legal staff has not reviewed this matter. Aid. Newman questioned if the Shaw Co. is aware at this present time of the City's intent on the negotiations with Scribcor. his. Aiello responded no, but she is under the impression that as pan of the negotiations, this matter would be presented to the Shaw Co. She has spoken with representatives of the Shaw co. And informed them that there are various issues that need to be addressed and they will be receiving a packet covering all details. She affirmed that the Shaw Co. is not aware of this discussion before P&D this evening. Aid. Newman reiterated his concerns with the way this agreement and negotiations are being handled as it related to the original agreement known by the Shaw Co. He feels this matter should be reviewed by legal staff before going forward with any more discussion or negotiations with the parking issue. He further reiterated his concern with proper notification to the Shaw Co. Chairman Engelman concluded further discussion of these items motioning that Aid. Newman's request and concerns be addressed by staff And that these items be held in Committee until the next meeting for that response. He added that the Shaw Co. be given notice of these discussions. The motion was seconded by Aid. Kent and the vote was 5-0 in favor. 1,1) Ordinance l 2 a-0-99. ,BA 99-49S(. i R) - Spccial Use for a Tyne 11 Restaurant at 711_ Church trees Chairman Engelman informed the Committee that staff' has advised him that there are a couple of changes to the proposed ordinance. One being on the first page - the name Marc Kelly should be Marc Simon, second - name of establishment is Chipolte Nlexican Grill. The third change is on exhibit #B (map) - it incorrectly identifies the location as the Evanston Public Library; location x P&D Committee Mtg. October 11, 1999 Page 6 should be one block south. He noted that these changes will be made and amended into the &W ordinance. Chairman Engelman then called on the applicant. Mr. Marc Simon handed out a booklet with color photos and background information on the concept of the restaurant along with a sample menu to the Committee members. He pointed out some of the differences in their concept versus the typical type 11 restaurant or other Mexican restaurants. He said the most important being that they are a fresh Mexican concept dealing with gourmet quality foods prepared in a quick service format. He said that their hours of operation are typically 11.00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m., pointing out that with these operation hours, they will be serving Margarita's and Mexican beer but will not have bar facilities. He added that only one drink can be purchased per order and no drinks can be purchased without food. He also noted that the early closing hour helps to avoid the late night crowd and to focus on their constituency's which is the family setting_ Mr. Simon informed that there are no microwaves, freezers or can openers; everything is fresh and made to order. Mr. Simon validated their efforts to St into the community and are very excited about locating in Evanston. He noted their condition and agreement with the City regarding trash collection and pick up for their restaurant as noted in the special use ordinance. He also noted the condition with parking and that most of their employees will be taking public transportation. Chairman Engelman informed Mr. Simon that only the consideration of the special use is before this Committee, not the liquor license application. Aid. Bernstein asked if there is a prohibition for liquor licenses for type 1I restaurants; he recalls discussion during the past consideration of L.eMadeleine. Chairman Engelman said that type U*s can obtain liquor licenses. Ald. Newman stated that he has spoken with the applicant about this issue and there was a type 11 that was turned down for a liquor license but there is nothing specifically in the ordinance that differentiates type I and lI establishments. Aid. Newman asked that although the applicant has stated a 10:00 p.m. closing time, is this a condition of the ordinance. Mr. Alterson said that this is not specifically worded in the ordinance. Aid. Newman requested that a condition be added for the closing time and that the time be extended to 11:00 p.m. The applicant agreed to this. The motion to amend the ordinance to include Aid. Newman's condition was so moved and seconded b�• Aid. Bernstein. The vote was 5-0 in favor. . Aid. Ne-A-man thanked Mr. Alterson and staff for the explicit language in the ordinance regarding dumpsters. He said this is an important issue for the downtown area and covers one of his biggest concerns with restaurants. Aid. Wynne questioned if the appearance has changed since the initial plan presented before Site Plan Review. Mr. Simon responded that the original plan has been altered, no significant changes were made that change what was approved. The changes made were to the canopy in front of the restaurant. Ms. Brenniman reminded the Committee of the additional amendment needed to change 1116 VC •P&D Committee Mtg. October 11, 1999 Page 7 the name of the restaurant and owner in the ordinance; so noted by the Committee.. Aid. Bemstein moved to approve Ordinance 123-0-99 with the noted amendments, seconded br Ald. %Nyatie. The vote 54 in favor of the motion. Mr. Wolinski apologized on behalf of staff for the few noted mistakes in the ordinance presented io the Committee. However, he pointed out that this item was before the ZBA just last Tuesday anid staff immediately prepared the packet for Council to accommodate the applicants. The Commime commended staff for their efforts in expediting zoning cases and moving applicants through tie zoning process. (l_6) Qrdinance 117-0-99. Amending the BOCA Prosy Maintenanr& Code 1996 Mr. Wolinski explained staffs request to amend the code for dumpsters. He said that the genesis of this ordinance was a committee of city staff from the Health Department, Corrtrnntity Development, Animal Warden and the City Manager's Office to deal with the issue of garbage witb over -flowing dumpsters in Evanston. He said the current language that is in the Property Maintenance Code basically gives the inspector the opportunity and the right to require moan dumpsters or more frequent pick-ups but the language is not stated specifically. He stated that this committee went out and surveyed other communities similar to Evanston and found the there was a common ground of how much garbage is generated per dwelling unit which was found to be approximately 25 cubic yards. He further explained that they are using this figure as the benchrnwk to estimate the amount of garbage space that needs to be provided for each unit. He said that either the correct amount of dumpsters need to be provided for one pick-up per week or have adequate dumpster space with more frequent pick-ups provided. Mr. Wolinski stated that it is agreed that there is a problem with garbage in the alleys and in many instances, it is caused by over -flown dumpsters. He said that this ordinance will also require that the lids must be closed, flushed tight on the dumpsters or else they are in violation of the code; this requirement helps to prevent animal and rodent infestation. He said that this ordinance also discusses to a small decree, commercial property. However, at this time, there is no set way of coming to a figure of how much a commercial property is expected to accumulate in garbage because there are so many different types of businesses. Ald. Kent commented that commercial business properties are one of his main concerns with over- flowing dumpsters and not enough pick-up services during a week. He has witnessed several instances where an inspector has written up a commercial property for their dumpster and it seems that this violation has been hard to enforce. He is in favor of this ordinance amendment for residential properties but would like to see commercial properties included with this ordinance. k1r. Wolinski stated that this committee is continuing to work on this issue and will hopefully come up with a minimum for commercial uses by classification of the type of business. He said that restaurants will be in a section of their own, which definitely generate more garbage than a regular .store such as a hardware. He said that at this time, they have addressed the residential aspect of this ordinance for Council approval and will hopefully have the commercial aspect ready to present P&D Committee Mtg. . October 11, 1999 Page 8 before the Committee. Ald. Kent said that it seems to him that it should not be that difficult to fit commercial properties into the ordinance with a similar formula used for multi -family buildaags. His feeling is that when he sees a aver -flowing dumpster, whether it be residential or commerdal use building. he would like to see it dealt with in the same manner, under the guidelines. Nir. Wolinski said that the health department and property inspectors currently do have the right to require additional dumpsters or pickups as the need may be for commercial sites, however, it is not codified in specific language as far as minimums. He stated that this is what the committee will be working on and will come back before P&D with a figure in the future. Aid. Newman expressed his concern with the 4 or more unit dwelling for multi -family residential for consideration in this ordinance because of the many 2-fiat and 3-flat buildings in Evanston and of particular concern for the common area between the l st and 5th wards. He said there is a big problem with garbage and rubbish in and around dumpsters at move -in and move -out times and it seems to occur just as often in buildings of less than 4 units. He suggest that this ordinance should be for all buildings 2-units and above. Mr. Wolinski explained the reason they chose 4 units and above was because buildings with that amount of units is serviced by private scavengers and less than that are serviced by the City. Aid. Newman still feels that regardless of the amount of units or who services the buildings, this ordinance should apply to all rental buildings. Chairman Engelman stated that staff has insinuated that they will come back to the Committee with amendments that address commercial properties and he suggest that less than 4 units buildings could be addressed at that time also. He said that for the time being, staff has addressed multi -family buildings of 4 or more units and that is what is before the Committee. Mr. Wolinski responded that staff can come back with amendments for both issues. Aid. Newman questioned why not address all the issues at one time within one ordinance and staff come back with that. He also questioned why no penalties were listed in the ordinance. Mr. Wolinski responded that this amendment is to the Property Maintenance Code which already stipulates a fine up to $500 a day in violation and staff feels this judgement amount is sufficient. Ald. NewTnan said this is not acceptable if the City wants to actually fine S500 per day - the ordinance needs to have explicit language with definite amount and also there is the fact that this would require an inspector to go out ever} day. Staff feels the time spent by the inspector to go out everyday is worth it due to the nature of the violation. Aid. Bernstein questioned if more explicit language is needed regarding the lids provided on the dumpster. The Committee called on legal staff for their opinion on amending such working in the Ordinance. Mr. Wolinski noted that if this ordinance is adhered to by 1-3 unit buildings also, it could require those buildings to purchase new dumpsters or trash containers. Aid. Newman suggested that only those buildings that appear to violate the code should be required to purchase the new containers. Chairman Engelman addressed tits. Brenniman with Aid. Bernstein's concerns for the wording in section 306.2 of the Ordinance. Ms. Brenniman responded that she feels, in quickly reading the section, that the wording is sufficient especially the wording in section 306.4 which . seems to umbrella the requirements for lids on all containers and dumpsters. P&D Committee Mtg. October 11, 1999 Page 9 After discussion, it was agreed to hold this item in Committee until staff can addren the requested language specifics discussed this evening and rill further look into amendments to the ordinance that address commercial uses and less than 4 unit buildings. Staff acknoiMedged this request of the Committee. (1) Exemption fMmSpiaj Use Provisions for Homeless Shelter Staff requested to the Committee that they consider holding the public hearing at the October 25th meeting. The Committee agreed to this date, Ald. Newman requested that staff contact the Center to invite the outreach workers to the hearing for comments and questions. Staff acknowledged. Aid. Wynne moved that the request for public hearing be held and put on the October 25,1999 agenda, seconded by Aid. Bernstein. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion. (2 ) Draft of PropQaad Memorandum! of Agreement between Custer Street FairInc.and the City of Evansto� Mr. Ruiz, Preservation Planner, introduced Mr. John Szostek, representative of the Custer Street •Fair, Inc. Who will explain their proposal. Mr. Ruiz said that he is present for any questions or concerns of the Committee also. hir. Szostek said that their project is the planned restoration of the Main Street Nfetra Depot. He explained that Custer St. Fair, Inc. Leases the building from Union Pacific and their project is basically to restore the building in landmark fashion and to make the building a destination for their business use and for entertainment as the building %4as once used for in the past. Mr. Szostek said that one possibility for funding is the application for TEA-21 funds from the Illinois Transportation Enhancement Program which requires sponsoring from the local municipality. He said this is the reasoning for the needed agreement between Custer Street Fair and the City. He said that Custer Street Fair is also applying for City of Evanston Facade Improvement funds to restore the facades of the depot. He informed the Committee that the City would only serve as a sponsor and would be under no financial obligations for repayment of the fluids which is stipulated in a condition within the application. He pointed out the draft proposed memorandum which clearly states the sponsorship agreement as well as no financial obligation expected of the City. He suggested that city legal staff has the opportunity to review this agreement also. He noted that the TEA-21 funding would provide for 80% of the monies needed and the other 20% would be raised by their organization. AId. Newman questioned the existing newsstand and coffee shop located in the Ivletra depot and where they stand in this restoration. Mr. Szostek responded that those operations would remain an they intend to renovate their locations within the project also. Aid. Ne%,6man noted the current graffiti problems at that site and questioned how Custer Street Fair plans to address this on -going .nuisance. hir. Szostek responded that Custer Street Fair has currently been taking care of the graffiti problems as they occur. He noted that he is aware of the recurring problem and the frequency but P&D Committee Mtg. October 11, 1999 Page 10 he is confident that with noticed activity in the building and more posith-v usage, the frequency of the building being targeted will drastically decrease. Aid. Newman asked how much funding is anticipated for this project. Mr. Szostek estimated that the highest amount would be approximately S I million for the entire project that would be needed. Ald. Bernstein felt the Committee should be aware of serial issues with regards to this building. He informed the members that this site was historically used by a train club and the area Mr. Szostek is restoring used to provide much entertainment and was used by many who enjoyed the toy trains. Additionally, he has requested to Ms. Aiello that the funds that were going to be used for the purchase of the newsstand from the CTA, that a portion be utilized on the facade of the embarkment east of this building. He has not yet received a response from staff on this rzquest but it is still under consideration. Chairman Engelman asked for any final comments from !fir. Ruiz. He noted that Custer Street is interested in applying for the City Facade Program funds and are eligible for up to 525,000. He said this will be a contribution by the City if this project goes underway. He also noted that initially Custer Street Fair was interested in applying for Landmark designation but the owner of the property decided not go forward with this after further investigation into the procedures. However, the building will be treated with landmark status. Aid. Bernstein noticed the wording in the letter of agreement with regards to the City's role as sponsor, he questions if this is acceptable to the State. Mr. Ruiz said that he has spoken with State representatives of this program and he was informed that the wording in this agreement is common. He said, however, the City has the ability to option their amount of involvement with the project. He made further comments as to how the City could address this issue if more involvement is desired. Aid. Bernstein said that he would be more comfortable with this agreement if the Sate signed off acknowledging that the City is under no obligation as sponsor if the fund are not secured by Custer Street Fair. Mr. Szostek responded that he was assured that this was the case even if an assessor were to come behind them. After all discussion. it was the consensus of the Committee to back the draft of the proposed memorandum of agreement between Custer Street Fair, Inc_ and the City. The Committee was in agreement that the project was excellent. Chairman Engelman clarified that staff is to come back to the Committee with the documentation for approval with signed State approval, C� a �i the Committee and staff discussed the draft Comprehensive General Plan and the rescheduling of the October 19th meeting that was planned to address this item. Staff noted Mr. Chris Wonders Is from the City and acknowledged all his hard work he put into rewriting the Plan. Mr. P&D Committee Mtg. October 11, 1999 Page 1 i Marino assured the Committee that he would continue staff s involvement in place of W. Wonders. After brief discussion of available dates, the Committee decided on reaeheduling a meeting for discussion of the Plan on November 15th at 7:30 p.m. Letter from North Shore - Barrington ALcosiation of Realtors_concernism anent licenxn' This communication was accepted by the Committee without comment. Ald. Newman requested that such letter continue to be forwarded to the Committee. Chairman Engelman noted 2 other communications that were presented this evening. Cony of ad in the QQjober 14. 1999 issue of Forbes Magazine from Herb Hill This communication was accepted by the Committee without comment letter from f_vanstonians For Responsible Preservation re: Draft Comprehensive General Plan This communication was accepted by the Committee without comment The meeting was officially adjourned at 7:38 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jac�elin.Brownlee 11 • • �I"VT Planning & Development Committee September 27, 1999 Room 2403 - 8:00 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, A. Newman, M_ Wynne Alderman Absent: S. Engelman, J. Kent Staff Present: J. Wolinski, A. Alterson, R. Schur, E. Szymanski, J. Brownlee Presiding Official: Alderman Wynne Aid. Wynne called the meeting to order at 9:13 p.m.- She chaired the meeting in Ald, Engelman's absence. She apologized for the lateness in starfM time due to a Council workshop that was scheduled before this meeting. Aid. Bernstein moved approval of the September 13th minutes, seconded by Ald. Newman. The minutes were approved 3-0. 1; / ! ;; 1► (18) Aaoeal of Building Permit Fee Penalty Ald. Wynne noted that this item was held over from the last meeting due to no representative being present for either the Buck Co. or Advanced Mechanical. Acknowledgment was given to Mr. John Nouicki of Advanced Mechanical and Mr. Sam Schaefer of the Buck Co. as being present. Mr. Wolinski explained that the Iast meeting when Mr. Nowicki and Mr. Schaefer were present, there was an issue concerning the penalty and whether this Committee had jurisdiction over considering a request for waiver of this fee. He noted that City Legal Staff has prepared an opinion to this question and has concluded that the Committee does have purview over this issue. Aid. Newman made note of the second legal opinion from a'Mr. Price, presenting the applicant, where he made some relevant points, in particular, how this case would stand in Court and also the point that the City can waive a penalty for any or no reason. Ald_ W}Tote called on Ivir. Nowicki for comments. Mr. Nowicki basically reiterated his comments made at the last meeting he was present which argued why his company proceeded with the work iand the seemingly misunderstanding in going ahead before the actual permit was approved. He again, explained working corder a deadline in putting in the cooling system by March 15th. He said -9 y P&D Committee Mtg. • Minutes of 9/27/99 Page 3 that they had received the demolition permit and permission for the helicopter life and lea proceeded on to keep working to meet the deadline %NUe keeping the Building Department infoem d of their progress every step of the way. He assured that they kept working under the assumption tho they had an understanding wit the City that while the permit process was going on they wcx4d continue working. Mr. Nowicki conceded that the work was done in compliance with all codes xnd reassured that if in any way they were under the impression that a penalty would he charred fee the progression in work, they would have stopped immediately. Aid. Bernstein commented that the issue that keep going through his mind is that he agrees the penalty fee is high and both the Buck Co. And Advanced Mechanical are highly respected %%vU knowledged companies, he is concerned with setting a precedence if this fee is waived due to the seriousness in nature of why the fee was charged. He said that he disagrees with the applicants legal Counsel's opinion in why the City's penalty should not be enforced He aid that if it is not cafomed, what lesson has been learned and what message will that give to other contractors, with lessor offenses and less job valuations who have faced or will face this same penalty. Mr. Now•icki responded to Aid. Bemstein's comments that the situation in hand should be considered in such case and every job should be considered on a one to one basis. He compared their situation as an emergency case where time is essential in meeting a deadline for completion of the job. He testified that under the circumstances, he can not wait for a 5-8 week permit process if he wanted to meet the • deadline date for completion. For this reason, the proceeded wit the work during the permit process and kept the City informed of their process along the way. He claimed this is a typical procedure under emergency situations. Aid. Bernstein responded that with respect to this being an emergency situation, the applicant Kw aware of the job involvement ahead of time and in such cases, the City should have been in a position to have ample time to consider this. He said that the argument testified by Nir. No%kicki on comparison to an emergency case, is wasted in his opinion. He reiterated that the penalty fee is costly and he feel this is the real issue that is a question in this case. Mr. Schaefer of the Buck Co, responded in support of Mr. Nowicki's comments made so far. He said that he was in attendance at the meetings held with the Building Division during the entire process. He explained that he called the meetings because of the difficulty they were having in trying to retrieve an additional 2.000 amps of power up to the penthouse to feed the new chillers. He said that they were under an accelerated schedule because of the leasing in the building and the timing to provide air conditioning due to the fact that the existing system could not provide sufficient air. He said that in addition. the job got off to a late start. fir. Schaefer assured that he called the meetings with Nis. Smith because he kne%% that they had a problem from the beginning and he wanted to develop a dialog with the Building Division to make the Cit% aware of what was going on. He stressed the point that there was no intention of misrepresentation on their part and what they were doing. He reminded the Committee of the amount of work the Buck Co., as well as Advanced Mechanical. ha%e done within the City of Evanston and their position has always been in good standing and up front with the Cirri. He said that there would be no benefit on their pan in doing any work under false pretense and w P&D Committee Nftg. Minutes of 9'27'99 Page 3 jeopardy of being fined. fir. S,:haefer confirmed that work would ha% a been stopped if they vverre under an impression of being tined for what they were doing. Aid. Newman asked the applicants if they have knowledge of any other municipalities that allmw• work to proceed without a permit. `Ir. No«-icki responded that under emergency situations, this is normal procedure if there is an tmderstanding with the City officials. He said that this 1 done all d= time in the Cite of Chicago and has been done in other municipalities wit the cooperation of tf t:ir Building Department. Ald. Wynne recalled from reading the minutes, that it seemed clear that Carolyn Smith did not have a clear understanding of what Advanced Mechanical was going to be doing and that is the fundamental problem win this case in her mind. She said that is where she has a problem and she questions why there was not a continued dialog, as stated by both Mr. Nowicib and Mr. Schaefer, that the City Building Officials were not clear on. She stated that even though this may be normal procedure in the City of Chicago, she would not like to see Evanston follow in their footsteps. She strongly feels the permit process should be followed, under any circumstance and there should have been a clear understanding by the Building Department. Ald. Newman agrees with Aid. Wynne's argument and the fact that there was a mistake or misunderstanding in this rase but the contractor claims that they kept %working with the understanding that the City know what they were doing and testified that they' kept the City informed of their ongoing work. He pointed out that the contractor know they would need inspections and a final inspection of the job which would clearly indicate the work that had been done. so why would they continue work if they knew their actions would put them in the position of such a penalty. Aid NewTnan said that he believes the testimony made that the Buck Co. Was in meetings with Building Department Officials during this process and he finds it hard to believe that the City was not aware of the proceeding work by the contractor. He questioned the fact that if the Buck Co. or Advanced ylechanical was aware of being penalized, if they would ave proceeded. Mr. Schaefer reassured that they would not have allowed the contractor to proceed if aware of the penalty fee: this comment was seconded by Mr. Nouicki Aid. Wynne responded that she understands the reasoning. but stands firm that the permit process can not be set aside for any reason except extreme emergencies and she questions the urgency in this situation due to the time involved in knowing the job had to be done. Mr. Wolinski said that he would disagree with Nir. Nowicki's analogy of comparing this to an emergency situation. He said that the Building Division issues over 2.000 permits a year and most are working under an accelerated schedule whether it involves timing. money. etc. He said his major issue is the fact that the Bualdtnsy Division is constantly under discussion %kith contractors and developers over problem situatjon5 but until such matters are resol, ed. �%ork does not begin until the permit is approved and obtained_ He stressed that it is never appropriate to begin work until this process is completed. Aid. Bernstein agreed that this is the point he was trying to make. Ald. Newman said that he agrees with the importance of the permit process but also realizes where the misunderstanding is apparent in this case and he feels that maybe the City needs to take some accountability in this. He stressed the accredibility of both these companies and the amount of worir they have done within the City of Evanston and he feels that if they testified that a misunderstanding P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 9"7l99 40 Page 4 was construed and that they worked under the impression that the City N« a%,.mv. this should be considered. Aid. Newman believes that consideration should be given to the Buck Co. And Advanced Mechartical that they worked with the City in good faith and should he given the befit of the doubt. Aid. Wynne agreed with Aid. Net,.-rnan's view- of the status of both these companies but she also sides with City staffs opinion with regards to whether or not there was a misunderstanding. the permit process guidelines were not followed. She said that even though the good standing of both companies is so noted, at the same time it should be noted that such companies are full aware of the permit process and this fact can not be ignored. She reiterated that earlier comment made by Aid. Bernstein on the importance of setting precedence if such penalty is waived due to status. She suggested that reduction in the fine be considered instead of waiving the entire fee because testimony has revealed that there was apparent time pressure involved in the working without a permit. Aid. Newman agreed that there has been a violation of the code in that respect. The Committee questioned the language of the Ordinance on the set 75% penalty of the permit fee. Ms. Szymanski responded that the Ordinance states 75% but also includes language that states "the Council shall have the authority to waive in whole or in part the fee upon a finding of hardship." Aid. Bernstein pointed out that hardship is based on financial burden. not pressure to meet a deadline. He feels that in this case it appears that the applicant is requesting forgiveness after the fact: fact being that the fee has already been paid, showing no financial hardship. He said that he would be willing to consider a reduction in the fine but no %%giver of the fee, even for the Buck. Co. Aid. Ne%MW clarified that he was not insinuating to treat this case any different because it is the Buck Co. but underlines the point that it is clear that the Buck Co. was full aware of the Building Department inspections and were not trying to hide the work that had been done. He said that it would appear senseless on the part of the Buck Co. to continue work if they were aware of receiving such an expensive fine. Aid. Bernstein pointed out that lust because the %%ork was done right and within the w code. it does not forgive the fact that the work as done without a permit. Mr. `owicki stated that he has done thousands of jobs and has never experienced a permit process problem in the past. He conceded that his company has done work for Northwestern University and all mechanical work for Evanston Hospital. Church Street Plaza. point being that his company has done numerous major jobs in the City of E,.anston with no permit process problems at any time. He said that they have always had a good stand with the Building Division and he would be deeply hurt if after all the time and work he has done in E %an,ton. he %%ould be tined after making one mistake. :did. Newman said that he is not arguing that a tine is in order in this case. but he does have a problem with the automatic 75% being charged_ He does believe the contractor and supports that fact that he has contributed to many major jobs within the City without any problem in the past. He strongly feels the penalty should be significantl} reduced. Aid. Bernstein asked staff how the . came up with the 75% penalty of the permit fee when the Ordinance was drafted. Nir. Wolinski responded that the majority of jobs where this offense is committed, is for jobs of much lessor value. He said P&D Committee `itg. Minutes of 9 27 99 Page 5 the fee was 5(P G up to 2 .cas ago and it was increased to make the risk of working without a permit more noticeable to the cr.,=;.-a.;tor. The Committee discusat7c Cjow to consider the reduction in the fine. Mr. Wolinski gave the Committee some tigure9 ,.,' phsY fines given. After discussion. Add. Newman moved to reduce the fine to S5,000. No second w as obtained. Aid. Wynne moved to redmce the penalty to %: the amount that was originally charge seconded by AhL Bernstein. Ms. Szymanski pointed out the reading of the Ordinance where it states that Council has the a=hority to waive in whole or in part on the basis of hardship. With respect to that section, she asked that the record reflect words to the effect that the Comrittee has determined that most of the entire amount of the fine would constitute a hardship on part of the applicant. Add. Wynne agreed to add Ms. Szymanski's request to the motion. Aid. Bernstein suggested wording that the hardship is due to a failure of communication. The vote was 3-0 in favor of the motion. 119) Regucat for Di%bU=mgmtgf HOME Funds - Reba Place Develgnment Comoratioa Ald. Feldman was called into the meeting for this case. He gave his full support for this project and • commended Reba Place Fellowship for the work they have done in that neighborhood. He said that this particular building has bern a police nuisance for some time. just as many others were that Reba Place has acquired and taken over. He pointed out the blight in that area that was apparent some years ago that Reba Place Fellowship has helped to relieve. He praised their work and contribution for providing decent housing for low to moderate income families. Aid. Newman moved approval of the request for HOME funds, seconded by Aid. Wynne. Aid. Newman said that Aid. Feldman and the previous alderman of the Sth ward, have worked hard to improve that neighborhood and Reba Place Church has been absolutely essential in providing quality housing for that area to low w moderate income families. He commended Reba Place for all their work and said that he is excited to vote in favor of this and totally endorses the project. rid. Bernstein agreed with Ald_ `ewman's comments. He questioned what percentage of units, under the federal guidelines. «ill ha,.e to be rented to 65% median income families. Nis. Schur responded that it depends on the amour.? of HONNIF funds that are disbursed for the totality of the project. A representative for Reba Place informed the Committee they are applying for accredible home loan urant money "hick requtreN trot 601 o of the units are for 500,o or less area median income families. �yhich the% will be pro%idim: or 90°o of the units. Ald. Newman asked of the 5675.000. is this all grant money. \Is. Schur responded that just S50.000 is grant and 5627.000 is a loan and the S150.000 from the Mayor's Special Housing Fund is also a loan_ The vote was 3-0 in favor of the motion. • P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 9/27/99 Page 6 (20) Be,Ruest for Disbursement of Mayor's Spmial Housing Fund_- RCM Place Deyelovt= Corporation In unison with the comments made above, Aid. Newman moved approval, seconded by AX Bernstein. The vote was 3-0 in favor of the motion. (21) Relocation Funding- 124-I32 Clyde Avenue The Committee noted that this relocation funding has already been discussed and approved as a previous meeting in August. She said that finding has already been approNvd for A families and this funding is for the 5th. Aid. Wynne moved approval of the relocation funding, seconded by Aid. Newman. The vote was 2-0 in favor of the motion. Ald. Bernstein refrained from vote due to his involvement with the applicant. (231 Ordinance 117-0-99_ Amending the BOCA Proms Mglintenance Code 1996 Ald. Wynne noted that this amendment to the Code is to formally establish an Ordinance that would create minimum standards for refuse containers and dumpsters for multi -family rental buildings or rooming units. She said that raised a question with Mr. Wolinski with regards to comparison of what is in place now within the Ordinance. Ald. Newman said that he has some additional questions also and requested that this item be introduced and held in Committee for further discussion at the next scheduled meeting. The motion was so moved by Aid. Newman and seconded by Ald. Wynne. The vote was 3-0 in favor. t Before adjourning, the Committee discussed release of the executive session minutes with regards to Dave's Italian Kitchen. Aid. Newman explained the normal procedure with regards to executive session minutes and the reason those meetings are held for confidentiality. Aid. Wynne informed the Committee that Aid. Engelman had suggested that these minutes be released and she was following through for him in his absence. Aid. Newman reiterated that the duty is to release the minutes when there is no longer a need for confidentiality. The Committee noted that this matter was not an item listed on the agenda. The Committee called on Ms. Aiello to respond to this inquiry. Ms. Aiello said that she has no comment on this issue and would go along with whatever the Committee desire to do. Tine Committee discussed this further and decided that it is the intent to hold the minutes in confidentiality until Dave's Italian Kitchen has actually been relocated. They concurred that there is no need at this time to release those minutes. The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m. • 0 • MINUTES Planning & Development Committee September 13, 19" Room 2403 - 7:00 p.m. • Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, S. Engelman, J. Kent, A. Newman, M. Wynne Staff Present: I Wolinski, A. Alterson, P. Haynes, C. Smith, E. Szymanski, J. Brownlee Presiding Official: Alderman Engelman Chairm,an Engelman declared a quorum and called the meeting to order at 7:43 p.m. He apologized to those in attendance for the delay in starting the meeting due to the Executive Session. ' \/ / %3 t 4 4 1 1 1 3 fail Ald. Wynne moved approval of the August 16th minutes, seconded by Chairman Engelman. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. (1") Appeal of Building Permit Fee Penalty Chairman Engelman noted that no one was present on behalf of the applicant for this item and it was the Committee's preference to hold over on the agenda for September 27th. Aid. Bernstein moved to hold this item in Committee, seconded by AA Wynne. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. Consideration of Licensing for MUM -Family Rental Buildings Mr. Wolinski informed the Committee that this was originally a reference from Ald. Rainey off the Council Boor to begin discussions about consideration of licensing for multi -family rental buildings in Evanston. He explained the memorandum in the packet which addresses the applicable of licensing landlords and lists 3 communities (Aurora. Elgin and Oak Park) with their fee schedules which do currently have a licensing program. He said that one of the concerns for Evanston, as the head of Property Standards. is the fact that our rental stock which consists of approximately 14,500 units. be maintained according to our Property Maintenance Code. He said currently we have no licensing program in place for multi -family buildings but there is a licensing program for rooming P&D Meeting Minutes of 9/13/99 Page ? houses which is primarily Northwestern dormitories although there are 20-25 rooming houses outside of NU. Mr. Wolinski said that he tried to offer in his memo suggestions that other communities have put in place. He told the Committee that a team made up of Ald. Rainey, Ald. Feldman, Ms. Sz manski and himself, went to Joliet where they have both licensing and Administrative Adjudication to examine the policy a regulations they have in place. He said that one of the issues that licensing does address, in his conversations with the other communities, is that it ,gives the municipality the power to issue. suspend or revoke licenses to property owners of buildings that are not being kept up to City Codes or have numerous police complaints against it. He said it appears the procedure for the other communities is to send out letters of information to correct any violations and warning the property owner of possible license revocation or suspension if such violations are not corrected in a timely manner. Mr. Wolinski noted that Evanston has checkerboard areas of problem buildings and landlords that abuse our City Code requirements. He believes that licensing would allow more control over continued maintenance or rental properties and he also feels the placement of Administrative Adjudication in Evanston could help in speeding up the judicial process in getting these property owners to comply. He said that landlords could be issued a license and if they maintain their properties in accordance with city Code. the license would continue and be renewed annually and those buildings with violations and police complaints would be in jeopardy of license renewal. He further explained the building inspection cycle to the Committee in comparison to the amount of inspectors on staff and their areas of responsibility. He said that in the CDBG Target areas, inspections are being conducted approximately every 2 years and the other areas every 3-4 years. He said that licensing would allow the City some leverage in having to require inspection of properties that are constantly being maintained by their owners which would allow our inspectors some relief in their schedules and allow more time for problem areas and this would also relieve those landlords who take responsibility for their properties. Ald. Kent entered the meeting at this time. Mr. Wolinski informed the Committee that one of Evanston's critical issues is the amount of Section 8 housing provided within our City. He said that in cook County. Evanston has the second largest number of certification holders. first being the Cinof Haney. He said this issue has been of concern to Mayor Morton and City staff as «ell. He noted that not only is the Section 8 issue to do with some problem tenants but also the fact of landlords who abuse the Section 8 program and take advantage of those tenants with underhanded methods. 'fir. Wolinski said that over the past several years. the City has tried to work with Cook County- Housing Authority by trying to develop a dialog to address the problem issues. He said that he is disappointed in the response he has received from Cook County in trying to make efforts to work together. He informed the Committee that City staff has conducted several meetings "ith Gary Jump and his staff from the Section 8 office and in those meetings staff informed them of certain landlords and buildings with numerous police and code • violations. Staff was told by Mr. Jump that those landlords would not receive any new certificate .P&D Meeting Minutes of 9/13/99 Page 3 holders to rent to. Mr. Wolinski said that in subsequent meeting that followed. Mr. hump iafotmed staff that the County's legal authority stated that they could not make this declaration at this time and would look into warning those landlords of the violations against them and their b0cift as would have to be corrected. He reiterated staffs disappointment in this response and informed the Committee that he and the City Manager have sent a letter of appeal to Mr. Floyd, Dirtctor of Cook County Housing Authority, review this matter. Nlr. Wolinski concluded that staff would like to see the city have the authority that licensim would provide and have the power to take awav licenses from such landlords. He also feels licensing wold allow the City the power to oversee these properties in coming into compliance in more timely manner. He believes that licensing would allow the City this authority. He also added that Gcenning could reward those property owriers who do take responsibility for their multi -family rental properties and would allow our property inspections more time to spend on problem buildings that require more attention. He said that staff supports the consideration of having licensing of rental units within Evanston and licensing would also take a lot of the control away from Section 6 authority and allow the City to take over the decision of allowing these problem landlords to continue renting if the}, do not abide by City Codes. Aid. Newman said that he is curious on how to hold landlords responsible for problem tenants and the legal issues that the City would face in tr}ing to do this. He expressed his interest to staff in receiving more background information on how this can be achieved and what the other communities are doing to enforce this. He raised question on the Universit% rental properties and questions whether the City, under licensing. could make the landlord state the number of tenants they are renting to in their buildings and per unit. tilr. 'Volinski responded that requirement is already regulated within the property maintenance code. Aid. Newman noted many buildings in the University area where he feels this regulation is being abused and is not realized until a complaint is lodged. He would like to see the City in the position to be informed of the number of tenants in a unit per building at all times and he would hope that licensing would allow the City to have this information from the start; eliminating the problem before it is noticed in the form of a complaint. He also would hope that this could put a handle on limiting the amount of cars allowed per unit due to the existing problems with parking and complaints of numerous cars per building and the problem of students illegal parking of cars on properties. Mr_ Wolinski responded that he is not familiar with the regulations on the amount of cars allowed per building or unit. but this is an issue that can be addressed in consideration of a licensing polio. :did, Nevanan said the care and parking issue is a problem within the NU area and he would like to see this addressed in the licensing of rental units for the University properties. Aid. Newman said with regards to the Section S issue, that he would like to see staff follow through on the examples of the other communities that are administering their own licensing police. He would also like to know the size of the buildings and number of units we are dealing with on the • buildings that City staff has tried to work with Cook County on with the problem landlords. He P&D Meeting • Minutes of 9/13/99 Page 4 would like to get some idea or handle or what we are dealing with in Evanston as fir as the imp= on the entire rental unit stock versus number of tenants and tenants on Section 8, where the Secti m 8 tenants are living and the landlords they are renting from. Mr. W'olinski responded that dxm buildings in question with the problem landlords are 16.24 unit buildings and are majority Section 8 certificate holders. He said that not all the units in the building have problem trirartts or tenants on Section 8 but the problems effect the entire building. He stressed that he is not against the subsidized housing program and feels it does benefits many qualified and deserving people but them are those few problem tenants that the City- can not seem to the Housing Authority to address. He said that it appears the Housing Authority wants to run the rental subsidy program but leave the communities to deal with the problems that exist with the maintenance of those properties and the landlords that take advantage of the program. Ivir. Wolinski also noted that it appears the County works on a different inspection code for requirements to allow rent to their certificaa holders than what the City Code requires for decent housing: it is much less restrictive. Aid. Kent agreed with Ivir. W'olinski's observation of the Housing Authority's inspection requirements versus the City- Code requirements. He noted that our Ciry inspectors have gone out on inspections and discovered several instances with illegal dwelling units in buildings where 2 fiats have been converted into 3 flats and in most instances. the illegal units are being rented to Section 8 tenants. He stressed his constant concern with this problem and the problem with the tenant being put in a position by the landlord because of underhanded abuse of the Section 8 program and manipulation by the landlord against the tenant into not reporting their living; conditions. He pointed out that this also happens frequently with single family homes being rented by Section 8 certificate holders. Aid. Kent said that is why he is in favor of the licensing for rental units because it would give the Cit% the opportunit} to not only help the "good" landlords that take care of their rental properties and also help decent Section 8 tenants and help weed out those that do not deserve to be on the program. But most importantly. the licensing program would weed out those landlords that are clearly takings advantage of our City Code requirements, tenants and the Section 8 program. Chairman Engelman commented that from this observation of what has been discussed so far, it appears that the licensing of multi -family rental units would attempt to grasp and put a handle on many of the problem landlord issues as far as compliance with our City Codes and help to eliminate some of the problem tenants. He said that licensing would also seem to benefit those landlords that have always kept their properties up to code. Ald, Newman stressed that his biggest concern is going after the landlords that have proven to have total disregard for our Ordinance and City Code requirements. He feels this licensing policy would adhere to and specifically effect those landlords who do abuse the rights and privileges given to them with the Section 8 program. He said in return, the licensing program would support those landlords who do respect and abide by our City codes. Fie gave more examples of those buildings within the University area that disrespect our City Codes but pointed out the disrespect and abuse of the tenants as well. He stressed the importance of finding a way to assist in the enforcement by the City to • PRcD Meeting Minutes of 9/13/99 Page 5 address these problems, whether by landlord or tenant, and he feels licensing of rental units is a method of some type of control. Aid. Bernstein said that he is in agreement with the problems discussed so far but has several points of concem that also need to be addressed. His first concern is for r the enforcement of the problems mentioned, especially for the responsibility of the landlord with problem tenants and the legalities of enforcing them by way of revoking or suspending their lieeme to rent because of a problem tenant. He said, secondly, is the problem of the cost of licensing and the subsequent effect of raising rents to cover those cost by landlords. He is positive this cost will be passed down to the tenant in the long run, reminding the Committee of the already existing high cost of rent in Evanston. In this respect, he feels this will effect those landlords who do take care of their properties and he questions the fairness in this. His third concern is with the displacemm of tenants who are in a problem building with a problem landlord. He questions the cost of replacing those tenants in other housing and who will pay this cost; also there is the question of where these tenants will be placed because there is limited amount of affordable housing within Evanston. Aid. Kent suggested that the licensing could start with buildings that already have a Iist of police complaints against them and buildings with large numbers of violations. He stressed the important of getting a handle on the problem landlords and enforcing compliance in their buildings or eventually revolving their license to rent in Evanston or those problem buildings. He expressed his support for this type of licensing for rental units. Aid. Wynne suggested that staff research further into the licensing of multi -family rental properties with those communities that have a program in place. She also suggested that staff start by addressing some of the questions raised by the Committee, such as enforcement, and see how the other communities are handling this within the program. Chairman Engelman questions how this licensing program could actually help out the "good" landlords because it seems in his opinion that all multi -family rental buildings should be inspected within a certain time frame. for safety issues. He commented on -Md. Kent's concerns with 2 flats turned into illegal 3 flats. He questions the impact these 2 flats have for the licensing program because there are twice as many ? flats versus 3 or more unit buildings. Chairman Engelman called on audience comments at this time. Mr. Bob Heiberger of Evanston Bond & Mortgage and also with the Evanston Property Owners Association, commented on the fairness of this licensing program. He questions if licensing would be revoked for one problem unit or would licensing for the entire building be revoked because of a few problem units. Mr. Wolinski responded that it could go either way depending on whether the landlord is one that has continually broken the law and not abided by City Codes. P&D Meeting w Minutes of 9/13/99 Page 6 Mr. Heiberger requested that staff look into how many landlords there are versus how many problems there are. He would assume there are only a handful of bad landlords that might cr%m several buildings compared to the entire number of landlords within Evanston. He expressed his concern for fairness to landlords with tenant problems because this is an unforseen predicament in most cases and is not the fault of the landlord but it appears that the landlord must take on the bur+dea of loosing their license if they do not take care of this problem tenant. He feels the City should get involved in these cases. He concluded that his biggest concern is with the fairness issue with regards to the landlord. Aid. Newman requested that staff retrieve more information on how other communities are enforcing their licensing program, specifically the Village of Oak Park and their experiences with the program. He commended staff' on the comparison information that they did put together and requested an extension of information in this method. rid. Bernstein requested that staff review the other communities on the cost of collections and make an analysis of what it would be for Evanston: also how the City will pursue these fees. Chairman Engelman raised the question of occupancy, as mentioned by Aid. Newman earlier, he requested that staff review whether or not the other communities are addressing this issue in their licensing program. Aid. Newman suggested that this question be addressed by our legal staff as to whether this question can be asked on the licensing application. He suggested that another college city or town be researched with their own licensing • program to compare with Evanston. Chairman Engelman concluded that the Committee and staff have proven that this is obviously an issue of concern. He requested that staff address the questions and concerns raised and come back before the Committee in the near future. Aid. Wynne moved to go into Executive Session at 8:31 p.m„ seconded by Aid. Bernstein. Vote was unanimous. oil 11111►► ► The meeting was adjourned at 9:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted, vv..4 . NJacqine E. Brownlee e MINUTES Planning & Development Committee August 16, 19" Room 2403 - 7:00 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, S. Engelman, J. Kent, A- Nevrman Alderman Absent: M. Wynne Staff Present: J. Wolinski, A. Alterson, M. Baaske. R. Schur, C. Smith, E. Szymanski Others Present: Y. Dickerson, T. McMahon Presiding Official: Alderman Engelman Chairman Engelman declared a quorum and called the meeting to order at 7:14 p.m. Chairman Engelman announced to the Committee, that item IX2 under Items for Discussion regarding the Appeal of the Decision by the Sign Review and Appeals Board, the applicant has been made aware that originally the matter was tabled by the SRA.AB, therefore, it is not right to make an appeal here. The applicant has withdrawn the appeal and have taken the matter back before the SRAAB. ; 9 0',1 1 u 1 11 1 0 la Aid. Kent moved approval of the July 12th minutes and the July 26th minutes, seconded by Ald. Bernstein. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. Chairman Engelman changed the order of the agenda. (25) Ordjnance 103-0-99 - Sj►ecial Use for tv�t�e_2 Restaurant at Q0 Davis Street Chairman Engelman recalled that the Committee did not have the transcript at the last meeting but this was introduced on Council floor. He asked the Committee if there were any questions or concerns now that they have received and reviewed the transcript. Being none, Chairman Engelman announced that this item will be on the consent agenda this evening. (25) Plat of Re -Subdivision - 327 Sherman Avenue Chairman Engelman acknowledged the applicant, Mr. William James. Mr. James had no comments. • Ald. Newman moved approval of the plat of resubdivision, seconded by Aid. Bernstein. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. P&D Committee Mtg. . August t6. 1999 Page 2 Q'1) Appeal of Building Permit Fee Penalty Chairman Engelman acknowledged Mr. Sam Schaeffer of the John Buck Co.. 1603 Orrington Avenue and Mr. John Nowicki of Advanced Mechanical Systems. He also acknowledged Ms. Carolyn Smith, Asst. Director of the Building Division that would give staff s perspective. Mr. Novicki summarized his letter explaining that he feels there has been a misunderstanding of what they intended to do. He said that Advanced Mechanical Systems (AMS) was employed by the Buck Company in November, 1998 to replace the boilers and the chillers within the building. He said that they submitted for a permit around the 1 st part of January and at that time a meeting was held consisting of a representative from AIMS, the John Buck Co., their electrical subcontractor and Ms. Carolyn Smith. It is his understanding that in the meeting, scheduling for the building was discussed and they informed the City of their wish to have the air conditioning installed by March l 5th to provide the occupants with a cooling system. Mr. Nowicki further explained that it was also his understanding that they would be issued a demolition permit for the existing cooling system to be removed and a helicopter permit, which were issued. He said they then proceeded with the work with the understanding that the permit for the rest of the work would be in process and they would be allowed to work to meet the scheduled deadline. He said that if there were a difference in what they installed and what is required by the permit, ANTS would correct this, assuming, with no penalty from the City. Mr. Nowicki revealed that the permit process took longer than anticipated and AMS 40 was called around the 1 st of March at which time they were asked if they had been working and they told the City they had. He said at that time. City officials informed them that AMS should seize working and they were then assessed an S 18,000 penalty. He said at that time, he had no other choice but to submit a check over to the City in order to finish the project. Mr. Now•icki conceded the position, on behalf of AMS and the Buck Co., in that both have done a large volume of work in the City of Evanston and there is no benefit to them to do work without a permit and to be subjected to any fines. He stressed that it was never their intent to do anything that was contrary to the Code and he feels this is totally the result of a misunderstanding. He said AMS has worked in the entire Chicago land area and the procedure they followed is not an uncommon arrangement in the City of Chicago and other communities as well. He noted to the Committee that he has worked in the City of Evanston since 1956 and has never been lined in any village or city in the past. Mr. Novicki requested that the Committee take into consideration all that he has explained and consider relieving them of this penalt}•. Mr. Schaefer added to Mr. Nowicki's comments that with the extensive renovations that have been undergoing for some time at 1603 Orrington, the Buck Co. Has made evm effort and have complied to City Codes to even• degree that has been required of therm. He stressed that it has always been their intent to satisfy and bring the building up to code in all the required aspects. He said that it has never been their intent to deceive the City and they were certainly operating under the impression that the City was fully aware of what they were doing every step of the way. Mr. Schaefer stressed • the fact that if the Buck Co. Had been aware of any fines or penalties caused by their actions, they P&D Committee Mtg. Aueust 16, 1999 Page 3 definitely would not have proceeded arr further with ongoing work. Mr. Schaeffer pleaded that the Committee and City staff reconsider the reversal of the fine placed upon AMS in consideration of the explanation given. Chairman Engelman called on City staff comments at this time. Ms. Carolyn Smith said that she agrees that there obviously must have been some misunderstanding at the time she acquired about the work going on and it did appear to be a surprise on behalf of ANTS and the Buck Co. She informed the Committee that it became immediately clear of the misunderstanding because she had never acknowledged that work could go on without a permit. She was under the impression that the work being done had a deadline. She said that there was a significant issue of how to rise up with the electrical service in the most efficient and safe manner and the meetings held were to figure out and work towards that goal. She said. with that in mind, that it was the Building Divisions interpretation that things were moving forward in terms of development of the reaching that goal but she stressed that at no time «•ere they under the impression that work was going on. Nis. Smith clarified that the applicant did submit drawings but at the time the drawings did not adequately define the scope of work which is why the permit process took some time to process. She explained in more detail the problems with the drawings. Ms. Smith reiterated her feelings that there was a .misunderstanding by the applicant in their belief that they had authorization to go forward with this work before the permit was approved. She confirmed that AMS did admit to the work going on when she asked and she immediately sent an inspector out to the job site. She stressed that before a fine of this nature is placed upon a contractor, City inspectors would go out to the site to verify the work that has been done. Ms. Smith stated the Building Division's responsibility in following every step of the process in any building construction or renovation within the City, especially with high rises which require extra special attention to all details. Ms. Smith concluded that a permit is required, in all cases, prior to starting work. Mr. Wolinski informed the Committee t1%at he had discussed this matter with Mr. Nowicki after he was levied the fine by the Building Division. He admitted the fact that AMS has done a lot of work int eh City and have always followed alt the regulations within the Code and he feels they are an upstanding contractor. However, he pointed out that there are several issues that bother him with this case. He explained that with the meetings that were held involving City building staid and the general superintendent of AMS, it has always been a rule and stressed in the Code, that no work can be done without a permit and this permit must be displayed on the job site. He said that the display of a permit justifies the fact that the City has approved the plans. Mr. Wolinski said what concerns him most is the fact that this contractor has a great degree of experience in this area so the assumption that work can be done without a permit is hard for him to identifi- with. aid-ough he acknowledges that AMS's intentions were honorable. He admitted that since the Buck Co. Has taken over the 1603 Onington site, it has been a vast improvement for the downtown and general area. However, he reminded the Committee of the past high rise fire and he is extremely cuncerited with any construction to such buildings and the necessity of following the operation diligently by his building inspection staff making sure that all work be done by Code without exception. .\Ir. P&D Committee Mtg. August 16, 1999 Page 4 Wolinski stressed that the responsibilities as Code Officials are that the proper procedures and regulations be followed to the maximum, especially in the case of high rise buildings: this requires the approval of plans for the required building permit. Aid. Newman asked as the work was completed, was it done to code satisfactorily_ Mr. WoUnsU replied that it has. Aid. Newman moved to waive the penalty fee placed on Advanced Mechanical, seconded by Ald. Bernstein. Aid. Newman explained that he feels from reading the information received and the comments made so far and, that thew is no doubt that the applicant has applied for 2 other permits, the demolition and the helicopter. Therefore, it proves this applicant does know City regulations and there is also confirmation of meetings held with City staff. He clarified that he is not den}7ng that the applicant has made a mistake in this case which the applicant has admitted to, however his problem with this is the very stiff penalty. Aid. Newman gave background on his experience with the John Buck Co. and the Whole Foods project explaining their good faith actions in the past and how throughout the entire project, they have been very cooperative and responsive to any concerns raised He said the Buck Co. has done an excellent job on the entire building. He pointed out that with the reputation of both the Buck Co. and Advanced Mechanical, he does feel an honest mistake has been made in this case. Ald. Nemmian gave recognition to City smfTfor their efforts in enforcing the Code, but he reiterated his concerns on the amount of money involved in this penalty. Ald. Newman would like to give the Buck Co. and AMS the benefit of the doubt. Mr. Schaeffer clarified that the original meeting with the Building Division was to discuss the how best to proceed with bringing the upgraded service to the penthouse. It was realized then that it would take some to time to figure this problem out which was discussed in the preliminary meetings with the Building Division. He affirmed the fact that as soon as they were made aware of the fine, he immediately stopped the work being done by AMS, as well as all the other work being done within the building. He said that it was two days after he had the work stopped, that the City inspector came to the job site and red -tagged that job. He feels it important for the Committee to recognize that in no way was it intention on their part to deceive the City in any way. In response to Aid. Newman, Mr. Wolinski agrees with his comments made in view of the John Buck Co. and their contribution and influence on the downtown area. However, as the Administrator of the Department, he is bound by the Ordinance which states that if someone is discovered working without a permit then they are to pay 75% of the permit fee as a penalty. the permit fee was S24.000 resulting in the penalty fee of S 18,000. lie pointed out that it is within the discretion of this Committee and City Council to overrule this penalty, but as the administrator, he feels obliged that the enforcement of the penalty rule mas his responsibility. Ms. Smith added that the timing factor in this case is decisive because the original drawings were inadequate and this was a problem which was noted to the applicant right away. L�] • P&D Committee Mtg. August 16, 1999 Nee 5 Ald. Bernstein stated that several matters bother him with this case. One being the fact that the John Buck Co. is very upstanding and AMS is also well versed as a contractor, both knowing or should be aware of the permit process. He questioned staff if this case qualifies as a technical % iolation or is it the perceived impediment of having to go through a permit would delay the completion time Ms. Smith responded that she dues not think there tivas a perceived delay regarding the permit process. She pointed out that the Building Division does not have the manpower to oversee every job that is going on within the City and she find it disappointing that out of all the many contractors doing work, this level of a qualified contractor would go forward working without a permit. She stressed the fact that if something had gone wrong, it would have been very unfortunate because there was no approved plan in place; this is a very serious problem that should be noted. She also stressed that fact that both companies were aware of their time frame for having the work done and should have accommodated this schedule with the permit process. Aid. Berstein said that Ms.. Smith's response addresses his concern with this case. Ald. Kent commented that although he understands the importance and seriousness of the problem just stated by Ms. Smith, it is also important to recognize the experience of this contractor and the fact that all the work done %%W to code with no problem. He questioned where drawings stand at this point being that the original drawings were inadequate and have staffs concerns been addressed. Ms. Smith responded that when it became aware to the contractor that a fine was involved, the process seemed to move along very quickly from that point. She said that new drawings were not received immediately after the original drawings were deemed inadequate; it appeared that when the fine was noted, it moved the contractor to submit new drawings. She said that weeks went by before new drawings were received. Mr. Novicki explained that from the original drawings there were several questions regarding the electrical and a few other elements that they could not solve at the time plus they were trying to get their hands on the existing building plans because they were needed to help solve some of the questions at stake. He said the misunderstanding came in because they were under the impression that they had a umbrella approval since they had received the demolition permit and the helicopter permission and went forward to meet the March deadline. He said that the electrical problems were the major factor in trying to get power to the top of the building which is the cause in the delay of the permit process. Once this information was all retrieved to finish the permit process, they were able to hand it over to the Buildine Division which was the balance of the information needed for the permit. Chairman Engelman asked Legal staff what is the Committee's jurisdiction. ills. Szymanski said in order to make a decision on this. council has to make a finding, in order to grant the waiver in whole or part, of hardship on the applicant. Chairman Engelman questioned the basis of hardship in this case. Aid. Newman comments on the lack of information received in Council packets in order for them to make such decisions or be informed of the proper direction to take. He said if there is a part of the Ordinance that covers the item then it should be include din the packet materials. Ms. • Szymanski directed the Committee to the section in the Ordinance that covers the permit fee penalty of 75%, and explained that this fine is what the Council is to determine whether this fee should be P&D Committee Mtg. . August 16. 1999 Page 6 waived upon which a burden of hardship must be proved and justified b% the applicant. Md. Newman said he does not agree with legal's opinion because he understands these standards to be for someone wanting to waive the underlying building permit, for example. such as a not -far -profit organizations. Ms. Szymanski responded that she would tend to arm with Ald. Newman and informed the Committee that she discussed this with Corporation Counsel (Mr. Hill) and their conclusion was that although there is no reference in this additional lead-in phrase, there is a phrase that reads "Council shall have authority to waive a full or part any fees for any building permit." She said that give that the matter is now pending before the Committee, legal stab`s determination was that this is broad enough to include an increase in a fee if a permit had not been obtained. Ald. Newman still disagrees with legals determination because he does not agree to waive a permit fee under that particular section of the Ordinance. He feels this appeal is meaningless under that section and the only way to waive a permit fee under this provision is to evaluate hardship on the ability to pay. He clarified that he is not denying building staffs position but this standard can not apply to this case due to the circumstances involved. He fees there are no real standards to follow in this situation to waive a permit fee fine in which Council can determine a hardship by the applicant. Chairman Engelman stated that if that's the case, the Committee would be acting arbitrarily. The Committee discussed this matter in further detail. Aid. Newman feels that language is needed in the Ordinance to define what the standards ought to • be for penalties. Aid. Bernstein said that he now looks at this case in that it appears to him that what the law calls an absolute liability offense; if you proceed without a permit then you are guilty. He explained that what he was trying to invoke is intent versus non -intent. He questions whether the Committee has the authority to deal with this issue at all because he does agree that Council does have the discretion to waive a permit fee due to financial hardship, but it is not the case in this matter. Ms. Sz---manski reiterated L.egal's opinion on the appeal of any permit fees. Aid. Newman concluded, from all comments and discussion thus far, that this Committee needs some memorandum from both sides, as to what the jurisdiction is under the Code to waive the fee or not. He said that the applicant needs to come up with arguments for a legal basis on what a municipality should do about waiving a fee when there is no explicit language in the Ordinance that sets standards for this. In addition, the City's legal staff should inform the Committee as to whether or not they think we have the discretion to waive this fee. Ald. Newman said he assumed when this was placed on the P&D agenda, this gave them the authority to determine such discretion. Chairman Engelman stated that staff did assume that the Committee has the discretion only upon a showing of hardship by the applicant. Chairman Engelman addressed Mr. Nowicki - he said that one of the issues, as explained by Ms. Smith. that was creating part of the problems with the adequacy of the drawings was the whole ideal of wanting to put the electricity up through the elevator shafts. Mr. Nowicki responded that this was a major issue involving many structural questions that needed to be addressed. Chairman Engelman . asked if this problem was resolved and was it resolved before starting the work. Mr. Nowicki P&D Commitur Mtg. .August 16. I990 Page 7 responded that i- w-as not resolved before starting the work but the issue was evenaWly rrsWvcd arrd worked out as the work was being done. He said they did not have all the information on the drawings submitted to the City but they began work once the problem as resolved and it was his understanding that they had in conversations with City staff that the issues were worked out as to what was required by Code and thy started the work on that basis. He said AIMS then presented the information to the City for the final permits and did not have to change anything that had been done.. After further discussion, the Committee agreed that discretion on their part to determine hardship by the applicant can not be done in this case under the standards set for waiving permit fees. TTte3• agreed that hardship under these standards would apply for financial hardship which does not apph, in this case. Mr. Wolinski commented on the permit process and the number of weeks involved in the process. He informed the Committee that this is a sensitive area concerning all building departments as far as time elemerim He confirms that his staff within the building department have tried to make effort to accommodate the developers and contractors that doe work in Evanston. He stated that in many communities if you submit insufficient material for a building permit, they give it back and tell the contractor to come back when all information requested is obtained, he affirmed that his building • department does not follow that policy and will work with the contractor with what is presented through to final approval of their permit. He stated that this is noted to the contractor up front and they are made fully aware of what information is lacking to complete their permit application process and also made aware that no work can commence until the permit is approved. Mr. Wolinski said that his staff is aware of time constraints put upon certain jobs and the contractors needing to meet their deadlines and the building department staff has always tried to work with the developer/contractor to meet those deadlines. Aid. Newman responded that if the argument on behalf of the applicant doing work without a permit is due to their hardship on meeting their deadline, this does not hold up in his opinion and is inexcusable. He suggested that this argument not be considered at this time and the matter of what standards to emulate in this case of a misunderstanding between the applicant and City staff. as testified by the applicant. The original motion was withdrawn. Aid. Newman moved to hold this item in Committee to give the applicant and the City Attorney the opportunity to comment in the form of a memorandum as to what the jurisdiction is of the Committee to waive the fee and whether the standard in paragraph 18 applies in this case or whether other rights under municipal law should be considered. Chairman Engelman added that Aid. tiewman's motion to hold is not debatable under the rules and explained that this matter will be held and will appear on the September 13th agenda. He said that any information chosen to submit bl- the applicant regarding a legal opinion on jurisdiction of Council to over -rule staff and waive the fine and how under the Ordinance it qualifies, should be received in the form of a memorandum to the • Committee. Aid. Kent requested additional information on the time frame from the beginning P&D Committee Mtg. is 16. 1994 Page 8 when the demolition and helicopter permits were issued on through the submittal of the fist drawings to the final approved drawings. Mr. Wolinski reiterated the position of the Building Division and his position as Code Official whkh they are bound by the Ordinance. He said it is in his opinion that the waiving of building permit fees has alN%ays been set by the standards of hardship, usually financial and he felt in this case that ty-pee of hardship does not apply. The entire basis for this penalty was due to working without a permit. He said that it has always been the policy of Council to have a process for appealing decisions nude by City staff and this was the avenue the seemed most appropriate to address such an appeal. Chairman Engelman explained to the applicant that it is up to their decision to submit the information requested on their behalf, noting that the Committee is requesting that City legal staff respond back to the Committee on this matter. (24) Request for Expenditure of HOME Funds AId. Kent began questioning why none of the previous tenants wanted to stay in the community or why they did not qualify to purchase one of the units; could something have been done to assist some of those tenants in purchasing a unit. Ms. Schur, Housing Planner, responded that there were only 9 occupied units at the time the building was purchased and none of those families could afford to . purchase a unit. She said all the families except one, stayed within the Evanston community. Ald_ Kent asked where those 8 families were relocated, specifically if any were relocated to wrst Evanston. Nis. Schur said that all remained in south Evanston, none were relocated to west Evanston. Aid. Kent's final question was with regard to the amounts to be paid out ranging from S504 • $2.100. what is the basis for determining the different levels of payout. Nis. Schur responded that they go by a HUD based formula which is applied and determined based on the amount of the prior rent versus the amount of the new rent multiplied by a period of 42 months. Ald. Kent asked if the background of the landlords were checked out on the relocation apartments for the 8 families. Ms. Schur assured the Committee that the tenants receiving relocation funds have all made a better choice in renting than the 124 Clyde building. Questions were raised as to why the money is being expended after the tenants have been moved, why not before. its. Schur explained that when the building was purchased, the Evanston Housing Coalition assisted in moving those tenants and it was found out afterwards, that those tenants are eligible for relocation assistant money. That is why the money is being used for the difference in the tenants rent amounts for 42 months. Aid. Kent suggested that consideration be given to providing additional mortgage assistance for those in need. He feels that it is possible that some of those tenants could have qualified with the more guidance and education on the mortgage process. Aid. Kent moved approval, seconded by Chairman Engelman. The vote was 2-0 in favor of the motion, with Aid. Bernstein abstaining from vote. • • P&D Committee Mtg. August 16, 1999 Page 9 Mr. Wolinski recognized Ms. Yvonne Dickerson of the Housing Commission who was in attemfiw cx for this item and he thanked her for coming and being patient- The Committee members coincided. 1. Continued Discussion of the Comprehensivs_General Plan The Committee agreed to hold a special P&D meeting on Monday, October 18. 1999 for the purposes of addressing the Comprehensive General Plan. This meeting is not a public hearing but will be for discussion only. The meeting was adjourned at 8.52 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ((�� ��, • •�� Jacq aline Brownlee IL DRAFT - NOT APPROVED PLANNANG AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES ,Monday. July 26, 1999 7: 00 p. m. - Room 2403 Evanston Civic Center ALDERMEN PRESENT: S. Bemstein, S. Engelman, J. rent, A. Newman, M. Wynne STAFF PRESENT: J. Wolinski, J. Aiello, S. Janusz. A. Alterson, E. Szymanski, C Wonders, M. Baaske OTHERS PRESENT: Macy Pat Kerrigan, Tom McMahon PRESIDING OFFICIAL: Aid. Engelman DECLARATION OF OUORUM • Aid. Engelman called the meeting to order at 7:25 p.m. H 3) Prop sed Resolution R49-99 Chairman Engelman explained that Resolution R49-99 is a continuation of funding by the City of the Evanston Housing Corporation's First Time Home Buyer program in the amount of S639,000. Mr. Wolinski added that this program will expire this November. Mr. Wolinski and Mary Pat Kerrigan gave some background of this program and explained the need for continuation. Aid. Bernstein moved approval, seconded by Aid. Wynne. Motion passed unanimously 5-0. (14) Proposed Resolution R-50-99 Evanston housing Corporation Multi -family Loan Program. Mr. Wolinski explained that this program was started approximately five years ago to provide low interest loans to property owners who had tenants in their buildings that were at less than 60% median income and thar at least 5 1 % of those: tenants were at that level. The Housing Corporation was asked to provide additional funding for this program and has agreed to provide a match funding program. The Corporation's charter will be up the end of this year. Mr. Wolinski asked the P&:D Committ_te for their continued support for this loan program. and stated that the Housing Corporation has indicated they will continue their support as long as the City continues its financial support. 0 Planning and Development Committee bdimitPc - tnly ?h t000 jr P,IgeSyn. • Mr. Wolinski explained that when this program was put together it was primarily for three different target areas (the Clyde -Callan area the area around Main street and Washington, and the area bound by the high school.) He said that there have not been many applications for Ehds program and thought if the target area could be expanded to include the whole Cite- the program would be more successful. Aid. Bernstein asked if there was any method by which the City maintained the status of the tenants after the property was rehabbed. Stan Janusz answered that there was a provision in the borrower's contract that the status of the tenants would be at the less than 60% of median eonu for ten years. Aid. Bernstein was concerned that a owner could use the funds to rehab and then require the low/mod income residents to leave and asked if there were any provision to prevem that occurrence. Stan Janusz said that, at present, there was no such provision. Mary Pat Kerrigan suggested requiring an annual rental and income statement, and if there was any change in the tenant mix the interest rate could be raised. She added that this provision could be put in the loan document. Aid. Bernstein was concerned that a buildin_ owner could get a loan from the Housing Corporation, fix his building and then sell it. Aid. Engelman mentioned that the program has been in existence for five years and this had never occurred. Aid. Kent asked that before the program is opened to the whole City that information be given • again to the two target areas that were not taking advantage of the program. 'vlr. Wolinski said that because he wanted to be sure that everyone in those two areas had the opportunity to correct their code violations, that over the past five rears two cycles of inspections were conducted. Owners of two and three flat buildings in the two areas Aid. Bent mentioned were informed at least twice of the program when they were inspected by the City. He suggested that in two years the program be reevaluated and if it has not been successful to give the money back to the CDBG program. Aid. Wynne moved approval of Resolution R-50-99, seconded by Aid. Bernstein. .lotion passed unanimously. 15. Ordinance 103-0-99 Aid. Engelman said this was a little unusual because a transcript is not yet available from ZBa. It is for introduction and if P&D votes to approve it. it will be introduced tonight and Committee members will receive the transcript before the August 16 meeting. Aid. Bernstein moved approval, seconded by Aid. Wynne. Aid. Newman asked if the Potbelly Sandwich restaurant intended to have delivery service. Mr. Bryant Keil (owner) answered there would be delivery service. Aid. Newman asked Mr. Keil for a commitment that there would not be any cars double parked on Davis Street. Mr. Keil replied that their deliveries would be made b� bicycle. Nlotion passed unanimously. Aid. hdiwarc _ fnw 11; 1QQQ Plge ThWe Engelman said that this matter would be introduced before the Planning and Development Committee and the City Council tonight, but that no vote would be taken He said a vote would be taken on August 16. 1999. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION Continued Discussion of the Compp<bensive Ogneral Plan Aid. Engelman asked for comments regarding the proposed changes to Chapters 6 and I 1 dealing with institutions and the parking system. Aid. Bernstein said that he was concerned about loss of property off the tax rolls and the new wording did not address that issue. Aid. Newman said he felt the wording of the Chapter was weak and did not address the problems in Evanston regarding institutions and Evanston tax rolls. He further stated that he did not object with some of the institutions growing, but that the goal should be to preserve the residential neighborhoods that surround these institutions. Aid. Newman added that he did not have a problem with the institutions growing in the part of the City where there was room, but that he did object to them growing in the backyard of the residents. He felt the way this Chapter was wTitten does not address these issues. The City's goal with institutions should be that we support maintaining vibrant residential neighborhoods and when there are institutions in those neighborhoods that the residential quality of those neighborhoods needs to be maintained. Where there could be support of institutions as in the downtown and in Research Park, then they should be fully supported. Discussion ensued regarding several possible changes to Chapter 6. It was decided that Ald. Newman. Aid. Bernstein..�ld. Engelman and Chris Wonders would form a subcommittee and meet to revise Chapter 6. Tom McMahon said that as he reads the Plan it indicates that Preservation is one of the most important aspects of Evanston, plus there are 18 other references in other chapters to the importance of Historic Preservation. He felt that it was not clear that this statement is supported by a survey of Evanston residents that is contained at the end of the draft Plan. In Table 5 of the survey there is a list of 23 items felt to be important by the citizens of Evanston. Old established houses, which %vas the closest thing he could find to historic preservation_ ranked 13 out of?3 and the old established areas ranked 21. In addition, the Plan states there is a high degree of satisfaction among the residents of Evanston, yet the survey states that approximately 25% of the population as reflected in the survey is considering moving out of Evanston. Of those. 40' o cite housing and high tat costs as their reason for moving out of Evanston. The Chapter on Preservation refers constantly of the need to protect the old houses of Evanston. N1r. McMahon said he thought the intent was to restrict the people who own those houses from making certain changes to those houses. His suggestion was that the Plan be more straightforward in describing what is really meant and that the Chapte­ .-n Community Design could sera a as an example. Mr. ,41c.%lahon said that the Plan needs to be more straight forward so that the people who read it are 0 not mislead, that this is only protection and that there are not any restrictions in the Plan. LV Planning and Development Committee • WnIftes - Itl Y 7F. 1000 pao�r >~n�rc Ald. Engelman suggested that P&D set aside a night to meet and have as the agenda the preservation issue and the institution system. The institutions and preservationists would be invited to this meeting. He suggested that before this meeting the subcommittee still meet with Chris Wonders to go over the wording in the Institution Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. Ald. Bernstein made a motion to go into executive session for the purposes of discussing land acquisition. Ald. Wynne seconded the motion. Roll call. Voting aye - heu4mam Bernstein, Wynne, Kent, Engelman. Meeting adjourned at 7:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Mary . tBaaske 16 #4 • MINUTES Planning & Development Committee July 12, 19" Room 2403 - 7:00 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, S. Engelman, A. Newman, M. Wynne Alderman Absent: J. Kent Staff Present: A. Alterson, E. Sz)manski, J. Brownlee Presiding Official: Alderman Engelman Chairman Engelman called the meeting to order at 7:20 p.m. .Aid. Wynne moved approval of the June 28th minutes, seconded by Aid. Bernstein. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. (17) Ordinance 86.0-99 - Amendment to Zoning Ordinance (Live Music Venues) Chairman Engelman asked for clarification of an issue in Mr. Alterson's memorandum regarding the distinction between live music venues and dance clubs. He said it is his understanding that the Ordinance that they are being asked to recommend introduction only addresses live music venues. Mir. Altersvn said that is correct and explained that the origin of this is when this item was before the Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission and there was some discussion about dance halls being close in analysis to live music venues. He said that they currently review dance halls as commercial indoor recreation which originates back to the old Zoning Ordinance; in some districts this is a permitted, some a special use and there are some districts that prohibit this use. He said there is no rational for dealing with this use the same as a bowling alley which comes under the same definition. He explained that music venues is viewed in the same manner and was subsequently dropped from this definition after discussion and is now considered cultural facilities so they are evaluated similar to theatrical presentations as opposed to a music club. Chairman Engelman acknowledged Mr. Bill Gilmore of 2016 Sherman Avenue. Mr. Gilmore expressed his desire to open a blues club in do,.vntow-n Evanston. He said that he would like to do •this without serving food because it complicates running his line of business which is operating a music club. He said in order to serve food you need the added space for kitchen facilities, storage P&D Committee Mtg. • Minutes of 7/12/99 Page 2 and the constant concern with sanitation issues. He said that he has never been in the food business and prefers to keep it separate from his business. He added that there are many fine dining facilities in downtown Evanston and he does not wish to compete with them in an area where he lacks expertise, instead he would like to promote the music club business to compliment the already established food businesses in downtown Evanston. Ntr. Gilmore pointed out his proposed locations for his business in downtown Evanston in the D2 district, He stated that he has a couple of locations in mind for backup. He informed the Committee of his extensive background in the blues club business from Chicago to New York and that he has booked over 10,000 blues acts in the last 20 years. He reiterated his disinterest in serving food at his establishment, but would be willing to consider it if required in order to open a venture such as this in Evanston. Chairman Engelman stated that if the ordinance is amended for live music venues to be permitted or special uses, a liquor license would be required. He asked Mr. Gilmore if he planned on applying for a liquor license. Mr. Gilmore responded that a liquor license would absolutely be required for operation of a blues or jazz club. He said that his venue would strictly be 21 years and older, no exception. Chairman Engelman asked if the City has a liquor license category that would apply to this type of establishment. Aid. Newman noted that there is a reference under A&PW for this category; there currently is none. Mr. Alterson reminded the Committee that when this w'as before the Committee a few meetings ago, • it was the Plan Commission's recommendation that live music venues be allowed as special uses in virtually all non-residential districts. He said the Committee had asked for some type of an example to restrict this to oniv the downtown district which is illustrated in the map within the packets. Aid. Wynne feels that many locations would be very inappropriate for such a use, especially if a non- residential district abuts a residential district. She also has concerns with the fact that there is currently no liquor license category for this use and she feels this issue should be addressed before the use is considered to operate. She does agree that the most appropriate location would be in the immediate downtown area and areas such as C I and C I a districts should be reexamined because this would allow the use to be considered along Chicago Avenue which abuts residential properties. Aid. Newman motioned to eliminate BI, B2, B3, Cl, C2, Cla, Dl & OI districts - leaving DZ, D3. D4 and RP districts applicable for special use for live music venues, seconded by Aid. Wynne. Aid. Newman said he would be willing to expand further districts in the future after seeing how the downtown district is handled with this use. Mr. Gilmore commented that he is in favor of this amendment and personally, had no intention on considering any other location that the immediate downtown area. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion to amend the Ordinance. Aid. Bernstein moved to approve Ordinance 86-0-99 with the above amendment, seconded by Aid. Wynne. Discussion ensued regarding the required parking regulations for this use. Chairman Engelman questioned if the owner is to provide these parking spaces or lease them from one of the public parking garages located within 1000 feet Mr. Alterson said this is correct for new P&D Committee Mtg- Minutes of 7/12/99 Page 3 construction; someone who is looking to locate within a odsting buiId"i.n�g would be exempt from this parking regulation even if the use is changed. Chairrn= Engelman said that he would like to cfiscums this issue further when the Committee reviews the reference on the special use category_ AIL Bernstein questioned the Iiquor license issue and the wording within the Ordinance related to serving liquor, he asked if the Committee should pass an Ordinance before such liquor license category is obtained. Ms. Szymanski responded that the language within the Ordinance can be amended in accordance to the requirement of a liquor license by staff. The Committee agreed with this The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. Mr. Alterson asked the Committee's preference regarding the issue of dance halls within the Zoning Ordinance. After discussion amongst the Committee, Ald_ Wynne made a reference that dance clubs be examined in the same way as live music vtaoes was addressed. Restaurants - Type 1 and Tie 2 Chairman Engelman reminded the Committee that this is a reference issue with Type l restaurants conducting Type 2 operations in combination or type 2 restaurants combined with another type of use. He said that the Committee has dealt with many recent situations with the above issue such as Michelini's, Ramy's Food Store and the convenient store on Howard Street. He said that it occurs to him that the concept that 2 uses can not be principal uses in the same place unless their is a "designation of mixed use". which has not been clearly defined in the Ordinance. He said that it is this designation that the Committee needs to discuss and address for clarification in the Ordinance. lie asked staff to elaborate on the memorandum handed out to the Committee. Nir. Alterson explained that the memorandum defines differtrtt types of restaurants and gives a chart of several Northern Cook County Suburbs which graphs permitted, special or not permitted uses ►6thin different business districts. The memo also includes different definitions for specified restaurant categories for the different suburbs. He stated that his conclusion from the survey is that some places have far more elaborate definitions that Evanston might want to look at and it appears that some places do not make use of their current definitions and some do. He said that Evanston appears to definitely not be behind in the game. however. he does feel that they can come up with language that better serves what they want to regulate. Ad. Newman stated that he sees no other real problem with this other than the carry -out issue in combination with a type 1 restaurant. He feels this could be categorized as an accessory use to the principal use. He said that this is happening at most all restaurants and he does not see any problem with this operation and it appears to pose no real concern in his opinion. Chairman Engelman added that carry -out of menu items is allowed as right of business at all restaurants. It was mentioned that the Zoning Administrator determined that the use at ik-iichelini's was more than an accessory use which caused concern in that case. Mr. Alterson explained that he made that determination because P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 7/12/99 Page 4 the use was an amount that became a necessary part of the operation of the business plan. The Committee discussed this matter in more detail. The Committee questioned if staff wants to add language to the Ordinance to define the extent off' carry -out operation as an accessory use to a type I restaurant. Staff' responded that is their intern btu %,,-ant the Committee's direction on how to determine the extent of carry -out for specific restaurant. The Committee discussed this in further detail. Suggestions were raised such comparing the extem of the type I restaurant operation to determine the extent that should be allowed for the type 2 operation to be considered or should the number of patrons using the carry -out service be considered or should floor area ratio be taken into consideration, etc. Aid. Wynne asked staff if there was a specific municipality listed in their survey that seems to address or fit within Evanston's needs and if not, what is the preference of staff in determining an accessory use.. Mr. Alterson responded char he is not prepared at this moment to make a recommendation on language or give an opinion of which municipality has the best model which would work the best for Evanston. He said that given the issues involved ►kith Michelin's and Ramv's. he feels that Ramy's had the more severe issues in determining the use as accessor}• because it appears to be a different t% of use from the primary use. He feels that both areas need consideration but the latter issue is of more concern to staff for determination of an accessory use. After lengthy discussion, Chairman Engelman asked the sense of the Committee with regards as to whether they are ready to address this issue at this time. It was the consensus of the Committee that they are not able to address the issue of hoc to determine the extent of a type 2 operation in combination with the type I operation to consider as accessory. The Committee does agree that the issue of adding language to better define "accessory use" needs to be added to the Ordinance. The Committee agreed to take this item off the agenda at this time and requested that staff provide a memorandum, similar to the one provided on restaurant types in the different northern suburbs, on different definitions of accessory use. The Committee thanked staff for their time and work done to complete the correspondence provided and appreciated the information that they provided. The meeting was adjourned at 8:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted. l l.L-C�1 Jacq'60 E. Brow•niee it MINUTES Planning & Development Committee June 28,1999 Room 2403 - 7:00 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, S. Engelman, J. Kent, A. Newman, M. Wynne Staff Present: J. Wolinsid, A. Alterson, C. Ruiz, J. Siegel (Corp. Counsel), E. Szymanski, J. Brownlee Presiding Official: Alderman Engelman Chairman Engelman called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. He announced his term of Chairman beginning with this meeting. He apologized for the lateness in starting this meeting, explaining that there was an Executive Session for Council beforehand. Aid. Wynne moved approval of the June 14th minutes, seconded by Aid. Kent. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion. (20) Tempqmry Sign Reguest for American Crad Ex snQ ition Chairman Engelman asked if anyone was present for this item. Mr. WolinsU reminded the Committee that this proposal has been before P&D for the pat 10 years. It is a repetitive request and he informed the Committee that the applicant was told that it probably would not be necessary for her to be present at this meeting. He noted that there has never been any opposition in the past with this request Aid. Wynne moved approval of the request by the Auxiliary of Evanston/Glenbrook Hospitah to erect temporary signs for the American Craft Exposition. The motion was seconded by Aka. Kent and the vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion. (;) Ordinance 77-0-99 - Special Use & Variance for 1744_Darrow Avenue Chairman Engelman noted that this matter was introduced at the last council meeting, however, it was requested that this item be returned to Committee because Aid. Kent could not be present at the last P&D meeting for comments. The Committee wanted assurance that Ald. Kent was still comfortable with this project. P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 6/28/99 Page 2 Ald. Kent thanked his fellow Committee members for their consideration in holding over this ittem for his comments and further thanking them for introducing this at the last Council meeting so as not to hold up the applicant. He noted that this matter was originally held to condu+-t a neighborhood/community meeting. He informed the Committee that this meeting was held in Which himself, the Pastor, members of the church, their architect and approximately a dozen neighbors were present. He said the main topic of discussion was situation of "give and take" to the surrounding community. He noted that there are 23 churches in the 5th Ward and many of them are expanding resulting in some residential properties being taken over to accommodate these expansions. Ald. Kent feels it is important that these churches in lieu of taking over residential properties should give back or contribute to their neighborhood as a sharing process for their prosperity. He informed the Committee that a number of good ideas were noted at the neighborhood meeting such as parking relief for the area when church services are session, increasing safety and Quality to the neighborhood such as the addition of better lighting, especially in the alleys. He said that the discussion was heated in the meeting but the outcome was prosperous for all. He said that one of his main concerns was that this will be the second house that Bethel w7I1 be taking dowry to expand their church, leaving one residential owner, Ntr. Darnell Howard, as the only home owner on that resident section of the block. He was the only objector to this project, however, the Church has offered some accommodation to this homeo%rner by leaving 12' of space in between the properties so that some landscaping can be provided. He pointed this out on the drawings presented by the architects. Aid. Kent concluded his comments by stating his support for this project. Chairman Engelman noted that no further vote or action by the Committee is needed for this item and that it will remain on the consent agenda for this evening. Chairman Engelman requested that due to the lateness in time, he wished to address the Item for Discussion at this time because 5 citizens have signed up to speak on this matter. Aid. Newman inquired as to the purpose for this discussion, noting that no vote or decision by the Committee is required and that his understanding is that this matter has already been voted on by the State. Chairman Engelman explained that there is nothing before the City Council on this matter but there is something before the State that the Council has no control over. He said it is his understanding that the Committee v.as asked to fund some time on the agenda by representatives of the Northeast Evanston Historic District (NERD) Association to address the Committee as well as other interested parties. He said their main reasoning is to inform and educate the Committee on the status of the nomination. Aid. Bernstein recalls that there is something in the Ordinance historicall- that Council can vote to ask the State to deny the proposal; he asked for staff comments on this. Mr_ P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 6128/99 Page 3 Ruiz explained Council's position on this subject noting an appeal process to the State that the City could take if an opposition to a nomination granted by the State. Chairman Engelman informed those wishing to speak that the maximum time to be given on this topic is 15 minutes gibing each individual signed up approximately 3 minutes. He began with Ms. Judy Fiske and his. Jeanne Lindwall, representatives of the NEHD. Ms. Fiske stated that she is a member of the NEHD Association. She passed out copies of the nomination packet to P&D Committee members for their information. She explained that the NEHD's intentions this evening is to familiarize the Committer with the nomination process which transpired up to date. She told the Committee that if they so desired, she has available the presentation that was made before the Illinois Historic Sites Ad%isory Council in DeKalb on June 11. 1999 that is approximately 13 minutes long. Ms. Fiske said the nomination is a two year effort to continue the work of the Preservation Commission from 1988 nouns that the NEHD Association has completed this as an all volunteer effort without any outside funding or City funds being sought. She said that all members involved in this project have bee affiliated with either the Preservation Commission or the Historical Society for over the past 15 years or more. She stated that the NEHD is very proud of this nomination and are available and willing to ans mr or address any questions or concerns by the Committee. She informed the Committee that this part of the nomination is for the National Register only and that there will be a separate nomination application for local landmark district status that will follow. Because of the 1994 Preservation Ordinance for the City of Evanston, they are required to go through 2 separate applications if they want National Register status. Ms. Fiske stated that so far, with regard to the National Register, the Illinois Historic Site Advisory Council unanimously voted to approve the nomination and is now going on to the Chief Preservation Officer of the State of Illinois and then on to the Department of Interior for the listing in the National Register of Historic Places. She noted that the one thing that could keep this from happening is that 51 % of the property owners within the district send a notarized letter to the State in opposition. Chairman Engelman asked how this will effect the residents within the boundaries of the district if this nomination is accepted. his. Jeanne Lindwall explained that basically the National Register is an honorary status designation and the only restrictions is that any State or Federal funded projects within the district must be reviewed by the State for approval. For example. the State would review the impact of the project on preservation of the historic district such as a proposal to use state or federal funds to do renovation on Sheridan Road, etc. She added that as a matter of course, the State has indicated that any major projects within or effecting the district would be reviewed by them because of the significant number of resources throughout the community. his. Fiske noted that, as far as any homeowner is concerned, they will not be restricted to do any renovations or construction to their homes as far as this nomination is concerned; the homeowner «ill only be required to follow the City Building and Zoning codes as usual. his. Lindwall stated that there are some significant benefits for property owners within the district such as the Sate has a property assessment freeze program for homeowners who do a significant amount of rehabilitation on their home as long as X P&D Comraitme Mtg. Minutes of 6/28199 Page 4 approval is given by the Secretary of the Interior, as normally done for homes designated as historical landmarks or structures. Aid. Newman pointed out that currently a residence has to be considered as landmark status to receive such a benefit. He questioned if all the residential properties within this district +.rill be considered as such. Ms. Lindwall confirmed this and said this is one of the reasons why they do this as a district to benefit an entire area in efforts to preserve historical status. Chairman Engelman questioned, after all that has been said and understood by Ms. Fiske and Ms. Lindvmll, if this nomination by chance fails or does not receive approval, will the residents of this district still receive the tax advantages. Ms. Fiske and Ms. Lind -mall concurred. Ms. Lindwall added that as far as the National Register is concerned, the assured benefit is the tax exempt freeze program. There are no real negatives to homeowners with this nomination however, she noted that there are only a select few that would qualify for funds to do any rehabilitation to their properties. Chairman Engelman referred to Ms. Fiske's earlier statement that the next step would be the follow up application for local landmark status for the district; he questioned the time frame expected for this next process. yis, Lindwall estimated that the end of summer - beginning of fall would be considered to initiate the application. Mr. Edwin Bates informed the Committee that he has been retained for legal representation by a homeowner who lives on Milburn Park. He said that all the property owners on Milburn Park have asked to have their properties withdrawn from the Northeast historic district. He said that he lived on Milburn Park in the past and sold his home to Mr. Tom McMahon who has signed up to speak on this issue. Mr. Bates said the "scuttlebutt" going around the neighborhood is that this is just the first step to getting the Evanston Ordinance applied to this neighborhood. He pointed out that the first thing he observed was the notice in the Evanston Review which was flawed in that when giving the boundaries of this district, it did not include anyone between Orrington. Sharman and Ridge Avenue. He noted that this is a substantial number of people within the district and further stated that his client, as well as others in the area, did not receive the notice for this nomination. He said that his client did not hear of this until the day before presentation to the State. `fr. Bates feels this incident is worth correcting from his point of view by the City to have the property boundaries in the notice be correct and accurate from a legal standpoint. In his opinion, he would assume that if the City Council wanted to take into consideration the homeowners of Milburn Park. they could advise the State that they %& ish to have these properties withdrawn from the nomination before approval is given. Mr. Bates commended the NEHD for their efforts in educating the community and City Council members and on this application and for his personal growth in this area. Mr. Tom yic"tahon noted that this %%•hole issue is a very complicated matter and he feels there is much mis-information; realizing that it is not intentionally but more a result in the entire process that is involved. He noted one example in that within this district there are approximately 1000 structures and 20°•0 of those are non-contributing, and «ill not receive any benefits at all from this nomination such as the tax exempt freeze program. He noted that his property is one of those such structures. He feels that one of the problems with this is the "hype" about being entered under the X P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 628/99 Page 5 National Register which he feels is a camouflage to the real effect of what is going on which is die coincidal with the Evanston Preservation Ordinance. Mr. McMahon noted that there have beers mo public hearings on this matter, only public informational meetings which in large were conduucZed to sell this project and did not address the burdens that come with this nomination. Mr. McMahon handed out a memorandum written by himself which addresses the issue that the to ahead for this application was given by the Evanston Preservation Commission as a certified local government body but he feels they should not have the authorization to do so when it effects st=b a large number of resident homeowners. HE came to this opinion because it -3•as noted before tlt City Council at this point would have no real effect on the State vote and would subsequently ha:%x to file for an appeal if necessary to do so. Aid. Newman responded that even under the currdat Preservation Ordinance, in order for the Council to vote either approval or opposition to strucmmn requesting special status and tax exemption, they must receive official notification from the Start that the property has filed for landmark status. More discussion took place on this issue. M.r. McMahon finished his presentation as documented in his memorandum. He reiterated Mr. Bates statement on the lack of notice to many individuals that Mll be effected by this district and the further lack of time to respond and give their comments and opinions on their behalf in a property held public hearing. He noted that the letter of notification by Mr. Ruiz was dated May 6th and mailed to homeowners on June 8th - 3 days before presentation to the State Advisory Commission. Mr. McMahon reiterated that there is confusion between public informational meetings and public notice but it is his assessment that the public notice that was given for the State action, which started through the Evanston Preservation Commission, was inadequate and should be withdrawn. Aid. Newman agrees that if insufficient time was given, as claimed by Mr. McMahon and Mr. Bates, then this is inappropriate. He asked Mr. McMahon for his opinion on a reasonable time from in which to receive notice. 30 days - 60 days prior to any meeting or action. He feels and would be willing to give the opponents enough time as necessary to respond since this is affecting their properties. He further stated his support for the efforts on behalf of the proponents but noted their time given to this project. He stressed that such an issue that effects homeowners should be given the time needed to respond on their behalf and he reiterated that he would be titiilling to go beyond any notice that has been given. Aid. Bernstein referred to Mr. McMahon's statement in that his propem, and 20% of the district would not be entitled tot he benefits under the nomination, even if rehabilitation to the property is done. Mr. McMahon responded that statement to be true because their properties are non- contributing, i.e., are not architecturally significant. Ms. Lindw•all explained that one a building is 50 years old they do come under the qualifications for the benefits if they are located in the district. Mr. McMahon pointed out that any structure within Evanston can be considered for landmark status at 50+ years, he does not see the need to draw boundary lines to signify this. k 1 P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 6/28/99 Page 6 Mr. Ruiz explained to the Committee that it is important that they understand the process. He informed them that the State is in charge of the public notice, not the City Preservation Commissiiam. He said that they announced this fact directly in the informational meeting held in April and f utber published a notice in the newspaper for this purpose. Aid. Bernstein asked who paid for this ward who asked for placement of this item on the agenda of the Preservation Commission. Mr. R=iz responded that the nomination is submitted to the Commission by the State requesting commerzas, this is a matter of public record. He said that the Commission then follows the agreement with the State to supply the requested comments and if necessary, hold public hearings. In this case, the Preservation Commission held a public informational meeting. Mr. Ruiz further explained the notification that was mailed out was published int eh Evanston Review and the State subsequently mailed out their own notice for the June 1 Ith hearing. He said, referring to his letter dated May 6tb, that they were only required to send a copy of the letter to property owners in the district in which he included a copy of the agenda. He stated that they followed the requirements of the State. More discussion followed in reference to Mr. McMahon's statements on the legality of the authorization of the Preservation Commission to go ahead with this nomination application and the property notification process. Aid. Bernstein asked Mr. McMahon if he and his neighbors feel they have the legal rights to request that this application be withdrawn and taken back to square one. Mr. McMahon said that they do feel it to be within their rights to request that their area be withdrawn from the district. He also feels the notification process was not done officially. Chairman Engelman requested that legal staff provide some information and their opinion on this issue in writing. Aid. Newman further requested that legal staff inquire as to whether City Council, at this point in the process, can either oppose, endorse and intervene with the nomination and if it would be binding. Chairman Engelman added that legal opinion also be provided as to whether City Council has the authority to carve out certain areas of the district Mr. Alan Cubbage. Vice President of Northwestern University Facility Management, informed the Committee that all of the discussion about notice and the problems involved with it came after the boundaries had been fixed. The Iocal applicants drew the boundaries and then began the notice process which resulted in no opportunity for discussion by the neighbors. He noted that the only notice he received was to his home and not to the Facilities Management offices at NU. He said that there is some opposition on behalf of the University with regards to certain properties within the boundaries of the historic district. He also feels that more time should have been given for those in opposition to respond or be heard in a public hearing. Aid. Neuman responded that he feels that tiorth%vestern should be given the opportunity to give their opposition to this district but pointed out the concern by some of his constituents in his ward on the upkeep of certain properties owned by the University that are located within the boundaries of the district. He said that he is interested in whether the University has any plans for some of the old homes on Sheridan Road and he would also like to see a report of the conditions of each of those homes owned by Northwestern that are in the district. He further elaborated on this issue. Chairman Engelman acknowledged Aid. Newman's P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 6128/99 Page 7 concerns bun stated that this issue goes beyond the preset-ation issue being discussed at this tome. Aid. Newman explained that all the issues he mentioned above have ever-ything to do with tihe preservation of Sheridan Road and the concern for the upkeep of those homes %ithin the district ailso has to do with preservation of those homes. (2I) Ordinance 93-0-99 - Spaial Use & Variance. for 1723 Simpson Strut Aid. Kent acknowledged his support for this project but understands that there is a legal opi�pnan pending on this case. He requested staff elaborate on the memorandum received from Corporation Counsel. Mr. Jack Siegel. Corporation Counsel, explained that from his understanding of the reading of the Ordinance according to Section 6.4-1(B), you can not have 2 principal uses on I lot unless approved as a mixed use development. In accordance with the above statement. the Zoning Board's recommendation would be in violation of that section. He said that in this case. it is apparent that an application for a mixed use would be required for this zoning lot because a type 2 restaurant can not be an accessory to an existing food store establishment. He noted that the Zoning Ordinance does not clearly define mixed use. Chairman Engelman reminded the Committee of a recent similar case on Howard Street that was approved which has set precedence. Mr. Roosevelt Alexander, legal advisor for the applicant, agreed with Chairman Engelman's statement. He explained that what the applicant is proposing to do is not much different from what they have traditionally providing with their deli operation. He said the proposal is to add a grill for hot sandwiches. He maintains that the proposed use is accessory to the existing food store use, just as the deli is currently. Mr. Siegel responded that this does not change his opinion because the application is for a special use for a type 2 restaurant which is a use separate and apart from the existing use of the building. htr. Alexander inquired that Counsel's comments are directed to the process at the time of application, and not directed towards the applicant doing an}thing wrong. Mr. Siegel agreed. :fir. Alexander said that it is his further understanding that a similar case was granted and passed through Council in recent past. Mr. Siegel stated that he is not familiar with the past cage mentioned but reiterated that one of his main concerns wfrith this is that the Zoning Ordinance does not clearly define mixed use, which causes some confusion. Aid. Newman expressed his concern for the communication between the City Legal Department and the Community Development Department and other departments «•ithin the City. He stressed that this situation with lack of communication between City departments should be avoided. He said that all the necessary issues should be addressed with a zoning application before it begins to go through the process of any hearings or meetings required. He said it is clear that this is not the applicant's fault. He said that it is senseless to receive a legal opinion that suppresses the application by this x P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 6/28/99 Page 8 stage and this information should have been communicated to the applicant months ago. The Committee members were in agreement with Ald. Ne,%nsan's comments. %1r. Siegel claimed that the Legal Department does not receive request for legal opinions from various departments in the time frame that would alloy: for this inconvenience to occur. Aid. Newman asked, in order to alleviate this problem, if it would assist the Legal Department in reviewing each zoning case fmm the beginning in order to identify if a legal opinion is needed_ Legal staff confirmed that it would help to have legal review of the case at the time the application is received Legal staff further claimed that they do not foresee any problems with expediting the cases along without any hold up. Aid. Bernstein moved to approve the special use and variations for 1723 Simpson Street, seconded by Aid. Wynne with language to the effect that by granting this request, it 6 a granting of the mixed use of the property. Aid. Newman added that it is the sense of the Committee to have all zoning case needing zoning relief, be reviewed by legal staff upon acceptance of the applications. Chairman Engelman stated that he does have some concern for a type 2 restaurant at this particular location due to high volume of traffic in that area He said this concern has nothing to do with the operation of Ramy's food store. Aid. Kent said that due to the time, he apologized to the applicants for not being able to give their presentation but he backs them in that they will be and have always been responsible for the pick up of litter and debris around their building and have always made an effort to keep the loitering in front of their building to a minimum. He said that hours of operation of very acceptable and the store has always been a well ran establishment. He comments the applicants for their continued efforts, The vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 8:54 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jacq elinl4 E. Brownlee it • MINUTES Planning & Development Committee June 14, 1999 Room 2403 - 7:00 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein. S. Engelman, A. Newman. M. Wynne Alderman Absent: J. Kent Staff Present: J. Wolinski, A. Alterson, E. Szymansld, J. Brownlee Presiding Official: Alderman Wynne Chairman Wynne called the meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. • Aid. Newman moved approval of the May 24th minutes, seconded by Ald. Bernstein. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION Chairman Wynne changed the order of the agenda to consider the items involving the Vineyard Church first so that Aid. Newman could tape part in the discussion due to his required attendance at the A&PW meeting. [26] Ordinance 74-0-99 - Amendment to Zoning Ordinancq Aid. Newman moved approval of Ordinance 74-0-99, amending the Zoning Ordinance so that religious institutions within the 01 Office District are special rather than prohibited uses. The motion was seconded by Aid. Bernstein. Aid. Engelman noted that he was not in attendance at the last meeting but questioned if this item Kas not already voted on at the last meeting and returned to Committee for further discussion. The minutes read that it was held in Committee but was actually introduced on the Council floor. Chairman % ynne noted that mistake and explained to the audience that this item was actually introduced on the Council moor at the last meeting but was never voted can with a motion for approval of the Ordinance by the Committee. She further explained that this item was held for further information from staff. She acknowledged the memorandums received from staff concerning the requested information from the Committee regarding past real estate tax bills and the Vineyards current property tax status. k P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 6/14,99 Page 2 Aid. Newman said that he is in favor of the amendment due to the compromise as mentioned in the letter from Rey. Hanawalt for the church's financial contribution to the school districts of S` 5 000 in addition to the annual gifts in services of S25,000, totaling an amount of S60,000. He feels this to be a fair alternative for payment in lieu of taxes and appreciates the Vinc}zrds efforts. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. (27) Ordinance 75-0-99 Special Use for 1800-12 Ridge Avenue Aid. Newman motioned to approve the special use as recommended by the ZBA with The amendment to the Ordinance to include the S60,000 payment in lieu of taxes allocated by S35,000 to the school districts and S25,000 for community services. The motion was seconded by Aid. Bernstein. AId. Newman asked legal staff if this was an appropriate amendment and also if specific recommendation for the allocation of the $35,000 to the school district can be stated in writing within the Ordinance. In accordance with legal staff's response, Aid. Newman moved to further amend the ordinance to include his recommendation to request that the S35,000 to the school district specifically go the district #65 to be used for playground renovations for 2 schools to be named in the Ordinance, seconded by Aid. Bernstein. Ald. Bernstein asked Aid. Ne%vman how he proposes to over see this request for distribution of funds. - Md_ Newman proposed • a mechanism by which the City -School Liaison Committee would have control over the allocation of those funds by approving payments for work done and monies spent. Aid. Engelman contemplated on why this particular religious organization is being put under such a immense demand in comparison to other religious institutions. He questioned the precedence that will be set by this. Aid. Neuman explained that this matter has nothing to do with this particular religious organization being requested to make such payment in lieu of tares. He clarified that his intention is that not -for -profit organization. regardless of type of religion or business, should be required and expected to accommodate the loss in tax monies that would otherwise be collected from the business or voice use that is permitted for the district because it is property that will be excluded from the tax roll and Evanston's tax base can not afford it. He stands firm that he would feel the same way if it were his own religious institution and would expect the same payment in lieu of taxes if they were to acquire property that would be taken off the tax roll. Aid. Engelman understands Aid_ Newman's reasoning, but it is his personal opinion that such demands on a organization such as the Vineyard, who has provenly given tot he community and initially made such a generous offer in community financial support. should not be subject to such high expectations. Rev. Steve Nicholson from the Vineyard, commented on the letter from Rev. Hanawalt. He noted the stern objection by the Church to the required payment in lieu of taxes, He stated that it was made clear to the Church that approval of the zoning text amendment and zoning relief would not be supported if they did not agree to such payment. He informed the Committee of the financial stress this causes on their organization and congregation. Rev. Nicholson also stressed the disappointment in this request for payment in lieu of taxes because the Church has given generously to the school :.1 i'W'i P&D Committee kitg,. Minutes of b/ 1 41 99 Page 3 districts in the past. Further. they offered to make a gracious offer of financial support for needed community services plus continued support to school district ?202. He noted that the Church has only agreed to this payment method in order to retrieve the needed zoning relief and to put this matter to rest. Aid. Engelman said that it appears to him that the Vineyard was made to believe that they would receive no support from the Council if they did not agree to this payment method. He stressed his disapproval of this payment and apologized to the church for their assumption that all of Council would not support their zoning relief if the payment in lieu of tares were not made. He stated for the record that he does feel other compromises could be agreed upon. especially in the case of the Vineyard and their standing position as being recognized for past community- support. Chairman Wynne asked for Committee decision at this time. The vote for the original motion and amended motion was 3-1. with Aid. Engelman voting nay. Mr. Sargis made comments to the Church Council's reluctance in setting a precedence that might impact the religious freedom of other religious institutions. He believes there are important reasons why churches are and should be treated differently than other not -for -profit institutions. He further •noted that the City of Evanston has never required any other church to make such payment in lieu of taxes for zoning approval and if so, not to such a demand. Aid. Ne►4 nan said, for the record. that his discussions. opinions and request for such payment in lieu of taxes with Rev. Hanaw•alt were strictly of his own and he stressed to Rev. Hanawalt that this is what would take for him, personally, to support this zoning relief. He clarified that he does not speak for the other Alderman but he stands firm on his belief that if any property that is taken off the tax rolls should be accommodated for and his main concern is for the tax base and trying to avoid any added burden that this type of situation causes to all other tax payers involved that %ill be required to co%er such losses in tar monies. At this point Ald, Newman left the meeting to attend the A&PW meeting. (231 Sidewalk Cafe for 1724 Shgrman Avenue Chairman Wynne acknowledged Nis. Sarah DeHartre as representative for Starbucks. Ms. DeHatre had no presentation but noted the request for waiver for the use of disposable beverage containers. Aid. Engelman moved approval with the exemption for use of disposable beverage containem seconded by .1d. Bernstein. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion (Aid. ;Yeoman absent for vote). 0 Y P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 6/ 14/99 Pace 4 Q41 Ordinance 77-0-99 - Special Use & Variance for 1744 Darmw• Avenue Chairman Wynne noted the absence of Ald. Kent who at the last meeting held this item in order to hold a neighborhood meeting before consideration of this case. She asked for the outcome of that meeting. It was confirmed by the Church representatives that this meeting did take place with favorable support from the neighbors. Ald. Engelman moved to recommend approval of Ordinance 77-0-99 to be introduced on Council Floor but requested that this item be returned to Committee for allowance of further discussion and comments from Ald. Kent due to his absence at this meeting, second by rid. Bernstein. x� Rev. Walter Bauldrick of Bethel A.M.E. Church, expressed his opposition of the need for further discussion and delay on this matter to accommodate Ald_ Kent's to make comments. He stated that confirmation has been given that the neighborhood meeting did take place and that there was no objection to the church's request for special use and variations. He noted that it would not be fair to the Church to delay their going forward due to Ald. Kent's absence from this meeting; they were told by Ald. Kent that he would be present this evening. The Committee members assured Rev. Bauldrick and other members of the church that this procedure would not hold up the process in going forward because introduction tonight would still require final action in two weeks. The • Committee further assured that return of this item is a courtesy to the ward Alderman to make final comments. Chairman %V%nne added that Ald. bent has expressed his support for this project and reiterated the courtesy is extended to him. and would be for am• other alderman, for final comments. After extended explanation by the Committee that this process to introduce and return the item for final discussion would not hold up the case, the applicant recognized and understood the process explained to them. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion (Aid. Newman absent for the vote). (18) Ordinance 76-0-99 - Special Use for 2545 Prairie Avenue Chairman Wynne explained why this item was introduced at the Iast meeting and returned to Committee. She said the noted amendments requested by the Committee to staff to add the conditions requiring that vehicles for pick up or deli%ery not double park and that the ratio of the Type I business to the Type 2 business never decrease below the current number of table and wait staff. Ald. Engelman noted that it was his understanding that the special use for Type 2 consideration to a Type I restaurant was an accessor-* to the use. Ms. Anderson. Plan Commissioner. suggested to the Committee that a Type la category for restaurants with the addition of carry out services be considered. Chairman Wynne agreed because there are many Type I restaurants with cam, out services available. Discussion took place on this matter. 0 P&D Committee Mtg. IsMinutes of 6/I4/99 Page 5 Ald. Newman returned to the meeting at this point. He said that it is in his opinion that when a Type I restaurant is fully being operated as such but also has a lame part of their business as carry out, this should be considered as a Type 2 accessory to the Type l operation. The Committee appeared w agree with this opinion. Aid. Engelman pointed out his reference on this matter, which he made some time ago, and the importance of addressing this issue in the near future. Md. Newman moved approval of Ordinance 76-0-99. seconded by Md. Bernstein. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. (25) Ordinance R6-0-99 - Amend cent towing Ordinanrr (Live Music VgnuCs) Ald. Newman stated that the ordinance prepared by staff on this issue is much too broad. His intention for this was to be limited to downtown districts, away from any residential districts, and limited to such. He requested that staff redo the ordinance to eliminate all other districts and limit to only the downtown districts for consideration and bring back before the Committee to review. Staff acknowledged this request and assured the Committee that the ordinance would be ready for consideration at the next meeting. This item was held in Committee. • *Ms. Anderson made a reference on behalf of the PIan Commission, that the Committee address the issue of new development townhouses facing dedicated streets and consideration of omitting this from the Zoning Ordinance. Aid. Newman moved to add this reference to the P&D Committee's agenda, seconded by Aid. Engelman. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. The meeting was officially adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jacgtline Brownlee 0 I It • MINUTES Planning & Development Committee May 24, 1999 Room 2403 - 6:30 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, J. Kent, A. Newman, hL Wynne Alderman Absent: S. Engelman Staff Present•, A. Alterson, A. Berkowsky, E. Szymanski, J. Brownlee Presiding Official: Alderman Wynne Chairman Wynne called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Aid. Kent moved approval of the April Sth minutes, seconded by Aid. Newman. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. Chairman Wynne changed the order of the agenda to accommodate needed time for the items requiring more lengthy discussion. 001Ordinance 77-0-99 -.Special Use & Variance for 1744 Darrow Aveng Chairman Wynne acknowledged representatives present for the applicant, Bethel A.M.E. Church. Aid. Kent, as Alderman of the ward, stated that he did review all documentation presented for this case and confirms that the project is in very good standing. However, he request that this item be held over in Committee so as to give him an opportunity to arrange a neighborhood/community meeting to discuss and give the neighbors a chance to discuss and air out any concerns before any decision is made by Council. He assured that a meeting could be scheduled before the next P&D meeting so this item can be considered at that time. Architects for the applicant, Daniel and Susan Sih, stated that decision would be up to the applicant. The applicants agreed to Aid. Kent's suggestion. Aid. Kent pulled the representatives of the church and their architect out of the meting to schedule a date for the meeting. After discussion. the agreed upon meeting date Is scheduled for Thursday, May 27th, at 7:30 p.m. at the church. This item is held In Committee until the June 14th meeting. 0 P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 5/24/99 is Page 2 Q 1) Ordinance 78-0-99 - Special Use &_Variance for 2144 Ashland Avenz Chairman Wynne noted that no one to represent this case was present at the time. Algid. New umn moved approval, seconded by Chairman Wynne. Ald. Bernstein noted to the Committee that he would be abstaining from voting on this case due to pass involvement with the applicant+ The Committee decided to introduce this item tonight and return to Committee at the June 14th meeting for any further discussion. The vote was 3-0 in favor of the motion, with AId_ Bernstein abstaining vote. Ald. Kent commented that since the creation of the NIUE district, this is actually the first case that has come up for discussion and decision before the Committee and is of importance because it is a test for the MUE district. He hopes, if everything goes well, it will be a "spring -board" for other developments to happen. (3.2) Ordinance 82-0-99 - Amendment to Section 4-2-10 Relating to Elevators Chairman Wynne asked the Committee if there is any further comments or discussion needed at this point with this time. noting the considerable amount of past discussion on this item. She also noted staffs incorporation of all recommendations in the final draft of the ordinance. With no further discussion, Aid. Newman moved approval of Ordinance 82-0-99, seconded by Chairman Wynne. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. • (221 Ordinance 74-0-99 - Amendment tg Zoning Ordinance Chairman Wynne acknowledged Rev. Hanaw•alt and Mr. Mark Sargis, attorney for 'Vineyard Christian Felfowship, being present. She asked for presentation at this time. Mr. Sargis stated that this particular case has a long: history with the City of Evanston, pointing attention to Mr. Alterson's huge file in his possession. He said there are some updates that might be helpful to the Committee to consider at this point. He pointed out, first of all. the letter submitted by Re%. Hana%valt to the City council outlining those updates and changes presented. Mr. Sargis handed out an additional application summary to the Committee members specifically outlining the updates from the 1997 application. He reminded the Committee that the Plan Commission and the ZBA have recommended approval of this application. He requested that Rev. Hana%%alt further explain at this point. Rev. Hanawalt explained that items (27) and (28) on the agenda before the Committee this evening, the cording is the similar to what was originally introduced in 1997. He pointed out that the letter he submitted explairts arty changes made. He feels the present application is stronger than the 1997 application particularly in view of the parking; needs which they have attempted to address on the crest side of Ridge A%enue. This is important due to the fact of trying to eliminate the pedestrian crossing over Ridge A►enue and the unstable future use of the Shand Morahan parking lot. He explained that they ha%e proposed their parking to be located of Asbury Avenue. 9 v •P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 5/24/99 Page 3 Rev. Hanawalt addressed the issue of payment in lieu of tares for the property. He feels this method is not appropriate for houses of worship. In return, they have made an offer of proposal for services to the community and money for ministries. He feels this to be a fair compromise and was suggested to them by other leaders of the religious community as well as leaders in the community, such as Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky. Aid. Newman asked Rev. Hanawalt if he's seen all the information before the Committee because there is an interesting passage from a motion referring to a case involving the City of Chicago Heights and another church. He stated that this case was brought not only under city zoning laws, but also in the motion to reconsider on the new Illinois Freedom of Religion Act. He read from the transcript "The city has submitted evidence that is zoning plan was designed to invigorate the commercial status to regenerate the revenue to create a strong tax base." Aid. Newman said that even a substantial burden is set on the free exercise of religion versus justification by the broad public interest in maintaining the sound tax system. He further noted that the ordinance reserves areas for commercial activity and allows for protection of residential areas from commercial intrusion and fosters economic stability and erowth. After reading such statements. Aid. Newman clarified for the record, in response to Rev. Hanaw•alt's comments. he said that there have been a number of situations before the Council where institutions, who are not -for -profit. have been asked to make payments in lieu of taxes and the breadth of those organizations goes beyond churches. He mentioned such organization as Evanston Hospital, group homes, etc. His point being to clear the disagreement on whether churches should be exempt from this method when the real issue is whether all not -for -profit organizations who voluntarily go about taking property off the tax rolls should be considered for these payments because the City government has a responsibility to try and protect the tax base and the burden on the school districts. Aid. Newman said that at the Plan Commission meeting, it was stated by on of the Commissioners who voted in favor of the application, that he thought the property was entirely off the tax roll. He quoted the statement by Plan Commissioner Hart from page 26 of the transcript. He questions the statement to ascertain whether ?fir. Hart had the facts correct. Mr. Sargis responded that he believes that the year in which the property was purchased there was an allocation of taxable versus non- taxable for part of that particular year. He explained that the following subsequent years, the property has been tax divided. according to the property tax records: the property is off the tax rolls under the new PIN number. fir. Samis said that he understands that the Citv has filed a motion to appeal the assessors recommendation. and to this date. this has not been a ruling of the Department of Review. However. the certificate had been issued for the initial year in which the property was purchased. Aid. NewYnan questioned if the property on Ridge is approximatel% 30.000 square feet and is there knowfledge of what the tax bill was in the year prior to the applicants purchase. Mr. Sargis confirmed the approximate square footage and said the problem is that the% have a property that was combined and then subdivided. so there are 2 buildings that were under I tax bill. He said the 1800 Ridge P&D Committee hitg. Minutes of 5/24/99 Page 4 building is slightly Iarger than the 1740 Ridge building and the 1800 property has less land. Ald Newman focused on only the building occupied by the applicant which has 30,000 square feet of what was previously commercial office space. He said if you apply S6.00 per square foot, the tax bill for that commercial space would be S 180,000 per year for the original use of that building. He asked for clarification from the applicant, questioning if it is their representation at this time that the takes on this property are zero. Mr. Sargis responded that it is their representation at this time as the assessor office has listed this property- under the current PIN. as exempt_ Aid. Newman noted that if the Council were to object, this is approximately what the tax bill would be. He asked if the use of the entire square footage will be for church office use. Mr. Sargis responded that right now, referring to the hand out he gave the Committee, that after the purchase, the second floor has several uses because it had previously been built out as office use. He said the architect was preparing plans for development of the first floor for possible sanctuary use but has since split up that project into half of the first floor to be immediately developed and permits were obtained in 1998. He said this area was the space determined by the assessors office to be exempt. He said the church is essentially using 3/4 of the property and the other 1/4 for storage which is eventually planned for future development. Aid. Newman said that if the objection is upheld, there is no definite on the amount of taxes that would be paid and he would request that legal staff try and determine what this amount would be. At this point. he assumes that this property is still partially on the tax roll based on what has been communicated to him. He expressed his concern that the Plan Commission were under the impression that this property was permanently off the tax roil. He feels that if the Commission would have known difTerent, he wonders if this would have had an impact on their recommendation, even if $60.000 out of the possible S180.000 were still eligible for taxation. Aid. Newman requested that legal staff obtain this information from Corporation Counsel regarding the tax situation for the next meeting. Mr. Sargis commented that the. City filed an appeal of intervention but did not specify any grounds that it was appealing the decision of the assessor's office. He has no idea of what the City's position is on questioning; the e► idence submitted by the applicant subjecting it to challenge. He personally does not see any grounds for such challenge by the City. Aid. Neuman explained the City's position on this case referring to the low level of commercial space and use within the City of Evanston and the City's obligation on trying; to maintain its tax base. He further argued the significance of the school districts in B anston and the Citv's constant struggle to maintain their tar base and the substantial burden on residential tax payers. He stated that the theoretical basis of their prior decisions to charge payment in lieu of taxes has been well supported. in his . iew. due to the City's struggling financial status to maintain their high u x base. He feels presrn'ation of any commercial space for commercial use should be maintained or accounted for if an% other use occupies such space. Ald. Ne-wman stressed his opinion that the Vineyard is an outstanding organization with a well respected congregation. but there still remains the important issue of trying to maintain the C'it%'s tar base and doing what is necessary to aid in that struggle. r LJ P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 5/24/99 Page 5 Aid. Kent asked for further explanation on the parking issue, how is the applicant proposing to maintain their parking to the west side of Ridge Avenue. Mr. Sargis responded that muds consideration was given tot he problems of pedestrian crossing over Ridge Avenue Kith usage of the: Shand Morahan parking lot and the ongoing doubts of the future usage of that lot. He explained that the church is proposing to add additional services, equaling to 3 services Q Sunday services and a Saturday night service), which will help alleviate the parking needs at one time. He said that they also provide shuttle service and would encourage this use as well as the use of municipal lots in the area. Mr. Sargis further explained the parking areas proposed on the west side of Ridge Avenue. Mr. Sargis responded in more detail to Aid. Newman's concerns on the tax issues and stated that this is unfortunately something that City Council will always have to deal with. He feels that in the Vineyard's case versus the City of Chicago Heights case, that particular City showed a very serious problem with their economic tax base and other problem issues. He would like to give the City of Evanston more credit for their position in dealing with the tax base and request that the Committee consider their position differently and independently from that particular case. He further request that the Committee take into serious consideration Rev. Hanawalt's proposal in offering such services to the community instead of payment in lieu of tares. The proposed seerices include assistance in child care and other burdens that would othewise fall on the municipal burden. Aid. Newman responded that he still stands firm on the issue of the loss of commercial space and the opportunity for commercial business in that space. He pointed out the loss of commercial business in Evanston due to the tar burden over the last ten years. He stated that he definitely does not want to vote on this until a study of the Chamber of Commerce is made a part of the record here so that if this case goes further due to not reaching an agreement, there is an actual documented study on record. Aid. Newman pointed out that the City is not the only taxing bod% being effected by loss of commercial business, it also effects the school boards as well. He said there is a definite need for upgrades to many school playgrounds and academic necessities. He reiterated and stressed his point that this is not a City versus church issue, but a major issue of taking property off the tax rolls that would otherwise be tax revenue property and being accountable for that. Aid. Newman acknowledged the Vineyard's offer of S45,000 in various services and appreciates their good faith offer to help alleviate the stress of these services on the municipal funds, but still feels the obligation as a Council member to consider all that could be contributed to the tax base regardless of any organizations position. Aid. Neuman said that it is his personal preference that any funds collected in this case. if so resolved, be distributed to the school districts. especially district =65. for renovation of the playgrounds and academic needs. Fie said this Lvould be his personal goal to see through, if given the opportunit} . Rev. Hanawalt responded to the comments made by Aid. Newman. lie claims that o%er the last 10 years. Vineyard has made investments, which if they hadn't of done so. 6iould have resulted in the school district raising their taxes even higher. He estimated the Vineyard's investment in the area of I million dollars. lie sated that no other church or synagogue in this communitti has made that kind of contribution. He said the Churches position has always supported the community. especially P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 5124/99 Page 6 in the way of child care and that is why they m tic the compromising proposal for assistanx in community needs. Rev. Hanawalt further iaforrn the Committee that in the present ordinance. as it applies to the subject building, is that the Chtzch is presently committee to hold all types of assemblies including political fontms, cultural c%cros. theatrical and musical events; but do not aiknv for religious assembly. He reassures that they, propose and arc willing to do ail such other acti-%hies in combination with their religious use of the budding. He pointed out the preaching of gospel seems to be prohibited because of the zoning district and with the 14th amendment rights, he feels this is unfair to single out religious assembly in comparison to all the other events that coald be allowed. Ald. Newman acknowledged Rey. Ha.-iawalt's comments and understands that this is thought to be a good legal argument under the circumstances but actually in not. He said the reason it is not is because religious institutions are very different than the other events such as theatrical or cultural events because if you refer to the axillary uses that a church performs, it does not produce funds that benefit or contribute in the same mane-r as the other events mentioned. 0 � More discussion took place between the Committer and the applicant regarding the tax base issue and payment in lieu of taxes. Aid. Newman stressed the importance of an EVYIARK or Chamber study to examine what the amount of commercial space is available, current uses of those spaces, and available tax collection on those properties. Aid. Nm-man also requested that 10 years back of tax bills be retrieved by legal staff and available for review at the next meeting. 0 Chairman W':.nne asked for the Committee's direction at this point. She said that it appears that Ald. Newman is requesting specific information from staff at this point regarding past tax records over the past 10 years and also that a study be conducted by EVNIARK or the Chamber. as mentioned above. Ald. Bernstein said that he feels the two agenda items need to be separated for consideration because it is separate and distinct from each other due to the request for special use. He said that ultimately, the nature of discussion is whether to grant a special use to this particular applicant if in fact the text is changed to allow the religious use within the; OI district as a special use. The Committee concurred. Aid. Bernstein moved approval of Item (27), Ordinance 74-0-99 - Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, to indicate that churches are either permitted andfor special uses in almost every category of zoning districts in the City. His feeling is that the 01 district was an o%ersight and the analysis of current OI districts who that there are actually more non -for -profit uses than there are office uses in the 01 districts. He pointed out the areas where this has set precedence. Aid. Kent seconded the motion. Aid. Newman expressed his feelings that it is a mistake to go foneard b% introducing this item as motioned because he questions whether we should consider amending; our Zoning Ordinance to allo%, arty additional uses in this district which is going to contribute to elimination ot'property that is qualified to be considered for commercial use. tax based property. He pointed out that all consideration Should be given to many other locations that religious institutions can be located other than commercial locations. He further pointed out that onl} approximatel% I I% of space in • •P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of 504/99 Page 7 Evanston is for commercial use and should be maintained if at all possible. Discussion took place amongst the Committee members regarding Ald. Newman's comments. Aid. Bernstein argued the fact that he would like to sec a religious organization such as the Vineyard take over the coat xreial space, but does realize the importance of Aid. Newman's concerns. Chairman Wynne also agreed with Aid. Newman's concerns and the possibility that there are other residential areas that could be considered that would not be a detrimental as eliminating commercial use space. Aid. Kent explained his position on seconding the motion in that he agrees with Ald. Bernstein's reasoning for his motion but does agree and backs Aid. Newman's position in tax revenue that could be collected from this property. He agrees that tax records on this property should be acknowledged and reviewed by the Committee before any final vote is given. The Committee discussed this in further detail and it was the consensus of the Committee to have staff go back and retrieve the tax revenue information on the property over the last 10 years and the current status of the property for being tax exempt. Aid. Newman said, in reference to Ald. Bernstein's motion, that when the Zoning Ordinance w-as under review in 1993, the Ol district was created especially for creating commercial activity in this particular district. He suggested that this entire issue be revisited in the future. Aid. Bernstein withdrew his motion at this point requesting that staff retrieve the information that the Committee has requested before any •further consideration of this item. Aid. Newman moved to hold this item in Committee until such information is obtained. Chairman Wynne seconded the motion. tiir. Sargis made additional comments to the effect of not -for -profit and religious organizations having to be made to make payments in lieu of taxes. I le claims that he is not aware of such a policy being adhered to in such a manner. Aid. Neuman explained that is an evolving policy that has become more and more effective. especially in Evanston and they have documented cases of such. Mr. Sargis stressed the position of the applicant in their disapproval of this method, especially when paymentproposing such a costly compromise to the pa}ent method by offering community services. Aid. Newman reiterated his position that this is not an issue of church, religious position but is more to do %ith any not -far -profit organization taking over and eliminating tax revenue space from the tax rolls and the City's responsibility to maintain such property for the tax base. He stressed that any such organization should be accountable for taking over tax revenue property. Chairman %Vynne at this point. ended all discussion on this matter and asked for final vote. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. CA) Ordinance 75-0-99 - Special Use for 1800-12 Rage Avenue %'ith all said above. Ald. `eK man motioned to hold this item in Committee along with item (27), seconded b% Ald. Kent. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. 0 P&D Committee Mtg. Is of 5/24/99 Page 8 (29) Ordinance 76-0.99 - S=ial Use for 2545 Prairie Avenue Chairman Wynne acknowledged'Ar. Andrew Mirth. attorney for the applicants Mr. & Mrs. Grois, owners of Michelini's restaurant. Aid. Nm-man moved approval, seconded by Aid. Bernstein. Mr. Wirth explained that they were a Type II restaurant in their prior location and are currentiy a Type I in their present location. He said there is a question of whether they need to be a Type IL explaining that they are currently operating as a Type I but have the need to still come under the Type 11 category to qualify for pick-up and deli% en• services. Chairman Wynne asked 44r. Alterson, referring to the fact that this case came under the ZBA's determination and the determination of his department, that there was a need to request for the Type II status. Mr. Alterson responded that it appeared after investigation, that as it stands, the balance of the business is to carry out food or delivery. Therefore, consideration of a Type II category is necessary under the land use requirements. Chairman Wynne asked staff if designating this restaurant as a Type II, does it become in totality a Type II restaurant or allows for Type I operations as well. Mr. Alterson responded that it is within the Committees power to recommend to adopt an Ordinance that limits the applicant to do exactly what is stated to do to maintain the dining areas as a Type I restaurant and to additionally allow the carry out and delivery service as well. After discussion, the Committee's consensus that any such granting of a special use for a Type II restaurant be restricted to the particular applicant and not run with the land. . Further discussion took place with concern of double parking on Prairie Avenue for pick up traffic and delivery employees. The applicants reassured that proper sign age is posted and will remain posted stressing no tolerance of double parking and will be enforced to the maximum of the capability. Aid. Newman moved to amend the Ordinance to state in writing the prohibition of double parking on Prairie Avenue for pick-up or delivery service, seconded by Aid. Bernstein. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the amended motion. (26) Sidewalk Cafe for'545 Prairie Avenue Aid. Newman moved approval of the request by INIichelini's for a sidewalk cafe, seconded by Aid. Bernstein. The Committee recognized the applicant past approval and operation of their sidewalk cafe. with no objections or complaints. They also recognized the applicants awareness of the rules for sidewalk cafe operation. The rote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. IAA► Plat of Subdi� Islon - Chucrrh Street Plaza Redc%elonrU= With no additional discussion on this [natter_ Aid. Newman moved approval, seconded by Aid. Bernstein. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. AD.IOURN41ENT fhe meeting was official adjourned at 7:57 p.m 0 MINUTES Planning & Development Committee May 10, 1999 Room 2403 - 7:00 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Engelman, J. Kent, A. Newman, M. Wynne Alderman Absent: S. Bernstein Staff Present: J. Wolinski, A. Berkowsky, M. Robinson, C. Wonders, I Brownlee Others Present: D. Anderson Presiding Official: Alderman Wynne Chairman Wynne called the meeting to order at 7:20 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 20. 1999 MEETING Aid. Kent moved approval of the April 5th minutes, seconded by Aid. Engelman. Aid. Engelman requested that it be stated in the minutes that he left the meeting at the beginning of the discussion on the Comprehensive General Plan and did not return until the end of discussion. Staff acknowledged the correction to the minutes and the vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. 126) Sidewalk Cafe for 1745 Sherman Avenue Chairman W-mne acknowledged Mr. Casey's presence as representative for Einstein Brothers Bagels. Aid. Newman moved approval, seconded by Aid. Kent. The Committee recognized the fact that Einstein Brothers Bagels received a sidewalk cafe permit last year with no problems reported. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. [PDI1 Proposed Amendments to Ordinance 6-0-97 concerning Building Code Regulations for Elevators Chairman Wynne noted that main• people have signed up to speak but requested that they begin with Chief Berkowskv's presentation. P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of May 10, 1999 is Page 2 Chief Berkowsky gave a brief summary of what has occurred up to this staff memorandum before the Committee. He explained that at the last meeting there was some discussion on how to address the issue of elevators and what would be a reasonable height limitation. He said that one of the suggestions was if staff were to provide some type of waiver for existing buildings for certain beigbm to be required to install the fire alarm system to provide early detection in lieu of the elevator recall requirements. He said the Committee asked for a comprehensive survey which is enclosed in the packet, dated March 3, 1999 which is the date that the Committee requested this information He said that the survey gives a background dealing with everything discussed including why fire alarm systems are needed with electronic devices that activate automatic or manual means and audiovisual systems and smoke detectors to provide early warning to the occupants of a building. A building survey was requested from the data base in the Community Development Department elevator files; there are approximately 165 buildings 5 stories or more in height. Chief Berkowsky had one of his inspectors go out and visualize half of those buildings to determine what types of life safety systems they had in place. He said out of 75 buildings. 71 had fire alarm systems; only 56 had smoke detection in conjunction with their fire alarm system. He pointed out that on page 3 there are actual cost given by several fire alarm installation companies. On page 4 there are actual cost and contract amounts that were received from installation companies on 8 buildings in Evanston. He added that on page 4 there is additional background information on the need for elevator recall and firefighter service in high-rise buildings. Chief Berkowsky concluded with the 3 recommendations that are listed on page 5. He explained the 3 recommendations and noted the appeal process that can be complied with to the Fire Chief as permitted by the Fire Prevention Ordinance 105-0-96. Nir. NVolinski reminded the Committee that when staff f rst came to them with the elevator ordinance a few years ago, they gage the Committee some quotes and estimates on the cost of retrofitting elevators for phase I and II. He informed the Committee that what staff did not include in those cost is the fact that many elevators in the City have been in place for some time and in order to install the phase I & II recall system, required in some cases that the entire control panel be changed to upgrade to the current time. He explained that this is why the original cost given by staff were less than quotes building owners were receiving after receiving estimates from elevators installation companies. Aid. Newman asked for clarification on recommendation # I, as written, it states that buildings more than 75 feet or more than 7 stores, which ever is greater, he questioned this statement. He quesdoris what would happen if a building were 74 feet in height and had 8 stories. Chief Berkowsky responded that particular building would not be required to do the elevator recall system because it states whichever is greater. .aid. Ne%%man was skeptical of how this statement was worded because you would assume, as written, that the 8 stories would require the building to install the recall system. Chief Berkowsk% conveved that is why the appeal process in available. Aid. Ne«man stated that he does not approve of the appeals going to the Fire Department because • he does not I'eel that any appeals will be granted. He does feel that the Fire Department should have P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of May 10, 1999 Page 3 full input but the appeals should not go to the Fire Chief directly for granting ,%waivers. He feels that the Fire Department, when it comes to doing the cost benefit analysis, is going to be as careful as they possibly could be, but %%ill they consider financial situations and hardships. Chief Berkowsky responded, in speaking for the Fire Department, that they do have citizens appealing every so often and they do worm diligently with people so that it works for both sides. He supports the position of the Fire Department in that they do understand the financial constraints as well as other constraints and try to weigh all the factors involved. He added that this appeal process has been in place since he can remember and they have never had anyone that wished to take their appeal to a further level. Ald. Engelman said that he is not sure of how effective a cost benefit analysis can be compared to life -safety issues that are required and the consequence is someone's life or death. He does feel that the Fire Department is in the best position to recognize the need for fire safety and concerns. He reiterated his strong feelings and support for City staff and that all Departments do bend over backwards to try and accommodate and recognize the needs of citizens wile at the same time noting the importance that rules need to be interpreted in away that make sense for human beings to live in. He also feels that staff is made conscious of the Council's desire that we are "taxpayer citizen friendly." Aid. Engelman supports the Fire Department's position in that they are in the best position for the elevator appeal because they are in the position of interpreting the Fire Code constantly. Aid. •Newman debated Aid. Engelman's comment on the effectiveness of a cost benefit analysis because if the City applied that theory. every home in Evanston would be required to have sprinkler systems, etc.. the costs would be astronomical for homeowners. He pointed out that this issue only effects condo homeowners and cost benefit analysis must be considered in many situations. Ald. Newman noted that half of the Ordinance deals with BOCA requirements and the other half are Fire Code requirements. He asked if what the requirement is for elevators under the BOCA code and what the appeal process is for BOCA requirements. Mr. Wolinski responded that staff"tailored" this ordinance down from what the BOCA Code actually states which is more stringent by actually requiring that practically all buildings have the fireman recall system. Ald. Newman pointed out that appeals to the BOCA Code go before the Property Standards Board which does have a few appointed citizens and not just all City officials. He strongly suggest that citizens be included on the appeals board for the elevators due to the fact that this does impact highly on taxpaying; residents and their input is in order. Chief Berkowsky still supports the fact the Fire Department has the expertise in having the ability to balance out life -safety issues as well as understanding the cost and being able to work with buildings on an individual basis in coming to an agreeable decision. Ald. Newman questioned the standards that would be followed. Chief Berkowsky responded that the standards to he followed are as the memo suggest. Mr. Wolinski recalled that when the Committee and staff fast started discussions on the amendments to the elevator ordinance, they did talk about the Property Services Board to hear out appeals, as mentioned by Aid. Newman. He also remembered from those discussions that the feeling of the majority of the Committee ►%•as the concern for the level of expertise on the Property Services Board as opposed to the Fire Department. He said that the Property Services Board consists of mostly, architects and building; managers. Mr. Wolinski P&D Committee Mtg. • Minutes of May 10, 1999 Page 4 suggested to the Committee for consideration, that the appeal go to the Fire Chief and if der ed. newt step to go before the P&D Committee. Aid. Kent questioned the appeal process, as stated that the Fire ChiefwilI respond within 5 days and such an appeal within 10 days. He said this gives the impression that the appeal process will move quickly and questions if this is do -able in the time frame given because he can recall a current case that the Fire Chief has been struggling with that has lasted over a couple of year due to the lack of cooperation of the building owner. Aid. Kent asked staff if this time frame can be adjusted accordingly. Chief Berkowsky responded that this time frame is flexible and the most important aspect in this appeal process is that the Fire Department makes contact and set up a meeting with the building owners as soon as possible. Aid. Kent asked what happens with the building if they are denied their appeal and still do not wish to comply. Chief Berkowsky responded that the matter would have to be decided by the court at that point. At this time, Chairman Wynne referred to the sign -in sheet of citizens wishing to speak. Mr. Earl Borgeson, 1426 Chicago Avenue, asked why the exemption was at 7 stories, why not 8 stories. Chief Berkowsky responded that staff had to determine what the code defines as high-rise which is considered over 7 stories. He said that 8 stories is usually higher than 75' which is the • typical height for considering a building a high-rise. hir. Borgeson pointed out that his building has a parapet higher than 75' and questions if parapets and roofs will be taken into consideration. He also questioned how high the fire truck ladders reach and if this was another factor in determining the exemption at 7 stories. Chief Berkowsky responded that the ladders reach a maximum of 105' but has nothing to do with the elevator recall requirements because there is a setback requirement for the trucks and accessibility issues with the ladders that don't consider classify them to be depended on for life safety situations. Mr. Borgeson contended that his building does have the fire alarm system in place but not connected to the Fire Department. He questions that even though his building is 8 stories, ►yh) the fire alarm system could not be sufficient for their building. Chief Berkowsky stressed the recommendation of the Fire Department, as listed in recommendation #1. that all buildings over 7 stories should be required to install the fire fighter recall system. Chairman Wynne questions how the measurement determination will be done. Chief Berkowsky explained that the Code states that the measurement is from the lowest point of fire department access which means from the street level to the top of the building. The Committee and staff debated this issue because the Committee felt that roofs and parapets should not be included in the height measurement. StafTagreed, explaining that penthouses are not included in the height measurements also. Chief Berkowsky clarified that height measurement is to the top of the highest occupied noorlstory. The Committee requested that this be worded into the ordinance to clarify this issue. Staff acknowledged this request. o] P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of May 10, 1999 Page 5 Mr. Don Stewart, President of the 721 Foster Building Cortwation. said that their building will tv effected by this Ordinance. He asked if the Committee has approved the recommendation than buildings under 5 stories are exempted from the tire fighter recall. Chairman Wynne explained thatt the Committee has not actually approved that recommendation: tFicy are still debating this issue now as to what height the exemption should be and what should be put into place to provide some layer of safety. Mr. Stewart stated that their building is modest with an elevator that was installed after the building was built. He said that his building strongly support the Committee accepting staffs recommendation to exempt buildings under 5 stories, as a matter of practicality. He informed than Committee that even with the first 3 items to comply with in the Ordinance, (stand-by lighting, door restrieters & telephones), the cost will be approximately $3.000 to be paid by the 6 families in their building. Ald. Newman agrees with Mr. Stewart's comments and recognizes the substantial cost for complying with this Ordinance, even with the first 3 items. Mr. Avi Weissman, representative of Cagan Management and one of their clients at 2150 Sherman Avenue (Hawthorne House), says that he is also in favor of the exemption at 5 or 7 stories. He informed the Committee that they did receive one estimate for the repairs and updates for the elevators at Hawthorne House which came to approximately S30.000 for a 14 unit building. He said that cost would be around S2.200 per unit in this building which is a great financial burden for most unit owners. He personally feels that the automatic detection fire alarm system is a smart and cautious way in exchange for the fire recall update. Mr. Weissman asked if the automatic detection system is required on each floor or on each floor above 4 stories. as he understands it in the memo. Chief Berkowsky responded that the fire alarm system would be required throughout the building to alert all floors. Mr. Weissman asked that the Committee give more consideration to the amount of units in a building in conjunction with the amount of stories because some building with 8 floor may only have 2 units per floor in comparison to the larger buildings with many more units per floor. Mr. Bruce Nesvig. 1721 Custer Avenue, expressed that he is still confused with what is actually under consideration. He is still unsure if buildings under 4 stories are required to install the fire alarm system with automatic detection in lieu of the fire recall requirements; it appears to him that any buildings under 5 stories will not be impacted by this at all. Mr. Wolinski responded that he is correct except that the first original 3 items of the Ordinance must be complied by all buildings. Mr. Nesvig pointed out that not all buildings are residential. some are equipped with only freight elevators. Chief Berkowsky responded that this issue was addressed at a prevIOUs meeting. Some freight elevators are used on a regular basis and would be required to comp)}. but the only %vay to make such a decision is for Fire Department personnel to go out and inspect the elevator to determine if it is remote and not easily accessible. This subject is covered under recommendation »1. Ms. Julie Farley, President of the Condo Board for Hawthorne House. expressed her support for Mr. Weissman's comments. She reiterated her concerns expressed by fir. Stewart with regards to the high cost involved with complying to just the first 3 items and the even greater anticipated cost P&D Committee Mtg. • Minutes of May 10, 1999 Page 6 associated with installing the automatic fire alarm system. She noted that their building curre rtly has normal smoke detectors on all floors and would be required to upgrade their system. She referred to the cost chart on page 4 and assumes from the quote given on a similar building that the cost would be in the area of $6,300 and would cost each unit owner approximately $450. She asks that the Committee still keep in mind the costs involved with all the upgrades from items 1-3. the automatic fire alarm system and especially the fire recall requirements and the extreme burden in can cause on many people. Chairman Wynne closed citizens comments at this point. The Committee discussed the appeal process. Aid. Ne%%Tmm said that he would be satisfied v%1th appeal of the Fire Chiefs decision to go before P&D, as suggested by Mr. Wolinski. Chairman Wynne questioned the rationale for the appeals to go before P&D instead of the Property Standards Board; she feels the latter board might be more appropriate. Mr. Wolinski responded that the majority of the appeal processes that we have from our various boards and commissions there is a step in the process that states any appeals to their decision should go before the P&D Committee; this appeal process should be treated the same way. Aid. Engelman said that in this case, the appeal is from the Fire Chief, not a specific board. He feels that this Committee does not have the expertise and he would prefer to leave it where it is_ Aid. Newman said that this is a philosophical matter because he feels that the residents of Evanston pay very high taxes and they depend on their elected officials to be involved in situations that involve City matters and decisions. He is not insinuating that the Fire Department should not be involved, their opinion and decision are crucial in this matter and he assures that if they have a strong case. he %Nil] support their decision. He also stated that the Fire Department has many competent and respected officials, such as Chief Berkowsky, that he would not doubt in their decisions. After more discussion on this topic. the Committee agreed that appeals should go to the Fire Chief with further appeals to the P&D Committee. Comments were made from a citizen in the audience referring to condo assessment reserves. She said that her particular condo building had to spend most of their reserve several years ago, leaving the balance very low. She suggested that consideration be given to exempt those buildings whose reserves have been depleted for needed or emergency repairs. Aid. Newman responded that condo assessment reserves can not be an accurate point to consider to exempt status because those reserve funds can fluctuate up and down depending on needed repairs and work to be done on a building and the increase in assessment fees to rebuild the reserve. He does, ho%%ever. recognize the burden placed on condo owners for very high monthly assessment and special assessment costs. Nfr. Wolinski stated that it is written in the Condo Conversion Ordinance that a certain amount should remain in the buildings reserves. Aid. ,Yew man moved to amend the Ordinance to state that appeals should go to the fire Chief with further appeals to the P&D Committee, seconded by Chairman Wynne. Aid. Kent • requested that an additional amendment be made for the appeal process to lengthen the stated 5 •P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of May 10, 1999 Page 7 working days to allow more time. Chief Berkowwsky stated that wording ►►us put in because as zbe time it the Ordinance was written, it was assumed that those issues needed to be addressed as swn as possible; this time frame is flexible. The Committee agreed to amend the appeals process tame from 5 working days to 30 days. AId. Newman commended ChiefBerkowsky and staff on the recommendations made and the survey conducted. He said effort was made to accommodate as much as possible. He recognizes the argument that at some point a firefighter vith a large amount of equipment on their back and going up a certain amount of stairs, is a consideration and at some point, control of the elevators has to take place. He reiterated the good job done by staff on this project. Ald. Newman questioned the time to be given to upgrade or install the alarm systems. Chief Berkowsky noted that corder item 42, there is a 3 1/2 year period. He said in buildings where there is a significant cost, he suggested that the work be done floor -by -floor or in phases to lessen the cost burden. Ald. Kent asked what the Fire Department is going to do to oversee the process over the next 3 '/2 years. Chief Berkowwsky said that the Fire Department will continue to do as they currently do with upgrading the elevators; they have a list of all the buildings that are in need of upgrading or that this ordinance ►gill effect. so they can do a follow-up «ith these buildings over a period of time. Ald. Newman asked if a yearly reminder letter can go out to those buildings. fir. Wolinski responded that such a letter can go out ►►ith the yearly bills for elevator certificates. Mr. Lon Williams. representing Northwestern University. asked what the time frame is for elevators requiring the firefighter recall and service systems. Staff responded that the time frame ►sill remain the original date of January 1.2003. Chairman Wynne asked staff if they are clear of the direction far amendments to the Ordinance. Staff replied that they are clear with the directions for amendments to the maximum height and stories for exemption to the fire recap and service requirements, the requirements for buildings to install the automatic fire alarm and smoke detection systems, and the amendments to the appeal process. Staff said that the amended ordinance should be ready for the Committee's final review in 2 weeks. tPDll Moving and Rental Assistanrg Rivrnents_for Tenants Residing at 908 Church Str"t {Da►, Mr. Robinson explained the situation ►tiith the current tenants above Dave's Italian Kitchen. 6 singles and 1 married couple. He has met ►►ith each tenant and all qualify for relocation assistance because they have lived in the d►►elling units for more than 90 days before the date in which the Cite acquired the property. He explained that City of Evanston's Residential and Business Relocation Policy. He said that this request is for conditional authorization is to eliminate multiple appearances before the Committee as the assistance is being, carried, as long as each case meets the guidelines. He further k P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of May 10. 1999— Page 8 explaired the attached documents to be signed by each tenant and that he would be personally carrying out this responsibility. Aid. Newman moved approval, seconded by Chairman Wynne. Ald. Engelman raised questions on the rooming house status of this buildings and if they were properly licensed and inspected. Staff was unsure at the immediate moment, but could check the records to verify if the Committee desires. Aid. Newman suggested at this point, it would not make much difference because the documents have been signed by the owner and the relocation process would still have to be carried out. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. Direction to the Plan Commission co rni g.the updatc of the C.omareheru ive 00=1 Plan Chairman Wynne wwas under the impression that direction was given at the last meeting. Mr. Wolinski explained that direction is somewhat unclear by the Plan Commissioner's as to what the Committee wants to address the on the actual document; i.e.. changes to be made and when the Committee wants to review any such changes. Aid. Engelman is under the impression, from reading the minutes. that what is to transpire is a public meeting to hear suggestions and comments as to whether or not there should be certain changes. Chairman Wynne explained that there was a wide range in discussion including some of the philosophical discussion about what the purpose of the Plan should be but there was not actually agreement to time. There was some agreement from the Plan Commissioner's in terms of possible sharpening the discussion of the economic focus and there was definitely a plan that staff would circulate the completed draft to carious institutions and organizations. including the school districts. for their review and comments. Chairman Wynne assumes that a meeting time would be scheduled for June. Aid. Engelman questioned who would hold the public hearing. P&D or the Plan Commission. IVIr. Wonders clarified that direction that the Plan Commission and staff are seeking at this time is because there was discussion pertaining to sending the document as -is to the full Council and let the hearing take place there or would the hearing stay at P&D. He further explained that staff need's this clarity to have proper notification and information when sending out the document and for ads in the papers. Discussion took place on this matter. Aid. Engelman feels that it is impomant for all members of the City Council as well as to include all the Committee's imol-,ed such as Human Senices and Human Relations along with the Plan Commission because this is not just a P&D issue, but a City-wide issue and because this is such a broad document. All should be urged to be present. Aid. Newman stated that there are some serious land -use issues that need to be considered in order to the Plan to be implemented. so the P&:D Committee should host the actual hearing. The Committee agreed and also agreed that such a hearing should take place on an oft=lVtonday night_ After discussion on possible dates that could be available and convenient, the Committee •P&D Committee Mtg. Minutes of May 10, 1999 Page 9 agreed to a tentative date of Thursday!, July 22nd. Stall will comply in sending out the document to the various institutions and organizations, as requested Ms. Anderson informed the Committee that at this Wednesday's Plan Commission meeting, they will be discussing the issue of music clubs in downtown Evanston; she extended an invitation_ Mr. Wolinski informed the Committee that the Human Relations Committee and the Community Development Department will hold an open forum on the Housing Authority Section 8 Program on Tuesday, .tune 8th at 6:30 p.m. in the Parasol Room of the Civic Center. He said that this meeting should be broadcast on the Evanston cable channel. The meeting was adjourned at 8:32 p.m. 0 Respectfully submitted, Jacqueline E. Bro%mlee LJ rZ MINUTES Planning & Development Committee April 20, 1999 Room 2403 - 7:00 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Berstein, S. Engelman, J. Kent, A. Newman, M. Wynne Staff Present: J. Wolinski,, A. Alterson, D. Marino, M. MyioM C. Wonders. J. Brownlee Others Present: D. Anderson, D. Hart, V. Kretchmer Presiding Official: Alderman Wynne 1 ;I V 113eKs)! ! ; Chairman Wynne called the meeting to order at 7:41 p.m., apologizing for the lateness in starting due to Executive Session prior to this meeting. She thanked Aid. Herrnstein for chairing the April 5th meeting in her absence. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 5,1999 MEETING Aid. Kent moved approval of the April 5th minutes, seconded by Ald. Nev%man. A correction was made to page 5 of the minutes by Aid. Rainey, noting a mistake in wording regarding the number of people in attendance at the second meeting for Osco's; it should state that 35 people were in attendance. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. u ! 1111KIN&I 113! (13) Ordinance 15-0-99 - Amendment to Zoning OrdinancQ (Fences) Chairman Wynne said that this item was held in Committee to give the Plan Commission an opportunity to review the final formulation of the Ordinance amending fence regulations. She noted that no comments or objections were received from the Plan Commission and all seemed to be satisfied with the outcome. Aid. Engelman asked for clarification on this Ordinance and how the Type I Street Ordinance will coordinate with each other. Mr. Nlylott explained that because the fence Ordinance, 15-0-99 says that the only location in which front vard fences may be permitted is along Type I streets, then an ordinance has to be enacted declaringwhatare Type I streets. Aid. Newman further explained that time was given to the PIan Commission for an opportunity to comment on all the changes the were made. He said that no comments of suggestions were received from the Plan Commission so these Ordinances are now ready to go before Council for approval. inA P&D Committee Mtg. • April 20, 1999 Page 2 Aid. Newman moved approval of Ordinance 15-0-99, seconded by Aid. Bernstein. The mote was 4-1 with Aid. Engelman voting nay. (14) Ordinance 31-0-99 - Type i Slreet Ordinance (Front-5-ard Fences) Chairman Wynne stated that this is a companion ordinance to the above with no further cornmems. Aid. Kent moved approval of Ordinance 31-0-99, seconded by Aid. Newman. The vote vm 4-1 with Aid Engelman voting any. Discussion with Plan -Commission concernine undated Comorehensive General Plan Chairman Wynne acknowledged the Plan Commissioners present, Ms. Valerie Kretchmer, W. David Hart and Ms. Doraine Anderson. Ms. Kretchmer announced that her term as Commissioner ended in December of 1998 but she was Chair of the Comprehensive General Plan Committee and is still very actively involved in the process. Ms. Kretchmer read a presentation prepared for the P&D Committee (see attached). In summary, the presentation explains the reasoning for need in updating the 1986 Comprehensive Plan and the process in which the Commission took in considering recommendations for updating the Plan; Lc. public/community meetings, meetings with planners, Realtors and developers, questionnaire sent to city's major institutions, and a telephone survey of 200 residents. She said that a compilation of the issues addressed was drafted and a public hearing was held for comments, these comments were incorporated in the draft document before the P&D Committee. Nis. Kretchmer pointed out several key themes of the Plan, which are listed in her presentation as well as key values and goals regarding land use. public facilities, circulation and community environment. She concluded in ber presentation that the themes, key values and goals seem broad. however the Plan lists specific actions. some of which have already been initiated. She pointed out that implementation of other actions come in various ways through capital improvements or land use studies, as listed in her presentation. In closing, Ms.. Kretchmer acknowledged and thanked the Planning Division staff. especially Chris Wonders and Dennis Marino, on all of their work and efforts in compiling and putting together this draft Comprehensive General Plan. Ald. Newman said out that an o-erall good job has been done on the draft Plan and he agrees with most of it. He said that when it is mentioned about changing the character of Evanston, he often questions what this means. In his opinion, there are a number of residential areas that are not changing and are being maintained. He specifically pointed out southwest Evanston, recollecting that there is a lot that can be changed in that area. he feels this needs to be addressed in the Plan. Ald. Newman also questioned vacant land development; do we want single story retail in the downtown area and for all neighborhood retail'' He feels more developments like the Target • shopping center should be considered and encouraged. He pointed out that it appears that many of it' P&D Committee Mtg. April 20, 1999 Page 3 our land use decisions in Evanston, in his opinion. have been driven by the fact that Evanston has very high taxes. He feels there needs to be a significant discussion in this Community regarding encouraging and attracting larger developments to begin dealing with the high tar bracket that exists in Evanston; the smaller neighborhood developments can not handle and support the high cost of living in this town. He said that anything you do in terms of land use is changing the character of Evanston and he believes this issue is debatable that needs to be understood by citizens. Aid. Newman said that although he does prefer the single -stony, neighborhood retail, he realizes that type of development and land use is minimum in dealing with the high tali level and decreasing the burden on residential. Ms. Kretchmer responded that the Commission spent a lot of time discussing this issue and she read from a section in the PIan which states "enhance existing assets of neighborhoods while recognizing that each neighborhood contributes the overall social and economic quality of Evanston." She pointed out that all of the neighborhoods need to realize theca is a certain "share" of development and density that relates to the economic vitality of the City. She said there is a certain balancing act in terms of wording because they support redevelopment efforts in the different neighborhoods and on the other hand, must try to convince developers that are adjacent to lower density neighborhoods that there needs to be some sensitivity but there also needs to be an awareness on the part of the people that live in the lesser dense neighborhoods that if you live adjacent to an area that permits higher density. then this issue needs to be realized and dealt with. Aid. Ne%;7nan pointed out that this has been a mistake in the past, referring to some of the tall residential buildings on Chicago Avenue and in that area which provided virtually no parking. He stressed the importance and need for further discussion and understanding by the citizens of the need for larger scale development and looking at the change in character for the city. He mentioned the fact that many citizens complained that the Arthur Hill Development was overdevelopment for the downtown and that too much was going into the development and that this would "change the character' of Evanston. He pointed out that if the City is not willing to have a certain amount of growth, then you take away any ability of the City Council to do anything about the tax problem. Its. Kretchmer agrees with Aid. New7nan that this issue is ven controversial but there are sections in the Plan that do address this in part. She pointed out that the primary theme of the Comprehensive General Plan is "the condition that Evanston must allow growth to occur while enhancing the communin•'s special character. New development should be integrated with existing neighborhoods with the walking and the use of mass transit and to continue to offer a broad range of housing stock, etc." She noted that the Plan is not an anti-growth/development document and the Plan Commission's intention was to try and deal with balance. Mr. Hart supported Ms. Kretchmer's comments and added that the Plan is not anti -developmental nor is the Plan Commission; he feels that they are eery positive and supportive of new growth for the City, lie added that there appears to be a misunderstanding if that is the message the Committee is receiving from the Plan. Ms. Anderson commented that this draft of the Comprehensive General Plan has been done 10 years after the last one and she hopes this one will be in place equally as long. She pointed out that certain funding and the ability to support dilferent projects. is due to the status of the economy. In her opinion. she does not see any immediate tax relief in site. no matter how successful the deals are that k P&D Committee Mtg. April 20, 1999 Page 4 they are working on and have put in place. She said that Evanston is almost funded out and we have an overwhelmingly aging infrastnxture. She said in terms of wanting taller building developrrwaft in downtown, the Hill project started out with no housing at all and now has 24 stories on top of a 4 story garage. She pointed out that the group west of the Hill development site that wanted minimal housing in the development, never envisioned the multitude that is now being proposed. Ms. Anderson expressed her skepticism that this project will bring much tax relief, no matter how successful it is because of all the other kinds of "sirs}: holes for money" throughout the City, such as the vast aging infrastructure. Aid. Kent thanked the Plan Commission for all their hard work they put into this draft of the Comprehensive Plan. He brought attention the to phone survey that was done noting the categories of white, black and other. With the large ethnic diversity within the City of Evanston, he requested that the category "other" be broken down more specifically. He feels this to be an important issue when looking at the breakdown of nationalities in schools, housing, etc. Mr. Wonders responded that the category other" was condensed in this case to facilitate the reading of the concern to an extent. Aid. Kent acknowledged how well the document was written. He did notice in the survey a portion where it asked "why a citizen does not visit downtown?" He pointed out that a majority of the responses were that there are no stores downtown that interest them. He suggested that this response be considered seriously and taken further to find out what types of stores these citizens are looking for or are interested in bringing to Evanston to enhance the downtown shopping. Ms. Kretchmer responded that the proper bodies and organizations should be in charge of taking the survey a step further to conduct full scale analysis, such as the Evanston Chamber of Commerce or EVMARK. Aid. Kent said that he ixould have no problem with that but does stress the importance that this matter be further examined for the sake of attempting to draw more business and shopping to downtown Evanston. He suggested that additional studies be done with the neighborhood shopping areas such as Church and Dodge to find out what types of stores would draw business for the area. He noted the fact that these type of detailed surveys would help in trying to sway certain businesses to locate in Evanston. Aid. Bent pointed out the section on affordable housing on page 14. He noted that none of the issues listed are what he is fighting for in his neighborhood. He said that he would like to know a little more about inhere the information is coming from and how it was collected for the Comprehensive Plan. He suggested that the Alderman of the ward be consulted to aid in neighborhood surveys and to seek the help of Human Relations for further assistance in neighborhood needs. He pointed out a specific problem of certain developers buying property in his ward at low• cost. rehabbing the building, then renting the units to others outside of the neighborhood. He mentions this to point out that the serve} s on housing need to be done in further detail by the residents of the neighborhoods to pinpoint the needs of that community. Nis. Kretchmer responded that due to cost restraints, only 200 residents were surveyed. 50 from each quarter of the City. She said the purpose of the survey that was done by the Plan Commission initially ? %ears ago, was meant to give them a general overview of what w-as going on in people's visions and thoughts in their area. She stressed that the x. P&D Committee Mtg. April 20, 1999 Pasze 5 key issues and points raised by Aid. Kent, she agrees with, but feels a :pore appropriate body should go into more detail on a study of specific needs for each unique community. She added that the Comprehensive General Plan can be used as a too! to begin initiating further studies to fine tune those needs. Ms. Anderson suggested that an appropriate body to put dnose surveys in motion should be the Housing Commission or Human Relations. AId. Kent questioned the definition of "affordable housing", according to the Comprehensive Plan. tits. Anderson res-ronded that the Commission went into lengthy discussion on this issue and precisely how this verbiage should be put together because she remembers complaints and disbelief at a meeting in the p2st when it was mentioned that the Hinman Avenue corridor of rental buildings was supposedly built as affordable housing. Her point being, she understands Ald. Kent's questioning of how and ufio should define "affordable housing." She said that you want to be specific in this rase with actually dollar amounts and figures, but it is hard to come to grips with such an issue because it seems that it would almost have to be dealt with on a block -to -block basis. Ms. Anderson reiterated that this is another example of further research that should be done by another appropriate body. Ms. Kretchmer said that the City does have a Consolidated Plan that duties deal with the needs of the low income population and in terms of some of the questions that Ald_ gent has raised, brings to her mind the need for more discussion and analysis or a task force approach. Aid. Kent clarified that his comments are not meant as criticism to the Comprehensive Plan but are real issues that points in the Plan help bring to mind that need to be further looked into. He said that he has had many discussions with Mr. Wolinski on the above issues and decent housing within his community and well as the Citr's ordeal with Section 8 certificate holders. He also explained that his concerns do not only lie within his community or on a ethnic background basis. but more importantly, different economic levels and stages. Mr. Wolinski concurred with Ald. Kent that they ha%e had several conversations on the topic of housing affordability and stable neighborhoods. He commented, as mentioned earlier by Ms. Kretchmer, the HUD Consolidated Plan which is updated ever. %ear, is a tool where they try to exhibit issues concerning housing affordability. problems of homelessness. etc He recalls approximately 15 objectives in the Consolidated flan and the majortt-. of them deal with housing affordability. maintaining the housing stock and issues along those lines. He justified that the Consolidated Plan is more a comprehensive housing document that deals not onl► with the infrastructure of our housing; stock but also with the affordability aspect of it. He said that Council revie« s the Consolidated Plan every year as it is updated; it is also reviewed b% the Housing Commission, Plan Commission and the CD Committee as well. Aid. Newman clarified from his earlier comments, that he is not insinuating that the Comprehensive Plan is an anti -growth document. In his opinion, as a member of the Council, it is his duty to look at the tax base and try to figure out ways to keep the cost down endured and passed on to the residents of this town. Fie added that it bothered him «hen he heard at a meeting last «eek that for a child to take swimming, lessons at the YMCA here in Evanston, the .early cost is approximately S600. He would like to find possible ways to accommodate such high fees in our community. He pointed out that problems with trying to balance our budget from year to %ear. he would like to find k P&D Committee Mtg. April 20, 1999 Page b a way where the residents are not always burdened with this balance act. He said that it is not just getting tax relief; it is in an up economy having your tax revenues not grow fast enough to pay aA the bills without increasing taxes significantly. Ald_ Newman emphasized that he feels very su migly for and supports preservation of the community and neighborhood development, but on the other hand, to pay the bills and support the high cost of living in Evanston, we need to work on the tax base and to support projects that wtiil help with these cost. He said that we need to make strong affirmative statements on how much it hurts this community to take land off the tax rolls; the City can not tolerate it anymore and we have to let such facilities as Evanston Hospital and Northwestern know this fact. He said his intentions are to be helpful in suggesting what he feels would benefit the entire community and as a City we need to come to terms with this. He feels there is a disconnect between the Council and Community on this point; he does not think the community understands why the Council must make certain decisions for the benefit of all. Aid. Newman said that he wants to have a document that communicates with the public in the City as to what we need to do in order to keep and maintain the excellence in this City. He feels the Plan Commission has covered a lot of this but he wants to add to what has been done. He reiterated that he wishes his comments and suggestions to be helpful in this matter, not critical; he feels his issue on taxes is a major dilemma for the City of Evanston. Aid. Bernstein commented that he feels Ald. Newman is asking too much of this document. He • noted that the Comprehensive General Plan does cover tax base issues as well as the issues of concern stated by Aid. Kent but in a general, serviceable form. He said the sub -heads cover all issues and talk about the ambiguity of what's happening in the City. He noted that the sections and issues covered in the Plan are an overview or capsuiization in time. He stressed that the Comprehensive Plan needs to be a "breathable" document and can not be specific: the specifics are left to the Zoning Ordinance, Consolidation Plan, the various Commissions and Boards, etc. Ald. Bernstein feels that the Plan does what it is supposed to do and in some instances with the previous Plan, he felt it to be too specific in more areas than this one. He said that the Plan talks about balance «7thin the entire communiy. Discussion ensued amongst the P&:D Committee and the Plan Commissioners regarding the issue of balance within the Comprehensive General Plan. The Commissioners stressed that the Plan Commission is not anti -developmental and did not want the Plan to give that impression. They pointed out that their intention, as written. does support smaller neighborhood scale development as well as realizing the need for more intense development to raise the tax rolls; balance is the key issue in pointing out the importance with both scales of dn-elopment. Aid. Bernstein added that it is hard to be specific. this document is supposed to be a general overview. Aid. W%mie recalled a prominent goal set in the last Plan which worded "To enhance and preserve the tax base of Evanston." She stated that she supported this goal with the last Plan and questions if this goal is written within this draft. Ms. Kretchmer responded that this goal is mentioned in the business and commercial area sections: she further elaborated on this issue. More discussion took place regarding this issue. P&D Committee Mtg. April 20, 1999 Page 7 From the different comments brought up during discussion, Chairman Wynne noted there are differences in opinion that have been expressed by different Committee members and the Pfam Commission. Ald. Newman clarified that he does not disagree with the Plan Commission's view3 and opinions and does not disagree or disapprove of the draft Plan; he feels there is a vag= misunderstanding of the purpose of the document. He feels there needs to be a chore philosophic discussion to clear up any misunderstanding. Chairman Wynne and the other Committee member3 agreed that there is a need for more detailed discussion to break down an understanding of the Plam The Plan Commission asked for Committee direction at this point on how they would like to proceed. Chairman Wynne asked the Committee for a consensus. Aid. Newman asked if this document can be distributed to a variety of institutions for their comments and opinions, such as the school districts, Chamber of Commerce, hospitals and various organizations. Staff concurred that this could be done. Aid. Engelman closed comment by noting the Plan Commission's admirable job on working on this document and commended all their hard work. It was the consensus of the Committee to have the copies of the draft Comprebensive General Plan distributed to the various institutions and organizations, as mentioned above, and bring their comments and opinions back before the Planning & Development Committee some time in June, date to be decided. Mr. Wolinski informed the Committee that staff has prepared a memo compiling the results of their survey and recommended amendments for the elevator ordinance. He said that this item will be ready for discussion at the May 10th meeting. The meeting, was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted. 4 i�•L�. Jar4uae E. Brownlee 0 ATTACHMENT PRESENTATION TO PLANNING AND DEVELOP51ENT COMbIITTEE April 20, 1999 Valerie S. Kretchmer, Chair Comprehensive General Plan Committee of the Plan Commis:ion • 3 years ago started processor reviewing the then 10-year old Comprehensive Plan. • While recognizing that much or that plan was still relevant, the Commission decided it needed updating to reflect changes in the city and region. • Specific "new" issues include infill housing, the scale and location of new development, the changing nature of the city's employment base from it "headquarters city" to a Technopolis. • Many of the 1986's goals and objectives were met or are in the process of being implemented. These include: - Public works, including sewers and street lighting • - Downtown plan and streetscape Public library - Increased residential development downtown - Re -use of former manufacturing sites on the west side - Landscaping along the Union Pacific railroad embankments along Green Bay Road. • However, because applicants for zoning changes must show that their proposals are consistent with the Comprehensive General Plan, and goals and objectives of the plan are implemented through other planning and budgeting processes, the commission decided an update was appropriate. • The process included extensive public participation. We started with 3 community meetings at different venues in the city — Chandler, Robert Crown and Fleetwood Jourdain. These meetings attracted 25-32 people each, who shared their ideas, vision and concerns for the citv's future. • The Commission also hosted two breakfasts with planners, realtors and developers, each with 10 in attendance. • Questionnaires were sent to the city's major institutions, including school districts, universities, hospitals and retirement homes. And a telephone survey of 200 residents from all over the city was conducted to elicit more specific resident input. ;<< isRepresentatives of city departments, boards and commissions were invited to our monthly committee meetings to discuss relevant issues for the plan. These inducted: - Arts Council - Preservation League - Environment Board and Ecology Center - Traffic - Parks and Recreation - Facilities - BuiIding Director - Community Development • From these, the committee systematically reviewed every chapter of the previous plan to identify relevant goals and objectives. A draft plan based on the consensus of Commission members and staff was completed last November. • A public hearing was held in the Civic Center last November which attracted 30 people, 11 of whom gave comments. These comments were then reviewed and incorporated into the document before you. • I'd like to point out several key themes of this document . - We have a wonderful city that is largely built out. We don't want to change the city's character. In fact the current planning buzzword is traditional neighborhood development and we've got it. - Transit -oriented, walkable neighborhoods, tree -lined stints, cultural, educational and recreational activities in close proximity to people's homes. - The challenge is to strike a balance between growth and preservation of the city's character. - The guiding principle of this plan is to encourage new development that improves the economy, convenience and attractiveness of the city, while, working to maintain a high quality of life within the community. - The plan is a statement of community values and a list of recommendations for interpreting those values into future land use and capital improvement decisions. While social issues are important, they are outside of the direct purview of this plan. - While we do not expect everyone to agree with all of the goals and objectives or with all of the recommendations, the plan tried to find a balance between potentially conflicting ideas for how best to enhance the city. • Key values and goals regarding land use, public facilities, circulation and community environment are on page 5 of the introductory vision statement. They include: - Neighborhood assets should be enhanced while recognizing that each neighborhood contributes to the overall social and economic quality of the city. - The housing stock should continue to offer buyers and renters a desirable range of choice in terms of style and price- - Evanston should maintain a diverse range of business and commercial areas, all of which will be viable locations for business activity. - Downtown should be an attractive, convenient and economically vital center of diverse activity. - Development interests of Evanston's institutions should be supported, recognizing the interests of surrounding residential neighborhoods. . - Public buildings should be fully accessible and modernized. City parks and recreation areas should be of the highest quality to meet residents' needs. - Utility systems should provide reliable, quality service and support future development. - Streets should safely, conveniently and efficiently link neighborhoods to the rest of the community and metro area. - The parking systems should serve the needs of residents, employees, commuters, shoppers and visitors to the city's business districts. - Transportation providers should provide safe, convenient, affordable and accessible alternatives to the automobile. Safety and convenience of pedestrians and cyclists are a priority. Buildings and landscaping should be of attractive, interesting and compatible design. 0 - The historic heritage of the city should be identified and preserved. - Art and arts activities should be recognized and promoted as a vita[ component of the local economy. - Natural resources should be preserved and public health promoted through a clean environment. Some might say that these are so broad as to be little more than nice Words to throw Around. However, the plan also offers specific actions, which can be or have already been initiated. Implementation comes in various ways—e.g., specific capital improvements or land use studies, some of which are underway. The Plan Commission is directly involved in some activities; other city groups are involved in others. These include: - Technopolis - City economic development strategy - Neighborhood planning activities, such as Southeast Evanston and the Chicago Avenue corridor plan underway. - Civic center analysis - Future corridor plans, including Green Bay Road, Dodge and Central Street - Church and Dodge area plan - Analysis of parking ratios for new multi -family development . Committee to study binding appearance review. A Plan Commission - sponsored committee has started reviewing the specifics of binding review. - Revised downtown plan - Feasibility of bike lanes - Gateway enhancements • In closing, I would like to say that Planning Division stair, especially Chris Wonders and Dennis Marino, worked very diligently on this and without their efforts, the committee could never have completed such a well -written document. We're happy to answer any questions you have. • MINUTES Planning & Development Committee April 5, 1999 Room 2403 - 7:00 p.m. Alderman Present. S. Bernstein, J. Kent, A. Newman, Alderman Absent: S. Engelman, M. Wynne Staff Present: A. Alterson, M. Mylott, E. Szymanski, NL Robinson, R. Schur, J. Brownkt Others Present: D. Anderson Presiding OiTicial: Alderman Bernstein Aid. Bernstein chaired the meeting in the absence of Aid. Wynne. The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OE MARCH 22-1998 MEETING Aid. Newman moved approval of the March 22nd minutes, seconded by Aid. Kent. The vote was 3-0 in favor of the motion. (24) Ordinance 44-0-99 - Ceding a portion of the 1999 Bond Volume Can to Gates Capital Co[roration for a First-Tirttt Homebuyer PrQgram Noting that this was previously done in the past, Aid. Newman moved approval, seconded by Ald. Kent. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion.. l=5 Ordinance 45-0-99 - Ceding a portion of the 1999 Bond Volume Cap to EH DA for a Mortg= Credit Certificate Progmm Noting that this also was done previously in the past, Aid. Newman moved approval, seconded by Aid. Kent. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. Mr. Alterson noted to the Committee that the agenda should state "1999" instead of"1998" on the agenda item description. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. r� P&D Committee Mtg. April 5, 1999 Page 2 (221 Ordinance 15-0-99 - amendment to Zoning Ordinance !Fences) Aid. Newman asked if the Plan Commission has had a chance to review all the changes that have been made. Nis. Anderson responded that they have not reviewed all the changes. She informed the Commission that the Plan Commission will be meeting this coming Wednesday and could review the changes at that time, but noted the Commission's full agenda with Vineyard as an item for discussion. Aid. Newman requested that staff forward a copy of the amended Ordinances to tine Plan Commission for their review at their next meeting and further requested that P&:D be notified if the Commission wants this to be held if they are unable to review before the meeting on April 20th. He asked staff if there is anything else that needs to be noted or discussed at this point. Mr. Mylott informed the Committee that the only change is that there is now a summary table of all the regulations so that users can easily note the changes made. Aid. Bernstein noted to Aid. Kent, who made this initial reference, that with the acceptance of these ordinances at this time, it will give people the opportunity in the spring and summer to apply for fences under the new ordinance. Aid. Kent expressed his satisfaction with the outcome of this goal. Aid. Bernstein asked the status with regards to the recyclable nature of PVC fences; he recalls from past discussion that there was the possibility that these fences are not recyclable. Nis. Anderson responded that they have discovered the PVC fences are recyclable, in fact, when they wrote the ordinance, they insisted that PVC fencing had to be recyclable at the end of usefulness. Aid. Bernstein recalled from past discussion that it was assumed that the by-product of recycling or burning could be hazardous. Aid. Kent said that once this ordinance finally passes. he requested that staff put together an information packet regarding the amended ordinance and have this publicized in the Arts & Recreation magazine and also on the Cable channel to educate and update the public on these changes. Mr. Ntylott acknowledged this request and apologized for not forwarding the amended ordinance ahead of time for Plan Commission review. Nis. Anderson said that she would feel more comfortable -Mth her Commission reviewing the ordinance before final acceptance. The Committee agreed to vote on and introduce this item this evening. Ms. Anderson assured the Committee that the Plan Commission would review and respond back to them for the April 20th meeting. Aid. Kent moved approval, seconded by Aid. Newman. The vote was 3-0 in favor of the motion. 123) Ordinance 31-0-99 - Tvpe 1 Street Ordinance I Front -yard Fenced With all said above. Aid. Kent moved approval, seconded by Aid. Newman. The vote was 3-0 in favor of the motion. ('_ 1) Resolution 27-R-99 - Reservation of 1999 Bond Volume Cap Aid. Newman moved approval, seconded by aid. Kent. The vote was 3-0 in favor of the motion. 0 4 P&d Committee Mtg. 0 April 5.1999 Page 3 t261 Ordina ce 46-0-99 - Amendment to Fee Ordinance Mr. Alterson noted that in the Ordinance received in Council's packets, there is a clerical error to changes in the zoning fees in Sections 2G-L. He said there has been no change from what the Council adopted last year on zoning fees. Aid. Newman asked if there has been any comments received regarding the increases. Mr. Alterson responded that he is unaware of any comments. Aid. Newman moved approval of the amendments to the Fee Ordinance, seconded by Aid. Kent. The vote was 3-0 in favor of the motion. Aid. Bernstein said this item will be introduced and he will take this off the consent agenda to indicate to the Council that the ordinance will be amended prior to the action vote. (2Z) Ordinance 43-0-99 - Special Use & Variance for 430 Asbury Avenue Aid. Rainey was called to the meeting for this item. Aid. Bernstein acknowledged the representatives present for Osco's. Mr. William Shiner. President of Mid -Northern Equities, and Mr. Lee Winter of Mid -Northern Equities introduced themselves as developer for Osco's. Aid. Bernstein asked them to give a short presenstion. ,Jr. Shiner noted that the building on the property was known as the old Asbury Market. He informed the Committee that Mid -Northern Equities (MNE) are the contract purchasers of the property. The result of the site plan and the elevation came about because of the two community meetings that were held. He stated that there were 2 critical concerns by the community, first being of which was the circulation around the building and the traffic pattern. especially the south ingress/egress driveway. He said what they did to alleviate the problem because of the drive-thru, they made one-way traffic going around the building and one-way out only so there is no cross - traffic. fie said the biggest concern was people turning in and going into the drive-thru located on the east elevation, he eliminated that conflict movement with the one-way traffic pattern. Mr. Shiner said the second major issue was the elevation on the east side facing onto Asbury Avenue. He said there was a lot of community concern that tl~.e facade mix in with the neighborhood. He exhibited a diagram showing the design which focuses on Asbury and explained how they came about with the plan due to community input and modifications of their own. Mr. Shiner informed the Committee that out of the approximately 90 citizens that attended the meetings, only a few individuals expressed opposition. the majority were fiery please with the outcome of the design of the building and site clan in general. He noted that the track deliveries %vill be less in comparison to the prior Asbun• Nfarret with only I semi coming 2-3 times per week (no ti+eekend delivery) and deli%erine bctween the hours of 9:30 a.m. and 3 p.m. Mr. Shiner expressed his appreciation with all the help they received from City staff resulting in no open development issues. He further aeknou!edged the helpful input from the community at the meetings that were held. 11 P&D Committee Mtg. April 5. 1999 Page 4 Aid. Bernstein asked what means %vill be used to preclude people from going in through that southern exit location. Mr. Winter's explained that proper signage will be posted as suggested by Dave Jennings. He added that if there became a problem even with proper signage. a pork chop could be added to the driveway. Aid. Kent asked about prevention of the kids from Chute Middle School from crossing through the rear of the property. It was noted that a 6 foot fence will be installed along the west property line. Ald. Newman asked if request for a liquor license is anticipated in the future. Nir. Alterson responded that no liquor license is being applied for and there is language to this fact stated in the ordinance. Hours of operation were discussed. noting there is a blank space in the ordinance for specified times. Mr. Winter's stated that '_ points of concerns with the neighbors is that the store not be opened 24 hours and sale of liquor. Both points wine agreed upon by the representative from Osco's. Ms. Szymanski mentioned that in the ZBA report, it is stated that "the petitioner has committed to limit the hours of operation to less than 24 hours on any day." She noted that this statement does not tell them much and leaves a wide range to hours of operation. this is why she left a blank in the ordinance. Mr. Shiner stated that normal hours of operation are from 8 a.m. until 10-10:30 p-m. he felt that Osco's would probably prefer until 10:30 p.m. Aid. Rainey informed the Committee that the neighbors are not opposed to those hours of operation. She said that 2 neighborhood meetings were held. plus the many phone calls she received regarding this item, and verified that 99% of the neighbors have eventually supported the design and the concept of this use for the property versus the neighbors preferred use to continue as a grocery store. She said there still remains a concern for the landscaping design. although on paper. it appears fantastic and they are confident that the developer and Osco's will maintain it. Aid. Rainey clarified that 2 issues still remain, I being trash in the neighborhood which will be covered by a litter plan agreed upon by the developer and Osco's. The 2nd issue is with regards to shopping carts. She pointed out the problems with shopping carts that have occurred with the Jewel,'Osco shopping center on Howard, noting the man), carts seen on Howard Street from that location. She realizes it is not Osco's or Jewel's fault. however. it is still the stores responsibility to go out and collect this carts and return them to their store. She would not like to rely on what was stated at ZBA regarding the Alderman of the ward having a neighborhood meeting concerning the collection to carts in the neighborhood. She expressed her disappointment with this statement noting that the neighborhood is the victim and the stores responsibility to the neighborhood. Aid. Rainev requested that there be a nvice-a-day collection of shopping carts. Mr. Winter's referred to Nlr. Alterson's suggestion of policing the area t%%ice-a-da% for trash and debris from the store. noting that the collection of any shopping carts could be done at that time also. Aid. hek%man said ►kith regards to the shopping cart policing. this would have to relate to the special use otthe drive-thru because any conditions would have to be in relation to the special use because that is the land use. Ms. Szymanski said not necessarily: if the legal description that was submitted relates to the entire property then the La%% Department's opinion is that the entire property is submitted to the Council. and theretore. the shopping carts relate to the operation of the entire 4 P&D Committee Nitg. April 5. 1999 Page 5 property. She concluded that it would be proper to place such a condition with this special use request. Aid. Rainey added that this project does not ha;?cnaithout the drive-thru and she does not see where any objection should come from requiring tf::s sw—c and any other, to go out and collect their shopping carts every day. Aid. Newman clarified d= h=s only concern was to the authority of the Committee in the legality of placing such a condition with regards to special use being requested - Ms. Sz)Ynanski reiterated her comments stated above w:tich supports her opinion in that it is within the authority of the P&D Committee to place such a condition on the entire property. Aid. Rainey informed the Committee that 81 people signed in at the first meeting, not counting walk- ins, and approximately the same amount of people at the second meeting. She confirmed that there was no animosity expressed at either meetings. She commended the representatives from Osco's and from MNE who were very willing to work with the community and both sides worked together diligently. Aid. Bernstein took the opportunity at this time also to thank the developers for their work on the project and their willingness to work with the neighborhood. Aid. Bernstein asked if there will be any other use for the d ire-thru other than prescription. Mr. Winter's responded that the drive-thru can only be used for tilling prescription; the ordering of any other store items is not allowed through the drive-thru. its. Sz-vmanski suggested to the Committee that this be added as a condition. Ald. Bernstein asked the developer if Osco's would have any objection to this condition. fir. Shiner responded that he mould presume that they wouldn't, but as the developer, he does not feel comfortable committing to any conditions without prior discussion with Osco's. Aid. Bernstein stated that this item is up for introduction this evening and maybe a definite answer could be obtained before final action. Aid. Newman expressed his approval for this project and the drive-thru. He has heard of no problems in the past with other drive -thews and he is inclined to support this one also. He noted his disagreement with Council and Legal's opinion with regards to conditions to the entire use of the property. He feels conditions are onh.- enforceable if the% relaw directl} to mitigating the special use being requested. - Aid. Newman moved approval of the request for special use and variance for 430 Asbury Avenue. Aid. Bernstein listed that amendments to the ordinance to include the conditions of. 1) Hours of Operation be from 8 a.m. until 10:30 p.m., 2) Pending of the collection of shopping carts into the litter collection plan, Nis. Szymanski asked about adding the condition regarding the drive-thru to only be used for prescriptions. Aid. Raine% stated that there «as no concern addressed on this issue and she still %%ould have not concern. Aid. Bernstein said that the notice stated the request of a drive-thru for 0 P&D Committee Mtg. April S. 1999 Page 6 prescriptions, and this legal notice should be bound to. He said if there appears to be a problem, it could be addressed at that time. Aid. Kent seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. Aid. Newman requested that Nis. Sn-manski review the matter discussed above regarding conditions set that tut with the special use or with the entire use of the property. 11 03 x #J t 11 Z i DKIKOR&II f► Prod Almendmengs to Ordinance 6-0-97 concerning Building Code Reaniations for El vatn�-e The Committee asked staff if the information that was requested is ready to go. Mr. Alterson speculated that staff has collected the data requested and should be ready for presentation at the next meeting. He said before committing to this. he would have to confirm this with Mr. Wolinski and Fire Department staff. Consideration of ;4tusic Club use in the Downtown Districts Aid. Ne%%Tnan suggested this be referred to the Plan Commission for consideration under the special use method and procedures. The Committee agreed to this. He asked staff if they could prepare some proposed language on the definition that is restrictive enough to include the fact that the club has to be a real music club with live music, no disc jockey music. and that live music is the primary use of the club. He said his primary purpose is that if there is liquor being served, they have a chance to say deny the project if they feel it is not fitting for a downtown use. He assures that the business that is requesting to locate downtown. is a good blues club establishment_ In response to a question from staff. Aid. Newman wants no food served. Mr. Alterson asked if the Committee wants in the language to prohibit recorded music. Aid. Newman responded no, but %►ants the primary use of the special use to be for rite music. Consideration to Develop a Police for CaMl2aign Signs and Cih• Actions on Election Day The Committee asked staff the status of information collected from other communities on this matter. Mr. Alterson responded that he is not sure of how much infon-riation has been collected to this date and would ha%a to check «ith the appropriate staffto %crif}. Consideration of Whoa Tent 11 t;se in an Accestiory to ► Tyt t_'se Restaura Mr. Alterson asked the Committee if the-, %%ant to send this directly to the Plan Commission for revie%%. similar to the music club issue. Aid. Nev�man feels the Committee needs to discuss in more detail exactly %%hat they Leant to do with this and come to some consensus. Ol P&D Committee Mtg. April 5, 1999 Page 7 The Committee moved to go into Executive Session at 7:53 p.m. The Meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, o� - Jacqu inc . Brownlee KI MINUTES Planning & Development Committee March 21. I999 Room 2403 - 5:30 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, S. Engelman. A_ Ne►►man. M. Wynne Alderman Absent: J. Kent Staff Present: J. Wolinski, J. Aiello, A. Alterson, M. Mylott, C. Ruiz, E. Szy-manski, C. Wonders, J. Brownlee Presiding Official: Alderman Wynne Chairman Wynne called the meeting to order at 5:47 p.m. 40 Aid. Newman moved approval of the March $th minutes, seconded by Ald. Bernstein. The vote was in favor of the motion. OWN 6;M 1) 6101OX&I 10It I1 (22) Ordinance 15-0-99 - Amendment to Zoning_ Ordinance (Fenced Chairman Wynne noted that the Committee did not receive any feedback or comments from the Plan Commission. Mr. Nlylott explained that due to time constraints, staff has not been able to send the amendments with a full cover memo to the Plan Commission for their review; staff will send out tomorrow. Aid. Newman requested that he would like to deal with this item at the next meeting after the Committee has dealt with the Church Street Plaza issue. This would also give staff time to forward to the plan Commission. The Committee agreed. Mr. Wolinsl:i reminded the Committee that there is still the matter of the Type I street ordinance for them to discuss which Legal has not yet completed the ordinance and the additional ordinance that deals with administrative powers of the Zoning Administrator to grant variations for fences accessory to Evanston Landmarks and the historical districts. The Committee further agreed to deal ►►ith all of the fence issues on the same night. Aid. Bernstein moved to hold this item in Committee until the April 5th meeting, seconded by Aid. Newman. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. 0 X, P&D Committee Mtg. 3/22/99 Minutes Page 2 (23) Resolution 2I-R-99 - Class L Tax Incentive Status for the Chandler Buildigg Chairman Wynne acknowledged representatives for the Chandler's building in attendance. AJ& Neuman questioned why this keeps corning before the Committee. Nir. Ruiz explained that the rust time the Committee considered this item is when the building was designated as a landmark. He said now this is back because the owners have applied to register the landmark and basically. the Commission has reviewed the application and found that they do meet or exceed the standards for historic preservation. This was also a request from the County Assessors's Office that they should have a resolution that indicates after alterations. the building will remain as a landmark. Ald_ Bernstein asked if the Preservation Commission has looked at the site plan for the restoration and feel it conforms. Nor. Ruiz confirmed and added the report indicates that they have fully conformed with our local standards and the U.S. Department of Interior Standards. Ald. Newman stated that the Committee has never seen any seen any analysis of this project which justifies that the developer needs what ever breaks he is requesting. He asks staff what the time frame is so that Council can see and review an analysis of this project. He mentioned the extensive discussions that have occurred regarding tax breaks the City has given and the school districts 465 and 4202 have complained that they are kept in the dark as to what the City is doing: he questions whether there is time to give the school districts information on this. Ald. Newman addressed Ms. Aiello: he noted that Council has never sin any memorandum from staff that says the pro forma on the Chandler's project has been reviewed by some professional in the development area and that the tax breaks they are asking for are needed. Ms. Aiello responded that this has been discussed at the Economic Development Committee meeting. Ald. Ne%% nan agreed that this has been discussed but it is still important that this information be in % ritten form. He noted that members of the Chamber of Commerce has raised questions about the tax break and it is important that he be able to answer their concerns with the backup of written documentation. He said that questions were also raised at the Citv/School Liaison Committee about tax breaks that the Cite gives out without notice to the school boards. He asked if this Class L tar incentive status effects the school boards. Staff responded that it would. Ald. Ne%vman feels that v6hat the City- needs to do. so as to have a clean record with the school boards. is to give them notice that we are considering giving the Chandler's project a tar break and he suggested that form now on that all such notices be forwarded to the school boards. Mr. Ruiz responded that before when the Preservation Commission was before P&D, thev recommended the designation of the building as an historic landmark but nothing to do with the alterations of the building. He said now the developer has applied for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the alterations and the Commission has reviewed the proposal and approved the alterations. Mr. Ruiz further clarified that now the Assessor's Office is requesting from the City certification that the alterations have been approved local], and b-, the U-S. Department of Interior Standards. He concluded that this reque-it is for the Cook County Assessor's Office in order for consideration of a Class L Tax Incentive Status for the Chandler Building!. The applicant confirmed Mr. Ruiz's statements. 0 P&D Committee Mtg. 3/22/99 Minutes Page 3 Aid. Bernstein commented with respect to Aid. Nev man's concerns. that the City will have as opportunity to object to any tax relief if we find from review of the pro forma that they do not show acceptable cause. This would effect their consideration for Class L status. Aid. Newman asked what the time fi-ame is for haying this done for the County. The applicant responded that they would begin construction tomorrow if this resolution is approved this evening. He further noted that approval of this resolution will allow them to start construction immediately. If they began construction before they file for the tax relief. they would not be eligible. He concluded that this is basically an amendment to the previous resolution for the landmark status. Aid. Bernstein moved approval of Resolution 21-R-99. He said that his understanding is that what Council voted for 2 weeks ago w-as to allow this building for landmark status as improved; apparently this was not the situation. He said this would be consistent with what was approved 2 weeks ago. The applicant confirmed and added that the previous Ordinance did not state that with the alterations this will remain a landmark and this amendment will clarih' this for the Assessor's office. Ms. Aiello said that when this w-as discussed at EDC. it was said that landmark status is for a pass through to the tenant because of the fact that it «ill triple that use and the other improvements that are being done with the Plaza issues are going towards the pro forma numbers of the developer which still stands. Aid. Bernstein recalled that at the last discussion there was 2 issues raised with 49 regards to the reasons for need of tax relief for this project and at that point and time. it was assumed that this was already considered and agreed upon that the landmark status would remain after alteration of the building. Ald. Newman believes that the applicant needs this tax break and he does believe that the applicant is going to pass this benefit along to the tenant but as a member of the Council. he has to be able to justify giving this type of tax break to a developer. He reiterated the importance of receiving the pro forma report and being able to give an honest answer to his constituents that have any questions behind the City's position on giving any tax breaks. lVls. Aiello assured the Committee that these issues have been addressed and ref iewed. AId. Newman stated that he would pass that statement on to his constituents if asked. Aid. Newman seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. 124t Ordinance 38-0-99 - Variance for 2421 Dempster Street Chairman Wynne acknowledged Mr. Mike Berger. applicant and owner of Evanston Tire & Auto. Mr. Berger addressed the Committee. He informed the Committee that he is investing approximately $100.000 into upgrading his existing building and he strongly feels it will improve the appearance of his property and asset the surrounding area and properties. He explained that he currently has only- 3 stalls to do work on cars and his business exceeds the amount of stalls needed to keep up with the flow. resulting in cars being stored on the property %%siting for service. He is requesting to add 2 additional stalls to help alley iate this problem. His architect has drawn up the proposed plans and concedes that the addition is aesthetically pleasing, and accommodating to the nerds of his business. 1 le stressed that this proposed plan by not come about without considerable thought and time put P&D Committee Mtg. 311_2'99 Minutes Page 5 their concerns were addressed at that time. He stated that since the neighbors have not formed together for any objection nor has the Alderman of the ward given them any statement of objection, he feels no objection to this request. Chairman W)mne stated that whether or not the neighbors have come forward with an objection to this request, she personally has observed the property and has witnessed the disagreeable appearance of the property and she is concerned with the temporary parking of can on the lot and the problems it causes. She pointed out the concern in her own ward with car dealers and the complaints she receives with excessive cars and the problems h causes for the surrounding neighborhood. She feels whether or not the neighbors have come forward with any objections; as an elected official she wants reassurance that this problem will be kept to a minimum for the salve of the appearance of the City as a whole. AId. Newman understands Chairrrsan Wynne's comments and agrees but explained that he point was that notice has been given to the surrounding neighbors and if any objection had been received from any one of the neighbors, he world not be so willing to support this request and would give every consideration to the neighbors apprehensions. Aid. Newman moved approval of the variation request for reducing the number of required parking spaces from 14 to 7, seconded by Aid. Engelman. The vote was 3-0 in favor of the motion with Aid. Bernstein abstaining from rote due to his previous involvement with this applicant. (25) Ordinance 33-0-99 - Amendment to Zoning -Ordinance Aid. Newman moved approval of the recommendation of the Plan Commission to amend the Zoning Ordinance so that public and private educational institutions within all downtown districts are special rather than permitted uses, seconded by Aid. Engelman. The rote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. Aid. Ne%%man thanked the Plan Commission for their prompt response to this Council reference. (261 Ordinance 41-0-99 - Pled Development - Church Street etaza The minutes for this item .►ere done by a Court Reporter. The transcript is to follow. ADJOURNMENT The meeting ,vas adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted. . Jac eline E. Brownlee f . MINUTES Planning & Development Committet March 8, 19" Room 2403 - 7:00 p.m. • Alderman Present: S. Bernstein. S. Engelman, J. KenL A. `'ewman, M. W)mnc Staff Present: J. Wolinsk. A. Alterson, D. Jennings, Ni. Nli clott, E. Szymanski, J. Terry, J. Brownlee Presiding Official: Alderman W4 rune Chairman Wynne called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Mll W;f 1 Kill r 0 .?:31 r Aid. Newman moved approval of the February 22nd minutes, seconded by Ald. Bernstein. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion. ( i 3) Ordinance I9-0-99 - Special U.-& and Variation for 2200 Main Street Aid. Newman moved approval of the request for special use and Variations for Baby Toddler Nursery, seconded by AId. Engelman. Ald. Bernstein noted that CD funds -ere given for this project and that Council approved the funds through the budget process. Ms. Szymanski brought to the Committee's attention that the Law Department has a concern and request direction. She directed the Committee to took at page 3 of the ordinance under Section 4. c. She noted the blank line and explained the reason for this is because the ZBA recommended that one of the conditions be that the special use not be granted unless the City Council granted a license to the Babv Toddler applicant for use of a particular portion of City property. She said as to the particulars of that use and of the City property, which she understands has been going on since about 1980, she would have to defer either to Mr. Alterson or Mr. Wolinski. She said with regards to the legal concerns. the Law Department after discussion. felt it appropriate to have direction from the Committee as to whether this should be done with the granting of an easement or through preparation of license as part of the condition. Aid. Newman asked Ms. Szyn anski to elaborate more on what item c. of Section 4 is attempting to address. She directed the Committee to the memo 18 in their packet dated March 4th from Mr. Wolinski & Mr. Alterson to the City Manager. She pointed C7 P&D Committer Mtg. March 3, 1999 Page 2 out that the last two paragraphs address this issue regarding the paved area between the property lime and present curb line which no parking was allowed because of the City right-of-way. The ZBA recommended to release the applicant from this condition but there is a concern with how to address this issue within the ordinance. Mr. Alterson explained that the Zoning Board's concern was that part of the zoning relief included a reduction in the amount of access aisle for the 50 degree parking spaces and they are concerned that if for some reason Baby ToddIcr could no longer make use of the right-of-way, that the variance to reduce that amount of access space would be a bad idea because they could no longer get out the parking spaces. He said the other side to this. however, is that right now Baby Toddler pulls out into the right-of-way. In his opinion- he does not see how the license limits Baby Toddler or the City because the right-of-way is currently being used anyway. Ald. Newtnan asked if this matter has been before Site Plan Rerzew and questions Dave Jennings opinion on this matter also. Mr. Alterson responded that this has been before Site Plan and Mr. Jennings has worked with Baby Toddler on the parking lot issue and he recalls that Mr. Jenning's found this solution acceptable. The Committee requested Mr. Jennings presence to comment on this issue. Aid. Newman asked Mr. Jennings to explain what he feels is necessary in terms of safety for the parking Iot. Mr. Jennings responded that currently the parking is parallel and with the proposed plan they are changing the angle of the parking spaces and are in need of the backing room which is already there. He further explained that the curb is already in place which allows them to back out onto the right-of-way and they need this space to back out safely-. He said the backing area is into a portion of the right-of-way that is separate from travel portion of lklain Street; it is an area of approximately 20 feet wide. Mr. Jennings assured the Committee that he sees no problem with this plan. Aid. Newman moved to direct staff to prepare an easement necessary to satisfy the condition, seconded by Aid. Bernstein. As suggested by Aid. Engelman, Aid. Newman added a condition to the easement that the right-of-way area be maintained by the property owner, including plowing, paving, etc. The vote was 5-0 on both motions. ta 1 (PDI J Ordinance 4-0-99 - 25I5-1 d Gross Point Road Chairman Wynne acknowledged the letter from Mr. James Murra%. attorney for the Alden Estates, stating that the applicant is requesting to withdraw their application at this time. Aid. Newman moved to eliminate this item from the agenda. seconded by Aid. Bernstein. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion. Aid. Bernstein stated that this situation should not have reached this paint and the City should have caught this before the case went through the ZBA and P&D. He apologized to .Aden Estates for the *�i •P&D Committee Mtg. March 3, I999 Page 3 process they were put through. Aid. Newman reminded the Committee of a similar recent case an Central Street and suggested that from now on legal review be done in the early stages to avoid this situation in the future. He fiuther suggested to staff to consider a check -off procedure be done to facilitate the process before any case reaches Council level. (PD21 Ordinance 120-0-97 - Amendment to Zoning Ordinance (Fenges) (PD3) OrdinanceXX-0-98 - Tvpe I Street Ordinance Mr. Mylott began his presentation by asking the Committee how they wanted to proceed at this point. He asked if the Committee wishes him to present the matter with a broad ovcT%,iew of curreru versus proposed or would they prefer that he give a summary of the last few discussions on fences. The Committee preferred the latter. Mr. Mylott referred the Committee to their packet materials regarding this matter which includes an outline of the questions remaining from past discussion. Que tis on 1: How do we treat non -conforming fences. Nfr. Mylott said the last direction staff had ww in the direction to amortize those front yard fences and those street sideyard fences that do not comply with the code. It was decided that if the fence was beginning to become structurally unsound and cited for such by the Property Maintenance, then the owner of the fence would loose their legal non -conforming status of that fence. He said that this determination was discussed in length and there may be some problem with this, for example. if someone had a chainlink fence in their front yard and the paint was peeling, this is something that is readily fixed but technically would not conform to the Property Maintenance Code. Therefore. that person would have to tear out their chainlink fence; he does not believe this to be the intent of the Committee. Mr. .1vtvlott summarized that staff is asking the Committee to what degree are they seeking to amortize fences. Mr. ,Mylott explained that the other extent of amortization to consider are non -conforming fences in terms of height. He said that when the owner goes to replace their fence, they would not be able to replace the fence with the same height and would immediately be forced to bring the fence down to the height limit in the Code. The last issue regarding amortization of fences is with regards to site triangles at corner and alleys. This would require the owner replacing their fence to bring, the fence in 3 feet on each side to allow clear distance around those corners. Mr. Mylott clarified that the question to the Committee is how much do they want to go after non- conforming front and street sideyard fences. Aid. Engelman gave his opinion that he would only want to make an exception for fences that need painting only. Mr. Ni% lott stated that the current text in place today says "that any non -conforming fence can be replaced in kind." Aid. Newman said the issue in his mind with this is having the Property Maintenance Inspectors overwhelmed with having to enforce this code; he would not like to see their time used for such situations as opposed to housing code violations that their are responsible for citing. Aid. Kent feels the same way. He suggested that even Sanitation workers can call in on fences in disrepair because their job would require them to witness such a situation. He too feels the Property Maintenance Inspectors time should be used on life safety matter. Aid. New•tnan said that in actuality. there are not that many P&D Committee Mtg. March 3. 1999 Page 4 fences in Bznston to take it to the extreme where it burdens our inspectors. He said that wham he thinks of this ordinance, he considers front yard fences making the most effect. Aid. Kent's feeling is that if a non -conforming fence has been in place for a long period of time and maintained then it should be left alone or allowed to be repaired to a certain extent. If any fence is in a s=e of disrepair and is cited to be replaced, then it should be replaced with a conforming fence. He pointed out that there are probably not that many fences in a total state of disrepair and those that are'_ cart easily be pointed out by the Inspectors. Mr. Wolinski stated that part of this is a policy issue on sOm the Committee would like to see. He said that if you want to remove non -conforming front yard fences, then he would suggest considering Ald. Engelman's view because repairs have to constantly be made to many fences and it is seldom where a fence gets in such bad shape where you hati-e to take the whose fence down. He said, however, fences that face alleys. not front yard fences, should be considered separately; pointing out that there are many fences in deplorable conditions facing alleys. He said these fences do not have the same impact as front yard fences and in most of those instances, he would rather require that the owner try to repair the fence instead of replace it do to the cost it would entail. Aid. Kent pointed out that most alley fences are wood stockade fences that go all the way to the corner of the property and cause a safety hazard; if a fence such as this needs to be repaired, then the site triangle requirement should be considered. Mr. Alterson asked the Committee to please keep in mind that most of these street side fences actually are not front yard fences, but are street side -yard fences. He said these fences are scatterrd throughout Evanston. not just on the west side. Chairman W-vnne asked the consensus of the Committee on this issue. Mr. Mylott asked the Committee if they would like staff to strike the 3rd line of Section D. starting with "except". The Committee agreed to staff's suggestion. Question I. This question deals with fences along residential and non-residential boundaries. fir. Mylott said a good example is where a house is adjacent to a non-residential property. He said the proposed ordinance would permit the residential o,.vner to erect a fence up to 8' high along the common boundary up to the required open front yard space. He said, however, if the non-residential property, such as a storefront. was located up to the property line, the residential property owner could only erect the 8' fence up to the street side yard setback of 15'. Mr. Mylott summarized that the question to the Committee is if they want the property owner to have the ability to erect an 8' fence all the Lta% along the lot line to clearly separate them from the non-residential use. He noted that a good example of this situation is where the new Walgreens is at Main and Dodge and the adjacent residential torn homes. Aid. Ne%%man said that if we left the ordinance as it is. and a residential homeowner wanted to do exactly as stated by "sir. ;Mylott, they would ha%a to go to the Zoning Administrator for a fence variance. With that in mind, he questioned hogs many times will such a variance be requested. He • asked staf3"how man% times in 1998 was such a variance requested. Mr. Aiterson responded none P&D Committee Mtg. Starch 3. 1999 Page 5 and is rarely requested. Aid. Newman feels that with such little demand for fence variation request with residential adjacent to non-residential uses, then this should remain under the fence variation process. After further discussion, the Committee's consensus was in agreement with Aid. Newman's suggestion. Mr. Mylott brought up the last issue of concern regarding discussion on Type 1 streets and permitting front vard fences when the applicant goes through the procedure that has been outlined_ He reminded the Committee that if a street is labeled as Type 1, then an applicant living in that designated area could construct a 4' high fence in their front yard. Mr. Mylott summarized that his question to the Committee is if a comer lot property on a designated Type 1 street request to construct a 4' front yard fence, should they have the ability to construct the same fence on their sideyard which abuts another street. Ald. Ne - man commented that one of the mistakes the City has made with the 50150 sidewalk program is that we don't make the side of the house as eligible under the program and it is usually those areas that are in need of repair. He brings this situation up because of the connection with the side yard and the front yard and how they usually coincide %ith the same needs. His opinion would be that if you are going to allow a fence in the front yard then you should also allow the same fence on the sideyard, especially on a comer lot. Aid. Kent agrees and added that personal])- he could not imagine spending money on putting up a fence that would end at your side yard. Aid. Engelman agrees with what has been said but said to keep in mind that this could set a precedence for many corner lot properties. The consensus of the Commitiee was to allow the extension of the 4' high fence along the side yard on a corner lot on a designated Type l street. Mr. Mylott concluded that the fence issues addressed and decisions made this evening. were under Items for Discussion only. lie assured the Committee that staff will make these corrections to the proposed ordinance a put together the Type I street ordinance and bring both ordinances before Council for introduction. Aid. Newman requested comments on the final version of the Ordinance from the Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission because there have been substantial changes and that Committee did considerable work on this amendment. ITEMS FOR ELI R _ CONSIDERATION The Committee: reviewwed the items listed on the agenda to consider future dates to discuss these issues. Pm sed rXmendrttents to Ordinance 6-0-97 conceming.Building Code Regulations for Elevators Mr. Wolinski informed the Committee that Chief Wilkinson. Berkoww•sky and himself have put together a proposal for the elevators and are ready to bring this before the Committee at the next .A P&D Committee Mtg. March 3, 1999 Page 6 meeting. He asked the Committee if they wish to do so. he would need to notify building owr.,crs in time so they could have the opportunity to attend the meeting. Mr. Alterson informed sbe Committee that the Church Street Plaza Planned Development %%-ill be on the agenda for the Maack 22nd meeting and could extend discussion into the next meeting for April. Aid. Newman said that discussion of the Church Street PUD will require substantial time and it may not be a good idea to include discussion of the elevators on the same night because this matter will also require ample tine for discussion. The other Committee members agreed. Ala. Newman suggested to the Committee that 3 hours be given for discussion of the Church Street Plaza Planned Development at the March 22nd meeting, resulting in P&D starting at 5:30 p.m. Chairman Wynne asked staff what other items are scheduled for the March 22nd meeting. Mr. Alterson responded that no issues for pressed time are scheduled for that date. With this in mind, Aid. Newman moved to start the Martel, 22nd meeting at 5:30 p.m. to allow ample time for the Church Street Plaza Planned Development discussion, seconded by Chairman Wynne. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion. Ordinance 44-0-98 - Amen menu to Special Use Procedure Chairman Wynne asked staff to elaborate on this item. Mr. Alterson explained that the Plan Commission held a hearing on this issue a year ago and subsequently made a recommendation to amend the current ordinance. Mr. �Volinski added that the Law Department has suggested some changes which have been incorporated to the proposed Ordinance that was drafted originally a year ago. Chairman Wynne asked what does control of special uses mean. Mr. Alterson explained that this mostly deals with time frames. prior existing special uses and when such special uses expire. He added that this examination of the special use procedure was originally requested by a Council reference on the matter and was referred due to the procedure for special uses for Type 11 restaurants. Afi;er discussion, the Committee agreed that this is not a priority item at this time. They requested staff to provide them with previous documentation and memorandums on the matter in the future when they have time to discuss this. Staff' acknowledged the Committee's request. Reference to P&D to develop a pgicv for campaign signs and Ci1v actipns on election day Ald. Newman refreshed the Committee's memory on this issue explaining that this matter was referred by the Rules Committee and he recalls that their intent was to look at what the election rules are, state, city and municipal, and tr} to craft an ordinance that would be combined and consistent. They were especially interested with the use of campaign signs on the parkway during election time. He said, in essence, this would probably be an amendment to the Sign Ordinance so this matter should first be reviewed by the Sign Review Board and initial comparison study done by staff. The Committee agreed this is not a priority item at this time but should be considered in due time before the heavy election period in November. 0 x P&D Committee Mtg. March 3, 1999 Page 7 C'onsid radon of the establishment of an Evanston Housing Authority Aid. Kent stated that he is still very interested in this issue and recalled the last time this matter vm discussed, Gary Jump from the Cook County Housing Authority and Mayor Morton were pre=A for that discussion. He added that his feelings have not changed µith regards to the importance of this matter due to the large effect it has on Evanston housing. He would like to see a combined effort by all the interested Committees that have shown interest in this matter in the past on their opinion of Evanston having a handle and more control over the Section 8 certificate allowance within the City. Aid. Kent said that he would also like to see Gary Jump invited back again When the time comes for such discussion. He realizes at this present time they are not prepared to hold such meeting but he would like to see staff begin in the near future gathering information from the different Committee's involved to prepare for a joint meeting. He stressed the importance of having strong backing and a sense of togetherness on this issue because we will not have an impact on H`JD and the Section 8 program until we are all pushing for the same thing. Chairman Wynne agreed with Ald. Kent and suggested that this matter be discussed in further detail at a future meeting to strategically plan proper presentation by the City before holding the actual meeting with Gary Jump. Ald. Newman said the biggest issue and concern he has with this is whether or not the City would have the ability, if we had our own Housing Authority. to be able to control our destiny on the Section 8 certificates. He said the impression he received from prior discussion was that even if Evanston had their own Housing Authority, Cook County would still control the allocation of the certificates. He added that the question currently exists on what responsibility HUD takes on the inspection of buildings were their certificate holders live. Mr. Wolinski commented that the Housing Authority's position. based on staffs discussion with Mr. Jump, is that of the approximately 900 certificate holders in Evanston, thev would continue to control because they receive a certain percentage of income from these certificates. He said that if the City, were to start their own housing authority we could begin issuing certificates after the 900— that Cook County already controls. NIr. Wlinski said from discussion with %favor Morton regarding the different interpretations of the program. they were under the impression that there %%ould be the possibility of buying out the current 900-- certificates controlled by Cook County and subsequently taking them over. He pointed out that none of this is crystal clear and unfortunately, HUD has been somewhat inconsistent in their answers when questions about this. He told the Committee that staff can look into this further and he informed them that staff is currently trying to make arrangements with HUD to jointly inspect their Section 8 certificate holder units along with our Property .Llaintenance Inspectors. .old. Kent said, in conjunction %%Ith 'sir. Wolinski"s comments. that Evanston is experiencing a lot of non-residents mo%ing into Evanston under the Section 8 program. This is another important reason for Evanston to have control over the process to ensure that our residents "ith Section 8 certificates can remain in Evanston. He suggested that it would be a good ideal to have an Evanston staff person being able to work along with families and intervene in helping Evanston residents with Section 8 certificates to stay in their community. 0 k P&D Committee yttg. March 3. 1999 Page 8 The consensus of the Committee is that if the City of Evanston could get control of the already 900+ existing Section 8 certificate holders and any subsequent holders, this would be crucial and very important due to the impact it has on the existing housing within the City and being able to control our own destiny with this program. Mr. Wolinski informed the Committee that if the City were to acquire their own Housing Authority, it would require the establishment of another bureaucracy within the City government structure. Ald. Newman suggested that star' conduct some research and get down to an estimated cost of what it would endure the City to operate it's own Housing Authority and the cost to possibly buy out the existing certificates from HUD. The Committee agreed to keep this under items for future consideration and come back to it in the near future. Consideration of Liggasing for Multi -Family Rental Buildin= Aid. Newman said that this was a budget reference and he feels the Committee owes an obligation to the rest of the Council to deal properly with this issue because it is a budget item for consideration. He said this is going to be a controversial matter and he suggested that staff begin gathering information as to who is licensing in other communities and what they are charging, revenue collected and what impact is has on tenants as far as rent hikes. Mr. Wolinski informed the Committee that staff already has quite a bit of information accumulated on this matter. He added that he personally has been pushing for this licensing. He said that the Evanston Property Owners 0 Association has already contacted him on this matter and wish to be notified when P&D is ready to address this matter. The Committee asked staff when they would be able to put this on the agenda. Mr. Wolinski responded that time could be allotted after discussion of the Church Street Plaza Planned Development and the elevator issue has been addressed. He suggested the 3rd meeting from tonight. The Committee agreed. ". 121010 ORW I WI I The meeting was adjourned at 8:26 p.m. Respectfull}- submitted. Jac ueline E. Brownlee • MINUTES Planning & Development Committee February 22,19" Room 2403 - 7:00 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, S. Engelman, J. Kent, A. Newman, M. Wynne Stab Present: J. Wolinski, J. Aiello, A. Alterson, M. Robinson, E. Szymanski, J. Terry, J. Brownlee Others Present: Aid. Rainey, D. Anderson, J. Deis, B. Seidenberg, Presiding Official: Alderman Wynne Chairman Wynne called the meeting to order at 7:22 p.m. . Aid. Engelman moved approval of the February 8th minutes, seconded by Aid. Newman. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. Chairman Wynne acknowledged the fact that she had promised to start this meeting with the Cousins Subs item to give the representatives a chance to speak since the last meeting did not allow them time for their presentation. (14) Ordinance 10-0-99 - S=*al Use for Cousins Subs, 1805 Howard Street Chairmai: Wynne requested that the representatives step forward and give their names. Mr. Matthew Lea introduced himself as representative for Cousins Subs, Inc. out of Wisconsin and Mr. Gene Guzzardi introduced himself as Architect with Ronald Sorce Architects. Mr. Lea explained that he is present to answer any questions or concems of the Committee and turned the presentation over to Mr. Guzzardi. Mr. Guzzardi said that the current zoning in the area is Cl to the east and west, and across the alley to the north is zoned single-family residential. He said the proposed Cousins Subs would be in partnership with the existing Quilt Mart and share approximately 'h of the existing 2400 square foot store. He explained that the interior remodeling will consist of new walls, floors and ceiling fixtures, new lighting, new bathroom installation, addition of tables and chairs for the restaurant section, etc. P&D Committee Mtg. February 22, 1999 Page 2 He added that there will also be alterations to the existing electrical and E- VAC systems. Mr. Guaardi further explained the planned exterior remodeling wild consist of a new canopy, painting,. removal of the current signage, new screen enclosure for the trash dumpster and scrrcnage for the cooling system and landscaping. Mr. Guzzardi said that there were several recommendations made by the ZBA and Site Plan Review Committee which the owner has complied with. He said that the owners are making considerable financial commitment to refurbishing and modifying the operation of their business and property. He said that Cousins Subs has also made a considerable financial commitment and they believe the owner has demonstrated a strong desire in obligation to this project. He added that the owners also have a strong desire to be good neighbors and citizens to the community. Mr. Guzzardi concluded that this intended use complies with the references set forth in the Comprehensive General Plan and in Sections 6.3-5-10, Standards for Special Use. Mr. Lea referred to the handout he gave to the Committee members, FAR Visitation Schedule, explaining that FAR stands for Franchise Area Representative. The schedule explains how many times the store will be visited by a company representative for the 1st year, 2-5 years and so on. These visits are not scheduled with the store manager, they are drop -in visits. He further explained what each visit will entail and what the representative will check for. The checklist will cover everything from cleanliness to customer service and controllable cost. Mr. Lea stated that Cousins takes very much pride in each of their stores and require and expect the franchisee's also feel that same way. Mr. Lea referred to the additional handout he gave the Committee members from MBA Architects which displays the proposed screening for the garbage dumpsters and the refrigeration unit. This fencing issue was discussed with Zoning staff and was one of the concerns expressed by the SPAARC. Mr. Lea listed several other issues and concerns stated by the SPAARC which the owner has addressed and taken care of. He feels this shores good faith effort by the owner to improve the site and added that this current owner has only owned the store for little over a year. He remarked, with this being a delicate issue, that Cousin's Subs has had many individuals of Mr. Pawl's race come to them requesting to be franchisee's and it has been their policy to test these indi%iduals to see where their understanding is with U.S. customs. He said they have found that these individuals test lower in comparison to American standards. He and his training directors came to the conclusion that there is a misunderstanding of the comprehension of our English writing compared to his background. He stated that once his training directors have worked out this barrier, they have found these individuals to be exemplary in maintenance of their stores. Aid. Kent referred to the list of conditions that were handed out at the last meeting by Aid. Rainey that were written in combination with her neighbors. He asked what the applicant has decided to do with regards to each condition requested by the neighbors and whether they accept them. Nir. Guzzardi responded that they agree to the snow plowing contract and will abide by that condition. t P&D Committee Mtg. February 22, I999 Page 3 He went on to the condition on the sale of adult magazines and videos; he understands these sales are not prohibited unless the display is not done through the City Ordinance. He has been informed that these displays and sales are done within the guidelines of the City Ordinance. Aid. Kent verified by this statement that the owner plans to continue the sale of such items. Mr. Patel added that all adult magazines and videos are kept behind the counter and we out of view or reach by the customers. Aid. Kent questioned the sale of drug paraphanelia. Mr. Patel responded that they do We cigarette rolling papers and that is all they sale that might be considered drug paraphane[ia. Ald. Newman reminded the applicant that they are applying for special permission to use this property in a way that is considered to be a special use and as far as he is concerned, it is not their decision to continue any operation if a condition is set upon it. He addressed legal staff as to whether or not this condition can be considered in relationship to the special use and if they can enforce such a condition. He strongly feels that if this is what the neighborhood wants in exchange for support of the granting of this special use, then the Committee should decide how important the condition should be for enforcement under the special use ordinance. Ald. Kent added that there was a grocery store that had adult magazine and videos displayed in a way that was very upsetting, he recalls that there was a question with the licensing of whether the store was considered a convenience store in comparison to a video store and if the two can be considered under that same license operation. Ms. Szymanski said, in response to Aid. Newmm's concern if Council has the jurisdiction to enforce such a condition and if the courts will uphold this, that with regards to the adult magazines this is very stipulative and is a 1 st amendment issue that is so unrelated to the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance that are set forth in the beginning of the ordinance which states that it would be using land use law improperly to address a Ist amendment issue. She believes that the courts would have a difficult time upholding that connection. Ald Kent asked Ms. Szymanski about Hanah's Food Store on Maple where at one time they were displaying adult magazines and videos, he questions that if you are selling adult videos does this come under the same license as operating a convenience store. Ms. Szymanski responded that she would have to look at the City Code licensing provisions to see if the class of products that convenient store can sell is limited. Her recollection is that it is not, she believes this to be an across the board permission to operate. Aid. Rainey requested to explain this condition. She explained that Quik Mart has sold adult videos and magazines and reefer papers for years even before the current or«er took over. She testified that these products were not behind the counter and were out in the open. She said that she has lived within 250` from this store for 11 years and has never once complained about this because the clientele at this store mainly come for cigarettes, videos, magazines and lottery tickets. She said there is no loitering there and rarely are there children present in the store_ She said, however, this special use, being a submarine carry -out operation, will attract teenagers and minors in general. She stressed the importance of considering eliminating the sale of such products with the certain change in clientele that will be attracted to this store and that is why she and her neighbors find this condition very important. She understands that if under the City Code guidelines this can not be enforced, then there should be a way to restrict and enforce displaying such products. t P&D Committee Mtg. . February 22, 1999 Page 4 Aid. Newman said that typically they have been told here that in order for the City to place conditions upon a special use, they have to impose conditions which mitigate some type of effect on the use of the land. He thinks the argument that the neighbors are making that if you think that the idea of selling submarine sandwiches is incompatible with the use of a convenient store that deals with such adult types of materials, you might be arguing not for a condition, but yet to rat the entire use because of such incompatibility. His experience under such situations is to be very careful because people have gone to court on the City to try and knock out conditions which = rwt rationally related to some type of land use purpose. Ald. Rainey said that she understands this issue and explained that they are asking for as much as they can possibly have done to consider going along with this special use. She feels that if Cousin's Subs is the family operation and the type of business that they claim to be, then they will impose this restriction on their franchisee in col.....::,... with their company. She also feels that if the owner has any sense of responsibility, then they too will also impose such a condition. She encourages the Committee to do whatever possible within their jurisdiction, to support this condition. Ms. Szymanski asked the Committee if they have considered imposing a restriction that the vending shall be limited exclusively to the food rather than overtly say "X shall not sell Y". Mr. Lea said, in defense, that when his company goes into an agreement with a franchisee, there is total distinction on where a Cousin's Sub is and where the franchisee operates. He referred to a drawing of how the interior of the store will be designed and pointed out that there is a clear distinction in the way the interior design is laid that will separate the two operations. The Committee pointed out that them will only be one entrance for both operations which connects the two operations. Aid. Newman said that it appears that Cousin's Subs and the owner are not willing to consider this condition. hir. Lea said that he would have to discuss this with W. Patel before commenting. Ald. Engelman reiterated a question that was brought up as to whether licensing requires that these items be sold only from behind the counter and not displayed on racks and only when requested by the customer. Ms. Szymanski responded that she does not recall this language. Ald. Engelman said that if the City does not impose this under the City Code, he questions the legality of asking whether the applicant would be willing to accept a restriction on special use to prohibit such sales. Ms. Szymanski said that if the applicant accepts this and begins to utilize the benefit of the special use then proceeds to operate, then the only argument the applicant would have later on would be that there was some cohesion involved to accept this condition to receive the special use. Chairman Wynne said that she does believe they have restrictions as to the display of adult magazines and videos and that it is a misdemeanor violation if not followed. Ms. Szymanski excused herself from the meeting to retrieve her Code Book to respond back to the Committee. Mr. Lea stated that out of all the times he has been at the store taking measurements etc., he has never seen the magazines and videos out in the open and you would have to look hard because they are not visible by the customers. Discussion continued regarding the remaining conditions listed by the neighbors. Aid. Rent questioned the garbage collection condition and recalled statements made in the previous meeting regarding a new garbage container and if there are currently 2 dumpsters on location. He also asked P&D Committee Mtg. February 22, 1999 Page 5 with the addition of Cousin's Subs, will they provide their own garbage dumpster. Mr. Lea responded that the 2 dumpsters for that site should suffice, especially with an increase in collection of the garbage. He said that currently, Mr. Patel has the garbage picked up twice a week and the condition is requesting 3 times a week which they agree to. He said that they have shown a diagram and propose to enclose the 2 current dumpsters with fencing to eliminate the view and to help with the maintenance of the property. Ald. Newman pointed out that Mr. Lea has stated that he has been out to the site several times since October and he asks for an explanation of Ald. Rainey's pictures which were taken a day before the last meeting which displayed an unacceptable state in terms of litter being all around the establishment, and questions his statements that the owner has made good faith effort towards maintenance of the property. He said that it is hard for him to trust the good faith effort that has been stated because it appears that the owner was having difficulty in maintaining the current operation and it also appears that this good faith effort was only applied after such evidence was presented that acceptable maintenance w-as not being done. He questions what assurance they have to go by that maintenance of the property will be on an on -going basis and putting this in writing does not assure that it will be followed. Ald. Newman further pointed out that the applicant is requesting a use that is very garbage intensive when there is evidence that they can not handle their present use. He stressed his concern on this issue. Mr. Lea responded that as Mr. Patel got more involved in this project and started to understand what is required of him as far as maintaining the property, especially with the inclusion of a food establishment, he has made extreme efforts in complying with those expectations. He reiterated his comments made earlier on the different expectations of the owners' background compared to what is expected in American culture and stated that it is a hand -holding process that has taken place and the owner is understanding and progressing towards those expectations. Ald. Kent stated that he tends to disagree with the statement just made by Mr. Lea. He said that he is in agreement with the hand -holding policy and feels that any individual deserves this but when he looks at the list of conditions, he can not see how that issue should be considered in conjunction with the normal operation and expectation with respect for operating in any neighborhood. This should be clearly visible and understood before any ownership and responsibility is taken on to operate a business; these are common courtesy issues. Chairman Wynne agreed with Ald. Kent's view on this issue. Ald. Newman brought up the issue of deep frying which generates an odor nuisance for the neighborhood. Mr. Lea stated that there will be no deep frying on the premises. Ald. Newman proposed adding as a condition that there will be no deep frying. Ald. Bernstein raised questions on the menu which lists french fries and also the fact that from the drawing it appears to show a deep fryer. Mr. Lea responded that the menu observed by the Committee is a general menu that is normally regarded at most of their stores but they are not considering deep frying for this location. He said that they will be baking bread at this location and will use a microwave to warm sandwiches. 0 P&D Committee Mtg. February 22, 1999 Page 6 Chairman Wynne addressed the next condition regarding the removal of the pole sign and replacement with a tree and that the only signage will be on the overhang above the front door. Mr. Lea responded that they had stipulated to the ZBA that whatever is allowed by the City zoning as far as signage is what they will follow. Mr. Guzzardi further commented that any business signage is very important to the success of a business aith the competition involved. He said that the need for the pulse sign is to attract clientele and he feels would fit in with other signage that is on Howard Street. Aid. Newman asked if they disagree with this condition. Mr. Guzxardi stated that it is not a matter of disagreeing but that they are only considering the Iimit of exposure in advertising for their business. Mr. Wolinski asked if Cousin's Subs is requesting to reface the current sign to advertise for their business. Mr. Lea responded that the sign company they are dealing with will be in contact with the Sign Committee and whatever is feasible, they will follow. He said that they would like to change the design of the current signage. Mr. Wolinski informed Mr. Lea that the current sign is nonconforming which is due for elimination in the year 2003. He said that if there is the desire to reface this sign with any type of new signage designating Cousin's Subs, then this would have to go before the Sign Review and Appeals Board. Mr. Lea said that they would want to be ahead of the requirement and comply with whatever is c-xpected to conform in the year 2003. Chairman Wynne asked Aid. Rainey to elaborate the neighbors concerns with the current signage. Aid. Rainey explained that with respect to the pulse sign, it currently does have additional signage on it other than the Quik Mart advertisement. She pointed out hared -written signage regarding parking that is totally inappropriate and an eyesore for the location. She said that this signage has been there for a long time and the neighbors consensus is that this type of inappropriate signage be removed because it is esthetically unacceptable and unnecessary. Aid. Rainey said that it is she and her constituents wish to stop and eliminate the current view that the community has of Howard Street and proper signage will certainly help to alie- late this view. The Committee raised questions on the cross coverage of employees in operation of the Cousin's Subs and the convenience store. Mr. Lea responded that it has always been their policy to separate employees that work specifically for Cousin's Subs and the franchise store. Both Mr. Lea and Mr. Patel assured the Committee that this policy %xill be followed. Hours of operation was then discussed. Mr. Patel said that the current operating hours of his convenience store is from 6:00 am. to 9:30 p.m. Mr. Lea said that normally an employee comes in around 6:30 a.m. to bake bread but the normal store hours are open from 10-10:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. At this point, Ms. Szymanski responded back to the Committee. She stated that she found nothing in the City Code regarding display of obscene materials to minors other than promotion pictures. She said that there is a specific ordinance for entertainment such as light entertainment, however under the stable, there is a provision for showing, displaying or advertising to persons under the age of 17 of stories of lust or crime. She said that there is nothing that requires such materials affirmatively to be extreme. It does penalize the showing of those materials is a way that is unacceptable. 0 P&D Committee Mtg. February 22, 1999 Page 7 Ald. Newman said that in looking at the substitution for special use provision in the ordin mr, be questions that if the current owner sells the business to a company that does use deep-frying and dwy want to install a deep -fryer, will this condition run with the property. Mr. Alterson responded that the condition will run with the special use that the current owner is selling, however, a substitution of the special use could be used to eliminate that condition. Ald. Newman asked for verificadan on this point that the next owner can apply for a substitution of special use and the Zoning Administrator can eliminate any of the conditions for the new owner as understood under the conditions of the special use. Mr. Alterson verified that under following the stated procedure. it can be done. Discussion took place on this issue. Ms. Szymanski suggested that consideration night be given to attaching a recorded covenant to the property to prohibit any deep-frying for any future establishments which would require any future owner to go before the ZBA and Council to request for consideration of such a condition considered uplifted. Mr. Wolinski pointed out that he leas seer[ many similar cases with this type of concern and he suggested that language can be incorporated so that they can differentiate between the intensity of the special use, for example, such as the addition of ice cream compared to a more intense use that would not fit in with the general pattem of what is being served. Aid. Newman referred back to his earlier comments made regarding his concern for the ongoing maintenance of the property and stated that the pictures taken by Aid. Rainey a day before their initial presentation before the Committee clearly tell the story of how the owner has been maintaining the property up until the present time. He stresses his personal need for reassurance that this condition will be followed and feels that written apprehension to this affect does not cut it. He would like to see a daily clean-up of the property, in combination with the requested condition of the neighborhood for a minimum of 3 weekly garbage collections and further requested to staff that there be some way of looking into enforcing this condition. He said that he would like to see language in the ordinance to state this condition and he personally said that he would be willing to back strong language that clearly states that the City move immediately to close this establishment and [wake the special use if the condition on maintenance is not followed. He asked the owner and representative of Cousin's Subs, if they understand his request. Both Mr. Lea and Mr. Patel agreed to Ald. Newman's statements and Mr. Patel further agreed that he would make all efforts to comply by this. Aid. Rainey added that in all her years of working with city government, she has found most effective her efforts on going out and taking those pictures. She stated that within an hour of taking those photos, she witnessed the owners immediately going out and making an effort to clean up the property and she pointed out that it is clear that the owner is capable of living up to his expectations of maintaining and being responsible for his property. Aid. Newman raised questions on the location of the pay phones at the store. He feels that outside pay phone seem to add nothing but trouble and would like to see any payphones located inside of the store. Mr. Patel responded that there is a current payphone located outside of the store and they are obligated until the year 2003 to keep that phone in that location due to a contract they assumed when they took over the property. Aid. Rainey stated that there is no concern with this issue becalm P&D Committee Mtg, February 22, 1999 Page 8 she and her neighbors have witnessed no problem associated with loitering at the property and do not feel this to be a issue of concern. The Committee addressed the condition listed on deliveries to the store being from Ho-%mW Streit and not through the alley. Mr. Guzzardi assured that this condition would be followed. He further pointed out that they propose to have the parking lot designed and enforced by signage, to have ingress and egress come through two different ways. He said that they propose to have a one -wary in ingress and a one -Kay out egress to ease a continuous flow for traffic. He said that all deliveries will be made from off of Howard Street, as currently conducted. The Committee agreed to this suggestion. All conditions listed on by the neighbors have been addressed at this point except for the last condition which states to provide the City with monthly maintenance reports and photographs of areas of concern. The Committee agreed to eliminate consideration of this condition due to the unreasonable nature of such a request. It %%us the consensus that since all condition have been discussed and decided upon so far, that this issue would be addressed Within those decisions that have been made to rectify any concerns stated. Aid. Newman moved to approve the request for special use for a type 2 restaurant subject to the conditions being placed in the proper form by legal counsel to draft as ordinance and that this matter be held in Council to receive such properly drafted ordinance to be reviewed by the owners, the neighbors and Council before the meeting of March 8, 19". The motion was seconded by Aid. Kent and the vote was 5-0 in approval of the motion. Ms. Szymanski agreed to draft and prepare an ordinance for review within a week from this date. Mr. Alterson asked the Committee for clarification on the agreed hours of operation. The Committee clarified the hours of 6 am. to 10 p.m. Chairman Wynne acknowledged the neighbors on the sign-up list to speak on this issue and requested that they come forward at this time. She further requested that the letters received from Lyn and Richard Hawley of 1733 Dobson and Ms. Laura Kaiser Ines be accepted into the record. So noted by staff. Mr. Ben Schapiro, a neighbor in the area for over 12 years, stated that his neighborhood and the Brummel/Dobson area between Asbury and Dodge has been involved in a long debate over traffic constraints within the neighborhood. He said that Howard Street is a major concern to them and the nature and view of any proposed changes effects his neighborhood immensely. He stresses his opposition of the granting of the special use for Cousin's Subs an Quik Man unless the conditions listed by his neighbors and presented by Ald. Rainey are seriously considered, especially with regards to the trash and traffic flow. He would like to see every effort made and the this Committee support their concerns and help in rectifying that these concerns be addressed and complied with. P&D Committee Mt& February 22, 1999 Page 9 Ald. Newman asked Mr. Schapiro if the conditions and restrictions that have been discussed and agreed upon are satisfactory in his mind. Mr. Schapiro responded that with regards to the fencing of the dumpsters and the added garbage collection and the condition that deliveries by made only on Howard Street and not through the alley, if these conditions are followed and enforced, he feels this to be a definite improvement from what they have witnessed and hopes that the owner will comply. Mr. Danny Bailey, 1726 Dobson Street, said that he is very much in favor of the restrictions that have been discussed and imposed by the Committee regarding the garbage pick up and the delivery of goods to the store. He said that he would like to see that the payphone only allow out -going phone calls and not be able to receive in -coming calls. He said that he is a frequent customer of the Quik Mart and agrees with Ald. Rainey that there is no current loitering problems and hopes that there will be no future problems with the addition of the Cousin's Subs. He would like to see the elimination of the cigarette rolling papers. Mr. Bailey supported the letter written by Ms. Laura Innes which has been accepted into the record. (11) Request for Special Use Extension Aid. Newman moved approval of the request by Ebenezer A.M.E. Church for a l year extension on the period in which they must obtain a building permit and initiate construction, seconded by Ald. Kent. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion with Aid. Bernstein abstaining from vote due to his involvement with the original time of application. Chairman Wynne recognized Rev. James Wade who had no comments to make. (12) Ordinance 21-0-22 - Evan5ton Landmark Status for 630-32 Davis Stree Aid. Newman moved approval of this request, seconded by Aid. Bernstein. Ald. Engelman questioned if they are designating both the 4 story and the 5 story parts of the building. The answer w-5 just the 5 story section of the building. Ald. Newman asked Ms. Aiello what the status is of the analysis on the tax break. Ms. Aiello said that they can apply for the tax break; this is not an automatic act when a property becomes landmark status nor will they receive the federal tax break because the property would have to be considered a federal landmark. Ald. Newman asked if the Council is essentially endorsing them to receive a tax break. his. Aiello said that they would still be required to go before the County and make their application, the County has to review the application and there is no guarantee that the County will give them the class L. Ald. Newman said that he understands this but it was his understanding from the Economic Development Committee meeting that they were going to have someone analyze their pro forma to see whether or not they needed just the Plaza for help on the project, or whether they needed just the tax relief or if they needed both; before we granted them anything. Ms. Aiello corrected that they must still get the landmark status and the application in for the tax break. She said they must receive some 40 � P&D Committee Mtg. Febcuaey 22, 1999 Page 10 indication from the County before they can do the final analysis to really see what impact all of this landmark status package is going to have on the pro forma. Aid. Newman stated that he is not opposed to supporting this project but he feels what they are doing tonight is approving a mechanism for them to go and get the rate reduced from 38 to 16 for a number of years. He said that what thry should be finding prior to doing this is that this type of tax relief is necessary to make the project worm Mr. Ruiz clarified that the landmark status does not automatically grant the developer to obtain the tax benefit because the City has to make out a pro forma report beforehand. The applicant responded to the question of pro forma which was after the EDC meeting. He said that they did revise the pro forma to reflect a couple of loses that were discussed. One being the federal tax credit for the building before 1935. He said there was a second question at that meeting about whether they were going to get a historic tax credit at a federal level by putting the property on the National Register which he doesn't believe they will comply with because they don't think the building will meet those particular standards which are more stringent. He said they also did a projection as to the tax abatement; one of the points being that even with this abatement, there is a substantial increase in the real estate taxes - almost double of what is being paid. He said because of the high land acquisition cost combined with having to tear down and rebuild part of the building, a portion of which is potentially going to be reimbursed by the City and combined with some added construction costs that they will have to incur, the tax break would be needed in order to meet some of the hurdles to achieve their goals. The vote was 5-0 in favor of the motion. Chairman Wynne stated that staff has informed her that in order for them to move this along more swiftly, the Committee needs to move to suspend the rules this evening so as not to hold this another two weeks until the next Council meeting. So moved by Ald. Engelman and seconded by Aid. Bernstein, vote was 5-0 in favor. (131 Ordinance 22-0-99 - Zollijag Text Amendment/Sh=d Parking Aid. Newman moved approval, seconded by Aid. Engelman. The vote was "in favor of the motion. l) ".4 a Rill WRY e (PDI ) Ordinance 4-0-99 - 2516-18 Qlgss Pointad Chairman Wynne said that the legal opinion has not yet been obtained that the Committee requested. She asked for comment on the Medicaid issue. Mr. Terry responded that staff received a letter a few hours ago and copied to the Committee. He reported that clearly it appears that some progress has been made. He has had numerous discussions with Mr. Murray and Alden Estate staff and has made .P&D Committee Mtg. February 22, 1999 Page 11 suggestions to them in terms of how they can affirmatively reach meeting the requirements of the past special use. Chairman Wynne said that it is clear that this issue is not ready to more forward at this time and v6ill remain on the table until the next meeting for finther information. She asked Mr. Murray and Ms. Szymanski if the March 8th date.would be enough time. Mr. Murray felt that he would have fiuther response ready at that time. Ms. Szymanski said that she has consulted with Corporation Counsel and the conclusion after that discussion was that the appropriate mechanism for considering the off - sued perking issue would be through the way of variation and would require the applicant to go back before the ZBA process. This item was tabled until the March 8th meeting for further information. The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. 0 Respectfully submitted, ,'V� ku,,� Jac uel' a E. Brownlee 0 MINUTES Planning & Development Committee February 8,19" Room 2403 - 7:30 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Engelman, J. Kent, A. Neuman, M. Wynne Alderman Absent: S. Bernstein Staff Present: J. Aiello, A. Alterson, H. Hill, M. Robinson, J. Terry, J. Brownlee Others Present: D. Anderson, A. Dienner, A. Gitelson Presiding Official: Alderman Wynne Chairman Wynne called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 11.1998 MEETING • Aid. Newman moved approval of the January 25th minutes, seconded by Aid. Kent. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. (14) Request for Funding Chairman Wynne noted that this is a request from the Evanston Housing Coalition [EHC) for $18.000 from the Mayor's Special Housing Fund. She acknowledged Mr. George Gauthier from EHC. Mr. Gauthier explained that EHC is asking for this funding as part of their single -fancily housing development program that they started in 1994 with the purchase of 5 vacant, boarded single family houses for rehabilitation. He said that they have been renting the houses ever since as affordable housing to low-income Evanston residents that would otherwise not be able to afford such housing. He further explained that the original rehabilitation did not include a roof tear -off for 2 of the houses that need a new roof because the budget was tight and did not allow for this work to be done at the time. Mr. Gauthier said that EHC is asking for this funding as a title transfer loan which will be documented by a lien against the property which will be recovered if the property is ever sold. He added that it is the intention of the EHC, that after the 10 year period. that these homes be sold and owned by qualified buyers under the Low Housing Development Authority Program. He said thev will use the funding from the sales to pay back all the mortgages from the first mortgage lender and P&D Committee Mtg. February 8, 1999 Page 2 City loans and to take a soft -second mortgage for the remainder of the balance so that the 5 fmf k s can afford to buy their homes. Aid. Kent commended all the work done by EHC and Mr. Gauthier throughout Etianom Wd especially in the 5th ward. He added that he definitely supports the program and arty w•oric pr zcatc+d by EHC. Aid. Engelman said that it is clear that the program has worked fabulously and EHC has demonstrated a talent for handling this type of program. He noted that title transfer loans hark no interest on them and asked if the City collects on the appreciation in the end. Mr. Alterson cold not answer that question since he has not worked with the loan program but Mr. Gauthier ansvmred that it is his recollection that the City does not collect on any profits. Aid. Engelman said, that as a matter of policy, the City should look at these loans where no interest is being charged and maybe reconsider collection on profits in the end. He added that this suggestion has nothing to do Kith EHC, only the consideration of reevaluating the loan program for no -interest loans. Aid. Newman commented on Aid. Engelman's suggestion of collecting on profits in the end_ He feels that whether the loans are at 5%. 3% or no interest; the important thing is collecting af!< the money due on their loan in the end and being able to help out those in need of such funding. He said that in the case of EHC, they reinvest their profits back into Evanston by doing other housing projects. He said that EHC has done a great job and he fully supports this request. Aid. Kent moved to approve the request from the Evanston Housing Coalition for $18,000 from the Mayors' Special Housing Fund to replace two roofs, seconded by Aid. Engelman. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. L15? Anneal from SPAARC's_Decision re: 2421 Dempster Street Chairman Wynne said that according to the legal opinion on this matter that states that P&D Committee does not have jurisdiction over this matter. Mr. Alterson notified the Committee that he has spoken with the applicant's architect this morning and he indicated that they are looking at Hithdrawing this appeal and applying for a zoning %- xiance to address their development problem. Mr. Alterson said that he has not received art written documentation from the applicant to this affect, but the architect's verbal withdrawal .%ill suffice for this meeting. Aid. Newman requested that staff make a point that Council members receive any leggy opinions ahead of meetings to enable them to review before hand. Aid. Engelman said that it appears that this is a matter of first impression on the appeal issue vwilh this Committee. He feels they ought to set the record that Zoning Administrators interpretation and 0 � P&D Committee Mtg. February 8, 1999 Page 3 legal staffs interpretation of our Zoning Ordinance. that theme is no appeal from an ordinary Site Plan and Appearance Review. He therefore moved that this matter be removed from P&D agenda and that the applicant be advised that the appeal was premature. The motion was seconded by Aid. Newman. The vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. Aid. Newman clarified that this case would end up back before the P&D Committee due to the off- street parking issue, confirmed by Mr. Alterson. (16) Qrdinancr. 4-0-99 - 2516-19 Gross Point Road Chairman Wynne noted that at this point, there are a number of issues that have been raised about this item from a variety of standpoints. She acknowledged Mr. Murray's letter of February 4th regarding the City's legal department opinion with respect to the legality of the expansion of the special use. She requested that Mr. Murray proceed with any presentation he may have on behalf of Alden Estates. hir. James Murray, attorney and representative for Alden Estates, said that since November 4, 1998, this matter has been before this Committee and the entire City Council on no less than 3-4 occasions. He said the use itself and prior legislation as in acquired several legal opinions and an additional opinion and memorandum from Mr. Jay Terry, and an opinion from Mr. Dave Jennings. He added that at the request of the alderman of the ward, a meeting of his constituents in the immediate %icinity of Alden Estates was held regarding some of the design issues. The totality and result of all of this. including his own opinion which he omitted one aspect regarding the fact that back in November, they requested a review of a particular request for zoning relief in order to expand the parking facility and recreational patio for Alden Estates. He said that this was the subject matter of a packet of materials submitted to Committee members that included opinions from the Law Department from 1995 and 1996 concerning the issue of the special use and its status at that point. .Mr. Murray's point is that he does not think it was at all unclear as to what they were requesting. He said that they asked that this matter be referred to the City Council to have a vote by the entire body about proceeding with the expansion of the special use as he indicated in his Ietter. He said this process has gone forward. He stressed that they have gone through the ZBA and obtained their recommendation to this body to approve the expansion of the parking facility and patio. He said there is no request to expand the special use itself in terms of the building and there will be no request for this expansion. Mr. Murray said that since this issue has been brought before the P&D Committee, other questions were raised which he believes have already been addressed appropriately in terms of procedural methods by which this matter was to be reviewed. He said that Mr. Alterson made an administrative decision back in November, and at that time. P&D endorsed that decision process. He said they now have in the process from a question by Aid. Engelman. an additional inquiry as to how this process should have been handled. Mr. �Mutray said that in his judgement. Alden Estates has responded and P&D Committee Mtg. February 8, 1999 Page 4 done everything that has been requested or required to do. He said that they have met xvith Mr. Terry regarding the issue of Medicaid admissions and their policy. He said that Mr. Terry has been Lind enough to submit a memo on this matter. Mr. Murray further reiterated all the meetings and responses to all the inquiries made to them on behalf of their request to expand the parking facility and patio and he believes that they have satisfied all concerns brought before them by the neighbors and City staff. After all said and considered, he requested that the P&D Committee present this matter before the full body Council for its approval. AId. Newman clarified that Aid. Engelman's point was whether or not the Committee has jurisdiction to consider expansion of the special use onto the acquired adjoining property. He feels Ald. Engelman's question was a good one and part of the process is that if one of the Council members is aware of such zoning issues and questions any legalities, then they should be addressed and answered appropriately before any further consideration can be given to proceed. He said his main concern at this time is the concern of Mr. Terry regarding the Medicaid issue and expectations for Alden Estates. He stressed that his position on zoning is that he will not vote in favor for relief for any applicant who either owes the City money or has not complied with certain conditions of a special use that were previously instituted. He said that he is not implying that Alden Estates has not complied with the conditions but he is inclined to consider the memo before the Committee from Mr. Terry which seems to indicate that there %vas a condition placed upon the special use pre,%tiously • which states that Alden Estates is supposed to provide 8 beds for Medicaid and further implicates from Mr. Terry that this condition has not been satisfied from his point of view. Mr. Terry confirmed this statement. Aid. Newman said from his standpoint, he backs Mr. Terry's interpretation and is inclined to feel the same way towards Alden Estates with regards to his feelings that if certain conditions of a special use have not been met. then he can not vote in favor of any relief until satisfied. Mr. Murray responded that they had a meeting with Mr. Terry at Alden Estates last week regarding the issue of whether or not they were in compliance with the previous conditions set. He said that issue is whether or not the condition of the special use which deals with the reservation of 8 beds for Medicaid resident. preferably Evanston residents, has been complied with. He said that in the course of the operation of the facility. Alden Estates has taken the position that when a person presents themselves to Alden for admission in connection with this particular provision. that the question of Medicaid is not one which is pending for the !Medicaid qualified in -patient which requires the skilled care level bed which Medicaid is designed to address. He further explained that there have been people who have presented themselves with those qualifications who are in fact, either in the facility now or will be soon be in the facility in the future. He said the question of whether the 8 beds that should be reserved for Medicaid patients at this present time is available; the answer is no. He said this is not because Alden Estates has pushed those patients aside or refusing to admit them and he added that Mr. Terry would acknowledge this fact. Mr. 110urray said that difficulty is in interpretation in what it is that Alden Estates responsibility might be with ruference to the Medicaid resident. He said that Alden has taken the position that the ,Medicaid resident must be qualified for *4 P&D Committee Mtg. February 8, 1999 Page 5 their admission qualifications in terms of need for such care that this facility provides. He further explained that qualifications of what Alden Estates considers the need for such skilled care that they provide and these qualifications must be met by either prh--sw pay patients or those who meet Medicaid standards. Mr. Murray concluded that admission to Alden Estates is based upon skilled care need that they provide for all patients and that is the onky basis that any individual might be rejected if they do not meet those needs. Aid. Newman referred to ivir. Terry's memorandum which stm in a paragraph that "in any event, it is our opinion that Alden Estates has not met even the letter or the spirit of the 1996 special use requirement. They do not have, nor have they ever had, 8 Medicaid funded skill care residents. We could not detect any effort on their part to facility reaching that figure, in fact, they have sent numerous obstacles in reaching that objective.." He asked staff if they have the exact language stated for this condition. Mr. Hill read the language which states: "The applicant shall commit no less than 20% of skdlled care beds to intercity Medicaid patients." Aid. Newman asked Mr. Terry to elaborate on the genesis of this condition and the expectations from his department on this matter. Mr. Terry explained that this facility was originally built as a facility involved with Pebblewood and was built by a couple of former nursing home owners in Evanston. He said that when they decided to sell, Alden Estates needed to go before the State's Health Facilities Planning Board for their certificate of need. He said at that point the Illinois Department of Public Health together with the Commission on Aging, as well as himself, testified as to the need for Medicaid nursing home beds that are needs for this community. He said that the Commission of Aging are on record as being pretty consistent throughout the process in asking that a certain percentage of beds be set aside for Evanston residents that are on Medicaid given the need that was perceived for the community. Mr. Tent' said the language, as he recalls, was added on the floor of the City Council by Aid. Moran on the night in which the special use was approved. He said that representatives ffom Alden Estates were present and heard the Council's debate and it was an additional condition added that was agreed upon unanimously. He said the point being is that the community's sense has always been, as it relates to this project, that there should be access provides to skilled -care beds within all nursing facilities for Evanston Medicaid residents and this should be part of the deal. He thinks that first and far most, the numbers speak for themselves; 201/6 is 8 beds for Alden Estates and these beds should be provides or set aside for Medicaid residents. Mr. Terry added that there arc interpretations of events that have occurred since 1996 that may differ to what has been expected of Alden Estates in providing for such patients based on phone calls his staff has received that would cause them to a 01 P&D Committee Mtg. February 8, 1999 Page 6 question Alden Estates admission for certain qualified Medicaid patients. He admitted that the phone calls received were from family members of Medicaid recipients who were told by Alden Estates that they do not work with Medicaid. Mr. Terry concluded that it is staffs opinion that the 8 bed threshold be upheld, as presented in the original condition, and he suggests that language to this effect be included in the proposed ordinance an be complied with. He added that he understands that the facility might be full and the number of beds requested might be steep, but nevertheless, he feels this stipulation is one that should be met by all means possible. At this point, Aid. Moran was requested to be called over to the meeting for comments. Aid. Engelman explained that he is willing to recognize the dialog that occurred between Mr. Terry and Alden Estates with regards to this issue and he is inclined to believe that they will and would make all efforts to comply with the 8 bed reservation for Medicaid patients. He warned to stress that point that the question he raised was not designed to put up a road block for AIden Estate, and in fact, he apologizes if it did. He hopes that any delay his inquiry has caused can be alleviated and worked out. He requested that any neighbor representative speak at this point to hear their feelings on what issues have been satisfied in their opinion, as well as the Alderman of the ward_ Chairman 0 Wynne agreed and acknowledged Mr. Michael Mulder who signed up to speak on this matter. Mr. Michael Mulder began by informing the Committee members that their original neighborhood representative. Mr. McGonigle, is ill and he is here in his place. He said that the neighbors were concerned on a couple of issues regarding lighting within the parking lot and the hopeful elimination of spillage on to neighboring properties and the issue of fencing between the nursing facility and the neighboring properties. He is in the opinion that these issues ha%-e been acknowledged and addressed by Alden Estates by providing the 8' fence and consideration expressed by them to minimize lighting that would not cause spillage onto the neighboring properties. He said that they have discussed in their meeting the issues of ingress and egress to the parking lot onto Gross Point Road and it is his interpretation that this concern has been addressed also. Mr. NNIulder said that Mr. McGonigle asked him to question Mr. Murray regarding this fact with reference to the south exit and whether there udll be a sign placed there that would state no exit. Mr. Murray clarified that this issue has been addressed and will be adhered to. Mr. Mulder said the final issue is to whether or not if granted this special use expansion, if the building will at any point and the use within. %%ill be expanded_ He said this issue is not clear on the neighborhood's perspective and he stressed the feelings of the neighborhood in their total objection to any possibility of this happening. Mr. Murray stressed that there is no plans, nor were there ever. to expand the use of the building itself. Aid. Moran entered the meeting at this point to make comments on this case. He referred to the documentation with regards to conditions set on the special use back in 1996 where it clearly indicates no sanction or authorization to any further expansion of the building to the south without x P&D Committee Mtg. February 8, 1999 Page 7 further review by the City and there has been no indication from Alden Estates to do so. He regrets Mr. McGonagle being ill and not being able to attend this meeting because he has been the sole representative for the neighbors in addressing their concerns. Nevertheless, it appears that most of those issues and concerns expressed by the neighborhood have been addressed by Alden Estates and to this he is grateful. Aid. Moran said that with respect to the Medicaid issue, he is pleased to hear of the meeting between the City's health official, Mr. Terry. and Alden Estates and it appears to be that they are on the same page. He said that he has somewhat of an abiding concern on this particular issue because there appear to have been conversation between certain parties in the past that signifies with what the commitment was with Alden Estates in the past and yet there appears to be even recent examples of situations questioning their position on admission of Medicaid residents. He said that although a meeting has been conducted between City official and Alden Estates and any positive discussion that was agreed upon, there still remains the issue of what has been perceived by staff in accordance to the phone calls they have received and situations that cause them to question compliance with the conditions set in providing what is expected by Alden Estates with regards to Medicaid recipients. Ald. Moran stressed that he is inclined to agree with and support staffs recommendation that some written documentation should be adhered to within the ordinance that abides them to comply with the 8 bed reservation for Evanston Medicaid residents. He hopes that this is not an intractable problem because he feels the proposal by Alden Estates is a positive one and will create a nicer environment for the its clients and improve the environment for the surrounding neighborhood. He stressed that he is very much in support of the sense of this proposal and feels it is a good project all around. He said the difficult that they face right now is that there has been an expression of a legal opinion as to whether the current petition can be granted given the structures of our current zoning ordinance. He said there has been some correspondence between the City's legal department and Mr. Murray and it is unfortunately that due to unforeseen circumstances. that no one has been able to review this issue from our legal department as of yet. Aid. Moran said that he has a particular concern on this from a legal standpoint because of the burden of time on the applicant and the matter of drawing closure to this issue. Regardless, this is a significant enough question that all have to pay attention to addressing the issue properly before going forward with any final decision by Council. Aid. Engelman reiterated his earlier statement that it was not his intention to set a road block for this applicant and in light of the win -win situation for the neighborhood and the applicant that has been expressed here. it is very unfortunate that this has occurred. He stressed that he does believe very strongly that they need to maintain the integrity of the City's zoning ordinance which is why he originally asked the question. He questioned legal staff as to the status of this opinion. Mr. Hill responded that this opinion has been asked upon his department and informed the Committee that Nis. Szymanski and himself have been working together on this issue. He said that unfortunately, he has not been able to review Mr. Murray's letter before this meeting. He made further comments on the law departments vie%% and opinion at this point and time. He concluded that the law departments position now is quite narrow that this is an accessory use and is an expansion of the accessory use and happens to be a non -conforming special use which is being expanded. The City P&D Committee Mtg. February 8, 1999 Page 8 Code has language which is clear that prohibits the expansion of an accessory special use. He said that back in 1995 when this matter was addressed, based upon the release of conditions, thost conditions pertaining to particular land in question and the accessory and must be further wed and discussed between legal staff and Community Development staff in order to make a frW decision and statement from the Legal Department. Aid. Newman said that for the benefit of Aid. Moran, he notified him that from what the Committee heard. is that he was the one that suggested the amendment in regard to the Medicaid condition. He reiterated his feelings that until he hears from Mr. Terry that Alden Estates has complied with the amendment, he is not prepared to support this request explaining that he feels very strongly that when applicants come before the City for special uses and conditions are placed upon them are not met, then he will not support going forward. He pointed out to Aid. Moran that it has been indicated by staff, Mr. Terry, that the applicant has had more than an opportunity to comply with the condition set upon them. He said until they resolve this issue and Mr. Terry is satisfied that compliance will be met. he is inclined not to support any such request for zoning relief. Aid. Newman stressed that any applicant has the right to, at any time, to go before the ZBA and then to Council, to request for consideration to lift any conditions set upon them by the original special use requirements. He added that in this case, this is a serious condition that deserves all consideration and respect as to why it was set to begin with. He feels that more than a written agreement needs to be done because such agreements tend to not be followed without regular investigation, stating that the applicant should be in compliance before approval is given to proceed. If they are not in compliance now, they should be required to be in compliance within the next few weeks. Aid. Newman justified that he does feel this is a good project and will help eliminate the parking problem in their vicinity. Nevertheless, Alden Estates has an obligation to either meet the standards and satisfy the City Director of Health and Human Services that they are in compliance with the Medicaid condition. if not. they should be required to go back before the ZBA to request zoning relief from this condition. He added that a «ritien letter does not satisfy him in meeting compliance with this condition. Aid.:Lloran recalled that going back to the time when this condition was imposed, although ultimately he was the person that advocated it. it actually arose from a eery substantial process that Alden Estates engaged in 1996 to get the change in a skilled -care status. He said it was the Commission on Aging that really developed a concept to consider for the allowance of Medicaid beds per nursing home. Aid. Moran said that he does agree with AId. Newman's comments and feelings with Alden complying to the Medicaid condition and agrees that this should be satisfied before granting their request for expansion of the special use. He noted the fact that there are currently 2 Medicaid patients in the facility and they are required to reserve 8 beds. He feels that consideration for the applicant should be given due to the time and effort they have put into this matter so far. He suggested that efforts towards compliance should be worked out through the City Health Department and agreed upon by Mr. Tem . 0 P&D Committee Mtg. do February 8. 1999 Page 9 Mr. Terry informed the Committee that since he wrote the memo before them. the Commission on Aging met this past Saturday and he shared a copy of the memo with them. He said the one suggestion that they had was to have regular inspections by City staff and reports submitted by Alden Estates to monitor on an on -going basis how mane beds are provided for Medicaid. The Committee agreed with the Commission's suggestion. Aid. Engelman said that the matter was introduced on Council floor on January 1 lth and referred back to Committee on January 25th. He said that this matter has been held here and on Council floor so it can not be held in Committee again. Aid. Engelman moved that this Committee retain jurisdiction to further investigate the legal issues as discussed and to resolve the Medicaid beds issue. He further moved that this matter be tabled on Council floor. Aid. Newman said that there seems to be a difference of opinion on Mr. Terry's memo - Alden Estates seems to be saying that they made a good faith effort to comply and staff states that they disagree with this. He said that Alden Estates has to come up with a plan where they are going to guarantee and show us what their strenuous efforts are going to be to achieve the goal of providing 8 Medicaid beds at their facility. He pointed out that if Alden is under the impression that they are in compliance because they feel they have made every effort to provide the Medicaid beds, then the Committee needs to make a finding of fact as to whether or not the condition has been satisfied. Aid. Newman tends to agree with Aid. Moran that if Alden Estates works with City's Health Department and comes up with a plan that satisfies Mr. Terns department, then this would also satisfy the Committee's view. A.ld. Engelman said that it is clear that Alden did recognize the need to be more aggressive in this area. He pointed out that they suggested designating one person to handle all Medicaid inquiries to avoid inconsistent statements by personnel. He does agree with the recommendation that Alden work with Mr. Terry's department through this issue. Mr. Murray commented that both the ordinance and conditions say that 20% of beds shall be reserved for Medicaid. He informed the Committee that the full achievement in having all 200i6 of those beds occupied by Medicaid patients. has never be done. He said that if it is the directive or consensus of the Committee that Alden must add 8 full-time, all-time Medicaid residents in house. he feels this not to be the original intention. He indicated that they are not saying that they will not make further agressive efforts to rectify what appears to be an imbalance. He pointed out that the elements that Mr. Terry outlined in his memorandum are acceptable to Alden Estates as a means by which to achieve that demonstration of committment. Chairman Wynne pointed out that in Mr. f4furray's opening statements he said that the applicant has satisfied all issues of concern brought before them. it is the Committee's general feeling that they disagree with this statement with regards to the Medicaid bed issue. She shares Aid. Newmart's view that compliance with the Medicaid should be satisfied before approval of this application could be granted. -r P&D Committee Mtg. February 8, 1999 Page 10 Chairman Wynne directed staff to incorporate the fence, lighting and traffic issues into the draft ordinance to settle those matters. ,did. Kent seconded the motion and the vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. (17) Ordinance 10-0-99 - Special Use for Cousins Subs, 1805 Howard Street Chairman Wynne noted that Ald. Rainey requested to give a presentation on this matter and that she would hear her comments first and then comments from the applicant. She noted that due to time, this item will be introduced at Council and referred back to Committee, if needed. Aid. Rainey said that she is here tonight and the alderman of the ward and because she is an effected neighbor by this. She feels most importantly as a neighbor because her home is within 250' of this property. She presented picture to the Committee showing various Iocations of her neighborhood on Dobson Street, just one block north of Howard. The picture displayed how home owners, one block over from the subject property, take very well care of their homes and surrounding property. She said that these very same homes share the same alley with QuikMart. She presented picdares to the Committee showing the condition of the alley behind the Quik Mart which displayed garbage and debris and an unsafe air-conditioning unit. The pictures clearly display unsightly conditions that should not be as in close vicinity as it is to residential properties, especially those which she showed in her photos of Dobson Street. . Aid. Rainey vouched that none of her neighbors are in support of a fast food establishment to be located within the Quik Mart_ They all feet the Quick Mart is a filthy establishment and needs to either be closed down or forced to clean up their surroundings. She presented more photos to the Committee, this time showing the front of the subject property which displayed e%zdence of lack of the car to the parking lot and lack of property garbage cans for the store. She said the owners were requested over 2 years ago to replace their open barrel garbage dumpster with a more appropriate one. She pointed out the photo which displayed the garage can situation. Aid. Rainey expressed her concerns with the type of restaurant that the applicant is requesting to install in their store. She displayed photos of a similar submarine restaurant finiher down on the Chicago side of Howard Street. This particular location is known for teenagers and gang members hanging out. She and her neighbors are particular concerned for this same type of crowd hanging out at the Quik 'Hart for the submarine store. This r% of restaurant establishment would require constant police supervision and inspection. She suggested the applicant provide constant security for the store to alleviate such a nuisance from occurring. On the same note. Aid. Rainey recalls that this Quik Mart was kno%m for selling adult magazines, and at one time, adult movies. She and her neighbors are in total opposition of this type of conduct and would request that consideration be given to prohibiting aU sales of any types of adult magazines and videos. Aid. Rainey said that the owners has implied that his store is currently losing business and will go . out of business if this special use in not granted. She does not believe this to be true and she has P&D Committee Mtg. February 8, 1999 Page I I seen no evidence in lack or amount of customers that were always known to shop at the state. She reiterated her statement that this particular store needs to either go completely out of business or the entire establishment needs to be cleaned up and properly operated with continuous and regularly scheduled maintenance of the property. Ald. Rainey banded out to the Committee members and staff, a list of conditions that the neighborhood has agreed upon and request that the P&D Committee consider incorporating these conditions into the special use ordinance, if so granted. She concluded that if this establishment is to remain in their neighborhood. with the combination of a fast food restaurant, she feels that subject these conditions are foliowed, it is a way to clean up the property and enforce proper maintenance that will benefit the neighborhood. At this point and the lateness in time, Chairman Wynne addressed the applicants, Mr. Ronald Some, Mr. Matthew Lea and Mr. Hasmukh Patel, notifying them that they would have to close the netting at this point. She assured the applicants that this item will be introduced at Council and referred back to this Committee for more discussion at the next meeting and that they will be able to speak and give any presentations at that time. She informed the applicants that the normal order of business would require 2 Council meetings for final approval, so this will not extend any waiting period for them. Aid. Newman moved to introduce this at Council and refer back to P&D Committee for further discussion and review, seconded by Ald. Kent. Vote was 4-0 in favor of the motion. ZBA Decision on Case 99-1-ViF) This communication was accepted without comment. The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, %JacelCt��el Brownlee MINUTES Planning & Development Committee January 25, 19" Room 2403 - 7:00 p.m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, S. Engelman, J. Kent, A. Newman, M. Wynne Staff Present: J. Wolinski, A. Alterson, A. Berkowsky, E. Szymianski, J. Brownlee Presiding Of>Eicial: Alderman Wynne Chairmanship was turned over to Aid. Wynne. Chairman Wynne called the meeting to order at 7:14 p.m. Aid. Newman moved approval of the January I 1 th minutes, seconded by Aid. Kent. Chairman Wynne pointed out that the issue was raised regarding the height of the fence and the material and style to be used. She said it was agreed by a representative of Alden Estates that the fence would be 8' tall, made of wood in the stockade style. She noted that this agreement was omitted from the minutes and requested that it be added. Aid. Newman moved approval of the minutes with the noted correction. The motion %-as seconded by Aid. Kent and the was unanimous. (9) Appeal from SPAARC's Decision re: 2421 Dempster Streel Chairman Wynne announced that this item will be held in Committee until the next meeting. Aid. Newman asked if there is any petition that is necessary to appeal to SPAARC instead of just receiving a copy of the minutes. He feels the applicant should be required to make some type of report or petition in support of their reasoning behind the appeal. He feels the applicant needs to articulate their appeal under the standards of the ordinance. Chairman Wynne recognized Mr. Michael Walker who signed up to speak on this matter. Mr. Walker explained that he is the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Evanston Church of Christ, the neighboring building to Evanston Tire and Auto Service. He said that it is the understanding of the Church that the approval of the addition was contingent upon receiving permission from the church to store or park a certain number of cars on the churches property. He P&D Committee Mtg. Jsnuan 25. 1999 Page 2 said the Church Boeud of Director's met and voted w deny their request, if in fact, the contingency is true. Chairman V vn= informed Mr. Walker that the expansion of Evanston Tire and Auto is not contingent upon obtaftfing permission from his church. She was under the impression that there was some past agreement between the church and Evanston Tire. Mr. Walker responded that out of courtesy. they ailow,ed Evanston Tire to park cars in their lot during the week but recently have requested them to stop doing so because their cars have restricted the church from using their lot at certain times. Chairman W,,mne thanked Mr. Walker for coming and expressing his concerns. She informed him that because the applicant was not notified of this meeting, this item will be held over to the next P&D meeting. She extended an invitation to be present at that meeting. Aid. Newman referred to comments made by Mr. Alterson in the minutes. stating that according to the zoning analysis the proposal does not provide enough off-street parking. He referred to other discussion in the minute questioning whether or not the spaces inside the bays count as spaces. He questions why any application would make it to SPAARC if the Zoning Administrator has made any decision that disqualifies their application. Mr. Wolin -ski responded that many of the projects that they review at Site Plan Revicw, through either concept. preliminary on up to final, do not need some phase of zoning. He said this is explained to the applicant that they will need to go through the zoning process and as long as it is not critical to the layout or site plan that they are reviewing, they will continue to rc%iew• the project. Aid. Newman expressed his concern with this process; it appears the zoning process is being circumvented. He suggested that in cases such as this where the Zoning Administrator has made a decision requiring a variation_ this should go before the Zoning Board and then before P&D Committee. He said the decision made by SPAARC and appealed by the applicant, is not what SPAARC should be considering. Mr. .person explained that the plan that was submitted by Evanston Tire and reviewed by the Site Plan Committee on December 18th, if excepted, he would have made sure that compliance %%Ith the Zoning Ordinance be sought. The Committee requested that staff obtain a report from the applicant stating the basis for their appeal. They further requested that the standards of the Site Plan Review Ordinance be supplied. Aid. Engelman also requested from staff that the Committee be advised whether they are the hearing body for this or whether they- are merely judging this based upon the record before SPAARC. Aid. Engelman moved to hold this item in Committee, seconded by Ald. Newman. This item will be introduced on Council agenda this evening and held in Committee for the information requested, and notification to the applicant to be present at the next meeting. (1_01 Request for Special U c ENtension - 21 1 1 De«-e% .-eve= Chairman Wynne acknowledged the presence of Mr. John Wemmer. recipient of the special use and variations. Mr. Wertymer had no comments. 0 .P&D Committee Mtg. January 25, 1999 Page 3 Aid. Kent moved to approve the request to extend an additional year, seconded by Ald. Newman. The vote was "in favor of the motion. U t) Q dinancc 4-Q-99 - 25I6-18 Gross Point Road Mr. Wolinski informed the Committee members that Ald. Moran has requested that this item be held in Committee because he is holding a neighborhood meeting this week and plans to discuss this issue at that time. Aid. Bernstein pointed out that the Committee is still waiting for legal opinion as to whether they have the Iegal ability regarding certain matters with the adjacent property. The Committee asked staff the status on information requested. Mr. Alterson informed the Committee that staff' has not yet received the legal opinion from the Law Department regarding the Council's jurisdiction. He also informed the Committee that Dave Jennings, Traffic Engineer, has been working diligently with the Alden Estates and the surrounding neighbors regarding the exiting onto Gross Point Road. He said the applicants attorney has furnished staff with some documentation referring to the Health & Human Services concern on the position being held from the last revision of the special use permit which required that a certain percentage of beds be available for Medicaid patients. •Chairman Wynne moved on behalf of Aid. Moran to hold this item in Committee, seconded by Aid. Bernstein. (PQl) Proposed Amel3dments to Ordinance 6-0-97 concerning Building Code RcgrulatioWfor Elew�ators Chairman Wynne recognized those signed up to speak and acknowledged that they had been present at the last couple of meetings. Mr. Torn Walder, President of the Board at 1426 Chicago Avenue, explained that the requirement to install fire fighter recall capabilities would cause the owners of the building many problems. He noted that their building is 80 years old, with 14 apartments and approximately 25 tenants. He stressed the financial burden it would cause on the owners due to their number and the extremity in cost it would be to do an 80 year old building. He told the Committee that their building is in the process of putting in a brand new fire escape to make sure they have 2 egresses from the building, at great cost to the unit owners. Mr. Walder further noted that the building currently has 2 small elevators. The Board is having a problem weighing the cost versus need or benefit in complying with the elevator update requirements. He informed the Committee that his building is 7 stories tall and would not qualify under the 5 story exemption. 0 �I P&D Committee Mtg. January 25, 1994 is Page 4 Ald. Newman said that when this Ordinance was originally cast, it wras going to require the fire fighter recall and service be done by the year 2000. After more consideration, an extension of that expiration date was given. He said that he was convinced then and is convinced now that the requirements of fire fighter recall, in addition to all the other requirements for elevators. does not make sense for buildings that can be reached by fire truck ladders. Fire truck ladders can reach up to 8 stories high; confirmed by Chief Berkowsky. Ald. Newman especially feels in cases such as 1426 Chicago Avenue, with minimal units and tenants, further consideration needs to be given due to the extreme financial burden it causes to comply_ He further pointed out the sensiti-.ity that nee& to be extended because of our City's high tax rate. He noted his appreciation for -Aiw the Fire Departments is trying to accomplish, but he stressed the importance in cost to some buildings versos the over benefit of complying with the fine fighter recall and service if the fire truck ladders can reach each floor of a building. He reminded the fact that the fire fighter recall recommendations came about because of a fire that occurred at the NBD Bank building which is a totally different situation than that of a small residential building. Ald. Newman concluded that he feels residential buildings below 8 stories should not be required to comply with the strenuous costs of complying with the fire fighter recall requirements, even to the time extension of the year 2006. He moved that it be considered that the Fire Department come back with an ordinance that states buildings below 8 stories will not be subject to the fire fighter recall service. This motion was seconded by Ald. Bernstein. Chief Berkowsky responded to Ald. Newman's suggestions. He said that the fire truck ladders can reach up to 8 stories depending on the setback of the building and any other obstructions that might be in the way. He said that the ladder needs a 105' area in conjunction with the strut. He said the average star}, is approximately 10-12'. He pointed out the fact that the ladders can serve as a rescue means to save people by window but consideration has to be given to handicapped and bed -ridden individuals. Those individuals can be saved in a more safe and timely fashion by elevator recall method. He added that the fire tighter recall and service would also eliminate individuals from being trapped in the elevator if a fire should occur and the elevators could also be used for fire suppression. Chief Berkowsky said the consideration of 8 stories is something where in the survey of the City of Chicago implemented based upon their high-rise requirement in which they judge upon the height of the building. He noted that the code states 75' and above should comply with the fire fighter recall and service requirements. Chairman Wynne recalled that the survey States that the City of Chicago ordinance evokes the retrofitting of elevators in buildings greater than 80'. Ald. Newman said that he would be willing to adopt than language. :�Ir. Walinski responded in support of Chief Berkowsky's comments. He noted that the Committee requested staff to conduct a survev which was done back in December. He said that Evanston was on the cutting edge in comparison to the survey done. in accordance aith the ordinance as proposed He referred to the Cite of Elgin in the survey. which uses river boat revenues to help implement the cost to some buildings to comply. He said that it appear that Waukegan is the only city that has such a change and is in comparison to Evanston. the Building Director there has given a time provision • 1-1 i qS .P&D Commince Mtg. January 25, 1999 Page 5 of 10 years to comply. He pointed out that from the survey, there is not a lot of reasoning to compare with Evanston's situation. Mr. Wolinski said that he would suggest, as noted by Chief Berkowslca_ that in the BOCA building code it states that 75' is the demarcation line that separates high-rise structure from others. He said that when you go above 75', it invokes a whole new set of code requirements due to several safety issues and fire department capabilities to serve the building in d= most efficient manner. He informed the Committee that his department and the fire departmem discussed the issue of feet in height versus actual stories and they mutually felt that stories should be considered, therefore if there is a difference between floor to ceiling distances in buildings, it would become an issue. Mr. Wolinski reiterated Aid. Newman's motion that an%ihin above 9 stories should have the fire fighter recall requirements and staff would be inclined to agree,with that` He added that staff would also suggest that buildings that are classified as institutional uses under the BOCA code such as hospitals, retirement homes. etc., would also be required to have the fire fighter recall service regardless of height. Aid. Engelman asked staff why they are drawing the distinction between stories and feet if the BOCA code determines feet. Mr. Wlinski responded that staff felt that they did not ,ant to get into a battle between building owners because of the argument that the floor to ceiling height in some buildings is perhaps shorter than others and staff felt this not to be a critical issue in Evanston: so ias building stories would be easier to differentiate by. Aid. Engelman said that this type of distinction causes concern in his mind. He feels that if the BOCA building code goes by height in feet to determine whether certain safety code issues should be considered. then those considerations should be seriously weighed upon. He stressed his respect for the judgement of our city officials and experts if they feel comfortable with such a decision if they feel this to be a prudent one for the City of Evanston`s needs. although it differentiates from the requirements of the code in which the City follows. Aid. Bernstein pointed out that it appears the biggest concern for complying «ith the fire fighter recall and service requirements is the extreme cost to certain residential buildings that come within a certain height with a minimal amount of tenant or unit owners versus the actual benefit to the building if there are other means of providing safety to such buildings. He suggested that a case- bv-case assessment on all residential buildings with elevators within Evanston needs to be done, recognizing the added time and work it would require fire department staff to do such a job. in order to determine fairly the financial burden on each building. The other Committee members discussed Aid. Bemstein's suggestion and were all in agreement with the noted extra work it .was burden fire department staff to survey the buildings in Evanston to make a list for case -by -case determination. Although it .would require the extra work involved, the Committee feels this survey of buildings is important due to the fact that Evanston does follow the BOCA code requirement which clearly states that buildings of 75' and above should comply with the fire fighter recall and service requirements. After such a survey is conducted. then the comparison of stories versus height in feet can be considered. Chairman Wynne asked Aid. Bemstein if he was suggesting that even with the survey of buildings in height. that the case -by -case consideration be given to financial burden on residential buildings with minimal amount of units At P&D Committee Mtg. January 25, 1999 Page 6 regardless to the amount of stories. Aid. Bernstein replied that this consideration should be given if the building is close within 8 stories and accessible by the 105' ladder capability. He stressed that his intention and concern is to reach a balance between the cost factor and the safety factor to the extent in which it can possibly be done. Chief Berkowsky reiterated his concern is mainly for the safety factor that should be considered vkith regards to the high-rise building requirements and the code specifications that pertain to the fire department being able to fulfill their expectations in obtaining their responsibilities to all citizens that may be involved. Aid. Newman said that based upon the survey before the Committee, the market seems to be that buildings 80' and above should comply with the fire fighter recall and service requirement, and Evanston would be staying consistent with what it appears other municipalities are doing if they were to follow the BOCA code requirements. His opinion would be to go with the requirements specified by the BOCA building code. Chairman Wynne referred to the survey where the City of Chicago requires that sprinkler systems be installed in the high-rise buildings also and she questions if this requirements is also for buildings below the high-rise criteria as well. Chief Berkowsky responded that all buildings are required to comply with the sprinkler system requirement as well as institutional buildings, regardless of height or stories. More discussion took place regarding institutional use buildings complying with fire fighter I and 11 recall and service requirements. From discussion between the Committee members and staff, it appeared to be the consensus that all institutional facilities should be required to comply with all requirements due to the nature of the use of such facilities by the residents that occupy such buildings. Points were raised by the Committee regarding fire alarms and their significant purpose in alarming the fire department in emergency cases. Consideration of installing high quality alarm systems in smaller scale residential buildings versus the cost of installing the fire fighter 11 recall service installations, was discussed between the Committee and staff. Chief Berkowsky responded that even with high-tech alarm systems being installed. considering that many lower scale residential buildings have already installed burglary fire alarm systems, this is not a reliable practice in which to go by. Aid. Newman pointed out that when the initial consideration of the fire fighter recall and service requirement was contemplated. it was not entirely clear how much the cost involved would be. He recalled that it was estimated, at that time, that the cost would be approximately $15.000 per elevator. lie noted as time went on and estimates were obtained by different buildings with different circumstances such as age of elevators and the height of certain buildings, that the cost could exceed over S80,000 per building to comply. fie said that he has no problem looking at the requirements suggested by staff if he knew the approximate cost per building depending on the amount of units in comparison to their height and number of stories. Aid. Newman said that as the proposed ordinance stands, it gives the building owners an opportunity to be aware of what is happening and allowing them the opportunity to appeal the requirements because of the amount of stories in the • i - P&D Committee Mtg. • January 25, 1999 Page 7 building and the location of their primary used elevator, excluding their freight elevator. if one. He stressed the importance of considering residential buildings within a certain amount of stories v4th a low number of units, to also be able to appeal due to the extreme cost to comply, especially if there is the possibility that the fire truck ladders can reach their height for safety rescue. etc. Aid. Neuman feels that aU elevators should be required to comply with the fire fighter I requirements, such as phone installation, etc., but he emphasized the extreme cost of complying with the fire fighter 0 recall and service requirements and every consideration should be given on a case -by -case basis per building. Aid. Engelman expressed his concern with what has been discussed and the suggestions on considering a case -by -case basis for buildings. He is convinced that the code requirements specified by BOCA, in which the City of Evanston follows, should be considered above all and should be followed to eliminate any discrepancies amongst building owners and City officials in trying to entail uniform compliance with the code. He reminded the Committee that the initial consideration of this proposed ordinance is %%ith regards to safety for residents of buildings and the ability of the fire department to fulfill their safety and rescue demands set upon them. Aid. Engelman concluded that he feels that if the BOCA code stales any building in height of 75" and above should be required to comply with the fire fighter recall and service requirements, then it should be followed. He doesn't .disregard the cost factor involved with such buildings as 1426 Chicago Avenue with a small amount of unit owners plus the age of their building; and does agree with special consideration being given to this type of circumstance. However, he feels that the specified code in which the City of Evanston goes by should be followed. He stressed his agreement with Aid. Bernstein's suggestion that a survey of the buildings in Evanston be conducted by staff to see how many buildings should come under special consideration due to their size in units and to see how- many buildings are beyond the 75' height limitation that should comply. Aid. Engelman said that he would be comfortable with looking at such a survey of buildings and then being able to weed out those buildings that come within that height that would require special consideration due to the amount of units in comparison to cost in order to comply - The Committee discussed this matEeT further and were in agreement with the comments and concerns as stated above. Further discussion took place regarding the issue as to whether 8 stories and above should be required to comply versus the 75' height requirement as stated in Chicago's high-rise building requirement, considering that Evanston is a different npe of City with less high-rise buildings than the City of Chicago. The Committee further discussed the cost factor versus the benefit factor for such buildings that would be considered under those circumstances. After all discussion incurred, the Committee agreed that this issue deserves more consideration before any final vote should be contemplated. The Committee asked staff how much time they should consider in order for staff to do a surrey of all buildings with elevators in the City of Evanston to determine how many Buildings come within the height of 75' and above and the status 0 of such buildings. Staff responded that they would need approximately 60 days to do a proper survey P&_D Committee Mtg. January 25, 1999 Page 8 of all buildings with elevators and eradicate those buildings of 75' and above and the amount of unit owners within such buildings to build a comparison factor for the Committee to re%iew. Chairman Wynne requested that staff summarize before the Committee the information being requested to make sure of that staff understands. Chief Berkowsky responded that it is his understanding that the Committee is requesting that staff come back within 60 days with a survey of all buildings within the City of Evanston, pointed out the buildings that are 75' and above and further pointing out those buildings within that height that are occupied by a minimal amount of unit owners where the cost would be extreme to comply with the fire fighter recall and service requirements. The Committee agreed to this receiving this analysis from staff. The meeting %us adjourned at 8:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, `1 r r1 �' Yuan i L •11/ it 1 J i Jac elf E. Brownlee 4AI • • 0 NaNUTES Planning & Development Committee January 11, 1999 Evanston Civic Center Room 2403 - 7:00 p-m. Alderman Present: S. Bernstein, S. Engelman, J. Kent', A. Newman, M. Wynne Staff Present: L Wolinski, A. Alterson, I. Brownlee Others Present: B. Siedenberg Presiding Official: S. Bernstein The meeting was called to order at 7:46 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF DECEMBER 11, 1993 Mcr, a tOG Ald. Wynne moved approval of the minutes of December 14, 1998, seconded by Ald. Newman. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. (11) Ordinance 4-0-99 - 2516-18 Gross Point Road Chairman Bernstein acknowledged Mr. James Murray, attorney and representative for Alden Estates. He noted that the petition is for an extension of their special use to permit additional parking and recreational use of the open space to the south of the existing building. Mr. Murray explained the request is to grant Alden Estates an expansion to the previously granted special use to expand the parking facility and the outside patio for passive recreational use by the residents. He said there does not appear to be a great deal of controversy except in one area which is the area of the fencing which is to be required along the west property line from its north to south point. He said there is an existing cyclone fence on a portion of the property which is not yet owned by Alden Estates and a board -on -board cedar fence which stretches approximately 70-80% of the lot length. He explained that the Zoning Board suggested that this committee and the City Council pay close attention to the type of fencing that might be required to be installed along that back property line, Mr. Murray said that the neighbors that appeared at the ZBA meeting expressed concern for the lighting and some other elements of the proposed project_ He said that they have indicated a willingness to address any of the lighting issues that relate to existing lighting conditions to bring them P&D Committee Mtg. January 11, 1999 0 Page 2 into compliance to be a zero foot candles at the property line so as not to spill over onto neighboring properties. Aid. Wynne asked for further clarification of the location of the existing fence. Mr. Murray showed the Committee the location in question of both the existing cyclone and the stockade fence on a blueprint of the property. He added that the cyclone fence also runs the full length of the north property line adjacent to the City's reservoir. Chairman Bernstein reflected back to the transcript, noted that there is a question with respect the location of ingress and egress on Gross Point Road with it being so close to Old Orchard Road and the concern for that. Mr. Murray responded that situation was a matter that was referred to Site Plan and Appearance Review by the Zoning Board and is an issue that will be addressed by that Board. He said their preference is to have 2 of the 3 entrances to the 2 lots that are currently in use, to eliminate one of the curb cuts and might be inclined to move one of those entrances, but they have to deal with the State of Illinois and other regulatory agencies to deal with this issue. He noted that it will be apparently beneficial to have that driveway as far from the intersection of Harrison/Old Orchard and Gross Point Road to permit as much free. flow of traffic in that area as possible without adding to any congestion. Mr. Murray said it is in their plan to use a counter -clockwise method of ingress and egress to take in -turning traffic farther from the intersection for a safe left turn into the property and a counter -clockwise to exit the property. Chairman Bernstein asked if the applicant would contemplate a right -turn only out of the property at that location. Mr. Murray answered that if necessary, they would be willing to consider that alternative. Mr. Wolinski notified the Committee that Nir J. Terry, Director of Human Services, expressed some concern that one of the provisions of the previous special use with Alden Estates when this was amended several years ago, is there was a requirement that a certain number of beds be allocated to Evanston Medicaid patients. He said that staff would like to see something in writing from Alden that this is indeed the case to console Mr. Terry's concerns. Mr. Murray responded that the regulationist contained the covenant which he copied and gave to Mr. Alterson, deals with maintaining that 8 beds be for Medicaid residents/recipients and added that to the extent permitted by law, grant priority to residents of the City of Evanston. Ald. Engelman clarified that the question is how many beds available for Medicaid recipients versus Evanston residents who qualify, will be in use. Mr. Murray responded that he is not sure of the exact number at this time but the approximate number is that there are 65 residents out of 99 licensed beds available to Medicaid recipients. He assured the Committee that a definite number will be supplied to staff as soon as possible. Mr. Wolinski verified that this issue is a definite condition of the prior special use and staff would require a definite answer/number to the question. Ald. Newman asked for further clarification from staff on this particular issue. He asked if staff is unsure that Alden Estates is currently in compliance with the existing ordinance. Mr. Wolinski said that is correct. Ald. Newman stressed, from staffs concerns, that he does not want to pass over this issue because it is a legitimate concern and emphasized the importance on this being addressed by Alden Estates and noted that this be a understanding that prior 46 P&D Committee Mtg January 11, 1999 Page 3 to the final vote on this item, that information will be received in concurrence with cornpliance with the existing ordinance. Mr. Murray acknowledged the Committee's wishes and conowyed. Ald. Wynne asked for clarification as stated by the applicant that they will obtain that there be no spillage of lighting over onto neighboring properties. Mr. Murray concurred that they will eliminate any light spillage onto neighboring properties which apparently is a current problem with the current fighting He said that all new lighting installed will address this problem. He added that a study wit! be done to assure proper fighting be installed. Chairman Bernstein, at this point, addressed the sign-up sheet and turned the meeting over to citizen comments. Mr. Andrew McGonigle, 2526 Princeton Avenue, informed the Committee of his professional expertise being that he is an architect and has special training in designing parking lots, parking areas and garages. He said that he is here to represent 23 individuals within the local community that carve together before the ZBA hearing also; the group has a mutual feeling to make sure that the neighborhood is protected and respected in the residential way it has always been. He said the neighborhood group is in favor of the proposed "foyer way" and encourage its development. He said the group does, however, have several reservations that were also brought up at the ZBA hearings. Mr. McGonagle informed the Committee that he would like to refer to those issues but has not received a copy of the ZBA transcript. Aid. Newman directed staff to supply a copy of the transcript to Mr. McGonagle. Mr. McGonigle addressed the community croups reservations He pointed out that the current height of the fence is 8 Yr' above ground level with the bottom 11/2' being a berm. He expressed the neighbors concern that this height level or above be maintained and prefer a type of fence that provides complete privacy to the neighbors and also as a buffer from the nursing home. He complained of the current trash and debris that exists between the fences and how no one maintains this area because no one currently has excess to this area. He said the group would like to have this issue resolved with the installation of the new fence. Mr. McGonagle stated another reservation is with regards to lighting and their concern for spillage over onto neighboring properties. He said :hey are also concerned with nuisance from car headlights during evening hours. Ald. Newman referred to the Ordinance before them which states a condition about a wood fence which he feels resolves any concerns for installation of a cyclone fence. Ald Newman directed staff to also provide a copy of the Ordinance for Mr. McGonigle. He suggested that he would like to hold this item in Committee to assure that the Ordinance addresses the concerns of the neighbors regarding the fence and lighting issues. Mr. McGonigle said that he has a problem with the manner in which this issue came before the City Council which relates to the extension -of the modification to the existing special use. Currently the property is zoned C2 which does not permit the use of a nursing facility. He revealed that the k P&D Committee Mtg. January 11, 1999 Page 4 neighbors have no problems with the nursing facility being there but the difficutty lies with the expansion of the use and parking facility. Ald. Newman asked for clarification of the neighbors concern for expansion of use.. Mr. McGonigle explained that the neighbors are against excessive use of the already existing special use and would like to keep the use to a minimum so as not to impact onto the surrounding neighborhood The neighbors would like to avoid the possibility of Alden Estates being able to expand the facility at a later date. Ald. Wynne recalled from reading the transcript, that there is a very specific condition on this special use that does not permit :Aden Estates to go beyond 99 beds and other wording that relates to the expiration of the special use if change in use occurs. Chairman Bernstein referred to staff regarding the issues and concerns raised. He asked, first of all, does Council have the ability to grant an extension of this special use, and secondh, it is presumed that granting of the extension of the special use is for expansion of their parking facilities and open recreational space; does this not limit ccpansion of the facility in the future? Mr. Alterson responded that the City's Law Department in April of 1995 gave them an opinion that because this is a special use that exists legally by virtue of the special use permit that was issued in 1989 under the old Zoning Ordinance, that modification of the ordinance which granted the special use permit was permissible. Chairman Bernstein clarified that opinion is with regards to the existing parcel and now they need to consider the terms for the adjacent parcel that has been acquired and the legality of Council's position. With no staff available from the City's Law Department, the Committee feh they needed this question answered before making any final decision. Mr. Alterson addressed the second question raised by Chairman Bernstein. He said the recommendation from the ZBA, limits their use of the property the applicant is acquiring to only parking and the passive recreational use He said it specifically excludes the expansion of the building/facility onto that parcel and this is stated in the ordinance. Mr. McGonigle further addressed his concerns for the parking facility. He said the neighbors are in agreement with the addition of valet parking being offered. He said, however, there is concern for specific language being added to secure the applicant provide 67 spaces within their parking lot to provide for their valet parking, visitor self -parking and staff. Ald. Wynne agreed and feels this is not an unreasonable request by the neighbors. Discussion on this matter took place between the Committee, staff and Mr. Murray. Mr. Murray felt it inappropriate to add a condition in the ordinance to specify that his applicant -ii ovide 67 spaces t ucause they are proposing more than the maximum number of spaces required for this use. He added that the only time there is a study flow of cars is during shift change time which lasts no longer than approximately 15 minutes Chairman Bernstein and Ald. Engelman also felt this condition to be an inappropriate way to do this, essentially they would need to change the Zoning Ordinance requirements to reflect the required number of spaces for this use. After discussion, Aid. Newman moved to amend the Ordinance to include the condition that no less than 67 spaces be provided for this facility, seconded by Aid. Wynne. After discussion, .P&D Committee Mtg. January 11, 1999 Page 5 Aid. Newman amended the number to 63 spaces. The vote was 3 in favor, 2 voting may (Bernstein & Engelman). Mr. McGonagle expressed concern for ingress/egress and the closeness of the curb cut into the driveway being in such close proximity to the busy intersection near Old Orchard Road. He recommended consideration of a circular drive and indicated from a diagram of the property where he felt a better location for the curb cut could be and suggested where the circular drive could be located. Mr. Murray stated that if a circular drive were installed, it would cut away from the amount of parkng spaces that could be provided; specifically it would cut down from the 63 spaces they woof , the applicant to provide. Mr. Michael Mulder, of 2511 Princeton, Mr. John Flood of 2525 Princeton and Mr. George Breffielh of 2507 Princeton, all agree with comments and representation given by Mr. McGonagle. They further expressed their concern for proper fencing to be installed to provide complete privacy from the nursing home use and expansion of the parking facilities. The further expressed concern that appropriate consideration be given by the applicant regarding spillage of lighting onto neighboring properties. The Committee voted unanimously to introduce this item on Council floor and refer the matter back to Committee for further information to be obtained as mentioned in previous discussion. (151 Ordinance 115-0-98 - Special Use for 1719-21 Sherman Avenue Chairman Bernstein noted that this item was introduced at Council at the last meeting and referred back to Committee requesting that a representative of the applicant be available for any questions. There were no questions of the Committee. The Committee voted unanimously to consider the recommendation of the ZBA to approve the special use for a Type 2 restaurant for Panda Express. (PD 1 )_ Proposed Amendments to Ordinance 6-0-97 conceming Building Code RMIateons for Elevators The Committee apologized far not getting to this item this evening after holding this over for several meetings. The Committee committed to this item being placed first for discussion on the agenda at the January 25th meeting. + P&D Committee Mtg. January 11, 1999 0 Page 6 Withdrawal_ ofZoWnQ Relief Rcoest for 1925 Central Streit This item was accepted by the Commi:.tee without comment. The nmting was adjourned at 9:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, %Jacq"IiTnE&Brownlee 0 *L Appxor w EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION / Daffier a 1999 PAGE I MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION Meeting of Wednesday, December 8, 1999 / 6:30 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Room 2403 MEMBERS PRESENT ..........Doraine Anderson, Richard Cook, Joseph Eatman, Sydney Grevas, David Hart, Dr. Alvin Keith, Steve Knutson, Ron Kobold, John Lyman ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ...............................................Ann Dienner, Sharon Feigon, Nettie Johnson, Martin Norkett STAFF PRESENT...............................................Arthur Alterson, Jung Won Kim, Dennis Marino PRESIDING....................................................................... ........................... Ron Kobold., Chair I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM The meeting was called to order at approximately 6:35 p.m., a quorum being present. The early starting time was due to an Economic Development Committee meeting at 8 p.m. 11. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 13, 1999 AND NOVE�4EBER 3, 1999 Doraine Anderson disagreed with some of the wording in Section V111 (Old Business: Chicago Avenue Corridor Study) of the minutes for October 13, 1999. The original statement read: "Members approved unanimously the Chicago Avenue Corridor Study, including the textual changes." Ms. Anderson believed that the word "approved" should be replaced with "received". While the Commission was in agreement that "approved" was incorrect, several members stated that the Commission did more than merely receive the Chicago Avenue Corridor Study. They suggested that "accepted" would be more indicative of the Commission's actions. Ron Kobold suggested that the verbiage be expanded to describe the Commission's actions in greater detail and to explain that the Commission has passed on the report to its subcomittees for further consideration. Staff will revise the minutes of October 13, 1999 for reconsideration in next month's Commission meeting. The minutes of November 3, 1999 were approved without any changes. ak� APPROrED EVANSTON PLAN COSOUSSIQN / Dkxmba 8.1999 PAGE 2 II1. NER' BUSINESS: APPOINTMENTS FOR COMMITTEE CHAIRS AN-D LIAISONS The Executive Committee of the Plan Commission presented its recommendations for the appointment of committee chairs and liaisons for the year 2000. The Commission approved unanimously the following recommendations for committee chairs, liaisons and officers, unless otherwise noted: • Sydney Grevas and John Lyman will serve as Chair and Vice Chair respectively of the Plan Commission. • As Plaza Commission Chair, Ms. Grevas will automatically become the Chair of the Executive Committee. • Richard Cook will remain as Chair of the Binding Appearance Review Committee. • John Lrian will serve as Chair of the Neighborhood Committee. • David Hart will remain as Chair of the Comprehensive General Plan Committee. • In regard to the Transportation Committee, the Executive Committee recommended that a voting Plan Commission member should be chair. (Sharon Feigon, a non -voting Associate Member of the Commission, chairs the Transportation Committee). The recommendation was based on the logic that every committee should be chaired by a voting Commission member. Steve Knutson disagreed with the recommendation, but he viewed the Transportation Committee's lack of a voting Commission member as a problem. Commission members agreed. Ms. Grevas asked Ms. Feigon if the Transportation Committee had a need for additional members. Ms. Feigon mentioned the various issues that the Committee will need to discuss in the near future, such as the interim parking plan and the RTA Study. Upon request, she also provided a general description of the Committee. The Commission approved Ms. Feigon to remain as Transportation Committee chair and requested that a voting Commission member join the committee. Joseph Eatman wanted some clarification about the procedure for deciding which committees to join. Ron Kobold explained that Mr. Eatman did not have to make his decisions now and that the meeting's purpose was partly to inform all Commission members about the different committees. • Doraine Anderson will serve as chair of the Zoning Committee. • Sydney Grevas will remain as the Plan Commission's liaison to the Economic Development Committee. • Dr. Alvin Keith will serve as liaison to the CD Committee. ;�l APPROMD EVA.NSTON PLAN COMMISSION / Detseffier 5.1999 PAGE • Ms. Grevas will serve as liaison to the Place Names Committee. IV. NEW BUSINESS: RULE CHANGES The Plan Commission made the following rule changes in its procedure: As a bookkeeping issue, the Commission decided that the one-year terms for Associate Members would be set from January 1 to Dezember 31. Associate Members who are appointed in the middle of a calendar year would serve out the nest of that year. • The Commission decided to make the Ethics Disclosure form an official requirement for all new Associate Members to complete and submit. V. NEW BUSINESS: OTHER DECISIONS • All current Associate Members will remain on the Plan Commission as Associate Members for year 2000. Sharon Feigon noted an error on the Commission's Committee Roster, clarifying that she is not a member of the Zoning Committee. The Executive Committee recommended that a Plan Commission member should he a voting member of Parking Committee. Ron Kobold stated that he had spoken with Aldermen Newman, Wynne, and Bernstein, all of who are members of the Parking Committee. Mr. Kobold said that the three Aldermen were supportive of the idea of including a Plan Commission member. The Executive Committee also recommended that Sydney Grevas be appointed as the Plan Commission's representative in the Parking Committee. Ms. Grevas inquired who had the authority to approve such a decision. Dennis Marino stated that the ordinance establishing the Plan Commission would need to be amended to allow a liaison from the Plan Commission as a voting member in the Parking Committee. Mr. Kobold stated that staff should prepare appropriate documents for rule change. Ms. Feigon suggested that the Parking Committee should include a member of the Transportation Committee. Mr. Kobold replied that committee reports should be sufficient to bridge the gap between the Parking and Transportation Committees. He added that the recommendation of Ms. Grevas for the Parking Committee was based on the relevance of her activities in the Zoning Committee and Evmark. The Plan Commission approved unanimously the recommendations regarding the Parking Committee as two separate motions: 1. A Plan Commission member should be a voting member of the Parking Committee. 2. Sydney Grevas will serve as the Parking Committee member. • The Commission scheduled its annual retreat for Tuesday, February 22, 2000, 5 p.m. The retreat will take place in the Civic Center. Ar Ir :►_tat. VI. EV.4NS rON PLAN COMMISSION i tle=mpba lL 1999 PAGE 4 Finally". the Commission approved its meeting schedule for 2000. As in previous )•ran, tint Commission will meet at 7 p.m. on the second Wednesday of each month in room 2403 of the Civic Center. The meeting dates for 2000 are as follows: Jaman' 12 May 10 September 13 Februan- 9 June 14 October I l March 9 July 12 November 8 April 12 August 9 December 13 Ron Kobold suggested that the Commission's subcommittees develop similar annual calendars to better inform other Commission members. COI%[IiITI'EE UPDATES A. Economic Development On October 27, the Economic Development Committee met with the Klutznick developnWat team to discuss the Sherman Plaza project. The team had reported that its land purchases were on track. Sydney Grevas noted that this meeting was before the Plan Commission's November 3 hearing, and hence she did not see the need to report what Commission members already knew. Ms. Grevas stated that Aldermen Engelman and Newman debated TIF (tax increment financing) district issues, particularly in regard to the degree to which school districts should be involved in the expenditure decisions in TIF districts. Ms. Grevas stated that in spite of permits issued for the demolition of the Main Sbeet Newsstand, there were three parties interested in rehabilitating the building. She also mentioned that the Comminee approved the redevelopment agreement of the shopping center on Dempster and Dodge. Remediation work on the site has already begun and Dominkk*s is set to open for the spring of 2000. Dennis Marino added that the agreement was subsequently approved by the City Council. Returning to the TIF issue, Mr. Marino reported that it is being discussed by City Council. The Council supports in concept the sharing of revenues from existing TIF districts when feasible. Documents are currently being drafted for the approval of this concept for a possible three-year period. Commission members asked about how 71F operates. Mr. Marino replied that according to state statute, home -rule municipalities could make independent decisions on TIF. B. Neighborhood Committee John Lyman updated the Commission on the activities of the Neighborhood Committee, especially the Chicago Avenue Corridor. He stated that an introductory letter and a copy of the Chicago Avenue report has been seat to commercial property owners. A special meeting for the commercial property owners is scheduled for January 14, 9 a.m. in room 2403 of the Civic 0 APPROi E:D EVANSTON PLA.t COMMISSICIN Uccember& 1999 PAGE S Center. The main purpose of this meeting is to update owners on the progress of the corridor study. Mr. Lyman stated that a letter of notification about the Zoning Committee meeting of January 26 would be sent out on January 3. The Zoning Committee will meet again on January 27 to analyze the proceedings of the January 26 hearing. In addition, February 2 has been set aside in case the hearing needs to be continued. In order to make further progress on the Chicago Avenue report, two groups have been created: an Interdepartmental Planning Team consisting of various city staff and a Neighborhood Implementation Group of residents, merchants, Aldermen Bernstein and Wynne, and Neighborhood Committee Chair John Lyman. Mr. Lyman expressed the need for the involvement of commercial property owmers in the latter group. Martin Norkett criticized the act of sending out the report to commercial property owners, stating that retailers will not have time to give it much attention during the Christmas season_ He also expressed the need for an economic analysis. Richard Cook stated that commercial property owners need to be more involved and be given sufficient notice about meetings and the report's progress. Mr. Lyman emphasized the need to move the process along and noted that the January 14 meeting is only to inform owners rather than making major decisions. Several other Commission members concurred. They mentioned that the meeting could be publicized in newspapers like the Round Table. There was agreement that Alderman Wynne should also help notify people. The Commission also decided to send a communication and the report to the Planning & Development Committee of the City Council, for information only. Since this committee's packet material is automatically sent to Council, it is a procedural way of informing Aldermen of current activities for the Chicago Avenue Corridor. C. Zoning Committee Doraine Anderson discussed several zoning -related issues that were raised in the Planning & Development Commitee. She mentioned the proposed conversion of 319 Custer Street to moderate -income housing, an issue that remains unsettled. A parking lease agreement was settled with the City as tenant and the Arthur Hill LLC as landlord for 1880 Oak Avenue. An intergovernmental agreement regarding the first-time home buyers program has been passed on to City Council. The Council has approved the millennium sign for north wall of the Rothchild Building (701-703 Davis Street) at Fountain Square. There was some debate about a proposal for special -use exemption of a coffeeshop, Casteel & Co., located on 2924 Central Street. r it APPRQMP FV,a.V,%-7A1\ I't.AN C O\1. NStION , Decembei.1999 PAGE 6 Case ZPC 99-6-T was not ready for today's meeting. The Commi..&km approved its continuation to January 12. Due to conflicts in Ms. Anderson's schedule, Zoning Committee meeting of December 22 was rescheduled for December 23. D. Transportation Committee Sharon Feigon spoke about the progress that has been made on the City's proposal for a study grant from the Regional Transportation Authority. The next step will be an intergovernmental agreement between the City and the RTA. The next Committee meeting will occur on December 15, 4 p.m. E. Binding Appearance Review Committee Richard Cook stated that the Committee is finally reconvening after the departure of Chris Wonders. Marc Mylott is now serving as the primary staff person. A meeting is scheduled for December 16, 8 a.m. David Hart stated that the Committee is still awaiting legal opinion that it had requested a year ago. F. Comprehensive General Plan Committee Mr. Hart stated that the Planning & Development Committee discussed the "Institutions" chapter of the Comprehensive General Plan. During the P&D meeting, Northwestern University representative Ron Naylor recalled a 1983 memo produced by Jack Siegel, the City's lawyer, as it relates to the historic district proposal for Northeast Evanston. Since Mr. Naylor did not provide copies of this memo, Mr. Hart was unsure about its significance aside from Mr. Naylor's statement that it made some commentary on zoning amendments. Steve Knutson added that the Preservation Commission gave Tom McMahon permission to demolish the existing structure on his property and build a new house as approved by the Preservation Commission. VIL ADJOURNMENT The Commission adjourned at approximately 8:15 p.m. The next meeting of the Evanston Plan Commission is scheduled for January 12, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. January 12, 2000 Planning Associate, Planning Division Community Development Department k7l OwrawArlaom IEVANSIM PLAN OKrt50ird,190 PAGE DItAM NOT APMVED MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMAHSSION Special Meeting of Wednesday, November 3, 1999 / 7.00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, City Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT .................................... Doraine Anderson, Richard Cook, Joseph Eaunan, Sydney Grcvas, David Hart, Steve Knutson, Ron Kobold, John Lyman MEMBERS ABSENT................................................................ N.................... M. Alvin Mth ASSOICATE MEMBERS PRESENT ........................................ ---Ann Dienner, Sharon Feigon, Nettie Johnson, Martin Norkett STAFF PRESENT ...................... Judith Aiello, Arthur Alterson, David Jennings, Jung Won Kim, Dennis Marino, Marc Myiott, Morris Robinson, James Wolinsid PRESIDING.................................................................................._................... Ron Kobold, Chair I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:10 p.m., a quorum being present. 11. NEW BUSINESS: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING The Commission convened the hearing of case ZPC 99-8-PD (an application by Sherman Plaza Venture, LLC, c/o Horizon Group Properties, and the City of Evanston for a Planned Development including such development allowances and other relief as may be necessary to allow redevelopment of the area within the D3, Downtown Development District, and lying generally between Church Street on the north, Davis on the south, Sherman on the east, and Benson on the west; for retail, residential, parking, and other uses permitted in the D3 District). Following deliberations, David Hart moved that the Plan Comn+ssion recommend approval of the application with the understanding that any significant material changes to the plan be brought back to the Commission for review. Richard Cook seconded the motion. The Commission voted 8 to 0 in favor of the motion, with one member (Dr. Alvin Keith) being absent from the meeting. After the vote, the Commission closed the hearing. A verbatim transcript of proceedings of the Plan Commission for case ZPC 99-8-PD is on file in the Evanston Zoning Division. The Zoning Division is located in Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center. X rAGE 2 ice. AWOURNMENT The Commission adjocnned at appmximately 9:45 p.m. The next meeting of the Evansron Plan Counnission is xbeduled for December 8,1999, at 7:00 pxL December 3,1999 J uqon Kim Punning Associate, Planning Division Community Development Deparanent EVANSTON PU1.S CO'SOMS510N Oca*= M 1999 MOM I AM4kOVED ML1'UTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION Meeting of Wednesday. October 13, 1999 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Committee Room 2403 MEMBERS PRESENT ..................................... - Dorainc Anderson, Sydney Gn-vas, David Hart, Dr. Alvin Keith, Steve Knutson. Ron Kobold, John Lyman MEMBERS ABSENT..................................................................... Richard Cook, Joseph Eat man ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ............ —....Ann Dienner, Nettie Johnson. Martin Norkett ASSOCIATE MEMBERS ABSENT........................................................................ Sharon Feigon STAFF PRESENT ........................................... Alterson. Jung Won Kim. Dennis Marino PRESIDING...................................................................................................... Ron Kobold, Chair L CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:05 p.m., a guonm being present. EL CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 8, 1999 Section VI (Adjournment) of the September S. 1999 minutes had stated November 10, 1999 as the date of the next Plan Commission meeting. This date was corrected to October 13, 1999. The minutes were then approved. IIL COMMUNICATIONS: PLANNING DIVISION STAFF CHANGES Dcnnis Marino stated that the Planning Division has begun advertising for the General Planner position recently vacated by Chris Wonders. Until the position is filled, Dennis Marino, Arthur Alterson, Jung Won Kim, and other staff will take up the workload. Staff is also reviewing resumes for the Neighborhood Planner position. Lisa Lyon, the former Neighborhood Planner, will be available for follow-up work as a consultant on behalf of Trkla, Pettigrew, Allen & Payne. k EVAN';STON PLAN CONISIM. 10N Omiba 13. 1999 PAGE 2 IV. NEW BUSINESS: ZONING AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING CASE ZPC 99-6-T: amending Chapter 3, "Implementation and Administration. and anv other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance to consider those standards for variation which rewe to the financial or economic situation or desires of an applicant. Arthur Alterson requested that the cases be continued to the Plan Commission meeting of December 8. The item will not be ready for the November meeting. Members approved the continuation. V. NEW BUSINESS: SHERMAN PLAZA (KLUTZNICl) PROJECT Arthur Alterson requested a Plan Commission meeting be scheduled for November 3 to discuss the Sherman Plaza (Klutznick) project. David Hart asked if the November 3 meeting could be held in lieu of the scheduled November 10 meeting. Ron Kobold proposed that the Commission attempt to finish discussion on Sherman. Plaza on November 3 but continue to November 10 if necessary. Members agreed. Martin Norkett asked Mr. Alterson if the Sherman Plaza project has any special problems that may require a second meeting. Mr. Alterson answered that the only concern is that Y. "t.;.. � f owners within 1000 feet of the proposed development have the right to demand further hearing. Mr. Kobold noted that a Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee is set for October 27,330 p.m. to review the Sherman Plaza project. VI. NEW BUSINESS: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN Dennis Marino mentioned that the Planning and Development Committee has rescheduled a special meeting to consider adoption of the Comprehensive General Plan, % ith November 15 being the new date. Mr. Marino stated that there is a growing desire to adopt the Plan and move it onto City Council. There will be continued discussion regarding institutions. David Hart requested that staff review a letter from Tom McMahon concerning the proposed preservation district in northeast Evanston and the preservation chapter of the Plan. VII. COMMUNICATIONS: NEW 'MEMBER OF PLAN COMMISSION, JOSEPH EATMAN Ron Kobold inquired about the new commissioner, Joseph Eatman. Dennis Marino explained that Mr. Eatman was not able to attend tonight's Plan Commission meeting but has received a letter from the mayor and the packet. Mr. Marino «•ill meet with Mr. Eatman to inform him of the current issues in the Plan Commission. EVANSTON PLAN COltvtt ION I ocu*w M 1999 PAGE 3 VIII. OLD BUSINESS: CMCAGO AVENUE CORRIDOR STUDY In the previous Plan Commission meeting, John Lyman and Ron Kobold had requested a corer letter for the recommended plan regarding committees' acti%hies and tasks for Chicago Av=uc. This letter was included in today's packet and approved by Commission members. The packet also included three changes to the draft report. Members accepted but did not approave the Chicago Avenue Corridor Study, including the textual changes, and passed it onto City staff and the Commission's relevant subcommittees (such as the Zoning Committee) for further analysis and input. Doraine Anderson stated that she had talked to Alderman Moran about B districts along Chicago Avenue and Evanston in general. Considering the busy schedule of the zoning commitxce. Ms. Anderson felt that a comprehensive review of B districts would be too large a task. She suggested that the Plan Commission think about the possibility of creating a separate committee to cover B districts. John Lyman agreed, stating that the Cl and Cla zones of Chicago Avenue are enough work. Mr. Lyman stated that there is a need to figure out how the neighborhood based implementation group will be selected. He recommended that someone from the Plan Commission should be a member. Dennis Marino believed that a member from the Plan Commission would be beneficial, but he viewed the group mainly as a self-selecting body, much like the Citizen Plarming Committee for Howard Street. Ms. Anderson expressed concern that the buyer of the Coronet Theater property has not been made aware of the Chicago Avenue report. She feared that the owner would complain about unexpected zoning changes. Ron Kobold noted that the report itself does not have the pokrr to restrict the owner to the zoning proposal. Debate ensued about whether or not the new Cla should apply to the Coronet property owner. Ultimately, Steve Knutson pointed out that such a debate might be a moot point, considering that the zoning change will take at least a year. This should give the Coronet owner plenty of time to obtain a permit under current zoning law. John Lyman and Doraine Anderson stated that all commercial property owners on the Chicago Avenue corridor should be notified of the potential zoning changes, as a courtesy from the City, not as required protocol. Such an action might help establish goodwill between City and property owners. David Hart said that the task would require a list of commercial property owners. Staff was assigned to compile the list. Ms. Anderson also suggested that copy of the Chicago Avenue report should be sent to City Council for their input. The involvement of Council at this stage would rcwlve disagreements early on and save everyone time. Dennis Marino stated that the draft report could be sent through the Planning and Development Committee. USA / Yl EVANSTON PLAN COkMSSIO*1 I Orwba 13.1999 PAGE 4 Arthur Alterson mentioned another possible timesa%ing measure. He said that the Zoning Committee meeting would be a more efficient setting for a public hearing on Cla- However, this may not be proper procedure, invalidating the Plan Commission's hearing and recommendation to city council. Ron Kobold disagreed. saying that a Zoning Committee hearing would hardly be different from the various groups that came to the Comprehensive General Plan Committee. Doraine Anderson said that she would check with the Law Department. IX. COMMITTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS Dennis Marino stated that the Binding Appearance Review Committee has not met since August. David Hart felt that the Committee has been plodding along and needs new staff; now that Chris Wonders has resigned. The Committee has been addressing the legal issues of binding appearance with communities that have such review processes. Mr. Marino said that the Transportation Committee has not met in six creeks. He believed that the Committee should help staff' in the proposed study project that will be jointly undertaken by the Regional Transit Authority and the City. The $100,000 project will address mass transit and infrastructure issues. City Council approved a resolution on RTA-Evanston project and appropriated $10,000. Another $70,000 will be supplied by RTA and S20,000 from Evanston businesses. An intergovernmental agreement with approval from RTA is being awaited. A meeting date for the Committee was set for Wednesday, November 17, 4 p-m. (The date was subsequently changed to November 10.) David Hart commented on the letter from Tom McMahon. Mr. Hart did not think that the Comprehensive General Plan had much relevance for Mr. McMahon's issues. There was general agreement among Plan Commission members that he had overreacted, especially in regard to the Comprehensive Plan. Dennis Marino offered to have staff review the Plan and produce a response to the letter for the next Commission meeting. John Lyman said that Mr. McMahon was also mistaken about lost tax revenues. Sydney Grevas stated that the letter may have some valid points about preservation in general but they need to be de -personalized from Mr. McMahon's particular situation. Ron Kobold stated that the Executive Committee should schedule a meeting for November to discuss chairmanships and recommendations to the Plan Commission. A meeting was set for Tuesday, November 16, 8 a.m. (It was subsequently rescheduled for November 19, 8 a.nL) Sydney Grevas stated that the Economic Development Committee was continuing discussion for the T1F district. The Committee is considering the idea of sharing the extra revenues if the TIF district were expanded. Ms. Grevas also reported that construction has started for the Church Street Plaza development. Martin Norkett inquired about parking for both the Hill and Klutzaick projects. The Hill development will have almost I400 parking spaces. The Klutznick project will have approximately 1200 spaces. Mr. Norkett asked how the demand for parking would be satisfied during the construction process. Dennis Marino answered that David Jennings has produced an ArrJt To EVANST'O►\ PAN COMMISM(W I Ocober 13,1999 PAGE i interim parking plan. The two garage constructions will overlap for sK'lut six months after the holiday season of next year. The Commission requested staff to obtain the construction schedules for both projects. David Hart asked about the components of the Klutznick development. Sherman Plaza will be anchored by Sears, and include a senior housing development, parking and. other retail. Osco will relocate to temporary space and attempt to find a permanent space near Sherman Avenue There was discussion on several other developments in Evanston, such as the Banc One building and the rehabilitation of Fountain Square. In addition, Dennis Marino commented that City Council had approved in concept the awarding of funds to school districts from existing, performing T1Fs. City staff is currently negotiating with the school districts. X. ADJOURNMENT With no further business or discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. As previously mentioned, the next meeting of the Evanston Plan Commission is scheduled for November 3, 1999, at 7.00 p.m. January 12, 2000 WJu m ing Associate, Planning Division Community Development Department X • MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION Meeting of Wednesday, September 8, 199917:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Committee Room 2403 MEMBERS PRESENT .......... Doraine Anderson. Richard Cook, Sydney Grevas, Dr. Alvin Keith, Ron Kobold, John Lyman MEMBERS ABSENT ............................. David Hart, Steve Knutson ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ................ Ann Dienner, Sharon Feigon, Nettie Johnson, Martin Norkett STAFF PRESENT .......... Arthur Alterson, Dennis Marino, Chris Wonders OTHERS PRESENT ...................... Alderman Melissa Wynne (3rd Ward), Debbie Hillman, Beth Steffan, Madeleine Sennett, Niki Hiltwein, Jane Woolley, MaeJean McGill, Jerome Sebastian PRESIDING ............................................ Ron Kobold, Chair I. CALL TO ORDER 1 DECLARATION OF QUORUM The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:05 p.m., a quorum being present. II. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES, JULY 14, 1999 The minutes were approved without correction. III. NEW BUSINESS: NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING COMMITTEE, DRAFT CHICAGO AVENUE REPORT John Lyman commenced the discussion of the draft Chicago Avenue corridor report that had been presented by the Neighborhood Planning Committee. He stated that still forthcoming would be a cover sheet introducing the report as well as a matrix highlighting the next steps in the planning process. Doraine Anderson commended the involved work of the Neighborhood Planning Committee, the citizens who had been involved, and the Alderman. She stated that the product presented to the Commission that night was one of the most significant she had seen in her tenure. She asked if the proposed zoning amendments recommended in the plan had been brought before the property owners who would be affected. x EVANSTON PIA.S COMMISSION 1 September S. 1999 PAGE I AP ROV D Alderman Wynne stated that Lisa Lyon, former Neighborhood Planner for the City, had made many efforts to engage the property owners. Her efforts had met with limited success. Obviously, she continued, any specific zoning amendments would require a public hearing at which time property owners would be notified. John Lyman stated that merchant groups had been present for the discussions and actively involved in the process. Sydney Grevas requested that the parenthetical phrase '(and in fact hoped)" be removed from the bottom of paragraph 7 on page 5. Members agreed. Ms. Grevas stated that the language leaned toward residential redevelopment of the site where Dominick's now stands. While there is likelihood of this happening, Ms. Grevas acknowledged, she urged the Committee and the Commission to do what is can to support the continued presence of a grocery store in that location. Doraine Anderson strongly supported the comments. Sharon Feigon asked that the Commission consider the inter -relationship of parking and mass transit. She stated that the corridor report's recommendations for increasing parking supply could undermine efforts to encourage people to not use cars and to support mass transit instead. Ms. Anderson stated that the reality was households are owning more than one car even when they live within walking distance of mass transit. Alderman Wynne stated that the realities of current mass transit in the area are such that evening and weekend travel require automobiles. Discussion ensued. Sharon Feigon urged the Commission to think of ways to try to prove interconnection of buses and trains and to lobby for improved weekend and evening service. She encouraged creative alternatives to more car use. Sydney Grevas commented on paragraph 2 of page fi. She stated that building height allowances cannot be lowered at the same time parking requirements were increased. She underscored the conflict in these two goals. John Lyman disagreed, stating that the Neighborhood Planning Commission felt that there were possibilities. Ultimately, he said, the matter was being referred to the Zoning Committee for more thorough analysis. Alderman Wynne stated that the community paMdpants were adamant about these changes and would be disinclined to compromise further. She stated that the current building allowances would promote a canyon along Chicago Avenue. She said this would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Sydney Grevas responded that more research is needed to know if the development and lending communities could make these changes work. Marty Norkett stated that building height is an issue directly related to the economic survival of the community. Doraine Anderson argued that too many tall buildings will jeopardize the quality of life in Evanston. John Lyman commented on next steps for the Chicago Avenue project. Along with referrals to other committees, such as the Plan Commission Zoning Committee, the report X A.'?.FC;s:. EVANS o!-s PLAUN COMM 5Si)N / Scpl, 9 t. 1"9 PAGE 3 recommended the establishment of an Interdepartmental Planning Team to bring varkxm city agencies into the planning process. He explained that a similar extemal group woiM be needed at the community level to maintain the high level of neighborhood participation in the process. Alderman Wynne asked that these points be spelled -out more succincdy in the document. The Commission agreed. IV. OTHER NEW BUSINESS: ZONING AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING CASE ZPC 99-5-T: amending Chapter 18, "Definitions,' of the Zoning Ordinance to establish and define a use category for "dance clubs." Following discussion of the proposed amendments, members unanimously approved recommending changes to the zoning ordinance. Exact text of the hearing is located in the transcript which can be found in the Evanston Zoning Division, 3rd Floor, Civic Center. CASE ZPC 99-6-T: amending Chapter 3, "Implementation and Administration,' and any other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance to consider those standards for variatiion which relate to the financial or economic situation or desires of an applicant. Arthur Alterson stated that this case would be pulled from the docket. He requested that the cases be continued to the next Plan Commission meeting, October 13. Members approved. CASE ZPC 99-7-T: amending Chapter 3, "Implementation and Administration;' Chapter 6, "Nonconforming Uses and Noncomplying Structures;" and any other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance to consider revising the regulations conceming restoring and/or repairing damaged or destroyed nonconforming uses or noncomplying structures. Arthur Alterson asked that the Commission official open and then close the hearing without making a recommendation. He stated that further investigation was needed to clarify the original intent of the proposed amendment. The case was closed without a recommendation. V. COMMITTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS Doraine Anderson updated the Commission on the work of the Zoning Committee, that being preliminary research into the items appearing for proposed hearings that night. Chris Wonders stated that the Binding Appearance Review Committee had met at the end of August with representatives from Park Ridge and Skokie. Both communities administer their own binding appearance review procedures successfully. The Committee had focused much of its attention on the logistics each community encounters in coordinating review in a timely manner. Several committee members expressed concern about presenting additional delays prior to the granting of building permits. Sharon Feigon stated that the Transportation Committee had offered some assistance in X EVA-%4MN PLAN COMMMION l Seprmba & 19" PAGE i ,(MOVED finalizing the scope of work to be used in a transportation study related to the downtown. She explained that the study was being funded by the RTA and would focus on improvkV circulation in the downtown and from the neighborhoods to key destinations in the central business district. Ms. Feigon also expressed interest in expanding membership of the committee. Members discussed how to bring in other entities such as the Chamber of Commerce to the Committee. Ms. Feigon stated that more people were needed to do the work at hand. Commissioners suggested that separate agencies could come before the Commmee, similar to the process used for the Comprehensive General Plan. Discussion ensued. John Lyman suggested that the Transportation could begin with an open-ended process to identify issues. He concluded that the Committee should report back so the Commission can make a formal analysis and recommendation of its own. Members agreed. VI. ADJOURNMENT With no further business or discussion, the Chair asked for a motion to adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. The next meeting of the Evanston Plan Commission is scheduled for October 13, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted as my last official duty, October 7, 1999 Christopher Wonders General Planner, Planning Division Community Development Department MINUTES EVANSTOIN PLAI'*T COMMISSION Meeting of Wednesday, July 14, 1999 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Committee Room 2403 MEMBERS PRESENT ............. Doraine Anderson, Sydney Grevas, David Hart, Dr. Alvin Keith, Steve Knutson, Ron Kobold MEMBERS ABSENT ............................. Richard Cook, John Lyman ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT.... Ann Dienner, Nettie Johnson, Martin Norkett STAFF PRESENT ........................... Chris Wonders, General Planner PRESIDING ............................................ Ron Kobold, Chair CALL TO ORDER I DECLARATION OF QUORUM The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:00 p.m., a quorum being present. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES, JUNE 9, 1999 David Hart moved approval of the minutes. Ron Kobold seconded the motion. The minutes were approved without correction. COMMUNICATIONS Ron Kobold announced that Lisa Lyon, the staff Neighborhood Planner, would be leaving Evanston as of July 30. He explained that she had taken a position as a planning consultant with the firm of Trkla, Pettigrew, Allen and Payne. He commended Ms. Lyon on her many months of hard work with the Plan Commission's Neighborhood Planning Committee. COMMITTEE REPORTS Mr. Kobold stated the Neighborhood Committee was scheduled to meet on July 27, at which time the complete draft of the Chicago Avenue report will be finalized. He said the report will be transmitted to the Commission for its September 8 meeting. Mr. Kobold summarized the findings of the report, explaining that it makes many references to other committees. According to Mr. Kobold, the community generally has received the EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION !JULY 14, 1M PAGE 2 report well. He added that, as he sees it, the most significant findings of the Neighborhood Committee relate to reducing allowable building height along the corridor and increasing parking requirements per dwelling unit. Commissioners discussed the potential impact if City Council adopts these changes. Sydney Grevas and Marty Norkett voiced concern about the economic realities that must be considered when downsizing building allowances. Doraine Anderson countered that the scale of development must be consistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. All agreed to wait for the draft report which will be presented in September. Ms. Anderson reported that the Zoning Committee had not met in June, but will meet in July. She raised the issue of townhouses facing dedicated streets, a Zoning Ordinance requirement she feels is too often ignored when permitting construction of attached single-family units. She cited the Ivy Court townhomes in the Research Park as an example; the entrances to the units face an inner courtyard turning the back of the homes to the community. Despite her disappointment with this type of development, Ms. Anderson acknowledged the continual granting of variances to allow it. In order to streamline the development process in Evanston, she proposed recommending a zoning amendment to remove the requirement in question. Furthermore, as she had brought this issue to the attention of the Commission at an earlier meeting and received no disagreement, Ms. Anderson stated she had instructed staff to draft a memo explaining the issue to the Council Planning and Development Committee. The Commission discussed the matter. David Hart asked if the Commission alternatively should recommend stronger enforcement of the requirement. Ann Dienner stated it was important to bring the issue to City Council's attention either way. Sharon Feigon, underscoring her relatively new arrival to the Commission, said she would prefer greater education about the matter before sending a recommendation to Council. Ms. Anderson responded that the item was already on the Planning and Development Committee agenda as a communication. She requested the other Commissioners to instruct her if they wished the item to be pulled. Sydney Grevas suggested that the process is effective as it is. By requiring townhouses to face dedicated streets, the City will procedurally insist upon variance applications if developers wish to do otherwise. Upon each such application, the Zoning Board can assess cases carefully and independently. Ms. Grevas asserted that ultimately this is better for Evanston. Members discussed the issue further. Steve Knutson stated that the requirement should be left in placed and enforced more often; attached single-family dwelling units should face the dedicated street. The Commission eventually agreed that it should not recommend amending the Zoning Ordinance. a r�'ROV—=C EN JNSTON PLAN COINIMISSio!d 1 IL-XY 14, 1999 PAGE 3 Sharon Feigon commented on the scope of work ahead of ;tee Transportation Committee. She stated in recent weeks she had met with staff to pnont ize the many tasks before the committee. The multiple tasks fall into general categories ct transit service improvements, bicycle planning, and pedestnan planning She stated that :he Committee would also Pike to work with the Center for Ne+ghborhood Technology to establish location -efficient mortgage programs in Evanston Before moving further on any of these matters, however, the Committee would like to build working partnerships voth other entities such as the Chamber of Commerce and other relevant boards and commissions. Chris Wonders stated the Regional Transit Authority (RTA) will fund a study of circulation and mass transit in downtown Evanston, per an application submitted by Evanston Inventure and the City. The study's goal is to find ways of improving circulation general connections to mass transit. Ultimately, the RTA s promoting transit -oriented developments that will lead to increased ridership. Mr. Wonders explained that the application had been submitted several years ago, prior to the announcements of the Church Street Plaza and Sherman Plaza developments. As such, the original scope of work for the study will have to be revised to reflect the significant changes these developments will bring about. Ms. Feigon recommended that the study examine a broader range of issues. Since the two plaza developments are already transit -oriented (by virtue of their proximity to the downtown transit hub) the study should focus on how neighborhoods can better connect to the downtown via mass transit, she stated. The study should then focus on how to achieve a highly effective interconnection of drivers, riders, cyclists and pedestrians in and around the downtown. Mr. Wonders stated that staff would be working to revise the scope of work accordingly. He explained the funding would be put together collaboratively; S70,000 from the RTA and another $30,000 from local sources. Once the scope of work is approved and the budget is put in place, a request for proposals to complete the study would be made. David Hart stated that the Binding Appearance Review Committee had not met since the June Plan Commission meeting. Chris Wonders explained that the next meeting, tentatively scheduled for late July/early August, would include a discussion with other communities regarding their administration of appearance review standards. Sydney Grevas updated the Commission on the latest activities of the Economic Development Committee. The Economic Development Committee's most recent meeting had focused on issues related to the redevelopment of the Dempster/Dodge shopping center (Evanston Plaza). She explained that there was some disagreement between the developer (Joseph Freed Co.) and the current owner (Balcor) as to who was responsible for soil remediation. Both sides were working towards an agreement. Ms. Grevas briefed the Commission on economic development in Downtown Evanston. EVAPMON PLAN COWASSION f JULY 14. IM PAGE 4 APPROVE) The Committee had approved final arrangements for assisting Heitman Properties in their redevelopment of the Chandler's building. Specifically, assistance would go for the completion of the open plaza area at the comer of Davis and Orrington. Finally, she said, the TIF Joint Review Board would convene in coming months to consider the expansion of the Washington National Tax Increment Financing District. The expansion of the TIF would fund the City's construction of a new parking garage as part of the Klutznick Sherman Plaza proposal. ADJOURNMENT With no further business or discussion, the Chair asked for a motion to adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. The next meeting of the Evanston Plan Commission is scheduled for October 13, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, �e Christoj;h onders General Planner, Planning Division Community Development Department September 3, 1999 MINUTES EVANS ON FLAN CO2%LNUSSION Meeting of Wednesday, June 9, 1999 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Committee Room 2403 MEMBERS PRESENT .......... Doraine Anderson, Richard Cook, Steve Knutson, Ronald Kobold, John Lyman MEMBERS ABSENT ................. Sydney Grevas, David Hart, Dr. Alvin Keith ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT....:.::':?-1:::'r-.. -SharorrFeiigm. MaityNodoW-i,*v.r7-,- ASSOCIATE MEMBERS ABSENT .. + ................ Ann Dienner, Nettie JotW%on ' - STAFF PRESENT ............................ Dennis Marino, Chris Wonders PRESIDING .............................................. Ronald Kobold CALL TO ORDER 1 DECLARATION OF QUORUM The meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m., a quorum being present. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES, MAY 12, 1999 Doraine Anderson moved approval of the minutes. (Richard Cook seconded the motion.) The minutes were approved without correction. COMMUNICATIONS Ron Kobold drew the Commission's attention to the memo from Assistant City Manager Judith Aiello. The memorandum notified members of a special joint meeting of the City Council and several other boards and commissions to be held at 7:00 p.m., June 21, 1999. The meeting had been scheduled to allow representatives of the Thomas Klutznick Company to present their conceptual plans for a mixed -use development in Downtown Evanston. Mr. Kobold encouraged members of the Plan Commission to attend the meeting. Doraine Anderson commented on the copies of memoranda from herself and Dr. Thomas Stafford (former Plan Commissioner) dated 1997. The memoranda identified numerous issues as unaddressed or inadequately addressed in the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Anderson stated that the copies appeared per her request at the May Plan Commission meeting. In order to update this list, which the Zoning Committee has used as a work plan to a degree, Ms. Anderson requested that her fellow Commission members Ll EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION I JUNE 9 1999 PAGE 2 help prioritize these issues along with new ones that recently have emerged. She explained that the Neighborhood Committee would be referring several zoning specific matters to the Zoning Committee vis-a-vis the Chicago Avenue corridor report. COMMITTEE REPORTS As there was neither new business nor any continued matters for consideration an the agenda, Mr. Kobold suggested the Commission focus its discussion on committee reports. Ms. Anderson stated that her foregone comments would serve as the Zonhrg Committee's report for this month. Mr. Kobold asked Sharon Feigon to brief the Commission on the activity ofa newly formed Transportation Committee. He suggested that she begin by addressing the matter of membership on the Committee. Ms. Feigon replied that, to date, she remained the only formal member of the Committee. She asked that staff follow-up with Ms. Nelig'"'� Johnson who had expressed interest in the Committee at a previous meeting. She further' stated that she had spoken with several members of the community whom she knew to have interest in transportation and circulation issues in Evanston. Doraine Anderson recommended that the Transportation Committee include a voting Plan Commissioner among its roster. Marty Norkett stated that he was interested in working with the Committee, particularly as its work relates to location efficient mortgages --a topic addressed in literature included in the Commission agenda packet. W. Feigon stated that she would present more information regarding the location efficient mortgage (LEM) program. Ms. Anderson reiterated her earlier comment that a voting member of the Commission join the Transportation Committee. She also recommended that Ms. Feigon familiarize herself with the draft Chicago Avenue corridor report prepared by the Neighborhood Committee. The report, she explained, addresses multiple topics related to transportation in Southeast Evanston. Ms" Feigon agreed to do so, requesting that staff forward her the draft report as soon as possible. Ms. Feigon reported that certain data indicate Evanston to have the lowest rate of automobile -ownership in the Chicago region. Likewise, she continued, Evanston reportedly has the highest rate of bicycle ridership and a very strong pattern of transit usage among residents. She told the Commission that Evanston benefits from having a high percentage of its working residents holding lobs within the community, thus facilitating forms of transportation other than the automobile. Ms. Feigon explained that the purpose of the Transportation Committee was to further explore the nature of circulation in Evanston, to identify areas for improving adequacy and efficiency, and to recommend strategies accordingly. She stated that the Committee would attempt to address basic issues, such as promoting bicycle parking and circulation facilities, as well as more complex ones. She cited the difficulties related to EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION /JUNE 9. 1299 PAGEE 3 improving mass transit service as an example. Ms. Feigon stated that her work with the Center for Neighborhood Technology in Chicago includes development of a location efficient mortgage program to be offered by specific banks in the city. She explained that the LEM program was an innovative, private -sector program that offered more favorable financing to home buyers locating within neighborhoods served by mass transit. The LEM recognizes that households agreeic�g to minimize automobile ownership and use will have a greater capacity to spend money in other ways. including home financing. The initial scope of the LEM project. Ms. Feigon continued, was to include inner -ring suburbs served by mass transit. Although the project has only focused on Chicago so she stated that the Transportation Committee could help to facilitate the projects expansion into Evanston. She commented that it would not be difficutt to find a bar* in Evanston willing to participate. - - Marty Norkett commented on the development of multifamily housing in certain areas of Evanston, including the Chicago Avenue/Main Street corridor. He stated that a LEM program would be very effective in these areas considering how well -served they are by mass -transit. Doraine Anderson cautioned the Transportation Committee to be sensitive to the work of the Parking Committee, the Housing Commission, and other boards and commissions whose work could be affected by the LEM initiative. Ms. Feigon stated the Transportation Committee would make a point of conferring with other concerned groups but reiterated that LEM's would ultimately be a private -sector matter. Discussion ensued regarding parking requirements in multifamily buildings; improving all modes of transportation in Evanston including buses. Following the discussion, other committee reports followed. Richard Cook stated that the Binding Appearance Review Committee had met several times and had sent meeting summaries to the Commission in the agenda packet He explained that the Committee was still awaiting a legal opinion on the matter of binding appearance standards. Meanwhile. it will be moving ahead with its investigation. Representatives from a handful of communities which use binding appearance standards would be invited to join the Committee at a date in the future. The representatives would be asked to share their experiences and opinions on the subject of aesthetic controls in the development process. Mr. Cook stated that the Commission would be apprised of the meeting when its date had been finalized. John Lyman summarized the events of the most recent Neighborhood Committee meeting. He stated that the Committee had integrated a large portion of the comments from the community into the Chicago Avenue corridor report. He stated that many participants from the community had urged the Committee to recommend binding EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION ! A NE 9, 1 M PAGE 4 "qb r yr-- f 7o s� 1.7^ appearance review in the report. The Committee had agreed. however, that the bkxUV appearance review issue needed further study. Mr. Lyman stated that the document in all likelihood will be before the Plan Commission in September. Doraine Anderson stated that the buiidms along chicago Avenue shouid bi A examined more carefully in order to determine those eligible for local landmark status, Stine': explained that the original survey of buildings (completed in preparaWn for rxm*mr&q tie'.., Lakeshore Historic District) had not been thorough. She stated that e5gk* bu&N gs ' should be designated; binding appearance review will be granted those buildings via the Preservation Commission. : Marty Norkett and.Dsnnis Marino gave a ibrWsynopsis ofthwi-01 lowY Ecor�0A1i�- L Development Committee Meeting. Topics discussed included %6 Chunch streetT�'lsza;�y` project, the Joseph Freed Companies planned redevelopment of tfie Evanston Plata, and the status of the "Gateway" development anticipated to occur south of Howard Street Chicago. Mr. Norkett stated that the Domihicks grocery store was still moving forward despite delays in the remainder of the project. Mr. Norkett conducted by commending staff member Lisa Lyon on her exemplary work with the Neighborhood Committee's Chicago Avenue study. ADJOURNMENT With no further business or discussion, the Chair asked for a motion to adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. The next meeting of the Evanston Ptan Commission Is scheduled for July 14, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, e2ronders General Planner, Planning Division Community Development Department July 12. 1999 0 .1c MINUTES Meeting of Wednesday, May 12, 199916:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Committee Room 2403 MEMBERS PRESENT ............ Doraine Anderson, Sydney Grevas, David Hart, Dr. Alvin Keith, Steve Knutson, Ronald Kobold, John Lyman MEMBERS ABSENT ........................................ Richard Cook ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ................ Ann Dienner, Sharon Feigon, Nettie Johnson, Marty Norkett STAFF PRESENT ................... Arthur Alterson, Lisa Lyon, Dennis Marino, James Wolinski, Chris Wonders PRESIDING .............................................. Ronald Kobold I. CALL TO ORDER I DECLARATION OF QUORUM The meeting was called to order at 6:15 p.m., a quorum being present. II. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10 AND MARCH 3 David Hart moved approval of the minutes. (John Lyman seconded the motion.) The minutes were approved without correction. III. NEW BUSINESS: RETREATIGOAL SETTING DISCUSSION Ron Kobold stated that 1998 had been a very busy year for the Plan Commission, noting that a retreat/goal setting session had not been conducted since 1997. It was at that retreat that the Commission set two important goals: completing the Comprehensive General Plan revision project and undertaking the Chicago Avenue study. Sharon Feigon stated that the now complete revisions to the Comprehensive General Plan outline a number of actions the Plan Commission, in conjunction with City agencies and other citizen boards, should seek to implement_ She stated that the Commission will increase the usefulness of the Plan by relying upon it for guidance. Chris Wonders listed several of the implementation goals from the proposed plan. various neighborhood and corridor plans, gateway enhancements on the city's west side, improved bicycle facilities. EVANSTON PLAN coMMiSSION r MAY 12.1999 PAGE 2 DRAFT. hC T/1PPRO VED John Lyman stated that the Plan Commission's role as a recommending body needs to be augmented with more efforts at implementation. He recognized that tfie Comprehensive General Plan addresses this point to a certain degree, noting that the Plan was still a draft which has not been officially endorsed by City Council. Doraine Anderson stated that there is not a "single mind" regarding the future of Evanston and that the City Council will hopefully conduct a serious dialogue about the Comprehensive General Plan. She added that some aldermen may wish to put more "teeth" in the Plan while others will consider the generality of its recommendations a prudent way to anticipate Evanston's various alternative futures. Ron Kobold stated that the point of the evening's goal setting discussion was to reflect upon those tasks the Commission will soon conclude and then to prioritize future ones. The Comprehensive General Plan Committee has largely finished its work, he stated. Likewise, the Neighborhood Planning Committee would soon complete its report on Chicago Avenue. Members discussed their own feelings about long range planning and priorities for Evanston. Several stated that there should be a companion Comprehensive Economic Plan to the General Plan, John Lyman stated that the city faces significant budget constraints; careful planning will help produce sound decisions for the future. Dennis Marino stated that the Plan Commission is not the only group involved in long range planning. He explained the role of various other groups in Evanston, not the least of which include City Council and its Economic Development Committee, the Chamber of Commerce, Evanston Inventure, and the school districts. He encouraged the Plan Commission to acknowledge the realities Evanston faces but to likewise concentrate its energies in those areas where it can be most helpful. Chris Wonders stated that the Plan Commission can best take initiative in the areas of land use and facilities planning. Members shifted the discussion to the Neighborhood Committee. Doraine Anderson commended the Committee's members on the success of their long —and at times difficult --endeavor. Ron Kobold posed the question, what is the vehicle in Evanston for encouraging development, not just reacting to it? Marty Norkett asked if the Committee should revisit Howard Street and try to stimulate redevelopment more actively than was done in its previous study of the business district. Sharon Feigon asked what the purpose of returning to the Howard Street area would be. Dennis Marino stated that Howard Street is presently the subject of a great deal of planning from other agencies --bath in Evanston and Chicago. He suggested that effective planning had been done; now the "market" needs to energize the corridor. Ms. Feigon asked if the Neighborhood Committee could focus on a redevelopment plan for the Dempster/Dodge commercial district. Sydney Grevas agreed. adding that there are multiple areas along the Dodge Avenue corridor that could be considered. including the Church/Dodge business district. f DRAFT, NOTAPPR1CvED E1tANSnSN PLM COMMISSION I MAY 1 Z 19% PAGE 3 Nettie Johnson stated that planning should also include initiatives to enhance opportunities for small, minority and women owned businesses in neighborhoods, particularly in the 5th ward. Jim Wolinski stated that multiple groups have already joined with the City and the High School to begin addressing the Church/Dodge area; he explained that the process has not moved forward due to the inability to reach consensus about redevelopment goals. Dennis Marino added that, further south, the Joseph Freed Company's redevelopment of the Dodge/Dempster Evanston Plaza will bring about significant market changes for that commercial district. Ron Kobold stated that the Commission should not seek to change individual properties such as the Dodge/Dempster plaza. David Hart agreed, stating that economic development priorities should be emphasized on Dodge Avenue —priorities for individual properties in need of new ownership and redevelopment. Mr. Hart continued, stating that Green Bay Road and Central Street face potential land use changes as does Chicago Avenue. He suggested that the Plan Commission should consider this mixed -use area as its next project, following completion of the Chicago Avenue report. Members discussed this suggestion. eventually agreeing that Green Bay Road should be analyzed in segments from Emerson to the Sanitary Canal and from Lincoln Street north to Isabella. Mr. Kobold asked that the Commission shift the focus to the future of its other committees. He asked about the future of the Comprehensive General Plan Committee. David Hart responded that the Committee was meeting on an as -needed basis to see the proposed Plan through its consideration before City Council. Richard Cook added that the Binding Appearance Review Committee had only recently commenced its investigation as recommended in the comprehensive plan. He reported that the Committee had met several times and would send meeting summaries to the next Commission meeting. Sharon Feigon asked if there was a committee to implement the various transportation policies recommended in the comprehensive plan. Dennis Marino stated that, at present, no committee focused on the matter of public transit in Evanston. Ms. Feigon stated that she would be interested in starting a committee to focus on the various transit and circulation issues in the community. She stated that numerous citizen groups were available to pitch -in. Members concurred that this would be worthwhile. Mr. Kobold suggested that the committee should include planning for bicycle facilities. Chris Wonders suggested that Ms. Feigon meet with staff to develop a work plan for the new committee. Doraine Anderson stated that the Zoning Committee continues to be very busy. largely focusing on issues raised through aldermanic references She noted that, at the 1997 retreat, the Commission had endorsed its own lengthy list of issues related to 9 )r EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION / HAY 12. 1999 PAGE ORAFT, ACT ilPPRO vW improving the Zoning Ordinance. She asked staff to send the list back to the Commission for the information of new members and to refresh everyone's memory. Ms. Anderson stated that she would like the Commission to address the requirement that new townhouses face a dedicated street. She questioned the rationale of keeping this requirement "on the books" when the City continually grants variances from it. Mr. Kobold commented that, in general, he feels the Commission would benefit from receiving follow-up reports on zoning amendment petitions. He explained that too often the Commission hears pros and cons regarding amendments and related developments as if it were a debate taking place before a jury. Once developments are complete, he continued, the Commission is never asked to consider which of the opposing viewpoints have been proven legitimate. The planning process should include consideration of development both in the planning and implementation stages. Mr. Kobold then asked if there were any other issues members wished to raise for discussion. Ann Dienner suggested that the Commission discuss the matter of "teardowns," (the tearing down of a small single-family home and replacing it with a much larger home that, although allowed by zoning, is constructed well -outside of the scale and architectural context of the surrounding neighborhood). Steve Knutson commented on the multiple articles on the topic of teardowns which staff had provided. He stated that it is a much greater problem in communities like Hinsdale and Winnetka. He expressed his confidence that the binding review of the Preservation Commission would protect Evanston's historic districts from this problem. Ms. Dienner responded that there are many single-family neighborhoods not in historic districts. Jim Wolinski acknowledged this fact but added that the 1993 Zoning Ordinance shifted its bulk regulation of residential districts from floor -area -ratio to lot coverage. As such, he explained, Evanston has the means to prevent the teardown epidemic other communities have experienced. He stated that Evanston faces more of a problem with regard to the future of its historic homes on large lots, many of which could face resubdivision. John Lyman suggested that the Commission should continually look for ways to increase and protect green space. He recognized the difficulty balancing this goal with the need to continually increase the amount of property tax the city's land generates. Dennis Marino commented that there is increasing regional interest in "smart -growth" issues. He stated that the Commission, and the City in general, needs to start becoming more aware and involved in these regional discussions. Steve Knutson agreed, stating that the Commission's consideration of land use in Evanston should take into account regional trends and issues. He noted the recent release of the Commercial Club of Chicago's regional plan document. DRAFT, NOTAPPROVEO EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSKU91 MAY 1Z 19" PAGE 5 IV. OTHER NEW BUSINESS: ZONING HEARING The Commission convened zoning amendment public hearing case ZPC 99-04-T, proposed amendment to Chapter 18, "Definitions," of the Zoning Ordinance, to establish and define a use category for music venues as besng land uses where the principal use is the provision of musical entertainment in a non -theatrical setting, and to consider incluchN such a use on the lists of special or permitted uses for those zoning districts in which and where such a listing is appropriate, including amendments to Chapter 9, Business Districts; Chapter 10, Commercial Districts; Chapter 11. Dovmtown Districts; Chapter 12, Research Park Districts; Chapter 13, Transitional Manufacturing Districts; Chapter 14, Industrial Districts: and Chapter 15, Special Purpose and Overlay Districts and any other related sections of the Zoning Ordinance Following deliberation, David Hart moved that the Plan Commission recommend amending the Zoning Ordinance per the petitioner's request. John Lyman seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 7 to D. A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of the Plan Commission for case ZPC 98- 05-T198-07-T is on file in the Evanston Zoning Division. The Zoning Division is located in room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center. V. COMMITTEE REPORTS Sydney Grevas discussed Downtown Evanston development issues presented at the most recent Economic Development Committee meeting. Discussion ensued. Vl. ADJOURNMENT With no further business or discussion, the Chair asked for a motion to adjourn. David Hart moved adjournment. Doraine Anderson seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p,m. The next meeting of the Evanston Plan Commission is scheduled for June 9, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, � June 7. 1999 Christoph Rders General Planner, Planning Division Community Development Department t MINUTES Meeting of Wednesday, April 14. 1999 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Committee Room 2403 MEMBERS PRESENT .................. David Hart, Dr. Alvin Keith, Ron Kobold, Steve Knutson, John Lyman MEMBERS ABSENT ............ Doraine Anderson, Richard Cook, Sydney Grevas ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT... Ann Dienner, Sharon Feigon, Nettie Johnson. Marty Norkett STAFF PRESENT ......................... . Arthur Alterson, Chris Wonders PRESIDING .............................................. Ronald Kobold I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m., although a quorum was not yet present. While awaiting the arrival of Dr. Alvin Keith, members reviewed the work of the various committees from the preceding weeks. II. COMMITTEE REPORTS Ron Kobold commented that the Binding Appearance Review Committee had conducted its first meeting. On behalf of the Committee's Chair, Richard Cook, David Hart stated that the first meeting had focused largely on allowing members to express their initial thoughts about the topic and how the Committee should proceed. He stated that the second meeting had been scheduled for the following Friday. Members commented that it was a very difficult topic that would require a lot of time to fully analyze. Sharon Feigon stated that the Committee would likely hear from many groups of interested parties before the task is complete. Mr. Kobold stated that the Neighborhood Committee had met on March 11 at which time several residents from the Chicago Avenue area expressed their dissatisfaction with the draft corridor plan. As a result. the Committee asked citizens and neighborhood interest groups to prepare their own written suggestions for the plan - He stated that the next meeting of the Committee was scheduled for Thursday, May 13, at 7:00 p.m. Marty Norkett summarized the discussion that occurred at the most recent Economic Development Committee meeting. He stated that the plans for redeveloping Jr EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION / APRIL 14. 1999 PAGE 2 :AFT, Pr-T APP - . , the Dempster/Dodge shopping center (Evanston Plaza) are moving forward. He explained that Dominick's was refining its plans to locate in the southern portion of the center in the spaces formerly occupied by Silo and Toys'R'Us. Office Depot will remain in the center but reduce its total square footage. Ms. Feigon asked if the basic layout of the shopping center would be changed. Mr. Norkett stated that it would not, but that a new tenant, Blockbuster Video, would replace Payless Shoes at the north end. He stated that no tenants had been found to occupy the outlot structure formerly occupied by Pizza Hut. Mr. Norkett continued with his summary. He said that representatives from Heitman Real Estate had been present to report on the Chandlers building renovation. Terry Jenkins spoke to the Economic Development Committee, updating members on downtown vacancy and redevelopment issues. Ron Kysiak was also present before the Economic Development Committee to talk about proposed office developments in the Research Park. Steve Knutson stated that the Zoning Committee had not met in the past months. Ar• n Dienner stated that the meeting had been canceled by staff in order to schedule the Binding Appearance Review Committee Meeting. Staff apologized for the confusion, assuring that the two meetings would not be scheduled simultaneously again. 111. NEW BUSINESS: ZONING HEARING, ZPC 99-3-T Dr. Keith arrived at approximately 7:10 P.M. The Commission declared a quorum and convened case ZPC 99-3-T. an application by Vineyard Christian Fellowship of Evanston to amend Section 6-15-2 of the Zoning Ordinance to include religious institutions on the list of permitted uses or, alternatively, on the list of special uses in the 01 Office Zoning District. Following the hearing and Commission deliberation. David Hart moved that the Commission recommend Citv Councils aoaroval of the amendment to list religious institutions as a special use in the 01 district. Dr. Keith seconded the motion. The Commission voted unanimously. 5-0. in favor of the motion. IV. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES, FEBRUARY 10 AND MARCH 3 John Lyman said he was absent from the meeting of February 10. but the minutes listed him as voting during the consideration of the zoning amendment. Chris Wonders observed that Dr Keith's name had been omitted and Mr. Lyman was listed in its place. Staff noted the correction. Mr. Lyman further explained that he had indeed voted for the zoning case after the meeting had adjourned. He and Sydney Grevas (also absent) were asked to read the transcript and vote in order to achieve the requisite number of votes. per Commission rules. He requested that his vote be placed in the official record along with that of Ms. Grevas. Staff agreed to make the requested k EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION /APFUL 14. 19" PAGE 3 corrections and additions. ono further comments. Mr. Lyman moved aaDroyal the minutes as amended. The minuams were apqjgtied as amended. Dr. Keith moves anoroval of the minutes for March 3. The minutes were agproved unanimouslv. V. OTHER NEW BUSINESS David Hart announced that members of the Comprehensive General Plan Committee would be attending the Planning and Development Committee meeting of April 20. The topic of the discussion would be the proposed draft revisions to the Comprehensive General Plan. Ron Kobold addressed the communication related to the fence ordinance amendments. He explained that the matter was sent back to the Plan Commission from the Planning and Development Committee, which had made several changes to the Commission's initial recommendation. The Planning and Development Committee wished for the Plan Commission to review these changes before City Council receives them. Arthur Alterson commented that, although the revisions to the fence ordinance had taken many months and were very thorough, a fence -related matter remained unaddressed. He explained that the ordinance as originally written and as revised did not address opacity very clearly. He recommended the Commission consider the issue at a later date. Members discussed the changes the Planning and Development Committee made to the Commission's initial work. Mr. Alterson explained that much of the difference related to Type I and Type 11 streets. Beyond that, Mr. Alterson stated, the biggest change between what is on the books and what has been proposed by the entire revision endeavor relates to the setback of front yard fences. As such, the changes made by P&D only further refined the Plan Commission's proposed changes. Following the discussion of tt.e fence ordinance amendments, Ron Kobold asked members to give preliminary though, to topics they wished to discuss at the May 12 retreat. Chris Wonders stated that tine Commission would come to order early in the evening on that date to conduct a goal setting session. Mr. Alterson stated that there would be a zoning hearing that night as well. He explained that the hearing was a reference from City Council and. as such, should be heard as soon as possible. Chris Wonders suggested that the zoning hearing convene at 8,00 P Fit . allowing more time for the retreat. Mr. Wonders asked members to advise staff of issues they wished to discuss at the retreat. Before the next meeting. staff would try to pull together material that would be helpful in giving the meeting some structure. Ron Kobold suggested that members forward their suggestions to staff over the coming week or EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION ! APRIL 14. 1M PAGE 4 Ann Dienner stated that the issue of residential teardowns should be looked at over the coming months. She stated that other North Shore communities, such as Winnetka and Wilmette, have had to deal with this issue. While Evanston has been fortunate to date, she continued. it would perhaps be wise to consider the topic In advance of it becoming a problem. Steve Knutson said he did not think teardowns would become the same kind of problem in Evanston as they were in other communities. He explained that the Preservation Commission safeguards against the loss of Evanston's more significant single-family homes. Sharon Feigon requested that the Commission discuss the future of the Dempster -Dodge business area. John Lyman suggested that the Commission systematically consider and update the required parking ratios for various land uses. He also suggested that the group should work towards a clearer definition of its opportunities for being proactive. Ms. Feigon stated that a study of transit -oriented development and ways to promote alternatives to the car should be studied. She commented that this might be a way for the Commission to be proactive. Ron Kobold stated that the Commission should discuss standards and incentives for adaptive reuse. He specified that current trends in adaptive reuse should be analyzed. Marty Norkett said the Commission would benefit from developing its skill in working with neighborhoods and special interest groups. He stated that it is often difficult for the Commission to satisfy special interests who do not appreciate the need for compromise. Several members expressed their frustration with certain participants, some of whom tend to conduct themselves in a less -than civil manner. John Lyman suggested that there is a process -problem in that developers bring their proposals forward as a "done deal." He stated that the Commission should be allowed to work with developers and neighbors in advance of the -courtroom-like" zoning amendment hearing. VI. ADJOURNMENT With no further comments on Issues for the retreat, the Commission adjourned at approximately 9,00 p.m. The next meeting of the Evanston Plan Commission is scheduled for 7:00 p.m.. Wednesday. May 12. 1999. Respectfully Submitted. Mav 10, 1999 Chnstophef Wo s General Planner Planning Division Community Development Department x x Mk 7, t\;-0T kPF%0 v2D MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COALMISSION Special Meeting of Wednesday, March 3, 1999 / 7:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, City Council Chamber MEMBERS PRESENT ..... Doraine Anderson, Richard Cook, Sydney Grevas, David Hart, Dr. Alvin Keith, Steve Knutson, Ronald Kobold. John Lyman ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT .. Sharon Feigon, Nettie Johnson, Martin Norkett ASSOCIATE MEMBERS ABSENT ............................... Ann Dienner STAFF PRESENT .................. Judith Aiello, Arthur Afterson, Dennis Marino, Moms Robinson, James Wolinski, Christopher Wonders PRESIDING .................................... . ......... Ronald Kobold 1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM II. NEW BUSINESS: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING The Commission convened the hearing of case ZPC 99-2-PD (an application by AHC Evanston, LLC, c/o Arthur Hill & Company, and the City of Evanston for a Planned Development including such development allowances and other relief as may be necessary to allow redevelopment of the area within the RP, Research Park District, and lying generally between the CTA tracks on the east; the Metra tracks on the west; Davis Street on the south; and University Place on the north for retail; cinema: residential; hotel: restaurant, including type 1 and type 2; parking; governmental/ quasi- governmental/public uses; and other uses permitted in the Research Park District pursuant to a Redevelopment Agreement entered into on October 25, 1998, as amended, by the City of Evanston and AHC Evanston). Following deliberations, David Hart moved that the Plan Commission recommend approval of the application with the understanding any material changes to the plan be brought back to the Commission for review. John Lyman seconded the motion. The Commission voted 7 to 1 in favor of the motion. Voting for the motion: Richard Cook, Sydney Grevas, David Hart, Dr. Alvin Keith, Steve Knutson, Ronald Kobold, John Lyman. Voting against the motion: Doraine Anderson. Following the vote, the Commission closed the hearing. A verbatim transcript of proceedings of the Plan Commission for case ZPC 99-2-PD is on file in the Evanston Zoning Division. The Zoning Division is located in Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center. EVANSTON PLAN COMLOSSKIM / YII MH 3. IM PAGE 2 Ill. ADJOURNMENT The Commission adjourned at approximately 10:30 pmt The next meeting of the Evanston Plan Commission is scheduled for 7.00 p.m., Wednesday. March 10, 1999. Respectfully submitted, 0 April 9, 1999 ChristophInders General Planner. Planning Division Community Development Department IL 4 DMF T, '"X)OT MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION Meeting of Wednesday, February 10, 199917:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center, Room 2403 MEMBERS PRESENT .......... Doraine Anderson, Richard Cook, Sydney Grevas, David Hart, Dr. Alvin Keith, Steve Knutson, Ronald Kobold MEMBERS ABSENT ......................................... John Lyman ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ................ Ann Dienner, Sharon Feigon, Nettie Johnson, Martin Norkett STAFF PRESENT .................. Judith Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Dennis Marino, Moms Robinson, James Wotinski, Christopher Wonders OTHERS PRESENT ............................................ Tom White PRESIDING .............................................. Ronald Kobold I. CALL TO ORDER 1 DECLARATION OF QUORUM The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M., a quorum being present. II. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES MEETINGS OF 12/10/1998 AND 1/13/1999 Doraine Anderson moved approval of both sets of minutes. Richard Cook seconded the motion. Members voted unanimously to approve the minutes. Ron Kobold introduced Ms. Sharon Feigon to the Commission, and members introduced themselves to her. At its January 13 meeting, the Plan Commission approved Ms. Feigon's application for associate membership. III. NEW BUSINESS The Commission convened the hearing of zoning amendment public hearing case ZPC 99-1-T (proposed amendments to Sections 6-11-2, D1 Downtown Fringe District; 6-11-4, D3 Downtown Core Development District; 6-11-5, D4 Downtown Transition District and any related sections of the Zoning Ordinance, to amend the Zoning Ordinance so that in all Downtown zoning districts the use categories "education institution -public" and "education institution -private" do not appear on the lists of permitted uses for such districts but do appear on the lists of special uses for such districts). Following staff presentation and Commission deliberation, Doraine Anderson moved that the Commission recommend approval of the amendments as proposed. David Hart 10 X EVANSTON PLAN COWASSION r Febmary 10. 19% oRAfT. sorApppaw D PAGE 2 seconded the motion. Members voted unanimously in support of the r7k-mn. A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of the Plan Commission for case ZPC. 99-1-T is on file in the Evanston Zoning Division. The Zoning Division is located Fn room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center. After the close of the hearing, Doraine Anderson suggested that the Commission consider other new business for the evening. She stated that consideration of the second zoning hearing, under the heading of "old business," would in all likelihood be lengthy; other matters should be dealt with first. Ron Kobold disagreed, stating that he Belt if advisable to complete zoning matters together. Other members agreed. IV. OLD BUSINESS The Commission reconvened zoning amendment public hearing rase ZPC 98-05-T and ZPC 98-07-T (consideration of zoning regulations and procedures concerning the relationship between certain land uses and provisions regulating the location of parking spaces, collective parking and shared parking). The Commission had continued this hearing from its January 13, 1998 meeting. Following staff presentation and Commission deliberation, David Hart moved that the Commission recommend approval of the amendments as proposed. Richard Cook seconded the motion. Members voted 4 to 2 in favor of the motion. Voting for the oration: Richard Cook, David Hart, John Lyman, and Ron Kobold. Voting against: Doraine Anderson, and Steve Knutson. Sydney Grevas joined the meeting close to the end of the Commission deliberation, and she abstained from voting. Because Plan Commission rules require a minimum of five consenting votes in order to take action, members agreed to let absent members, Ms. Grevas and John Lyman, read the transcript and report their votes later. A verbatim transcript of the proceedings of the Plan Commission for case ZPC 98-05- T/98-07-T is on file in the Evanston Zoning Division. The Zoning Division is located in room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center. V. COMMUNICATIONS Judith Aiello stated that the Plan Commission would convene a hearing on March 3 to consider the Church Street Plaza planned development. She reported on the status of negotiations and progress with the Hill Company and the redevelopment agreement. She commented on uncertainties in the financial markets which are affecting the hotel component of the redevelopment. She said that the developer and the City are working to resolve options for addressing the hotel. Ms. Aiello stated that she anticipates the transfer of land to the developer to occur in June or July. Ms. Aiello briefly explained the City's own uncertainties related to parcel 18 south of Church Street. Representatives from the YMCA and the Mather foundation had expressed alternatives to the proposed relocation of the Levy Senior Center to that site. The committee focusing on the senior center is working with both organization to evaluate these options, one X- DRAF-- NOTAPPROVED EVA iSTON PLAN COMMISSION / FWrumry 10. 19" PAGE 3 of which would include construction of a new senior center adjacent to the YMCA at Mb;)4e Avenue and Grove Street. Regarding the Performing Arts Center, Ms. Aiello stated that rising cost estimates (now close to $13 million) are making construction of such a facility within the Church Street Plaza less likely. The committee investigating the feasibility of such a facility has turned its attention to the aging Varsity Theatre building on Sherman Avenue, She explained that current estimates for the renovation of that structure are ctoser to $10 million. That figure however does not include acquisition cost. Ms. Aiello stated that one option would include renting one floor of the facility and adapting it for use as a performing arts venue. Ms. Aiello concluded by stating that the City is looking to an April 1 deadline for making its final commitment to a redevelopment program for parcel 18. David Hart asked staff to explain how the Commission will conduct the hearing on March 3. He asked for clarification of the findings of fact the Plan Commission should establish. Judith Aiello stated that Arthur Alterson could answer that. She added that, on March 3, the application for a planned development special use permit will be submitted jointly by the City and AHC Evanston, LLC. Ron Kobold asked Arthur Alterson to clarify the communication members had received regarding procedures for planned developments per the zoning ordinance. Arthur Alterson thanked the Chair for the opportunity to explain the materials in question. He stated that the memos summarize the planned development process and were written as a guide for any person(s) seeking a planned development special use permit. Because the memos were not written specifically for the Plan Commission, he continued, they provide information beyond that needed for the Commission's hearing. In particular, the second memo addressed required submittals that staff must receive from the applicant. Mr. Alterson asked the Commission to focus on those sections of the memos that list the public benefits, special use standards, research park district planned development standards, and development allowances provided for reviewing the application. He explained that the Zoning Ordinance does not present these standards in a single location, making it difficult for the reader, staff, and potential applicants. He stressed that the March 3 hearing will be the first time this Zoning Ordinance's planned development guidelines are used to address a significant redevelopment proposal. David Hart expressed his dissatisfaction with the clarity by which this information was presented. The Commission asked staff to prepare a new memo that more succinctly presents the standards they will be asked to use at the hearing. Mr. Alterson and Mr. Wonders agreed to submit this memo by the end of the next week. VI. OTHER NEW BUSINESS Ron Kobold introduced the draft Annual Report 1998 and opened the Commission's discussion. Chris Wonders stated that, following approval of the document, the Commission will send it to City Council as a communication. Ron Kobold suggested that the report should include more information about the number of public meetings that were conducted early in X EVANSTON PLAN COLUMWION 1 February 10, 1999 PAGE 4 the Comprehensive General Plan revision process. He also suggested that staff make additions to the zoning section of the report to indicate how each of the Commission's recommendations were received by City Council. Members agreed, suggesting that a fourth column be added to the case summary table to show final action. Ann Dienner stated that Valerie Kretchmer should be included in the final section of the document in which membership for the year ahead is discussed. Although Ms. Kretchmer's official membership ended in December, Ms. Dienner felt that her dedication should be recognized. Chris Wonders suggested that the document state that Ms. Kretchmer has agreed to continue her involvement with the Comprehensive General Plan project. Members approved. Ms. Dienner stated that she had some minor editorial corrections that she wished to share with staff. Members unanimously approved the document as amended, instructing staff to make the requested corrections and send the document to City Council for its next meeting. Ron Kobold addressed the next item on the agenda, preliminary consideration of a Commission retreat. He stated that he had requested the item be placed on the agenda so members could begin thinking about goals for the coming year. The Committees particularly benefit from this goal setting exercise, he continued. Members commented on several significant matters that would be coming before the Commission in the near future. Mr- Kobold stated that, in recognition of the busy schedule, the Commission consider April for its retreat. Doraine Anderson stated that at one time retreats were held on Saturdays. Members expressed difficulty coordinating schedules. Dennis Marino suggested that the Commission use its regular monthly meeting date, April 14, as a retreat session by starting earlier in the evening. Ron Kobold agreed with this concept. He asked members to give more thought to the retreat and discuss it further at the March meeting. ViL COMMITTEE UPDATES AND REPORTS The Commission revisited its discussion from January about the coming year's Committee roster. Mr. Kobold drew members' attention to the membership chart staff had prepared. He noted that the position of CD Committee liaison was still vacant. Dr. Keith stated that he would fill the position. Mr. Kobold asked if there were any further additions or changes. Ann Dienner instructed staff to place her name on the Neighborhood Planning Committee Mr. Kobold asked Sharon Feigon if there were any particular committees that interested her. The Commission summarized the activities and meeting schedules of the committees for Ms. Feigon. She stated that she would be willing to serve on the Zoning Committee and on the new Binding Appearance Review Committee. Doraine Anderson stated that the Zoning Committee had been addressing multiple issues. She noted the promptness with which the Committee had reviewed the aldermanic DRAFTNOTAPPROVED EVANSTON PLA K CONNAIS=+t .I Februwy tq tM PAGE S reference related to educational institutions in the Downtown zoning district, Ron Kabold commended the Committee for the manner in which it furnished the Comm, fission with proposed language for consideration. He noted that the document provided was very concise and helpful. Mr. Kobold stated that the most recent Neighborhood Committee meeting reladed to Chicago Avenue had gone very well. He stated that the Committee was nearing a complete draft of a report to furnish to the Commission. He stated that other issues will have to be studied more closely after the draft report is presented. Steve Knutson cor,mented that the draft report had reached a point where it more clearly addresses the issues discussed related to Chicago Avenue. Ron Kobold thanked staff for their help over the past months. Sydney Grevas stated that the Economic Development Committee was given a presentation on the redevelopment of the Chandler's building in Downtown Evanston. Representatives from Heitman Realty had shown their plan to rehabilitate the building for ground floor retail and upper story office space. She explained that the Economic Development Committee had asked about the proposed plaza in front of the building, vis-a- vis who will maintain it and pay for it. Dennis Marino stated that the Economic Development Committee had stated its willingness to support the project, but that final plans for assisting with the open plaza remained incomplete at this time. The Committee had approved funding for the plaza as well as a recommendation to grant a "Class L" assessment with the county to lower property taxes in the short term. ADJOURNMENT The Commission adjourned at approximately 9:00 p.m. The next meeting of the Evanston Plan Commission is scheduled for 7:00 p.m., Wednesday, March 10, 1999. Respectfuliy Submitted, J, �� I Chrisio er Wonders General Planner, Planning Division Community Development Department April 9, 1999 16 .. MINUTES EA � —N,5TON PLA- CO.�L\115510N Meeting of Wednesday, January 13, 199917:00 p.m. Evanston Civic Center. Room 2403 MEMBERS PRESENT .......... Doraine Anderson. Richard Cook. Sydney Grevas, David Hart, Steve Knutson, Ron Kobold, John Lyman MEMBERS ABSENT ........................................ Dr. Alvin Keith ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT ............................ Martin Norkett ASSOCIATE MEMBERS ABSENT .................. Ann Dienner, Nettie Johnson STAFF PRESENT ......................................... Chris Wonders PRESIDING ............................................ Ron Kobold, Chair I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m., a quorum being present. li. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES, MEETINGS OF DECEMBER 9, 1998 Ron Kobold asked if all of the members had received the minutes for the December 9 meeting which were sent separately. Several members stated that they had not received them or that they received them late and had not had time to read them. Mr. Kabold suggested that they postpone consideration of the minutes until the February 10 meeting, Members agreed. III. OLD BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARINGS ZPC 98-05-T. 98-07-T (continued from December 9. 19g81: Amendments to Chapter 16, `Off -Street Parking and Loading," and Chapter 18, "Definitions" of the Zoning Ordinance and any related sections of the Zoning Ordinance, including but not limited to Chapter 3, "Implementation and Administration," Chapter 15, "Special Purpose Overlay Districts," and Chapter 12, `Research Park District," to establish regulations and procedures concerning the relationship between certain uses (including but not limited to cultural facilities, including cinemas; recreation facilities; conference facilities; commuter train facilities; offices; restaurants; retail goods/services; dwellings; and research facilities) and provisions regulating the location of parking spaces, collective parking and shared parking. EVANSTONPt,AtrCOLINFISSIoN,'Jar,_a,�•3 -999 PAGE 2 Chas Wonders stated that the Zoning staff had requested further continuation at this time He requested teat the Commission continue the zoning cases until the next regularly scheduled meeting --February 10, 1999. Doraine Anderson moved that the case be continued to February 10. 1999. Richard Cook seconded the motion. Members approved the motion unanimously. After the heanng is closed, a copy of the verbatim transcript will be placed on file in the Zoning Division, Room 3700 of the Evanston Civic Center. Mr. Wonders stated that the Commission had referred the matter of shared parking to the City Council Parking Committee for more detailed fact-finding. He explained that the Committee would be making its recommendation in the coming month and sending it to the Commission in February Members discussed Northwestern University's application for a Zoning Map Amendment for the parcel at the southeast corner of Maple Avenue and Foster Street. Doraine Anderson beefed the Commission on the City Council's approval of the creation of a Ufa zoning district for that site. (Details of the City Council's consideration of the case are presented in the Council minutes of January 11, 1999.) Chris Wonders presented a memo addressed to the Plan Commission Zoning Committee from Arthur Alterson. The memo addressed a reference from Alderman Newman for listing educational institutions (public and private) as a special use in the downtown zoning districts. Mr. Wonders stated that the Zoning Committee would be asked to consider this matter at its January 27 meeting. He further explained that the Committee's recommendation would be brought to the Commission for consideration at the February 10 meeting. Mr. Wonders stated that the Zoning Division was still anticipating the planned development application for the Church Street Plaza. Because the redevelopment agreement for the Plaza stipulates a specific time frame, he continued, the Commission might be asked to conduct the planned development hearing in late February or early March. He stated that staff would contact members as soon as possible regarding the need for this special meeting. Discussion ensued regarding the multiple aspects of the Church Street Plaza redevelopment. IV. NEW BUSINESS Ron Kobold announced the next item on the agenda, consideration of proposed revisions to the draft Comprehensive General Plan. David Hart spoke for the Comprehensive General Plan Committee. He stated that the Committee had met in the first week of January to look over changes that were proposed for the text according to comments received from the public at the hearing in November and in subsequent correspondence. EJANS—ON OLAN CO3V%ITSS!C% January '349 AGE Mr. Hart presented the draft revisions to t-re Commission. explaining tnat, upcn the Commission's final adoption, the draft will be sent to the Planning and Develocrnent Committee and City Council for consideration. Steve Knutson made a suggestion regarding proposed language changes He stated that he felt historic landmarks need to be both protected and enhanced Members agreed that leaving the word "protected" in the text was desirable. John Lyman commented on the revised text's stated commitment to the formation of a committee to consider the implications of binding appearance review. Ron Kobold stated that he was unclear how the Commission will proceed with this. He stated that the matter also came up at a recent Neighborhood Committee. At that meeting, it was mentioned that the staff Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee was undertaking a similar investigation. Chris Wonders explained that the Plan Commission is the appropriate body to make recommendations to City Council on policy matters related to appearance review. He stated that however the Commission chooses to act upon this commitment --whether it be through a committee of its own or a joint review committee with other groups --the findings of the Site Plan Committee can serve as a fact-finding instrument for the Commission. Doraine Anderson stated that she understood the Site Plan Committee's findings would come to the Plan Commission and its yet -to -be -formed Binding Appearance Review Committee where hearings could occur and public input could be gathered. Ron Kobold suggested that the Comprehensive General Plan Committee would cease to exist in the near future upon the completion of the Comprehensive General Plan Revision Project. He stated that a Binding Appearance Review Committee would not necessarily be the members of the Comprehensive General Plan Committee; rather a new group that included several of the Commission's architects should come together. Mr. Kobold asked staff how this matter should be taken up at present so as to be most efficient and to not duplicate the efforts of the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee. Chris Wonders stated that the recommendation of the Comprehensive General Plan Committee as presented in the revised text presented for approval tonight is the first step. Doraine Anderson stated that members could volunteer for the new committee in anticipation of the Site Plan Committee's findings. She said that the staff should furnish the new committee with information from other communities that detail their experiences with binding appearance review. After the Site Plan Committee finishes determining how it would administer binding appearance review, the Plan Commission and its Binding Appearance Review Committee would conduct hearings and/or focus groups with representatives of the design and development communities as well as the city at -large. w X EVANSTON =LAN COMMISSION o January 13. 1959 PAGE 4 Steve Knutson commented that Design Evanston has made the matter Of binding appearance review a major component of its work plan for the coming year. Sydney Grevas concurred. recalling the presentation of Mr. David Galloway. current chair of Design Evanston, at the November 11 public hearing on the Comprehensive General Plan. Mr. Kobold asked if the draft Comprehensive General Plan revisions presented tonight need to specify exactly how the matter of binding appearance review will be investigated. He expressed concern over holding up the draft revisions until the details were finalized. Members agreed that the language presented in the draft would be adequate with its general commitment to address the matter with the specific structure of the investigation to be addressed later. John Lyman suggested that staff` shculd be included in the list of those who would contribute to the investigation, thereby encompassing the Site Plan Committee. Members concurred. Mr. Kobold asked if there were further comments on the draft revisions. John Lyman asked about the nature of the deletions related to lead -based paint. Chris Wonders explained that the Environment Board had advised the Commission to minimize the language since the matter is largely regulated by federal policy. David Hart said that the previous language went into more detail than was necessarily consistent with the nest of the document. Richard Cook moved approval of the draft revisions as amended through the discussion of the evening. John Lyman seconded the motion. Members voted unanimously to adopt the draft. The revisions will be included in the final draft which will be sent to PBD. V. OTHER NEW BUSINESS Ron Kobold announced the newly -approved full membership of Steve Knutson. Mr. Knutson had served for several years as an associate member and was approved by the City Council for full membership on January 11. Mr. Kobold introduced two applications for associate membership. The first was from Mr. Martin Norkett, former full member of the Commission whose final three-year term ended in December of 1998. D+oraine Anderson moved approval of the application. Richard Cook seconded the motion. Members approved the motion unanimously. Chris Wonders distributed the application for associate membership that had been submitted by Miss Sharon Feigon, a resident of 1125 Colfax Street. He stated that the application was received after the meeting packet materials were distributed. Mr. Kobold highlighted the application, drawing attention to Ms. Feigon's experience as a professional planner. Members reviewed the application and agreed on the benefit of hawing a professional planner at the table. David Hart moved approval of the application. John Lyman seconded the motion. Members approved the motion unanimously. k- EN, avSTON PLAN � OWWSSICA _a.„ary TY 1999 PAGE 5 Members discussed committee membership for the zoming year Mr Kcbold reiterated his comment that the Comcrehensn-e General Plan Committee will most likely reduce its workload once the plan is acopted by City Council. Chris Wonder` advised t:hat those who have been involved with the Comprehensive Genera; Plan Committee remained so until the Plan is adopted. He states that the group would nct have to continue meeting on a regular basis, however. Members agreed to maintain the Comprehensive General Plan Committee with David Hart acting as the designated Chair. Following discussion, it was agreed that Ron Kobold would remain the Chair of the Neighborhood Committee. The other members who make up that Committee —Richard Cook, Steve Knutson. Marty Norkett, and John Lyman --would remain on the Committee. Mr. Kobold commented that other Commissioners join the Committee from time to time. Steve Knutson agreed to serve as the Acting Vice Chair of the Zoning Committee. Sydney Grevas agreed to remain on the Zoning Committee at the same time that she serves as the liaison to the Economic Development Committee. Doraine Anderson stated that she will remain Chair of that Committee, as long as Mr. Knutson can serve in her absence. The discussion continued. Members agreed that the Executive Committee would consist of the Ron Kobold, Sydney Grevas, David Hart, and Doraine Anderson. Ron Kobold commented that he would like to recommend Dr. Keith for the position of CD Committee liaison. Richard Cook, David Hart, and Steve Knutson volunteered to serve on the new Binding Appearance Review Committee. Richard Cook agreed to be the Committee's Chair. He asked staff to contact Dr. Keith who was absent that evening. Several members commented that the associate members —Ann Dienner, Nettie Johnson, and Sharon Feigon, should be contacted regarding their committee interests. Doraine Anderson suggested that a liaison or observer be sent to the Parking Committee. Members agreed to pursue this, recommending that one of the associates could serve in an observer capacity. Chris Wonders stated that he would provide the Commission with an updated membership/committee roster as soon as all members had finalized their committee choices. VI. COMMUNICATIONS Members reviewed the communications that were sent in the monthly packet. Discussion ensued vis-a-vis the redevelopment of the Chandler Building in Downtown Evanston. Ron Kobold asked if staff could prepare an update of redevelopment projects that have appeared before the Commission in recent years in the form of zoning amendment petitions. X FWANSTCN v_AN COMMiSSICM !a^uary 13. 199S CIAGE L VII. COMMITTEE REPORTS Marty Norkett updated members on the evolving Church Street Plaza redevelopment. Members asked for more detailed updates on the project in advarce of their planned development hearing. Several members stated that the Commission -would benefit from increased understanding of the project and its multiple components, Dwaine Anderson stated that future land use recommendations for the planned development will be more effective if the Commission is fully aware of the redevelopment dynamics invc],ved. Ron Kobold commented on the status of the Neighborhood Planning Committee's Chicago Avenue investigation. He stated that people in the audience at the December 17 meeting expressed concern over fiscal impacts of development and the need to be more concerned with aesthetics. Some audience members at the December 17 meeting raised concerns over a tack of public input and notification. Members of the Neighborhood Committee underscored their dedication to public participation in the process, outlining the extensive involvement of multiple business and neighborhood groups. Doraine Anderson reported that the Zoning Committee would be meeting on January 27, at 8:00 A.M. Vill. ADJOURNMENT Members gave Marty Nor>kett a framed certificate recognizing his 6 years on the Commission. The Commission adjourned at approximately 9:00 P.M. The next meeting of the Evanston Plan Commission is scheduled for 7:00 p.m., Wednesday, February 10, 1999. Respectfully Submitted, _ February_ 6, 1999 Christopyet`I�fi rs General Planner!Planning Division Community Development Department