Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07.28.14 Packet
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, July 28, 2014 7:15 p.m. Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Evanston Council Chambers AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER/DECLARATION OF QUORUM: ALDERMAN RAINEY, CHAIR II. APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2014 III. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION (P1) Ordinance 78-O-14, Amendments to Inclusionary Housing Ordinance The Housing and Homelessness Commission and City staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 78-O-14, amending the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to define all for-sale, rental and condo conversion developments of five or more units as covered developments, increase the percentage of affordable units in developments receiving public funding from 10% to 20% and increase the fee-in-lieu of affordable units on site from $40,000 to $100,000 per unit. For Introduction (P2) Ordinance 68-O-14, Amending the Zoning Ordinance Text for Notice Requirements for Zoning Applications The Plan Commission and staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 68- O-14 to amend various parts of Chapter 3 – Implementation and Administration of the Zoning Ordinance to clarify Public Hearing notice requirements for zoning applications. The proposed amendment provides a consistent language to clarify public hearing notice requirements. For Introduction (P3) Ordinance 93-O-14, Granting a Special Use for Scoreboards at Ryan Field, 1501 Central Street The Zoning Board of Appeals and City staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 93-O-14 granting a special use permit for Scoreboards at Ryan Field football stadium at 1501 Central Street. Suspension of the Rules is requested for Introduction and Action on July 28, 2014. For Introduction and Action 1 of 478 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda Page 2 of 2 July 28, 2014 (P4) Ordinance 81-O-14, Amending the Zoning Ordinance Regulations for Neighborhood Gardens, Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms The Plan Commission and staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 81- O-14 to establish land use regulations for Neighborhood Gardens, Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms as principal uses. For Introduction (P5) Ordinance 92-O-14, Extension for Church Street Village Planned Development, 1629-1691 Church Street City staff recommends City Council adoption of Ordinance 92-O-14 extending the time for completion of Church Street Village Planned Development located at 1629- 1691 Church Street originally approved in April of 2006. The Ordinance grants the approval to complete the 13 unfinished townhome units and construct the last remaining eight-unit building within three years. For Introduction IV. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION V. COMMUNICATIONS (PD1) Board and Committee Improvement Process VI. ADJOURNMENT 2 of 478 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes of July 14, 2014 – 7:15 p.m. Council Chambers - Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Fiske, J. Grover, D. Holmes, A. Rainey, M. Tendam D. Wilson, M. Wynne STAFF PRESENT: S. Flax, M. Masoncup, M. Muenzer, B. Newman, C. Plante, M. Poole PRESIDING OFFICIAL: Ald. Rainey I. DECLARATION OF QUORUM A quorum being present, Chair Rainey called the meeting to order at 7:50 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 9, 2014 Ald. Grover moved approval of the minutes of the June 9, 2014 meeting, seconded by Ald. Wynne. The Committee voted unanimously 7-0 to approve the June 9, 2014 minutes. III. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION (P1) Approval of Sidewalk Café for Naf Naf Grill, 1629 Orrington Ave The Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee (SPAARC) and staff recommend approval of a first-time application for a sidewalk café (SWC) permit for Naf Naf Grill, a Type #2 restaurant located at 1629 Orrington Ave. For Action Ald. Fiske moved to recommend approval of the sidewalk café, seconded by Ald. Grover. The Committee voted unanimously 7-0 to recommend approval of the sidewalk café. (P2) Approval of Sidewalk Café for DMK Burger & Fish, 815 Noyes St The Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee (SPAARC) and staff recommend approval of a first-time application for a sidewalk café (SWC) permit for DMK Burger & Fish, a Type #2 restaurant located at 815 Noyes St For Action Ald. Tendam moved to recommend approval of the sidewalk café, seconded by Ald. Grover. At Ald. Fiske’s inquiry, Mr. Muenzer confirmed that there would be no alcohol served at the sidewalk café, adding that alcohol is not served at Type 2 sidewalk cafés. DRAFT – NOT APPROVED 3 of 478 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes of June 14, 2014 Page 2 of 5 Ald. Fiske made a friendly request that the manager try to control any kind of gathering as it is a narrow, heavily traveled sidewalk. Ald. Holmes asked about the amount of space between the tables and the green space at the curb. Ald. Wynne said there is 12’ from the curb to the window and if they use 3’, that leaves 9’. Ald. Holmes wondered how wide the grassy area is. Michael Cornick, co-owner of DMK reported that people have not been having trouble passing the two 24” tables and 4 chairs that are against the window. Ald. Fiske maintained that it is very tight with the laundromat traffic, commuters and students. Ald. Grover suggested that the Committee approve the sidewalk café for this year and review any complaints before approving it for next year. Ald. Fiske agreed, as long as people are not having to walk in the street. Chair Rainey said there is traffic by any business district. The Committee voted unanimously 7-0 to recommend approval of the sidewalk café. (P3) Approval of Community Partners for Affordable Housing (CPAH) $300,000 Forgivable HOME Loan Staff recommends the approval of a $300,000 forgivable HOME loan to Community Partners for Affordable Housing (CPAH) for the acquisition and rehabilitation of a five-flat property at 1620 Washington Street. HOME funds will be used for the acquisition and rehab of three of the five units for rental by households with incomes ≤ 60% of the area median income (AMI). Funding is provided by the City’s HOME grant (Account 240.10060.014.5430.65535). For Action Ald. Holmes moved to recommend approval of the forgivable loan, seconded by Ald. Grover. Housing Planner Mary Ellen Poole introduced Rob Anthony, Executive Director of CPAH, who explained that one of the units will be rented to a household that earns up to 60% of the median income; the other 2 units to households up to 80% of the median income. Ald. Grover thanked Mr. Anthony for his work. The Committee voted unanimously 7-0 to recommend approval of the loan. (P4) Approval of Affordable Housing Fund Loan for Security Cameras at the Claridge Apartments (319 Dempster) The Housing and Homelessness Commission and staff recommend approval of a forgivable loan from the City’s Affordable Housing Fund to Housing Opportunity Development Corporation (HODC) in an amount not to exceed $25,000. The loan will be used to purchase and install a comprehensive security camera system in the common areas of the 48-unit Claridge Apartment building located at 319 Dempster. 4 of 478 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes of June 14, 2014 Page 3 of 5 Funding is provided by the Affordable Housing Fund (Account 250.10060.004.5465.65510). For Action Ald. Wilson moved to recommend approval of the forgivable loan, seconded by Ald. Grover. The Committee voted unanimously 7-0 to recommend approval of the loan. (P5) Ordinance 90-O-14, Granting Zoning Relief for a Rear Yard Setback and Zero Parking Spaces at 1026 Davis Street The Zoning Board of Appeals and City staff recommend the adoption of Ordinance 90-O-14 granting zoning relief for a 9.9’ rear yard setback and zero parking spaces where 31 parking spaces are required for a new two-story commercial building with retail and two Type 1 Restaurants at 1026 Davis Street. For Introduction Ald. Wynne moved to recommend introduction of Ordinance 90-O-14, seconded by Ald. Grover. John Myefski, architect, and Dan Kelch, owner, presented slides of the plans for the site: • Project is to move Taco Diablo and Lulu’s restaurants to the current site of the Tom Thumb hobby shop • Taco Diablo and Lulu’s will occupy the east half of the 1st floor and will share a kitchen • 1 - 2 retail stores will be on the west half of the 1st floor • An entrance to the 2nd floor will be in the center • Rear 10’ easement can be used for loading only, not parking, and will provide 2 loading spaces, as required • Propose to pull the 2nd floor back to provide a 25’ deep terrace • 2 stairways in the rear will be enclosed • Materials: tile and stone with steel wrap-around frame • Trash area in rear will be enclosed • No windows across rear of property will prevent noise from reaching the residential area in the rear • Ald. Fiske confirmed that there would be 3 restaurants occupying the building • Seating capacity is approximately 60 seats for each of the 1st floor restaurants • 2nd floor will have a small bar, dining room, kitchen, private function space, game room, rest rooms, mechanical and electrical rooms • All 3 restaurants will be open 7 days a week (to make the large space financially feasible) • 2nd floor will hold approximately 50 inside and 80 when the outside area is in season • Private function space will hold 150–180 • Parking will have to be provided off-site in lots such as the one on Oak just north of the alley behind Davis, the Sherman Avenue garage 5 of 478 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes of June 14, 2014 Page 4 of 5 Ald. Wynne said she does not see a problem with off site parking and a curb cut would remove existing parking The Committee voted unanimously 7-0 to recommend introduction of Ordinance 90-O-14. Agenda Items P6 and P7: The following two ordinances 83-O-14 and 89-O-14 provide for rezoning and zoning variations which will accommodate redevelopment to establish one two-unit dwelling and one single family home at 1409 Dodge Avenue and 1825 Greenwood Street. (P6) Ordinance 83-O-14 Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment from I2 to R4 for 1409 Dodge Avenue and 1825 Greenwood Street The Plan Commission, Zoning Board of Appeals and City staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 83-O-14 to rezone the subject property from I2 General Industrial to R4 General Residential district For Introduction Ald. Fiske moved to recommend introduction of Ordinance 83-O-14, seconded by Ald. Grover. Chair Rainey said she is against the ordinance as she is opposed to eliminating industrial zoning in Evanston, since there is so little industry. The Committee voted by majority of 6-1 with Chair Rainey opposed, to recommend introduction of Ordinance 83-O-14. (P7) Ordinance 89-O-14 Zoning Relief for Two Principal Structures, Setbacks, and Parking at 1409 Dodge Avenue and 1825 Greenwood Street The Plan Commission, Zoning Board of Appeals and City staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 89-O-14 to approve zoning relief for two principal structures on one lot, a 14.4’ front yard setback, 8.5’ street side yard setback, 1.9’ interior side yard setback, 1.7’ interior side yard setback, 6.6’ rear yard setback, and two parking spaces where three are required. For Introduction Ald. Grover moved to recommend introduction of Ordinance 89-O-14, seconded by Ald. Wynne. Chair Rainey commented that this is a fabulous project. The Committee voted unanimously 7-0 to recommend introduction of Ordinance 89-O-14. IV. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION There were no items for discussion. V. COMMUNICATIONS 6 of 478 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes of June 14, 2014 Page 5 of 5 There were no communications. VI. ADJOURNMENT Ald. Holmes moved to adjourn, seconded by Ald. Wynne. The Committee voted unanimously 7-0 to adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Bobbie Newman 7 of 478 For City Council meeting of July 28, 2014 Item P1 Ordinance 78-O-14: Amendments to Inclusionary Housing Ordinance For Introduction To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Planning and Development Committee From: Mark Muenzer, Director of Community Development Sarah Flax, Housing and Grants Administrator Mary Ellen Poole, Housing Planner Subject: Ordinance 78-O-14, Amendments to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Date: July 17, 2014 Recommended Action The Housing and Homelessness Commission and City staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 78-O-14 amending the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to define all for-sale, rental and condo conversion developments of five or more units as covered developments, increase the percentage of affordable units in developments receiving public funding from 10% to 20% and increase the fee-in-lieu of affordable units on site from $40,000 to $100,000 per unit. Summary The recommended revisions will strengthen the existing ordinance and expand its capacity to meet City Council’s goal of serving at-risk families. In addition, it will help address the trend of increasing housing costs that has a negative impact on the sustainability of the City of Evanston, including employers’ ability to maintain a local workforce. Since its approval in 2007, the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance has not resulted in the development of any affordable housing units or contribution of fees-in- lieu to the Affordable Housing Fund. Recommended effective date is January 1, 2015. Background The steady decline of affordable rental units in Evanston has been a central topic in every housing analysis, report and plan developed in the last five years. The need for additional affordable housing has been identified by the Mayor’s Task Force on Homelessness and the Evanston Affordable Housing Task Force reports that were accepted by City Council, as well as the 2010-2014 Consolidated Plan adopted by the City Council in 2010. Increasing the supply of affordable housing is an integral component to serving Evanston’s at-risk families, one of the six City Council goals for 2014. Securing housing is often the first step in achieving stability for a household. In March of 2014, Evanston became the second city in the nation to be awarded a 4-STAR community rating for national excellence in sustainability. The creation and preservation Memorandum 8 of 478 of affordable housing helped the city achieve substantial points in the “Built Environment” category. According to the most current data from the U.S. Census Bureau, 28% of Evanston renter households and 10.2% of homeowner households are severely housing cost burdened. This means they spend more than 50% of their gross income on housing; households spending more than 30% of their income on housing are considered cost burdened and may have difficulty affording necessities including food, clothing, transportation and medical care. In 2004, 25.9% of the all rental and ownership units in Evanston were affordable, per the Illinois Affordable Housing and Planning and Appeal Act (Public Act 93-595, as amended by Public Act 93-678). A 2013 update to this report, shows that this figure declined to 15.4%, a reduction of over 40%. The recently released Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI) noted that “In Cook County, a minimum-wage worker earns an hourly wage of $8.25. In order to afford the fair market rate for a two-bedroom apartment, a minimum-wage earner must work 90 hours per week, 52 weeks per year. The National Low Income Housing Coalition estimates that 56% of Cook County renters are currently unable to afford the two-bedroom fair market rate for rental.” In addition, between 2000 and 2011, although median housing values and gross rents declined, incomes declined by over three times as much, making renting or owning in Evanston even less affordable. See attached table. The AI is available at: http://www.cityofevanston.org/assets/EvanstonAI4414.pdf. The current Inclusionary Housing Ordinance covers only planned developments of for- sale housing with 25 or more units. Covered developments must sell 10% of the units to households whose incomes do not exceed 100% of the area median income (AMI) at affordable prices, and 25% of those units must be affordable to households whose incomes do not exceed 80% AMI. Currently the income for a family of four cannot exceed $72,400 and $57,900 respectively to qualify to purchase these units. Affordable units must remain affordable in perpetuity or as long as legally possible. Developers may pay a $40,000 fee-in-lieu per unit instead of providing actual units on site. All units developed must be substantially the same as the market rate units in terms of size, interior and exterior finishes and energy efficiencies. Proposed amendments to the ordinance include: • Expand the definition of covered developments to those with 5 or more units • Include new rental construction and condo conversions in addition to new for- sale construction • Increase the percentage of affordable units to 20% of total units for projects receiving public funds • Price leases for half of affordable rental units for households at 60% AMI, and half for households at 30% AMI. Currently the income for a household of four could not exceed $43,440 and $21,700 respectively to qualify for the rental units. • Maintain affordability of rental units for twenty-five years. • Increase the fee-in-lieu from $40,000 to $100,000 per unit for all covered developments • Use the property standards code to establish the minimum square footage for affordable units based on unit type 9 of 478 Households applying to rent affordable units would be subject to the same screening and selection process established by the property owner as those applying to rent market rate units. The following benefits would continue under the revised Inclusionary Housing Ordinance: • Expedited application process • Deferral of payment of building and plan review fees related to the non-affordable dwelling units until receipt of the temporary certificate of occupancy • Waiver of building permit and plan review fees related specifically to the affordable units Developers may propose an alternative equivalent action or request a reduction in requirements. Any alternatives or reductions will be considered on a case-by-case basis by City Council. Legislative History Inclusionary Housing Ordinance 32-O-07 was approved on March 26, 2007 Attachments Inclusionary Housing Ordinance 78-O-14 Comparison of Inclusionary Housing Ordinances: Chicago, Highland Park and Evanston Income Eligibility and Housing Cost Table 10 of 478 7/17/2014 78-O-14 AN ORDINANCE Amending Portions of City Code Title 5, Chapter 7 to Expand the Application of the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS THAT: SECTION 1: Legislative Statement. At the time of the passage of this ordinance, the City of Evanston observed a noticeable decline in the diversity of the City’s housing stock as a result of increasing property values and housing costs, and a reduction in the availability of affordable housing. With the exception of housing subsidized by the City or other affordable housing providers, privately developed new residential housing that is being built in the City is generally not affordable to low and moderate income households. The City determined that, without intervention, the trend toward increasing housing prices would result in an inadequate supply of affordable housing for City residents and local employees, which would have a negative impact on the sustainability of the City, including employers’ abilities to maintain a local workforce, and would otherwise be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare of the City and its residents. The City has an existing inclusionary housing ordinance within the City Code of 2012, as amended (herein the “City Code”). Adding additional restrictions will bring more developments within the purview of this affordable housing ordinance and will better address the housing development issue at hand. 11 of 478 78-O-14 ~2~ The court in Southwestern Ill. Dev. Auth. v. National City Environmental found “that a lack of decent housing contributes to urban blight, crime, anti-social behavior, disease, a higher need for public assistance, reduced tax revenues, and the migration of workers and their families away from areas which fail to offer adequate, decent, affordable housing”. 199 Ill.2d 225 at 261 (2002). There is a compelling and legitimate public interest in requiring residential developments or developments which contain a residential component to include a certain percentage of dwelling units in a proposed development to be priced affordably for low and moderate income households or to make a payment in accordance to the terms of this Chapter. The requirements provided in the ordinance will allow the City to maintain a diverse population, provide affordable housing for those who work or live in the City, and will promote the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City of Evanston. SECTION 2: Title 5, Chapter 7, “Inclusionary Housing,” of the City Code is hereby further amended to read as follows: 5-7-1. TITLE. This chapter shall be titled and referred to as the INCLUSIONARY HOUSING ORDINANCE. 5-7-2. PURPOSE AND INTENT. The purpose of this Chapter is to promote the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Evanston by requiring residential developments or developments which contain a residential component to include a certain percentage of dwelling units in a proposed development to be priced affordably for low and moderate income households or to make a payment in accordance with the terms of this Chapter. Based upon the review and consideration of reports and analyses of the housing situation in the City, it is apparent that the diversity of the City's housing stock has declined as a result of increasing property values and housing costs, and a reduction in the availability of affordable housing; and that, with the exception of housing subsidized by the City, the privately developed new residential housing that is being built in the City generally is not affordable to low and moderate income households. The City 12 of 478 78-O-14 ~3~ recognizes the need to provide affordable owner occupied and rental housing to low and middle-income households in order to maintain a diverse population, and to provide owner occupied and rental housing for those who live or work in the City. Without intervention, the trend toward increasing housing prices and rental rates will result in an inadequate supply of owner occupied and rental affordable housing units for City residents and local employees, which will have a negative impact upon the ability of local employers to maintain an adequate local work force, and will otherwise be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare of the City and its residents. Since the remaining land appropriate for new residential development within the City is limited, it is essential that a reasonable proportion of such land be developed into owner occupied dwelling units and rental units that are affordable to low and moderate income households and working families. 5-7-3. DEFINITIONS. For the purposes of administering this Chapter, these definitions shall apply: AFFORDABILITY PERIOD, OWNER OCCUPIED. The time during which the affordability restrictions imposed by this Chapter shall apply to owner occupied affordable dwelling units. Owner occupied affordable dwelling units covered by this Chapter shall remain affordable in perpetuity or as long as allowable by law. The affordability period begins at the time of first occupancy of the affected unit. AFFORDABILITY PERIOD, RENTAL. The time during which the affordability restrictions imposed by this Chapter shall apply to leased affordable dwelling units. Leased affordable dwelling units covered by this Chapter shall remain affordable for a period of twenty-five (25) years, after which the requirements of this Chapter cease to be controlling. The affordability period begins at the time of first occupancy of the affected Affordable Dwelling Unit. AFFORDABLE DWELLING UNIT. All owner occupied or leased dwelling units in a covered development that are not affordable dwelling units as defined herein. AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT. The document signed by the purchaser or lessee of an affordable dwelling unit at the time of sale or lease, along with such other legal documents as may be required, detailing the affordability requirements of the affordable dwelling unit. 13 of 478 78-O-14 ~4~ AFFORDABLE HOUSING, OWNER OCCUPIED. Decent, safe, sanitary housing that is: a) affordable to "relevant households that meet AMI parameters" as set forth in this chapter defined herein; and b) to be sold only to "qualified households" as defined herein. The cost of the mortgage payment and relevant expenses (a calculation of property taxes, homeowner's insurance, and, when applicable, condominium or homeowner association fees) of owner occupied dwelling units shall not exceed thirty three percent (33%) of the relevant household's gross annual household income (the total income of all adults over eighteen (18) years of age in the household). AFFORDABLE HOUSING, RENTAL. Decent, safe, sanitary housing that is: a) affordable to households with AMI parameters set forth in this chapter; and b) to be leased only to "qualified households" as defined herein. APPLICANT. Any developer who applies to the department to receive approval of a covered development pursuant to this Chapter. AREA MEDIAN INCOME (AMI). The median income level for the Chicago primary metropolitan statistical area, as established and defined in the annual schedule published by the secretary of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and adjusted for household size. CERTIFICATE OF QUALIFICATION. A certificate issued by the department establishing a qualified household's eligibility to purchase or lease an affordable dwelling unit. Certificates of qualification shall be valid for twelve (12) six (6) months. COMMUNITY LAND TRUST. A private, not for profit corporation which the city may create or authorize organized exclusively for charitable, cultural, or other purposes to acquire and own land for the benefit of the city and low to middle income persons, including the creation and preservation of affordable housing. CONSUMER PRICE INDEX. Consumer price index for all urban consumers as published annually by the United States department of labor, bureau of labor statistics. 14 of 478 78-O-14 ~5~ COVERED DEVELOPMENT. A development containing twenty five (25 5) or more owner occupied dwelling units, subject to the planned development requirements of title 6, chapter 3 of this code, on contiguous land under common ownership or control by an applicant at one location within the city, when such dwelling units are to be sold or leased to owner-occupants or tenants. The term “covered development” and the regulations contained in this chapter shall not apply to a development that is designed to provide affordable dwelling units. The term "covered development" includes, without limitation, the following: (A) A development that is new residential construction or new mixed use construction with a residential component. (B) A development that is the renovation, repurposing or reconstruction of an existing multiple-family residential structure that changes the use from rental to owner occupied units or vice versa. increases the number of residential units from the number of units in the original structure. (C) A development that will change the use of an existing building from nonresidential to residential. (D) A development built in phases. DEPARTMENT. The Evanston cCommunity dDevelopment dDepartment or any successor agency, unless otherwise indicated. DEVELOPER. Any person, firm, corporation, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, or any entity or combination of entities that develops dwelling units, but does not include any governmental entity. DIRECTOR. The director of the City of Evanston cCommunity dDevelopment department or his/her designee. HOUSING PROVIDER. A nonprofit entity designated by the city to own affordable dwelling units. INCLUSIONARY HOUSING PLAN. The plan submitted as part of a planned development application which details the development's compliance with the affordable housing requirements of this chapter. LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLD. A household with a total income equal to or below eighty percent (80%) of the AMI. 15 of 478 78-O-14 ~6~ MARKET RATE DWELLING UNITS. All owner occupied or rental dwelling units in a covered development that are not affordable dwelling units as defined herein. MODERATE MIDDLE INCOME HOUSEHOLD. A household with a total income between eighty percent (80%) and one hundred percent (100%) of the AMI. PROPERTY, RECEIVING PUBLIC FUNDING Any residential development or development containing a residential component, existing or new, that receives or has received any public funds. Public funding is any grant, loan, or subsidy from any Federal, State or local agency or instrumentality, including, but not limited to, the disposition of real property for less than market value, purchase money financing, construction financing, permanent financing, the utilization of bond proceeds and allocations of low income housing tax credits. Public funding shall not include the receipt of rent subsidies pursuant to Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, or an exemption or abatement of real property taxes or other such other programs of full or partial exemption from or abatement of real property taxation. PROPERTY, PRIVATELY FUNDED. Any residential development or development containing a residential component, current or new, that does not and has not received any public funds. QUALIFIED HOUSEHOLD. A household whose income that the department has been verified as meeting the AMI parameters meets the definition of a relevant for a household as defined detailed herein in this Chapter and has received a certificate of qualification from the developer department per section 5-7-6 of this chapter. RELEVANT HOUSEHOLD. A household whose total income does not exceed one hundred percent (100%) of the AMI. 5-7-4. REQUIREMENTS. (A) General Requirement: For privately funded developments, ten percent (10%) of the total number of owner occupied dwelling units in a covered development shall be affordable dwelling units. For properties receiving 16 of 478 78-O-14 ~7~ City public funds, twenty percent (20%) of the total number of dwelling units in a covered development shall be affordable dwelling units. (B) Calculation: To calculate the number of affordable dwelling units required in a covered development, the total number of proposed owner occupied dwelling units shall be multiplied by ten or twenty percent (10% / 20%), with all fractions rounded up to the nearest whole number. When a requirement of this Ordinance results in a fraction, the following rules apply: a) Fractions of one-half and more are counted as a whole. b) Fractions less than one-half are disregarded. c) The above two rules are also applied in the computation of numbers of dwelling units. 5-7-5. COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES. (A) Application. The applicant for approval of a covered development shall file an application for approval of the affordable dwelling unit component of a planned the development on a form provided by the Community Development dDepartment and submit it with the application for approval of the planned development. The application for planned development shall not be considered complete without the information required by this chapter for the affordable dwelling unit component. The application shall require, and the applicant shall provide, among other things, general information about the nature and scope of the covered development, as well as other documents and information as this chapter and the department may require. The application shall include the inclusionary housing plan referred to under subsection (B) of this section. (B) Inclusionary Housing Plan. The applicant shall submit an inclusionary housing plan that outlines and specifies the covered development's compliance with each of the applicable requirements of this chapter. The inclusionary housing plan shall specifically contain, as a minimum, the following information regarding the covered development: 1. A general description of the covered development. 2. The total number of market rate dwelling units and affordable dwelling units in the covered development. 3. The number of bedrooms in each market rate dwelling unit and each affordable dwelling unit. 4. The square footage of each market rate dwelling unit and each affordable dwelling unit. 17 of 478 78-O-14 ~8~ 5. The general location of each affordable dwelling unit within the covered development. 6. The pricing schedule for each affordable dwelling unit and each market rate dwelling unit. 7. The phasing and construction schedule for each market rate dwelling unit and each affordable dwelling unit. 8. Documentation and plans regarding the exterior and interior appearances, materials, and finishes of the covered development and each of its dwelling units. 9. A description of the marketing plan that the applicant proposes to utilize and implement to promote the sale of the affordable dwelling units within the covered development. 10. Any proposal to make a cash payment, per section 5-7-8 of this chapter, or alternative equivalent action, per section 5-7-9 of this chapter, in lieu of providing affordable dwelling units. 5-7-6. ELIGIBILITY AND PREFERENCE OF HOUSEHOLDS FOR AFFORDABLE DWELLING UNITS. (A) Certificate Of Qualification. The developer, or its designee, department shall issue a certificate of qualification to any household the developer, or its designee, department has verified meets the AMI threshold requirements for a definition of "relevant household" as set forth defined in this chapter. (B) Eligibility. 1. The affordable dwelling units within a covered development which are for sale shall be sold only to owner-occupant qualified households whose primary residence shall be said affordable dwelling units and whose household income does not exceed one hundred percent (100%) of the AMI adjusted for household size. At least twenty-five percent (25%) of the affordable dwelling units shall be sold to qualified households whose income is eighty percent (80%) of the AMI or less adjusted for household size. 2. The affordable dwelling units within a covered development for lease shall be leased only to tenants with qualified households whose primary residence shall be said affordable dwelling unit and whose household income does not exceed sixty percent (60%) of 18 of 478 78-O-14 ~9~ the AMI adjusted for household size. At least fifty percent (50%) of the affordable dwelling units shall be leased to qualified households whose income does not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the AMI, adjusted for household size. (C) Preference. Priority for affordable dwelling units will be given first to qualified households who currently live in Evanston, or who have lived in Evanston with a member of a household currently living in Evanston, or and to households in which the head of the household or the spouse or domestic partner works in Evanston. 5-7-7. DISTRIBUTION AND ATTRIBUTES OF ON SITE AFFORDABLE DWELLING UNITS. (A) Location Of Affordable Dwelling Units. Affordable dwelling units shall be dispersed among the market rate dwelling units throughout the covered development. (B) Phasing Of Construction. In a multiphase d development, all phases shall include a proportion of affordable dwelling units throughout the covered development. The affordable dwelling units shall never be the last units to be built in any covered development. (C) Exterior Appearance. The exterior appearance of the affordable dwelling units in any covered development shall be visually compatible with the market rate dwelling units in the covered development. External building materials and finishes shall be substantially the same in type and quality for affordable dwelling units as for market rate dwelling units. (D) Interior Appearance and Finishes. Affordable dwelling units shall have the same interior appearance and finishes as basic market rate dwelling units and the bedroom mix of affordable dwelling units shall be in equal proportion to the bedroom mix of the market rate dwelling units. If the bedroom mix creates more options than the number of affordable dwelling units to be built, the affordable dwelling units shall be built with the greater number of bedrooms; e.g., if the bedroom mix provides for four (4) options: efficiency, one bedroom, two (2) bedroom, or three (3) bedroom; but only three (3) affordable dwelling units are to be built, then a one bedroom, a two (2) bedroom, and a three (3) bedroom unit shall be built. (E) Unit Size. Affordable dwelling units shall be similar to have substantially the same square footage as market rate dwelling units with a comparable number of bedrooms and subject to the following minimum standards for square footage size of the affordable dwelling unit: 19 of 478 78-O-14 ~10~ Studio 500 square feet 1 Bedroom 750 square feet 2 Bedroom 900 square feet 3 Bedroom 1,200 square feet (F) Energy Efficiency. Standard components related to energy efficiency, including, but not limited to, mechanical equipment and plumbing, insulation, windows, and heating and cooling systems, shall be the same in market rate dwelling units and affordable dwelling units. 5-7-8. CASH PAYMENT IN LIEU OF PROVIDING AFFORDABLE DWELLING UNITS. As of right, an applicant may pay a fee in lieu of building each affordable dwelling unit required by Section 4 of this chapter for the covered development. (A) The fee in lieu per affordable dwelling unit shall be determined and approved by the city council. The fee in lieu amount per affordable dwelling unit shall be forty one hundred thousand dollars ($40,000.00 $100,000). The fee in lieu is subject to review and revision by the city council. (B) All cash payments received pursuant to this chapter shall be deposited directly into the affordable housing fund. (C) Unless otherwise preempted by law, any fee in lieu shall be paid prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for any dwelling unit in the covered development. 5-7-9. ALTERNATIVE EQUIVALENT PROPOSAL. An applicant may propose to meet the requirements of Section 4 of this chapter by an alternative equivalent action, subject to the review and approval by the City Council planning and development committee. A proposal for an alternative equivalent action may include, but is not limited to, dedication of vacant land, the construction of affordable dwelling units on another site, or acquisition and enforcement of affordability sales price restrictions on existing market rate dwelling units so as to render them affordable dwelling units. Any proposal shall show how the alternative proposed will increase affordable housing opportunities in the city to an equal or greater extent than compliance with the express requirements of this chapter. Such proposals for alternatives shall be considered on a case by case basis by the City Council planning and development committee and may be approved at the City Council’s committee's sole discretion, if the City Council committee determines that such alternative will 20 of 478 78-O-14 ~11~ increase affordable housing opportunities in the city to an equal or greater extent than compliance with the express requirements of this chapter. 5-7-10. REDUCTION OR WAIVER OF REQUIREMENTS. (A) Reduction. If the applicant presents clear and convincing financial evidence to the City Council planning and development committee that full compliance with Section 4 of this chapter, payment in lieu as per Section 8 of this chapter, or alternative equivalent action as per Section 9 of this chapter, or any combination thereof would render the development financially infeasible, the applicant may seek a reduction in the required number of affordable dwelling units and/or payment in lieu as to render the project financially feasible. If such a reduction is requested, a detailed explanation shall be provided which demonstrates the financial infeasibility of full compliance with the requirements of this chapter. (B) Waiver. If the applicant presents clear and convincing financial evidence to the City Council planning and development committee that any compliance with Section 4 of this chapter, payment in lieu as per Section 8 of this chapter, or alternative equivalent action as per Section 9 of this chapter, or any combination thereof would render the development financially infeasible, the applicant may seek a waiver of the required affordable dwelling units and/or payment in lieu as to render the project financially feasible. If such a waiver is requested, a detailed explanation shall be provided which demonstrates the financial infeasibility of any compliance with the requirements of this chapter. 5-7-11. AFFORDABILITY CONTROLS. (A) Initial Sale Prices For Affordable Owner Occupied Dwelling Units. 1. Every affordable owner occupied dwelling unit required to be established under this chapter shall be offered for sale or to a good faith purchaser to be used for his or her own primary residence. 2. The director shall publish a pricing schedule of sales prices for affordable dwelling units shall be in accordance with the provisions of subsections (A)5, and (A)6, and A(7) of this section. The director shall update the pricing schedule at least annually by December 1. 3. Income limits for eligible buyers shall be based on the Illinois Housing Development Authority schedule released annually. Units will be priced so as to be affordable to households at one hundred percent (100%) AMI. At least twenty five percent (25%) of owner- occupied affordable dwelling units shall be priced so as to be affordable to households whose incomes do not exceed earning up 21 of 478 78-O-14 ~12~ to eighty percent (80%) of AMI, who shall be eligible to purchase such unit. 4. In calculating the sales prices of affordable dwelling units, the following relationship between unit size and household size shall be used to determine the income figure at which affordable housing payments are calculated: Unit Size Income Level for Household Size Efficiency 1 Person 1 Bedroom 2 Persons 2 Bedrooms 3 Persons 3 Bedrooms 4 Persons 4 Bedrooms 5 Persons 5. Prices for a minimum of twenty-five percent (25%) of the sale units shall be calculated on the basis of: a. Housing payments at or below thirty-three percent (33%) of the household income for a household at eighty seventy percent (80 70%) of AMI at the household size corresponding to the size of the unit; b. An available fixed rate thirty (30) year mortgage, consistent with the average rate published from time to time by Freddie Mac; c. A down payment of no more than five percent (5%) of the purchase price; d. A calculation of property taxes; e. A calculation of homeowner's insurance; and f. A calculation of condominium or homeowner association fees; and g. A calculation of private mortgage insurance, if applicable. 6. Prices for up to seventy-five percent (75%) of the affordable sale units shall be calculated on the basis of: a. Housing payments at or below thirty-three percent (33%) of the household income for a household at one hundred ninety percent (90100%) of AMI adjusted for household size; b. An available fixed rate thirty (30) year mortgage, consistent with the average rate published from time to time by Freddie Mac; 22 of 478 78-O-14 ~13~ c. A down payment of no more than five percent (5%) of the purchase price; d. A calculation of property taxes; e. A calculation of homeowner's insurance; and f. A calculation of condominium or homeowner association fees. ; and g. A calculation of private mortgage insurance, if applicable. (B) Rental Rates for Affordable Dwelling Units 1. Fifty percent (50%) of the affordable dwelling units within the covered development shall have affordable rental rates at 60% AMI and the remaining fifty percent (50%) of affordable dwelling units shall have affordable rental rates at 30% AMI, pursuant to the annual rental rate schedule published by the Illinois Housing Development Authority. 2. If the most recent edition of the Illinois Housing Development Authority report indicates a lower AMI than the previous edition, the maximum allowable rent shall be adjusted accordingly. 3. The affordability period of an affected leased unit begins at the time of the first occupancy and continues for twenty-five (25) years, after which the affordability requirements of this chapter cease to control the unit. 4. A written lease is required for all leased affordable dwelling units, except for units in an assisted living residence. Final lease agreements are the responsibility of the landlord and the prospective tenant. Tenants are responsible for security deposits and the full amount of the rent as stated on the lease. All lease provisions shall comply with applicable laws and regulations. The landlord shall maintain copies of all leases entered into with a certified household (including an income certification) and distribute a copy to the City upon request. (C) Procedure For Initial Sale Or Lease To The General Public. 1. Sixty (60) days prior to offering any affordable dwelling unit for sale or rent, the applicant shall notify the department in writing of such offering. The notice shall set forth the number, size, price, and location of affordable dwelling units offered, and shall provide a 23 of 478 78-O-14 ~14~ description of each dwelling unit's finishes and availability. The notice shall also include a copy of the inclusionary housing plan, and any such additional information the dDirector may reasonably require in order to establish compliance with this chapter. 2. The prospective purchaser or lessee shall make application for a "certificate of qualification" on a form provided by the Director department and available on the City's website. If the developer, or its designee, director determines an applicant is qualified pursuant to the requirements of this chapter to purchase or lease an affordable dwelling unit, he/she shall issue a "certificate of qualification" to that applicant. An applicant must provide documents to verify that he or she satisfies these requirements, including an affidavit that the affordable dwelling unit will be his or her primary residence and evidence of income, household size, and residency or employment in Evanston. The developer, or its designee, director shall determine whether or not the prospective purchaser or lessee satisfies the requirements of this chapter within six (6) days after receiving the completed application. The developer shall, upon request by the Director, furnish documentation to the City to demonstrate compliance with this section (C). 3. An applicant The developer shall not sell or lease any affordable dwelling units without first obtaining a valid certificate of qualification for from the prospective purchaser/lessee. (D) Agreement To Ensure Compliance During The Affordability Period. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any covered development or conveyance of title of any dwelling unit in any covered development, the applicant shall have entered into an agreement with the city regarding the specific requirements and restrictions imposed by the city council upon the approved planned development. The applicant shall agree to execute any and all documents deemed necessary by the city, including, without limitation, deed restrictions, restrictive covenants, and other related instruments, to ensure the continued affordability of the affordable dwelling units in accordance with this chapter. The agreement shall set forth the commitments and obligations of the city and the applicant, and shall incorporate, among other documents, the inclusionary housing plan. If applicable, the agreement shall also detail the fee in lieu or alternative 24 of 478 78-O-14 ~15~ equivalent action of providing on site affordable dwelling units as set forth in Sections 8 and 9 of this chapter respectively. Rental Compliance. The developer, or its designee, shall submit an annual compliance report describing each affordable unit in detail including but not limited to changes in tenancy, turnovers, and income certifications for all new tenants upon request of the Director. (F) Control Of Resale Prices. The maximum sales price, with the exception of foreclosure sales, permitted on resale of an affordable dwelling unit shall be based on the following formula: 1. The original purchase price plus: a. An inflation adjustment of the original purchase price calculated in accordance with the CPI, using the year of the prior sale as the base year; b. Allowances for closing costs and sales commissions paid by the seller; and c. The fair market value of approved improvements made to the unit between the date of original sale and the date of resale, up to an average of five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) per year. "Approved improvements" are capital improvements which add value to the home, prolong its useful life or adapt it to new uses. Repairs to maintain the home in good condition are not allowable capital improvements. A list of general allowable capital improvements shall be included in the affordability documents signed by the purchaser. (G) First Sale After Affordability Period Ends. 1. This subsection (EG) shall apply in the event an affordability period in perpetuity is unlawful or becomes unlawful. Upon the first sale of an affordable dwelling unit after the affordability period ends, the seller shall pay to the city out of the sale proceeds a percentage of the difference between the actual sales price and the current affordable resale price as determined pursuant to subsection (DG) of this section. Such sums shall be deposited into the affordable housing fund. The percentage is based upon the number of years the seller owned and occupied the unit, as follows: 25 of 478 78-O-14 ~16~ Years of Ownership Share to Affordable Housing Fund 11 to 15 Years 50 Percent 6 to 10 Years 60 Percent 1 to 5 Years 70 Percent 2. The dDirector shall determine whether the price and terms of a resale covered by the preceding paragraph meet the requirements of this chapter. Upon a finding of compliance, the dDirector shall terminate the affordable housing controls and execute a recordable release of all applicable mortgages and restrictions. 3. If an affordable dwelling unit is sold through a foreclosure or other court ordered sale, the affordable restrictions are extinguished, but any remaining net profit shall be returned to the department and deposited into the affordable housing fund. 5-7-12. COMMUNITY LAND TRUST. The City may create or authorize a community land trust to effectuate the purposes of this chapter. Any established or designated land trusts must be staffed by paid employees and be sufficiently operational, subject to the discretion of the City. 5-7-13. INCENTIVES FOR APPLICANTS. For any covered development project that complies with the requirements of this chapter, the city shall follow the procedures described below and provide the described incentives: (A) Expedited Application Process: All applications shall be processed by all city departments before other residential land use applications regardless of the original submittal date. (B) Fee Deferral: All city required fees related to the covered development for plan review, building permit fees or other similar development review fees for the non-affordable dwelling units, which are not subject to a fee waiver per subsection 5-7-13(C), shall be deferred for payment until the issuance of the first temporary certificate of occupancy for a non-affordable dwelling units. The project applicant shall not receive a fee deferral from payment for any other City fees associated with the covered development, including but not limited to right-of-way fees, demolition fees, and fees related to the commercial portion(s) of the development. 26 of 478 78-O-14 ~17~ (C) Fee Waiver: All city required fees that are specifically related to affordable dwelling units built on the site of the covered development shall be waived. All projects with a covered development which must comply with the requirements of this Inclusionary Housing Ordinance shall be exempt from all plan review, building permit fees or other similar development review fees for the affordable units. Whenever a project includes a combination of affordable and market rate housing units, fees shall be pro- rated appropriately as determined by the Director and no fees associated with the commercial portion shall be deferred, if applicable. The project applicant shall not receive a waiver from payment of any other fees associated with the covered development, including but not limited to right-of-way fees, demolition fees, or fees related to the commercial portion(s) of the covered development. 5-7-14. ENFORCEMENT. (A) The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all agents, successors and assignees of an applicant. (B) The cCity may institute injunction, mandamus, or any other appropriate legal actions or proceedings for the enforcement of this chapter. In addition, any person, firm, or entity, whether as principal, agent, employee or otherwise, who violates, disobeys, omits, neglects, or refuses to comply with or resists the enforcement of any of the provisions of this chapter shall be fined not less than two hundred dollars ($200.00) nor more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) for each offense. Each day such violation or failure to comply is permitted to exist after notification thereof shall constitute a separate offense. 5-7-15. ADMINISTRATION. In order to ensure compliance with the provisions of this chapter, the cCity may utilize a maximum of fifteen percent (15%) each year of funds from the affordable housing fund for administration. 5-7-16. SEVERABILITY. The provisions and sections of this chapter shall be deemed separable, and the invalidity of any portion of this chapter shall not affect the validity of the remainder. SECTION 3: The findings in this Ordinance, and the Legislative Record, are declared to be prima facie evidence of the law of the City of Evanston, and shall be 27 of 478 78-O-14 ~18~ received in evidence as provided by the Illinois Compiled Statues, and the courts of the State of Illinois. SECTION 4: If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance is ruled unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid application or provision, and each invalid provision or invalid application of this ordinance is severable. SECTION 5: This ordinance shall become effective on January 1, 2015; all subsequent property development applications shall be subject to all provisions contained herein. Those applications substantially filed prior to January 1, 2015 shall be subject to the provisions of the preceding Ordinance and exempted from the changed and additional provisions. Introduced: _________________, 2014 Adopted: ___________________, 2014 Approved: __________________________, 2014 _______________________________ Elizabeth B. Tisdahl, Mayor Attest: _______________________________ Rodney Greene, City Clerk Approved as to form: ______________________________ W. Grant Farrar, Corporation Counsel 28 of 478 Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Comparison Chicago Highland Park Evanston-Current Evanston-Recommended Amendments Project size (# of residential units)10 or more 5 or more 25 or more 5 or more Other criteria receive zoning changes (higher FAR, change from non-residential to residential, allow ground floor residential); land purchased from City; financial assistance from City; part of a planned development in downtown zoning district new residential & mixed use construction; renovation of existing multi-family that increases dwelling units; change in use from non-residential to residential or conversion from rental to condo; affordable units must be disbursed throughout development subject to planned development requirements; on contiguous land under common ownership; new residential or mixed use construction; renovation of existing multi-family that increases the number of units; change of use from non-residential to residential; development built in phases • New construction, including new mixed-use construction with a residential component • Renovation or reconstruction of an existing multi-family building that increases the number of residential units in the building • A change in the use of an existing building from non-residential to residential or conversion from rental property to condominium. Tenure for-sale and rental for-sale and rental for-sale for-sale and rental % of units affordable 10% of total units if privately funded; 20% if receiving City funds 20% of total units 10% of total units (round up to nearest whole #) 10% of total units if privately funded; 20% if receiving City funds Income restrictions - rental HH income ≤60% AMI minimum of 1/3 affordable units for HH ≤50% AMI; 1/3 for 51-80% AMI; 1/3 for 81-120% AMI Not applicable HH income ≤60% AMI. May want to look at set asides for 50% or 30% AMI Income restrictions - for-sale HH ≤100% AMI minimum of 1/2 affordable units or at least one for HH ≤80% AMI; remainder HH ≤120% minimum of 25% affordable units for HH ≤80% AMI; remainder HH ≤100% AMI Same Affordability period - rental Not specified minimum 25 years Not applicable in perpetuity or as long as legally possible Affordability period - for-sale Not specified in perpetuity or as long as legally possible in perpetuity or as long as legally possible in perpetuity or as long as legally possible Developer benefits see other criteria above density bonus of 1 market rate unit for each required affordable unit; density bonus in PUDs of up to .5 market rate units for each required affordable unit expedited application process; fee deferral until temporary CofO; waiver of fees specifically related to affordable units Same Fee in lieu of on-site unit/per unit $100,000 $100,000 $40,000 $100,000 Affordability enforcement usually placed in Chicago Community Land Trust land use restrictions planned development agreement; deed restrictions or restrictive covenants; payments to Affordable Housing Fund if not maintained Same. Look at placement of for sale units into Land Trust Limits to use of fee in lieu May add because most developers pay fee in lieu Other Size of affordable units may be up to 25% less than market rate units with same # of bedrooms; interior finishes may be different but no compromise on energy efficient features Size of affordable units must be substantially same sq footage as market rate with same # of bedrooms; same interior finishes as basic market rate units; no compromise on energy efficient features Same 29 of 478 Table of Income Eligibility Household Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 100% AMI $50,700 $58,000 $65,200 $72,400 $78,200 $84,000 80% AMI $40,550 $46,350 $52,150 $57,900 $62,550 $67,200 60% AMI $30,420 $34,800 $39,120 $43,440 $46,920 $50,400 30% AMI $15,200 $17,400 $19,550 $21,700 $23,450 $25,200 Source: Illinois Housing Development Authority (IHDA), Effective December 18, 2013; Subject to change Changes in Housing Value, Rent, and Income in Evanston; 2000 to 2011 Year Median Gross Rent Median Housing Value Median Household Income 2000 $1,156 $392,631 $76,062 2011 $1,113 $383,100 $68,292 % change 00-11 -3.70% -2.40% -10.20% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census (SF-3, H76, H63, P53), 2007-11 American Community Survey (B25064, B25077, B19013); BLS.gov Note: All numbers in the chart above are 2011 inflation-adjusted 30 of 478 For City Council meeting of July 28, 2014 Item P2 Ordinance 68-O-14: Notice Requirements for Zoning Applications For Introduction To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Planning and Development Committee From: Mark Muenzer, Director of Community Development Department Lorrie Pearson, Planning and Zoning Administrator Damir Latinovic, Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Subject: Ordinance 68-O-14 Amending the Zoning Ordinance Text for Notice Requirements for Zoning Applications Date: July 11, 2014 Recommended Action: The Plan Commission and staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 68-O- 14 to amend various parts of Chapter 3 – Implementation and Administration of the Zoning Ordinance to clarify Public Hearing notice requirements for zoning applications. Summary The proposed amendment provides a consistent language to clarify a public hearing notice must be published in the local newspaper, mailed to surrounding property owners and a sign must be posted on a subject property for all zoning applications. The amendment also clarifies that notices for the initial hearing suffice for any subsequent continued hearings for the same case. The Zoning Ordinance includes public hearing notice requirements for all zoning applications (zoning variations, planned developments, special uses, Zoning Ordinance text and map amendments, etc.). A typical zoning application public hearing requires a general notice published in a newspaper, a notice mailed to surrounding property owners and posting of a sign on a subject property regarding the public hearing time and date. Although staff has always provided these notices for all zoning applications, the text of the Zoning Ordinance does not consistently specify which notices are required for each zoning application. For planned developments for example Section 6- 3-6-8 Review Procedure; Decision does not include specific language that a notice must be published within a local newspaper as it is specified for other zoning applications such as the Zoning Ordinance Text and Map Amendments or Special Uses. Additionally, the Zoning Ordinance is silent on the need for additional notices when a particular zoning application is continued to a second or third public hearing. Memorandum 31 of 478 Staff is not proposing to make any changes to the content of the public hearing notice requirements. The proposal simply clarifies the language of Chapter 3 – Implementation and Administration to specify the following notices are required for all types of zoning applications: 1. General notice of public hearing published in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the City a minimum of 15 days prior to the hearing date and a maximum of 30 days prior to the hearing date. 2. Notice via first class mail to all owners of surrounding properties located within a certain distance of the subject property. (The distance varies between 250 ft. and 1000 ft. based on the type of the zoning application.) 3. Notice via a sign posted on the subject property a minimum of ten working days prior to the public hearing indicating the place, time and date of the hearing. Staff will also continue to provide the following notices, but are not expressly listed in the Zoning Ordinance: • Posting of a meeting notice within the Civic Center. • Posting of a meeting notice on the City’s website. • Meeting notification email to persons subscribing to all zoning related notifications. Additionally, the proposed amendment includes a clarification that subsequent notices are not required for continuances of a hearing, if any. The amendment is consistent and complies with the Illinois Open Meetings Act. The proposal meets the standards for approval of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance outlined in Section 6-3-4-5 of the City Code. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive General Plan. Clear notice requirements will assure adequate notices are provided to affected residents and will reduce the potential for project delays due to the ambiguity of current public hearing notice requirements. Because staff is already providing all notice requirements as part of the proposed text amendment, the proposal will not have any adverse effect on the properties under review or the properties in the immediate vicinity of proposed projects. Legislative History June 11, 2014 – The Plan Commission unanimously forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed amendment. May 21, 2014 – The Committee unanimously forwarded a positive recommendation to the Plan Commission with minor edits regarding notice requirements for continued hearings. Attachments Proposed Ordinance 68-O-14 Plan Commission Packet 06/11/14 Plan Commission Draft Meeting Minutes 06/11/14 32 of 478 Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Notice Requirements for Zoning Applications 13PLND-0044 33 of 478 7/11/2014 68-O-14 AN ORDINANCE Amending Various Portions of the Zoning Ordinance Relating to Notice Requirements in Connection with Map Amendments, Text Amendments, and Development Applications NOW BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, THAT: SECTION 1: Ordinance 68-O-14 shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in the manner provided by law. SECTION 2: Section 6-3-3-4 of the City Code of 1979, as amended (the City Code”) is hereby amended to read as follows: 6-3-3-4: SPECIAL PROCEDURES IN CONNECTION WITH COMBINED APPLICATIONS: Whenever an application for a special use, unique use or an amendment will, in addition, require a variation, the applicant shall indicate that fact on the application where indicated and shall, at the time of filing the application for a special use, unique use, or amendment, as the case may be, file an application for a variation pursuant to Section 6-3-8-4. All required notices for the application for approval of the special use, unique use or amendment, as the case may be, shall include reference to the application for a variation. The initial hearing notice shall be sufficient notice for the initial hearing, as well as any continuances of the same hearing, if any. The variation application shall only be decided after a final decision has been reached with respect to the special use, unique use or amendment. SECTION 3: Section 6-3-4-6 of the City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 6-3-4-6: PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW AND DECISION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: A petition to amend the text of the Zoning Ordinance or the Zoning Map shall be processed in accordance with the following procedures: 34 of 478 68-O-14 ~2~ (A) Public Hearing: After the filing of a petition for amendment in proper form, the Zoning Administrator shall set a date for a public hearing. (B) General Notice of Public Hearing: Notice of the public hearing required by Subsection 6-3-4-6(A) shall be given by the Plan Commission Zoning Administrator by one (1) publication in one (1) or more newspapers of general circulation within the municipality. Notice shall be published a minimum of fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing date and a maximum of thirty (30) days prior to the hearing date. Such notice shall be sufficient notice for the initial hearing, as well as any continuances of the same hearing, if any. (C) Mailed Notices Required for Redistricting or Rezoning: Notice shall also be given by first class mail to all owners of property within a five hundred (500) foot radius of the subject property, inclusive of public roads, streets, alleys and other public ways from the area proposed to be rezoned or redistricted whose addresses appear on the current tax assessment list as provided by the applicant. The failure of delivery of such notice, however, shall not invalidate any such amendment. In addition, a sign shall be posted on the property for a minimum of ten (10) working days prior to the public hearing indicating the place, time and date of the hearing. Such notice shall be sufficient notice for the initial hearing, as well as any continuances of the same hearing, if any. (D) Content of Published and Mailed Notices: Published and mailed notices shall contain the time, date, and place of the public hearing and, in addition, shall include all of the information listed in Section 2 of Appendix D, of this Ordinance, "Submission Requirements for Published and Mailed Notices for Proposed Amendments." (E) Plan Commission Action: Upon receipt of the petition with the copy of the proposed text and map changes, the Plan Commission shall hold a public hearing scheduled pursuant to Subsection 6-3-4-6(A). Within thirty (30) days after the hearing is closed, the Commission shall recommend the approval or denial of the proposed amendment, or the approval of the amendment with modifications, and shall then submit its written recommendation, together with the petition for the text and/or map change, to the City Council. (F) City Council Action: The City Council shall either adopt or reject the recommendation of the Plan Commission or adopt some modification of the recommendation of the Plan Commission. Except as provided in Section 6-3-4-7, no amendment to the Zoning Ordinance shall be adopted except by a vote of the majority of the Council. 35 of 478 68-O-14 ~3~ (G) Continued Hearings or Meetings. In the instance a hearing or meeting is continued to a date certain, the date and time of the continued hearing or meeting shall be announced at the time and place of the hearing being continued, and the continued hearing’s notice requirements shall be deemed satisfied. If for any reason the continued hearing or meeting date or time needs to be changed, the Zoning Administrator shall, in his or her best effort, provide the public with the new date and time of the continued hearing by: 1. Posting the continued meeting or hearing notice at the Civic Center; and 2. Posting the continued meeting or hearing notice on the City’s website. Failure to provide such notice, however, shall not invalidate any such continued hearing or meeting. (H) In the event a quorum is not present for the initial meeting or a continued meeting, a majority of the board or commission members present may reschedule the meeting to a new date and time. No additional publication or mailing notice will be required for as provided in Section 6-3-4-6(G). SECTION 4: Section 6-3-5-7 of the City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 6-3-5-7: REVIEW PROCEDURE; RECOMMENDATION: (A) Public Hearing: Upon the review of an application for a special use, the Zoning Administrator shall, pursuant to Section 6-3-3-1, notify the applicant of any deficiencies and or modifications necessary to complete the special use application. After determining that the application is complete pursuant to Section 6-3-3-1, the Zoning Administrator shall at the same time schedule the application for review by the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee, and a public hearing to be held by the Plan Commission in case of a Planned Development, and to the Zoning Board of Appeals for all other categories of special uses. (B) General Notice of Public Hearing: In the case of a planned development, notice of the public hearing required by Subsection 6-3-5-7(A) shall be given by the Zoning Administrator pursuant to Section 6-3-6-8. In the case of all other special uses, the Zoning Administrator shall cause notice of a public hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals to be published not more than thirty (30) days nor less than fifteen (15) days before the date of the hearing. In addition, a sign shall be posted on the property for a minimum of ten (10) working days prior to the public hearing indicating the place, time and date of the hearing. Such notice shall be sufficient notice 36 of 478 68-O-14 ~4~ for the initial hearing. Subsequent notices are not required for continuances of a hearing, if any. (A) Review Procedure: After determining that the special use application is complete pursuant to Section 6-3-3-1, the Zoning Administrator shall prepare and forward his written recommendation accompanied by the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee's written report to the Plan Commission, in the case of planned developments, and to the Zoning Board of Appeals for all other categories of special uses. At the same time, the Zoning Administrator shall, in the case of a planned development, cause notice of a public hearing before the Plan Commission to be published pursuant to Section 6-3-6-8. In the case of all other special uses, the Zoning Administrator shall cause notice of a public hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals to be published not more than thirty (30) days nor less than fifteen (15) days before the date of the hearing. In addition, a sign shall be posted on the property for a minimum of ten (10) working days prior to the public hearing indicating the place, time and date of the hearing. (B)(C) Mailed Notices Required: Notice shall also be given by first class mail to all owners of property within a five hundred (500) foot radius of the subject property, inclusive of public roads, streets, alleys and other public ways whose addresses appear on the current tax assessment list as provided by the applicant. The failure of delivery of such notice, however, shall not invalidate any such amendment. Such notice shall be sufficient notice for the initial hearing. Subsequent notices are not required for continuances of a hearing, if any. (D) Content of Published and Mailed Notices: Published and mailed notices shall contain the time, date, and place of the public hearing. Additionally, the published and mailed notices shall contain the following: (a) A statement indicating that the petition is a request for Special Use approval; (b) The address of the subject property requesting the Special Use; (c) The current zoning classification of the property requesting the Special Use; (d) The time and place where the petition proposing to amend the Zoning Ordinance will be available for examination for a period of at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing; (e) The name of the person responsible for giving notice of the public hearing by publication or by mail, or by publication and mail; 37 of 478 68-O-14 ~5~ (f) Any other information requested by the commission or board, as the case may be; and (g) A statement that after the conclusion of the hearing the matter will be submitted to the City Council for its action. (C)(E) Recommendations: All written recommendations and reports forwarded by the Zoning Administrator shall be considered at the public hearing. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the commission or board, as the case may be, shall recommend, based on written findings of fact, that the council: 1) approve the special use; 2) approve the special use subject to conditions; or 3) deny the special use. (F) Continued Hearings or Meetings. In the instance a hearing or meeting is continued to a date certain, the date and time of the continued hearing or meeting shall be announced at the time and place of the hearing being continued, and the continued hearing’s notice requirements shall be deemed satisfied. If for any reason the continued hearing or meeting date or time needs to be changed, the Zoning Administrator shall, in his or her best effort, provide the public with the new date and time of the continued hearing by: 1. Posting the continued meeting or hearing notice at the Civic Center; and 2. Posting the continued meeting or hearing notice on the City’s website. Failure to provide such notice, however, shall not invalidate any such continued hearing or meeting. (G) In the event a quorum is not present for the initial meeting or a continued meeting, a majority of the board or commission members present may reschedule the meeting to a new date and time. No additional mailed or published notices shall be required for meetings continued as provided in Section 6-3-5-7(F). SECTION 5: Section 6-3-5-16 of the City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 6-3-5-16: SUBSTITUTION FOR AN EXISTING SPECIAL USE: (A) Review Procedure: The Zoning Administrator, pursuant to his authority to render interpretations prescribed by Section 6-3-9 of this Chapter and subject to the procedures, standards and limitations contained herein, shall have the authority to review and grant applications for the substitution of a special use for an existing special use. 38 of 478 68-O-14 ~6~ (B) General Notice And Opportunity To Comment: After receipt of a completed application for the substitution of a special use for an existing special use, a sign shall be posted on the property subject to the application for a minimum of ten (10) working days prior to the Zoning Administrator's decision. (C) Mailed Notices Required: Notice shall also be given by first class mail to all owners of property within a five hundred (500) foot radius of the subject property, inclusive of public roads, streets, alleys and other public ways whose addresses appear on the current tax assessment list as provided by the applicant. (D) Content of Notices: The notice shall indicate that the application shall be available for review and submittal of written comments thereon for ten (10) working days prior to the Zoning Administrator's decision. The Zoning Administrator, pursuant to his authority to render interpretations prescribed by Section 6-3-9 of this Chapter and subject to the procedures, standards and limitations contained herein, shall have the authority to review and grant applications for the substitution of a special use for an existing special use. Before rendering a decision on an application the Zoning Administrator shall undertake the following procedure: (A) Notice And Opportunity To Comment: After receipt of a completed application for the substitution of a special use for an existing special use, the Zoning Administrator shall cause a written notice of the application to be delivered to all owners of the property located within a five hundred (500) foot radius of the subject property inclusive of public roads, streets, alleys and other public ways. In addition, a sign shall be posted on the property subject to the application and shall remain on the property for a minimum of ten (10) working days prior to the Zoning Administrator's decision. The notice shall indicate that the application shall be available for review and submittal of written comments thereon for ten (10) working days prior to the Zoning Administrator's decision. (B)(E) Zoning Administrator Decision: Within twenty (20) working days of receipt of a completed application for the substitution of a special use, the Zoning Administrator shall, by written order, render his interpretation that the special use proposed to be substituted is either: 1) similar in nature and intensity to the existing special use and presents no differing or additional impact; or 2) substantially different in nature, intensity and impact from the existing special use. If the Zoning Administrator determines the special use proposed to be substituted is similar in nature and intensity to the existing special use and presents no differing or additional impact, he shall grant the application for a substitution of a special use. If the Zoning Administrator determines the special use proposed to be substituted is 39 of 478 68-O-14 ~7~ substantially different in nature, intensity and impact from the existing special use he shall deny the application for a substitution of a special use. (C)(F) Conformance With The General Standards: Any special use proposed to be substituted for an existing special use pursuant to this Section shall be required to meet the general standards for special uses as set forth in Section 6-3-5-10 of this Chapter. (D)(G) Notification Of Decision: The Zoning Administrator shall send his decision within five (5) working days to the applicant and all other persons previously notified pursuant to Subsection (AC) of this Section. (E)(H) Appeal: An appeal of the decision of the Zoning Administrator may be taken to the City Council, through its planning and development committee within ten (10) working days of the Zoning Administrator's decision. (F)(I) Conditions: The Zoning Administrator, in granting an application for the substitution of a special use, may, pursuant to Section 6-3-5-13 of this Chapter, require the transfer of conditions imposed on the existing substitution special use to the proposed substitution for an existing special use. The Zoning Administrator, in granting an application for substitution for an existing special use, shall also have the authority to modify any conditions imposed on the existing special use, provided the modification does not alter the nature, intensity or impact of the special use being substituted in such a manner that it no longer can be considered similar. (G)(J) Limitations: The approval of an application for the substitution of a special use shall be deemed to authorize only that particular special use at the particular location for which the substitution is authorized. Except when otherwise provided in the ordinance for approving a special use, a special use shall be deemed related to, and be for the benefit of, the use and lot in question, rather than the owner or operator of such use or lot. (H)(K) Records: A record of all applications for the substitution of a special use shall be kept on file in the office of the Zoning Administrator. At least once a year, the Zoning Administrator shall make public a listing of his decisions, by address, regarding applications for the substitution of a special use. (I)(L) Fees: Fees for the substitution of a special use shall be as set forth in Section 6-3-5-6 of this Chapter. SECTION 6: Section 6-3-6-8 of the City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 40 of 478 68-O-14 ~8~ 6-3-6-8: REVIEW PROCEDURE; DECISION: (A) Public Hearing: All applications for planned developments will be given priority review by the Zoning Administrator. Upon the review of an application for a planned development, the Zoning Administrator shall, pursuant to Section 6-3-3-1, notify the developer of any deficiencies and or modifications necessary to perfect the planned development application. After determining that the application is complete pursuant to Section 6-3-3-1, the Zoning Administrator shall at the same time schedule a public hearing to be held by the Plan Commission at which time a formal presentation of the planned development application will be presented. The public hearing shall be held not less than fifteen (15) calendar days and no more than thirty (30) calendar days from the date of receipt of the complete application. (B) General Notice of Public Hearing: The Zoning Administrator shall cause notice to be published of a public hearing to be held by the Plan Commission. The public notice shall be published a minimum of fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing date and a maximum of thirty (30) days prior to the hearing date. In addition, a sign shall be posted on the property for a minimum of ten (10) working days prior to the public hearing indicating the place, time and date of the hearing. Such notice shall be sufficient notice for the initial hearing. Subsequent notices are not required for continuances of a hearing, if any. (A) Review Procedure: All applications for planned developments will be given priority review by the Zoning Administrator. Upon the review of an application for a planned development, the Zoning Administrator shall, pursuant to Section 6-3-3-1, notify the developer of any deficiencies and or modifications necessary to perfect the planned development application. (B) Public Hearing: After determining that the application is complete pursuant to Section 6-3-3-1, the Zoning Administrator shall at the same time schedule and cause notice to be published of a public hearing to be held by the Plan Commission at which time a formal presentation of the planned development application will be presented. The public hearing shall be held not less than fifteen (15) calendar days and no more than thirty (30) calendar days from the date of receipt of the complete application. In addition, a sign shall be posted on the property for a minimum of ten (10) working days prior to the public hearing indicating the place, time and date of the hearing. (C) Mailed Notices Required: Notice shall also be given by first class mail to all owners of property within a one thousand (1,000) foot radius of the subject property, inclusive of public roads, streets, alleys and other public 41 of 478 68-O-14 ~9~ ways from the subject property whose addresses appear on the current tax assessment list as provided by the applicant. The failure of delivery of such notice, however, shall not invalidate any such hearing. Such notice shall be sufficient notice for the initial hearing. Subsequent notices are not required for continuances of a hearing, if any. (D) Content of Published and Mailed Notices: Published and mailed notices shall contain the time, date, and place of the public hearing. Additionally, the published and mailed notices shall contain the following: (a) A statement indicating that the petition is a request for a planned development; (b) The address of the subject property requesting the planned development; (c) The current zoning classification of the property requesting the planned development; (d) The time and place where the petition proposing the planned development will be available for examination for a period of at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing; (e) The name of the person responsible for giving notice of the public hearing by publication or by mail, or by publication and mail; (f) Any other information requested by the Plan Commission; and (g) A statement that after the conclusion of the hearing the matter will be submitted to the City Council for its action. (D)(E)Recommendation: The Plan Commission shall conduct a public hearing to review the application for the proposed planned development. The Plan Commission shall make a recommendation within sixty (60) calendar days of the close of the public hearing to the City Council for its decision in accordance with the procedures for special uses set forth in Section 6-3-5- 8. The Plan Commission may, upon agreement with the applicant, extend the sixty (60) calendar day review period. The maximum length of any extension, however, shall be limited to ninety (90) calendar days. (F) Continued Hearings or Meetings. In the instance a hearing or meeting is continued to a date certain, the date and time of the continued hearing or meeting shall be announced at the time and place of the hearing being continued, and the continued hearing’s notice requirements shall be deemed satisfied. If for any reason the continued hearing or meeting date or time needs to be changed, the Zoning Administrator shall, in his or her 42 of 478 68-O-14 ~10~ best effort, provide the public with the new date and time of the continued hearing by: 1. Posting the continued meeting or hearing notice at the Civic Center; and 2. Posting the continued meeting or hearing notice on the City’s website. Failure to provide such notice, however, shall not invalidate any such continued hearing or meeting. (G) In the event a quorum is not present for the initial meeting or a continued meeting, a majority of the board or commission members present may reschedule the meeting to a new date and time. No additional mailed or published notices shall be required for meetings continued as provided in Section 6-3-6-8(F). SECTION 7: Section 6-3-6-12 of the City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 6-3-6-12: ADJUSTMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT PLAN: (A) New Application Required for Amendments: Except for minor and major adjustments authorized pursuant to Subsections 6-3-6-12(B) and 6-3-6- 12(C) no amendment shall be made in the construction, development or use of a planned development without a new application under the provisions of this Ordinance. The date of completion of a planned development, for which an amendment has been proposed, may be extended by the City Council for good cause. (B) Minor Adjustments: During build-out of the planned development, the Zoning Administrator may authorize, following review and recommendation of the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee, minor adjustments to the approved development plan, when such adjustments appear necessary in light of technical or engineering considerations. Such minor adjustments shall be limited to the following: 1. Altering the location of any one (1) structure or group of structures by not more than one-fourth (1/4) of the distance shown on the approved development plan between such structure or structures, and any other structure or any vehicular circulation element or any boundary of the site, whichever is less. 2. Altering the location of any circulation element by not more than one-fourth (1/4) of the distance shown on the approved development plan between such circulation element and any structure, whichever is less. 43 of 478 68-O-14 ~11~ 3. Altering the siting of any open space by not more than twenty percent (20%). 4. Altering any final grade by not more than twenty percent (20%) of the originally planned grade. 5. Altering the location or type of landscaping elements by not more than twenty percent (20%). 6. Altering the location or type of utility equipment. Such minor adjustments shall be consistent with the intent and purpose of the Ordinance and the development plan as approved pursuant to this Section 6-3-6, and shall be the minimum necessary to overcome the particular difficulty and shall not be approved if such adjustments would result in a violation of any standard or requirement of this Ordinance. For properties located in a designated historic district or incorporating identified historic structures, no such adjustment shall be granted for any critical structure, feature or element identified in the approved development plan as historically contributing without the prior consent of the preservation commission. (C) Major Adjustments: Any adjustment to the approved development plan not authorized by Subsection (B) of this Section, shall be considered to be a major adjustment. The Plan Commission following notice to all property owners whose properties are located within a one thousand (1,000) foot radius of the property boundary of the planned development, may approve an application for a major adjustment to the development plan not requiring a modification of written conditions of approval or recorded easements upon finding that any changes in the plan as approved will be in substantial conformity with such development plan. Such notice shall be sufficient notice for the initial hearing. Subsequent notices are not required for continuances of a hearing, if any. If the commission determines that a major adjustment is not in substantial conformity with the final development plan as approved, then the commission shall review the request in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 6-3-6-8 of this Chapter. SECTION 8: Section 6-3-7-5 of the City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 6-3-7-5: PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW AND DECISION OF PROPOSED USE: 44 of 478 68-O-14 ~12~ An application for a unique use shall be processed in accordance with the following procedures: (A) Public Hearing: After the filing of a perfected application for a unique use, the Zoning Administrator shall transmit the application to the Plan Commission and schedule a date for public hearing. (B) Staff Review Procedure: The Zoning Administrator shall schedule and conduct a staff review conference to review the comments received from the various departments and boards pursuant to Subsection 6-3-7-4(A) of this Chapter. Following the staff review conference, the Zoning Administrator shall forward staff's written report to the Plan Commission. (C) General Notice Of Public Hearing: Notice of the public hearing required in Subsection (A) of this Section shall be given by the Plan Commission by one (1) publication in one (1) or more newspapers of general circulation. Notice shall be published within a minimum of fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing date and a maximum of thirty (30) days prior to the hearing date. Such notice shall be sufficient notice for the initial hearing. Subsequent notices are not required for continuances of a hearing, if any. (D) Mailed Notices Required: Notice shall also be given by first class mail to all owners of property within one thousand (1,000) feet in each direction of the subject property, inclusive of public roads, streets, alleys and other public ways from the subject site whose addresses appear on the current tax assessment list as provided by the applicant. The failure of delivery of such notice, however, shall not invalidate any such hearing. In addition, a sign shall be posted on the property for a minimum of ten (10) working days prior to the public hearing indicating the place, time and date of the hearing. Such notice shall be sufficient notice for the initial hearing. Subsequent notices are not required for continuances of a hearing, if any. (E) Content Of Published And Mailed Notices: Published and mailed notice shall contain the time, date and place of the public hearing. (F) Application Process: Each unique use application shall be processed in conformance with the procedures of Sections 6-3-6-7, "Application Procedure," and 6-3-6-8, "Review Procedure; Decisions," of this Chapter. (G) Applicant Rights: Applicants for a unique use and owners of property within one thousand (1,000) feet inclusive of public roads, streets, alleys and other public ways, shall have the following rights, in addition to any others they may possess by law, at any hearing before the Plan Commission: 45 of 478 68-O-14 ~13~ 1. To inspect all documents and material submitted as part of the application for the unique use prior to the hearing. 2. To present witnesses on their behalf. (H) Objection Of Property Owners: Eligible property owners, as set forth above, who wish to object shall, upon written request, be granted one (1) continuance for the purpose of presenting evidence to rebut testimony given by the applicant. The date of such continued hearing shall be at the discretion of the commission. (I) Continued Hearings or Meetings. In the instance a hearing or meeting is continued to a date certain, the date and time of the continued hearing or meeting shall be announced at the time and place of the hearing being continued, and the continued hearing’s notice requirements shall be deemed satisfied. If for any reason the continued hearing or meeting date or time needs to be changed, the Zoning Administrator shall, in his or her best effort, provide the public with the new date and time of the continued hearing by: 1. Posting the continued meeting or hearing notice at the Civic Center; and 2. Posting the continued meeting or hearing notice on the City’s website. Failure to provide such notice, however, shall not invalidate any such continued hearing or meeting. (J) In the event a quorum is not present for the initial meeting or a continued meeting, a majority of the board or commission members present may reschedule the meeting to a new date and time. No additional mailed or published notices shall be required for meetings continued as provided in Section 6-3-7-5(I). SECTION 9: Section 6-3-8-10 of the City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 6-3-8-10: PROCEDURE FOR DECISIONS ON MAJOR VARIATIONS: Applications for major variations shall be reviewed and decided in accordance with the following procedure: (A) Public Hearing: Upon receipt of a completed application for a major variation, or a combined variation application, the Zoning Board of Appeals shall hold a public hearing in accordance with its adopted rules and procedures. 46 of 478 68-O-14 ~14~ 1. General Notice Of Public Hearing: Notice of the public hearing shall be given by the Zoning Board of Appeals by one (1) publication in one (1) or more newspapers of general circulation. Notice shall be published within a minimum of fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing date and a maximum of thirty (30) days prior to the hearing date. Such notice shall be sufficient notice for the initial hearing. Subsequent notices are not required for continuances of a hearing, if any. (B) Mailed Notices Required: Notice shall also be given by first class mail to all owners of property within a five hundred (500) foot radius of the subject property, inclusive of public roads, streets, alleys and other public ways from the subject site whose addresses appear on the current tax assessment list as provided by the applicant. The failure of delivery of such notice, however, shall not invalidate any such hearing. In addition, a sign shall be posted on the property for a minimum of ten (10) working days prior to the public hearing indicating the place, time and date of the hearing. Such notice shall be sufficient notice for the initial hearing. Subsequent notices are not required for continuances of a hearing, if any. (C) Zoning Board Of Appeals Decision: Following the close of the public hearing, the Zoning Board of Appeals shall either approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application for major variation or the combined variation application, except when the application for major variation pertains to off street parking, off street loading, height beyond fifty (50) feet, including within that measurement any height otherwise excluded because the story provides required parking, or townhouse orientation, or when the application for major variation pertaining to off street parking, off street loading, height beyond fifty (50) feet, including within that measurement any height otherwise excluded because the story provides required parking, or townhouse orientation, is combined with any other variation application; for such exceptions, the Zoning Board of Appeals shall make a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or denial to the City Council for their consideration. (D) City Council Decision: Upon receipt of the recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding an application for a major variation for off street parking, off street loading, height beyond fifty (50) feet, including within that measurement any height otherwise excluded because the story provides required parking, or townhouse orientation, or a combined application for major variation pertaining to off street parking, off street loading, height beyond fifty (50) feet, including within that measurement any height otherwise excluded because the story provides required parking, or townhouse orientation, and any other variation, the City 47 of 478 68-O-14 ~15~ Council shall either approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. (E) Appeal: Any person adversely affected by decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals or the City Council may appeal the decision to the circuit court. (F) Continued Hearings or Meetings. In the instance a hearing or meeting is continued to a date certain, the date and time of the continued hearing or meeting shall be announced at the time and place of the hearing being continued, and the continued hearing’s notice requirements shall be deemed satisfied. If for any reason the continued hearing or meeting date or time needs to be changed, the Zoning Administrator shall, in his or her best effort, provide the public with the new date and time of the continued hearing by: 1. Posting the continued meeting or hearing notice at the Civic Center; and 2. Posting the continued meeting or hearing notice on the City’s website. Failure to provide such notice, however, shall not invalidate any such continued hearing or meeting. (G) In the event a quorum is not present for the initial meeting or a continued meeting, a majority of the board or commission members present may reschedule the meeting to a new date and time. No additional mailed or published notices shall be required for meetings continued as provided in Section 6-3-8-10(F). SECTION 10: The findings and recitals contained herein are declared to be prima facie evidence of the law of the City and shall be received in evidence as provided by the Illinois Compiled Statutes and the courts of the State of Illinois. SECTION 11: All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION 12: If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance is held unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid application or provision, and each invalid provision or invalid application of this ordinance is severable. 48 of 478 68-O-14 ~16~ Introduced:_________________, 2014 Adopted:___________________, 2014 Approved: __________________________, 2014 _______________________________ Elizabeth B. Tisdahl, Mayor Attest: _______________________________ Rodney Greene, City Clerk Approved as to form: _______________________________ W. Grant Farrar, Corporation Counsel 49 of 478 50 of 478 51 of 478 52 of 478 DRAFT Page 1 of 3 Evanston Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission Minutes MEETING MINUTES ZONING COMMITTEE OF THE PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, May 21, 2014 7:00 P.M. Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Room 2403 Members Present: Richard Shure, Terri Dubin, Colby Lewis Members Absent: Scott Peters, Jim Ford Other Plan Commission Members Present: David Galloway Staff Present: Damir Latinovic, Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Lorrie Pearson, Planning and Zoning Administrator Mario Treto, Assistant City Attorney Presiding Member: Richard Shure, Chairman 1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM With a quorum present, Chairman Shure called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm . 2. MINUTES Approval of February 19, 2014 Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission Meeting Minutes: Commissioner Lewis motioned to approve the minutes as presented. Commissioner Dubin seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the minutes were approved with a voice vote 3:0. 3. NEW BUSINESS … B. TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE 14PLND-0044 Notice Requirements Specifically consider a text amendment, pursuant to City Code Title 6, Zoning, for the notice requirements for all zoning applications requiring approvals per the Title 6, Zoning, of the City Code. Mr. Latinovic presented the staff report memo. Chairman Shure noted Commissioner Peters has submitted a memo with certain changes to the proposed text. Mr. Latinovic stated that staff has received the Memo and City’s legal staff is reviewing the proposed clarifications. Mr. Latinovic also noted that he 53 of 478 DRAFT Page 2 of 3 Evanston Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission Minutes received an email from Commissioner Ford in response to the Memo from Commissioner Peters. Staff will evaluate the comments and include them in the proposed text amendment if appropriate. Commissioner Galloway asked for a clarification on what happens if there is no quorum to hold the initial public hearing that is scheduled for a case. Mr. Latinovic said that if there is no quorum, the meeting is cancelled. In that instance, any cases scheduled for that meeting are automatically rescheduled for the next regularly scheduled meeting and the notices are again provided to all surrounding property owners and in the newspaper as well as by posting of the sign on the property advertising the new hearing date. If however, the public hearing is held and it needs to be continued to a date certain, the date certain is announced at the initial public hearing and then for the continued hearing the notices are not provided. Mr. Latinovic clarified this is the practice right now and staff is not proposing to make any changes. Chairman Shure asked how people can find out about the continued hearings. Mr. Latinovic indicated that the first notice provides residents with contact information at the City where they can follow up. The City also posts notices on its website, at the Civic Center and an email is sent out to the residents subscribing to the City notifications regarding zoning matters. Commissioner Dubin asked for more clarification about the email subscription. Mr. Latinovic explained when an individual is looking to subscribe they can check off which types of topics they would like to get updates on. But he does not have a number of how many individuals have subscribed for the email notification list. Commissioner Lewis asked for confirmation that the agendas are posted on the website, to which Mr. Latinovic confirmed stating that the agendas are usually posted by Friday before the meeting. Chairman Shure asked if anyone that is in the audience that would like to speak on this matter. Peggy Gregory, 1419 Brown Ave, asked how any interested residents can find out if they are on the mailing list. Mr. Latinovic stated they can contact him or someone else in the planning and zoning division of the Community Development Department and staff can check the database that is generated based on the latest tax bills received from the County. There being no further discussion, Commissioner Lewis made a motion to approve the proposed text amendment regarding the notice requirements as recommended by staff. Chairman Shure asked that the motion incorporate comments and suggestions provided by Commissioners Peters and Ford. Commissioner Dubin seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a voice call: 3-0. 54 of 478 DRAFT Page 3 of 3 Evanston Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission Minutes … 4. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Lewis motioned for adjournment and Commissioner Dubin seconded the motion. With all commissioners in favor, the meeting was adjourned at 8:02 pm. The next meeting of the Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission is scheduled for Wednesday, June18, 2014 at 7:00pm., in room 2403 of the Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue. Respectfully Submitted, Damir Latinovic Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Community Development Department 55 of 478 DRAFT Page 1 of 3 Plan Commission Minutes 06/11/2014 MEETING MINUTES PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, June 11, 2014 7:00 P.M. Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Council Chambers Members Present: Scott Peters (Chair), Jim Ford, Terri Dubin, Kwesi Steele, Carol Goddard, Lenny Asaro Members Absent: Andrew Pigozzi, Colby Lewis, Richard Shure Associate Members Present: David Galloway Associate Members Absent: Seth Freeman, Stuart Opdycke Staff Present: Damir Latinovic, Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Lorrie Pearson, Planning and Zoning Administrator Mario Treto, Assistant City Attorney Presiding Member: Scott Peters, Chairman 1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chairman Peters called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M and explained the general meeting procedure, schedule, agenda items, time limits on public testimony and opportunities for cross examination of witnesses. Chairman Peters concluded the opening statement by saying that the Plan Commission forwards a recommendation to the City Council which makes the final determination on any matters discussed by the Plan Commission. 2. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: May 14, 2014 Commissioner Ford made a motion to approve the minutes as prepared. Commissioner Dubin seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the minutes were approved by voice call 3-0. Commissioner Goddard and Commissioner Steele abstained. 3. NEW BUSINESS … B. TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE 14PLND-0044 Notice Requirements Specifically consider a text amendment, pursuant to City Code Title 6, Zoning, for the notice requirements for all zoning applications requiring approvals per the Title 6, Zoning, of the City Code. 56 of 478 DRAFT Page 2 of 3 Plan Commission Minutes 06/11/2014 Mr. Latinovic explained that the text amendment was regarding public hearing notice requirements for zoning applications. This case was presented at the Zoning Committee meeting last month and received a positive recommendation. The proposal was brought up by staff due to the fact that the notification requirements are not clearly outlined in the Zoning Ordinance for different types of applications, such as special uses, variances, and planned developments. Staff has always provided a notice in the newspaper between 15 and 30 days before the hearing, notified surrounding property owners within a certain distance by mail, and posted a sign on the property. The proposed text amendment seeks to clarify language across the board on all types of applications. The second part of the amendment is to clarify that for any continued hearings, the second notice is not required. This is the current practice and is not new; this text amendment simply clarifies that. Prior to the Zoning Committee meeting, staff received feedback on improvements to the text amendment, many of which have been incorporated based on legal counsel. The proposed clarifications to the standards are found in the report. Mr. Latinovic invited questions. Chairman Peters voiced his concern for instances when notices are mailed out, printed, and posted and then at the meeting there is not a quorum. This allows someone to argue that there was no initial meeting to be continued. The cases in Illinois do not specifically address it. However, if there is a defective notice, the action taken may be invalid. Chairman Peters suggested the addition of two sentences to the portion of the ordinance that legal counsel believes is appropriate, perhaps the notice section. He read aloud the two sentences: “In the event that quorum is not present for the initial meeting or continued meeting, a majority of the Board of Commission members present may reschedule the meeting to a new date and time. No additional mailed or public notices shall be required for meetings continued as provided in this paragraph.” Chairman Peters felt it was clear given past practices and practices of other cities where he has observed this problem that re-sending and re-publishing more notices is not useful, is burdensome and causes delays. This text amendment will remedy that problem. He also discussed this with Commissioner Ford, who thought this might have already been addressed by Roberts Rules, which is true, however it would be stronger to express it as part of an ordinance. He noted that other states have different requirements. Mr. Latinovic noted that when quorum is not met, staff currently reschedules the meeting for the next regularly scheduled meeting and would republish notices. This amendment would allow staff to republish only if determined to be necessary. Chairman Peters followed that you can always republish, but the question now is if you have to. There being no further discussion or public input, Commissioner Ford made a motion to approve the Chairman Peters’ language addition to the text of the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Dubin seconded the motion. There was no discussion. The proposed language was added to the proposed text amendment unanimously 6:0. Commissioner Goddard made a motion to the approve of the staff recommended text amendment with the language added in the previous motion. Commissioner Ford seconded the motion. 57 of 478 DRAFT Page 3 of 3 Plan Commission Minutes 06/11/2014 There was no discussion. Chairman Peters commended the staff for a well drafted amendment and for addressing a subtle issue in the ordinance. A voice call was taken and the motion was approved by voice call 6-0. … 4. ADJOURNMENT There being no further discussion, Commissioner Goddard made a motion to adjourn the meeting, and Commissioner Asaro seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Damir Latinovic Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Community Development Department 58 of 478 For City Council meeting of July 28, 2014 Item P3 Ordinance 93-O-14: Special Use for Scoreboards at Ryan Field Football Stadium For Introduction & Action To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Planning and Development Committee From: Mark Muenzer, Director of Community Development Lorrie Pearson, Planning and Zoning Administrator Melissa Klotz, Zoning Planner Subject: Ordinance 93-O-14, Granting a Special Use for Scoreboards at Ryan Field, 1501 Central Street Date: July 16, 2014 Recommended Action The Zoning Board of Appeals and City staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 93-O-14 granting a special use permit for Scoreboards at Ryan Field football stadium at 1501 Central Street. The applicant requests suspension of the rules to obtain special use approval as quickly as possible to ensure there is adequate time to acquire a building permit and install the scoreboards prior to the football season. Summary The requested special use permit will allow Northwestern University to replace two existing scoreboards and add one new ribbon-style scoreboard for home football games and special events at Ryan Field. The applicant has complied with all other zoning requirements, and meets all of the standards for a special use in the U2 University Athletic Facilities District. 1501 Central Street is located on the northeast corner of Ashland Avenue and Central Street in the U2 University Athletic Facilities District, on a large lot featuring multiple athletic facilities for Northwestern University. The property is adjacent to Northwestern University parking lots, as well as single and multi-family homes. The applicant proposes to replace two existing scoreboards at Ryan Field football stadium, and add one new ribbon-style scoreboard. All three of the scoreboards are within the stadium, but can be seen from varying locations surrounding the property. Memorandum 59 of 478 The applicant proposes to modify the two existing scoreboards and install one new north ribbon-style scoreboard as follows: Main Scoreboard (replacement): The existing main scoreboard structure is 54’ wide by 53’ in height. The structure features advertising panels on both sides, scoreboard information, and an 18’ by 24’ LED video screen. The proposed scoreboard will utilize the existing structure, and will minimally increase the overall size by half of one foot in width while maintaining the same height. The new LED video screen is proposed at approximately 25’ by 44.5’. With the larger LED video screen, the new scoreboard will not feature the advertisements that the current scoreboard displays. This scoreboard is primarily not visible from the Central Street right-of-way, but can be seen from certain locations surrounding the stadium such as from the right-of-way near the main entrance. South Ribbon Scoreboard (replacement): The existing south ribbon scoreboard structure is 140’ in length and 8’ in width at the widest portion, and sits atop the south end bleacher seats. The proposed scoreboard is minimally smaller, at approximately 138’ in length. The proposed scoreboard is more streamlined at just over 4’ in height. The proposed scoreboard does not feature any advertising panels, and is proposed with smaller LED display screens. The back of this scoreboard is visible from the Central Street right-of-way. Since the proposed ribbon scoreboard will replace the existing ribbon, and is slightly smaller in bulk, there is no added impact on surrounded properties. North Ribbon Scoreboard (new): The applicant proposes to add a new ribbon scoreboard on the north end of the field, attached to the top of the building that is just beyond the football end zone. The proposed scoreboard is 134’ in length and approximately 4’ in height. The scoreboard is an LED display and will not feature additional advertisements. This scoreboard is primarily not visible from the Central Street right-of-way, but can be seen from certain locations surrounding the stadium such as from the right-of-way near the main entrance. Since this scoreboard is primarily not visible from the Cental Street right-of-way and is attached to an existing building, the impact on surrounding properties is minimal and should not cause a negative effect. Conclusion: The proposed replacement of the two existing scoreboards and the addition of the new north ribbon-style scoreboard are requests that will bring Ryan Field up to the standard of similar Big Ten University athletic facilities. The scoreboards will be used during Northwestern football home games, and periodically for special events that occur at the stadium. The scoreboards will be minimally visible from the right-of-way, and will not be detrimental to adjacent properties. City staff is not aware of any objections from neighboring property owners. 60 of 478 Neighborhood Benefit This use should not cause a negative effect on the surrounding neighborhood. As a result of public comment at the Zoning Board of Appeals hearing, the applicant has agreed to dim the LED screens to black, rather than grey as they are currently dimmed when in standby mode to minimize the impact on properties that have site lines to the scoreboards. With the proposed scoreboards, the neighborhood will continue to benefit from having a high-quality educational institution in the community with facilities on par with other Big Ten universities. Comprehensive Plan The Evanston Comprehensive General Plan encourages institutional development enhancements. The proposed scoreboards are an enhancement for Northwestern University’s football program that competes in the Big Ten Conference at the NCAA Division I level. The Comprehensive Plan specifically includes: Goal: Support the growth and evolution of institutions so long as the growth does not have an adverse impact upon the residentially-zoned adjacent neighborhoods. The scoreboards will promote Northwestern University’s football program and educational institution, which will in turn benefit the community as a whole. Legislative History July 15, 2014: The ZBA recommended unanimous approval of the special use permit with the following conditions: 1. All three scoreboard LED panels must dim to black when in standby mode. Attachments Proposed Ordinance 93-O-14 July 15, 2014 ZBA Draft Meeting Minutes Excerpt ZBA Findings Staff memo to the ZBA ZBA Application Packet – July 15, 2014 61 of 478 7/16/2014 93-O-14 AN ORDINANCE Granting a Special Use Permit for Three Scoreboards Located at 1501 Central Street in the U2 University Athletic Facilities Zoning District (“Ryan Field”) WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”) met on July 15, 2014, pursuant to proper notice, to consider case no. 14ZMJV-0074, an application filed by Charles Davidson, property owner agent of the property legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, commonly known as 1501 Central Street (the “Subject Property”) and located in the U2 University Athletic Facilities District, for a Special Use Permit to permit, pursuant to Subsection 6-15-7-3 of the Evanston City Code, 2012, as amended (“the Zoning Ordinance”), the replacement of two existing scoreboards and the addition of one new ribbon-style scoreboards on the Subject Property; and WHEREAS, the ZBA, after hearing testimony and receiving other evidence, made a written record and written findings that the application for a Special Use Permit to replace two existing scoreboards and add one new ribbon-style scoreboard met the standards for Special Uses in Section 6-3-5 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommended City Council approval thereof; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of July 28, 2014, the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council (“P&D Committee”) considered the ZBA’s record and findings and recommended the City Council accept the ZBA’s recommendation and approve the application in case no. 14ZMJV-0074; and 62 of 478 93-O-14 ~2~ WHEREAS, at its meeting of July 28, 2014, the City Council considered and adopted the respective records, findings, and recommendations of the ZBA and P&D Committee, as amended, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, THAT: SECTION 1: The foregoing recitals are found as fact and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2: The City Council hereby approves the replacement of two existing scoreboards and the addition of one new ribbon-style scoreboards on the Subject Property as applied for in case no. 14ZMJV-0074. SECTION 3: Pursuant to Subsection 6-3-5-12 of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council hereby imposes the following conditions on the Applicant’s Special Use Permit, violation of any of which shall constitute grounds for penalties or revocation of said Permit pursuant to Subsections 6-3-10-5 and 6-3-10-6 of the Zoning Ordinance: A. Compliance with Applicable Requirements: The Applicant shall develop and use the Subject Property in substantial compliance with: all applicable legislation; the Applicant’s testimony and representations to the ZBA, the P&D Committee, and the City Council; and the approved plans and documents on file in this case. B. Scoreboard LED Panels: All three scoreboard LED panels must be black when in standby mode. C. Recordation: Before it may operate the Special Use authorized by the terms of this ordinance, the Applicant shall record, at its cost, a certified copy of this ordinance with the Cook County Recorder of Deeds. SECTION 4: When necessary to effectuate the terms, conditions, and purposes of this ordinance, “Applicant” shall be read as “Applicant’s agents, assigns, and successors in interest.” 63 of 478 93-O-14 ~3~ SECTION 5: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval, and publication in the manner provided by law. SECTION 6: All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION 7: If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance is ruled unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid application or provision, and each invalid provision or invalid application of this ordinance is severable. SECTION 8: The findings and recitals contained herein are declared to be prima facie evidence of the law of the City and shall be received in evidence as provided by the Illinois Compiled Statutes and the courts of the State of Illinois. Introduced:_________________, 2014 Adopted:___________________, 2014 Approved: __________________________, 2014 _______________________________ Elizabeth B. Tisdahl, Mayor Attest: _____________________________ Rodney Greene, City Clerk Approved as to form: _______________________________ W. Grant Farrar, Corporation Counsel 64 of 478 93-O-14 ~4~ EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE PART OF LOTS 18 AND 18 LYING EAST OF THE EAST LINE OF ASHLAND AVENUE, SOUTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF ISABELLA STREET AND NORTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF CENTRAL AVENUE (EXCEPT THE EASTERLY 4 FEET OF THE SOUTHERLY 432.92 FEET OF THE NORTHERLY 465.92 FEET OF LOT 18) IN GEORGE SMITH’S SUBDIVISION OF THE SOUTH PART OF ARCHANGE QUILMETTE RESERVATION IN TOWNSHIP 42 NORTH, RANGE 13, LYING EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PIN: 05-35-310-015-0000 COMMONLY KNOWN AS: 1501 Central Street, Evanston, Illinois. 65 of 478 DRAFT NOT APPROVED Page 1 of 6 Zoning Board of Appeals MEETING MINUTES ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Tuesday, July 5, 2014 7:00 PM Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Council Chambers Members Present: Matt Rodgers, Violetta Cullen, Clara Wineberg, Mary Beth Berns, Andrew Gallimore Members Absent: Scott Gingold, Beth McLennan Staff Present: Melissa Klotz, Lorrie Pearson, Mario Treto, Michelle Masoncup, Kari Grace Chair: Matt Rodgers Declaration of Quorum With a quorum present, Chair Rodgers called the meeting to order at 7:10pm. Approval of Minutes The minutes from the July 1, 2014 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting were motioned for approval by Ms. Cullen and seconded by Ms. Berns. The motion was approved 2-0 with two abstentions. New Business 2330 Orrington Avenue ZBA 14ZMJV-0072 Gina Giannetti, landscape architect, applies for major zoning relief to construct a backyard bluestone patio. The applicant requests a 5.0’ street side yard setback where 15’ is required (Zoning Code Section 6-8-2-8-C-2). The Zoning Board of Appeals is the determining body for this case. Ms. Klotz read the case into the record. Ms. Wineberg arrived. Ms. Giannetti, the landscape architect, explained the case: • Replace existing backyard patio in same location, new configuration that is more functional • Proposed patio will lower the impervious surface coverage • The patio is fully screened by a fence and landscaping • They cannot locate the patio to another portion of the yard because they want to preserve a mature tree • The property is unique in that it is a corner lot and has no alley access, so a significant portion of the yard is already taken up by the garage and driveway The ZBA entered into deliberations. Ms. Berns noted that terraces may encroach into the setback. Ms Klotz responded that terraces can only encroach by 10%. The Standards were then addressed: 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Yes 66 of 478 DRAFT NOT APPROVED Page 3 of 6 Zoning Board of Appeals Mr. Purohit answered that the front elevation windows will not be tinted, only the alley windows will be tinted. The front windows will utilize curtains for privacy. Chair Rodgers stated that they are creating seven accessible units but not the same amount of parking spaces. He asked what would happen if more people want parking spaces than are available. Ms. Berns stated that if that were the case, people would probably not rent the units. Mr. Moore showed a new site plan, Exhibit B, with one accessible parking space. Ms. Klotz stated that the applicant may need a new variance for the drive aisle; however, she will look into it further to determine if that is necessary. Mr. Gallimore noted that the applicant could rezone to residential instead, which could impact setbacks to the adjacent property to the east if it is abutting residential. Ms. Klotz replied that the setback would be determined based on the zoning district. Ms. Wineberg stated that if that were the case, if the adjacent building were to rebuild in the future near to the property line, the lighting and ventilation of the units on that side may be impacted. Ms. Cullen stated that the study says that most handicapped people do not have cars; however, they would likely need a medi-car. She asked if there would be loading space for a medi-car. There is no street parking in front of the property. Chair Rodgers noted that the drive aisle is 22 feet and asked if that is enough space. The ADA space is 16 feet wide. Chair Rodgers also asked if the ceiling height is different on the first floor since there are no adjoining buildings. Mr. Purohit replied that the building height is 30 inches lower in the rear building; however, the ceiling heights will all be eight to nine feet. The ZBA entered into deliberations: Chair Rodgers noted two concerns. One concern is parking space number six. The other is the setback impact on the adjacent property as the building is on the property line. Ms. Wineberg stated that the project is needed; however, the parking lot and loading zone are not thoroughly thought out. She also noted that one of the units may not be large enough to meet code. The record was re-opened. Tom Moore requested a continuance for time to address concerns. Ms. Berns motioned to continue the case at the August 5, 2014 meeting. The motion was seconded by Ms. Cullen and approved 5-0. 1501 Central Street ZBA 14ZMJV-0074 Charles Davidson, property owner agent, applies for a special use permit for three scoreboards at Northwestern University’s Ryan Field football stadium. The applicant requests a special use permit to replace two existing scoreboards and add one new ribbon-style scoreboard in the U2 67 of 478 DRAFT NOT APPROVED Page 4 of 6 Zoning Board of Appeals University Athletic Facilities District (Zoning Code Section 6-15-7-3). The Zoning Board of Appeals makes a recommendation to City Council, the determining body for this case. Ms. Klotz read the case into the record. Charles Davidson, the applicant, and Scott Airy explained the proposal: • The main scoreboard will remain approximately the same height and size • The south ribbon scoreboard will also remain approximately the same size • The main scoreboard will have less advertising • The south ribbon scoreboard will essentially be the same but will have new technology • The new north ribbon scoreboard is visible from the right-of-way from the gate area • The scoreboards are used for home games and occasional special events; however, it will be used mostly during the day Chair Rodgers noted that there will be a larger LED screen, and at night the game field will also be lit, so there will be no additional light pollution. He asked about any additional sound. Mr. Airy replied that there is no audio capability on any of the scoreboards. All of the sounds go through the existing stadium sound system. Jeffrey Bayer, a neighbor, stated that he can see the scoreboard from his front yard. The existing scoreboard is often on, although he is not sure why. He asked if that would change. Mr. Airy replied that the power supply is active even when the board is not on, so the panel has a glowing grey color. It is possible to change that so that it is black instead while it is in a sleep mode. Ms. Cullen asked how many night games per year there are. Mr. Airy answered that there are two night games at the most and some that may end at dusk. There are a total of seven home games. Temporary lighting is brought in for home games at night and dusk. He is happy to work with Mr. Bayer to make sure that the screen appears off at night. The ZBA entered into deliberations: Ms. Berns suggested they make a condition that the LED panel scoreboards be black when in standby mode. The Standards were addressed: 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Yes 4. Yes 5. Yes 6. Yes 7. Yes 8. Yes 9. Yes Ms. Berns motioned to recommend approval of the proposal with the following condition: 1. The LED scoreboard panels must be made black when in standby mode. The motion was seconded by Mr. Gallimore and approved 5-0. 68 of 478 FF II NN DD II NN GG SS FOR STANDARDS OF SS PP EE CC II AA LL UU SS EE PP EE RR MM II TT SS In the case of After conducting a public hearing on July 15, 2014, the Zoning Board of Appeals makes the following findings of fact, reflected in the audio-visual recording of the hearings, based upon the standards for special uses specified in Section 6-3-5-10 of the Zoning Ordinance: Standard Finding (A) It is one of the special uses specifically listed in the zoning ordinance; ___X__Met _____Not Met Vote 5-0 (B) It is in keeping with purposes and policies of the adopted comprehensive general plan and the zoning ordinance as amended from time to time; ___X___Met _____Not Met Vote 5-0 (C) It will not cause a negative cumulative effect, when its effect is considered in conjunction with the cumulative effect of various special uses of all types on the immediate neighborhood and the effect of the proposed type of special use upon the city as a whole; ___X___Met _____Not Met Vote 5-0 (D) It does not interfere with or diminish the value of property in the neighborhood; ___X___Met _____Not Met Vote 5-0 (E) It can be adequately served by public facilities and services ___X___Met _____Not Met Vote 5-0 (F) It does not cause undue traffic congestion; ___X___Met _____Not Met Vote 5-0 Case Number: 14ZMJV-0074 Address or Location: 1501 Central Street Applicant: Charles Davidson, Northwestern University Proposed Special Use: Scoreboards for Ryan Field 69 of 478 (G) It preserves significant historical and architectural resources; ___X___Met _____Not Met Vote 5-0 (H) It preserves significant natural and environmental features; and ___X___Met _____Not Met Vote 5-0 (I) It complies with all other applicable regulations of the district in which it is located and other applicable ordinances, except to the extent such regulations have been modified through the planned development process or the grant of a variation. ___X___Met _____Not Met Vote 5-0 and, based upon these findings, and upon a vote __5__ in favor & __0__ against Recommends to the City Council _____ approval without conditions __x__ approval with conditions specifically: 1. All three scoreboard LED panels must dim to black when in standby mode. _____ denial of the proposed special use. __________________________________________ Date: _____________ Matt Rodgers Zoning Board of Appeals Chair Attending: Vote: Aye No ___X___ Mary Beth Berns __X__ ____ ___X___ Clara Wineberg __X__ ____ _______ Scott Gingold _____ ____ _______ Beth McLennan _____ ____ ___X___ Matt Rodgers __X__ ____ ___X___ Violetta Cullen __X__ ____ ___X___ Andrew Gallimore __X__ ____ 70 of 478 71 of 478 72 of 478 73 of 478 74 of 478 75 of 478 76 of 478 77 of 478 78 of 478 79 of 478 80 of 478 81 of 478 82 of 478 83 of 478 84 of 478 85 of 478 86 of 478 87 of 478 88 of 478 Department of Facilities Management Operations Northwestern University Prepared by: Charles Davidson NU—Ryan Field Scoreboard Preliminary Zoning Review SubmiƩal Friday, June 20, 2014 1. ExisƟng CondiƟon Site Plan 2. Site Plan—Photos 3. Main Scoreboard ElevaƟons / Photos 4. South Ribbon Board ElevaƟons / Photos 5. North Ribbon Board ElevaƟons Photos Ryan Field Main Scoreboard North Ribbon Board South Ribbon Board 89 of 478 Department of Facilities Management Operations Northwestern University Prepared by: Charles Davidson Ryan Field Main Scoreboard ExisƟng / Proposed ExisƟng Proposed Friday, June 20, 2014 90 of 478 Department of Facilities Management Operations Northwestern University Prepared by: Charles Davidson Ryan Field Main Scoreboard Friday, June 20, 2014 91 of 478 Department of Facilities Management Operations Northwestern University Prepared by: Charles Davidson ExisƟng South Ribbon Board Proposed South Ribbon Board South Ribbon Board ExisƟng CondiƟon Photo AD PANEL Friday, June 20, 2014 92 of 478 Department of Facilities Management Operations Northwestern University Prepared by: Charles Davidson North Ribbon Board Friday, June 20, 2014 93 of 478 Department of Facilities Management Operations Northwestern University Prepared by: Charles Davidson Site Line to exisƟng South Ribbon Board Rear elevaƟon only Site line to main Scoreboard Top Only Site Line through corridor to Main Score-board and Proposed North Ribbon Board A C B Site Line to South Ribbon Board B A C Site Line main Scoreboard Visible at angle Site Plan Photos—ExisƟng CondiƟon Site Lines Site line to main Scoreboard Top Only Site line to main Scoreboard Top Only Friday, June 20, 2014 94 of 478 95 of 478 96 of 478 97 of 478 98 of 478 99 of 478 100 of 478 For City Council meeting of July 28, 2014 Item P4 Ordinance 81-O-14: Land Use Regulations for Neighborhood Gardens, Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms For Introduction To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Planning and Development Committee From: Mark Muenzer, Director of Community Development Department Lorrie Pearson, Planning and Zoning Administrator Damir Latinovic, Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Subject: Ordinance 81-O-14 Amending the Zoning Ordinance Text Land Use Regulations for Neighborhood Gardens, Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms Date: July 14, 2014 Recommended Action: The Plan Commission and staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 81-O- 14 to establish land use regulations for Neighborhood Gardens, Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms as principal uses. Summary As proposed, the Neighborhood Gardens would be allowed as permitted uses in R, B, C, I, M, and O1 districts and as special uses in the D and RP districts. Urban Farms would be allowed as special uses in the I districts only, while Rooftop Urban Farms would be allowed as special uses in B, C, D, I, M, RP and O1 districts. Neighborhood Gardens are locally-based garden plots managed by a specific person or group that maintains the property. Currently, garden plots would only be allowed as an accessory use on properties that have a separate primary use, such as a residence, school or a park. The proposal would allow Neighborhood Gardens as a primary use so that vacant parcels can be utilized for education, recreation, harvest, and beautification through gardening. A Neighborhood Garden may include a small garden shed and a fence with incidental sales of plants or produce allowed only off-site at a location such as a farmer’s market. However, per the proposed definition of the use, a Neighborhood Garden may not be utilized as for-profit commercial business. All Neighborhood Gardens would require a permit handled by the Zoning Office, similar to yard sale permits. There is no permit fee proposed. Urban Farms or Rooftop Urban Farms are commercial enterprises that typically utilize vacant properties with traditional and non-traditional farming techniques. The uses are Memorandum 101 of 478 currently prohibited as agricultural uses. Because of the multitude of variables Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms may have, approval of such businesses on a case-by- case is needed. This can be adequately done through the special use approval process so that such establishments can be given consideration based on their type of system, indoor or outdoor use and proximity to neighboring businesses and residences. The special use process also allows the City to condition the approval to eliminate potential nuisance issues. On July 9, 2014 the City staff held a meeting and invited local experts and community stakeholders interested in local food production to provide their feedback regarding the proposed text amendment. The group agreed the proposal is a much needed first step in promoting local food production. The group also noted the proposal may have to be modified after the City can evaluate operations of such uses in the future. Proposal Staff proposes the following land use definitions and regulations: Neighborhood Garden – a principal use that provides space for people to grow plants for non-commercial purposes, such as beautification, education, recreation, or harvest, and is managed by a specific person or group responsible for maintenance and operations, subject to the following regulations: a) The person or group responsible for managing the garden shall be identified on each required annual application/registration form. b) On-site processing and/or storage of plants or plant products are prohibited. c) Outdoor storage of any kind is prohibited. d) A fence and one accessory structure for the storage of gardening tools and supplies, no larger than 120 square feet in area, shall be allowed on-site, provided the owner or operator first obtains a Certificate of Zoning Compliance or Building Permit. e) Composting of plant material that is grown on site shall be permitted, except in the required front yard. All other composting is prohibited. f) No incidental sales of plants or produce shall take place on site. g) Neighborhood gardens shall be maintained so as not to encourage the harboring of vermin. Accumulation of weeds and/or rubbish is prohibited. Urban Farm – An indoor or outdoor principal use that includes growing plant products for wholesale or retail sales and which may include one or more of the following: washing; packaging; storage. Typical Urban Farm operations may include growing beds, greenhouses, and orchards. Rooftop Urban Farm – A rooftop operation that includes growing plant products for wholesale or retail sales and which may include one or more of the following: washing; packaging; storage. Typical Rooftop Urban Farm operations may include growing beds, greenhouses, and orchards. 102 of 478 Current Regulations Proposed Regulations Neighborhood Gardens Only allowed as an accessory use to another principal use on the same zoning lot, such as a residence or school. Permitted Use in: R1, R2, R3, R4, R4a, R5, R6, B1, B1a, B2, B3, C1, C1a, C2, O1, I1, I2, I3, MU, MUE, MXE. Special Use in: D1, D2, D3, D4, RP Urban Farms Considered agriculture, which is not allowed. Special Use in: I1, I2, I3 Districts Rooftop Urban Farms Considered agriculture, which is not allowed. Special Use in: B1, B1a, B2, B3, C1, C1a, C2, D1, D2, D3, D4, I1, I2, I3, MU, MUE, MXE, RP, O1. Standards of Approval The proposal meets the standards for approval of amendments listed in Section 6-3-4-5 of the City Code. The proposed regulations will encourage local sustainable produce production and further City’s goal of becoming the most livable city in the country. The Neighborhood Garden regulations would enable non-profit organizations to utilize vacant parcels throughout the City and provide residents who lack adequate personal outdoor space to practice gardening. Similarly, Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms regulations can further the City’s sustainability goals. By allowing the Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms as a special use, each application will be reviewed by the Plan Commission and City Council to assure the proposed establishment will be adequately served by public services and is compatible with the surrounding uses. The proposed amendment will not have an adverse effect on the existing properties and uses in the City, but could reenergize underutilized properties and commercial areas. The proposed text amendment is also consistent with the Comprehensive General Plan of the City. The proposed uses are consistent with the goals of the Plan to achieve a clean and attractive environment that preserves natural resources and promotes health and high quality of life. The proposal is also consistent with the Plan’s objective to promote awareness of environmental issues and encourage practices that sustain a healthy environment through urban farming that can provide fresh produce to the community and utilize vacant properties. Since most produce from Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms is typically consumed within a 60 mile radius of where it is harvested, the residents of Evanston stand to benefit from fresh produce. Legislative History The proposed land use regulations for Neighborhood Gardens, Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms were presented to the Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission and the Plan Commission in summer of 2012. The Plan Commission forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council but because of the priority of other items and the lack of formal applications for such establishments, the proposed text 103 of 478 amendment was not presented to the City Council. Since the official recommendation by the Plan Commission took place approximately 20 months ago, City’s legal counsel recommended presenting the proposed text amendment again to the Plan Commission before the proposal is introduced to the City Council. June 11, 2014 – The Plan Commission forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council by a vote of 5:0:1. Per the chairman’s discussion with a representative of Northwestern University, the Plan Commission included a condition that Neighborhood Gardens be allowed as permitted uses also in U and T districts where majority of the land is owned by or is devoted for the use by Northwestern University. The condition was the reason for the sole abstaining vote. Since the meeting, staff has confirmed the University does not believe the change to allow Neighborhood Gardens as a permitted use in U and T districts is necessary. The University is in agreement with City staff to continue to allow such uses only as an accessory use to another established use on a property in U and T districts. The University otherwise supports the proposed text amendment. September 12, 2012 – The Plan Commission unanimously made a positive recommendation to the City Council. August 15, 2012 – The Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission discussed the proposed land use definitions and noted incidental sales of products grown at Neighborhood Gardens should only be allowed off-site. The Committee forwarded a positive recommendation to the Plan Commission. July 18, 2012 – The Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission discussed the proposed land use definitions and zoning regulations for Neighborhood Gardens, Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms. The Committee discussed a need for licensing and permitting of neighborhood gardens and directed staff to investigate the matter. Attachments Proposed Ordinance 81-O-14 Plan Commission Packet 06/11/14 Plan Commission Draft Meeting Minutes 06/11/14 104 of 478 Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Neighborhood Gardens, Urban Farms & Rooftop Urban Farms 13PLND-0059 105 of 478 7/15/2014 6/3/2014 81-O-14 AN ORDINANCE Amending Portions of the Zoning Ordinance to Create the “Urban Farm,” “Urban Farm, Rooftop,” and “Neighborhood Garden” Uses WHEREAS, on June 11, 2014, the Plan Commission held a public hearing, pursuant to proper notice, regarding case no. 14PLND-0059 to consider various amendments to the text of Title 6 of the Evanston City Code of 2012, as amended (the “Zoning Ordinance”), relating to the creation of the Use known as “Urban Farm,” “Urban Farm, Rooftop” and “Neighborhood Garden;” and WHEREAS, the Plan Commission received testimony and made written findings pursuant to Section 6-3-4-5 of the Zoning Ordinance that the proposed amendments met the standards for text amendments, and recommended City Council approval thereof; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of July 28, 2014, the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council considered and adopted the findings and recommendation of the Plan Commission in case no. 14PLND-0059 and recommended City Council approval thereof; and WHEREAS, at its meetings of July 28, 2014 and August 11, 2014, the City Council considered and adopted the records and recommendations of the Plan Commission and the Planning and Development Committee, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, THAT: 106 of 478 81-O-14 ~2~ SECTION 1: The foregoing recitals are hereby found as fact and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2: Section 6-18-3 of the Zoning Ordinance , “Definitions,” is hereby amended to include the following: NEIGHBORHOOD GARDEN: A principal use that provides space for people to grow plants for non-commercial purposes, such as beautification, education, recreation, or harvest, and is managed by a specific person or group responsible for maintenance and operations. URBAN FARM: An indoor or outdoor principal use that includes growing plant products for wholesale or retail sales and may include one (1) or more of the following: washing; packaging; storage. Typical Urban Farms may include growing beds, greenhouses, and orchards. URBAN FARM, ROOFTOP: A rooftop operation that includes growing plant products for wholesale or retail sales and may include one (1) or more of the following: washing; packaging; storage. Typical Rooftop Urban Farms may include growing beds, greenhouses, and orchards. SECTION 3: Chapter 4 of the Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended by the enactment of a new Section 9 thereof, to read as follows: 6-4-9: NEIGHBORHOOD GARDENS: A neighborhood garden is a principal use that provides space for people to grow plants for non-commercial purposes, such as beautification, education, recreation, or harvest, that is managed by a specific person or group responsible for maintenance and operations. The following general requirements shall apply to neighborhood gardens: (A) The person or group responsible for managing the garden shall be identified on each required annual application/registration form. (B) On-site processing and/or storage of plants or plant products are prohibited. 107 of 478 81-O-14 ~3~ (C) Outdoor storage of any kind is prohibited. (D) A fence and one (1) accessory structure for the storage of gardening tools and supplies, no larger than one hundred twenty square feet (120 sq. ft.) in area, shall be allowed on-site, provided the owner or operator first obtains a Certificate of Zoning Compliance or Building Permit for it/them. (E) Composting of plant material that is grown on site shall be permitted, except in the required front yard. All other composting is prohibited. (F) No incidental sales of plants or produce shall take place on site. (G) Neighborhood gardens shall be maintained so as not to encourage the harboring of vermin. Accumulations of weeds and/or rubbish is prohibited. SECTION 4: Subsection 6-9-2-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the B1 District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 5: Subsection 6-9-3-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the B2 District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 6: Subsection 6-9-4-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the B3 District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 7: Subsection 6-9-5-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the B1a District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 8: Subsection 6-10-2-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the C1 District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 9: Subsection 6-10-3-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the C1a District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 10: Subsection 6-10-4-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the C2 District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 11: Subsection 6-11-2-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the D1 District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” 108 of 478 81-O-14 ~4~ SECTION 12: Subsection 6-11-3-4 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the D2 District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 13: Subsection 6-11-4-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the D3 District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 14: Subsection 6-11-5-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the D4 District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 15: Subsection 6-12-2-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the RP Research Park District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 16: Subsection 6-13-2-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the MU District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 17: Subsection 6-13-3-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the MUE District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 18: Subsection 6-13-4-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the MXE District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 19: Subsection 6-14-2-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the I1 District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm” and “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 20: Subsection 6-14-3-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the I2 District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm” and “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” 109 of 478 81-O-14 ~5~ SECTION 21: Subsection 6-14-4-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the I3 District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm” and “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 22: Subsection 6-15-2-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the O1 Office District, is hereby amended to include “Urban Farm, Rooftop.” SECTION 23: Subsection 6-8-2-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the R1 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 24: Subsection 6-8-3-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the R2 Residential, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 25: Subsection 6-8-4-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the R3 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 26: Subsection 6-8-5-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the R4 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 27: Subsection 6-8-6-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the R4a District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 28: Subsection 6-8-7-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the R5 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 29: Subsection 6-8-8-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the R6 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 30: Subsection 6-9-2-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the B1 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 31: Subsection 6-9-3-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the B2 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” 110 of 478 81-O-14 ~6~ SECTION 32: Subsection 6-9-4-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the B3 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 33: Subsection 6-9-5-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the B1a District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 34: Subsection 6-10-2-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the C1 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 35: Subsection 6-10-3-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the C1a District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 36: Subsection 6-10-4-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the C2 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 37: Subsection 6-11-2-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the D1 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 38: Subsection 6-11-3-4 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the D2 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 39: Subsection 6-11-4-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the D3 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 40: Subsection 6-11-5-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the D4 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 41: Subsection 6-12-2-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Special Uses” in the RP District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 42: Subsection 6-13-2-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the MU District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” 111 of 478 81-O-14 ~7~ SECTION 43: Subsection 6-13-3-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the MUE District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 44: Subsection 6-13-4-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the MXE District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 45: Subsection 6-14-2-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the I1 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 46: Subsection 6-14-3-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the I2 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 47: Subsection 6-14-4-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the I3 District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 48: Subsection 6-15-2-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, “Permitted Uses” in the O1 Office District, is hereby amended to include “Neighborhood Garden.” SECTION 49: All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION 50: If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance is held unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid application or provision, and each invalid provision or invalid application of this ordinance is severable. SECTION 51: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in the manner provided by law. 112 of 478 81-O-14 ~8~ SECTION 52: The findings and recitals contained herein are declared to be prima facie evidence of the law of the City and shall be received in evidence as provided by the Illinois Compiled Statutes and the courts of the State of Illinois. Introduced:_________________, 2014 Adopted:___________________, 2014 Approved: __________________________, 2014 _______________________________ Elizabeth B. Tisdahl, Mayor Attest: _______________________________ Rodney Greene, City Clerk Approved as to form: _______________________________ W. Grant Farrar, Corporation Counsel 113 of 478 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PERMIT # ______________________ (Office Use Only Please) A NEIGHBORHOOD GARDEN is a principal use that provides space for people to grow plants for non-commercial purposes, such as beautification, education, recreation, or harvest, and is managed by a specific person or group responsible for maintenance and operations. Date of Application: ____________________________ Location of Neighborhood Garden: __________________________________________________________________ NEIGHBORHOOD GARDEN MANAGER Name: __________________________________________________________________________________________ Address: ________________________________________________________________________________________ Contact Information: ___________________(Phone)_______________________________________________(Email) Signature: _______________________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNER Name: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Address: ________________________________________________________________________________________ Contact Information: ___________________(Phone)_______________________________________________(Email) Signature: _______________________________________________________________________________________ Description of Operation:___________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Water Usage/Supply:_______________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Hours of Operation:________________________________________________________________________________ RULES AND REGULATIONS (A) The person or group responsible for managing the garden shall be identified on each required annual application form. (B) On-site processing and/or storage of plants or plant produce are prohibited. (C) Outdoor storage of any kind is prohibited. (D) A fence and one accessory structure for the storage of gardening tools and supplies, no larger than 120 square feet in area, shall be allowed on site, provided the owner or operator first obtains a Certificate of Zoning Compliance or Building Permit for it/them. (E) Composting of plant material that is grown on site shall be permitted, except in the required front yard. All other composting is prohibited. (F) No incidental sales of plants or produce shall take place on site. (G) Neighborhood Gardens shall be maintained so as not to encourage the harboring of vermin. Accumulation of weeds and/or rubbish is prohibited. Failure to comply with the above regulations may result in the revocation of your permit, termination of the Neighborhood Garden, and fines administered through the Administrative Adjudication process. Community Development Department — Zoning Office, Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Ave. Evanston, IL 60201 847‐448‐8230 847‐448‐8126 zoning@cityofevanston.org www.cityofevanston.org/zoning NEIGHBORHOOD GARDEN APPLICATION Approval: (Office Use Only Please) 114 of 478 Urban Farms Often utilizing vertical farming techniques since space is limited 115 of 478 Also utilizing rooftop locations 116 of 478 APPROVED Page 1 of 2 Evanston Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission Minutes MEETING MINUTES ZONING COMMITTEE OF THE PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, July 18, 2012 7:00 P.M. Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Council Chambers Members Present: Jim Ford, Richard Shure (Chair), Seth Freeman, Patricia Ledesma Liebana, Dave Galloway, Scott Peters Members Absent: Kwesi Steele Staff Present: Melissa Klotz Presiding Member: Richard Shure, Chairman 1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM With a quorum present, Chairman Shure called the meeting to order at 7:10 P.M. 2. MINUTES Approval of June 13, 2012 Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission Meeting Minutes: Commissioner Freeman motioned for approval of the June 13, 2012 meeting minutes. Commissioner Ford seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the minutes were approved as written. 3. OLD BUSINESS … B.) 12PLND-0036 TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE Consideration of the proposed zoning text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to discuss the regulation of Community Gardens. Committee members agreed Community Gardens should be allowed uses rather than special uses, but they should be licensed with certain regulations. Attorney Ken Cox noted that the Parks & Recreation Department regulates and oversees public land where there currently are a few Community Gardens, but they cannot oversee private land. John Gareth Proctor explained that he has a lot of experience with creating Community Gardens throughout Chicago. They are permitted as of right, are not licensed, but it is necessary to discuss the plans with the Police Department to ensure the layout does not create issues for the police. 117 of 478 APPROVED Page 2 of 2 Evanston Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission Minutes The Committee felt the special use process would be appropriate in the downtown area, and Community Gardens should be allowed in all other districts. Mr. Proctor added that Community Gardens are well cared for because so many people are involved and there is a sense of pride. Commissioner Peters motioned to refer Community Gardens back to staff so that a registration permit with specific regulations could be created. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Steele and approved 6-0. C.) 12PLND-0036 TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE Consideration of the proposed zoning text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to discuss the regulation of Urban Farms. Mr. Proctor explained that rooftop farms have expensive startup costs because a structural engineer must be consulted since dirt and water are heavy. Commissioner Peters asked staff to look into the building code to ensure anything done on a rooftop related to Urban Farms would be covered by code, would be safe, and would be adequately reviewed by City staff. Commissioner Ford motioned to approve the definition of Urban Farm and Rooftop Farm. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Galloway and approved 6-0. Commissioner Peters motioned to approve Urban Farms and Rooftop Farms as special uses in all districts other than residential. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Freeman and approved 6-0. The issue was referred back to staff to find specific language in the building code that will ensure proper safety measures are taken for Rooftop Farms, and to create height regulations for accessory structures that may be used on Rooftop Farms. …. 4. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Peters motioned to adjourn. Commissioner Ledesma Liebana seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 10:05 PM. The next meeting of the Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission will be Wednesday, August 15, 2012 at 7:00 P.M., in the Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue. Respectfully Submitted, Melissa Klotz Zoning Planner, Community and Economic Development Department 118 of 478 APPROVED Page 1 of 2 Evanston Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission Minutes MEETING MINUTES ZONING COMMITTEE OF THE PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, August 15, 2012 7:00 P.M. Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Room 2404 Members Present: Jim Ford, Richard Shure (Chair), Patricia Ledesma Liebana, Scott Peters, Stuart Opdycke Members Absent: Kwesi Steele, Dave Galloway Staff Present: Melissa Klotz, Dennis Marino, Ken Cox Presiding Member: Richard Shure, Chairman 1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM With a quorum present, Chairman Shure called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. 2. MINUTES Approval of July 18, 2012 Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission Meeting Minutes: Commissioner Peters motioned for approval of the July 18, 2012 meeting minutes. Commissioner Liebana seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the minutes were approved as written. 3. OLD BUSINESS A) 12PLND-0036 TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE Consideration of the proposed zoning text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to discuss the regulation of Community/Neighborhood Gardens. Committee members discussed a slight change to the wording of the proposed definition of Neighborhood Gardens. Committee members decided incidental sales of produce should be allowed but not on site. Commissioner Peters motioned for approval of the proposed text amendment with the changes to the definition and sales of produce as discussed. Commissioner Ford seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0. B) 12PLND-0036 TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE Consideration of the proposed zoning text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to discuss the regulation of Urban Farms 119 of 478 APPROVED Page 2 of 2 Evanston Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission Minutes Committee members discussed a slight change to the wording of the proposed definition of Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms. Commissioner Liebana motioned for approval of the proposed text amendment with the changes to the definitions as discussed. Commissioner Ford seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0. … 4. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Ford motioned to adjourn. Chairman Shure seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 7:50 PM. The next meeting of the Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission will be Wednesday, September 19, 2012 at 7:00 P.M., in the Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue. Respectfully Submitted, Melissa Klotz Zoning Planner, Community and Economic Development Department 120 of 478 APPROVED Page 1 of 2 Plan Commission Minutes MEETING MINUTES PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, September 12, 2012 7:00 P.M. Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Council Chambers Members Present: Jim Ford, Barbara Putta, Seth Freeman, Patricia Ledesma, Scott Peters (Chair), Richard Shure, Members Absent: Kwesi Steele, David Galloway, Stuart Opdycke (Associate), Lenny Asaro Staff Present: Craig Sklenar, Ken Cox, Melissa Klotz, Dennis Marino Presiding Member: Scott Peters, Chairman 1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM With a quorum present, Chairman Peters called the meeting to order at 7:06 P.M. 2. APPROVAL OF AUGUST 8, 2012 MEETING MINUTES Commissioner Ford motioned for approval of the August 8, 2012 meeting minutes Commissioner Freeman seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the minutes were approved. 3. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT 12PLND-0036 Consideration of the proposed text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to discuss zoning regulations of Neighborhood Gardens. Melissa Klotz, Zoning Planner, provided a staff report concerning the proposed establishment of a definition for Neighborhood Gardens. Chairman Peters opened the discussion asking for a motion concerning the proposed text amendment. Commissioner Ford motioned to approve the proposed definition and provide a recommendation to City Council to approve this definition. Commissioner Putta seconded the motion A voice vote was taken, the motion passed 7-0. 4. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT 12PLND-0036 121 of 478 APPROVED Page 2 of 2 Plan Commission Minutes Consideration of the proposed text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to discuss zoning regulations of Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms. Commissioner Ford motioned to approve the proposed definition and provide a recommendation to City Council to approve this definition. Commissioner Freeman seconded the motion A voice vote was taken, the motion passed 7-0. … 6. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Ford motioned for adjournment Commissioner Shure seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 P.M. Respectfully Submitted, Craig Sklenar, AICP General Planner, Community and Economic Development Department The next regular Plan Commission meeting is scheduled for WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2012 at 7:00PM in COUNCIL CHAMBERS of the Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center. 122 of 478 DRAFT Page 1 of 4 Plan Commission Minutes 06/11/2014 MEETING MINUTES PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, June 11, 2014 7:00 P.M. Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Council Chambers Members Present: Scott Peters (Chair), Jim Ford, Terri Dubin, Kwesi Steele, Carol Goddard, Lenny Asaro Members Absent: Andrew Pigozzi, Colby Lewis, Richard Shure Associate Members Present: David Galloway Associate Members Absent: Seth Freeman, Stuart Opdycke Staff Present: Damir Latinovic, Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Lorrie Pearson, Planning and Zoning Administrator Mario Treto, Assistant City Attorney Presiding Member: Scott Peters, Chairman 1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chairman Peters called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M and explained the general meeting procedure, schedule, agenda items, time limits on public testimony and opportunities for cross examination of witnesses. Chairman Peters concluded the opening statement by saying that the Plan Commission forwards a recommendation to the City Council which makes the final determination on any matters discussed by the Plan Commission. 2. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: May 14, 2014 …. 3. NEW BUSINESS … D. TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE 14PLND-0059 Neighborhood Gardens, Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms A Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment pursuant to City Code Title 6, Zoning, regarding zoning regulations for Urban Farms, Rooftop Urban Farms and Neighborhood Gardens. Mr. Latinovic gave the staff presentation for the proposed text amendment related to Neighborhood Gardens, Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms. This land use was presented to the Zoning Committee and the Plan Commission in 2012. These uses are 123 of 478 DRAFT Page 2 of 4 Plan Commission Minutes 06/11/2014 not currently in the Zoning Ordinance. The Plan Commission made a positive recommendation to the City Council; however, the text amendment was never presented to City Council. Neighborhood garden plots are currently allowed as an accessory use to a principal use on any property. This proposed amendment is for a principal use on a vacant lot or facility. Staff is currently not proposing any changes to the text amendment from 2012. The definition of a neighborhood garden in the text amendment is, “A principal use that provides space for people to grow plants for non-commercial purposes, such as beautification, education, recreation, or harvest, and is managed by a specific person or group responsible for maintenance and operations, subject to the following regulations: (A) The person or group responsible for managing the garden shall be identified on each required annual application/registration form. (B) On-site processing and/or storage of plants or plant products are prohibited. (C) Outdoor storage of any kind is prohibited. (D) A fence and one accessory structure for the storage of gardening tools and supplies, no larger than 120 square feet in area, shall be allowed on-site, provided the owner or operator first obtains a Certificate of Zoning Compliance or Building Permit for it/them. (E) Composting of plant material that is grown on site shall be permitted, except in the front yard. All other composting is prohibited. (F) No incidental sales of plants or produce shall take place on site. (G) Neighborhood gardens shall be maintained so as not to encourage the harboring of vermin. Accumulation of weeds and/or rubbish is prohibited. All the regulations listed would remain. A permit would be required including information about water usage and approval from property owner. Neighborhood gardens are being proposed as a by permitted right use in Residential, Business, Commercial, Research Park, O1, and Industrial districts. In the Downtown districts, it would be a special use. Similarly, there are no changes to the urban farms proposal from 2012. Urban farms are more commercial. The following definitions distinguish urban farms and rooftop urban farms: Urban Farm – An indoor or outdoor principal use that includes growing plant products for wholesale or retail sales and which may include one or more of the following: washing; packaging; storage. Typical Urban Farm operations may include growing beds, greenhouses, and orchards. Rooftop Urban Farm – A rooftop operation that includes growing plant products for wholesale or retail sales and which may include one or more of the following: washing; packaging; storage. Typical Rooftop Urban Farm operations may include growing beds, greenhouses, and orchards. Both are being proposed only as special uses because they can vary in their nature, which can be addressed in the special use process. Staff believes the proposed text amendments meet standards for approval outlined in 6- 3-4-5. They are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan to promote healthy environment 124 of 478 DRAFT Page 3 of 4 Plan Commission Minutes 06/11/2014 and high quality of life and environmental issue awareness. Another benefit is that the produce is usually consumed in close proximity. Staff recommends the Plan Commission make a positive recommendation to the City Council. Chairman Peters invited discussion and comments. Commissioner Asaro had a comment for neighborhood gardens. One use identified in the proposal is for school and educational purposes. His first experience with urban farming was with a City Public School that taught farming as well as sales and business but without the main goal of making a profit, and any profits hat to be returned to the school. He wants staff to consider if they would want to limit schools from selling produce. Chairman Peters wondered if from a zoning perspective, if sales are permitted on school grounds. Commissioner Asaro responded that was an issue the CPS school had to overcome. Chairman Peters noted that at the time of the original proposal, an individual was adamant that there be no sales allowed. Commissioner Ford commented that living across from a school, he would not like to see a farm stand on the corner; however, if instead the school grew the produce on site and sold it at a farmer’s market, that would be more acceptable. Combining both the growing and business sides as an educational application makes sense. Mr. Latinovic clarified that incidental sales would be allowed off-site. Chairman Peters shared that before the meeting, Andrew McGonigle from Northwestern University felt that the University and Transitional zoning districts should be included in the permitted use zones and that Research Park should be included in the special use. Mr. Latinovic responded that staff intended allowing Neighborhood Gardens as special uses in Research Park, particularly as that area has been looked at for Downtown rezoning. Chairman Peters and Commissioner Goddard noted that the University supposedly already has a garden being used for teaching purposes. Mr. Latinovic responded that if there is a principal building or use on that property, it is likely permitted as an accessory use. But if the University feels the University and Transitional Districts should be included to allow Neighborhood Gardens there by-right, it can be discussed and the Planning and Development Committee and City Council would ultimately decide. There were no more audience members present and no further comments. Commissioner Goddard made a motion to approve the proposed text amendment to amend portions of the ordinance to create new use types for Neighborhood Gardens, Urban Farms and Rooftop Urban Farms with a modification to allow Neighborhood Garden as permitted use in the University and Transition Districts and to allow it as a special use in the Research Park district. Commissioner Dubin seconded the motion. Chairman Peters invited discussion. Commissioner Steele asked for clarification on including certain University zoned areas. Mr. Latinovic responded that staff’s intent was 125 of 478 DRAFT Page 4 of 4 Plan Commission Minutes 06/11/2014 not to change anything from the original proposal from 2012 when all the discussions took place. Chairman Peters believes those districts were not intentionally excluded and likely were simply forgotten. There was no further discussion. A voice vote was taken and a motion was approved by voice call 5:0:1with one abstention from Commissioner Steele. Chairman Peters repeated that staff already addressed the standards for approval in the staff memo and confirmed with the Board to which everyone agreed with the findings for the standards. 4. ADJOURNMENT There being no further discussion, Commissioner Goddard made a motion to adjourn the meeting, and Commissioner Asaro seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Damir Latinovic Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Community Development Department 126 of 478 For City Council meeting of July 28, 2014 Item P5 Ordinance 92-O-14: Extension for Church Street Village Planned Development - For Introduction To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Planning and Development Committee From: Mark Muenzer, Director of Community Development Department Lorrie Pearson, Planning and Zoning Administrator Damir Latinovic, Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Subject: Ordinance 92-O-14 Extension for Church Street Village Planned Development - 1629-1691 Church Street Date: July 14, 2014 Recommended Action: City staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 92-O-14 to extend the time for completion of Church Street Village Planned Development located at 1629-1691 Church Street originally approved in April of 2006. The Ordinance grants the approval to complete the 13 unfinished townhome units and construct the last remaining eight-unit building within three years. Summary On April 11, 2006 the City Council adopted Ordinance 38-O-06 granting a special use approval for a 40-unit multi-family townhome Planned Development at 1629-1691 Church Street. Since then, the original developer completed most of the site work and constructed two of three multi-family townhome buildings. However, 13 units within the two buildings were never completed and the construction on the last remaining eight- unit building was never commenced. There have been no construction activities on the property in more than five years. As such, the approval of the Planned Development has expired. Monty Titling Trust has recently acquired the rights to the unfinished units and through its developer Kinzie Real Estate Services, LLC is requesting reinstatement of the Planned Development. The applicant is seeking approval to complete the 13 unfinished units and to construct the last remaining eight-unit building and associated site work per the original plans. The proposed extension ordinance grants the approval for reinstatement of the planned development. Per the Ordinance, the applicant would have one year to receive all necessary construction permits and complete all construction within two years of issuance of the building permits. Memorandum 127 of 478 As a condition of the approval, the applicant will have to pay all remaining public benefit contributions. Specifically, the applicant will pay remaining $24,125 of the $50,000 originally agreed upon to the Mayor’s Affordable Housing Fund. The applicant will also pay the $25,000 contribution originally agreed upon to the City of Evanston Job Initiative Fund. Both contributions will have to be made within 14 days of the approval of the extension ordinance. Additionally, the applicant will have to present revised elevations for the yet-to-be constructed Building 1 to the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee with improvements to building architecture. Attachments Proposed Ordinance 92-O-14 128 of 478 Planned Development Amendment Church Street Village 1629-1691 Church Street 129 of 478 7/14/2014 92-O-14 AN ORDINANCE Extending the Time for the Applicant to Obtain a Building Permit to Construct Building 1 and Finish Associated Site Work and to Complete Construction of Units in Buildings 2 and 3 in the Church Street Village Planned Development Previously Authorized by Ordinance 38-O-06 WHEREAS, the City of Evanston is a home-rule municipality pursuant to Article VII of the Illinois Constitution of 1970; and WHEREAS, as a home rule unit of government, the City has the authority to adopt legislation and to promulgate rules and regulations that protect the public health, safety, and welfare of its residents; and WHEREAS, it is a well-established proposition under all applicable case law that the power to regulate land use through zoning regulations is a legitimate means of promoting the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, Division 13 of the Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/11-13-1, et seq.) grants each municipality the power to establish zoning regulations; and WHEREAS, pursuant to its home rule authority and the Illinois Municipal Code, the City has adopted a set of zoning regulations, set forth in Title 6 of the Evanston City Code of 2012, as amended, (“the Zoning Ordinance”); and WHEREAS, on April 11, 2006, the City Council enacted Ordinance 38-O-06 by a supermajority vote (8-0), as required by Section 6-3-6-6 of the Zoning Ordinance, attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by reference, which, pursuant to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, amended the Zoning Map to Rezone 1613 Church 130 of 478 92-O-14 ~2~ Street from an I2 General Industrial District to an R4 General Residential District, and granted a Special Use Permit for a Planned Development (the “Planned Development”) at 1613 Church Street (the “Subject Property”), which is legally described in Exhibit 1; and WHEREAS, Ordinance 38-O-06 approved the construction of forty (40) single-family attached dwelling units within three (3) buildings and eighty-two (82) parking spaces at the Subject Property (the “Project”), which is detailed at length in Exhibit 1; and WHEREAS, Section 7 of Ordinance 38-O-06 provides that the development and construction of the special use for the Planned Development must be constructed in substantial conformance and compliance with the terms of the Ordinance and all applicable provisions of the City Code; and WHEREAS, the Project is partially constructed to date, the breakdown is as follows: 19 units of the total 40 units are complete in Buildings 2 and 3, thirteen (13) units in Building 2 and 3 are partially constructed and significant work is needed to finish the units, and Building 1 (8 units total) construction and associated landscaping and site work has not yet commenced; and WHEREAS, by letter to the City dated June 26, 2014, Monty Titling Trust 1, new owner of the Subject Property (the “Applicant”) requested an amendment to the Planned Development (the “Amendment”); and WHEREAS, Section 6-3-6-4(d) of the City Code provides that no planned development as a form of special use shall be valid for a period longer than one (1) year unless a longer time is requested and granted by the City Council; and WHEREAS, The site development permit for the subject Planned 131 of 478 92-O-14 ~3~ Development was issued on April 3, 2007, making the time for completion April 2, 2008 and Ordinance 38-O-06 did not provide for an expanded time schedule to lengthen the time for completion of the Planned Development; and WHEREAS, in order to complete construction of the existing 13 units and to commence and complete construction of Building 1 units and associated site work per the plans attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein, the Applicant requests an amendment to the Planned Development; and WHEREAS, on July 28, 2014, and August 11, 2014 the Planning and Development Committee (“P&D Committee”) held a meeting, in compliance with the provisions of the Illinois Open Meetings Act (5 ILCS 120/1 et seq), during which it retained jurisdiction over the Planned Development Amendment request; and WHEREAS, during said meetings, the P&D Committee received input from the public, and carefully deliberated on the Extension request and the Applicant was given notice and the opportunity to be heard at the P&D and City Council meetings; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of August 11, 2014, held in compliance with the provisions of the Illinois Open Meetings Act, the City Council considered the P&D Committee’s deliberations and recommendations, heard public comment, made findings and considered this Ordinance 92-O-14, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, THAT: SECTION 1: The foregoing recitals are hereby found as fact and incorporated herein by reference. 132 of 478 92-O-14 ~4~ SECTION 2: Pursuant to the terms and conditions of this ordinance, the City Council hereby grants an amendment to the Special Use Permit previously authorized by Ordinance 38-O-06 to allow for the construction and operation of the Planned Development described herein. SECTION 3: Pursuant to Subsection 6-3-5-12 of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council imposes the following conditions on the Special Use Permit granted for the Planned Development, may be amended by future ordinance(s), and violation of any of which shall constitute grounds for penalties or revocation of said Special Use Permit pursuant to Subsections 6-3-10-5 and 6-3-10-6 of the Zoning Ordinance: (a) Compliance with Applicable Requirements: The Applicant shall develop and operate the Planned Development authorized by the terms of this ordinance in substantial compliance with the following: the terms of this Ordinance 92-O-14; terms of Ordinance 38-O-06 which have not been amended by this Ordinance; the Building and Landscape Plans in Exhibit 2, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; all applicable City Code requirements; the Applicant’s testimony and representations to the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee for Building 1, the P&D Committee, and the City Council; and the approved documents on file in this case. (b) Building 1 Elevations: Prior to issuance of the building permit for Building 1 (8 units), Applicant must present site plans and elevation plans for review and consideration by the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee to clarify and articulate the elevations and improvements of Building 1. (c) Changes in Property Use: Any change as to the property’s use in the future must be processed and approved as an additional amendment to the Planned Development. (d) Landscape Design: The Applicant shall install and maintain landscaping as depicted in Exhibit C, and as recommended by SPAARC prior to construction of Building 1. (e) Construction Schedule: Construction Schedule: Pursuant to Subsection 6-11-1-10(A)4 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Applicant shall reactivate a building permit to finish 13 units in Buildings 2 and 3, and obtain a new permit for construction and associated site work on Building 1 within twelve (12) months of the passing of this Ordinance. Additionally, the Applicant must 133 of 478 92-O-14 ~5~ complete the construction of this Planned Development within twenty-four (24) months from the date the Applicant receives its building permit. (f) Mayor’s Affordable Housing Fund: Section 6 of Ordinance 38-O-06 requires Applicant to donate fifty thousand and no/100 dollars ($50,000.00) and the City has received twenty-five thousand eight hundred seventy-five and no/100 dollars ($25,875) of the total, leaving a remainder of twenty-four thousand one hundred twenty-five and no/100 dollars ($24,125). Applicant agrees to remit the remainder in full within fifteen (15) business days of adoption of this Ordinance. (g) City of Evanston Job Initiative Fund: Section 6 of Ordinance 38-O-06 requires Applicant to donate twenty-five thousand and no/100 dollars ($25,000.00) and the City has not received the donation to date. Applicant agrees to remit the full payment within fifteen (15) business days of adoption of this Ordinance. (h) Recordation: Pursuant to Subsection 6-3-6-10 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Applicant shall, at its cost, record a certified copy of this ordinance, including all exhibits attached hereto, with the Cook County Recorder of Deeds, and provide proof of such recordation to the City, before the City may issue any permits pursuant to the Planned Development authorized by the terms of this ordinance. SECTION 4: Except as otherwise provided for in this Ordinance 92-O-14, all applicable regulations of the Ordinance 38-O-06, the Zoning Ordinance, and the entire City Code shall apply to the Subject Property and remain in full force and effect with respect to the use and development of the same. To the extent that the terms and/or provisions of any of said documents conflict with any of the terms herein, this Ordinance 92-O-14 shall govern and control. SECTION 5: When necessary to effectuate the terms, conditions, and purposes of this ordinance, “Applicant” shall be read as “Applicant and its agents, assigns, and successors in interest” and shall mean Monty Title Trust 1, and any and all successors, owners, and operators of the Subject Property. SECTION 6: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after 134 of 478 92-O-14 ~6~ its passage, approval, and publication in the manner provided by law. SECTION 7: Except as otherwise provided for in this ordinance, all applicable regulations of the Zoning Ordinance and the entire City Code shall apply to the Subject Property and remain in full force and effect with respect to the use and development of the same. To the extent that the terms and provisions of any of said documents conflict with the terms herein, this ordinance shall govern and control. SECTION 8: All ordinances or parts of ordinances that are in conflict with the terms of this ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION 9: If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance is ruled unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid application or provision, and each invalid provision or invalid application of this ordinance is severable. SECTION 10: The findings and recitals herein are hereby declared to be prima facie evidence of the law of the City and shall be received in evidence as provided by the Illinois Compiled Statutes and the courts of the State of Illinois. Ayes: ______ Nayes: _____ Introduced:_________________, 2014 Adopted:___________________, 2014 Approved: __________________________, 2014 _______________________________ Elizabeth B. Tisdahl, Mayor Attest: _____________________________ Rodney Greene, City Clerk Approved as to form: _______________________________ W. Grant Farrar, Corporation Counsel 135 of 478 92-O-14 ~7~ EXHIBIT 1 ORDINANCE 38-O-06 136 of 478 137 of 478 138 of 478 139 of 478 140 of 478 141 of 478 142 of 478 143 of 478 144 of 478 145 of 478 146 of 478 92-O-14 ~8~ EXHIBIT 2 BUILDING PLANS AND LANDSCAPE PLAN 147 of 478 Not Installed Land Development Phase Dated: 7.1.14 Not Installed Building #3 Dated: 7.1.14 Not Installed Building #1 Dated: 7.1.14 LEGEND 148 of 478 149 of 478 150 of 478 151 of 478 152 of 478 153 of 478 154 of 478 155 of 478 156 of 478 157 of 478 158 of 478 159 of 478 160 of 478 161 of 478 162 of 478 163 of 478 164 of 478 165 of 478 166 of 478 167 of 478 168 of 478 169 of 478 170 of 478 171 of 478 172 of 478 173 of 478 174 of 478 175 of 478 176 of 478 177 of 478 178 of 478 179 of 478 180 of 478 181 of 478 182 of 478 183 of 478 184 of 478 185 of 478 186 of 478 187 of 478 188 of 478 189 of 478 190 of 478 191 of 478 192 of 478 193 of 478 194 of 478 195 of 478 196 of 478 197 of 478 198 of 478 199 of 478 200 of 478 201 of 478 202 of 478 203 of 478 204 of 478 205 of 478 206 of 478 207 of 478 208 of 478 209 of 478 210 of 478 211 of 478 212 of 478 213 of 478 214 of 478 For City Council meeting of July 28, 2014 Item P6 Ordinance 32-O-14: Special Use for a Planned Development at 835 Chicago Avenue For Action To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Planning and Development Committee From: Mark Muenzer, Director of Community Development Lorrie Pearson, Planning and Zoning Administrator Melissa Klotz, Zoning Planner Subject: Ordinance 32-O-14 Planned Development 835 Chicago Avenue, 13PLND-0117 Date: July 21, 2014 Recommended Action The Plan Commission and City staff recommend the adoption of 32-O-14, granting Planned Development approval to construct a nine-story mixed use commercial, office, and residential building at the southeast corner of Chicago Avenue and Main Street, commonly known as 835 Chicago Avenue, with 25 off-site parking spaces located at 935 Chicago Avenue. The Plan Commission and City staff recommend approval of Site Development Allowances for the number of dwelling units per lot size, floor area ratio (FAR), building height, enclosed parking setback, number of parking spaces, and the number and length of loading berths. The development complies with all other zoning requirements of the C1a Commercial Mixed Use District, and meets all of the Standards of a Planned Development for this district. Summary Update: Following the March 24, 2014 Planning and Development Committee, the developer revised the proposal to include 25 off-site parking spaces located at 935 Chicago Avenue. This revision changes the Site Development Allowance for parking and brings the total number of parking spaces to 152 spaces where 216 spaces are required, which is 70% of the total parking requirement. Proposed Public Benefits have also been finalized and are detailed below. Parking Revision: The developer now proposes providing 25 additional off-site parking spaces at 935 Chicago Avenue, an existing parking lot that is six properties to the north, on the east side of Chicago Memorandum 215 of 478 Avenue, approximately 475’ from the proposed development. Since the parking lot is within 1000’ of the development, the off-site parking counts towards the Zoning Ordinance’s required parking. This brings the total amount of parking spaces to 152, for a parking ratio of 1.36 (152 spaces to 112 dwelling units), or 1.02 when excluding the retail and office parking (114 spaces to 112 dwelling units). A parking ratio of 1.02 is similar to previously approved Planned Developments such as E2 at 1890 Maple/1881 Oak, which is currently under construction with a parking ratio of .99 with no commercial parking, and Central Station at 1700-1722 Central Street, which is now fully constructed with a parking ratio of 1.01 with no commercial parking. The parking is summarized as follows: Spaces Location Use Comment 76 underground garage residential Anticipated that half of the spaces will be shared parking for office users during the day 6 underground garage (tandem) residential Not counted as official parking spaces per the Zoning Ordinance 15 underground garage (parking lifts) residential Not counted as official parking spaces per the Zoning Ordinance; 15 max if needed* 17 ground-floor garage residential Includes 2 spaces for car-share program 13 ground-floor garage retail 25 off-site office May be used for residential if needed and if office use does not utilize all spaces * Three parking lifts must be initially installed. The developer will provide a certified rent roll of the parking spaces to City staff on an annual basis, including the hydraulic lift spaces. In the event all hydraulic parking lifts are rented, the developer must install three additional lifts, until a maximum of the required 15 lifts are installed or City staff determines there is no additional demand. This requirement will sunset three years after the building’s final Certificate of Occupancy. Parking will be managed on-site 365 days a year. The underground parking will be gate controlled and spaces will be numbered and assigned to specific users. The developer feels this combination of parking provides more than enough spaces for all users and is flexible enough to accommodate any changes in the parking demand. Public Benefits: The following Public Benefits have been negotiated and agreed upon by the developer: 1. Construct sidewalks, curbing, decorative brickwork, and landscaping along Chicago Avenue and Main Street in accordance with the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan. 2. Hire a minimum of five, with a goal of ten, Evanston residents to work at the site during construction. 216 of 478 3. Provide a payment of $2,250 to the City Parking Fund for each metered on- street parking space on Chicago Avenue and Main Street that will be temporarily removed during construction. 4. Bury adjacent property utility lines, including but not limited to the lines on the four adjacent utility poles, in conjunction with the required underground placement of utility lines for the development project. 5. The developer will apply for the 50/50 alley reconstruction program through the Public Works Department. If the 50/50 program is approved for the entire alley, the developer will pay the required amount for the alley reconstruction. If the 50/50 program is not approved (dependent upon adjacent property owners), the developer will either pay for the full reconstruction of the alley where it is adjacent to the subject property (estimated at $82,000), or the developer will reconstruct the alley where it is adjacent to the subject property to the City’s specifications, which includes an eight inch concrete base and stormwater conveyance. 6. Public art will be incorporated into the development in the form of decorative stamped concrete walks, special brick work, glass blocks, or landscaping art. The property owner will be responsible for all costs associated with the public art, including installation and maintenance. 7. If/when the development converts from rental dwelling units to condos, contribute to the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance that is typically required for new construction condo units, a payment to the City’s Affordable Housing Fund of 10% of units at $40,000 per unit for a total payment of $440,000. Summary: O’Donnell Investment Company proposes to construct a nine-story mixed-use building featuring underground parking, ground floor retail and parking, second story office, 112 dwelling units, and 25 off-site parking spaces. The entire building measures 97’ to the roof, with a small mechanical penthouse above. The development requests the following Site Development Allowances: Zoning C1a Zoning Requested Maximum Code Section Requirement Development Allowance Development Allowance 6-10-3-4-B Lot size: 350 sq ft per dwelling unit = 87 dwelling units max for this lot (sized at 30,500 sq ft) 112 dwelling units 40% increase = 122 dwelling units max 6-10-3-7 Maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 4.0 (excludes parking and mechanical) (ratio is gross sq ft compared to lot size) 4.86 FAR +1.5 FAR = 5.5 FAR max 6-10-3-9 Maximum allowed building height of 67’ 97’ height (excludes mechanical penthouse) +30’ = 97’ height max 6-10-3-10 Enclosed parking must be set back 20’ from any lot line 10’ setback for enclosed parking off of Chicago Avenue (inside garage) N/A 217 of 478 6-16-3-5 Table 16-B Total parking requirement of 216 spaces (155.75 for dwelling units, 28.75 for retail, 31.34 for office) 152 parking spaces total (106 typical on-site spaces, 6 tandem, 15 hydraulic lift, 25 off-site) N/A 6-16-5 5 short loading berths required (2 for dwelling units, 2 for retail, 1 for office) at 35’ in length 2 short loading berths at 25’ in length N/A Attachments TIF Process Informational Memo Ordinance 32-O-14 Parking Summary from Applicant Site Plans and Elevations Letters of Concern and Support P&D memo – March 24, 2014 P&D Meeting Minutes – March 24, 2014 Supporting Documents/Full Planned Development Application Link: http://www.cityofevanston.org/assets/CCAP%203.24.14%20ce2.pdf 218 of 478 To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Planning & Development Committee From: Johanna Nyden, Economic Development Division Manager Subject: Process for Consideration of Tax Increment Financing Funding 835 Chicago Avenue Date: July 18, 2014 Recommended Action: Information follows regarding the process for consideration of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) funding for 835 Chicago Avenue. No action regarding TIF funding is required at this time. Funding Source: Chicago/Main Tax Increment Financing District Background: The Chicago/Main Tax Increment Financing District was established in January 2013 to support the reinvestment of incremental property tax dollars into the commercial district located near the Metra and CTA stations at Main Street. The designation and eligibility identified significant need to address deteriorating infrastructure, preserve pedestrian- scale commercial properties that house a variety of businesses, support development that maintains the neighborhood scale, and make funds available for necessary transit- related improvements. Staff has worked with the property owner at Main/Chicago to create a plan for a high- quality mixed use development. In initial planning stages in 2010, staff worked with the property owner to develop a mixed use building that would include retail and office uses. Extensive work was conducted to attract office users to induce building development. Unfortunately, an appropriate and credit-worthy tenant was not identified for this location and the development team redesigned the property to include ground floor retail use, with upper floors mainly devoted to residential uses, and one single floor of office use. Summary: The inclusion of office use is important to supporting the surrounding merchants with a population that is present in the neighborhood during the day. During visitations conducted by the Economic Development staff, merchants in the area have noted that Memorandum 219 of 478 when the previous building that included office use was demolished, a decrease in day- time activity was noted. The development team has preliminarily determined that the inclusion of office uses will create a financial gap of approximately $2.9 million. They have indicated that following the approval of the Planned Development Ordinance, they will be able to better determine the cost of the building they are approved to build and subsequently will submit a TIF request for this amount. Based on the process established during the TIF designation in January 2013, the request for funding would be formally submitted to the Chicago/Main TIF Advisory Committee. This Committee is a group of residents and businesses, appointed by the Mayor and approved by City Council, that represent the neighborhood in which the TIF is situated. The Chicago/Main TIF Committee has worked for the past year to establish criteria for reviewing funding requests from the TIF and a process by which to formulate a recommendation. After review by the Chicago/Main TIF Committee, the item would be presented to the Economic Development Committee; from the Economic Development Committee the request for funding would be sent to the City Council. If the Planned Development Ordinance is adopted on July 28, the following schedule is tentatively considered for funding requests for this project: City Committee Potential Meeting Date Main/Chicago TIF Committee Thursday, August 21, 2014 Main/Chicago TIF Committee Thursday, August 28, 2014 Economic Development Committee Wednesday, September 17, 2014 The consideration for funding would return to City Council in September 2014. 220 of 478 3/4/2014 4/21/2014 7/22/2014 32-O-14 AN ORDINANCE Granting a Special Use Permit for a Planned Development Located at 835 Chicago Avenue in the C1a Commercial District (“Chicago + Main ”) WHEREAS, the City of Evanston is a home-rule municipality pursuant to Article VII of the Illinois Constitution of 1970; and WHEREAS, as a home rule unit of government, the City has the authority to adopt ordinances and to promulgate rules and regulations that protect the public health, safety, and welfare of its residents; and WHEREAS, Article VII, Section (6)a of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, which states that the “powers and functions of home rule units shall be construed liberally,” was written “with the intention that home rule units be given the broadest powers possible” (Scadron v. City of Des Plaines, 153 Ill.2d 164); and WHEREAS, it is a well-established proposition under all applicable case law that the power to regulate land use through zoning regulations is a legitimate means of promoting the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, Division 13 of the Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/11-13-1, et seq.) grants each municipality the power to establish zoning regulations; and WHEREAS, pursuant to its home rule authority and the Illinois Municipal Code, the City has adopted a set of zoning regulations, set forth in Title 6 of the Evanston City Code of 1979, as amended, (“the Zoning Ordinance”); and 221 of 478 32-O-14 ~2~ WHEREAS, O’Donnell Investment Co. (the “Applicant”), owner of the property located at 835 Chicago Avenue, Evanston, Illinois (the “Subject Property”), legally described in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, applied, pursuant to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, specifically Section 6-3-5, “Special Uses”, Section 6-3-6, “Planned Developments”, and Subsection 6-10-1-9, “Planned Developments” in Commercial Zoning Districts, to permit the construction and operation of a Planned Development with accessory parking located at the Subject Property in the C1a Commercial Zoning District (“C1a District”); and WHEREAS, the Applicant sought approval to construct a new nine-story ninety-seven foot (97 ft.) tall mixed use commercial, office, and residential building consisting of one hundred twelve (112) dwelling units, approximately 15,670 gross square feet of office space, approximately 12,064 gross square feet of commercial retail space, with one hundred twenty-seven (127) enclosed, garage parking spaces; and WHEREAS, construction of the Planned Development, as proposed in the application, requires exception from the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance with regards to number of dwelling units per lot size, floor area ration (FAR), building height, enclosed parking setback, number of parking spaces, and the number and length of loading berths; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Subsection 6-3-6-5 of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council may grant Site Development Allowances to the normal district regulations established in the Zoning Ordinance; and 222 of 478 32-O-14 ~3~ WHEREAS, on February 12 and February 26, 2014, in compliance with the provisions of the Illinois Open Meetings Act (5 ILCS 120/1 et seq.) and the Zoning Ordinance, the Plan Commission held a public hearing on the application for a Special Use Permit for a Planned Development, case no. 13PLND-0117, heard extensive testimony and public comment, received other evidence, and made written minutes, findings, and recommendations; and WHEREAS, the Plan Commission’s written findings state that the application for the proposed Planned Development meets applicable standards set forth for Special Uses in Subsection 6-3-5-10 of the Zoning Ordinance and Planned Developments in the C1a District per Subsection 6-10-1-9 of the Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Plan Commission recommended the City Council approve the application with conditions; and WHEREAS, on March 24, 2014, April 28, 2014, and July 28, 2014, the Planning and Development (“P&D”) Committee of the City Council held meetings, in compliance with the provisions of the Open Meetings Act and the Zoning Ordinance, received input from the public, carefully considered and adopted the findings and recommendations of the Plan Commission; and WHEREAS, after the March 24, 2014 meeting of the P&D Committee, the Applicant submitted an amended application to add off-site parking spaces to the proposed development; the amended application is for a proposed Planned Development, seeking approval for a new nine-story ninety-seven foot (97 ft.) tall mixed use commercial, office, and residential building consisting of one hundred twelve (112) dwelling units, approximately 15,670 gross square feet of office space, approximately 223 of 478 32-O-14 ~4~ 12,064 gross square feet of commercial retail space, with one hundred twenty-seven (127) enclosed, garage parking spaces and twenty-five (25) off-site parking spaces located at 935 Chicago Avenue; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of July 28, 2014, the P&D Committee of the City Council held a meeting in compliance with the provisions of the Open Meetings Act and the Zoning Ordinance, received input from the public, carefully considered the amended application, amended and adopted the applicable findings and recommendations of the Plan Commission, and recommended approval thereof by the City Council; and WHEREAS, at its meetings of March 24, 2014, and July 28, 2014, held in compliance with the Open Meetings Act and the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council considered the recommendation of the P&D Committee, received additional public comment, made certain findings, and adopted said recommendation; and WHEREAS, it is well-settled law that the legislative judgment of the City Council must be considered presumptively valid (see Glenview State Bank v. Village of Deerfield, 213 Ill.App.3d 747 (1991)) and is not subject to courtroom fact-finding (see National Paint & Coating Ass’n v. City of Chicago, 45 F.3d 1124 (7th Cir. 1995)), NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, THAT: SECTION 1: The foregoing recitals are hereby found as facts and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2: Pursuant to the terms and conditions of this ordinance, the City Council hereby grants the Special Use Permit applied for in case no. 13PLND- 224 of 478 32-O-14 ~5~ 0117, to allow construction and operation of the Planned Development described herein. SECTION 3: The City Council hereby grants the following Site Development Allowances: (A) Number of Dwelling Units Per Lot Size: A Site Development Allowance is hereby granted for one hundred twelve (112) dwelling units, whereas subsection 6-10-3-4-(B) of the Zoning Ordinance requires a maximum of 87 dwelling units for a lot sized at 30,500 sq. ft. in the C1a District. (B) Floor Area Ratio (FAR): A Site Development Allowance is hereby granted for a 4.86 floor to area ratio, whereas subsection 6-10-3-7 of the Zoning Ordinance requires a maximum floor area ratio of 4.0 in the C1a District. (C) Building Height: A Site Development Allowance is hereby granted for a ninety- seven (97) feet maximum height, whereas subsection 6-10-3-9 of the Zoning Ordinance requires a maximum allowed building height of sixty-seven (67) feet in the C1a District. (D) Enclosed Parking Setback: A Site Development Allowance is hereby granted for a ten (10) foot setback for enclosed parking off of Chicago Avenue, whereas subsection 6-10-3-10 of the Zoning Ordinance requires enclosed parking to be set back twenty (20) feet from any front or street side lot line in the C1a District. (E) Number of Parking Spaces: A Site Development Allowance is hereby granted permitting a total of one hundred and fifty-two (152) parking spaces, whereas subsection 6-16-3-5 of the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of two hundred sixteen (216) parking spaces for this particular mixed use building in the C1a District. Of the aforementioned one hundred and fifty-two (152) parking spaces, one hundred and thirty-one (131) parking spaces are compliant with the requirements of Zoning Ordinance Section 6-16, six (6) parking spaces are tandem parking spaces that are not recognized under the Zoning Ordinance due to a lack of a travel lane, and up to fifteen (15) parking spaces to be located above traditional spaces via hydraulic parking lifts that are not recognized by the Zoning Ordinance due to inadequate height clearance. Of the one hundred and thirty-one (131) code compliant parking spaces, twenty-five (25) parking spaces will be located off-site at 935 Chicago Avenue. All parking spaces, inclusive of the hydraulic lift and off-site spaces as required under this Ordinance, must be in place and usable prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. (F) Number and Length of Loading Berths: A Site Development Allowance is hereby granted for two (2) short loading berths at twenty-five (25) feet in length, whereas subsection 6-16-5 of the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of five 225 of 478 32-O-14 ~6~ (5) short loading berths at thirty-five (35) feet in length for this particular mixed use building in the C1a District. SECTION 4: Pursuant to Subsection 6-3-5-12 of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council imposes the following conditions on the Special Use Permit granted hereby, which may be amended by future ordinance(s), and violation of any of which shall constitute grounds for penalties or revocation of said Special Use Permit pursuant to Subsections 6-3-10-5 and 6-3-10-6 of the Zoning Ordinance: (A) Compliance with Applicable Requirements: The Applicant shall develop and operate the Planned Development authorized by the terms of this ordinance in substantial compliance with: the terms of this ordinance; the Site and Landscape Plans in Exhibits B and C, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; all applicable legislation; the Applicant’s testimony and representations to the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee, the Plan Commission, the P&D Committee, and the City Council; and the approved documents on file in this case. (B) Enclosed Parking Ingress/Egress: The Applicant shall provide access from the enclosed parking structure to Chicago Avenue via a one-lane right turn only egress as depicted on the Site Plan in Exhibit B. Primary access to and from the enclosed parking structure shall occur via the ingress/egress located at the alley as depicted in the Site Plan in Exhibit B. (C) Landscape Design: The Applicant shall install and maintain landscaping as depicted in Exhibit C. All landscape and hardscape, including but not limited to sidewalks, curbing, decorative brickwork, and planting materials, shall conform to the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan along Chicago Avenue and Main Street. (D) Retail Exclusive Parking: The Applicant shall provide thirteen (13) enclosed parking spaces on the ground floor of the building parking, which shall be exclusively used for retail customers during the business hours of the on-site retail businesses and shall not be utilized for office or residential purposes during those business hours. Additionally, the Applicant agrees to display proper signage within the parking structure that specifically details such restriction. The aforementioned thirteen (13) on-site parking spaces for retail use shall be privately managed. (E) Parking Lifts: The Applicant shall install three (3) parking spaces located above traditional spaces via hydraulic parking lifts. Up to twelve (12) additional hydraulic parking lifts shall be installed on an as-needed basis as determined by the City of Evanston. The Applicant shall provide the City a certified rent roll of the parking spaces on an annual basis, including hydraulic lift spaces. In the event all hydraulic parking lifts are occupied, the Applicant shall purchase and install an 226 of 478 32-O-14 ~7~ additional three (3) hydraulic parking lifts until a maximum fifteen (15) lifts are installed or there is no additional demand. In the event there is not a demand for additional hydraulic parking lifts upon the third anniversary of the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy, such hydraulic parking lift obligation shall sunset and the Applicant shall be released of said requirement within the Planned Development. (F) Car Sharing and Car Club Service: The Applicant agrees to provide and place a minimum of two (2) car share vehicles in the enclosed parking structure prior to obtaining the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. In the event this Planned Development, 835 Chicago Avenue (“Chicago + Main”), is converted to condominiums, Applicant may cease to provide the Car Sharing and Car Club Service. (G) Employees: That the Applicant will have, as a primary goal, the employment of ten (10) Evanston residents, with a required minimum amount of five (5) Evanston resident employees during construction. Said residents, without regard to sex, race or ethnicity, can be sub-contractors or vendors to the development. The Applicant will hire as many competent minority and/or women Evanston subcontractors, workers, and residents as possible for the construction project. (H) Temporary Parking Meter Loss Compensation: The Applicant shall pay two thousand two hundred fifty dollars ($2,250.00) per City of Evanston parking meter that must be temporarily capped or removed during the construction period, not to include any permanently removed meters. Such payment shall be for the City Parking Fund and shall be made prior to the issuance of the building permit. (I) Permanent Parking Meter Loss Compensation: The Applicant shall pay seventy-two thousand two hundred eighty-one dollars ($72,281.00) for the total permanent removal of four (4) City of Evanston parking meters. Such payment shall be made prior to the temporary Certificate of Occupancy and is for the City Parking Fund. (J) Alley Excavation and Pavement: The Applicant agrees to have the City of Evanston excavate and pave the north-south alley adjacent to Subject Property by way of the City of Evanston’s Special Assessment Process. The Applicant shall obtain a Special Assessment Process petition from the City Engineer and comply with the subsequent required procedure necessary for the Special Assessment. If the Special Assessment Process is not approved, the Applicant shall, at its sole cost and expense, reconstruct the alley along the length of the subject property to the City alley standard, which includes but is not limited to an 8” concrete base with stormwater conveyance. 227 of 478 32-O-14 ~8~ (K) Waste Management Services: The Applicant agrees to work with the waste management company servicing the alley to the best of their ability to ensure the alley remains passable during waste collection and/or pick-up. (L) Property Utility Lines: The Applicant shall bury adjacent property utility lines, including but not limited to the lines on the four (4) adjacent utility poles, in conjunction with the required underground placement of utility lines required for the development project. (M) City of Evanston Affordable Housing Fund: In the event this Planned Development, 835 Chicago Avenue (“Chicago + Main”), is converted to condominiums, the Applicant shall contribute to the Affordable Housing Fund four hundred forty thousand dollars ($440,000.00), amount consisting of ten percent (10%) of the units paid at forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) per unit. (N) Public Art: Applicant will include public art in its development and visible to pedestrians. Public art may be in the form of decorative stamped concrete walks, special brick work, glass blocks, or landscaping art. The Applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the public art, including installation and maintenance. (O) Recordation: Pursuant to Subsection 6-3-6-10 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Applicant shall, at its cost, record a certified copy of this ordinance, including all exhibits attached hereto, with the Cook County Recorder of Deeds, and provide proof of such recordation to the City, before the City may issue any permits pursuant to the Planned Development authorized by the terms of this ordinance. SECTION 5: When necessary to effectuate the terms, conditions, and purposes of this ordinance, “Applicant” shall be read as “Applicant’s tenants, agents, assigns, and successors in interest.” SECTION 6: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval, and publication in the manner provided by law. SECTION 7: Except as otherwise provided for in this ordinance, all applicable regulations of the Zoning Ordinance and the entire City Code shall apply to the Subject Property and remain in full force and effect with respect to the use and development of the same. To the extent that the terms and provisions of any of said documents conflict with the terms herein, this ordinance shall govern and control. 228 of 478 32-O-14 ~9~ SECTION 8: All ordinances or parts of ordinances that are in conflict with the terms of this ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION 9: If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance is ruled unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid application or provision, and each invalid provision or invalid application of this ordinance is severable. SECTION 10: The findings and recitals herein are hereby declared to be prima facie evidence of the law of the City and shall be received in evidence as provided by the Illinois Compiled Statutes and the courts of the State of Illinois. Introduced:_________________, 2014 Adopted:___________________, 2014 Approved: __________________________, 2014 _______________________________ Elizabeth B. Tisdahl, Mayor Attest: _____________________________ Rodney Greene, City Clerk Approved as to form: _______________________________ W. Grant Farrar, Corporation Counsel 229 of 478 32-O-14 EXHIBIT A Legal Description LOT “A” IN THE MAIN CONSOLIDATION, BEING A CONSOLIDATION OF LOTS 1, 2 AND 3 IN BLOCK 11 IN W HITE’S ADDITION TO EVANSTON IN SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 14, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED JANUARY 5, 1977 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 23769201, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PINs: 11-19-401-024-0000 COMMONLY KNOWN AS: Unimproved vacant land, 835 Chicago Avenue, Evanston, IL (approx. 30,500 sq. ft.) 230 of 478 32-O-14 EXHIBIT B Development Plans 231 of 478 232 of 478 233 of 478 234 of 478 235 of 478 236 of 478 237 of 478 238 of 478 239 of 478 240 of 478 32-O-14 EXHIBIT C Landscape Plans 241 of 478 242 of 478 243 of 478 Chicago & Main – A Transit Oriented Mixed Use Development Narrative on Parking Utilization This mixed use community consists of residential, office, and retail uses. These uses are complimentary and supportive of one another and will have an ample variety of parking options. Importantly, the size of this community will be large enough to support a full‐time staff on site to manage the parking facilities 24/7/365. The parking facilities consist of 97 potential basement spaces, 30 ground floor spaces, and 25 off‐site spaces for a total of 152 potential spaces. Basement Spaces: These 97 spaces consist of 82 conventional spaces and up to 15 hydraulic lift spaces (depending on demand). Any hydraulic lifts installed will be used exclusively for residential. For the remaining 82 spaces, these will be used exclusively for residential on nights and weekends. On weekdays during the daytime, it is anticipated that at least 50% or 41 of these residential spaces will be vacated by non‐transit commuters which will free them up for use by office tenants. Each of the basement spaces will be numbered and assigned to both residential and office users, and access to the basement garage will be gate controlled. Unassigned spaces managed by the staff will be available during AM and PM transition periods to address overlap conflicts that may arise and for overnight guests of residents. Ground Floor Spaces: These 30 spaces will be allocated: 13 for retail (dedicated), 2 for car sharing (dedicated), and 15 for residential. All or a portion of these 15 residential spaces will be available weekday and daytime for retail use depending on whether they are used by non‐ transit using residents. These spaces will be assigned to residential users and have flexible signage with the relevant parking restrictions for retail customers. Off‐Site Spaces: These 25 spaces are located in a parking lot on the east side of Chicago Ave. approximately 1/2 block north of the project. These spaces would be allocated primarily to office tenants. However, depending on demand, they may also be used for retail employees, retail customer overflow, or residents. If unused, these spaces may be rented to neighbors on a daily or monthly basis. These spaces will also be numbered and managed by the on‐site staff. In summary these 3 parking areas provide a high level of flexibility to respond to a wide margin of demand needs both during the course of the day as well as over time as the needs of the project may change. 244 of 478 245 of 478 246 of 478 247 of 478 248 of 478 249 of 478 250 of 478 251 of 478 252 of 478 253 of 478 254 of 478 255 of 478 256 of 478 257 of 478 258 of 478 259 of 478 260 of 478 261 of 478 262 of 478 G|R|E|C Architects24 March 2014CHICAGO+MAINEVANSTONGROUND FLOOR PLANN263 of 478 264 of 478 265 of 478 266 of 478 267 of 478 268 of 478 269 of 478 270 of 478 271 of 478 272 of 478 273 of 478 274 of 478 275 of 478 276 of 478 277 of 478 278 of 478 279 of 478 280 of 478 281 of 478 282 of 478 283 of 478 284 of 478 285 of 478 286 of 478 287 of 478 288 of 478 289 of 478 290 of 478 291 of 478 292 of 478 293 of 478 294 of 478 295 of 478 296 of 478 297 of 478 298 of 478 299 of 478 300 of 478 301 of 478 For City Council meeting of March 24, 2014 Item Ordinances 32-O-14: Special Use for a Planned Development at 835 Chicago Avenue For Introduction To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Planning and Development Committee From: Mark Muenzer, Community Development Director Melissa Klotz, Interim Zoning Administrator Subject: Ordinances 32-O-14 Planned Development 835 Chicago Avenue, 13PLND-0117 Date: March 12, 2014 Recommended Action The Plan Commission and City staff recommend the adoption of 32-O-14, granting Planned Development approval to construct an nine-story mixed use commercial, office, and residential building at the southeast corner of Chicago Avenue and Main Street, commonly known as 835 Chicago Avenue. The Plan Commission and City staff recommend approval of Site Development Allowances for the number of dwelling units per lot size, floor area ratio (FAR), building height, enclosed parking setback, number of parking spaces, and the number and length of loading berths. The development complies with all other zoning requirements of the C1a Commercial Mixed Use District, and meets all of the Standards of a Planned Development for this district. Summary Background: 835 Chicago Avenue is located on the southeast corner of Chicago Avenue and Main Street, adjacent to the Main Street CTA and Metra stations, in the Main Street business district. The property is located within the C1a Commercial Mixed Use District and is surrounded by commercial, business, and multi-family residential zoning districts and uses. The property is also located within the newly established Main Street TIF District. The property has been vacant since 2007. In the years since the previous two-story commercial and residential building was torn down, City staff worked with the property owner to redevelop the site with an office building. Throughout this time, market conditions have not proved favorable to a large-scale office development. However, a mixed-use development with an office component is feasible with the current market conditions. Memorandum 302 of 478 Proposal: O’Donnell Investment Company proposes to construct a nine-story mixed-use building featuring underground parking, ground floor retail and enclosed parking, second story office, and floors three through nine of rental studio to three bedroom dwellings. The entire building measures 97’ to the roof, with a small mechanical penthouse above. The project will be constructed to a LEED Silver certification level as required by the City’s Green Building Ordinance. The ground floor features approximately 12,064 square feet of commercial retail space as well as a parking garage with 30 parking spaces. 13 of the parking spaces are devoted to retail parking, two spaces feature car share vehicles for community use, and the remaining 15 spaces are for residential use. The parking garage entrance is accessible off of the rear alley that parallels Chicago Avenue, with a one-way right-turn only egress out onto Chicago Avenue via a 12-foot wide curb cut. City staff feels the proposed curb cut on Chicago Avenue deters from the walkability of the area, which is significant given the close proximity of the Main Street CTA and Metra stations, as well as the surrounding neighborhood business district, but necessary for the vehicular flow of the project and an added right turn lane for northbound vehicles. Staff has negotiated the smaller 12’ right-only curb cut in order to mitigate pedestrian issues. The applicant feels the curb cut on Chicago Avenue is vital to the success of the ground-floor retail spaces. The applicant intends to permanently remove four metered parking spaces on the east side of Chicago Avenue for the proposed curb cut and visibility lines. There is also ingress/egress via the alley to the underground parking, which features 76 typical parking spaces, six tandem spaces, and 15 hydraulic lift spaces that stack vehicles above regular parking spaces. The underground parking will be for residential use, with some spaces available as shared parking with the office use. The applicant anticipates 15- 20 spaces will be needed for the shared parking concept, which will be monitored by on-site management and will allow for parking for the office use during the day and residential use in the evenings and overnight. The alley is 20’ in width at the tightest point, with 30’ between buildings at the loading dock and parking garage entrances. The applicant will ask the owner of the Lucky Platter building to the east to relocate their dumpsters at the southwest end of their property, where there is 30’ between the buildings, to allow for better vehicular circulation. The total on-site parking for the building is 127 spaces. Above the first floor is a mezzanine level that houses mechanical equipment. The mezzanine does not feature any gross floor area. The second floor features approximately 13,427 square feet of rentable space with high-speed fiber optic cable that is intended as small office space, as well as amenities for the residential dwellings. This floor also includes an outdoor landscaped terrace that is partially visible from Main Street. Floors three through nine feature residential rental units with two studios, seven 1-bedroom units, six 2-bedroom units, and one 3-bedroom unit per floor for a total of 112 dwelling units. Some of the residential units on each floor feature outdoor balconies. 303 of 478 The property is located within the newly established Main Street TIF District. The applicant anticipates utilizing two to three million dollars of TIF funds for the development, and estimates the completed project will generate $16 million dollars back into the TIF. Site & Building Appearance: The ground floor of the building features a charcoal-colored granite base and tan-colored masonry façade with large expanses of floor to ceiling windows for the retail spaces. The second floor features floor to ceiling windows for the office use. The outdoor terrace on the second floor features low-lying vegetation as well as four large trees that will be partially visible from Main Street. The remaining floors are comprised of a deep reddish-brown face brick with horizontal detailing between the window expanses. The windows angle out towards the street to add dimension to the façade, and alternate between typical insulated glass and opaque spandrel glass. The residential balconies are made of a tan colored metal mesh. Zoning Ordinance: The C1a Commercial Mixed Use District permits commercial, office, and residential uses. Planned Development approval is required for the construction of 20,000 square feet or more, or substantial construction on property with a lot size of 30,000 square feet for more. The proposed nine-story mixed-use building requires Planned Development approval, as it meets both of the aforementioned criteria. The proposed development requests to exceed six of the base zoning regulations for the C1a District by requesting the following Site Development Allowances: Zoning C1a Zoning Requested Maximum Code Section Requirement Development Allowance Development Allowance 6-10-3-4-B Lot size: 350 sq ft per dwelling unit = 87 dwelling units max for this lot (sized at 30,500 sq ft) 112 dwelling units 40% increase = 122 dwelling units max 6-10-3-7 Maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 4.0 (excludes parking and mechanical) (ratio is gross sq ft compared to lot size) 4.86 FAR +1.5 FAR = 5.5 FAR max 6-10-3-9 Maximum allowed building height of 67’ 97’ height (excludes mechanical penthouse) +30’ = 97’ height max 6-10-3-10 Enclosed parking must be set back 20’ from any lot line 10’ setback for enclosed parking off of Chicago Avenue (inside garage) N/A 6-16-3-5 Table 16-B Total parking requirement of 216 spaces (155.75 for dwelling units, 28.75 for retail, 31.34 for office) 127 parking spaces total (106 typical spaces, 6 tandem, 15 hydraulic lift) N/A 6-16-5 5 short loading berths required (2 for dwelling units, 2 for retail, 1 for office) at 35’ in length 2 short loading berths at 25’ in length N/A 304 of 478 Maximum Site Develop Allowances can be exceeded when approved by a 2/3 supermajority vote of City Council. However, the applicant does not request to exceed any maximums. The only requested Site Development Allowance that is fully maximized (but not exceeding) is the building height at 97’. Transit Oriented Development & Traffic Impact: The intersection of Chicago Avenue and Main Street is busy, with traffic congestion rated at a C level. Both streets see high traffic counts, high pedestrian crossing due to the surrounding business district and the adjacent CTA and Metra stations, a bus stop, and designated bicycle route. City staff feels a development at 835 Chicago Avenue with a large amount of vehicular traffic would be detrimental to the already congested intersection. The applicant proposes the 835 Chicago building as a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) that features minimal parking and instead relies on the close proximity of the CTA and Metra stations and surrounding pedestrian-friendly business district. The applicant anticipates very few retail and office users will travel to the building by car, and the needed residential parking will be less than a 1:1 ratio, meaning the average vehicle per dwelling unit will be less than one. The development’s proposal for 13 retail-only parking spaces (for retail customers) leaves 114 on-site parking spaces for the 112 dwelling units, with a shared parking agreement that will allow office users to park on-site in spaces that are unoccupied by residential vehicles in the underground garage during business hours. According to the submitted traffic analysis by KLOA, the number of vehicles this development will bring to the immediate area is minimal enough that the traffic congestion will remain at a C level. As the applicant anticipates the number of parking spaces the development will demand are located within the on-site parking garage. Off-site parking, which is at a premium in the area, should not be adversely affected. The total parking ratio for the development is 1.13, which is comparable to other recent multi-family residential developments such as E2 at 1890 Maple Avenue and Central Station at 1700 Central Street. The location of the proposed development is one of the most preferable sites for Transit Oriented Development in the entire Chicagoland area. The area is extremely unique in that it features both a CTA and Metra station, as well as a bus stop, immediately across the street. TODs use lower parking counts to encourage residents to live with fewer vehicles (typically none or one) and instead rely on the other transportation options in the area. TODs are neighborhood friendly because they encourage local shopping, pedestrian activity, eyes on the street, environmental friendliness, and do not increase traffic congestion. TODs typically keep housing more affordable since they reduce the number of parking spaces constructed – which typically range from $40,000 - $60,000 per space in parking garages. Studies indicate the Generation X and Y groups in urban and semi-urban areas are switching to TOD lifestyles when such option is available. Many Generation X and Y families do not have two or more vehicles, and instead embrace public transportation, bicycling, and walking within their community. The 2008-2012 American Community Survey from the U.S. Census Bureau found that among the four census tracts that converge near 835 Chicago Avenue, approximately 12% of households do not have a vehicle available, and approximately 66% of households have one or fewer vehicles available. Rental dwellings, as opposed to owner- occupied units, typically further decrease the number of vehicles owned per dwelling. These 305 of 478 figures indicate a large acceptance within the immediate area for the use of other travel means and less reliance on vehicular travel. One common and conservative way of estimating how much on-site parking a TOD building needs is with the following formula: Zoning Ordinance - 25% TOD - 4 x carsharing spaces - Shared parking spaces = TOD parking requirement discount i.e. I-Go, Zip Car (each serves 2 vehicles) parking Using the above formula, the original Zoning Ordinance requirement for 216 on-site parking spaces is reduced to 123 spaces, which is less than the 127 spaces proposed by the applicant. Other communities that are similar to Evanston in terms of mass transit access, walkability, and suburban/urban densities have successful TOD mixed-use structures. The following chart describes similar TODs that are completed or currently under construction. The two comparable Evanston TODs, E2 and Central Station, both have commercial space with no on-site parking for the commercial uses. The parking ratios for the residential uses are 1.01 and .99, respectively. Central Station currently has 42 dwellings leased and 46 parking spaces leased, for a leasing ratio of 1.1. Development/ Municipality Dwelling Units Commercial/ Office SF Parking Spaces Ratio Oak Park Apts, Oak Park 200 14,000 200; Built adjacent to Public Parking Garage 1.0 4929 Forest Ave., Downers Grove 24 None 37 1.5 Acadia on the Green, Downers Grove 126 du 33,235 148 interior; 62 street 1.6 Lake & Forest, Oak Park 270 25,000 270; Built adjacent to Public Parking Garage 1.0 Arkadia Tower, West Loop, Chicago 350 Unknown 356 1.02 1601 Tower, Chicago 99 3 retail spaces Shared parking for residential; additional parking for retail 0 1890 Maple/1881 Oak, (E2) Evanston 356 4,000 353 .99 1700-1722 Central St., (Central Station) Evanston 80 10,500 81; No retail parking 1.01 Public Benefits: All new development within the city should provide public benefits to the community. Large scale development projects such as 835 Chicago Avenue should provide substantial public 306 of 478 benefits, both to improve the neighborhood and community as a whole, as well as to offset any potential concerns due to the higher intensity of the development. City staff has negotiated the following public benefits with the applicant: 1. Construct sidewalks, curbing, decorative brickwork, and landscaping along Chicago Avenue and Main Street in accordance with the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan. 2. Hire a minimum of five, with a goal of ten, Evanston residents to work at the site during construction. 3. Provide a payment of $2,250 to the City Parking Fund for each metered on- street parking space that will be temporarily removed during construction (estimated by City staff to be eight spaces). 4. Provide a payment of $50,000 towards the renovation of St. Paul’s Park just west of Chicago Avenue, adjacent to the Main Street CTA station. 5. Bury adjacent property utility lines, including but not limited to the lines on the four adjacent utility poles, in conjunction with the required underground placement of utility lines for the development project. 6. Provide a lump sum payment of $72,281 to the City Parking Fund to offset the loss of City revenue for the four metered on-street parking spaces that will be permanently removed for the benefit of the development. 7. If/when the development converts from rental dwelling units to condos, contribute to the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance that is typically required for new construction condo units, a payment to the City’s Affordable Housing Fund of 10% of units at $40,000 per unit for a total payment of $440,000. 2000 Comprehensive General Plan: The 2000 Comprehensive General Plan lists specific goals and objectives to promote the growth and redevelopment of business, commercial, and industrial areas of Evanston. The proposed redevelopment and site improvements at 835 Chicago Avenue achieve these goals by developing a property that is currently vacant and underutilized into an asset to the neighborhood and community as a whole. An evaluation of the proposal by City staff as it relates to the Comprehensive Plan goals is as follows: LEGEND M = Meets Guideline D = Does Not Meet Guideline N/A = Does Not Apply LAND USE Standard Result Neighborhood assets should be enhanced while recognizing that each neighborhood contributes to the overall social and economic quality of Evanston M Evanston’s housing stock should continue to offer buyers and renters a desirable range of choice in terms of style and price M Evanston should maintain a diverse range of business and commercial areas, all of which will be viable locations for business activity M Downtown Evanston should be an attractive, convenient, and economically vital center of diverse activity. N/A The growth and evolution of Evanston’s institutions should be supported so long as the growth does not have an adverse impact upon the residentially-zoned adjacent neighborhoods M 307 of 478 PUBLIC FACILITIES Standard Result The City of Evanston’s public buildings should be fully accessible, modernized buildings that serve civic needs and interests of residents. N/A City parks and recreation areas should be of the highest quality in order to meet residents various recreation and leisure interests N/A Utility systems in Evanston should provide reliable, quality service and support future development throughout Evanston M CIRCULATION Standard Result Evanston’s streets should safely, conveniently, and efficiently link neighborhoods to the rest of the community and to the metropolitan area M Evanston’s parking system should serve the needs of residents, commuters, employees, shoppers, and visitors to Evanston’s neighborhoods and business districts M Transportation providers should offer safe, convenient, affordable, and easily accessible transit alternatives to the automobile M The safety and convenience of pedestrians and bicyclists should be a priority M COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT Standard Result Buildings and landscaping should be attractive, interesting and compatible design M The historic heritage of Evanston should continue to be identified and preserved for the benefit of current and future residents M The creation of art and arts activities should be recognized and promoted as a vital component of the local economy N/A Locally and regionally, natural resources should be preserved and public health should be promoted through a clean environment M Legislative History February 12, 2014 – The Plan Commission expressed concerns regarding the number of parking spaces located on site, and granted a continuance to allow the developer to explore possible revisions to the proposed parking. February 26, 2014 – The developer presented a revised parking plan that increased the number of on-site parking spaces to 127 and explained details for a shared parking agreement between the residential and office uses. The Plan Commission voted 5-3 to recommend approval of the proposed Planned Development with the requested Site Development Allowances and Public Benefits. Attachments Ordinance 32-O-14 Site Plans and Elevations Plan Commission Packet, February 26, 2014: http://www.cityofevanston.org/assets/02.26.14%20PC%20Packet.pdf Plan Commission Packet, February 12, 2014 http://www.cityofevanston.org/assets/02.12.14%20PC%20Packet.pdf Letters of Concern Plan Commission Draft Meeting Minutes, February 26, 2014 Plan Commission Meeting Minutes, February 12, 2014 308 of 478 309 of 478 310 of 478 311 of 478 312 of 478 313 of 478 314 of 478 315 of 478 316 of 478 317 of 478 318 of 478 319 of 478 320 of 478 321 of 478 322 of 478 323 of 478 324 of 478 325 of 478 326 of 478 For City Council meeting of July 28, 2014 Item P7 Ordinance 90-O-14: Zoning Relief for a Rear Yard Setback and Zero Parking Spaces at 1026 Davis Street For Action To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Planning and Development Committee From: Mark Muenzer, Director of Community Development Lorrie Pearson, Planning and Zoning Administrator Melissa Klotz, Zoning Planner Subject: Ordinance 90-O-14, Granting Zoning Relief for a Rear Yard Setback and Zero Parking Spaces at 1026 Davis Street Date: July 2, 2014 Recommended Action The Zoning Board of Appeals and City staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 90-O-14 granting zoning relief for a 9.9’ rear yard setback and zero parking spaces where 31 parking spaces are required for a new 2-story commercial building with retail and two Type 1 Restaurants at 1026 Davis Street. The applicant has complied with all other zoning requirements, and meets the standards for variances in the D2 Downtown Retail Core District. Summary 1026 Davis Street is located on the south side of Davis Street between Oak and Maple Avenues in the D2 Downtown Retail Core District and is surrounded by a variety of commercial uses and multifamily residential. The property in question is the current location of Tom Thumb Hobby & Crafts, which is relocating to Niles later this summer. The property features a one-story building with a partial second story. The building was moderately damaged by a fire years ago and therefore cannot support the expansion of a full second story. The applicants propose to construct a 2-story building with approximately 19,980 square feet of commercial space. The first floor will feature two full-service restaurants, Taco Diablo and Lulu’s Asian Fusion, on the east half of the building, as well as general retail space on the west half of the building. The second floor will feature additional seating and event space for functions related to the first-floor restaurants, and an outdoor terrace fronting Davis Street. The building design has received preliminary approval at SPAARC, and is considering moderate design changes such as the addition of a Memorandum 327 of 478 ground-floor knee-wall as an architectural element consistent with the adjacent buildings. The combination of restaurants and retail uses require a total of 31 parking spaces. The 12,000 square foot lot size and 88’ width make it difficult to construct enclosed parking. Additionally, the property does not feature alley access – only a small access easement at the rear of the property for deliveries and garbage pickup. The easement is not large enough for vehicles to regularly use to enter and exit a parking lot; any parking provided on site would require a curb cut on Davis Street that would eliminate street parking and reduce the commercial space along the street. Based on their previous experience with the same restaurants at their former location across the street, the applicants believe 31 parking spaces are not necessary for the given uses, which are pedestrian oriented. Most employees of the restaurants either use public transportation or walk to work. The applicants plan to offer valet service as necessary when special events occur in the second floor space. On-street parking is available directly in front of the property, and multiple City parking garages are nearby. The applicants also request a 9.9’ rear yard setback where 15’ is required due to the adjacent residential zoning district to the rear of the property. The requested setback proposes a building footprint that is the same as the current building footprint. The fire escapes at the rear of the building may have to be enclosed to meet the fire code, which would slightly increase the building footprint but still meet the requested 9.9’ setback. City staff has not received letters of objection to the project. Some citizens that live near the property attended the Zoning Board hearing and voiced concerns regarding the parking variance. Neighborhood Benefit This use should not cause a negative effect on the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed development complements the pedestrian-friendly downtown by encouraging walkability and eyes on the street via the second story terrace. Ample parking is available on the street and in nearby parking garages. The rear yard setback is an existing condition that will be replaced by the proposed building and should not negatively impact the adjacent residences. The development will allow two local Evanston restaurants to reopen in the downtown, and will utilize a property that would otherwise sit unused. Comprehensive Plan The Evanston Comprehensive General Plan encourages the redevelopment of vacant spaces within the downtown. The Comprehensive General Plan specifically includes: Objective: Retain and attract businesses in order to strengthen Evanston’s economic base. Objective: Promote the growth and redevelopment of business, commercial, and industrial areas. The requested variances will promote the pedestrian-friendly character of the downtown and bring two local restaurants back to the area on a redeveloped property. 328 of 478 Legislative History July 1, 2014: The ZBA recommended unanimous approval of the requested variances with the following conditions: 1. Employees of the restaurants shall not park on the street. 2. The project must be within substantial compliance with the documents and testimony on record. Attachments Proposed Ordinance 90-O-14 July 1, 2014 ZBA Draft Meeting Minutes ZBA Findings Staff memo to the ZBA ZBA Application Packet – July 1, 2014 Additional Document Submitted to ZBA (Re: Fire Code) 329 of 478 7/1/2014 90-O-14 AN ORDINANCE Granting Major Variations Related to 1026 Davis Street in the D2 Downtown Retail Core Zoning District WHEREAS, Daniel Kelch and Marty Cless, contract purchaser and owner, respectively (collectively, the “Applicants”), of the property commonly known as 1026 Davis Street (the “Subject Property”), located within the D2 Downtown Retail Core zoning district and legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, submitted an application seeking approval of Major Variations to zoning requirements imposed by Subsections 6-11-3-8-E and 6-16-3-5 of Title 6 of the Evanston City Code of 1979, as amended (the “Zoning Ordinance”); and WHEREAS, the Applicant requests the following Major Variations: (A) The Applicant requests a 9.9 foot rear yard setback where a fifteen (15) foot rear yard setback is required; and (B) The Applicant requests zero (0) on-site parking spaces where thirty-one (31) parking spaces are required; and WHEREAS, on July 1, 2014, the Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”), pursuant to proper notice, held a public hearing in case no. 14ZMJV-0063 to consider the application, received testimony, and made written records and findings that the application did meet the standards for Major Variations set forth in Subsection 6-3-8-12- (E) of the Zoning Ordinance and recommended City Council approval thereof; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of July 14, 2014, the Planning and Development (“P&D”) Committee of the City Council considered and accepted the 330 of 478 90-O-14 ~2~ ZBA’s recommendation, and recommended City Council approve the Major Variations, as requested; and WHEREAS, at its meetings of July 14, 2014 and July 28, 2014, the City Council considered and adopted the recommendation of the P&D Committee, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, THAT: SECTION 1: The foregoing recitals are hereby found as fact and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2: The City Council hereby adopts the P&D Committee’s records, findings, and recommendations, and hereby approves, pursuant to Subsection 6-3-8-10-(D) of the Zoning Ordinance, the Major Variations on the Subject Property applied for in case no. 14ZMJV-0063 and described hereinabove. SECTION 3: The Major Variations approved hereby are as follows: (A) Approval to allow a 9.9 foot rear yard setback where Subsection 6-11-3-8-E requires a fifteen (15) foot rear yard setback. (B) Approval to allow zero (0) on-site parking spaces where Subsection 6-16-3-5 requires thirty-one (31) parking spaces. SECTION 4: Pursuant to Subsection 6-3-8-14 of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council hereby imposes the following conditions on the Major Variations granted hereby, violation of any of which shall constitute grounds for penalties or revocation thereof pursuant to Subsections 6-3-10-5 and 6-3-10-6 of the Zoning Ordinance: (A) Compliance with Requirements: The Applicant shall develop and use the Subject Property in substantial compliance with all applicable legislation, with the testimony and representations of the Applicant to the ZBA, the P&D Committee, and the City Council, and the approved plans and documents on file in this case. 331 of 478 90-O-14 ~3~ (B) Employee Parking: Employees must not park on the street when driving to and from work. SECTION 5: When necessary to effectuate the terms, conditions, and purposes of this ordinance, “Applicant” shall be read as “Applicant’s agents, assigns, and successors in interest.” SECTION 6: Except as otherwise provided for in this ordinance, all applicable regulations of the Zoning Ordinance and the entire City Code shall apply to the Subject Property and remain in full force and effect with respect to the use and development of the same. SECTION 7: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval, and publication in the manner provided by law. SECTION 8: All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION 9: If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance is ruled unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid application or provision, and each invalid provision or invalid application of this ordinance is severable. SECTION 10: The findings and recitals herein are declared to be prim a facie evidence of the law of the City and shall be received in evidence as provided by the Illinois Compiled Statutes and the courts of the State of Illinois. 332 of 478 90-O-14 ~4~ Introduced:_________________, 2014 Adopted:___________________, 2014 Approved: __________________________, 2014 _______________________________ Elizabeth B. Tisdahl, Mayor Attest: _______________________________ Rodney Greene, City Clerk Approved as to form: _______________________________ W. Grant Farrar, Corporation Counsel 333 of 478 90-O-14 ~5~ EXHIBIT A Legal Descriptions PARCEL 1: THE NORTH 135 FEET OF LOT 5 AND THE NORTH 135 FEET OF LOT 6 (EXCEPT THE WEST 51 FEET 8 7/8 INCHES OF LOT 6) IN BLOCK 62 IN EVANSTON IN SECTION 18, T 41 N, R14E OF THE 3RD PM, IN COOK COUNTY, IL. PARCEL 2: NONEXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF PARCEL 1 AS CREATED BY DEED FROM PHILIP JUDSON AND ELIZABETH JUDSON, HIS WIFE, TO WILLIAM H. GRANT DATED MAY 19, 1871 AND RECORDED MAY 14, 1872 AS DOCUMENT 30726 FOR PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND: THE SOUTH 10 FEET OF THE NORTH 135 FEET OF THE WEST 51 FEET 8 7/8 INCHES OF LOT 6 IN BLOCK 62 IN EVANSTON IN SECTION 18, T 41 N, R 14 E OF THE 3RD PM, IN COOK COUNTY, IL. PIN: 11-18-309-031-0000 Commonly Known As: 1026 DAVIS STREET, EVANSTON, IL 334 of 478 DRAFT NOT APPROVED Page 1 of 6 Zoning Board of Appeals MEETING MINUTES ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Tuesday, July 1, 2014 7:00 PM Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Council Chambers Members Present: Matt Rodgers, Beth McLennan, Violetta Cullen, Clara Wineberg, Scott Gingold Members Absent: Mary Beth Berns, Andrew Gallimore Staff Present: Melissa Klotz, Lorrie Pearson, Mario Treto Chair: Matt Rodgers Declaration of Quorum With a quorum present, Chair Rodgers called the meeting to order at 7:03pm. Approval of Minutes The minutes from the May 20, 2014 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting were motioned for approval by Ms. Cullen and seconded by Ms. McLennan. The motion was approved 3-0 with two abstentions. New Business 1315 Lee Street ZBA 14ZMJV-0061 Andrew Venamore, Project Manager Representative, applies for major zoning relief to replace a a 14.1’ x 22.1’ 1.5-car detached garage with a 16’ x 22’ 1.5-car detached garage. The applicant proposes a building lot coverage of 42.7% where a maximum 30% is allowed and where 41.6% currently exists (Zoning Code Section 6-8-2-7), 62% impervious surface coverage where a maximum 45% is allowed and where 56% currently exists (Zoning Code Section 6-8-2-10-A), and a 3’ east interior side yard setback where 5’ is required (Zoning Code Section 6-8-2-8-C-3). The Zoning Board of Appeals is the determining body for this case. Ms. Klotz read the case into the record. Mr. Venamore, the project manager, explained the case: • The proposal is to replace the existing decrepit garage • The new structure will be in approximately the same location and will be slightly larger • The drive will be reduced in width to 9’, the width of the garage door James Winegardner, added that the house was built in 1806 and that the garage existed when he moved in in 1996. Chair Rodgers also noted that the 9’ driveway width reduces the proposed impervious surface cover to 60% from the original 62% request. Currently, the impervious surface cover is 56%. The ZBA entered into deliberations. There was none. The Standards were then addressed: 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Yes 335 of 478 DRAFT NOT APPROVED Page 2 of 6 Zoning Board of Appeals 4. Yes 5. Yes 6. Yes 7. Yes Ms. McLennan motioned to approve the variances with the following conditions: 1. A maximum of 60% impervious surface coverage as revised by the applicant. 2. The project must be within substantial compliance of the documents and testimony on record. The motion was seconded by Ms. Cullen. The vote concluded at 5-0. 1026 Davis Street ZBA 14ZMJV-0063 Daniel Kelch and Marty Cless, contract purchaser and owner, apply for major zoning relief to construct a 2-story commercial building. The applicants request a 9.9’ rear yard setback where 15’ is required (Zoning Code Section 6-11-3-8-E), and zero on-site parking spaces where 31 parking spaces are required (Zoning Code Section 6-16-3-5). The Zoning Board of Appeals makes a recommendation to City Council, the determining body for this case. Ms. Klotz read the case into the record and noted an additional email from the Fire Department, requiring enclosed fire escapes. John Myefski, the architect for the project, explained the proposal: • Rebuild at the Tom Thumb building • The footprint will be essentially the same • They cannot renovate and add a full second story • They propose a terrace with a trellis on the second floor • Taco Diablos and Lulus restaurants on the first floor plus a retail space • The second floor will have more restaurant and event space • They request no on-site parking: the property does not have an alley and they do not want a curb cut off of Davis Street • The existing building has no parking Mr. Gingold asked if there were a condition that employees cannot park on the street. Dan Kelch replied that yes, employees would not park on the street and most do not drive anyway. Mr. Gingold asked if there was a need for a 10’ setback. John Myefski replied that they must have a minimum 10’ for the loading dock and the new building needs to go right up to the loading docks. Ms. Wineberg asked what kind of trucks will use the loading dock. Dan Kelch replied that vans or c-class trucks and occasional large trucks will use the loading dock. Mr. Gingold asked about the seating capacity. Dan Kelch answered stating that there will be capacity for 60 at each restaurant downstairs and 50-60 upstairs excluding the terrace. The terrace will be used for dining and as a lounge area. Ms. Cullen asked about hours of operation. 336 of 478 DRAFT NOT APPROVED Page 3 of 6 Zoning Board of Appeals Dan Kelch responded that hours will be 11:30am-10:30pm at the maximum during the week and until midnight on weekends. Chair Rodgers asked about the number of employees. Dan Kelch replied that there would be 70 part-time employees for the restaurants, with probably 24 employees per shift for the restaurants combined. For the event space, there would be three to six employees for the event space. Mr. Gingold asked about valet for the event space. Dan Kelch responded that yes, valet serves the customers best. They may put cars on private property nearby or use a City lot or garage. Bruce Boyer stated that he was concerned about parking. There is a big parking demand for events. He asked if the City did a parking study. Ms. Klotz replied that the City has not done a parking study to this specific property, but studies have been done for City garages, which took into account lots like this one. No garages are at capacity. Frances Anderson also had parking concerns. Mike Moyer stated his concern about the common wall to his property to the east. Chair Rodgers said that that would be addressed through the permit process. John Myefski added that there is no basement specifically for that reason. They will build a new wall that is completely separate from the property to the east and will leave the existing wall to not impact that property. The ZBA entered into deliberations: Chair Rodgers noted this is a case for two variances and no special uses. Mr. Gingold commented on the setbacks, stating that it is impractical to require 15’ with respect to the loading dock issue. Parking could be problematic, but it is consistent with the City’s plan for a busy, pedestrian friendly Davis Street. He would like conditions for no on-street parking for employees and to require some valet. Ms. McLennan felt there is plenty of parking available in the downtown. She added that we do not want an open parking lot in the downtown. Ms. Wineberg and Chair Rodgers agreed. Ms. Cullen asked if it will impact neighbors. Dan Kelch responded that the construction will have some impact, but they are working with them. The Standards were then addressed: 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Yes 4. Yes 5. Yes 6. Yes 337 of 478 DRAFT NOT APPROVED Page 4 of 6 Zoning Board of Appeals 7. Yes Chair Rodgers motioned to recommend approval of the variances with the following conditions: 1. Employees and valet cars cannot park on any street 2. The project must be within substantial compliance of the documents and testimony on record. The motion was seconded by Ms. McLennan and approved 5-0. 1825 Greenwood Avenue /1409 Dodge Avenue ZBA 14ZMJV-0065 Thomas Heskin, property owner, applies for major zoning relief to add a second story addition and attached garage to a single family residence and convert an automobile repair service establishment into a 2-family residence with a second story addition. The applicant requests to establish two principal structures on one lot where one principal structure is allowed (Zoning Code Section 6-4-1-6-B), as well as the following for the single family residence (1825 Greenwood Street): 1. 14.4’ front yard setback where 27’ is required (Zoning Code Section 6-8-5-7-A-1) for the second story addition. 2. 8.5’ street side yard setback where 15’ is required (Zoning Code Section 6-8-5-7-A-2) for the attached garage. 3. 1.9’ east interior side yard setback where 5’ is required (Zoning Code Section 6-8-5-7-A- 3) for the second story addition. And the following for the 2-family residence (1409 Dodge Avenue): 1. 1.7’ east interior side yard setback where 5’ is required (Zoning Code Section 6-8-5-7-A- 3) for the second story addition. 2. 6.6’ rear yard setback where 25’ is required (Zoning Code Section 6-8-5-7-A-4) for the second story addition. 3. 2 on-site parking spaces where 3 parking spaces are required (Zoning Code Section 6- 16-3-5). The Zoning Board of Appeals makes a recommendation to City Council, the determining body for this case. Ms. Klotz read the case into the record. Tom Heskin, the applicant, explained the proposal: • The property has an existing single family residence and a mechanic shop • Commercial use is not probable at that location Chair Rodgers asked if the building footprint for the single family home is increasing. Tom Heskin answered no, the building footprint is not increasing. Ms. Klotz added that a garage is being added to the single family residence, so that is changing. Chair Rodgers asked about the building footprint for the proposed two-family structure. Tom Heskin replied that there is no change to that footprint. Ms. Cullen noted that the property has had high crime and that residential would be much better. Tom Heskin also stated that there are no longer any proposed curb cuts off of Dodge anymore. 338 of 478 DRAFT NOT APPROVED Page 5 of 6 Zoning Board of Appeals Ms. Klotz added that the applicant has worked extensively with staff to eliminate Dodge curb cuts and to minimize the impervious surface cover. Mr. Gingold asked if the garage has been relocated. Ms. Klotz replied that yes, the garage was moved forward to minimize driveway length off of Greenwood. Chair Rodgers stated he was not thrilled with having two separate principal structures. There could be a future problem with wanting a subdivision or more variances. Patrick Stayhand said he was glad the previous property owner is gone. He uses the alley frequently. He objects to the use of the property as rental and the use of the alley. This will mean more users for the alley. Tom Heskin replied that the two single car garages will use the alley access. This will be much less vehicular traffic than the mechanic shop that regularly had six or so cars. The residences will be sold individually. Mr. Gingold agreed with Chair Rodger’s comment that this could create future zoning issues. Ms. Wineberg stated that it is a unique situation because two principal structures already exist. This is an opportunity to provide residential continuity and eliminate an eyesore and social sore. Ms. Cullen agreed stating that the property has been a big eyesore. The ZBA entered into deliberations: Chair Rodgers stated he was torn. He was pleased to see residential development, but he foresees future problems. Ms. Wineberg believes it is worth the risk and supported the proposal. Ms. Cullen and Ms. McLennan agreed. The Standards were addressed: 1. Yes 2. Yes Chair Rodgers initially expressed concerns. Ms. Cullen and Ms. McLennan agreed it would be better if they were developed as condos or a Home Owners Association 3. Yes 4. Yes 5. Yes It is a public benefit 6. Yes 7. Yes Chair Rodgers motioned to recommend approval of the proposal with the following conditions: 1. Consider establishing an HOA/condo. 2. The project must be within substantial compliance of the documents and testimony on record. The motion was seconded by Ms. Cullen and approved 5-0. Council should consider the implications of creating a substandard lot if the lot wants to be subdivided in the future. 339 of 478 DRAFT NOT APPROVED Page 6 of 6 Zoning Board of Appeals Ms. Klotz stated that the next ZBA meeting is July 15th and there are four cases. She also shared by email information on the Illinois APA conference and a recommended training session at the conference. Chair Rodgers asked staff to send ZBA Rules to all. They need to be revised and asked everyone to please comment on changes to propose by July 18th. Then staff will add comments. The meeting adjourned at 8:50pm. 340 of 478 FF II NN DD II NN GG SS FOR STANDARDS OF VV AA RR II AA TT II OO NN SS In the case of after conducting a public hearing on July 1, 2014, the Zoning Board of Appeals makes the following findings of fact, based upon the standards for major variances specified in Section 6-3-8-12 of the City Code: Standard Finding (A) The requested variation will not have a substantial adverse impact on the use, enjoyment or property values of adjoining properties; ___X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 (B) The requested variation is in keeping with the intent of the zoning ordinance; ___X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 (C) The alleged hardship or practical difficulty is peculiar to the property; ___X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 (D) The property owner would suffer a particular hardship or practical difficulty as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out; ___X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 (E) The purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to extract additional income from the property; or there is a public benefit; ___X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 Case Number: 14ZMJV-0063 Address or Location: 1026 Davis Street Applicant: Daniel Kelch and Marty Cless Proposed Zoning Relief: 9.9’ rear yard setback, zero on-site parking spaces – for construction of a 2-story commercial building 341 of 478 (F) The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person having an interest in the property; __X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 (G) The requested variation is limited to the minimum change necessary to alleviate the particular hardship or practical difficulty which affects the property; __X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 and, based upon these findings, and upon a vote of __5__ in favor & __0__ against recommends to the City Council __X__ approval __X__ approval with conditions: 1. Employees and valet cars cannot park on any street 2. The project must be within substantial compliance of the documents and testimony on record. _____ denial (cases that fail to receive 4 concurrent votes in favor are deemed a recommendation for denial) __________________________________________ Date: _____________ Matt Rodgers Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman Attending: Vote: Aye No __X__ Violetta Cullen _X__ ____ _____ Mary Beth Berns ____ ____ __X__ Beth McLennan _X__ ____ __X__ Matt Rodgers _X__ ____ _____ Andrew Gallimore ____ ____ __X__ Scott Gingold _X__ ____ __X__ Clara Wineberg _X__ ____ 342 of 478 343 of 478 344 of 478 345 of 478 346 of 478 347 of 478 348 of 478 349 of 478 350 of 478 351 of 478 352 of 478 353 of 478 354 of 478 355 of 478 356 of 478 357 of 478 358 of 478 359 of 478 360 of 478 361 of 478 362 of 478 ©2014MYEFSKIARCHITECTS,INCCOPYRIGHT 2014: MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC. EXPRESSLYRESERVES ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHERPROPERTY RIGHTS IN THESE DRAWINGS. THESE DRAWINGS ARENOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY FORMOR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TOANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESSEDWRITTEN PERMISSION OF MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC.PAGE06/20/14EXISTING CONDITIONCOMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT1026 DAVIS ST.EVANSTON, IL1VIEW OF PROPERTY FROM REARVIEW OF PROPERTY FROM DAVIS STREETVIEW OF PROPERTY FROM ABOVESITE LOCATION MAP363 of 478 DAVIS STREETOAK AVENUE88' - 7 3/16"FIRST FLOOR = 10,780 SQ. FT.SECOND FLOOR = 8,430 SQ. FT.TOTAL GROSS = 19,210 SQ. FT.D2 ZONED2 ZONER6 ZONEROOF TERRACE = 2,110 SQ. FT.135' - 6 1/8"10' x 35' LOADINGOPEN TRELLISSTORM WATER DETENTIONTANK UNDER LOADING AREA9.9' MIN. PER VARIANCE10' - 0"CANOPY ABOVE STAIR©2014MYEFSKIARCHITECTS,INCCOPYRIGHT 2014: MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC. EXPRESSLYRESERVES ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHERPROPERTY RIGHTS IN THESE DRAWINGS. THESE DRAWINGS ARENOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY FORMOR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TOANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESSEDWRITTEN PERMISSION OF MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC.PAGE 1" = 20'-0"06/20/14SITE PLAN - ZONINGCOMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT1026 DAVIS ST.EVANSTON, IL2ZONINGCODE ENFORCEMENT (JURISDICTION) EVANSTONZONING DISTRICT D2SITE AREA 12,006 SQ. FT.PERMITTED FLOOR AREA RATIO 2.75PERMITTED FLOOR AREA 33,016 SQ. FT.PROPOSED FLOOR AREA 19,210 SQ. FT.PERMITTED BUILDING HEIGHT 42'PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT 34'SPECIAL HEIGHT REQ. - FRONT WALLHEIGHT24'PARKING SPACES REQUIRED 31PARKING SPACES PROVIDED 0(VARIANCE HAS BEEN FILED)LOADING REQUIRED 1 SHORTLOADING PROVIDED 1 SHORTREQUIRED SETBACK - FRONT 0'REQUIRED SETBACK - REAR 15'(VARIANCE HAS BEEN FILED FOR 9.9')REQUIRED SETBACK - SIDE 0'0 10' 20'40'364 of 478 UPUPUP1431 SFRESTAURANT1391 SFRESTAURANT4686 SFRETAIL8' - 1"TOILETSTRASH ENCLOSURESENTRY10' x 35' LOADINGDAVIS STREET10' x 35' LOADING421 SFMECHANICAL998 SFSHAREDKITCHEN3073 SFEVENT SPACE(ACCESSARY TORESTAURANT)758 SFKITCHEN2110 SFOUTDOORTERRACE1184 SFBAR319 SFGAMES670 SFTOILETS830 SFSEATINGOPERABLEWALLSCANOPY ABOVE318 SFMECH.178 SFELEC.©2014MYEFSKIARCHITECTS,INCCOPYRIGHT 2014: MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC. EXPRESSLYRESERVES ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHERPROPERTY RIGHTS IN THESE DRAWINGS. THESE DRAWINGS ARENOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY FORMOR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TOANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESSEDWRITTEN PERMISSION OF MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC.PAGE 1" = 20'-0"06/20/14FLOOR PLANSCOMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT1026 DAVIS ST.EVANSTON, IL3FIRST FLOOR PLANSECOND FLOOR PLANAREAS:1ST FLOOR =10,780 SQ. FT.2ND FLOOR = 8,430 SQ .FT.TOTAL = 19,210 SQ. FT.EXTERIOR TERRACE = 2,110 SQ. FT.365 of 478 0' - 0"1ST FLR.17' - 0"2ND FLR.33' - 0"RoofWOOD BOARD SIDING20' - 6"(24' MIN. STRUCTURE TO STREET)28' - 6"35' - 0"UTILITY BRICK PARTY WALLSPAINTED STEEL STRUCTUREGLASS RAILINGPORCELAIN EXTERIORFACADEPAINTED STEEL STRUCTURE©2014MYEFSKIARCHITECTS,INCCOPYRIGHT 2014: MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC. EXPRESSLYRESERVES ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHERPROPERTY RIGHTS IN THESE DRAWINGS. THESE DRAWINGS ARENOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY FORMOR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TOANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESSEDWRITTEN PERMISSION OF MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC.PAGE 1/8" = 1'-0"06/20/14NORTH ELEVATIONCOMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT1026 DAVIS ST.EVANSTON, IL4366 of 478 0' - 0"1ST FLR.17' - 0"2ND FLR.33' - 0"RoofUTILITY BRICKWALLSPAINTED STEELCANOPY FASCIAPAINTED STEELSTAIR ANDRAILING©2014MYEFSKIARCHITECTS,INCCOPYRIGHT 2014: MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC. EXPRESSLYRESERVES ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHERPROPERTY RIGHTS IN THESE DRAWINGS. THESE DRAWINGS ARENOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY FORMOR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TOANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESSEDWRITTEN PERMISSION OF MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC.PAGE 1/8" = 1'-0"06/20/14SOUTH ELEVATIONCOMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT1026 DAVIS ST.EVANSTON, IL5367 of 478 ©2014MYEFSKIARCHITECTS,INCCOPYRIGHT 2014: MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC. EXPRESSLYRESERVES ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHERPROPERTY RIGHTS IN THESE DRAWINGS. THESE DRAWINGS ARENOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY FORMOR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TOANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESSEDWRITTEN PERMISSION OF MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC.PAGE06/20/14VIEW FROM DAVIS STREETCOMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT1026 DAVIS ST.EVANSTON, IL6368 of 478 ©2014MYEFSKIARCHITECTS,INCCOPYRIGHT 2014: MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC. EXPRESSLYRESERVES ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHERPROPERTY RIGHTS IN THESE DRAWINGS. THESE DRAWINGS ARENOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY FORMOR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TOANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESSEDWRITTEN PERMISSION OF MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC.PAGE06/20/14CONTEXT VIEWCOMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT1026 DAVIS ST.EVANSTON, IL71026 DAVIS369 of 478 ©2014MYEFSKIARCHITECTS,INCCOPYRIGHT 2014: MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC. EXPRESSLYRESERVES ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHERPROPERTY RIGHTS IN THESE DRAWINGS. THESE DRAWINGS ARENOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY FORMOR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TOANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESSEDWRITTEN PERMISSION OF MYEFSKI ARCHITECTS, INC.PAGE 1/16" = 1'-0"06/20/14MATERIAL PALETTECOMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT1026 DAVIS ST.EVANSTON, IL8UTILITY BRICKPAINTED STEEL LINTELSIPE (HARDWOOD) RAINSCREENPAINTED STEEL TRELLISARCHITECTURAL METAL PANELPORCELAIN / CERAMIC TILE.......CHANNEL LETTER SIGNAGE370 of 478 371 of 478 372 of 478 373 of 478 374 of 478 375 of 478 376 of 478 377 of 478 378 of 478 For City Council meeting of July 28, 2014 Items P8 & P9 Ordinances 83-O-14 and 89-O-14: 1409 Dodge Avenue and 1825 Greenwood Street For Action To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Planning and Development Committee From: Mark Muenzer, Director of Community Development Department Lorrie Pearson, Planning and Zoning Administrator Damir Latinovic, Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Melissa Klotz, Zoning Planner Subject: (P8) Ordinance 83-O-14 Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment from I2 to R4 (P9) Ordinance 89-O-14 Zoning Relief for Two Principal Structures, Setbacks, and Parking at 1409 Dodge Avenue and 1825 Greenwood Street Date: July 3, 2014 Recommended Action: The Plan Commission, Zoning Board of Appeals and City staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 83-O-14 to rezone the subject property from I2 General Industrial to R4 General Residential district and Ordinance 89-O-14 to approve zoning relief for two principal structures on one lot, a 14.4’ front yard setback, 8.5’ street side yard setback, 1.9’ interior side yard setback, 1.7’ interior side yard setback, 6.6’ rear yard setback, and two parking spaces where three are required. The rezoning and zoning variations would accommodate redevelopment to establish one two-unit dwelling and one single family home on the property. Rezoning Summary The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject property from I2 General Industrial to R4 General Residential zoning district to accommodate a total of three residential units on the property (existing and proposed zoning maps are attached). The subject property, commonly known as 1409 Dodge Avenue (north end of the lot) and 1825 Greenwood Street (south end of the lot) is located at the northeast corner of Dodge Avenue and Greenwood Street. The 7,542-square foot property contains a vacant one- story commercial building previously occupied by an automobile repair service establishment (1409 Dodge Avenue) and a vacant single family home (1825 Greenwood Street). The properties immediately to the north and east are zoned R3, Two-Family Residential district and are improved with single family homes. The property immediately to the south is zoned I2, General Industrial and is improved with a multi-tenant two-story office Memorandum 379 of 478 building. The property to the west is zoned R4, General Residential and is part of the West Evanston Overlay District. That property is improved with a single family structure that was previously home to a roofing contractor business but is currently vacant. The current I2 zoning classification is not suited for the subject property. The property is too small to accommodate a light-manufacturing or light-industrial use typically found in the industrial districts. Additionally, the property is surrounded by residential neighborhoods to the north and east. The intent of the R4 zoning district is to provide a mix of residential use types at a moderate density including multiple-family dwellings, two-family dwellings, townhouses, and single family attached and detached dwellings. The proposed use consisting of one two-family dwelling and one single family home is compatible with the character of residential neighborhoods to the north and to the east. At the same time, the proposal provides a transitional use buffer between the industrial uses to the west and the residential uses to the north and east and is consistent with other R4 zoning classifications along the old railroad right-of-way. The proposed Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment to rezone the property from I2- General Industrial to R4-General Residential meets the standards of approval outlined in Section 6-3-4-5 of the Municipal Code. The proposal is consistent with surrounding uses and land use classifications. The proposed multi-family use is consistent with the goal of the General Comprehensive Plan to preserve and enhance neighborhood assets by creating an appropriate multiple-family use buffer between the low-density residential neighborhoods to the north and east and the light-industrial and office area to the west and south. The proposed rezoning will not have any adverse effect on the value of adjacent properties. The proposal will instead improve the value of adjacent properties through the construction of a two-family dwelling on the site that previously housed an automobile repair service establishment which was a detriment to the surrounding neighborhood. The property will continue to be adequately served by public facilities and services. Zoning Variations Summary The applicant proposes to renovate the subject property by adding a 2-car attached garage and full second story to the existing single family home at 1825 Greenwood Street. The applicant also proposes to add a full second story to the former automotive repair building and convert the building into a two-family dwelling with one enclosed garage parking space for each unit at 1409 Dodge Avenue. The applicant has worked extensively with staff to minimize the impervious surface on the property and eliminate all curb cuts from Dodge Avenue. Access to the garage for the single family home is proposed via a driveway off of Greenwood Street within the cul de sac. Access to the garages for the two-family dwelling is off of the alley at the rear of the property. No open parking is proposed. With the exception of the new 2-car attached garage for the single family home, all other additions will maintain the same building footprints and only require variances because the existing building footprints are legally-nonconforming to the current Zoning Ordinance. The variances requested include allowing two principal structures on one lot where only one principal structure is permitted, as well as the following for each structure: 380 of 478 1825 Greenwood Street (single family residence) Variance Requested Reason 14.4’ front yard setback where 27’ is required (Greenwood) For second story addition; aligns with existing building footprint; does not extend as far as the enclosed front porch at 12.4’ 8.5’ street side yard setback where 15’ is required (Dodge) For new attached garage with second story; only location on property where a garage could fit given the existing building placement 1.9’ east interior side yard setback where 5’ is required For second story addition; aligns with existing building footprint 1409 Dodge Avenue (2-family dwelling) Variance Requested Reason 1.7’ east interior side yard setback where 5’ is required For second story addition; aligns with existing building footprint 6.6’ rear yard setback where 25’ is required For second story addition; aligns with existing building footprint 2 on-site parking spaces where 3 are required for a 2-family dwelling No legal location available for third parking space, whether enclosed or open parking Each of the requested variances is related to the placement of the existing structures and the required setbacks given the property is a corner lot. The variances are necessary in order to rehabilitate the structures into dwelling units that are comparable to the surrounding residential neighborhood. Legislative History July 1, 2014 – Following the submittal of a revised site plan as recommended by the Plan Commission, SPAARC, and City staff, the Zoning Board of Appeals unanimously forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council for the proposed zoning relief, which will allow for the redevelopment of the property with building additions that will allow the property to be repurposed with a single family dwelling and two-family dwelling. The Board recommendation included the following two conditions: 1) The dwelling units shall be sold as condominiums or a homeowners association shall be established. 2) The project must be in substantial compliance with the documents and testimony on record. June 11, 2014 – The Plan Commission unanimously forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed rezoning from I2 to R4. The Commission included a suggestion that the parking layout should be redesigned so that vehicles do not have to back out on Dodge Avenue. May 21, 2014 – The Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission unanimously forwarded a positive recommendation to the Plan Commission regarding the proposed rezoning of the property from I2 to R4. Several residents inquired at the meeting if the units would be rentals or sold at market rate. The applicant’s presentation included a summary that the units would be sold at market rate. 381 of 478 Attachments Proposed Ordinances 83-O-14 and 89-O-14 Existing and Proposed Area Zoning Maps Site Plan Elevations Plan Commission Packet 06/11/14 Link: http://www.cityofevanston.org/assets/06.11.14%20PC%20Packet.pdf Plan Commission Draft Meeting Minutes 06/11/14 Zoning Board of Appeals Findings Checklist Zoning Board of Appeals Packet 07/01/14 Link: http://www.cityofevanston.org/assets/ZBA%20packet%2007.01.14.pdf A Letter of Objection submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals Zoning Board of Appeals Draft Meeting Minutes 07/01/14 382 of 478 1409 Dodge Avenue and 1825 Greenwood Street 13PLND-0043 Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment I2 to R4 14ZMJV-0065 Zoning Variations 383 of 478 5/14/2013 83-O-14 AN ORDINANCE Amending the Zoning Map to Re-Zone Certain Properties From the I2 District to the R4 District WHEREAS, the City of Evanston is a home-rule municipality pursuant to Article VII of the Illinois Constitution of 1970; and WHEREAS, as a home rule unit of government, the City has the authority to adopt ordinances and to promulgate rules and regulations that protect the public health, safety, and welfare of its residents; and WHEREAS, Article VII, Section (6)a of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, which states that the “powers and functions of home rule units shall be construed liberally,” was written “with the intention that home rule units be given the broadest powers possible” (Scadron v. City of Des Plaines, 153 Ill.2d 164); and WHEREAS, it is a well-established proposition under all applicable case law that the power to regulate land use through zoning regulations is a legitimate means of promoting the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, Division 13 of the Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/11-13-1, et seq.) grants each municipality the power to establish zoning regulations; and WHEREAS, pursuant to its home rule authority and the Illinois Municipal Code, the City has adopted a set of zoning regulations, set forth in Title 6 of the Evanston City Code of 1979, as amended, (“the Zoning Ordinance”); and 384 of 478 83-O-14 ~2~ WHEREAS, on June 11, 2014, the Plan Commission held a public hearing, pursuant to proper notice, regarding case no. 14PLND-0043, to consider amendments to the Zoning Map, cited in Section 6-7-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, to place certain properties within the R4 General Residential District; and WHEREAS, the Plan Commission received testimony and made findings pursuant to Subsection 6-3-4-6 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommended City Council approval thereof; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of July 14, 2014, the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council considered and adopted the findings and recommendation of the Plan Commission in case no. 14PLND-0043 and recommended City Council approval thereof; and WHEREAS, at its meetings of July 14, 2014 and July 28, 2014, the City Council considered and adopted the records and recommendations of the Plan Commission and Planning and Development Committee; and WHEREAS, it is well-settled law that the legislative judgment of the City Council must be considered presumptively valid (see Glenview State Bank v. Village of Deerfield, 213 Ill.App.3d 747) and is not subject to courtroom fact-finding (see National Paint & Coating Ass’n v. City of Chicago, 45 F.3d 1124), NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, THAT: SECTION 1: The foregoing recitals are found as fact and incorporated herein by reference. 385 of 478 83-O-14 ~3~ SECTION 2: The City Council hereby amends the Zoning Map to remove those properties with the addresses and PINs listed in Exhibit A and identified in Exhibit B, both attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, from the I2 General Industrial District and place them within the R4 General Residential District. SECTION 3: All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION 4: If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance is held unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid application or provision, and each invalid provision or invalid application of this ordinance is severable. SECTION 5: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication in the manner provided by law. SECTION 6: The findings and recitals contained herein are declared to be prima facie evidence of the law of the City and shall be received in evidence as provided by the Illinois Compiled Statutes and the courts of the State of Illinois. Introduced:_________________, 2014 Adopted:___________________, 2014 Approved: __________________________, 2014 _______________________________ Elizabeth B. Tisdahl, Mayor Attest: _______________________________ Rodney Greene, City Clerk Approved as to form: _______________________________ W. Grant Farrar, Corporation Counsel 386 of 478 83-O-14 ~4~ EXHIBIT A Addresses and PINs of Properties Removed from the I2 General Industrial District and Placed Within the R4 General Residential District 1409 Dodge Avenue PIN 10-13-419-041-0000 1825 Greenwood Street PIN 10-13-419-040-0000 387 of 478 83-O-14 ~5~ EXHIBIT B Map of Properties Removed from the I2 General Industrial District and Placed Within the R4 General Residential District 388 of 478 389 of 478 7/1/2014 89-O-14 AN ORDINANCE Granting Major Variations Related to 1825 Greenwood Street/1409 Dodge Avenue in the R4 General Residential Zoning District WHEREAS, Thomas Heskin (the “Applicant”), property owner of the property commonly known as 1825 Greenwood Street/1409 Dodge Avenue, (the “Subject Property”), located within the R4 General Residential zoning district and legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, submitted an application seeking approval of Major Variations to zoning requirements imposed by Subsections 6-4-1-6-B, 6-8-7-A-1, 6-8-5-7-A-2, 6-8-5-7-A-3, 6-8-5-7-A-4, and 6-16-3-5 of Title 6 of the Evanston City Code of 1979, as amended (the “Zoning Ordinance”); and WHEREAS, the Applicant requests to establish two principal structures on one lot where one principal structure is allowed; and WHEREAS, the Applicant requests the following Major Variations for the single family residence located at 1825 Greenwood Street (the “Greenwood Residence”): (A) The Applicant requests a 14.4 foot front yard setback where a twenty-seven (27) foot front yard setback is required for the second story addition; (B) The Applicant requests an 8.5 foot street side yard setback where a fifteen (15) foot street side yard setback is required for the attached garage; (C) The Applicant requests a 1.9 foot east interior side yard setback where a five (5) foot east interior side yard setback is required for the second story addition; and 390 of 478 89-O-14 ~2~ WHEREAS, the Applicant requests the following Major Variations for the two-family residence located at 1409 Dodge Avenue (the “Dodge Residences”): (A) The Applicant requests a 1.7 foot east interior side yard setback where a five (5) foot east interior side yard setback is required for the second story addition; (B) The Applicant requests a 6.6 foot rear yard setback where a twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback is required for the second story addition; (C) The Applicant requests two (2) on-site parking spaces where three (3) parking spaces are required; and WHEREAS, on July 1, 2014, the Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”), pursuant to proper notice, held a public hearing in case no. 14ZMJV-0065 to consider the application, received testimony, and made written records and findings that the application did meet the standards for Major Variations set forth in Subsection 6-3-8-12- (E) of the Zoning Ordinance and recommended City Council approval thereof; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of July 14, 2014, the Planning and Development (“P&D”) Committee of the City Council considered and accepted the ZBA’s recommendation, and recommended City Council approve the Major Variations, as requested; and WHEREAS, at its meetings of July 14, 2014 and July 28, 2014, the City Council considered and adopted the recommendation of the P&D Committee, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, THAT: SECTION 1: The foregoing recitals are hereby found as fact and incorporated herein by reference. 391 of 478 89-O-14 ~3~ SECTION 2: The City Council hereby adopts the P&D Committee’s records, findings, and recommendations, and hereby approves, pursuant to Subsection 6-3-8-10-(D) of the Zoning Ordinance, the Major Variations on the Subject Property applied for in case no. 14ZMJV-0065 and described hereinabove. SECTION 3: The Major Variations approved hereby are as follows: (A) Approval to allow two principal structures on one lot where one principal structure is allowed. Subsection 6-4-1-6-B allows for one principal use on one lot. (B) Approval to allow a 14.4 foot front yard setback where Subsection 6-8-5-7-A-1 requires a twenty-seven (27) foot front yard setback for the Greenwood Residence. (C) Approval to allow an 8.5 foot street side yard setback where Subsection 6-8-5-7- A-2 requires a fifteen (15) foot street side yard setback for the Greenwood Residence. (D) Approval to allow a 1.9 foot east interior side yard setback where Subsection 6-8- 5-7-A-3 requires a five (5) foot east interior side yard setback for the Greenwood Residence. (E) Approval to allow a 1.7 foot east interior side yard setback where Subsection 6-8- 5-7-A-3 requires a five (5) foot east interior side yard setback for the Dodge Residences. (F) Approval to allow a 6.6 foot rear yard setback where Subsection 6-8-5-7-A-4 requires a twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback for the Dodge Residences. (G) Approval to allow two (2) on-site parking spaces where Subsection 6-16-3-5 requires three (3) parking spaces are required for the Dodge Residences. 392 of 478 89-O-14 ~4~ SECTION 4: Pursuant to Subsection 6-3-8-14 of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council hereby imposes the following conditions on the Major Variations granted hereby, violation of any of which shall constitute grounds for penalties or revocation thereof pursuant to Subsections 6-3-10-5 and 6-3-10-6 of the Zoning Ordinance: (A) Compliance with Requirements: The Applicant shall develop and use the Subject Property in substantial compliance with all applicable legislation, with the testimony and representations of the Applicant to the ZBA, the P&D Committee, and the City Council, and the approved plans and documents on file in this case. (B) Property Requirement: All residential units on the Property shall either (1) be sold as condominiums; or (2) a Homeowners Association must be established. SECTION 5: When necessary to effectuate the terms, conditions, and purposes of this ordinance, “Applicant” shall be read as “Applicant’s agents, assigns, and successors in interest.” SECTION 6: Except as otherwise provided for in this ordinance, all applicable regulations of the Zoning Ordinance and the entire City Code shall apply to the Subject Property and remain in full force and effect with respect to the use and development of the same. SECTION 7: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval, and publication in the manner provided by law. SECTION 8: All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION 9: If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance is ruled unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance that can be given effect 393 of 478 89-O-14 ~5~ without the invalid application or provision, and each invalid provision or invalid application of this ordinance is severable. SECTION 10: The findings and recitals herein are declared to be prima facie evidence of the law of the City and shall be received in evidence as provided by the Illinois Compiled Statutes and the courts of the State of Illinois. Introduced:_________________, 2014 Adopted:___________________, 2014 Approved: __________________________, 2014 _______________________________ Elizabeth B. Tisdahl, Mayor Attest: _______________________________ Rodney Greene, City Clerk Approved as to form: _______________________________ W. Grant Farrar, Corporation Counsel 394 of 478 89-O-14 ~6~ EXHIBIT A Legal Descriptions PARCEL 1: THE SOUTH ½ OF LOTS 20 AND 21 IN BLOCK 3 IN BROWN AND CULVER’S ADDITION TO EVANSTON, BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE NORTH ½ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ AND THE NORTH 71 FEET OF THE SOUTH ½ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHEAST ¼ OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 13, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PIN: 10-13-419-040-0000 Commonly Known As: 1825 GREENWOOD STREET, EVANSTON, IL 60201 PARCEL 2: THE NORTH ½ OF LOTS 20 AND 21 IN BLOCK 3 IN BROWN AND CULVER’S ADDITION TO EVANSTON, BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE NORTH ½ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ AND THE NORTH 71 FEET OF THE SOUTH ½ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHEAST ¼ OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 13, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PIN: 10-13-419-041-0000 Commonly Known As: 1409 DODGE AVENUE, EVANSTON, IL 60201 395 of 478 oWE oWE R3 OS R3 R4 R4 C2 B1 C1 C2 R2 R4 R3 B1 B1 MXE R2 R4 R1 R4 I2Hartrey AveDarrow AveDewey AveDempster St Greenwood St Dodge AveCrainSt Darrow AveDavis St Grove St Darrow AveGreenwood St Lake St Dewey AveThelin Ct Davis St Crain StBrown AveGrey AveFlorence AveFlorence AveExisting Zoning Map0225450112.5 Feet ¯Subject Property 1409 Dodge Ave and 1825 Greenwood St 396 of 478 oWE oWE R3 OS R3 R4 R4 C2 B1 C1 C2 R2 R4R3 B1 B1 MXE R2 R4 R1 R4 I2Hartrey AveGreenwood St Dempster St Greenwood St Lake St Darrow AveDavis St Grove St Darrow AveDodge AveDewey AveDarrowAveThelin Ct Davis St Crain St Darrow AveBrown AveGrey AveFlorence AveFlorence AveFlorence AveDewey AveProposed Zoning Map0230460115Feet¯Subject Property 1409 Dodge Ave and 1825 Greenwood St 397 of 478 398 of 478 399 of 478 400 of 478 401 of 478 402 of 478 403 of 478 404 of 478 405 of 478 DRAFT Page 1 of 4 Plan Commission Minutes 06/11/2014 MEETING MINUTES PLAN COMMISSION Wednesday, June 11, 2014 7:00 P.M. Evanston Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Council Chambers Members Present: Scott Peters (Chair), Jim Ford, Terri Dubin, Kwesi Steele, Carol Goddard, Lenny Asaro Members Absent: Andrew Pigozzi, Colby Lewis, Richard Shure Associate Members Present: David Galloway Associate Members Absent: Seth Freeman, Stuart Opdycke Staff Present: Damir Latinovic, Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Lorrie Pearson, Planning and Zoning Administrator Mario Treto, Assistant City Attorney Presiding Member: Scott Peters, Chairman 1. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chairman Peters called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M and explained the general meeting procedure, schedule, agenda items, time limits on public testimony and opportunities for cross examination of witnesses. Chairman Peters concluded the opening statement by saying that the Plan Commission forwards a recommendation to the City Council which makes the final determination on any matters discussed by the Plan Commission. 2. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: May 14, 2014 Commissioner Ford made a motion to approve the minutes as prepared. Commissioner Dubin seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the minutes were approved by voice call 3-0. Commissioner Goddard and Commissioner Steele abstained. 3. NEW BUSINESS A. MAP AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE 14PLND-0043 1409 Dodge Avenue and 1825 Greenwood Street Specifically consider a map amendment to the Zoning Ordinance pursuant to City Code Title 6, Zoning, to rezone the following properties: 1409 Dodge Avenue, PIN 10-13-419-041, and 1825 Greenwood Street, PIN 10-13-419-040 from I2, General Industrial to R4, General Residential district. 406 of 478 DRAFT Page 2 of 4 Plan Commission Minutes 06/11/2014 Mr. Damir Latinovic, Neighborhood and Land Use Planner, explained that the petitioner is requesting to rezone a property from I2, General Industrial to R4, General Residential district. The property is located at the Northeast corner of Dodge Avenue and Greenwood Street. Greenwood Street ends in a cul-de-sac and does not cut through to Dodge Avenue. 1825 Greenwood Street is a single family home located at the southern portion of the lot while an old auto repair shop at 1409 Dodge Avenue is located on the northern section of the lot. The property is approximately 7,542 square feet in area and is currently vacant. A zoning map was shown depicting the current zoning for the property as I2 Industrial. The surrounding properties to the north and east are R3, which is two- family residential district. The property to the south is also zoned I2 and is currently a two-story multi-tenant office building. The property to the west is zoned R4 and is a vacant single family structure that was previously used as a contractor’s office. The petitioner is proposing to construct three dwelling units on the property. The existing single family home would be renovated to include an attached garage. The former automobile shop on the northern edge of the property would have a second floor added and be converted into a duplex (two units). There would be a total of three dwelling units on the property; therefore, the petitioner is requesting the R4 district for multi-family residential. Slides showing the proposed improvements were projected. The petitioner will modify the existing structures, which are non-conforming and do not meet the bulk restrictions, so the petitioner will be requesting several variations that will be reviewed by the Zoning Board of Appeals. The petition for the zoning variations are scheduled for July 1, 2014 ZBA hearing. However, the discussion for tonight is just for the rezoning. The single family home site plans for the first and second floors were shown, as well as the addition of an attached garage. The proposed site plans for conversion of the automobile repair shop into a duplex were shown. The plans included first and second floors, as well as attached single car garages for each unit. Staff believes that the proposed rezoning from I2 to R4 is appropriate as a transitional density buffer to the residential R3 uses to the east from the more intense uses to the south and southwest. There are other R4 zoning districts on the east side of Dodge Avenue. Over time, these transitional multi-family uses have been established along the old railroad corridor that initially only had industrial and commercial uses. However, residential uses and districts have emerged over time on the east side of the old corridor. Staff believes that standards for approval for rezoning have been satisfied and the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed rezoning would enhance the neighborhood by providing an appropriate buffer to said uses. It would also provide a range of housing choices to the area residents and is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood character because the use of the property would be a single family dwelling and a two-family dwelling rather than a multi-family structure. Staff also believes that the proposed changes would not negatively impact the surrounding area. In fact, staff believes the proposal would increase values of properties in the area by eliminating the old automobile repair shop, which was a detriment to the surrounding area. The proposal will be adequately serviced by public facilities. 407 of 478 DRAFT Page 3 of 4 Plan Commission Minutes 06/11/2014 To summarize, staff recommended approval of the proposal that was presented to the Zoning Committee at their May 21, 2014 meeting. Several residents attended that meeting inquiring about the affordability of the new units. The petitioner was present at that time to confirm that they will be market rate. The Zoning Committee Board made a positive recommendation to the Planning Commission at last month’s meeting. Chairman Peters invited the discussion and questions from Commission members. Commissioner Ford asked if there were other issues raised at the Zoning Committee meeting that were resolved. Mr. Latinovic stated that the only discussion at the meeting was regarding the affordability of the duplex. Commissioner Steele commented on the narrowness of the lot with 14 feet in front of the old garage. He noted that there was no access from the alley, meaning people would have to enter from Dodge Avenue, an already busy street. He wanted to know how the additional two-units will impact traffic conditions there since reversing onto Dodge Avenue would be necessary. Mr. Latinovic reminded everyone that this meeting was dealing only with the rezoning. Access and other issues are reviewed by SPAARC and the Zoning Board of Appeals. He was unsure if the typical 18 foot length for a parking stall would be achieved if residents wanted to park in the driveway. He also repeated that the automobile repair shop converted to a duplex would have two one-car garages with access to Dodge Avenue. During the SPAARC meeting that day, this same access issue was brought up, and a number of ideas were proposed. These ideas included having access on the north side alley to loop into the units, having access off of the cul-de-sac on Greenwood Street and bringing the single-family home’s garage closer to the front to avoid requiring access to Dodge Avenue. These matters and variances are to be addressed by SPAARC and ZBA. The designs for both the single family home and the two-family structure are still in design stages. Commissioner Steele also wanted to confirm that the duplex will have the same footprint of the existing auto shop. He followed up with a question to the idea of providing access for the two cars on the Greenwood Street cul-de-sac. Mr. Latinovic clarified that the Greenwood Street access idea would only apply to the single family home and that it was brought up during SPAARC meeting. The alley access idea would apply to the duplex. Commissioner Steele followed up saying he thinks the proposal will be an improvement to the neighborhood but feels that parking and having to reverse onto Dodge Avenue is still an issue. He also noted that the alley is narrow, which might make it difficult to access the single-car garages with a sharp turn. Chairman Peters stated that he would not agree that the Pc lacks jurisdiction and that it will go to the Zoning Board for specific considerations of access before it goes to the Council. He continued by saying the appropriate use for this site is residential given the surrounding uses. He would recommend approving. Chairman Peters invited the applicant to speak. The applicant, Mr. Tom Heskin, was sworn in. He spoke to address Commissioner Steele’s parking comments and to add to comments by Mr. Latinovic. Mr. Heskin stated that another option for access would be to add a turn-around in front of each of the two townhomes to allow drivers to back out onto the turn-around and make a 90 degree turn in a forward fashion onto Dodge Avenue if there were not a sufficient radius to turn from the alley. 408 of 478 DRAFT Page 4 of 4 Plan Commission Minutes 06/11/2014 Commissioner Steele asked wondering if these new dwelling units will sell. Mr. Heskin stated that due to the fact that further down Greenwood Street there are nicer homes, he feels that continuing that westward the homes will sell. With no other questions for the applicant and not other members of the public present in the audience, Chairman Peters asked for a motion or further discussion. Commissioner Steele restated that this proposal will be a 100% improvement to the current site. He made a motion to approve the proposed rezoning with a condition that the parking issues be addressed. Chairman Peters clarified the motion was for the approval of the rezoning petition, and that parking access comment can be added as a suggestion but cannot be tied to the motion, to which Commissioner Steele confirmed. Commissioner Ford seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and a motion was approved by voice call 6-0. Chairman Peters confirmed with the Board that the standards have been met as indicated in the staff’ memo. He asked staff to confirm that adequate public facilities and services standard was also addressed. Mr. Latinovic confirmed that staff believes that the public utilities and facilities are adequate for the area. … 4. ADJOURNMENT There being no further discussion, Commissioner Goddard made a motion to adjourn the meeting, and Commissioner Asaro seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Damir Latinovic Neighborhood and Land Use Planner Community Development Department 409 of 478 FF II NN DD II NN GG SS FOR STANDARDS OF VV AA RR II AA TT II OO NN SS In the case of Case Number: 14ZMJV-0065 Address or Location: 1825 Greenwood Avenue/1409 Dodge Avenue Applicant: Thomas Heskin Proposed Zoning Relief: establish two principal structures on one lot, 14.4’ front yard setback, 8.5’ street side yard setback, 1.9’ east interior side yard setback – for addition of a second story and attached garage to a single family residence; 1.7’ east interior side yard setback, 6.6’ rear yard setback, 2 on-site parking spaces—for conversion of an automobile repair service establishment into a 2-family residence with a second story addition after conducting a public hearing on July 1, 2014, the Zoning Board of Appeals makes the following findings of fact, based upon the standards for major variances specified in Section 6-3-8-12 of the City Code: Standard Finding (A) The requested variation will not have a substantial adverse impact on the use, enjoyment or property values of adjoining properties; ___X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 (B) The requested variation is in keeping with the intent of the zoning ordinance; ___X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 (C) The alleged hardship or practical difficulty is peculiar to the property; ___X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 (D) The property owner would suffer a particular hardship or practical difficulty as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out; ___X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 410 of 478 (E) The purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to extract additional income from the property; or there is a public benefit; ___X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 (F) The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person having an interest in the property; __X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 (G) The requested variation is limited to the minimum change necessary to alleviate the particular hardship or practical difficulty which affects the property; __X___Met _____Not Met 5-0 and, based upon these findings, and upon a vote of __5__ in favor & __0__ against recommends to the City Council __X__ approval _____ denial (cases that fail to receive 4 concurrent votes in favor are deemed a recommendation for denial) approval with conditions __X__ approval _____ denial (cases that fail to receive 4 concurrent votes in favor are deemed a recommendation for denial) 1. Consider establishing an HOA/condo 2. The project must be within substantial compliance of the documents and testimony on record. __________________________________________ Date: _____________ Matt Rodgers Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman Attending: Vote: Aye No __X__ Violetta Cullen _X__ ____ _____ Mary Beth Berns ____ ____ __X__ Beth McLennan _X__ ____ __X__ Matt Rodgers _X__ ____ _____ Andrew Gallimore ____ ____ __X__ Scott Gingold _X__ ____ 411 of 478 __X__ Clara Wineberg _X__ ____ 412 of 478 413 of 478 DRAFT NOT APPROVED Page 1 of 3 Zoning Board of Appeals MEETING MINUTES ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Tuesday, July 1, 2014 7:00 PM Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Council Chambers Members Present: Matt Rodgers, Beth McLennan, Violetta Cullen, Clara Wineberg, Scott Gingold Members Absent: Mary Beth Berns, Andrew Gallimore Staff Present: Melissa Klotz, Lorrie Pearson, Mario Treto Chair: Matt Rodgers Declaration of Quorum With a quorum present, Chair Rodgers called the meeting to order at 7:03pm. Approval of Minutes The minutes from the May 20, 2014 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting were motioned for approval by Ms. Cullen and seconded by Ms. McLennan. The motion was approved 3-0 with two abstentions. New Business … 1825 Greenwood Avenue /1409 Dodge Avenue ZBA 14ZMJV-0065 Thomas Heskin, property owner, applies for major zoning relief to add a second story addition and attached garage to a single family residence and convert an automobile repair service establishment into a 2-family residence with a second story addition. The applicant requests to establish two principal structures on one lot where one principal structure is allowed (Zoning Code Section 6-4-1-6-B), as well as the following for the single family residence (1825 Greenwood Street): 1. 14.4’ front yard setback where 27’ is required (Zoning Code Section 6-8-5-7-A-1) for the second story addition. 2. 8.5’ street side yard setback where 15’ is required (Zoning Code Section 6-8-5-7-A-2) for the attached garage. 3. 1.9’ east interior side yard setback where 5’ is required (Zoning Code Section 6-8-5-7-A- 3) for the second story addition. And the following for the 2-family residence (1409 Dodge Avenue): 1. 1.7’ east interior side yard setback where 5’ is required (Zoning Code Section 6-8-5-7-A- 3) for the second story addition. 2. 6.6’ rear yard setback where 25’ is required (Zoning Code Section 6-8-5-7-A-4) for the second story addition. 3. 2 on-site parking spaces where 3 parking spaces are required (Zoning Code Section 6- 16-3-5). The Zoning Board of Appeals makes a recommendation to City Council, the determining body for this case. Ms. Klotz read the case into the record. 414 of 478 DRAFT NOT APPROVED Page 2 of 3 Zoning Board of Appeals Tom Heskin, the applicant, explained the proposal: The property has an existing single family residence and a mechanic shop Commercial use is not probable at that location Chair Rodgers asked if the building footprint for the single family home is increasing. Tom Heskin answered no, the building footprint is not increasing. Ms. Klotz added that a garage is being added to the single family residence, so that is changing. Chair Rodgers asked about the building footprint for the proposed two-family structure. Tom Heskin replied that there is no change to that footprint. Ms. Cullen noted that the property has had high crime and that residential would be much better. Tom Heskin also stated that there are no longer any proposed curb cuts off of Dodge anymore. Ms. Klotz added that the applicant has worked extensively with staff to eliminate Dodge curb cuts and to minimize the impervious surface cover. Mr. Gingold asked if the garage has been relocated. Ms. Klotz replied that yes, the garage was moved forward to minimize driveway length off of Greenwood. Chair Rodgers stated he was not thrilled with having two separate principal structures. There could be a future problem with wanting a subdivision or more variances. Patrick Stayhand said he was glad the previous property owner is gone. He uses the alley frequently. He objects to the use of the property as rental and the use of the alley. This will mean more users for the alley. Tom Heskin replied that the two single car garages will use the alley access. This will be much less vehicular traffic than the mechanic shop that regularly had six or so cars. The residences will be sold individually. Mr. Gingold agreed with Chair Rodger’s comment that this could create future zoning issues. Ms. Wineberg stated that it is a unique situation because two principal structures already exist. This is an opportunity to provide residential continuity and eliminate an eyesore and social sore. Ms. Cullen agreed stating that the property has been a big eyesore. The ZBA entered into deliberations: Chair Rodgers stated he was torn. He was pleased to see residential development, but he foresees future problems. Ms. Wineberg believes it is worth the risk and supported the proposal. Ms. Cullen and Ms. McLennan agreed. 415 of 478 DRAFT NOT APPROVED Page 3 of 3 Zoning Board of Appeals The Standards were addressed: 1. Yes 2. Yes Chair Rodgers initially expressed concerns. Ms. Cullen and Ms. McLennan agreed it would be better if they were developed as condos or a Home Owners Association 3. Yes 4. Yes 5. Yes It is a public benefit 6. Yes 7. Yes Chair Rodgers motioned to recommend approval of the proposal with the following conditions: 1. Consider establishing an HOA/condo. 2. The project must be within substantial compliance of the documents and testimony on record. The motion was seconded by Ms. Cullen and approved 5-0. Council should consider the implications of creating a substandard lot if the lot wants to be subdivided in the future. Ms. Klotz stated that the next ZBA meeting is July 15th and there are four cases. She also shared by email information on the Illinois APA conference and a recommended training session at the conference. Chair Rodgers asked staff to send ZBA Rules to all. They need to be revised and asked everyone to please comment on changes to propose by July 18th. Then staff will add comments. The meeting adjourned at 8:50pm. 416 of 478 For Planning & Development Committee meeting of July 28, 2014 Item PD1 Board and Committee Improvement Process For Communication To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Planning and Development Committee From: Mark Muenzer, Director of Community Development Maleka Sumar, Management Analyst Subject: Board and Committee Improvement Process Date: July 21, 2014 The Community Development Department manages nine (9) boards, commissions and committees and in Fall 2013 the department instituted a Board and Committee Process Improvement Review with our staff that serves as a liaison to these boards and committees. The primary objective of this initiative was to evaluate, improve and enhance the quality of the recommendations that are often forwarded to City Council for final approval. A process was developed which covered various matters to include: • Agenda (template, mode of distribution, timeline for implementation/website posting) • Minutes (template, format, timeline for implementation/website posting) • Packets (format, contents, staff/case memo, delivery method and timeframe for implementation/website posting) • Cases o Maintain a case log (for internal use) • Board and Committee Rules and Ordinance o Review current rules o Revisit every 5 years o Review and adherence to applicable ordinance o Observance of Robert’s Rules • Meeting o Quorum Absence notification process o Attendance Maintain an attendance log Memorandum 417 of 478 o Presentation Format Deadline for submission Responsible party o Current meeting process vs. Ideal meeting process o Board Members New member orientation Term expiration notifications Vacancies Training needs Working Groups vs. Sub-Committees o Meeting Preparation Chair briefings (as needed) Process, run-throughs for major projects Utilization of comparable community research Encourage board members to conduct site visits Backup staff liaison (cross train another colleague) Provide a brief meeting summary to director by next business day o Best Practices Attend at least one other Chicago-area board/commission meeting per year to study best practices The first round of meetings were scheduled with staff in late 2013 to discuss the abovementioned topics. Staff liaisons were encouraged to bring their creative ideas and suggestions to the meeting to improve their respective board and committee process. Based on the discussion, a Board/Committee Improvement Work Plan was developed for each board and committee with goals and a timeline for implementation. Rounds of follow-up meetings were scheduled to review progress. The Law Department was also given the opportunity to review all work plans and provide feedback. To date, all follow- up meetings have been completed to ensure major milestones have been achieved. A summary of improvements by Board/Commission/Committee with the primary staff person is listed below: Housing and Community Development Act Committee (Sarah Flax) Majority of items were in compliance. An attendance log was provided for recordkeeping and staff was asked to attend at least one other community meeting closely related with the Housing and Community Development Act Committee for best practices. 2 418 of 478 Housing and Homelessness Commission (Mary Ellen Poole) • Updated elements of the agenda template • Meetings will now be audio recorded • Located and shared the meeting rules with the commission • A staff memo was instituted to summarize the contents of the meeting packet • Implemented attendance log • Clarified some concerns on relevant ordinance with the Law Dept. Plan Commission (Damir Latinovic) • Revised agenda template • Posted missing videos online • Posted approved minutes online • Reviewed Rules and Procedures • Addressed quorum requirements in consultation with the Law Dept. • Implemented attendance and case logs • Instituted monthly chair briefings • Revised meeting presentation material/format • Staff was instructed to conduct new member orientation prior to appointment • It was recommended that staff encourage members to conduct site visits Zoning Committee of the Plan Commission (Damir Latinovic) • Implement attendance and case logs Planning and Development Committee (Mark Muenzer) • Implementation of attendance and case logs Preservation Commission (Carlos Ruiz) • Update of agenda template to include certain required elements • Instituted a formal process where the staff liaison provides formal staff recommendations on all cases via a staff/case memo • Posted missing meeting minutes online, established timeline by when minutes should be transcribed • Changed agenda packet distribution mode from postal mail to electronic distribution • Updated the commission website with clarification on estimated time for application review • Updated commission website to reflect current commission member names, term information etc. • A timeline was established to review the commission rules • Attendance and case logs were implemented • Chair briefings were emphasized • Identified back-up staff and emphasized cross training • New member orientation was encouraged prior to appointment 3 419 of 478 Sign Review and Appeals Board (Scott Berg) • Agenda, Minutes and Packets: Updated template to standardize document titles, headings and footnote • Addressed formatting concerns and naming scheme on website postings • Changed agenda packet distribution mode from postal mail to electronic distribution • Revamped staff/case memo to include additional details about the project • Addressed quorum concerns, appointment terms, member qualifications and vacancies with staff liaison • Updated Sign Variation Form to reflect current adopted fees • Consulted with the Law Dept. on Sign Code issues • Implemented attendance and case logs • Identification of back-up staff and cross training • Hold new board member orientation prior to appointment • Encourage board members to conduct site visits Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee (SPAARC) (Melissa Klotz/Damir Latinovic) A thorough analysis of the SPAARC Ordinance and current procedures was conducted to identify opportunities for improvement. A revised ordinance will be proposed to the City Council with a new name of the Committee to Design and Project Review (DAPR). Additional details on the revised ordinance and new review process will be shared under a separate memo. Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) (Melissa Klotz) • Posted missing meeting videos • Posted missing meeting minutes online • Staff was instructed to implement an electronic meeting packet distribution process • Member terms limits were clarified with the Mayor’s Office • Member vacancies were addressed • Consulted with the Law Dept. on quorum concerns • ZBA ordinance was reviewed to ensure compliance and adherence • Implemented attendance and case logs • Chair briefings were encouraged • PowerPoint presentation and projection of agenda packet during the meeting is now required • New member orientation prior to appointment • Encourage board members to conduct site visits 4 420 of 478 For City Council meeting of July 28, 2014 Item O1 Business of the City by Motion: 2014 Great Merchants Grant Allocations For Action To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Wally Bobkiewicz, City Manager Johanna Nyden, Economic Development Division Manager Meagan Jones, Economic Development Coordinator Subject: Recommended Funding Applications for the 2014 Evanston Great Merchants Grant Program. Date: July 10, 2014 Recommended action: The Economic Development Committee and staff recommend approval from City Council for funding through the Great Merchants Grant Program totaling $45,000 to the West Village Business Association, Central Street Business Association, Hill Arts Business District, Central Evanston Business Association and Main Street Merchants Association. Funding Source: The Economic Development Fund’s Business District Improvement Account: 5300.65522. The proposed 2014 Fiscal Year Budget allocated $147,000 to this account. To date, $6,178.55 has been spent from this account with an additional $36,075 approved for additional projects. Summary: Staff has received five applications for the 2014 Fiscal Year for the Evanston Great Merchants Grant Program from the following: • West Village Business Association; • Central Street Business Association; • Hill Arts Business District; • Central Evanston Business Association; and • Main Street Merchants Association. These include a range of business district projects and programmatic activities to be completed during the 2014 fiscal year. Four additional Business Associations previously submitted their requests and were reviewed, along with updates to the Great Merchants Grant Program, at the May Economic Development Committee meeting. These Memorandum 421 of 478 requests totaled to the amount of $35,140 and were approved at the June 23, 2014 City Council meeting. Evanston’s Great Merchants Grant Program is designed to provide small grants, ranging up to $9,000 to Evanston’s small business/merchant associations to pursue projects that address at least one of three core areas: Business Support and Retention, Enhancement of Physical Environment and Neighborhood Promotion. Eligible applicants for this program are business districts or merchant associations with associated Federal Tax Identification Numbers (FEIN #). Business and merchant associations are encouraged to work together for bids on common goods and services to aggregate spending for cost savings. Business District Requests There were five applications for funds that total $45,000. The approved 2014 Fiscal Year Budget allocates $147,000 to business district improvements. To date, $6,178.55 has been spent from this account. The breakdown of the category and funding amounts for the projects each of the five groups has requested is shown below: Although the Program requires three bids, the applicants were not required to provide those at the time of submission of their application. However, the three quotes/estimates are expected to be provided by the applicant prior to award of any funding, unless the three bid/quotation requirement is waived by City Council. Representatives from the five Associations have been advised to be present at the July 28, 2014 City Council meeting to answer any questions or provide additional information regarding their grant applications. Legislative History: At the Economic Development Committee meeting held on July 9, 2014, the Committee voted unanimously (9-0) to recommend the approval of these projects to the City Council. Attachments West Village Business Association Application and Membership List Central Street Business Association Application and Membership List Hill Arts Business District Application and Membership List Planters Banners Streetscape Furniture Website Work Marketing Brochures Advertising Holiday Décor West Village Business Association $4,580 $4,220 $200 $9,000 Central Street Business Association $7,280 $500 $1,220 $9,000 Hill Arts Business District $3,925 $2,075 $3,000 $9,000 Central Evanston Business Association $500 $3,500 $3,500 $1,500 $9,000 Main Street Merchants Association $7,000 $2,000 $9,000 $45,000 Proposed Business District Staples Other TotalBusiness District 422 of 478 Central Evanston Business Association Application and Membership List Main Street Merchants Association Application and Membership List 423 of 478 Name of Business Association: Name of Point of Contact: Application for Evanston's Great Merchants Grant Applicant Information Address: Phone : Email: Business District Describe the geographic area that your business district serves: Y N Does your group collect association dues for memberships? What is the amount collected annually from members? Please list other ways that businesses may attain membership (i.e. in-kind services for membership): Attachment A: Attach a current list of your members. Page 1 How many businesses are located in your business district: Non-Association businesses:Members: Evanston West Village Business Association Nancy Floy-President 1818 Dempster Street, Evanston, IL 60202 (847)491-1122 x11 nancyfloy@heartwoodcenter.com The Evanston West Village Business Association (EWVBA) is bounded by the following streets: East Side of Dodge Ave. (on the west)/Wesley St. (on the east)/Lake St. (on the north)/Lee St. (on the south) *Please note that the Evanston Plaza is not within the current boundaries of the EWVBA. Most of the $40.00 Bartering and in-kind contributions are excepted in lieu of association fees when requested and appropriate. 85 22 424 of 478 How much money is your group requesting from the City of Evanston for the remaining fiscal year (through December 31, 2014)? Please provide a description of proposed programs, projects, and activities for your association.Amount Requested Is this vendor located in Evanston? Is this a "bulk" purchase with another association? Name of "bulk" items/projects/programs/activities Which organization/individual will be taking the lead on this activity? If you are "bulk" purchasing anything with another business association, please complete the table below: Page 2 $9,000.00 Concrete planters with seasonal plant rotation were placed in 2013, with Great Merchant grant funds, at the intersection of Dodge/Dempster; Dempster/Darrow; Lake/Ashland. These planters not only change the aesthetic look of the bh l $4,580.00 Yes No Digital Marketing for EWVBA: This includes a website re- design to improve visibility, functionality and the overall brand. It also includes ongoing website and marketing management, including regular updates to the site and lld $4,420.00 Yes No 425 of 478 If you checked "No" for vendor location in Evanston, please provide an explanation as to why you are not proposing to use an Evanston vendor. Attachment B: Include any additional description or materials for how funds will be utilized. Past Neighborhood Business District Funding Awards Please list sources of revenue for your association in the previous years. Year Revenue from Dues Description of Revenue from other sources Amount of Revenue from other sources 2013 2012 2011 Y N If funds were awarded in 2013, were all funds spent? If not, why were all funds not expended? Provide a summary of how funds were used in the past fiscal year and direct measurable impacts these funds had on business district activities. Page 3 $440.00 Dues Collected in 2013; Dues for 2014 have not been solicited yet. $425.00 Dues Collected in 2012 We have had 2 years of funding: one in 2011 and then one in 2013. The funds from 2011 were directed to the planning and execution of the Making It Happen Event- a two day marketing event held at the Evanston Plaza. The Intent and result of this event was to bring positive attention to the businesses in the Dempster/Dodge corridor. It was a very successful event which generated positive media coverage and widespread city awareness of the renaissance that is 426 of 478 Will the programs or projects proposed this year help retain/expand existing Evanston businesses? N Y If yes, please specify which program/project and describe how it will help retain/expand existing businesses: If yes, please specify which program/project and describe how it will help to attract businesses: N YWill the programs or projects proposed this year include any attraction efforts to bring new businesses to your district? Describe project program outcomes not otherwise described above. Specifically, applicants should identify the desired outcome associated with funding. Describe deliverable and/or proposed criteria for monitoring outcomes to track the relative success of the program (i.e. measurable increases in sales, total number of visitors to the district, etc.) Page 4 If you have any questions regarding this application, please contact Meagan Jones in the Economic Development Division at (847) 448-8170 or mmjones@cityofevanston.org. The landscaping project will continue seasonal plantings in the beautiful concrete planters at the gateway into this business district. This project is the beginning of what the WVBA board hopes will be an ongoing process of beautification of this business area. The beauty of plants will help to esthetically enhance the corners of Dodge/Dempster which is heavily visually impacted by fast food cash station and pay day loan type businesses which boast an abundance of flashing signs The visual enhancement of the planters will hopefully help attract new businesses, as well as shoppers, visitors and tourists to this district. The improved website and marketing strategy will help increase awareness of who we are and what business adventures are waiting to explored in the West Village. Shoppers want to shop in an area that is pedestrian friendly, visually pleasing and safe. The corner of Dodge and Dempster has struggled for many years as a business area which has not met that criteria-for a variety of reasons including a partially empty shopping mall whose past, present and future visibility is questionable. As a result our business district has not been a destination shopping and tourist location for Evanston residents or others coming into Evanston who often Survey responses to the beautification project by visitors to the area (such as 500-700 weekly clients of the Heartwood Center) will be one tool of measurement-albeit subjective. Businesses within the EWVBA will be surveyed as well through the year to gauge whether their businesses have experienced an increase in traffic. The updated and enhanced website will be used on other digital media to drive traffic but mostly to raise awareness of the hidden, unseen treasures that Print FormSubmit by Email 427 of 478 428 of 478 429 of 478 430 of 478 Christina Giordano Consulting, LLC. Evanston West Village Business Association. Rev.6.10.2014 Evanston West Village Business Association Marketing Proposal Overview: The following is the Christina Giordano Consulting, LLC proposal of the website design and development project, the brand strategy project, and various tiers of monthly marketing management services. Objectives: One-time Projects: ! Web Design & Development: Upon completion of the website questionnaire, CGC will design and develop a website in WordPress with up to 8 pages of content for approval. ! Brand Strategy: CGC will revisit the current brand strategy, which includes revisiting the name, the logo and marketing strategy. CGC will redesign & revise each of the above aspects for approval. Monthly Management: ! Website & Marketing Management: CGC will provide the following services: " Add content or revise content on the website; " Create one e-newsletter to be sent on a quarterly basis; " Manage a Facebook page at a rate of 2 posts per week; " Provide one graphic design piece (flyer, postcard, etc.) per quarter. Project Outlines and Required Budgets: One-time Projects: Objective # Website Design & Development $1820.00 Objective # Brand Strategy $200.00 Monthly Management: Objective # Website & Marketing Management $200.00/month 431 of 478 NATURE'S PERSPECTIVE LANDSCAPING, INC. 2000 Greenleaf Street, Evanston, Illinois 60202 (847) 475-7917 Fax (847) 475-7975 www.naturesperspective.com Proposal/Contract 14A50439No 7600 C#5/15/2014 Proposal Submitted To:Work to be Performed at: Dickelle Fonda West Village - Annuals 2014 1220 Darrow Ave West Village Annuals 2014 Evanston, IL 60202 Evanston, IL 60202 JULIE # 847-491-9748 Cross St. F R ECLR.SugrCreek@aol.com NATURE'S PERSPECTIVE LANDSCAPING, INC., the "Contractor", hereby proposes to furnish all the materials and perform all the labor necessary for the completion of the following described work: Quantity Description Price Each Total SPRING SEASONAL CONTAINERS Spring Seasonal ArrangementEA1.00 $1,145.00 $1,145.00 Seasonal Arrangement for (11) Containers Located on Dempster St. from Dodge Ave. to Darrow Ave. (5)-Large 36" dia @ $115.00ea (6)-Small 24" dia @ $95.00ea Plant seasonal containers to create a "premium display" utilizing accents of Cyclamen, Bacopa, Pansy, Ornamental Grasses, Snapdragon, English Ivy, Lysimachia, Hydrangea, and Branch Accents. SUMMER SEASONAL CONTAINERS Summer Seasonal ArrangementEA1.00 $1,145.00 $1,145.00 Seasonal Arrangement for (11) Containers Located on Dempster St. from Dodge Ave. to Darrow Ave. (5)-Large 36" dia @ $115.00 ea (6)-Small 24" dia @ $95.00 ea Plant seasonal containers to create a "premium display" utilizing accents of Salvia, Begonias, Vinca, Ageratium, and other summer annuals. FALL SEASONAL CONTAINERS Fall Seasonal ArrangementEA1.00 $1,145.00 $1,145.00 Seasonal Arrangement for (11) Containers Located on Dempster St. from Dodge Ave. to Darrow Ave. (5)-Large 36" dia @ $115.00 ea (6)-Small 24" dia @ $95.00 ea Plant seasonal containers to create a "premium display" utilizing accents of Kale, Cabbage, Swiss Chard, Ajuga, Mums, Ornamental Grasses, Vinca, Lysimachia, and other fall accents. WINTER SEASONAL CONTAINERS Winter Seasonal ArrangementEA1.00 $1,145.00 $1,145.00 Seasonal Arrangement for (11) Containers Located on Dempster St. from Dodge Ave. to Darrow Ave. (5)-Large 36" dia @ $115.00 ea (6)-Small 24" dia @ $95.00 ea Plant seasonal containers to create a "premium display" utilizing accents of Evergreen Boughs, Pussy Willow Tips, Winter berries, and Eucalyptus Pods. 432 of 478 NATURE'S PERSPECTIVE LANDSCAPING, INC. 2000 Greenleaf Street, Evanston, Illinois 60202 (847) 475-7917 Fax (847) 475-7975 www.naturesperspective.com Proposal/Contract 14A50439No 7600 C#5/15/2014 Proposal Submitted To:Work to be Performed at: Dickelle Fonda West Village - Annuals 2014 1220 Darrow Ave West Village Annuals 2014 Evanston, IL 60202 Evanston, IL 60202 JULIE # 847-491-9748 Cross St. F R ECLR.SugrCreek@aol.com NATURE'S PERSPECTIVE LANDSCAPING, INC., the "Contractor", hereby proposes to furnish all the materials and perform all the labor necessary for the completion of the following described work: $4,580.00Total Comments: Above prices include all labor for installation, taxes and delivery unless otherwise noted. Any deletions, additions, or other changes to your proposal and/or plan may affect pricing and will need to be re-quoted. A minimum re-stocking fee of 25% will be charged for all special order items, or for items brought to the job site and not used due to customer initiated changes. If items are custom made they will be charged at 100% Above prices are based on complete proposal. Deletions, additions, or other changes to this proposal may affect prices and will need to be re-quoted. Specific time of day work requests must be made at least 48 hours in advance of work. All material is guaranteed to be as specified, and to be performed in accordance with the drawings submitted for above work and completed in a workmanlike manner for the sum of $4,580.00 with payments to be made as follows: 50 % on acceptance , remainder on completion , 10 days net . NOTE: Credit/Debit cards are not accepted. Any alteration or deviation from above involving extra costs will be executed upon verbal or written orders, and will become an extra charge over and above the quoted price. This proposal is contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control. Contractor will carry and keep in force public liability and Workman's Compensation insurance in amounts desired by contractor. Owner will provide fire, tornado and all other insurance coverage necessary or desired by Owner, at Owner's expense. The General Conditions, as attached, are expressly incorporated into this agreement. For paving work , customers must select paver type , color , pattern and edge detail prior to scheduling and approve layout prior to commencing excavation . Walkway and patio base to be four inches of crushed compacted gravel with one inch torpedo sand leveling course. Edges retained with concealed edging. All brick paver work guaranteed by Nature's Perspective Landscaping Inc. for three years against settlement on undisturbed soil. Concrete pavers carry manufacturer's lifetime guarantee against breakage. Nature's Perspective will contact J.U.L.I.E. and assume responsibility for all J.U.L.I.E MARKED underground cable and lines. If we cut a marked line, we are responsible for its repair. Nature ' s Perspective is not responsible for cutting or damaging any UNMARKED buried lines , cable or satellite TV , modem , water , electrical , gas , sprinkler lines / heads , or any buried object that is not identified , marked , and located . Respectfully Submitted: Nature's Perspective Landscaping, Inc.By: Tom Klitzkie Note: This proposal may be withdrawn by us if not accepted within 15 days. ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL The above prices and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. I accept the General Conditions on the back of this contract or that have been attached in an email or fax. You are authorized to do the work as specified. My acceptance of the proposal constitutes this as a valid and binding Agreement. Dated:_________________________________Signature: Owner Signature: Owner I am fully aware that I may rescind this contract within 3 days. I am fully aware that failure to make payment of final notice within 30 days of receipt shall invalidate limited warranty.433 of 478 434 of 478 435 of 478 436 of 478 437 of 478 438 of 478 439 of 478 440 of 478 441 of 478 Name of Business Association: Name of Point of Contact: Application for Evanston's Great Merchants Grant Applicant Information Address: Phone : Email: Business District Describe the geographic area that your business district serves: Y N Does your group collect association dues for memberships? What is the amount collected annually from members? Please list other ways that businesses may attain membership (i.e. in-kind services for membership): Attachment A: Attach a current list of your members. Page 1 How many businesses are located in your business district: Non-Association businesses:Members: Hill Arts District John Leineweber/Muffy McAuley P. O. Box 6094, Evanston, Illinois 60204-6094 (847)602-4282/ (847)858-6066 john.leineweber@gmail.com/ mf.mcauley@gmail.com Greenbay Road on the east - Simpson Street on the south - Bridge Street on the west - North Shore Canal/Twiggs Park on the north. $1,000.00 In kind services. 30 40 442 of 478 How much money is your group requesting from the City of Evanston for the remaining fiscal year (through December 31, 2014)? Please provide a description of proposed programs, projects, and activities for your association.Amount Requested Is this vendor located in Evanston? Is this a "bulk" purchase with another association? Name of "bulk" items/projects/programs/activities Which organization/individual will be taking the lead on this activity? If you are "bulk" purchasing anything with another business association, please complete the table below: Page 2 $9,000.00 -Perform monthly maintenance including: spring clean-up, weed control, plant and bush trimming cultivating, watering, landscape light bulb replacement and $500 of new/ replacement plant material & mulch; Dr. Hill Memorial Garden $3,000.00 No Plant 7 Containers @ $150 each spring/summer Plant 7 Containers @ $150 each fall/winter $2,100.00 Yes Purchase three (3) new containers ($250 each) Soil & Delivery ($175) Plant 3 containers - 2 plantings @ $150/pot/planting ($900) $1,825.00 No Design & Develop "Hill Arts District" Website and blog - craf t district logo $2,075.00 No Use of company Plantings which also plants containers for other Dempster Street and Howard Street 443 of 478 If you checked "No" for vendor location in Evanston, please provide an explanation as to why you are not proposing to use an Evanston vendor. Attachment B: Include any additional description or materials for how funds will be utilized. Past Neighborhood Business District Funding Awards Please list sources of revenue for your association in the previous years. Year Revenue from Dues Description of Revenue from other sources Amount of Revenue from other sources 2013 2012 2011 Y N If funds were awarded in 2013, were all funds spent? If not, why were all funds not expended? Provide a summary of how funds were used in the past fiscal year and direct measurable impacts these funds had on business district activities. Page 3 All Vendors are Evanston Businesses. $1,000.00 Great Merchants Grant $9,000.00 $1,000.00 Great Merchants Grant $9,000.00 $700.00 Great Merchants Grant $5,000.00 We have maintained the Memorial Garden & Sculpture. Increased the number of planters and maintained and planted them seasonally. We have incorporated and rebranded the district. Designed, fabricated and installed 15 banners reflecting the new branding of "Hill Arts District". We have continued to attract new vibrant business. Maintained existing business while keeping a very low vacancy factor. Assisted existing business to come into ownership of their offices/buildings through the SBA 504 Program 444 of 478 Will the programs or projects proposed this year help retain/expand existing Evanston businesses? N Y If yes, please specify which program/project and describe how it will help retain/expand existing businesses: If yes, please specify which program/project and describe how it will help to attract businesses: N YWill the programs or projects proposed this year include any attraction efforts to bring new businesses to your district? Describe project program outcomes not otherwise described above. Specifically, applicants should identify the desired outcome associated with funding. Describe deliverable and/or proposed criteria for monitoring outcomes to track the relative success of the program (i.e. measurable increases in sales, total number of visitors to the district, etc.) Page 4 If you have any questions regarding this application, please contact Meagan Jones in the Economic Development Division at (847) 448-8170 or mmjones@cityofevanston.org. This year's budget maintains the existing memorial garden and eight street planters and the generations sculpture in the garden. We have been in the process of rebranding the Dr. Hill Business Association the Hill Arts District over the past two years. We are continuing that effort with new banners to replace the original banners which are 10 years old. We are also creating a new logo for cards stationary and electronic communication All of this year's program/projects will attract businesses to the district, maintaining the gateway garden and sculpture as well as the flowering planters and colorful arts district banners set us aside from other warehouse type office commercial districts in the area. The designation as the arts district magnified by the banners create and immediate appeal. Our ourpose us to attract more art based business. Constinuing the trend of architects, photographers, videographer, graphic artist, marketing/advertising production companies, specialized food service professionals and a healthy mix of alternatives health & exercise opportunities within the district. We are moving toward creating an electronic presence on the web through the volunteer efforts of some of our members further enhancing the art work in our new We currently have little or no vacancy in the district and have increase the number of businesses every year dating back to 1998 when there was only three or four active businesses. Today there are over seventy. The time measure of success of our efforts is retaining our existing business while growing and attracting new business to the district. Print FormSubmit by Email 445 of 478 446 of 478 447 of 478 448 of 478 449 of 478 450 of 478 451 of 478 452 of 478 453 of 478 454 of 478 Name of Business Association: Name of Point of Contact: Application for Evanston's Great Merchants Grant Applicant Information Address: Phone : Email: Business District Describe the geographic area that your business district serves: Y N Does your group collect association dues for memberships? What is the amount collected annually from members? Please list other ways that businesses may attain membership (i.e. in-kind services for membership): Attachment A: Attach a current list of your members. Page 1 How many businesses are located in your business district: Non-Association businesses:Members: Central Evanston Business Association David Roberts 1319 Emerson Street (847) 491-6195 david@robertsarchitectsltd.com Church Street to Simpson Street (south side); Green Bay Road to McCormick Boulevard $0.00 In-kind services. 30 10 455 of 478 How much money is your group requesting from the City of Evanston for the remaining fiscal year (through December 31, 2014)? Please provide a description of proposed programs, projects, and activities for your association.Amount Requested Is this vendor located in Evanston? Is this a "bulk" purchase with another association? Name of "bulk" items/projects/programs/activities Which organization/individual will be taking the lead on this activity? If you are "bulk" purchasing anything with another business association, please complete the table below: Page 2 $9,000.00 Logo Branding & Design $1,500.00 Yes Banners $3,500.00 Yes Marketing Products - maps of busineses, CEBA stickers for businesses, etc.$3,500.00 Yes Three (3) planters and seasonal plantings - will work with ETHS on securing and placing planters at Church & Dodge intersection $500.00 Yes 456 of 478 If you checked "No" for vendor location in Evanston, please provide an explanation as to why you are not proposing to use an Evanston vendor. Attachment B: Include any additional description or materials for how funds will be utilized. Past Neighborhood Business District Funding Awards Please list sources of revenue for your association in the previous years. Year Revenue from Dues Description of Revenue from other sources Amount of Revenue from other sources 2013 2012 2011 Y N If funds were awarded in 2013, were all funds spent? If not, why were all funds not expended? Provide a summary of how funds were used in the past fiscal year and direct measurable impacts these funds had on business district activities. Page 3 NA NA NA NA NA 457 of 478 Will the programs or projects proposed this year help retain/expand existing Evanston businesses? N Y If yes, please specify which program/project and describe how it will help retain/expand existing businesses: If yes, please specify which program/project and describe how it will help to attract businesses: N YWill the programs or projects proposed this year include any attraction efforts to bring new businesses to your district? Describe project program outcomes not otherwise described above. Specifically, applicants should identify the desired outcome associated with funding. Describe deliverable and/or proposed criteria for monitoring outcomes to track the relative success of the program (i.e. measurable increases in sales, total number of visitors to the district, etc.) Page 4 If you have any questions regarding this application, please contact Meagan Jones in the Economic Development Division at (847) 448-8170 or mmjones@cityofevanston.org. Creating a logo/brand for use on banners will give a presence and greater visibility to the existing businesses which can bring more customers and increase diversity in the area. Having a visible presence (banners & marketing efforts) will give the district a uniform identity and exposure to attract new businesses and increased development. CEBA intends to improve the community through business growth, bringing more customers to the district to build stronger businesses and improve the image of the community CEBA serves by attracting more Northwestern students and a broader range of Evanston residents. Increased membership to the business association and collection of dues. Print FormSubmit by Email 458 of 478 459 of 478 460 of 478 Name of Business Association: Name of Point of Contact: Application for Evanston's Great Merchants Grant Applicant Information Address: Phone : Email: Business District Describe the geographic area that your business district serves: Y N Does your group collect association dues for memberships? What is the amount collected annually from members? Please list other ways that businesses may attain membership (i.e. in-kind services for membership): Attachment A: Attach a current list of your members. Page 1 How many businesses are located in your business district: Non-Association businesses:Members: Main Street Station Merchants Association Malik Turley 707-709 Washington Street, Evanston, IL 60202 847-328-5767 malik@hipcirclestudio.com Greenleaf - South Blvd; Hinman - Ridge $60 for NFP, $80 for businesses with 1 - 5 employees, $100 for businesses with more than 5 employees N/A 461 of 478 How much money is your group requesting from the City of Evanston for the remaining fiscal year (through December 31, 2014)? Please provide a description of proposed programs, projects, and activities for your association.Amount Requested Is this vendor located in Evanston? Is this a "bulk" purchase with another association? Name of "bulk" items/projects/programs/activities Which organization/individual will be taking the lead on this activity? If you are "bulk" purchasing anything with another business association, please complete the table below: Page 2 $9000 Artistic Bike Racks & Installation (3 - 4) 7000 No No Reprinting of Welcome Packet (including postage) 2000 Yes No 462 of 478 If you checked "No" for vendor location in Evanston, please provide an explanation as to why you are not proposing to use an Evanston vendor. Attachment B: Include any additional description or materials for how funds will be utilized. Past Neighborhood Business District Funding Awards Please list sources of revenue for your association in the previous years. Year Revenue from Dues Description of Revenue from other sources Amount of Revenue from other sources 2013 2012 2011 Y N If funds were awarded in 2013, were all funds spent? If not, why were all funds not expended? Provide a summary of how funds were used in the past fiscal year and direct measurable impacts these funds had on business district activities. Page 3 We have not exhausted our search but, as of right now, have not found a local producer of the artistic bike racks. Installation will be handeled by the city. 1580 Merchant Grant $9000 1270 Merchant Grant Full amount 1400 Merchant Grant Full amount We used the funding last year to design, create, and distribute a brand new Welcome Packet to new residents in the area. The packet was very well recieved by the member businesses and has enabled us to bring on new members excited about inclusion in the next printing/ distribution round. We are still sending them out (the grant last year paid for the creation of the packets, not the distribution) and are too soon in that process to have measurable results to report, but the anecdotal response has been good from the consumer standpoint. We also were able to do some social media marketing for the first time and had strong responses (via likes, shares, and views) on Facebook during the holiday shopping season. The social media training prepared us for 2014 and beyond to be able to make the most of our marketing dollars.463 of 478 Will the programs or projects proposed this year help retain/expand existing Evanston businesses? N Y If yes, please specify which program/project and describe how it will help retain/expand existing businesses: If yes, please specify which program/project and describe how it will help to attract businesses: N YWill the programs or projects proposed this year include any attraction efforts to bring new businesses to your district? Describe project program outcomes not otherwise described above. Specifically, applicants should identify the desired outcome associated with funding. Describe deliverable and/or proposed criteria for monitoring outcomes to track the relative success of the program (i.e. measurable increases in sales, total number of visitors to the district, etc.) Page 4 If you have any questions regarding this application, please contact Meagan Jones in the Economic Development Division at (847) 448-8170 or mmjones@cityofevanston.org. Our focus this year is on "greening" Main street, starting with making it more of a destination for everyone but especially those using alternative transportation. By increasing bike parking options with artistic bike racks we aim to also beautify the area. This is the first step in our greening process with additional changes to be made via dues funding, other grant applications, and TIF funding when available. ! ! Outside of our greening initiative, we intend to encourage use of the districts shops and services by introducing new residents to all we have to offer through the continued distribution of our Welcome Packet. The marketing efforts of the Welcome Packet show new businesses that our district is committed to supporting them and spreading the word about what is offered and available in our district. The greening initiatives are also appealing to new businesses as they show a clear intent to drive traffic to the area. This year's ask is not so easily quantifiable in terms of outcomes - the stronger and more welcoming we are to both businesses and consumers the more traffic the area will generate. Our hope is that the changes made possible through grant funding will allow us to draw more visitors to Main Street, but the proof will be anecdotal for the most part. We will be able to measure the use of the coupons in the welcome packet but that won't directly correlate to the impact of the packet itself as consumer participation can happen without the use of the coupons. Submit by EmailSubmit by Email Print FormPrint Form 464 of 478 For City Council meeting of July 28, 2014 Item O2 Business of the City by Motion: Façade Improvement Grant for Fitness Avenues For Action To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Wally Bobkiewicz, City Manager Johanna Nyden, Economic Development Division Manager Meagan Jones, Economic Development Coordinator Subject: Approval of Financial Assistance through the Façade Improvement Program for Fitness Avenues Date: July 11, 2014 Recommended Action: The Economic Development Committee and staff recommend City Council approval for financial assistance for a façade improvement project for Fitness Avenues, located at 1910 Main Street (PIN: 10-24-304-038-0000), on a 50/50 cost sharing basis in an amount not to exceed $1,890. Funding Source: The funding is provided by the Economic Development Fund’s Business District Improvement Fund (5300.65522). The approved Fiscal Year 2014 Budget allocated a total of $147,000 for this account to fund both the Façade Improvement and Great Merchant Grant Programs. To date, $6,178.55 has been spent from this account with an additional $36,075 approved for additional projects. Summary: The façade improvement project proposed for Fitness Avenues includes the installation of new signage in the form of red illuminated channel letters showing the business name. This project is eligible under the guidelines of the program and the work is estimated to cost $3,783. The property owner is in good standing with their property taxes according to the Cook County Treasurer’s office. Legislative History: At its July 9, 2014 meeting, the Economic Development Committee voted unanimously (9-0) to recommend the approval of this project to City Council. Memorandum 465 of 478 Attachments: Application Estimates Before photos of property Page 2 of 2 466 of 478 467 of 478 468 of 478 469 of 478 470 of 478 471 of 478 472 of 478 473 of 478 474 of 478 475 of 478 For City Council Meeting of July 28, 2014 Item O3 Resolution 55-R-14, Amending City Council Rule 6.4 For Action To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: W. Grant Farrar, Corporation Counsel Subject: Proposed revisions to City Council Rule 6.4 Date: July 28, 2014 Recommended Action: Rules Committee and staff recommend City Council approval of proposed revision to Council Rule 6.4. Legislative History: Following direction received at the July 7, 2014 Rules Committee meeting, staff drafted the below revision to Section 6.4 of the Council Rules. 6.4 A person invited to address the Council as specified herein, when accorded the floor, shall limit comments to include items within the jurisdiction of the Evanston City Council as determined by the Mayor and be governed by these rules to the extent applicable. Any person who requests to use audio/visual equipment during their comments at City Council committee meetings shall first receive permission from the Committee Chair prior to such use. Attachments: Resolution 55-R-14 Memorandum 476 of 478 7/16/14 55-R-14 A RESOLUTION Amending City Council Rule 6.4 WHEREAS, The City Council amends the City Council Rules and Organization of the City Council of the City of Evanston from time to time; and WHEREAS, it was necessary to amend the City Council Rules, adding sections 27 & 28, which speak to the Mayor’s appointments to the Compensation Committee, and the Ward Communications policy; and WHEREAS, other non-substantive technical changes were made to conform punctuation, internal cites, and the like, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION 1. That Subsection 6.4 of the City Council Rules is hereby amended to read as follows: 6. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 6.4 A person invited to address the Council as specified herein, when accorded the floor, shall limit comments to include items within the jurisdiction of the Evanston City Council as determined by the Mayor and be governed by these rules to the extent applicable. Any person who requests to use audio/visual equipment during their comments at City Council committee meetings shall first receive permission from the Committee Chair prior to such use. SECTION 2: That this Resolution 55-R-14 shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval in the manner provided by law. 477 of 478 55-R-14 ~2~ ______________________________ Elizabeth B. Tisdahl, Mayor Attest: _____________________________ Rodney Greene, City Clerk Adopted: ________________, 2014 478 of 478