Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1987Ald, Present. Ald. Absent: Staff Present: Others Present: Presiding Official: MINUTES Planning and Development Committee January 5, 1997 7:30 P.X. S. Brady, R. Warshaw, J. Korshak, J.. Bleretns, D. Drummer and ff. Juliar None R. Carlson, R. Ahlberg, S. Eiseman and - R; itudd :'•, . . Ira Golan and John Klein D. Drumoor Minutes of December 22. 1986. Ald. Korshakk moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of December 22, 1986 as submitted. Committee voted 3-0to:approve the minutes (Aldermen Julian, Bleveans and Warshaw absent). cop"icATrons 2nd Draft of Proposed Sign Ordinance The Committee received a second draft of the Proposed Sign Ordinance which will be discussed at the January 12, 1987 P A D meeting. Staff indicated that if possible the Committee should give direction at the January 12 :seating so that the ordinance and final revisions to the ordinance can be ready for Introduction to City Council on February 9, 1987. - OLD BUSINESS Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Restaurant Regulations. Ald. Korshak indicated that he had met with staff to discuss revisions that modify the original proposal of requiring all restaurants to be special uses. Staff suggested developing a two-tier approach to restaurants. Sit down restaurants as permitted uses in certain districts, and fast-food (carry -out) restaurants as special uses in various districts. Staff suggested that the distinction be made that sit-down restaurants (full service restaurants) would be required to have table service (by waiter/waitress) and the use of non -disposable (reusable) cutlery and other eating utensils. Staff indicatad that this approach appears to address many of the concerns stated by the P & D Committee at the December 22, 1986 meeting, in which interest was expressed to avoid situations where all types of restaurants, would be required to have a special use. Ald. Drummer stated that the new proposal appears to focus on what are the real problems: carry -outs, fast -foods. He stated that under this new proposal the Blind Faith Restaurant would appear to have been addressed adequately with respect to restaurants, though the zeal issue with Blind Faith was with respect to three (3) parking spaces. Ald. Warshaw expressed concern a I P 6 D Kinutes Special nesting January 5. 1987 that under the now proposal the issue of litter may not be addressed. Aid. Juliar expressed concern that under the now proposal there still may be Trays for certain types of restaurants to get around the guidelines. Ald. Brady stated that she likes the non -disposable utensils and the waiter/waitress service but would suggest adding a 30% carry -out limit on full service restaurants. Staff indicated that the enforcement of a percent of carry -out Mould be very difficult. if not impossible to enforce. Ald. Korsbak felt that the new proposal served in on the issue that was of concern to the Committee: prioarily franchised carry -out restaurants. He stated that he feels that the new proposal separates the sit-dosm restaurant operation from other types of restaurants based on the non -disposable cutlery and eating utensils and table service. Jerry Gordon was present and stated that the City should prohibit all drive thru (carry -out restaurants) in the future. Ald. Juliar stated that be is uncomfortable with the reliability of the new proposal. He stated that he finds the percent of carry -out an interesting (test and is concerned that various franchises may change their method of operation to negate the necessity for the special use and attempt to fall under the full -service restaurant definition. Ald. Warshaw stated that she feels that it is reliable because Franchise restaurants will not deviate and woulO opt to seek the special use to obtain the proper toning for their franchise operation. Ald. Korshak stated that with respect to litter that the zoning ordinance say not be this answer to controlling that issue. He stated that by addressing litter through regulations per special use restaurants may provide some manner of control in addition to strengthening restaurant license requirements. John Klein, owner of J K Sweets, stated that the litter issue in the downtown area could be solved if there were more garbage cans. Klein expressed concern that convenient stores should be controlled by the restaurant ordinance; it is unfair if a Seven -Eleven or White Hen or Open Pantry to not classified as a restaurant, since they are developing food services similar to restaurants. He also expressed concern that the convenient types of food stores create situations where kids loiter and cause problems. Ald. Drummer stated that ZAC did discuss the issue of deli's, convenient stores and bakeries and opted to leave those items out of the restaurant issue. Ald. Drummer also pointed out to Klein that the City has in recent years taken additional measures to aid in cleaning up the downtown and providing additional garbage cans. Ald. Brady suggested that the Committee consider the requirement that all restaurants within the CSD (commercial business district) be allowed to be permitted uses and all restaurants outside of the CHD be required as special uses. Ald. Juliar felt that restaurants should be treated uniformly throughout the City and not separated by CBD and neighborhood shopping areas. &41 P & D Minutes Special Meeting January 5, 1987 Ald. Brady felt that there were different expectations for residents living in the CBD than residents living outside of the CBD, in residential areas. The Committee discussed the issue of restaurant odors and whether it would be possible to control sane. Klein stated that he is aware of systems that would ramove 9n of the odors caused by restaurants at a cost of approximately $10,000. The Committee expressed concern that odors emanating from a restaurant are a nuisance and a problem in residential areas. Ald. Brady expressed concern about the convenient stores which have a segment of the operation as a carry -out restaurant. Staff suggested that if the Committee is considering, regulations regarding convenient stores that it should be a separate issue from restaurants and not attmpt to define and regulate convenient stores through a restaurant regulation. The Committee concurred that the regulations regarding convenient stores could be discussed in the future, xeparate from restaurants. Ald. Warshaw questioned what the Committee would recommend regarding drive through restaurants, particularly with respect to proximity to residential zones. Ald. forshak felt that the regulations of the drive thru, carry out restaurants was the major problem that caused discussion of cbanging restaurant regulations. He suggested tbet in addition to making drive thru restaurants (carry -outs) a special, use than additional licensing regulations be applied to not only the special use for drive thru, but also to applying stricter licensing regulations of sit-down restaurants. Ald. forsbsk further stated that issues such as noise, odors, parking and litter should be addressed through licensing regulations. Ald. Brady suggested that the Committee may want to consider developing a 'community fapact ordinance" that would address all facets of the zoning ordinance whenever there is an application for a special use. Chairman Drummer recommended that the Cosmittes give staff direction to draft a proposed ordinance based on a definition of sit-down (full service) restaurant which would require that traitress/waiter table service be provided to addition to non -disposable (reusable) cutlery and eating utensils being part of the operation. Also that restaurants other than full service restaurants be defined to include carry -out and a carry -out operation with a drive thru window. Ald. Bleveans questioned in what category would ice cream stores and a Dunkin Donuts, type operation be included? It was the consensus of the Comittee that Ice cream stores that did not have non -disposable utensils and table service would be classified its carry -outs and that the example or a Dunkin Donut would be both a bakery and a sit-down restaurant of it met the requirements or full service restaurant definition). -3- ` � • ti r_ •}.. —. .� � � ""Y,= gel yt� � h:�h �4ii-.via . "Yi `1A P i D Minutes Special Hooting January 5, 1967 The Coasittee then proceeded to review the various zoning districts whore permitted and special us* restaurants would be located. Staff indicated that at a later date a chart would be provided detailing the existing districts and the pers<itted and special uses classifications in addition to a chart Illustrating whore the now proposed, full service and carry -out restaurants would be allowed. She Coewittee recosssended scheduling a special sleeting of the P i D Comeittea for Tharsday, January 29, 1987 to review the now information in addition to a draft ordinance regarding definitions of the two (2) types of restaurants. ADJOURNMW The sleeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. The next regular sleeting of the P i D Ca Ittoo will be January 12, 1986. Staff: obert T. itndd 33(7/10) -4- P -. MINUTES PYantming and Development Committee January 12, 1987 7:30 P.M. A1d. Present S. Brady, R. Warshaw, J, Korsbak.-J� Blevosms, D. Drummer and H. Jultar Ald. Absent: !tone Staff Present: R. Carlson, D. Carter, R. Ahlberg, D. Rasmussen, R. Szymanski and R. Rudd Others Present: Ira Golan, Bennett Johnson and L. Brown Make Associates) Presiding.Official: D. Drummer Minutes of Special Meeting of January 5, 1987. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of January 5, 1987. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes as submitted. C0MU1iICATIONS Ouarterly Uvdate Evanston of Board -Ups The Committee received the quarterly update regarding various board -ups throughout the City of Evanston. Ald. Brady recommended that a copy of this listing be supplied to the Housing Comission and Ald. Warshaw suElested that a copy be provided to the Mayor's Special Housing Fund Committee. P & D Chairmanship Schedule The Committee received the P & D Committee chairmanship schedule indicating that Ald. Korahat would assume chairmanship of the Committee on January 19, 1987. ZBA Public Notice for January 20. 1987 Hearing. The Committee received without comment. ZBA 86-31-V(F). final Variation Decision re 1314 Wilder Street. The Committee received Without comment. ZBA 86-23-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 2117 Payne Street. The Committee received Without comment. t P & D Minutes January 12, 1987 OLD BUSINESS Proposed Sign Ordinance The Committee received a letter dated January 12, 1987 from George Cyrus, of Cyrus Realtors recommending that the City strike from the proposed sign ordinance a proposed requirement to date the erection of For Sale signs. Ald. Korshat questioned staff as to whether complaints have been received regarding the length of time that For Sale signs are left on properties. Staff indicated that to their knowledge no complaints have been received. Lee Brown of Testa, Associates was present and questioned vhethur the Committoe also wishes to drop the 180-day length of time for the erection of the subject sign. It was the consensus of the Committee to leave the 180-day limitation on the signs, but to delete from the proposed ordinance a requirement to date the signs. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Xorshak seconded that the Committee mate the proposed amendments. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the motion. Ald. Warshaw cited an example presented to her by a sign maker for a paper sign d.jsplayed for over 30-days would run into conflicts with the ordinance. Leo Brown stated that a paper sign displayed over 30-days would fall into the permanent sign category and would be permitted under the regulations of permanent signs. Ald. Brady questioned Section 4-12-13-A-3 with respect to terms of the Sign Review and Appeals Board (page 30). Ald. Brady felt to be consistent with other City board memberships the term should be an original three (3) year term and one (1) three year reappointment. It was the consensus of the Committee to make that change to the subject section. Ald. Brady also recommended that Section 4-12-14F be deleted from the proposed ordinance. She subject section provides that the City Coancil would be the final review body If an appeal from the Appeals Board decision was made. Ald. Warshaw stated that to delete Section F would not allow for adequate electivo official review. Ald. Brady stated that the subject section needs to be deleted to give final authority to a technical, hearing body. Ald. Bleveans said he equates having the Sign Review and Appeals Board as final authority with the Zoning Board of Appeals on certain zoning cases. AM forshak suggested that if there should be appeals beyond the Sign Review and Appeals Board to an elected body then there should be a time frame providing limitations as to how long before an appeal could be heard. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether certain types of sign appeals from the Appeals Board could be heard by the P 6 D Committee based on the significance of the appeal or sire of sign paralleling the situation where all of the decisions are not final by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ald. Juliar felt that all appeals should end at the Sign Review and Appeals Board otherwise the p g D Committee may see all denials by the Sign Review and Appeala Board. Ald. Korshak cited his opinion that all citizens should have the right to appeal and be heard by elected officials and not appointed officials or staff. Ald. Juliar stated that -2- P b D Minutes January 12, 1987 elected officials should face policy decisions and not decisions of such a technical nature as will be heard by the Sign Review and Appeals Board. Chairman Drummer called for a vote on the original motion to delete Section P. Co=mittee voted 3-3. !lotion failed (Voting aye: Aldermen Juliar, Brady and Drummer). Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the proposed ordinance be amended to provide for the P b D Committee to be final authority. Committee voted 4-2 to amend the ordinance to reflect the P & D Committee as final authority. (Voting nay: Aldermen Juliar and Brady.) Ald. Bleveans suggested that a rule be developed to be contained in the P & D Committee's Rules of Procedures setting forth the timing requirement for requests for appeals from a decision from the Sign Review and Appeals Board. Staff indicated that this would be developed. Lee Brown reviewed a memorandum from Yeska, Associates dated December 31, 1986 which sat forth an opinion that the notification requirements for appeals and variations as revised in the subject ordinance on page 32 appear to meet the concerns of the Committee. Bronco further stated that the criteria for approval of variations remains as originally proposed based on legal counsel who feels that a reduction in required findings are in conflict with precedent set in cases litigated by home rule municipalities. Susan Connor, Consultant Attorney explained that various cases indicate that the variation standards should remain. Brown pointed out that the amortization of billboards is not include¢ in the proposed ordinance nor are other non -conforming signs amortized. The Committee reviewed the composition of the Sign Sevier and Appeals Board and after a brief discussion elected to leave the composition as drafted in the subject ordinance. Ira Golan, Executive Director of the Evanston Chamber of Commerce was present and endorsed the proposed composition. Chairman Drummer directed that the changes discussed at this meeting be reflected in the proposed ordinance and that a final draft ordinance be developed for review by the P g D Committee and introduction to City Council on February 9, 1987. Docket 7-1A-87. ZAC 86-6, ordinance 5-0-87. Rezone the North Shore Channel Lands. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Wrxshaw seconded that the Committee adopt the subject ordinance and the ZAC Report rezoning various lands to the recently adopted zoning district called the North Shore Channel Greenbelt Zoning District. Ald. Bleveans requested that the P & D Committee's minutes reflect that a review of the ZAC transcript indicated that no one appeared in opposition during the ZAC hearing to the proposed rezoning. Ald. Blevesns also noted that upon questioning the audience at the January 12, 1987 P b D Committee that there was no opposition expressed by owners of the property to be rezoned nor adjacent property owners. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council introduction of the subject ordinance rezoning the property. -3- WI P & D minutes January 12, 1987 Docket S-IA-871 ZRA 86-28-VUU(R). Ordinance 3-0-87. re Variation and Special Use for 303 Dodge Avenue. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recomend to City Council introduction of the subject ordinance granting a variation and special use to permit the installation of an identification sign in the front yard. Committea voted 6-0 to introduce. Sign Review and Appeals board Hearin The Committee considered the application of Northwestern Buick for retention of two (2) free standing signs at 1030 Chicago Avenue. Mr. George Voock of White Way Sign Company and Mr. Steve Napleton, owner of Northwestern Buick were present for the variation rc:quert. Ald. Brady questioned whether the current signs could remain if left unchanged. Staff indicated that would be the case since they would be legal. non -conforming. Ald. Brady questioned whether the Sign Review and Appeals Board would consider approving a variation for Sign A which would indicate Northwestern Bulck and whether it would be possible to request elimination of the "used car" sign. (Sign 8). Ald. Bleveans stated that he supports Ald. Brady's compromise. The consensus of the Committee was to support thu compromise if Sign A could meet the variation standards. Ald. Drummer reviewed the six (6) standards for variation. The findings of the Sign Review and Appeals Board are as follows: 1. Unique hardship - The Board found that to require removal of the subject sign would impair the viability of the business and create an unusual hardship due to loss of the subject sign. The Board also felt that the hardship was unique in that the cause for variation was necessitated only by the change of ownership and not demonstrated by any problem with the sign. 2. Reasonable Return - The Board felt that if the subject sign was removed a reasonable return on the business due to the need for advertising could not be expected. 3. Not Self Created - The Board found that the current owner bought the property and paid, for the signs and the situation was therefore not created by this owner. a. Not Harps Public Welfare - The Board Mound that the subject signs have existed for a number of years and could continue to exist if not for the change of ownership. The Board found that there was no evidence submitted to indicate any harm existed in the past to the public welfare, nor any indication that future harm to the public welfare would be creatod. 'l. Graphic Effectiveness Demonstrated - The Board found that the subject sign had been designed by a professional firm in accordance with general policy set forth by General Motor Corporation. -4- M P & D Minutes January 12, 1987 6. Consistent With Intent - The Board found that the subject sign is in harmony with the overall intent of the subject ordinance to promote aesthetics and not be harmful to the general welfare. The Committee voted 6-0 to approve Sian A variation as requested. At this point owner Steve Mapleton requested that the variation request for Sign B be withdrawn. The Committee concurred with the request and approved the withdrawal of the variation request for Sign B. Docket 6-IA-87. ZBA 86-24-V(R). Ordinance 4-0-87 re Variation for 1829 Dempster Street. Ald. Juliar moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee approve the recommendation from the Zoning Board of Appeals granting a variation for a drive-in restaurant and relief from Condition 4 of a recorded covenant as a covenant. Chairman Drummer recommended that additional conditions be added to the subject ordinance similar to those placed on Pizza Nut's proposal at the Dodge Dempster Shopping Center. Ald. Drummer suggested that a litter and trash provision be added to the ordinance for Brown's Fried Chicken citing the acme conditions set forth in Pizza Hut. Ald. Drummer also recomended that hours of operation be added to the subject ordinance requiring that hours of operation from Sunday thru Thursday be 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and Friday and Saturday 11:00 a.m. until 12:00 a.m. The owners of Brown's Fried Chicken were present and stated that they concur with the additional conditions. The owners further stated their willingness to participate in a team effort to address the litter problem in the Dodge/Dempster area. The Committee further recommended that the conditions be set forth in the ordinance and be part of the recorded covenant. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council Introduction of the subject ordinance. Docket 190-8A-86. ZBA 86-13-SU(R). re Special Use for 1615 Lake Street. Ald. Drummer stated that Rev. Nilson was present and had informed him that additional evidence had been gathered to support the request for a special use to be granted. Due to the lateness of the hour the Committee recommended to continue this matter to the next regular meeting of the P S D Committee on January 26, 1987. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is January 26, 1987; next special meeting of the P 6 D Committee is Thursday, January 29, 1987 (Restaurant Amendments). Staff: Robert R dd 33(9/13) -5- Ald. Present 'Ald. Absent: Staff .Present: Presiding official: MINUTES Planning and Development Committeo January 26, 1987 7:30 P.K. S..Brady, R. Warshaw, J. Korshak,- J:-Bleveans, D. ' - Drummer and f. Jul i ar Minutes of January 12, 1987. Aid. Warshaw moved and Aid. Bleveans seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of January 12, 1987 P & D Committee meeting as submitted. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes (Aldermen Juiiar and Drummer absent). Communications ZAC Public Notice for February 5; 1987. The Committee received without comment. December 1986 Nonthly Rehab Report The Committee received without comment. Docket 19-1B-87: Consider Plat of Resubdivision for Property at 1735 Wesley Avenue. Aid. Brady moved and Aid. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve the plat as submitted. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the plat of resubdivision. Docket 18-I B-87: Consider Plat of Consolidation for Property at 1000 -1020 Central Street (old Central Motors property). Aid. Bleveana moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee approve the plat of consolidation as submitted. Committee voted 6-0 to approve. Docket 190-8A-86. ZBA 86-13-SU(R) re Special Use for 1615 Lake Street. Aid. Drummer stated that he had spoken with neighboring property owners of the proposed church site. It is his understanding that the neighbors have not changed their mind in their opposition to the church and that no compromise has been worked out. Rev. Wilson of the proposed church was present and stated that one person has change their mind, but that the others remain against the proposal. Wilson cited the properties on each side of the proposed site where one property owner has change his position. Upon a question from Ald. Korshak, Rev. Wilson indicated that the property owner has change his position but that the property is rented to two (2) tenants at this time and the property owner does not live there. Aid. Drummer moved and Aid. Warshaw seconded that the P & D Committee reaffirm an August 11, 1986 P 6 D Minutes January 26, 1987 recomendation at which tima the Committee voted 4-0 to support the Zoning Board of appeals recommendation to deny the special use. Ald. Brady stated that there were concerns other than just the neighbors in opposition to the church such as the use of the alley and potential uses of the church for purposes other than worship. Ald. Bleveans stated that he tries not to decide zonivS issues only on the emotions or the concerns of the neighbors, but rather on zoning criteria. Ald. Bleveans felt that the Zoning Board's decision was well founded and that the Zoning Board bad taken into account all of the evidence. Ald. Warshaw stated that her decision was based not only on the neighbors concerns but rather on the use of the alley, the capacity of the church and the lack of adequate parking. Committee voted 6-0 to affirm their earlier position to recommend to City Council denial of the special use request. Lakofront Rehab, Lagoon and Demrpster Street Buildings. Don Wirth, Director of Parks, Recreation and Forestry was present and reviewed a proposal to rehab the Lagoon and Dempster Street lakefront buildings. The proposal for the rehabilitation took into account planning and design review which involved the Preservation Commission, the Preservation League, the Recreation Board and the Plcn Commission. Wirth indicated that the project is Included in the City's Capital Improvement Plan with funding allocations from the Park Enrichment Fund. He further indicated that the project was included In the Recovery Action Program as approved by the City Council. 'Wirth indicated that after reviewing of the plans at tonight's meeting that the next step was to bring the construction contract to the Committee and City Council on February 9, 1987. A review of the plan by Mr. Thorpe of the architectural firma of Holtzman and Phillip, indicated that both structures require major rehabilitation. The architects and those citizens with whom the staff have worked emphasized the Importance of retaining the architectural integrity of the structures. Mr. Thorpe indicated that there were significant changes in the lakefront office building. The proposed improvements will make it possible to more efficiently receive the thousands of citizens that come to the facility for information and to register for programs. At the lagoon building all mechanical systems are to be replaced. Space allocations and interior use will remain basically the same. In response to a question from Chairman Korshak, Don Wirth indicated that the original estimate was approximately $80,000 for the Dempster Street building. The current estimate proposed by the architect is between $110,000 and $130,000. Thorpe indicated that approximately one half of the estimate is due to mechanical changes. Ald. Bleveans questioned Thorpe what an entirely new building would coati Thorpe indicated that a new building would be significantly more than the rehabilitation cost. In response to a question -2- P & D minutes January 26, 1987 from Chairman Karshak regarding the source of funding, Wirth indicated that the five (5) year Capital Improvement Plan estimated $180,000 for the two buildings. Wirth indicated that if the cost of the two (2) buildings exceeded $180,000 the City Manager would be proposing various alternatives for the Committee and City Council to review to allow funding. Ald. Juliar indicated that he has reviewed the plans in the past with Don Wirth and other members of the reviewing bodies and finds that due to the high visibility of the two (2) buildings that it is necessary to have attractive facilities. However, he expressed concern that the rehabilitation was an expensive venture. Ald. Bleveans moved that the Committee endorse the general concept of the plans and look forward to reviewing the contract and final cost at a later date. Ald. Juliar seconded the notion. It was the unanimous consensus of the Committee to approve the general concept ns submitted. Docket 20-IB-87: ZBA 86-23-SU(R) re Special Use for B21 Moves Street. Ald. Juliar moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the P & D Committee affirm the Zoning Board of Appeals denial of the special use requested for Amvets at 821 Noyes. Prior to discussion of the issue by the P g D Committee, Chairman Rorshak explained P & D's role in reviewing this matter and making a recommendation to Citg Council which will snake the final decision. Ald. Drummer questioned whether some material recently received by members of the P & D Committee constituted new evidence. Chairman Korshak ruled that the letters received were not new evidenco. Ald. Bleveans reviewed the P & D Committee Rules of Procedure, specifically the Winfield Rule, addressing new evidence. Since no new evidence has been filed the Committee would not entertain new evidence at this meeting. Ald. Warshaw stated that she was against the ZBA conclusion and feels that neighbors were misled by the various statements that were made in a negative connotation about Amvets. She stated that Amvets is currently located a block and half from her home and she has experienced no problems nor has the neighborhood experienced any problems far the many years that they were located there. Ald. Warshaw further stated that any commercial use in the neighborhood would cause more problems and increase the intensity than would the Amvets. Ald. Brady stated that she thinks Ald. Warshaw is correct in her analysis. She stated that it is unfortunate they have to move from their current location, however, she thinks that the few blocks on Hoyea Street are of a fragile nature and that the area needs permitted commercial uses more suited to neighborhoods. Ald. Brady stated that she in no way feels that Amvets would not be good neighbors. Ald. Juliar agreed with Ald. Brady in that the Amvets have been good neighbors. the question in his mind was whether It was a proper land -use. Ald. Juliar stated that he feels that there are more beneficial land uses to the neighborhood than Amvets and therefore would support the ZBA denial recommendation. Ald. Bleveans stated that he shared a view that a special use allowing the consumption of alcohol in a neighborhood -3- P & D Minutes January 26, 1937 Is not a correct land use. Ald. Warshaw stated that it was regrettable that a special use was even required. She questioned whether the Committee should consider a reference to ZAC to make a zoning amendment where facilities like Anvets would be a permitted use and not even require a special use. Ald. Warshaw also questioned whether the City should be directed to provide support services to help relocate Amvets. Ald. Bleveans stated that he did not oppose efforts to help relocate Amvets and that his purpose was not to force then from the City of Evanston. Chairman Korshak expressed his views that the City should grant the special use with conditions, such as on hours of operation, etc. He also stated that In his mind no evidence of past problems was indicated nor was there any reason to assume future problems. He stated that he does not believe allegations that property values will decline if Amvets is located at 821 Noyes. Ald. Brady stated that before P & D considers a ZAC reference that she would request a staff memo providing background as to why operations such as Amvets are required to have special uses. Staff indicated that such a report would be forthcoming. Ald. Juliar stated that he still considers the issue being one of land use and that to allow Amvets could cause similar land use conflicts such as those that are experienced with restaurants in residential. areas. Ald. Warshaw stated that the Amvets operation is vaatly different thatl restaurants and any other commercial use. Chairman Korshak questioned whether there was any new a-ridence being offered by :members of the audience. Attorney for the applicant, Michael Poulos was present and stated he had no new evidence. Chairman Korshak called for a vote on the original motion to affirm the ZBA recommendation to deny the special use. Voting aye: Aldermen Juliar, Drummer, Brady and Bleveans. Voting nay: Aldermen Korshak and Warshaw. The Committee voted 4-2 to recommend to City Council to affirm ZBA recommendation and deny the spacial use. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next special meeting of the P & D Committee will be Thursday, January 29, 1987; next regular meeting will be Monday, February 9, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: Ro ert T. Iu 39(20/23) -4- M MINUTES Special Meeting Planning and Development Committee January 29, 1987 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: S.-'Brady, R. Warshaw,'J. Bloioana, D. Drummer and N. Julian ;. Ald. Absent; J. Xorshak Staff Present: R. Ahlberg and R. Rudd Others Present; 8. Radon and B. Jobasbn. Presiding Official: D..Druismer Docket 87-48-85. Ordinance 40-0-86, ZAC 85-4, Zoning Amendments re Restaurants The Committee reviewed two reports addressing zoning amendments to restaurants and proposed revisions to the Municipal Code regarding restaurant licensing. Staff reviewed with the Cosittee the restaurant amendments and suggested that the term "full service" be deleted and that restaurants be defined as "Restaurant Type I" and "Restaurant Type II". The Committee concurred with the revision. Ald. Brady recommended that on page 2 of the revised zoning amendments to restaurants that items 4 and 5 which address protection for residential districts adjacent to a restaurant be combined and indicated in a separate category. The Co=Ittee concurred with the recommendation and directed staff to amend the requirements. Ald. Warshaw questioned attachment A of the restaurant revision report as to why M1 and M2 Districts do not permit restaurants? Staff indicated that currently there is only one small area zoned M1 in the City and that there is no area zoned M2. After a discussion the Committee recommended that M1 and M2 allow Type I restaurants as permitted uses and Type II restaurants as special uses so that the zoning districts will be parallel to the M3 and M4 Districts. Ald. Brady reviewed the issue of drive-ins with respect to Type II restaurants. Staff indicated that drive-ins are prohibited with Type I restaurants and would require a special use with Type II restaurants. Staff also indicated that the extra standards proposed for special uses apply to all Type II restaurants whether the Type II restaurant has a drive-in or not. Ald. Bleveans suggested that where the term "automobile" is used that the ordinance be changed to state "vehicles". It was the consensus of the Committee to direct staff to make that change. Ald. Radon was present and provided a brief history of the growth of "junk food" restaurants in the City of Evanston. She asked the Committee to consider a ban on all drive-thru restaurants. Ald. Juliar stated that he shared the concern with the growth of such restaurants, but feels that many people within the City may desire drive-thru restaurants at certain - locations. Ald. Warshaw stated that drive-thru restaurants are not necessarily all bad and that they do serve some purpose. Upon a question from P 6 D Committee Minutes Special Meeting - January 29, 1987 Chairman Drummer, staff indicated that to their knowledge there are four (A} drive-thru restaurants currently in the City (2 McDonald's and 2 Brown's Chicken). Ald. Bleveans stated that he is concerned that the City would have constitutional problems by prohibiting drive-thru restaurants entirely. He stated that he is more comfortable with requiring them to be special uses in which conditions can be attached or they can be denied. Chairman Drummer concurred that by applying reasonable conditions to the special uses for drive-thru restaurants that many of the problems can be alleviated. Ald. Warshaw concurred and stated that with the special use process, if the City finds that the applicant does not meet the various standards the City can always deny the request. Further review of the Type II restaurants raised questions by Ald. Bleveans with respect to Dunkin Donut located at Livingston and Greenbay Road. Ald. Bleveans questioned whether Dunkin Donut would fall into a Type II category. Staff indicated that Dunkin Donut would be classified as two principal uses: Type I restaurant and a bakery. Ald. Bleveans stated that in his opinion Dunkin Donut is primarily a fast-food restaurant (Type II) and is not a bakery or a Type I restaurant. After a lengthy discussion the Committee requested Ald. Bleveans to develop a proposal for the February 9, 1987 P & D Committee fleeting which would recommend how to address uses such as Dunkin Donut. Staff expressed concern that if Dunkin Donut continues to be called a bakery and is regulated that all bakeries would have to be similarly regulated. Ald. Bleveans indicated that he would work with staff to develop a response to address the issue of uses such as Dunkin Donut. The Committee proceeded to review the second memorandum from staff regarding proposed revisions to licensing requirements. Bennett Johnson was present and suggested that regarding waste roceptacles and litter that the proposed licensing regulations indicate that an anti -litter sign be prominently displayed in the restaurant. Ald. Brady recommended that the ordinance be changed to reflect that an anti -litter sign be prominently displayed at the point of service to allow all patrons to observe the sign. Staff indicated that the amendment would be made. The Committee proceeded to review the remaining licensing requirements, and approved with no further changes. The Committee directed staff to proceed with the drafting of two ordinances; (1) to amend the zoning ordinance regarding regulations for restaurants and (2) to draft an ordinance amending the Municipal Code regarding licensing to restaurants Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.; next regular mooting of the P & D Committee will be February 9, 1987. Staff: Aobert9.Rdd AA(1!2} -2- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee February 9, 1987 7:30 P.I. Ald.'Present: S. Brady, R. Warshaw, J..'Rorehak, J. Bleveans, D. Dru=er and R. Jullar Ald. Absent: None Staff Present: 'R. Carlson, D. Carter, R. Ahlberg,.S.:Riseman.: D. Rasmussen and R. Rudd Others Present: Ira Golan Lee Brown and Xathy Skobel _ Presiding Off1Ci&l:L J. Rorshak Minutes of January 26, 1987 (reAular wetinF) and January 29, 1987 (special meeting Ald. Juliar moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planniag & Development Committee meeting of January 26, 1987 and the minutes of the Planning b Development Committee special meeting of January 29, 1987. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes as submitted. Communications ZBA Public notice for February 17. 1987. The Committee received without comment. 86-33-V-JF). Final Variation Decision re 2830 Harrison Street. The Committee received without comment. ZBA 86-35-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 1226 Greenleaf Street. The Committee received without comment. ZBA 86-35-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 2760 Broadway Avenue. Ald. Bleveans stated that he found no objections to the variation being granted. ZBA 86-36-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 2401 Pioneer Road. Ald. Bleveans stated that be found no objections to the variation being granted. New Business Docket 30-28-87. Consider Approval of Plat of Consolidation for Property at 1222 Chicago Avenue. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee approve tho plat of consolidation as submitted. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the plat. P & D Committee Minutes February 9, 1987 Docket 31-28-87. Consider Approval of Plat of Consolidation for Property at 2765 Crawford. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the plat of consolidation as submitted. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the plat. Docket 32-2B-87. Plat of Consolidation for 2198 -2200 Lee Street and 2221-2223 Main Street. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the plat of consolidation as submitted. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the plat. Docket 33-2B-87. Resolution 9-R-87. Authorizing Application for Second Generation Planning Grant from urban Park and Recreation Recovery Act. Don Wirth, Director of Parks. Recreation g Forestry was present and reviewed with the Committee a mereorandun submitted with the aforementioned application. Wirth indicated that late on February 9, 1987 he received word from the subject federal agency that the grant was a matching grant and not a full grant. Therefore, Wirth recommended to the Committee if they approve the Resolution the last paragraph of the subject Resolution ba ammended to delete the number "S6,000." and to ascend it to read "for a $2,500. matching grant". Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of Resolution 9-R-87 as amended. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the Resolution. Reference re Proposed Marina for the North Shore Channel. Philip Peters of the City's Plan Commission was present and reviewed the subject memo from the Plan Commisaion. Peters indicated that during the meetings that the Plan Commission has held that three (3) possible sites for the Marina were indicated: near Evanston High School, near Howard Street and at the Baha'i Temple. The Plan Commission recommended that the City of Evanston go on record as opposed to the Marina project at any future hearings and that the Plan Commission be directed to continue to represent the City's position on this subject. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee direct the Plan Commission to proceed as a representative of the City's position to oppose the Marina. Committee voted 6-0 to so direct the Plan Commission. Ald. Brady recommended that the City send a copy of the Plan Commission's report, dated January 2, 1937 to the Metropolitan Sanitary District, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Village of Wilmotte, Village of Skokie and to Congressmen Yates and Porter to inform them of the City of Evanston's position. Chairman Korshak asked that the Mayor be requested to provide a cover letter to the memo and express to all parties concerned the City's sentiment which is in opposition to the proposed Marina. It was the consensus of the Committee to have this material forwarded to the various aforementioned parties. -2- P & D Committee Minutes February 9, 1987 Docket 29-28-87. Memorandum on Rehab AQveals Board Comoosition. Due to a restructuring in the membership of the Housing Commission's Subcommittees there no longer is an alderman on the Rehab Appeals Board. The Housing Commission has recommended that the Rehab Appeals Board be expanded from three (3) to four (4) members and that an alderman currently serving on the Housing Commission be appointed as the fourth member. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the guidelines for the Rehab Appeals Board be so amended to allow a fourth member and that that member be one of the alderman serving on the Housing Commission. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council to amend the guidelines to the Rehab ,Appeals Board. Staff Report on Whv Clubs and iodmes are Soecial Uses. The Committee reviewed a report submitted by staff at the request of Ald. Brady at a previous P & D Committee meeting, providing background as to the reasons why various private clubs and lodges are required to obtain special uses. Ald. Warshaw questioned why they were viewed as "living places"- or residential facilities. Bob Ahlberg, Zoning Planner was present and indicated that a review of the transcripts indicated that it was not the intent to view private clubs as residential facilities, but rather they were grouped into that category during the zoning amendment in 1973. Ahlberg further indicated that there was no discussion with respect to clubs or lodges. Ald. questioned whether a reference should be made to ZAC to clarify shy clubs and lodges were Included in the amendment or to remove them from the currant classification. Ald. Juliar stated that he feels that clubs and lodges fit within the context of the speclal use and should be maintained. Ald. Brady stated that she concurs with the requirement to have clubs and lodges as a special use classification, but also agrees Hith Ald. Warshaw with respect to the lack of reasoning why they are included in the current classification. Ald. Brady questioned whether the Committee should consider adding clubs and lodges to the Type II Restaurant because they are often an eating and/or drinking establishment. Ald. Warshaw stated that upon review of the material submitted by staff that she hasn't been sufficiently convinced that there was a sound basis for requiring clubs and lodges to be special uses. Ald. Drummer stated that he concurs with Ald. Warshaw and suggested that the Committee review possible locations to allow clubs and lodges as permitted uses within the City. Ald. Juliar stated that he feels that clubs and lodges should be special uses but would also consider including clubs and lodges as a Type II Restaurant. Ald. Warshaw stated that she foals that most clubs and lodges would fall into a Type I Restaurant definition, and therefore would not need a special use. She stated that she doesn't feel that clubs and lodges should be Included in the restaurant definition. Chairman Korahak suggested that due to the number of other items on the agenda that this matter be held -over to the February 23, 1987 Planning & Development Committee meeting to allow further discussion. -3- P & D Committee Minutes February 9, 1987. , Docket 3 4-28-87. Ordinance 18-0-87, ZAC 86-8. Removing Sian Rexulations from the Zoning Ordinance. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of ZAC report 86-8, removing all sign regulations from the Zoning Ordinance. Ald. Brady questioned whether the Zoning Board could override the sign ordinance and thus grant variations to the sign ordinance. Ahlberg stated that the Zoning Board could not grant variations to the sign ordinance. Coamaittee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council introduction of Ordinance 18-0-87. Docket 87-48-85. Ordinance 15-0-87 and Docket 36-28-87. Ordinance 17-0-87, ZAC 85-4. Zoning Amendments re Restaurants. Chairman xorshak reviewed Ald. Bleveans' recommendation to include retail bakeries as special uses. Ald. Bleveans stated that he fools in many Instances retail bakeries such as Dunkin Donuts have an impact very similar to Ice cream shops and Type 11 Restaurants. He feels that these operations are similar to a carry -outs restaurant and create problems such as traffic and litter. Ald. Juliar stated that he agrees with Ald. Bleveans' position about Dunkin Donuts and that it appears to generate traffic, litter and is similar to a carry -out restaurant. However, he stated that he is not sure that a special use for retail bakeries should be required since most other retail bakeries are not similar to Dunkin Donuts. Ald. Brady stated that it is her opinion that the City should not regulate bakeries in the restaurant ordinance, but should look at the issue separately. She suggested that possibly the Committee could require special uses when uses such as Dunkin Donuts have more than one principle use (bakery and restaurant). Chairman koishak suggested that the Committee review regulation of bakeries through licensing. Ald. Drummer suggested that if the bakeries construct seats or provide service that they are a restaurant and not a bakery and therefore should be regulated as a restaurant. Ald. Warshaw stated that she feels that the Committee should be careful in what it calls special uses. She stated that the regulation of bakeries thru the special use process may not be justified. Aid. Bleveans stated that the issue of the Dunkin Donuts may not just be in his ward, but may be a problem in other wards in the future. Upon questioning from the Committee Ald. Bleveans stated that he has received one (1) complaint about traffic and has observed some litter generated by the Dunkin Donuts at Livingston and Green Bay. Ira Golan, Executive Director of the Evanston Chamber of Commerce was present and suggested review of page 3 of the subject licensing ordinance which regulates litter. Golan felt that the subject section would govern litter problems at Dunkin Donuts and other similar operations. Golan further stated that to handle the litter, particularly in the downtown, the City needs to place more garbage cans in needed locations. Ald. Warshaw stated that with ME P b D Committee Rinutes February 9, 1987 respect to Dunkin Donuts at Livingston and Green Say that the traffic generated by the subject use may be less than a gas station that was previously located at that site. Ald. Bleveans stated that he would withdraw his proposal but wishes to continue the discussion at the Committee level to explore regulations of uses, such as Dunkin Donuts and other multiple uses such as Convenient Stores. Ald. Brady stated that she would request a staff report summarizing this problem with proposals for various regulations. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee approve Ordinances 15-0-87 and 17 -0-87 regarding restaurant regulations. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council introduction of the subject ordinances (Ald. Bleveans absent). Docket 35-28-87. Ordinance 10-0-87. Comprehensive Sign Regulations. The Committee reviewed the subject ordinance which encompasses changes from the original draft ordinance that the City has reviewed for approximately two (2) years. Kathy Skobel of Sign Here and Ira Golan of the Chamber were present and submitted to the Committee on Friday, February b, 1987 several pages of comments with respect to the ordinance. Lee Brown of Teaks Associates was present and began a review of the various comments submitted by Skobel. After several minutes of review of the comments which Brown indicated were either expressing opinion in some instances or were resolved previously by Committee action and were reflected in the existing ordinance and in other areas of issues of policy decided by the Committee, Chairman Korahak directed that Golan and Skobel greet with the City staff prior to the next P & D Committee meeting, on February 23, 1987 to iron out the various differences. It was the consensus of the Committee to place this item on the February 23, 1987 P S D Committee agenda and also to introduce Ordinance 10-0-87 on February 9, 1987. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee will be February 23, 1987 at 7:00 p.m. Staff • obert T. itudd 39(11/1S) -5- u . ;6 0 MINUTES Planning and Development Committee February 23, 1987 Minutes of February 9. 2987. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of February 9, 1987. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes (Aldermen Juliur and Bleveans•absent). Communications January 1987 Monthly aehab Report. The Committee accepted the report without comment. Old Business Staff Report on Why Clubs and Lodmtes are special Uses. At the suggestion of Chairman Korshak the staff memorandum on this subject was held -over to the March 9, 1987 meeting. Docket i a-2C-87. ZBA 86-37-PD(R). Ordinance 23-0-87. re Planned Development for 1200 Forest Avenue. Ald. Brady reviewed the project and noted the extreme cooperation received from the developer. She additionally noted that in regard to condition #5 which obligates the developer to pave an adjacent alley that little discussion on the subject took place at the ZBA hearing, and this condition seems to have been added as an after thought. Ald. Drummer felt that it was not unreasonable to require the developer of a project of this size to pave an adjoining alley. Ald. Brady noted that the alley as dedicated is only 8' wide and to be improved should be widened thereby taking up valuable green space as well as slowing down the development of the project, and adding considerable cost. Ald. Warshaw noted the complete lack of neighborhood interest in the alley paving and repeated Ald. Brady's concerns regarding the loco of green space and the added expense. Ald. Warshaw further noted that the paving of the alley seemed to be a qualified special assessment project that could be shared by all adjoining property owners at a future date. Ald. Korshak noted that there were only two (2) very abort references to alley paving in a lengthy transcript and that the developer had no input in the discussion which Was held mainly among board members. He further stated his feeling that the P & D Minutes February 23, 1987 alley paving topic was handled in a totally improper manner by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Aid. Drummer noted that during the discussion by the Zoning Board of Appeals, counsel for the developer was present and did not object to the alley paving requirement. He further stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals in requiring paving was looking to the future and did not wish to leave an unpaved alley adjacent to this project. Aid. Drummer further commented on the neighborhood Impact a development of this size creates making pawing of the alley imperative. He also noted that by not requiring paving of the alley the Committee pay be setting a precedent for other developments of this size. Aid. Brady stated that the alley paving decision was a major dollar and time item as far as the developer was concerned and it seemed to have been decided with very little debate. Ald. Brady moved approval of Introduction of the ordinance with the removal of condition d5 which required alley paving. The motion was seconded by Ald. Warshaw. Committee voted 5-0 to approve introduction of the ordinance (Ald. Bleveans absent). Aid. Brady commended the developer for his cooperation in this long approval process and requested comments of the Plan Commission, the Zoning Board of Appeals on the new planned unit development ordinance. Aid. Korshak requested that in addition to the Plan Commission and the zoning Board of Appeals, the Preservation Commission forward comments on the the new Planned Unit Ordinance. Ald. Brady reviewed the length of time the approval process has taken and made a notion to recommend to City Council suspension of the rules and adoption of Ordinance 23-0-87. Notion was seconded by Aid. Juliar. Committee voted 5-0 to approval recommendation of suspension of the rules (Ald. Bleveans absent). Selection and Commission of a Sculpture for Installation at Congregational Park. Aid. Warshaw questioned why only one (1) alderman from the Ward was recommended for the project committee. She also questioned the $500.00 design fee noted in the memo as possibly being large enough for this project but may not cover expenses of a larger future project. Aid. Juliar stated his feeling that one (1) alderman being a member of the board is sufficient representation for the Council. Don Wirth, Director of Parks, Recreation g Forestry noted that the $500.00 mentioned in the memo is for this project only and would not apply to future projects. Motion by Aid. Drummer, seconded by Ald. Warshaw to approve the process as noted in Mr. Wirth memo dated January 29, 1987. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the motion. Docket 42-2C-87. Consider Approval of Plat of Consolidation for Property at S.W. Corner of Dodxe and Dempster for Banbury Development Corporation. Ald. Korshak reviewed the material submitted by staff and voiced his objection to adequate lack of notice of this consolidation and requested staff to reply to the Committee as to the plans for Arena Control use of the property Involved in the transfer with Banbury Development and also requested a letter -2- P & D Minutes February 23, 1987 from Banbury Development as to their use of the piece of property acquired from Arens Control. Ald. Bleveans noted that a plat of consolidation approval Is a ministerial act and that the plat should be approved. Ald Drummer noted that the information furnished to the Committee with regards to this item is Identical to the amount of information that has been submitted for past plat approval requests. It was the consensus of the Committee to hold this item over to the next regular meeting of the Committee on March 9, 1987. Docket •3-2C-87. Ordinance 22-0-87. Amendments to Title 4, Chapter 17 of the City Code re Site Plan Review. Ald. Warshaw reviewed the intent of the proposed Ordinance especially the provision that removes the March 15, 1987 sunset provision of the Site Plan Review Committee unless extended. She stated her opinion that the P & D Committee has not received information as to comments of persona or firms appearing before the Committee. She requested that a blind survey be taken of all persons who have appeared before the Committee in the last year and that the proposed ordinance be held until the completion of that survey. Ald. Dru mer noted that to his knowledge the Committee had not receivod any appeals from rulings of the Site Plan Review Committee, nor have in fact received any complaints from persons or firms who have appeared before the Committee. Ald. Drummer than wade a motion to approve the ordinance as presented, seconded by Aid. Brady. Ald. Warshaw stated her concern that any ordinance authorizing the operation of the Site Plan Review Committee that does not contain a sunset provision will lack the P & D Committee out of hearing any appeals or complaints in the future. Ald. Bleveans stated that parsons affected by the Ordinance and appearing before the Site Plan Review Committee should have the opportunity to comment by way of a blind survey. Ald. Brady suggested approval of the Ordinance by the Committee with a request to staff to provide blind survey forms to the P & D Committee from all persons or firms who appear before the Site Plan Review Committee for the next six (6) month period. Ald. Drummer agreed to that addition to his memo requiring blind surveys to be submitted to the P & D Committee for the next six (6) month period. Ald. Juliar stated that he felt that feed -back to the Committee is essential. Committee voted 6-0 to approve Ordinance 22-0-87 for introduction to City Council and to request staff to report back to the Committee regarding the result of blind surveys taken over the next six (6) month period. Docket 35-2B-87. Ordinance 10-0-87. Comprehensive Sixn Retulations. The Committee reviewed a memo dated February 17, 1987 from sign consultant, Teska Associates in regard to a meeting held between staff and Ira Golan, Executive Director of Chamber of Commerce and Cathy Skobel to settle questions remaining in regards to amendments to the ordinance. In reviewing the memo Ald. Korshak noted that all items of difference seemed to have been settled except for the allowed size for construction site signs. Ald Brady noted that the process of allows certain size construction signs as exei:.pt signs and requires permits to be issued for any sign exceeding thirty-two (32) square -3- P b D Minutes February 23, 1987 feet seemed to be satisfactory. Under this process it would be staff judgment to allow larger sites to erect larger signs. Ald. Drunimwr noted that the sizes noted in the ordinance seemed appropriate to the problem. Ald. Warshaw stated that staff should have the discretion to judge requests for permits for larger signs and in fact grant those permits if their'judgment deem the request proper. Ire Golan stated that he has a problem depending on staff Judgment in cases of this type. Cathy Skobel stated that construction signs should be in relation to the size of the property with the ordinance containing a formula to allow same. It was the consensus of the Committee that staff add an amendment to the ordinance containing a formula for calculating the allowed size of construction signs for the !larch 9, 1987 Committee meeting. Ald. Brady reviewed the ordinance section regarding appeals from decisions of the Sign Review and Appeals Board being able to be voted to the Planning L Development Committee who would bo the final authority. She stated her intent to attempt to amend the ordinance an the Council floor in order that the Sign Review and appeals Board would be the final authority without any further appeal. Sign contractor, Charles Zenn inquired of the Committee as to the illumination standards in the ordinance applying to exterior, noon type signs. Staff replied that their interpretation of the lighting standards is that those standards do not apply to exterior type neon signs. It was the consensus of the Committee to request Mr. Zenn to contact staff in regard to this inquiry and if any amendments were necessary to bring them to the attention of the Committee on March 9, 1987. It was the consensus of the Committee to hold adoption of this ordinance on the Council floor until ?Earth 9, 1987. Adi ourmment The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Next regular tweeting of the P b D Committee will be March 9, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: , Reed Carlson 33(1S/18) ME Minutes Planning & Development Committee Sitting as the Sign Review and Appeals Board March 9, 1987 - 7:30 P.H. Ald.-Present: S.'Brady,•B. Warshaw, J. Korshak,D. Dru mer and N - Juliu Ald. Absent: J. Bleveana Staff Present: R. Carlson. J. Aiello. R. Ahlberg, D. Rasmussen, E. Szymanski, C. Powers,' D. Carter, W. Morin, B. DiCanio and R. Rudd Presiding Official. J. Korshak Mobil Media Corporation - Mobil Gas Station on the S.W. Corner of Central and Central Par: Avenue. Representing Mobil Media was Mr. Stuart Shore. Mr. Shore reviewed with the Committee the request of his corporation to install a pole sign 20 ft. high and a sign whose area exceeds that set forth in the sign ordinance. The sign also as proposed is located within 20 ft. of two (2) driveways. Mr. Shore Indicated that his firm is seeking relief from all sections of the sign ordinance where in conflict. Mr. Shore provided to the Committee numerous photographs indicating where the proposed sign may be located and under what conditions a sign would be located if it met the conditions not forth in the City's sign ordinance. Mr. Shore also indicated that the business is currently in their possession having been purchased by the Mobil Corporation from Texaco. Ald. Nelson of the Ward was present and stated that he did not have a problem with the sign as proposed and the variation being requested. His only concern was that the hours of operation with respect to the lighting of the sign be limited to no more than what is current (7:00 A.M. to 12:00 midnight). Shore stated that be would agree to lighting the sign only during the current hours. Ald. Drummer indicated that he thinks that the Committee should grant the variations since that would be consistent with previous action by the P b D Committee sitting as the Sign Review and Appeals Board with respect to Northwestern Buick on Chicago Avenue. Ald. Drummer felt that the Committee needed to compromise with the applicant and suggested elimination of some other signs and to grant the variations for the oversized proposed sign. Chairman Korshak reviewed a memo from Dick Carter, Planning Director which stated that the proposed sign and variation request did not meet the standards as set forth in the sign ordinance nor was the proposal appropriate for the neighborhood shopping area in which it is located along Central Street. Ald. Brady stated that she concurred with the staff reasoning and felt that it would be inappropriate for the Sign Review and Appeals Board to grant this request since the P 6 D Committee, in review of the sign ordinance, made a significant policy decision early on in which the minutes P 6 D Committee/Sitting as the Sign Review and Appeals Board March 9, 1987 amortization clause was removed and the attrition provision was inserted in. the ordinance to address issues exactly like the proposal tonight. She felt that the ordinance was drafted to address problems such as this which would cause the elimination of the non -conforming signs rather than the proliferation of the same problem. Ald. Juliar stated that he felt that the business would not be hurt by a smaller, monument sign since the business was morn of a neighborhood nature. Ald. Drummer questioned Mr. Shore with respect to the cost of the new sign and removal of the existing. Mr. Shore indicated that the new sign would cost between $6,000. - $9,000., and that Mobil Corporation had no intention of utilizing the existing pole or sign standard. Shore indicated that the 16.000. - $9,000. sign would be a coat incurred regardless of the outcome of the variation standard. He indicated that the removal of the existing sign would only cost $500. Chairman Korshak reviewed with the Committee the variation standards as not forth in the sign ordinance and felt that in his opinion the applicant net numbers 3, 4 and 5. but did not meet standards 1, 2 and 6. Korshak reviewed with the Committee that, according to this ordinance as with issues heard before the Zoning Board of Appeals, the applicant was required to Meet all of the standards. Ald. Brady indicated that upon her review of the standards she concurs that the applicant did not meet the first standard. Ald. Warshaw asked Mr. Shore if he would consider placing the signage "over the pumps paralleling" Central Street. Shore indicated that the Mobil Corporation was trying to get away from gas station "clutter" and limit the signage to a large pole and a minimum amount of other signs located on the site. Shore also felt that signs located over the pump would not serve their intent and would not impact on the motoring public on the street. Ald. Korshak reminded the Committee that the petitioner once more would be required to meet all six standards and that he was still troubled with the petitioners' Inability to meet the aforementioned standards. Shore indicated, in an attempt to compromise with the Committee, that he would agree to tako down a "red" sign located on Central Street. Drummer indicated that he feels there is a unique hardship that was not caused by the applicant a and that the Committee should look favorably upon this request if the applicant was willing to compromise and reduce the height of the proposed sign, eliminate the "red" sign and provide an additional 5 ft. set back. Chairman Korshak conducted a straw poll with the Board which indicated that the Board would approvr on a 3-2 vote (voting aye: Aldermen Drummer, Jultar and Warshaw. Voting nay: Aldermen Brady and Korshak) on the compromise set forth by Ald. Drummer. -2- Kinutes P b D Committee/Sitting es the Sign . Review and Appeals Board March 9, 1987 After a discussion with the applicant the Comittee voted 3-2 to approve the variations conditioned upon the following: 1. The overall height of the proposed sign would be 15 ft. 2: The applicant would remove the "rod" sign Nast of the pumps. 3. Proposed 15 ft. high sign Would have a 7 ft. setback from the right-of-way. The Cosssittee voted 3-2 to approve this compromise and voted 3-2 that the applicant not the variation standards set forth in the sign ordinance. - Staff: /obb4ort T. Rudd 14(lb/18) -3- r • � MIliIIT65 Planning and Development Committee March 9, 1987 7:30 P.M. Ald...Priisentt � 'S. Brady, R. Warshaw, J. Korrahak, D."Drumsor and M:-,Juliar J. Bleveans R. Carlson, J. Aiello. R. Ahlberg, D. Rasmussen, B. Szymanski. C. Powers, D. Carter, Y. Morin';' B. DiCanio and R. Rudd Lee Brown, Tests Associates J. Xorshak Minutes of February 73. 1987 Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee approve .the minutes of the P & D Committee of February 23, 1987 as submitted. Committee voted 4-0 (Ald. Juliar absent) to approve the minutes. Communications ZBA public Notice for !larch 17, 1987. The Committee received without comment. Legal Opinion re Demolition Moratorium. The Committee received a legal opinion from the City's Legal Department with respect to a demolition moratorium. Ald. Brady gave a brief background as to why the legal opinion was forwarded to the Committee as a communication. No action was necessary by the Committee on this issue. Old Business Staff Report on Why Clubs and Lodges are Special Uses. Ald. Warshaw stated that she had requested this report since she felt that the Zoning Amendment Committee had not comprehensively defined "clubs and lodges" with a past zoning amendment. She stated that she expects in the future to make a reference to the Zoning Amendment Committee to more comprehensively define "clubs and lodges". Ald. Warshaw stated that she will prepare a response ror a future meeting for further discussion. Docket 42-2C-87. Consider Approval of 3rd Plat of Consolidation for Property at S.W. Corner of DodKe and Dempster for Banbury Development Corporation. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the subject plat of consolidation. Committee voted 4-0 (Ald. Juliar absent) to recommend City Council approval. minutes P & D Committee !larch 9, 1987 Ordinance 29-0-87. ZAC 86-3. Amendments to the Zoning Variation Standards. Chairman Korshak indicated to the audience and Committee that there would be no discussion with respect to the subject variation standard amendments at this meeting since the transcript from the ZBA and ZAC is quite lengthy. He stated that this matter would be rescheduled at a future meeting and the members from ZAC and ZBA present tonight (Thomas Stafford and William Whitney) and their respective committees being notified. Docket 46-3A-87. ZBA 86-45-SU(R). Ordinance 26-0-87. re Special Una for 2501 Central Street. Aid. Warshaw moved and Aid. Drummer seconded that the Committee approve the special use to permit observance of Israel Independence Day in McGaw Hall on Ray 3, 1987. Committee 4-0 (Ald. Juliar absent) to recommend to City Council approval of the special use. Reauest of Reba Place Church re Extension of a Special, Use -Loaves S Fishes Foods Co-op at 620 Madison Street. Aid. Warshaw moved and Aid. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council extension for the operation at the subject location for term of ownership by Reba Church. Committee 4-0 (Aid. Juliar absent) to recommend to City Council extension of the special use. Ordinance 32-0-87 re multi -Family Demolition Review Process. Aid. Brady moved and Aid. Drummer seconded to table Ordinance 32-0-87. Ald. Brady provided the Committee background with respect to the original reference from the P & D Committee to the Housing Commission to discuss the issue of a moratorium and multi -family demolition review ordinance. Aid. Brady explained that at the most recent Housing Commission meeting the Housing Commission discussed the issue of "linkage" and felt that the present draft of the ordinance provided an ultimatum in the form that the applicant could or could not demolish a building. Aid. Brady felt that by tabling thin matter with the P b D Committee and removing it from the agenda at this time would allow the Housing Commission to discuss this issue further with the thought to bring back the item to the P g D Committee in late May or early June. It was the consensus of the Committee to remove the item from the P b D Committee agenda until such time as the Housing Commission made further comments. Docket 35-2B-87. Ordinance 10-0-87. Comprehensive SiRn Regulations. Aid. Warshaw moved and Aid. Drummer seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council adoption of this previously introduced ordinance comprehensively amending the City of Evanston Sign Regulations. The ordinance before the Committee and City Council on March 9, 1987 contained a revision -2- hinutes P S D Committee March 9, 1987 with respect to construction signs par the direction of the P & D Committee at their mating of February 23, 2987. Ald. Brady indicated to the Committee that if the P 6 D Committee did not teaks an aswndmant with respect to the City Council having final review authority that she would on the Council floor at the lurch 9, 1987 meeting propose to amend page 23F and page 24C to remove any sections whereby the Sign Review and Appeal Board was not final autiority. The Committee discussed at length the pros and cons of having an elected body make the final determination if an aggrieved party manta to pursue recourse beyond an appointed, technical board. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the P b D Committee recommend to the City Council to delete the subject sections on pages 23 and 24. Committee voted 3-2 to recommend to City Council to amend ordinance 10-0-87 by deleting the subject sections. Voting aye: Aldermen Juliar, Drummer and Brady. Voting nay: Aldermen Warshaw and Korshak. Herrick Rose Garden Rehabilitation. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee approve the staff recommendation with respect to the rehabilitation planned for the Merrick Rose Garden. Committee voted 5-0 (no action necessary by the City Council). Ald. Drummer requested of Bill DiCanio, Director of Parks for the City of Evanston that s final cost figure be supplied to the Aldermen when available. DiCanio indicated that he would supply that figure when determined. &dJournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. will be March 23, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff •A?2 rla� Robert T. Rudd 32(1/3) The next meeting of the P & D Committee -3- Minutes of March 9. 1987 Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committea approve the minutes of the Planning 6 Development Committee meeting of March 9, 1987. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes as submitted (Ald. Bleveans absent). Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning g Development Committee sitting as the Sign Review and Appeals Board at the meeting of March 9, 2987. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes as submitted (Ald. Bleveans absent). Communications 86-43-7(F). Final Variation Decision re 2662 Orrinzton Avenue. The Committee received without comment. ZBA 86-44-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 1201 -13 Michirtan Avenue. The Committee received without comment. Memos from Ald. Xorshak, dated March 17. 1987. Aid. Norshak reviewed his memos dated March 17, 1987 to the Committee. The Committee agreed to hold a special meeting of the P 6 D Committee on Monday, April 6, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. to review variation standards. Chairman forshat stated that with respect to the zoning board case regarding 500 Dodge that this matter will be on the agenda for the Wednesday, April 15, 1987 P & D Committee meeting. Old Business None Minutes P & D Committee March 23, 1987 Now Business Docket 59-38-87. ZAC 86-7. Ordinance 39-0-87. Rezone Certain Properties in the 1100 Block of Oak Avenue. Chairman Korshak reviewed the ZAC recommendation to rezone various portions of property to an R3 Residential District classification. Ald. Brady questioned that the Zoning Amendment Committee appeared to be leaning toward rezoning to R2 but at the very end of the discussion settled on an R3 District. Bob Ahlberg, Zoning Planner was present and gave a background as to some thoughts of the Zoning Amendment Committee. Aid. Drummer questioned Chairman Korshak as to whether Aid. Raden was satisfied with the recommendation since it was her original roterence to ZAC to rezone the property to R1. Chairman Korshak stated that Aid. Wen was satisfied with the recommendation to R3. Ald. Brady moved and Aid. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council Ordinance 39-0-87 and the ZAC recommendation be approved. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the recommendation (Aldermen Bleveans absent). Docket S8-3B-87. Ordinance 30-0-87. ZBA 86-39-V(R) re Variation for 1213-17 Oak Avenue. Aid. Drummer moved and Aid. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the subject ordinance to grant a variation to permit a resubdivision into two lots, each improved with a residence. Ald. Warshaw questioned why the Zoning Board recommended eliminating a dwelling unit. Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning was present and stated that the Zoning Board's concern was that there was a lack of square footage to allow that dwelling unit. The Committee voted 4-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals' recommendation (Aid. Bleveans absent). Docket 57-38-87. ZBA 86-27-V(R), Ordinance 27-0-87. re Variation for 3101-OS Central Street. Aid. Bleveans moved and Aid. Drummer seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council to concur with the ZBA recommendation to grant variations from the permitted use and non -conforming building structure and use regulations of the zoning ordinance to permit retention of the non -conforming building and non -conforming use as a public garage, including body repair and painting. Chairman Korshak stated that he questioned Aid. Nelson as to whether the ZBA recommendation caused a problem. Korshak stated that Nelson informed him that there was no problem with the recommendation. Attorney James Murray for the applicant wac recognized and requested the Committee to amend condition d5 to incorporate the ownership to include the daughter and son-in-law of the applicant. Attorney Murray was directed to provide proper language to Aid. Bleveans who in turn would provide the language to City staff to incorporate in a clean copy of the ordinance for the next City Council meeting. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the ZBA recommendation. # -2- minutes P & D Committee March 23, 1987 Consider Reauest re Waiver of ZoninK Pass for Northwest Corner of Lake Street and Dewey Avenue. Chairman Korsbak reviewed the evidence submitted by the applicant indicating financial hardship and medical problems. Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee waive the various fees for zoning application and transcript costs. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the waiver of fees. Ordinance 29-0-87. ZAC 86-3, Amendments to the ZoninK Variation Standards. Cbairman Korshak reviewd with the Committee issues raised in his earlier mentioned memos of March 17, 1987. The Committee had a lengthy discussion regarding various approaches to addressing the zoning variation amendments in addition to comprehensive amendments to the zoning ordinanca. The Committee discussed saaw of the history behind the current zoning ordinance which is approximately twenty-seven (27) rears old. The Committee discussed weaknesses of the zoning ordinance; how the City of Evanston has changed in twenty-seven (27) years; its population, residential, and commercial make-up. The Committee also cited the fact that the zoning ordinance has been amended piece meal over this twenty-seven (27) year period and has developed internal conflicts. The Committee highlighted that most citizens and even attorneys, architects, planners, etc. have a difficult if not impossible time in tryin3 to understand the zoning ordinance. After this discussion the Committee directed staff to develop a memorandum for the Committee by June 1, 1967 highlighting the numerous difficulties and issues involved with the current zoning ordinance as a ground work for developing an RFP which would lead to the hiring of a consultant to develop a comprehensive amendment to the zoning ordinance. The Committee agreed to continue review of the variation standards since any _ comprehensive amendment would take a minimum of two (2) years to accomplish. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded to direct staff to prepare the aforementioned memorandum and to continue the discussion of the standards at the special meeting on April 6, 1987. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. The next special meeting of the P 6 D Committee is April 6, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Next regular meeting of the P 6 D Committee will be Wednesday, April 15,1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff ; Robert T. "Rv d 84(1/3) -3- " iiINUTBS Planning and Development Committee April. 5, 1987 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: S. Brady,.R. Warshaw, J.,Korshak; and.Mo Ja1fair Ald. Absent: J. Bleveaas and D. Drueswr StaftPresent: R. Carlson, S.-Eisoon, R. Ahlberg, D. Rasmussen. and . R: Rudd Presiding Otticial: J. Korshak minutes or March 23, 1987 Ald. Warshaw moved and Aid. Brady soconded.that the.Cosmmittee approve•.the minutes of March 23, 1907. Committee .voted 3-0 to approve 'the' miauto#' (Ald. Juliar absent). Old Business Ordinance 29-0-87. ZAC 86-31 Review of Variation Standards. Chairman Korshak reviewed with the Committee and members or the audience a brief background with respect to the proposal to amend the variation standards presently defined in the City of Evanston Zoning Ordinance. Chairman Korshak Indicated that the Committee had at an earlier meeting proposed that a comprehensive amendment to the zoning ordinance be undertaken. However, the Comittee felt that since the comprehensive amendment process would take approximately two (2) years, the Committee at this time should address the variation standards. Korshak reviewed with the Committee communications from himself to Committee members and also a communication relating John Young's views on variation standards. Chairman Korshak proceeded to review with the Committee and audience current procedures regarding variation requests. Korahak explained that the P & D Committee, and then the City Council, act as an "appeals court' to provide relief if deemed necesaary from decisions of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Korshak reviewed with the Committee a memo he developed after meeting with former Alderman and ZBA Chairman, Paul Boyer. Korshak explained in his memo that Boyer suggested possibly eliminating use variations entirely and adopting a technique similar to "time extension". Ald. Juliar stated that the City currently was utilizing both time extensions and use variations. It was indicated that the zoning ordinance does currently allow both techniques. Ald. Juliar cited that current problems often have evolved around the amortization provisions and the termination sections of the zoning ordinance particularly with respect to Yesterdays, 500 Dodge and 319 Dempster. Ald. Brady stated that she is in preliminary agreement with the proposal submitted by ZAC and ZBA. She stated that she has not felt that the current standards are workable. Ald. Warshaw stated that she would like to discuss the different types of properties when variation standards are applied and if P 6 D Committee - Minutes April 6, 1987 possible to keep single family property separate from the variation standards applied to multi -family, commercial, etc. Aid. Warshaw also questioned the Committee as to how ankh the Committee wants to do at this point since the Committee is considering a complete overall of the zoning ordinance. Aid. Brady fait that ZAC/ZBA transcripts brought out very good discussion and that the decision was a consensus that did not express the unanimity of all members of those bodies. Dave Rasmussen. Assistant Director of Zoning, responded to a question from Chairman Rorshak stating that the ZDA feels that the problems that they have . encountered recently with the standards requires them to bend the rules and have not allowed them to properly apply the standards. Rasmussen indicated that the ZBA feels the cases that are beard can be placed into two (Z) categories: use and bulb. Rasmussen stated that the committee often questioned in making decisions whether anybody is harmed by the variation request if it would be granted. He further stated that ZBA thinks that possibly the standards can be coupled with respect to bulk and use variations. The ZBA foals that a literal application would result in few variations. Bob Ahlberg, Zoning Planner and staff person to ZAC, agreed with Rasmussen. Ahlberg stated that ZAC also discussed different standards for single family, but decided that possibly income producing properties would be a better category. Rudd reviewed with the Committee some of the problems with ramoving use variations entirely from the current ordinance. Problems cited were the possible prohibition of uses throughout the City due to the antiquated terminology often found in the list of uses. It was recommended that the Committee not eliminate the mechanism from the currant ordinance but could review with a consultant the elimination of use variations in a new ordinance. Ald. Juliar stated that he would be troubled with the elimination of use variations from the current ordinance. Ald. Warshaw stated that upon reading forshak's memo relating his discussion with Paul Boyer that it may not be appropriate to eliminate use variations and utilize "time extensions" or "spot zoning" since this could create zoning districts that are in conflict with the comprehensive land -use plan. Rasmussen indicated that time extensions create a problems in that they just postpone decisions. He further stated that a plus for a use variation is that such a technique allows the City to apply conditions to the request. Ald. Warshaw stated that she agrees that the time extension theory sounds reasonable but that the use variation allows more flexibility. Chairman forshak stated that use variations may be needed to maintain the integrity of the ordinance, preserve tradition, and provide flexibility. Aid. Brady stated that it may be ok to eliminate use variations in a new ordinance but would be concerned with the rigidity that would be imposed in the current ordinance if such a technique was removed. -2- P i D Committee - Minutes April 6, 1987 Ald. Warshaw stated that one purpose of the ordinance is to have compatible uses in the City. She stated that things change pear time and some past decisions may not be the correct decisions today. She further stated that many of the problem viewed twenty-seven (27) years ago when the ordinance was adopted have disappeared through attrition. Ald. Brady stated that upon review of the ZAC transcript she liked the idea of the history of the vLriation, spacial use information being provided by the staff covering the subject areas. Chairman forshak questioned the Committee as to what instances would Aldermen take into account neighbors' concerns versus what the zoning ordinance states. The Committee discussed at length the pros and cons of how each amber reviews neighbors' concerns with respect to concerns of the City as a whole. Ald. Brady stated that she agrees with the proposed special use standards being applied to use variations. She stated that since a comprehensive amendsent would take approximately two (2) years there is no reason not to wake some changes now to facilitate the use of the zoning ordinance in the interim period. Ald. Warshaw suggested that when a consultant is hired that it be required that the consultant meet with various members of ZAC and ZBA to gain from their expertise. Chairman Xorshak reviewed the memo expressing Young's concerns with the lack or findings of fact in the Zoning Amendment Committee report in addition to the vagueness and generalities expressed by ZAC. Ahlberg stated that ZAC felt that a more concise report than usual, in addition to the transcripts, the report from ZBA and the reference endorsed by the City Council, was quite adequate and provided all of the information and the reasons (findings of fact) that were required by the zoning ordinance. Ald. Brady stated that she felt that the ZAC's recommendations were findings of fact. Doreen Anderson, a representative of Sherman Gardens and several members of that complex were present. Anderson stated that she and other members are concerned with the importance of the findings of fact and also urges the P A D Committee to proceed very cautiously when waking any changes to the variation standards. She stated that she would not want the City to jeopardize the Yesterday's Restaurant case. Ald. Warshaw stated that it was not the Intention of the P b D Committee or ZAC/ZBA to "weaken" the standards. Rather It was in an attempt to make them applicable and realistic. Rasmussen stated that ZBA felt that the variation standards arose from numerous court cases over a lengthy period of time throughout the country. Rasmussen stated that ZBA often questioned why the standards should be applied in all cases since they were developed as & result of totally unrelated cases. ZBA felt that this often causes them to twist the standards in an attempt to apply them to each case. Ahlberg stated that ZAC probably viewed the recommendations as more stringent and did not attempt to weaken the standards. Ald. Brady stated that she liked the strength of the need for a "preponderance of evidence" contained in the recommendation. -3- P & D Committee - Minutes ' April 6, 1987 In summary, Chairman Korshak felt that the Comittee, in their attempt to amend the variation standards, was striving for clarity, sufficient specificity for all to understand the ordinance. The Committee agreed to continue this discussion at a later date and Ald. Korshak would attempt to met with staff to develop a structure for further discussion. 91(8/11) -4- 4 MINUTES Planning and Development Committee April 15, 1987 7:30•P.If. Minutes of April 6, 1987 Ald. Jultar moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the special meeting of the Planning & Development Committee on April 6, 1987. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes as submitted. Communications ZBA 86-47-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 2306 RidxewaY Avenue. The Committee accepted without comment. 1100 Forest Planned Unit Development PUD) Minor Changes. The Chairman reviewed a memo from Joel Asprooth, City Manager, Planning Director, Dick Carter and Preservation Coordinator, Gwen Sommers-Yant regarding minor changes to the planned unit development at 1100 Forest (Cove School). Ald. Brady stated that she concurred with the changes made. She further stated that she was impressed with the PUD process as it pertained to this particular project. It was the consensus of the Committee to concur With the minor changes contained in the aforementioned memo. Old Business None New Business Docket 86-4A-87. ZBA 86-34-V(R). re Variation for 500 Dodge Avenue. Chairman Korshak requested the Committee to hold this item over until Ald. Warshaw could be present for the discussion. Committee agreed to hold this matter until further notice pending the availability of Ald. Warshaw. P & D Committee - Minutes April 15, 1987 Docket 87-4A-87. ZBA 86-48-SU(R), Ordinance 40-0-87, re Special Hospital Use for 2650 Ridge Avenue. Chairman Korshak reviewed the ZBA recommendation to grant a special hospital use to permit the construction of two (2) new buildings and a parking area. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Juliar seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the special use. Ald. Bleveans praised the Evanston Hospital on the open process and thorough disclosure of plans and sharing of information with the neighborhood. Ald. Bleveans further noted that not a single objector was present at the ZBA hearing. The Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to the City Council approval of the special hospital use and Introduction of Ordinance 40-0-87. Definition of Family and Occupancy of Dwelling Units. Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning was present and reviewed with the committee various scenarios and their applicability to the zoning ordinance definition of family and occupancy of dwelling units. It was a consensus of the Committee to make a reference to the Zoning Amendment Committee per the basic outline contained in a memo forwarded to the P S D Committee from Dave Rasmussen dated March 23, 1987. Ald. Bleveans felt that the reference should be limited to "attached and detached single family dwelling units" since the intent was to address the "large homes" in the City of Evanston and not the multi family units. Ald. Juliar also wanted the reference to be specific enough to not reopen the issue regarding rooming houses. Staff indicated that a draft of the reference would be developed and forwarded under "communications" to the P & D Committee for their review. Ald. Brady recommended that the conditions as proposed by staff contained on page 4 of the memo should be considered by ZAC as the frame work for the discussion. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Next regular meeting of the P & D Committee will be Monday, April 27, 1987 at 7:30 p.m.. scarf• �T-?':eAe obert 91(7/8) -2- 'Aid. Present: Aid. Absent: Staff Present• MINUTES Planning and Development Committee April 27, 1987 7:00 P.M. S.'' Brady, R. Warshaw, ' J..Blevesns' and D. Drummer. J. Korshak and M. Juliac R. Carlson, C. Powers, D. W1rth',`.G."Sommers-Want, R. Ahlbeeg, D. Rasmussen, R.'Szymanski and R. Rudd Presiding Official: J.' Bleveans Minutes of April 15. 1987 41d. Brady moved and Aid. Drummer seconded that the Committee approve the: minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of April 15,,1987. Committee voted +-0 to approve the minutes as submitted. Communications March 1987 Konthly Rehab Report. The Committee received the Rehab report without comment. Definition of Family and Occupancy of Dwelling Units. Ald. Warshaw suggested that the Committee review the reference before them and amend by substituting the words "two persons" instead of the phrase "one person, his or her spouse". Due to the length of the agenda and the short meeting time the Committee agreed to hold this matter over to the May 4, 1987 P & D Committee meeting. Old Business Ordinance 29-0-87. ZAC 86-3. Review of Variation Standards. Chairman Bleveans recommended that the Committee hold this matter over to the May ♦, 1987 meeting to allow an indepth discussion and also to take into consideration the two (2) new Aldermen (Rudy and Morton) that will be members of the P & D Committee. The Committee concurred and recommended that this item be held to Hay 4, 1987. Now Business The Avenue of the Righteous Don Wirth, Director of Parks, Recreation & Forestry was present as were representatives of the Avenue of the Righteous. Aid. Brady suggested that in inscription #3 that the phrase "this area" be deleted since it was unclear as to specifically what area was referred to. Representatives of the Avenue of the Righteous concurred and indicated that the phrase would be deleted. Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the P & D Committee approve the inscriptions as amended and that there would be no need for the Avenue of the Righteous representatives to return to the P & D Committee for review of the plaques. Committee voted 4-0. Minutes P & D Committee April 27, 1987 Docket 98-4B-87t Plat of Consolidation 1701-47 Chicago Avenue. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Drummr seconded that the Committee approve the plat of consolidation of the City owned property proposed for the parking garage and housing development at Chicago and Church. Committee voted 4-0. Docket 99-4B-87. Consider Approval of Zera Third Plat of Subdivision for Property North of Oakton Street and East of the North Shore Channel. Ald. Warshaw questioned staff as to what uses mould be allowed in the subdivision and what the developer (Phil Zera) proposed to do. Staff indicated that the uses would be of a manufacturing nature and the purpose of the subdivision was to allow the developer to sell-off individual parcels. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the subject plat of subdivision. Committee voted 4-0 to approve. Docket 100-4B-87, Ordinance 49-0-87, Amending City Code re Evanston Landmarks. Mary McWilliam, Chairman of the Preservation Commission, was present and provided the P & D Committee some recent highlights of the Preservation Commission. MCWilliam indicated that the success of the Wilson estate (Cove School) planned unit development in addition to the Planned Unit Development Ordinance were highlights of the Preservation Commission this past year. McWilliam also indicated that the Preservation Commission has now completed the survey of the City of Evanston Landmarks and that only a few landmarks would remain to be placed on the list. NeWilliam indicated that May 10 thru Kay 16 would be preservation week and invited the P & D Committee members to participate. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the P & D Committee recommend to City Council approval of the additional Evanston landmarks. Committee voted 4-0 to approve. Reference to TAC re Transitional Housing. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the reference from the Mayor's Special Housing Committee to the P & D Committee be forwarded to Zoning Amendment Committee for hearing. The P & L Committee stated that assigning a priority to this reference Would be made at the Nay 4, 1987 P & D meeting. Zoning Amendment Committee Triennial Review. Chairman Dave Mann and member Dr. Thomas Stafford of the Zoning Amendment Committee were present to answer questions of the P & D Committee. Chairman Mann indicated that Zoning Amendment Committee felt strongly that a comprehensive zoning amendment was necessary due to the antiquated nature of the current zoning ordinance. Mann indicated that the piece -meal amendments over the past two and one-half decades have created unforeseen problems and made an ordinance that is very difficult to understand. Members of the P & D Committee indicated that the committee has somewhat committed to the development of a new ordinance in the near future. Mann indicated that he sees ZAC functioning as a sounding board and developing recommendations to the -2- Minutes P & D Committee April 27, 1987 P & D Comittee. He indicated that in some instances ZAC feels they are at a disadvantage since certain constituencies do not attend the Zoning Amendment Committee meetings and thus do not participate in the discussion but instead appear before the P & D Committee and criticize the ZAC findings. Mann urge that the P & D Committee attempt to curtail new evidence before it when those parties did not participate before ZAC and did not provide ZAC with the opportunity to hear their comments. A particular concern was the expected input before the P & D Committee during discussion of the recently completed report regarding variation standards from ZAC. Members of the P & D Committee Indicated that for the most part new evidence has not been heard at the P & D Committee though there have been occasions where it has. Ald Brady suggested to ZAC that it would be helpful to P & D Committee members that if at the end of each meeting the Chairman of ZAC would attempt to summarized the accomplishments of the committee that night. Chairman Mann concurred and felt that that was a sound idea. Ald. Brady also stated that she feels that the forms and questions contained in the triennial review procedures are not necessarily applicable to the function of ZAC. She suggested that ZAC during the next triennial review develop their own questions that would be more attuned to their purpose. The Committee voted +-0 to forward the triennial review on to the Committee on Committees and recommend the continued existence of the Zoning Amendment Committee. Zoninz Board of Appeals Triennial Review. Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the P & D Committee recommend to the Committee on Committees continuation of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ald. Brady stated that she likes the idea to meet witty the Zoning Board of Appeals annually. It was the consensus of the Committee that the Zoning Board of Appeals has served a needed purpose and should be continued. Committee voted 4-0 to recommend continuation of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ald. Brady directed that the minutes reflect that the Committee will miss the Input of Aldermen Drummer and Juliar who are leaving the P & D Committee and transferring to other standing committees. It was the consensus of the Committee that the two Aldermen have made significant input and will be missed. Ald. Drummer stated that he regrets leaving the P & D Committee and has enjoyed the past few years but looks forward to his term on the Human Services Committee. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Next regular meeting of the P & D Committee will be Kay 4, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff � •���G�' 049 'f. alu 84(11/13) -3- MINUTES Planning -and -Development Committee May 4, 1987 7:30 P.K. , Ald. Present: S: Brady, R.lWarahaw, J..Bleveans, L. Morton and. 'J. , Rudp Ald. Absent: J.- Korshak -+ Staff Present: R..Ahlberg, E. Sxymanskl,• D. 'Rasmussen 'and R:.Rvdd Presiding official: J.'Bleveans Minutes of April 27. 1987. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of April 27' 190 . Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes as submitted (Ald. Morton absent). Communications Revised Listing of Pendint References to ZAC. Upon review of the list of pending references Ald. Brady questioned when ZAC would be completed with the parking reference. Bob Ahlberg, Zoning Planner Indicated that it was possible that the Committee could complete this reference in two (2) or three (3) meetings (late June or early July). At that time it was felt that ZAC could begin hearings on transitional housing. Aid. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee refer to ZAC the reference on transitional housing and amend the priority list to make transitional housing number 2. Committee voted 5-0. Ald. Rudy requested that staff provide the Committee with a more detailed description of the references. Old Business Ordinance 29-0-87. ZAC 86-3. Review of Variation Standards. Chairman Bleveans reviewed a letter from a representative of Sherman Gardens who indicated that she would be out of town until May 17, 1987 and requested that the P & D Committee not take any final action prior to her return. The Committee agreed that the matter would not be resolved at the May 4 meeting and would most likely continue for at least one more meeting. Ald. Brady began the discussion of the suggested variation standards revisions by providing some background. Chairman Bleveans reviewed the ZAC proposal and also reviewed with other Committee members numerous reports submitted over the past several months to the Committee regarding this issue. Staff indicated that copies of all memos and reports would be provided to the new Aldermen (Horton and Rudy) on the P & D Committee. P & D Committee Minutes May 4, 1987 Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning explained the variation standards and what constituted a variation request. Rasmussen highlighted that if a request fails any particular standard, the request must be denied. Chairman Bleveans indicated that in his view a variation is a "modification" of the zoning ordinance based on a particular, narrow request. He indicated that he views it as a "rifle shot change" to the zoning ordinance versus a comprehensive amendment to the text that would apply citywide. Ald. Bleveans went on to explain some past variation cases and conditions that the P & D Committee and City Council has placed on the request. Ald. Brady reviewed with the Committee some past problems with use variations and explained some of the subtle differences between special use requests and use variation requests. Ald. Brady reviewed with the Committee the ZAC report which attempts to apply certain use standards to use variations since it is felt that they are more appropriate. At the request of the Committee, Rasmussen explained the difference between use variations and bulk variations. Ald. Morton questioned the various procedures in obtaining variations or other zoning relief. Chairman Bleveans explained a typical case and the procedure for hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ahlberg explained to the Committee the difference between ZBA and ZAC and described the functions of ZAC. John Young, a member of the audience, was present and indicated his view of what an amendment to the zoning text constituted and what the variation process is. Dr. Thomas Stafford. ZAC member was present and indicated that a bad variation could have ramification citywide since it could elevate certain property to a point where all other properties use that as a measuring stick. He further stated that ZAC attempts to take into account not only the concerns of neighbors and neighboring property but also the City as a whole keeping in mind what precedent setting action may take place. He stated that the ZAC report attempted to create a separate course for use variation versus normal variations (bulk). The Committee reviewed further the zoning map and the general zoning process citing various examples of special uses, variations and use variations. Chairman Bleveans indicated that the Committee has somewhat leaned in favor of new zoning ordinance and informed the new members of the Committee that it is anticipated that a new ordinance can be undertaken in the near future. Definition of Family and Occupancy of Dwelling Units. Ald. Warshaw explained that her original request was due to changes in the family structure. She stated that she has reviewed the staff proposal for a reference to ZAC and finds it acceptable. Ald. Horton questioned how the City can defined family and why it defined family as it does. Committee members explained that the City has the authority to define family and that the current definition is based on numerous hearings over the years. Ald. Brady -2- P & D Committee Minutes may 4, 1987 indicated that though the Committee has been discussing changing only a small part of the definition of occupancy of dwelling units, that she has already received three (3) phone calls expressing concern that the City would be liberalizing this section of the ordinance. She explained that the proposal provides safeguards and is not a form of liberalizing the zoning ordinance but rather to account for realistic situations. Former Ald. A. Weems was present and questioned briefly exactly what the Committee was attempting to do. The Committee indicated that a reference is being proposed to ZAC to allow for two (2) unmarried single people, and their children, to reside in a single family detached or attached home. It was emphasized that the amendment is not one to the definition of family but rather to the definition of occupancy of dwelling units. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee refer the reference to ZAC. Committee voted 5-0 to make the reference. Upon reviewing the references, the Committee indicated that this new reference should be placed as number 5. Committee voted 5-0. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is May 18, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: 1116t,f-F Robert T. Rudd 3A(11/13) -3- Ald. Present: . Ald. Absent: MINUTES Planning and Development Committee May 18, 1987 7:30 P.M. S. Brady, R.,Warshaw, J. Bleveans, L. Carton and J. Rudy J. Korshak Staff Present: R. Carlson, D. Carter, R. Ahlberg, D. Rasmussen,. . E. Szymanski,. and R. Rudd Presiding Official: J. Bleveans Minutes of May •. 1987. : Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Morton seconded that the Committee approve.tho." minutes of the ;Tanning & Development Committee of Kay 4, 2987. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes as submitted. Cam- nications April 3.987 Monthly Rehab Report In response to a question from Ald. Morton, Ald. Brady explained the numerous changes that have taken place regarding the City's Housing Rehabilitation Guidelines since the inception of the program in the mid 1970's. Ald. Brady explained that a subcommittee of the Housing Commission is currently reviewing the Guidelines for additional changes that Will allow more flexibility. Docket 110-5B -87. Church/Chicago Project re Waiver of Fees. Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of zoning was present and explained that since the City was the property owner and a co -applicant would be required to pay the subject fee to itself. It was recommended that this fee be waived. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the P & D Committee recommend to City Council waiver of $1,320 zoning variation filing fee plus transcript cost. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend approval of waiver. Docket 109-SB-87. Consider Approval of Plat of Subdivision for Property at 1213-1217 Oak Avenue. Ald. Warshaw moved and Aid. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the plat of subdivision. Ald. Warshaw indicated that the Planning & Development Committee previously granted variation for the subject parcel. Upon a question from Chairman Bleveans regarding any concerns of ward aldermen, Ald. Warshaw stated that she felt that there were no problems with the proposed subdivision. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the subject plat of subdivision. Old Business Ordinance 29-0-87. ZAC 86-3. Review of Variation Standards. A discussion ensued with the Committee regarding how to proceed with the review of variation standards. The Committee discussed possibly conducting a special meeting and developing an outline to follow. Ald. Morton suggested P & D Minutes May 18, 1987 that language contained in variation standards be simplified so that the layman could easily understand. In summary, staff was directed to prepare a proposed outline to structure the discussion of variation of standards and will submit the outline to the Committee at the dune 8, 1987 meeting. With respect to the variations for 500 Dodge Avenue which is currently on the City Council agenda and also requires discussion at the P & D Committee, the Committee scheduled this matter for the June 22, 1987, P & D Committee meeting. Docket 108-58-87. Fleetwood-Jourdain Community Center, 1655 Poster Street - ZoninR Exemption. Don Wirth, Director of Parks, Forestry and Recreation was present and explained the reason for the zoning exemption request. Wirth reviewed a memo dated May 7. 1987 to the P & D Committee which detailed the proposal. The plan is to create five (5) parking spaces on the circle drive. The five (5) spaces lie within the 27 ft. required front Yard thus requiring a zoning exemption. Wirth explained that not only would the required screening be in place but additional screening would be added to the site. Section 6-4-5(B) of the Zoning Ordinance allows any governmental function owned or operated by the City to request an exemption from underlying zoning requirements. The exemptions are allowed when the proposed changes are necessary for the provision of desired City services and when action have been taken to minimize the adverse impact of the non-compliance on surrounding properties. The exemption is subject to approval by the City Manager, P & D Committee and the City Council. Upon review of the plan the Committee felt that the requirements for exemption were met. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether the amount of landscaping would create a hazard for children playing in the area adjacent to the driveway and street. Wirth stated that all attempts were made to take the pedestrian traffic into account and expects that the design will not create a hazard. Chairman Bleveans questioned whether there were any neighborhood problems with the plan. Ald. Morton indicated that several neighborhood meetings were held and no apparent dissatisfaction was cited regarding the subject plan. Ald. Norton moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the zoning exemption. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend approval. Plan Commission Triennial Review. Phil Peters, Chairman of the Plan Commission was present to answer questions from the P & D Committee. Ald. Warshaw congratulated the Plan Commission on its work and in particular on its completion of the comprehensive plan. Aid. Brady questioned Peters regarding the Plan Commission feeling about more references from the P & 0 Committee. Peters stated that the Plan Commission will give full attention to any referrals forwarded by the P & D Committee. Ald. Morton stated that she has reviewed the Comprehensive Plan and finds that -2- P & D Minutes Kay 18, 1987 objections stated by opponents of the Research Park are not founded on facts in the Comprehensive Plan as it is often stated. She questioned the Committee and members of the Plan Commission as to how the information on the Comprehensive Plan could be disseminated to the citizenry. Chairman Bleveans suggested that possibly sections of the Plan could an a regular basis be part of the City of Evanston Highlights Newsletter. Ald. Morton questioned the Plan Commission as to whether they have given thought to developing in the Comprehensive Plan a section on 'Residential Parking Only". Ald. Rudy, a member of the Parking Committee stated that some discussion did take place in the triennial review and that the Parking Co=ittee will review that issue. Ald. Warshaw stated that regarding parking some discussion should take plan pertaining to limiting truck parking. She felt that there needs'to be policy discussion on this matter. She stated that the problem has increased since the City of Evanston does not have records that are on a street -by -street basis regarding parking regulations. Chairman Peters indicated that in the future the Plan Commission wants to meet with various boards and commissions to share their insights and concerns. Ald. Brady stated that last week members of the Housing Commission met with the Plan Commission and found it very helpful and productive. In response to a question from the Committee, Chairman Peters indicated that prior to this revision the last revision of the Comprehensive Plan was over ten (10) years ago.. He felt that every five (5) years was probably beat to review the plan. Ald. Morton suggested that possibly after the 1990 census the Plan Commission could start review of the Plan. Peters stated that by 1991 or 1992 the results of the 1990 census would be available and the Plan Commission could undertake a revision. Peters further stated that revising a Comprehensive Plan totally dominates the limited staff time throughout the revision process. It was the consensus of the Committee that efforts should be made by the Plan Commission to review the Comprehensive Plan in five (5) years and if necessary resources (personnel) should be allocated by the City Council to undertake such revision. Chairman Bleveans suggested that at their leisure, Plan Commission members should return at a future date to discuss the three (3) points contained in the May 4, 1987, Triennial Review memorandum. Ald. Brady requested that periodically the Plan Commission submit brief memos to the P & D Committee updating them on their activity. Chairman Peters felt that was a good idea and will supply those memos. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the P & D Committee approve continuance of the Plan Commission and forward this recommendation on to the Rule Committee. Committee voted 5-0. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P 6 D Committee will be June 8, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. 1 �1 S t a f f : 4 � 7 -1 -� o erC ud 34(17/19) -3- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee June 8, 1987 7:30 P.K. Ald.� Present:''.-. S:''Brady,•R. Warshaw, J._ Xorsbak °J.,Bleveans, L..Norton and J. Rudy' Ald. Absent: None Staff Present: R: Carlson, J. Aiello,.R. Ablber6, S.- Sisesuii, D. Carter, D. Rasmussen, and -A. Rudd Presiding Officials- J.'Bleveans Minutes of Ray 18. 1987. Ald. Brady sowed and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee of May 18, 1987. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the Minutes as submitted. Communications ZBA Public Notice for June 16. 1987. The Committee received the Zoning Board of Appeals public notice for June 16, 1987 meeting without comment. ZBA 87-1-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 112 • Sheridan Road. The Committee received the final variation decision for 1124 Sheridan Road without comment. New Business Docket 128-6A-87. Plat of 6asoma t for former Cove School Property at 1100 Forest Avenue. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Morton seconded that the Committee approve the subject plat of easement. Ald. Rudy requested that in the future the Committee be supplied with a larger scaled plat to make it easier to read. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the plat of easement to the City Council. Docket 129-6A-87. Plat of Subdivision for former Cove School Property at 1100 Forest Avenue. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Morton seconded that the Committee approve the subject plat of subdivision as submitted. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the plat of subdivision to the City Council. Docket 127-6A-87. Request of Biblewav Church for Tent Permit at 1813 Dodge. Ald. Morton moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the subject tent permit. Ald. Morton questioned whether the Church agreed with the staff proposed 9:00 p.m. curfew. flood Carlson, Director of Building & Zoning was present and stated that he had spoken with representatives of the Church who have agreed to the curfew. Ald. Warshaw P g D Minutes June 8, 1987 questioned whether the Church had proper safety and liability insurance. Carlson indicated that insurance is up to the Church but that companies that rent tents are required to have fire proof tents. Commmittee voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the tent permit. Docket 126-6A-87. Consider Approval of Tent Permit for Evanston Hospital, 2650 RidRe. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Morton seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the requested tent permit for a Children's health Fair. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend approval. Dockot 125-6b-87. Request of Sephardic ConKregation. 1819 Howard Street for Waiver of BuildinK Permit Fees. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee concur with the staff recommendation not to waive the building fees. Ald. Brady stated that she agrees with the recommendation and feels that the building fee is a small portion of overall cost and goes toward paying a service provided by the City. Ald. Warshaw stated that she did not feel that an extreme hardship has been demonstrated in this case and is concerned that if the building fee is waived for this not -for -profit organization others will make similar requests. Committee voted 6-0 to concur with the staff recommendation not to naive the building fees. Docket 130-6A-87, ZB.k 86-42-SU(R). Ordinance 55-0-87. re Special Use for 843 Pad o Avenue. Representatives of the applicant for Fun In The Bun were present to respond to questions from the Committee. Ald. Warshaw questioned the hours of the existing 7-81even store. Mr. Liss, the developer, indicated that the 7-91evon was open 24 hours a day. The Committee discussed with Mr. Liss the proposed hours of operation for the restaurant. After the discussion Mr. Liss and his attorney, Mr. Steve Bernstein, agreed to limit the hours of operation Monday through Saturday from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., except during the summmer months (June, July, August and September) which would be limited to 11:00 p.m. Sunday operation would be limited from 12:00 noon to 3:00 p.m. Ald. Brady recommended that the Committee limit the restaurant to the current applicant. Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning advised the Committee that in the past the Legal Department has cautioned against limiting special uses to a specific operator, but rather recommended that limitation be more generic in nature. Ald. Rudy questioned the applicant as to whether it was Mr. Liss' intent to obtain a liquor license! Liss stated that there was no intodtion to request a liquor license. Ald. Rudy suggested that the Committee modify the proposed special use ordinance and hold the owner responsible for establishing an odor removal system that would eliminate all odors. Attorney Bernstein stated that the owners are installing a device (sand trap) to address the odor issue. Ald. Brady questioned Ald. Rudy as to whether his -2- P 6 D Minutes June 8, 1987 intent was to eliminate 100% of the odors. Ald. Rudy stated that he believes that it is possible to remove those odors. The Committee directed the applicant to meet with staff to develop proper wording that would address the goal of removing odors from the air so as not to infringe upon the adjacent residential neighborhood. Ald. Rudy recommended that the Committee condition the special use that no liquor license would be allowed. Chairman Blevesns stated that he felt uneasy in conditioning the special use for prohibiting a liquor license Since the P b D Committee is not the appropriate committee for either granting or denying a liquor license. Chairman B1e►eans called for a vote of the Committee as to whether to place a condition on a special use that would prohibit a liquor license. Committee voted 5-1 (Ald. Rudy) not to place a condition on the special use prohibiting a liquor license, but rather to leave that issue up to the Liquor Control Commission and the City Council. Ald. Brady stated that upon her review of the transcript the ZBA did not require the developer to construct a fence in the rear of the property adjacent to the alley. She also noted that the ZBA did not explicitly relieve the developer from meeting this aspect of the zoning ordinance. Ald. Korshak recommended that the issue be clarified and that a condition of the special use be added that would relieve the developer from constructing the subject fence since this could create hazardous situation. It was the consensus of the Committoe to add that condition to the special use ordinance. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council introduction of Ordinance 55-0-87 as amended. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council. A revised Ordinance will be submitted to the P g D Comittee and City Council for the June 22, 1987 meeting. Amplification of Earlier Reference to ZAC and Commercial District Report by Plan Commission. Planning Director, Dick Carter and members of the Plan Commission were present to provide an amplification on an earlier reference to ZAC regarding commercial district rezonings. After a brief slide presentation Ald. Brady requested that the matter be held over to the June 22, 1987 P b D Committee meeting to allow her to discuss the report and issues with fellow Third Yard Alderman Davis. It was the consensus of the Committee to hold the matter over to the next regular meeting of the P 5 D Committee. Staff Report on Comprehensive Amendment to the Zoning ordinance. The Committee reviewed a memo from the Site Plan Review Committee dated May 28, 1987. After a discussion of certain aspects of the memo and detailed deficiencies of the current zoning ordinance the Committee directed staff to prepare for P b D Committee review an RFP soliciting bids from consultants to develop a now zoning ordinance for the City of Evanston. Chairman Bleveans -3- Y P & D minutes June 8, 1987 indicated that he would report to the City Council at the meeting of June 8, 1987 the recommendation of the P & D Committee and also that City Council should expect an RIP for a new zoning ordinance in the future. The Commaittee .voted 6-0 to direct staff to prepare the RPP. Staff indicated that they would attempt to return an RFP to the Committee for the June 22, 1987 meeting. Ordinance 29 -0-87, ZAC 86-3 Review of Variation Standards. The Committee reviewed a memo from Ald. Rorshak dated June 8, 1987 regarding "An approach to examining the variation problems". Ald. Korshak's memo suggested that staff develop a brief report summarizing the problems encountered in too (10) specific cases. Dave Rasmussen stated that he would attempt to have that information for the next regular meeting of the P & D Committee for their review in addition to the already submitted staff memo dated May 28, 1987 regarding an outline for review of variation standards. ourwent The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Cosmmittee will be Jun* 22, 1987 at Staff:�� obert S. Rndd (24) (19/22) Next regular meeting of the P & D 7:30 p.m. -4- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee June 22, 1987 7:30 P.H.. Ald. Present: S. Brady. R. Warshaw, J.-Korahak, J.'Bleveans, L.'Morton and J. Rudy Ald.-Absent:. None Staff Present.: R. Carlson, R. Ahlberg,­D. Rasmussen, S. Iiseiaan; and R. Rudd Presiding Official: J.' Bloveans Minutes of June 8. 1987 Ala. Warshaw moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee of June 8, 1987. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes (Ald. Rudy absent). Communications Z8A 87-3-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 414 Greenleaf Street. The Committee received a final variation decision from the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding 414 Greenleaf Street. ZAC Public Notice for Julv 2. 1987. The Committee reviewed a ZAC public notice for July 2, 2987 of which Ald. Brady questioned whether representatives from the Housing Commission or the Mayor's Special Housing Committee should make a presentation about transitional housing? Staff indicated that Chairmen of the two committees would be contacted about attending the ZAC hearing. MAY 1987 Rehab Report The Committee also received the May Rehab Report. Docket 86-4A-87. ZBA 86-34-V(R). re Variations for 500 Dodge Avenue. Chairman Bleveans gave a brief review of the issue before the Committee which the applicant has requested that a zoning variation be granted to allow for the continued use of an automobile service station. The Zoning Board of Appeals has recommended that the variations be denied. Ald. Warshaw moved to grant the variation and retain the automobile service station with the conditions that the current hours of operation be made a part of the ordinance and secondly, that the sub -tenants of the current operation also be identified In the ordinance. Ald. Brady seconded the motion. Ald. Rudy questioned whether objectors' concerns about noise, snow removal and parking should be Included in the ordinance. Ald. Warshaw stated that upon review of the transcript she felt that the objections were not founded, particularly the issue regarding the snow removal. Ald. Rudy stated that the objections appeared to have come from across the street from the station and thus were directly P & •D Minutes June 22, 1987 impacted by the station. He stated that he could only support the continuation of the automobile service station if the objectors' issues were addressed. Ald. !Morton stated that she does not agree that conditions regarding the three issues mentioned by Ald. Rudy should be made a pant of the ordinance. Ald. Brady stated that she feels that by limiting the hours of operation the noise issue will be handled, and that the snow removal is a non -issue and was adequately answered in the course of the hearing. She also felt that employees park on the site and do not negatively impact the neighborhood. Ald. Rudy felt that since this variation is being requested the Committee has an obligation to apply conditions that will protect neighboring properties. Ald. Warshaw stated that historically parking has not been a problem in the area and she does not feel that this is a issue. Upon a question from the Committee, Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, indicated that the zoning ordinance requires one (1) parking space for each employee on duty. After a brief discussion the Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council reversing the Zoning Board of Appeals recommendation to deny and to recommend variations to allow the continued existence of the automobile service station. Committee voted 6-0. The Committee directed staff to draft an ordinance and place on the P & D agenda at the next meeting of July 13, 1987 for review. It was also noted that due to the override of a ZBA recommendation, an extraordinary vote of the City Council would be required. Docket 142-6B-87. Consider Approval of Tent Permit for Kendall College. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of a tent permit for Kendall College. Ald. Rudy questioned whether noise would be a problem. Ald. Bloveans indicated that since there is an 8:30 p.m. ending time for the event there would not be a problem. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council approval of a tent permit for Kendall College for July 13 and 14, 1987. Docket 130-6A-87. ZBA 86-42-SU(R). Ordinance 55-0-87. re Special Use for 843 Dodge Avenue. The Committee reviewed an ordinance previously submittod allowing a special use for a type 2 restaurant at 843 Dodge Avenue. Ald. Rudy commented that his earlier concern was not adequately addressed regarding odor control. Ald. Rudy proposed an amendment to change Section 8 on page 2 of Ordinance 55-0-87 to read as follows: "All exhaust vents in air conditioning systems serving the proposed type 2 restaurant shall be located on the roof and must remove grease and suspended particles creating odors objectionable to adjacent to residential areas." After a brief discussion with Steve Bernstein, attorney for the applicant, the Committee voted 6-0 to amend the the subject section of the ordinance as proposed by Ald. Rudy. This matter was previously introduced at City Council and would be on the agenda for approval for June 22, 1987. &41 P & D Minutes June 22, 1987 HousinK and Community Development Act (CD) Committee's Triennial Review. Chairman of the the subject Committee, Ald. Juliar was present to answer questions of the Committee. Ald. Korshak questioned what percent of the overall CD budget was allocated to CD Administration? Ald. Juliar indicated that approximately $250,000 or 107. of the overall budget was provided for CD administration. Ald. Brady stated that she would like to see more detailed reports regarding projects that significantly fall short of their goals that are funded by CD dollars. Ald. Juliar stated that he is sympathetic to these concerns and that the committee has made efforts to target problem projects for additional scrutiny and follow-up. Ald. Rudy questioned a section of the triennial review which addressed staff performance review. Ald. Juliar stated that formal staff review is conducted by the City Manager and not the committee, although the committee makes known to the City Manager their opinion regarding staff performance. Ald. Rudy questioned item g on page 3 regarding the "need for new goals, objectives, and activities.' Ald. Juliar stated that the committee conducts a form of needs assessment and solicits community input to determine what goals, objectives and activities the committee should be undertaking and funding. Aid. Morton guestioned how many members of the CD Committee are minorities and how are memberships to the committee determined? Ald. Juliar stated that there are four (4) minority members. He further stated that membership on the committee is by appointment by the Mayor. Ald. Warshaw stated that she is not satisfied with the current procedure for determining memberships not only on the CD Committee but also other committees. She stated that currently an alderman can only encourage applicants to file with the Mayor and hope that the Mayor takes into consideration their application when positions become open. She stated that there is often a problem when committee members leave during mid-term and City Council members are not aware of these vacancies. Aid. Korshak stated that he previously suggested that a committee be developed to make a recommendation of three (3) names to the Mayor for an appointment to the various committees. fie further stated that possibly this is an issue that the Rules Committee should discuss in the future. Aid. Morton moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee recommend that the Housing 6 Community Development Act Committee continue. Committee voted 6-0. Docket 144-68-87, Proposed RFP for Comprehensive Zoning Amendment. Ald. Brady questioned staff as to the background materials submitted with the RFP. She felt that possibly this section of the RFP was to folksy and could be shortened. Ald. Brady also suggested that a Housing Commission representative be added to the Blue Ribbon Committee aiding the consultant. The Committee concurred to add the Housing Commission representative. Ald. Korshak suggested that the RFP also be amended to require that a preliminary draft of the ordinance be submitted to the P 6 D Committee no later than fifteen (15) months after commencement of the project. The Committee also -3- P 6 D Minutes June 22, 1987 agreed with the modification. Ald. Brady suggested the the P & D Committee member be deleted from the committee since the P & D Committee would be Involved at a latter stage in review of the overall draft. It was the consensus of the P & D Committee to delete a P & D Committee member from the Blue Ribbon Committee. The Committee voted 6-0 to forward to City Council a recommendation directing the City Manager to solicit RFP's for a comprehensive amendment to the zoning ordinance, Ad.fournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Next regular meeting of the P S D Committee is Monday, July 13, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: obert T. dd 39(16/19) -4- a MINUTES Planning and Development Committee July 13, 1987 7:30 P.N. Ald. 'Present:, S.'.• Brady, R. Warshaw, J: Korshak, J. 8leveeriA and. J. Rudy Ald.. absent: L. Morton Staff Present:. R: Carlson, D..Rasmussen, E. Eiseman'and R.'Rudd Presiding Official: T. Korsbak _ Minutes of June 22. 1987. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning b Development Committee of June 22, 19s7. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes. Communications Docket 86-4A-87. ZBA 86-3 4-V(R). Ordinance 68-0-87, re Variations for 500 Dodge Avenue. The Committee reviewed the ordinance for the continuation of the service station at 500 Dodge. The Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council Introduction of the subject ordinance. ZBA Public Notice for July 21. 1987. Committee received a ZBA notice for the July 21, 1987 meeting. 1100 Forest - Planned [Unit Development Approved Minor Changes. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve minor changes in the Planned Development at 1100 Forest. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minor changes. Old Business Amplification of Earlier Reference to ZAC and Commercial District Report by Plan Commission. Ald. Brady, who requested at a previous meeting to !told this chatter over, found that the reference was appropriate. Ald. Brady stated that her only question was why B-2 was not recommendedT Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the reference be forwarded to ZAC. Committee voted 5-0 to forward this amplification of the earlier approved reference to ZAC. Citizens' Advisory Committee on Public Place Names' Triennial Review. Michael Darling was in attendance representing the Public Place Names' Committee. Chairman Rorshak questioned as to whether there Was public input with respect to the determination of names. Darling described the procedure for reviewing place names and also soliciting public input. Ald. Warshaw questioned a statement in the triennial review which indicated that the P b D Committee - Minutes July 13, 1987 ' com.ittee received pressure to name public places for citizens outside of the criteria. Darling indicated that the committee at all times tries to follow the proper procedures and criteria as setforth in their charter. After a brief discussion Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the P & D Committee recommend continuation of the Citizens' Advisory Committee on Public Place )lames and forward to the Rules Committee. Committee voted 5-0. Recomendation on Zoninjt Amendments to Authorize Liauor Sales Outside CBD. _ Ald. Warshaw questioned whether this matter should go back to City Council to determine if any aldermen would be supportive of having a liquor store in their respective wards outside of the CBD. She felt that it may be useless to go through ZAC and ZBA hearings when the end result maybe that the citizens and aldermen do not want liquor sales outside of the COD. Ald. Brady stated that she was willing to recommend not to forward this smatter on to the Zoning Amendment Committee for discussion. Ald. Rudy stated that citizona may not be willing to accept liquor sales outside of the CBD and that it would be unnecessary to put ZAC and ZBA through lengthy hearings. Ald. Rudy stated that he fools that the first ward is not interested in liquor stores. Ald. Bleveans stated that he knows of no groundswell in the community to locate liquor stores outside of CBD. Ald. Bleveans moved and Aid. Brady seconded to tecommend to City Council to not send this reference on to ZAC. Committee voted 5-0. Docket 149-7A-87, ZBA 87-4-SU(R), re Special Use for 1900-80 Dempster Street. Chairman Korshak indicated that representatives of the petition for Taco Bell requested that this matter be held -over for two (2) weeks due to the attorney's inability to attend the July 13. 1987 meeting., Docket 150-7A-87. ZBA 87-5-V(R). Ordinance 67-0-87. re Variation for 2400 Dempster Street. Attorney Steven Bernstein and applicant. Dan Michael were present. Bernstein gave a brief presentation of the proposal. Ald. Rudy questioned whether the five (5) foot setback was sufficient. Discussion revealed that the five (5) feet setback was the minimum that could be placed on the site and that it was better than nothing. Question arouse regarding the section of the proposed ordinance which prohibited a drive -through of the planned facility which would require an exit on the alley. Chairman Korshak stated that the ordinance as It is currently drafted would prohibit any future drive -through. He informed the applicant that if it was the intent to provide a drive -through, the ordinance should be amended at this time to specify that if the drive -through Is built the alley must be improved. After a brief discussion the applicant agreed to this amendment to the ordinance. The applicant was informed that the ordinance would be introduced at the July 13, 1987 City Council meeting and that the applicant would have two (2) weeks to evaluate the alternatives. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded to recommend introduction of the ordinance. Committee voted 5-0. 4f -2- P & D Committee - Minutes July 13, 1987 Docket 148-7A-87. Plat of Consolidation re 3219 Colfax Street. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the subject plat of consolidation. Ald. Rudy questioned whether the lot was of sufficient size (sixty-two hundred square foot). Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, was present and explained the provisions of the zoning ordinance which would allow the subject lot to be buildable. After a brief discussion regarding various aspects of the zoning ordinance as they pertain to non -conforming lots, the Committee _ voted 5-0 to recommend to the City Council approval of the subject plat of consolidation. Ordinance 29-0-87. ZAC 86-3 Review of Variation Standards. Chairman Korshak provided a brief background pertaining to the issue at hand to members of the audience. Ald. Brady suggested that the Committee needed to develop a consensus on the procedure in order to make progress on this issue. Chairman Korshak stated that in his opinion there are two (2) types of variations: Area and Use. He further stated that use variations can be broken down into "new" and "existing". He stated that he believes there can be different standards for the differont types of variations. Chairman Korshak supplied the Committee with a memo that stated that the public benefit should be weighed regarding use variations. Ald. Brady suggested that the Committee first answer the question "do we need changes in the ordinance"T She felt that it was imperative that this question be answered first so that the Committee can focus on the issues at hand. Ald. Warshaw suggested that the Committee look at bulk and use variations in addition to developing different standards for single family and multi family/commercial/industrial variations. Dr. Thomas Stafford, a member of ZAC, was present and made a presentation to the Committee. He stated that he supports the ZAC report and feels that is the best way to solve the problems presented. He stated that it was ZAC 's opinion that the Zoning Board of Appeals struggles with the problem of the variation requests meeting the cumulative standards in all of the cases. He stated that he feels that a variation is a "valve" that allows the City of Evanston to be fair and equal to everyone. He stated that ZAC believed that there was difficulty in defining hardship and practical difficulties. Stafford further stated that it was ZAC's intent to allow "area variations" to be structured so that they could more easily be approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals and to have "use variations" be required to meet more stringent standards (additional "special use" standards). Stafford felt that possibly the Committee should consider allowing ZAC to address use variations rather than the Zoning Board of Appeals. Chairman Korshak questioned Stafford as to his opinion whether residential and commercial variations should have separate standards. Stafford stated that it was his opinion that the standards should be the same. Korshak summarized -3- P & D Committee - Minutes July 13, 1987 Stafford 'a presentation by stating that area variations would be -eased through lesser standards while use variations. which began to impinge on Council's policy, would be more difficult to receive and would have more stringent requirements. Ald. Bleveans stated that he finds the ZAC's report practical and appealing and can support it. Ald. Brady stated that she thinks the special use standards are more realistic and basically agrees with the thrust of the ZAC report. Ald. Rudy stated that he is concerned if area variations are made less stringent and would appear to be less important. Chairman Korshak stated that there is no intent to make area variations less important but rather to be more practical about the standards applied to area variations. After a brief discussion the Committee cancelled a previous special meeting scheduled for July 20, 1987 and rescheduled a special P & D Committee meeting to discuss variation standards for Wednesday, August 12, 1987. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P i D Committee is Monday, July 27, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: Robert T. Rtidd 1t(1S/18) -4- r Presiding Official: J. Korshak Minutes of July 13. 1987. Aid. Rudy moved and Aid. Warshaw seconded that the Committee -approve the. minutes of the Planning 5 Development Committee meeting of July 13,'1987. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes. Communications ZBA Public Notice for August 4. 1987. The Committee received a ZBA notice for the August 4, 1987 meeting without comment. ZOA 87-6-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 500 Davis Street. The Committee reviewed the report from the Zoning Board of Appeals, dated July 17, 1987 for the property at 500 Davis Street. This variation for Pru-Care which was a.final decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals was for a variation from the zoning ordinance to permit a net increase of fifteen (1S) additional off-street parking spaces to be supplied in the City garage approximately 1200 feet away from the generating use instead of within 750 feet as required by the zoning ordinance. This additional parking is required to allow conversion of an additional 6415 sq. ft. on the eighth floor of the 500 Davis Street building from general offices to medical offices for Pru-Caro. Aid. Brady stated that she was troubled by the Zoning Board of Appeals making a final decision on this type of variation which in her opinion has a strong Impact on the neighborhood. She stated that she has received many parking complaints in the area of the 500 Davis building and feels that enforcement against employee street parking in the area has not been vigorously prosecuted. She stated further that hearing evidence in the transcript was weak in regard to control of employee parking as was required in the original special use for Pru Care. Ald. Warshaw stated her misgivings regarding employees and/or patients of Pru Care now having to park farther from the 500 Davis building than previously. Aid. Rudy also expressed his concern regarding the parking shortage in the area. Aid. Korshat suggested that variation uses which have a great effect on the neighborhood should not be a final decision of the ZBA. He requested clarification from staff regarding the dates of the annual reports required by the ordinance. Rasmussen replied that the date would be set by staff and followed up in an annual manner. The Committee accepted the ZBA report without further comment. i P & D Minutes July 27, 1987 Old Business None New Business Multi Family Demolition Review Ordinance. Ald. Brady reviewed the request of the !lousing Commission to return the Multi Family Demolition Review Ordinance to the Comission for further consideration due to recent Supreme Court decisions that may have an effect on portions of the Demolition Ordinance. Aid. Warshaw moved and Aid. Rudy seconded the return of said ordinance to the :lousing Commission. The Committee voted 5-0 ,to approve the return. Docket 149-7A-87. ZBA 87-4-SU(R), re Special Use for 1900-80 Dempster Street (Taco Bell). Aid. Korshak reviewed a letter dated July 21, 1987 to the P & D Committee requesting a six (6) week deferral of any action on this matter. This deferral was requested by the developer in order that a planning consultant have adequate time to submit a report on the cumulative effect of another drive-in restaurant at the Evanston Plaza Shopping Center. Ald. Warshaw stated that this request seems to be after the fact but stated her willingness to wait an additional six weeks. Resident Gerald Gordon expressed opposition to the delay, noting the numerous times that this item has been before the Zoning Board of Appeals then withdrawn from consideration, refiled and again appearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals and tho P & D Committee. It was the consensus of the Committee to grant a six (6) week delay to Banbury Development to allow their planning consultant to prepare his report. Docket 150-7A-87. ZBA 87-5-V(R). Ordinance 67-0-87 re Variation for 2400 Dempster Street. While this item was not an the P & D Committee agenda, Ald. Korshak noted the presence of Attorney Bernstein and applicant Dan Michael to discuss a revised plan for the automotive service building to be built at the above address. Attorney Bernstein reviewed a plat of the property and requested a change in the Ordinance to allow one drive -through opening in the west wall near the southern end of that mall. Inherent in this request was the fact that the alley would not be required to be paved by the applicant. Bernstein noted that this drive -through opening would only service three to five cars per day and should not cause any undue congestion. Aid. Warshaw stated that paving of the alley should take place and that the project would benefit overall from the paving. Rasmussen explained the process that this plan followed through the Site Plan Review Committee and the ZBA, and the recommendation of those bodies that no openings be allowed in the west wall for drive -through purposes unless the alley was paved. Bernstein noted the amount of parking spaces -2- P & D Ninutes ' July 27, 1987 being furnished as being seventeen (17) more spaces then is required by the zoning ordinance. Aid. Brady moved and Ald. Norton seconded a motion to approve the change to allow not more than one drive -through opening in the west wall without paving of the alley by the applicant. Ald. Rudy moved to amend the motion changing the wording in paragraph d page 2 to read "a planting strip not less than 1 1/2 ft wide be provided". The amendment was seconded by Ald. Warshaw. The Committee voted 5-0 to approve the amendment and also voted 5-0 to approve the main motion allowing for the adoption of Ordinance 67-0-87 at the City Council meeting. Docket 157-7B-87. ZBA 87-7-V(R). Ordinance 71-0-87. re Variations for 1001 Sherman Avenue. 'Ald. Korshak reviewed the Zoning Board of Appeals recommendation in this case which recommends that City Council grant the application to permit retention of the non -conforming building and non -conforming use thereof as a part of Evanston Lumber Company beyond the established elimination date of September 23, 1988 on the above property. Ald. Warshaw and Ald. Rudy commented along with Ald. Korshak on the service to the community that is provided by Evanston Lumber Company and also noted the lack of objections showing in the hearing transcript. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Norton seconded approval of the ZBA report and introduction of Ordinance 71-0-87 to the City Council. The Committee voted 5-0 to approve the motion. Adiournment The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is scheduled for 7:30 p.m. on August 10, 1987. A special meeting of the P & D Committee will take place at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, August 12 to consider the revisions to the variations standards. Staff: le Reed Carlson 24(14/16) -3- COMMUNICATIONS ZBA 87-9-V(F). Epinal Variation Decision re 1034 Asbury Avenue and ZBA 87-10-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 1705 Fake Street. The Committee received two (2) final decisions on variations from the Zoning Board of appeals for 1034 Asbury and 1705 Lake Street. ZBA Public Notice for August 18, 1987. The Committee received ZBA public notices for august 28, 2987. Minor ChanKes for 1100 Forest Planned Unit Develovment (PUD). The Committee approved minor changes for the 1100 Forest Planned Unit Development without comment. NEW BUSINESS Docket 170-BA-87, Revised One and Two Family Housing Rehabilitation Guidelines. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the guidelines as recommended by the Housing Commission. Ald. Brady, a member of the Housing Commission, provided a brief explanation to the Committee with respect to the need for revised One and Two Family Housing Rehabilitation Guidelines. Ald. Brady indicated that these revisions further refined and matte the guidelines practicable. R. Bush, a member of the Housing Commission, was present and indicated that the revised guidelines addressed two (2) significant areas: (1) The guidelines make eligible new purchasers of homes rather than making those purchasers wait for a one (1) year period, and (2) the guidelines are greatly simplified in the areas of language and lending categories. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the guidelines as recommended by the Housing Commission. P & D Minutes August 10, 1987. Docket 173-8A-87. ZBA 87-2-7(R). Ordinance 77-0-87. re Variations for 1700 Payne Street. Ald. Morton moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee concur with the ZBA recommendation to grant variations to permit retention of the building and to use as a commercial laundry. In response to a question from Ald. Xorshak, Ald. Morton indicated that she knowns of no opposition to the proposed variation request. Ald. Warshav stated that she is opposed to the approval since the owners were notified twenty-five years ago that the non -conforming use would expire in 1985 and that such a notice provides ample time. She also felt that the change to a commercial laundry was substantially different from that of a contractor's office. She felt that the lack of the .required Improvements to the alley was problem. Finally, she felt that to allow this use was in conflict with zoning patterns established by the City of Evanston. Aid. Morton stated that the neighborhood was fortunate to get a laundry versus the probability of a vacant building left by the contractor. She stated that no problem has been brought to her attention by the neighbors in the area and therefore she would not object to it. Ald. Brady indicated that upon review of the transcript she finds that no neighbors opposed the variation at the ZBA hearing. Ald. Rudy indicated that a review of the site finds that the lot is only 33 ft. wide and thus has a very limited use (possibly only as a single family residence). Ald. Warshaw stated that she would prefer rezoning versus the variation process and indicated that the ZBA hearing did not address potential negative impacts such as truck parking. Ald. Morton reiterated that she feels the laundry will be an improvement and supports the variation. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the variation for 2700 Payne Street. Docket 172-8A-87. ZBA 87-11-V&SU(R). Ordinance 7b-0-87, re Variation and Special Use for 2020 Greenwood Street. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee concur with the ZBA recommendation and recommend to the City Council to grant a variation and special use for the construction of an addition and three storage silos. Committee voted 6-0. Docket 171-8A-87. ZBA 87-12-SU(R). Ordinance 75-0-87. re Special Use for 1501 Central Street. Ald. Morton moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee concur with the Zoning Board recommendation and recommend to City Council granting a special use for a building addition at the Byron Coon Center. Ald. Bleveans stated that the use was consistent with other uses in the U zone and he found no objection to the request. Ald. Warshaw stated that she did not object to the project but was opposed to ZBA member Fields participation and recommendation. Ald. Warshaw stated that Fields was a part-time student at -2- P & D Minutes August 10, 1957 Northwestern and thus had a conflict of interest and should not only have not voted but not led the discussion supporting the.special use request. Warshaw requested that some sanctions be taken against Fields for her participation or possibly to cause her removal from the ZBA. Ald. Bleveans stated that he feels such uanctions and such strcng language goes beyond what is called for in this situation. He objected to the statements that Fields participation was unethical or inappropriate. Ald. Blevea_ra felt that there was no conflict of interest and that to extend the interpretation that Fields had a conflict of interest would also include several members of the City Council since they have had various associations with Northwestern over the years. Rudy questioned whether it was appropriate to discuss this matter at P 6 D or to refor to the Ethics Committee? Chairman Korshak indicated that the matter could be referred by Ald. Warshaw to th Ethics Committee during the call of the wards at the City Council meeting. Ald. Warshaw reiterated that she was not against the project but was opposed to ZBA member Fields participation in the discussion. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the special use request. Docket 143-68-87, Landscapinx with Chicago and Northwestern Transportation Company at Davis Street. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a license agreement with the Chicago and Northwestern Transportation Company for beautification purposes at Davis Street. Ald. Brady expressed her position that it was ridiculous for the City to have to incur this liability. However, since it was necessary to accomplished this landscaping, she requested that any lease be drawn tightly so that the City was only liable and obligated for the minimum area. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the lease agreement. Docket 174-8A-87. ZBA 87-8-V&SU(R). Ordinance 78-0-87 re Variations and Special Use 519-31 Church Street. Chairman Korshak provided background of the case to the audience. The Committee would be considering a ZBA recommendation to grant variation and a special use for construction of a multiple family dwelling and parking structure on the northeast corner of Church and Chicago. Ald. Bleveans stated that due to a conflict of interest with his employer being involved in the project that he would recuse himself from this discussion. After a brief discussion the Committee agreed at this early point not to make a motion but rather to provide an opportunity for comments to be taken from members of the audience and also discussion by the Committee prior any motion. Chairman Korshak outlined to the audience procedures of the P & D Committee which was not to rehear statements made at prior ZBA hearings. 52 P 6 D Minutes August 10, 2987 Ken Watson of 1730 Hinman read from a letter submitted to the Committee, dated August 10, 1987 opposing the project on environmental grounds (air, and noise pollution, and light and ventilation). Jim Green, President of the 1730 Hinman Condo Association was present and read a statement objecting to the proposal indicating that the property was not unique and thus did not meet the variation standards. Mrs. Singh was present to oppose the project and attempted to clarify some dimension issues mentioned in the ZBA transcript (e.g., floor area ratio, side yard. height, etc.). Mrs. Singh suggested that the Committee members review the Letter of Intent between the City of Evanston and Rescorp which highlighted the fact that the City of Evanston was not obligated to grant any variations, lira. Singh pointed out that in her opinion earlier presentation by Rescorp indicated that the project met all zoning requirements and would not need relief. Singh also stated that the current proposal fails since other buildings could be built on the site which would meet zoning standards and not need variations. Singh indicated that in her opinion a City staff memo to the Council was misleading with respect to set -back and height issues. Holly Reynolds of 204 Davis Street read from a statement crafted by her husband who attended the ZBA meetings. She stated that they originally supported the project if it needed only minor zoning variations. She protrayed the project now as one of a B3 nature in R7 clothing. She felt that the City of Evanston did not provide evidence that the variation request net any of the three (3) standards. She requested that the P & D Committee and City Council send the project back to the staff and developer to develop new alternatives within the guidelines. Diane Ferdinand of 1738 Chicago stated that in her opinion the traffic analysis did not take into account traffic to the east of the project, but only to the west. She felt that a traffic study, conducted by Barton-Aschman Associates, was insufficient and missed the target. Chairman Korshak recognized lack Siegel, City Corporation Counsel, and offered him an opportunity to provide responses to several of the comments made by audience. Siegel stated that the proposal, which had several changes over time, was completely consistent with the last two comprehensive plans adopted by the City of Evanston. Siegel further clarified pertinent sections of the zoning ordinance with reference to the determination of floor -area -ratio. Siegel stated that the proposal followed the Barton-Aschman Associates parking studies which were quite accurate. Siegel went on to clarify the aforementioned City staff memo which he felt did accurately depict the situation with respect to compliance. He indicated that the memo stated that the project was in compliance exclusively of the parking garage. Siegel went on to state specifically the variations requested and concluded that the City has demonstrated that the project met all zoning standards. -4- • P & D minutes August 10, 1987 Ald. Brady questioned the developer as to what would be the cost if the project were to be designed with parking underground. Mr. Zuba, of Rescorp, stated that such a scheme would be very costly and was not advisable based on the City's Traffic Engineering Consultant. Committee members exchanged questions with Mr. Zuba regarding possible redesigns, estimates, and reasons for excluding some alternatives. After several minutes it was the decision of the Committee to continue this matter to the special P b D Comittee meeting scheduled for Wednesday, August 12, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. .Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. staff: Ro ert T. Rudd k. 24(14/18) -5- Old Business Docket 174-8A-87, ZBA 87-8-V&SU(R), Ordinance 78-0-87 re Variations and Svecial Use 519-31 Church Street. Chairman Korshak opened the meeting by restating his previous question from the August 10, 1987 Planning b Development Committee meeting. at which time he posed to the developer whether it would be possible to have 119-125 apartments and a 600 car garage versus the 192 proposed apartments. He further questioned whether variations could be eliminated if there was a reduction in apartments. Ald. Brady asked how many public parking spaces could be reduced to eliminate variations! Mr. Zuba of Rescorp was present and stated that originally Rescorp discussed 118 apartments, however the number was increased In order to "mask" the parking structure along Chicago Avenue. The change in number of apartments from 166 to 190 really dealt with the difference in the mix of the units and not an increase in floors. He stated that originally the R7 District could handle the number of apartments proposed but the parking garage necessitated the variation. He stated that it was his understanding that there was a favorable consensus to the arcades and apartments masking the garage along Chicago Avenue. Though necessitating variations, this was more appealing than just an open-faced parking structure. He also stated that he feels the alley variation on the east side and the two (2) side yard variations are minor. The Committee discussed the floor area ratio variation In addition to the need for the parking spaces with Mr. Katz of Rescorp and the developer's parking consultant. Judy Aiello explained that simply eliminating floors would not necessarily eliminate the need for variations since certain widths and lengths were necessary to accommodate proper parking configurations. She emphasized that there were many complexities involved in determining the current parking plan. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether the developer could propose just 118 units! Mr. Katz indicated that 118 units would not work when you add the parking garage and stated that the developer proposed 178 units but added approximately 12 units to mask the parking garage. He stated that he felt that that was the consensus of the community, to shield the parking garage. P 6 D !Minutes Special fleeting August 12, 1987 Ald. Rudy requested more definite cost figures for a proposed two -level underground parking project. The parking consultant stated that in approximatc numbers, a two -level, below ground parking garage would add an additional $960,000 due to changes to the structural design, wall design, water proofing. ventilation, sprinkler cost, mechanical systems, and the added operation and maintenance. Kr. Katz stated that the numbers utilized by the developer's parking consultant were confirmed by the City's parking consultant, Mr. May. The Committee requested that the City's parking consultant reH ew the numbers once more and confirm that they are accurate. Aid. Morton questioned what the original agreement with the community was, that appeared to be acceptable earlier, that somehow has not been reflected in the current proposal? Mr. Katz stated that there never was unanimous agreement but that the developer has conducted 19 public meetings and that the City Council has approved the basic plan. The Committee proceeded to review minutes of the Economic Development Committee over the past several months to determine the earlier leaning of that committee. Ald. Rudy stated that Rescorp was originally selected to undertake this project because their proposal most closely met the R7 zoning district requirements. He feels that the currant proposal now has moved away from the original intent and has necessitated greater than expected variation requests. Aiello stated that the current proposal reflects concerns that had been brought up during the aforementioned 19 public meetings and that variation requests have been significantly reduced. Mr. Zuba indicated that City Council has had full knowledge of Scheme D which was determined to be most closely in line with the City's goals and desires. Aid. Morton discussed With the Committee the possibility of aldermen of the ward meeting with constituents before the P g D Committee proceeds any further. Ald. Brady stated that there has been steady dialogue between the community and the aldermen over the past several months and that the community and the aldermen always assumed 600 spaces would be needed for the parking garage. Ald. Brady proposed that the Committee and developer discuss three (3) alternatives: (1) placing the parking two levels underground; (2) reducing the 600 parking spaces and (3) eliminate some of the apartment units. Chairman Korshak reviewed with the Committee and the audience some past history on the site starting with a proposal by Washington National in 197S which was approved for a parking garage which needed significantly greater variations than the proposed. Why the subject garage never was built was left unanswered. Ald. Rudy suggested that in addition to Ald. Brady's three (3) alternatives, a fourth (4) alternative would be a combination of anyone or all three of the options proposed by Ald. Brady. He stated that he -2- P & D Minutes Special Meeting August 12, 1987 would be willing to meet with the community, the City and the developer to further discuss this issue. Ald. Rudy felt that the P & D Committee should not move ahead until members are convinced that all attempts to moot the R7 District requirements have been exhausted. Jack Siegel, City Corporation Counsel, was present and stated that was the whole reason the issue went to the Zoning Hoard of Appeals because the proposal could not meet the zoning standards. He reminded the Committee that to reduce the 600 parking spaces defeats the City's purpose of building a parking garage. He also brought to the attention of the Committee and the audience that variations were granted for some of the residential structures located in the Neighborhood. Some residents of those structures are currently stating that no variation should be granted for this project. He also stated that the developer's proposal, is in line with and based on the City Council guidelines. After a brief discussion it was the consensus of the Committee to conduct a special meeting at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, August 17 to finalize discussion on this issue. For that meeting the Committee requested that the developer provide answers to the following questions: (1) what would be the consequences of establishing two levels of parking below ground (economic and zoning)? (2) what actions can be taken to meet all of the R7 zoning requirements? (3) did the forty-eight units masking the Chicago Avenue side of the parking garage aoceasitate variations? (4) has the developer adequately determined the traffic impact on Hinman and Church, and Hinman and Clark east of the project? Chairman Korshak advised the audience that if they had further questions to be answered that they should send in writing to Judy Aiello so that they maybe passed on to the developer for response on Monday, August 17, 1987. Discussion of Variation Standards. Chairman Korshak reviewed with the Committee and members of the audience the ZAC/ZHA report. He stated that he is unable to determine the problems that ZAC/ZBA are having. He stated that he cannot find the problems detailed in the transcript and has consulted a couple of zoning experts, who are in the audience, and they concur that this transcript does not reflect the problems. He stated that meat ordinances prohibit use variations and that the City should consider this restriction. He posed to the P S D Committee amendments to confine the Zoning Hoard of Appeals to only addressing bulk variations and to have the ZBA act as final authority on those variations. The only time the P & D Committee and City Council mould review bulk variations is when a decision would result in the removal of dwelling units. Chairman Korshak suggested that matters involving change of use or use variations go to ZAC since it involves policy and the Zoning Board should not be setting zoning policy for the City. Ald. Brady questioned that some other communities must allow use variations and that it is difficult to understand that the -3- P & D Minutes Special Meeting , August 12, 1967 City of Evanston is the only one that does. She suggested that staff review other zoning ordinances to determine if use variations are common. Ald. Brady also stated that since the City is in the processing of selecting a consultant to comprehensively amend the zoning ordinance that it would be more appropriate to wait and have the input of such a consultant. Ald. Warshaw stated that she would be concerned about adopting any standards that appear to be less strict than the current standards and that she feels that the ZAC/ZBA report proposes lesser standards. Chairman Korshak recognized Barbara Baran, attorney with Ross Hardies, and solicited from her comments regarding this discussion. Saran stated that since the comprehensive zoning amendment process is currently underway she feels that it may be prudent to not change the variation standards but wait until the consultant has input. She foals that her reading of the ZAC transcript concludes the discussion is confusing and the problem is not Identified. She stated that the City Council has an opportunity, with a consultant, to have a thorough review of past zoning actions in the comprehensive amendment process. She suggested to the Committee that any efforts made by the Committee to change the variation standards rill prr�Aably be repeated by the consultant. She also cautioned the Committee about changing the variation standards since it could have a negative impact on the Yesterday Restaurant case currently being litigated. She stated that she represents the Sherman Garden 's residences and feels that their position could be placed in jeopardy by changing the variation standards. She further reviewed the ZAC transcript and emphasized that she finds the problem confusing and does not understand ZAC's thinking. She stated that the Illinois State Statutes allows use variations but they also allow municipalities to prohibit use variations in the zoning ordinances. She concluded that her review of the ZAC proposal finds that they appear to make the standards much easier to obtain a use variation than it is to obtain a bulk variation and thus could not support ZAC thinking. She stated that her review of the ZAC report finds substantial problems with their conclusion which appears not to make sense with respect to zoning low. She recommended that the P & D Committee go no further until the consultant is on -board to review the comprehensive amendment to the zoning ordinance. Ald. Rudy stated that with respect to time extensions and elimination of non -conforming uses that sometimes the current City Council doesn't feel the same war that the City Council felt in 1960. He questioned what the City could do in those instances. Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Zoning Director, was present and stated that the ZBA would prefer to have -the P & D Committee proceed changing the variation standards and not wait for eighteen to -4- P & D minutes . Special Meeting August 12, 1987 twenty-four months. He stated that he personally would like to see the use variation process eliminated. Rasmussen provided some background of problems that ZBA has had with the practical application of the current standards. Bob Ahlberg, Zoning Planner, stated that it maybe worth exploring in the comprehensive amendment to the zoning ordinance the elimination of use variations, however to eliminate that process from the current ordinance would eliminate a safety valve and not provide, in some cases, a much needed relief. John Young, an old City employee, was present and stated that he supports Barbara Baran's comments. He warned the Committee that to allow variations little -by -little causes the actual development of the City to move further away from stated City policies. Bennett Johnson, a member of the Dewey Community Conference, was present and stated that as a local architect that he In aware of the delays and problems caused by sections of the current zoning ordinance. He suggested the Committee or consultant consider separating residential from commercial variation considerations. He stated that in working in the development community it is common knowledge that no one wants to go the City of Evanston because the zoning process is such a mess. Ald. Brady stated that she views the zoning map as sacred ; without the use variation process she fears the City will be reviewing spot zoning of parcels throughout neighborhoods. She feels that the use variation process is necessary under the current ordinance. Chairman Korshak summarized the discussion by stating that it was the consensus of the Committee that stronger standards for use variations versus bulk variations are necessary; there is a need to better understand the problems before making changes; in the absence of a clear understanding of what should be changed it is recommended that the City wait for the consultant's report on the comprehensive amendment before it proceeds further. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that since the request for proposal process is underway and a consultant is being selected for a comprehensive amendment for the toning ordinance that no further action be taken until a consultant has had an opportunity to review, indepth, the zoning ordinance. Committee voted 5-0 to take no further action on variation standards until such time a comprehensive zoning ordinance draft is proposed. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Next Committee is August 17, 1987 at 7:30 p.m.; Committee is August 24, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff, AdbertT. 9u d 34(22/26) -5- special meeting of the P b D Next regular meeting of the MINUTES Special Meeting 'Planning and Development Committee August 17, 1987 7:30 P.M. Ald..Piesen,t: S.`''Brady, R: Warshaw;:J. Korshak,4,L Morton and . . J. Rudy , 41d. ,Absent: J:' Sleveans Statff Present: J. Aiello, and R: Rudd Presiding, Official: J. gorshak fib, Minutes None Docket 17 4-8A-87. ZHA 87-8-V&SU(R). Ordinance 78-0-87 re Variations and Special Use 519-31 Church Street. Mr. Henry Zuba, of Rescorp, was present and replied to the questions posed at the special meeting of August 12, 1987. in response to the first question regarding the econoraic and design impacts of a one or two level parking garage Mr. Zuba indicated that for one level below grade the cost would be approximately $960,000 and take approximately two (2) additional months for construction. Regarding a two level garage, Mr. Zuba indicated that the cost would be approximately $1,940,000. and four (4) months additional for construction. Mr. Zuba stated, as indicated at the prior meeting, that problems of security with the underground enclosed garage in addition to soil settlement problems, design problems, plus approximately $6,800 a year per level additional operation and maintenance costs would be part of the two level garage. Zuba indicated that a reduction in apartments for a one level garage would result in removing twelve (12) apartments and a two level garage would result in the eliminating of twenty-four (24) apartments. Ald. Rudy stated that the purpose of the questions posed at the last meeting were to help in working out a plan that would meet the zoning ordinance. He felt that Mr. Zuba's answers just responded to the existing proposal and did not review new alternatives. Mr. Zuba stated that in response to the second question "could a design be developed for an R7 solution without variations or the need for a special use?" that in any case, if a parking garage were to be built, a special use would be required. Zuba further stated that at one level below grade the east and west yard variations would not be eliminated but would be reduced from 7 ft. to 4 ft. on the east side and from 30 ft. to 27 ft. on the west side. With respect to a proposed two level, Zuba indicated that the east side would be reduced from a 7 ft. to a 1 ft. and the west side from a 30 ft. to a 24 ft. variation request. Zuba stated that with either a one or two level the gross lot coverage would still exceed the zoning ordinance. Regarding question number 3 which asked "did the 48 (masking) apartments Impact the 12 ft. set -back on Chicago Avenue?" Mr. Zuba responded affirmatively. Zuba went on to review with the Committee the site plan for the project which indicates the Chicago Avenue building line being located 28 ft. east of the curb line. Zuba stated that the proposed arcade was an additional 12 ft. from the building line indicating that the project was set back 40 ft. from the curb line. He stated that the zoning ordinance currently required a 58 ft. set -back. Question number 4 asked "whether the traffic engineer's report considered traffic east of the project at Hinman and Clark and Hinman and Church?" Zuba responded that the report did review traffic east of the project and indicated that the project would generate a 12% Increase in traffic at Hinman and Church and a 3% increase in traffic at Hinman and Clark. Mrs. Singh, a resident near the project, questioned the traffic report and impact. Mr. Zuba and his parking engineer explained the grading procedure and the criteria for conducting the traffic study. Diane Ferdinand, a resident in the area, questioned the assumptions of the traffic report. Zuba proceeded to explain the assumptions utilized in the traffic report. Aid. Rudy questioned whether the developer had reviewed a redesign in order to meet the zoning ordinance? Zuba responded that the developer has always worked within the guidelines provided by the City and that to include a garage in the project would most likely require the project to exceed the floor area ratio and possibly the net and gross lot coverage maximums. Mr. Dale Strube, traffic engineer, read to the Committee detailed costs associated with a one and two level parking garage. Strub6 indicated that a one level garage would be an additional $961,000 and a two level approximately $1,948,000. Aid. Rudy questioned the developer as to whether there was any way to most the current zoning ordinance. Aid. Rudy stated that it would appear putting the parking below grade would meet the zoning ordinance. Strube stated that it would cost approximately $2,000,000 for every 160 spaces below grade. He stated that difficulties with underground parking such as the psychological draw -back of users to the garage, security problems, ventilation problems, sprinkler coats and additional operation and maintenance expenses. Ald. Morton asked whether the developer had considered placing the parking underground and extend it under Chicago Avenue on the west and the alley on the east? Strube stated that the developer had not reviewed that proposal but would anticipate encountering underground utility problems that would be extremely expensive to correct. Aid. Morton questioned whether the City or the developer was paying for the 600 parking spaces. Judy Aiello, Assistant City Manager, stated that the City of Evanston would pay for the parking garage after the developer built the garage. Aid. Rudy questioned whether the developer had reviewed a design for a lot -line to lot -line proposal. Zuba stated that to built lot -line to lot -line would be expensive. Zuba stated that lot -line to lot -line would add only between 20 and 40 spaces. Ald. &Z P & D Minutes Special Meeting August 17, 1987 Horton questioned current proposal 88 additional 6 ft. to not necessitating t would not allow for Zuba further stated City and neighbors as to why the original design was 94 ft. high and the ft. high. She suggested that possibly by adding an the height would allow the building to be redesigned thus he side yard variations. Zuba indicated that the 6 ft. sufficient redesign -area to create the desired result. that he has always operated under the impression that the_, wanted to limit the height of the building. Judy Aiello reviewed with the Committee several Questions posed by the residents since the last meeting (attachment 1). David Reynolds, a resident, questioned the history of the ordinances cited by Aiello that granted variations in the neighborhood. Reynolds felt that two of the projects were granted variations after they were constructed. Jay Canel stated that he was aware of the Central Street project (Joe Hagee) which was granted after the fact. Larry Murphy, a resident, questioned why the City could not construct a free standing garage similar to that on Sherman Avenue and not build the apartments. Aiello stated that a "stand alone" garage creates a dead space and discourages pedestrian traffic. The City has elected not to construct that type of building on the Chicago Avenue site and would prefer a mixed use project. One resident suggested that the City explore placing the underground garage on the west side of Chicago Avenue. Chairman Korshak stated that the developer did not review an alternative for that site since he was charged With only developing a project on the Church/Chicago site, east of Chicago Avenue. Bess Weiss of 1738 Hinman questioned why the developer needed 190 units instead of 178 units. Mr. Zuba indicated that the current proposal added 12 units in order to provide a "mask" for the parking garage along Chicago Avenue. Another audience member questioned whether the City really needed an additional 600 parking spaces! Chairman Korshak indicated that studies over the years have shown the need for a minimum of 600 spaces. Mrs. Singh stated that by granting these variations the City could be placed in a difficult position in denying future variations. She felt that to grant these requested variations would weaken the zoning ordinance. Mr. Howard, a resident of the area, questioned why the facade could not be redesigned and made more appealing and therefore avoiding additional apartments. Mr. Zuba stated that the architect feels that the apartments are much more functional and are more desirable than a redesigned facade. John Macsai, architect for the project, stated that it is possible to have a false facade but it is not desirable. He stated that the proposal of masking the parking garage with apartments creates a kind of urban/residential quality desired by the City of Evanston. Zuba stated that with or without the apartment masking the garage side yard, floor area ratio, gross and net lot coverage variations would still be required. Mr. Altmeyer, a member of the audience, stated that he felt by placing apartments on the west side of the Chicago Avenue parking garage, all -3- P & D Minutes Special Meeting August 17, 1987 natural ventilation was cut off. He felt that an architectural design could be developed which would allow for natural air flow. Ald. Rudy stated that he would like to move ahead with the project allowing for housing and parking. However, the quickest way to kill the project was to grant the variations because citizens would take the City to court, delaying the project, and the City would lose the case in court. Therefore, he suggested that the Committee, residents and the developer, continue to develop a plan that would meet all or most of the zoning ordinance requirements. Ald. Rudy further stated that he feels the City, through its zoning actions by allowing reduced parking requirements for several projects within the CBD, has created the need for these additional 600 parking spaces. Ald. Rudy reiterated that the only way to move ahead on this project is to find a way for the proposal to meet the zoning ordinance as much as possible. He stated that he felt that the City and developer have not investigated all of the options available. Rudy suggested that the Committee table the variations until additional time was spent exploring every possibility. He stated that if there were truly minor variations he was confident the neighborhood would accept them. Ald. Warshaw spoke against tabling the variations unless a time certain was established for disposition by the Committee. She stated that delays damage not only the developer but the City of Evanston. Chairman Korshak stated that in his opinion it would not be proper to table this issue at the P & D Committee since a decision of this magnitude should be discussed by the whole City Council. Ald. Brady concurred that the issue of tabling belongs at the City Council level. Ald. Brady moved to forward the matter to the City Council. Ald. Brady moved to grant the variations and special uses. Sho stated that she believes that the best solution is to go underground but possibly it is too expensive. She stated that she made her motion in an effort to move this from the Committee to the City Council to allow a final decision. (The motion failed for lack of a second.) Ald. Rudy reiterated that to grant the variations will most assuredly kill the project due to court actions. He further stated that his review of a Barton-Aschmann CBD study finds that the study identifies alternative parking garage sites such as near the 1800 Sherman building and the Research Park. He stated that the proposed parking garage is being developed for the CBD but is impacting a residential area. Ald. Morton stated that she feels that both the citizens and developer are acting in good faith. She stated that it seems that there must be some compromise and believes that the two groups can get together and agree. Joel Asprooth. City Manager, was present and reviewed with the Committee earlier comments made about the Barton-Aschmann parking study. He stated that the study assumed that the Research Park parking needs would all be contained within the Research Park, Therefore, to place CBD parking within the Research Park was not an alternative location for this parking garage. With respect to 1800 Sherman, Asprooth indicated that the City's development agreement with -4- P 6 D Minutes . Special Meeting August 17, 1987 Carley allows for an additional building to be constructed and if so, a parking garage required for the projects' buildings. Therefore, this would not be an alternative site for the proposed 600 parking spaces. Ald. Warshaw moved that the P & D Committee forward this item on to the City Council without a recommendation. Ald. Rudy seconded the motion. Under discussion, Ald. Rudy stated that he would be happy to meet with staff, citizens and the developer in an effort to work out the problems prior to Lhe City Council discussing the project. Zuba indicated that he would be willing to continue discussion on alternatives but felt that the current proposal was already approved in concept by the City Council. Ald. Rudy stated that it was his understanding that the City Council only approved the letter of intent and did not approve a project that would need variations. Ald. Morton stated that to end discussion at this point and to forward to City Council without a recommendation would require the City Council to wrestle with the same issues. Anprooth questioned the Committee that if further discussion was to continue in an attempt to reach a compromise, parameters for design would need to be established. He requested the Committee to consider limits on configurations, design options, and other guidelinea to structure any future discussion. Zuba stated the developer requests at this time the City Council's opinion on this proposal since the developer has worked for several months on eliminating alternatives that would not work. Ald. Rudy reminded the Committee that the ZBA voted 4-3 to approve the variations and special use and felt that such a vote was hardly decisive. After a call for the question the Committee voted 3-2 (voting ayes: Aldermen Warshaw, Brady and Korshak, voting nays: Aldermen Rudy and Morton) to forward this matter to the City Council on August 24,1987 without a recommendation. After a brief discussion Chairman Korshak indicated that the minutes should reflect that it was the consensus of the P & D Committee to reaffirm the need for 600 parking spaces in addition to maintaining a mixed use development for the site. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Next regular meeting of the P 6 D Committee is August 24, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. Staff• a-T. Rudd 39(18/22) -5 - QUESTIONS FOR PLANNING & DEVELI)PMENT CW1MITTEE SUBMITTED BY NEIGHBORS, 1. Are there any ordinances from the recent past (1975) in which variations of this magnitude have been granted to either residential or commercial buildings to be newly built? May we have copies of these ordinances? See attached. 2. In the minutes of the EDC March 1986 meeting, Ns. Aiello states that 12 developers have "shown interest". Does this mean they picked up RFP? Who were the other eight? 1*4 did) why did they not submit proposals? At the time the City issued the Request For Proposals 39 people requested copies. In the "arch 1986 EDC minutes the 12 developers indicated in the minutes were people who were aware of the Parking Study and that a parking garage and residential project had been recommended for development. I am not aware of the reasons why some did not submit a proposal. 3. What kinds of developments which complied with the zoning ordinance for R-7 have been examined. Viat was Lhe nature of'these designs? Why were they unsatisfactory? When the proposals were received preliminary zoning analyses were A completed. At that time none of the proposals met all the requirements of the zoning ordinance. I)owever,'since these were only proposals which contained coneptual plans, it was not at all unusual for many aspects of the zoning code to be found to be not in compliance. •The nature of the designs were what we are reviewing today, a mixed -use development consisting of 600 public parking spaces and a residential development. Two proposals although not in total compliance proposed dwelling units on the north end of the site and a separate stand alone parking garage on the south end, and due to the economics of these projects and the consensus that two separate structures were not as desirable when compared with an integrated project. 4.Did the RFP ask that.the zoning be complied with? (� The RFP stated that "it is desirable that the housing complex meet zoning ordinance regulation and have sufficient parking, in excess of the 600 public spaces, to meet the zoning requirements for this development". gip. 2) The RFP further states that "The City is seeking a proposal that meets all of the applicable City Codes, including zoning for the development of this site. However, the City will consider alternative development plans which include commerial and,'or cultural facilities". (p. 5) It is important to keep in mind that the Zoning Code does contain provisions for special -use and variations. 5. Did the RFP ask for up to 600 parking spaces and whatever number of apartments could be added and still comply? What was the nature of those submitted in response? The RFP asked for "at least 600 public use parking spaces...... plus the A necessary number of parking spaces required for any other non -parking uses developed on this site in an integrated and aesthetically pleasing design;" rp. 1). ti QUESTIONS RECEIVED FROM HOLLY REYN[ILDS 1. Should underground parking prove to be a feasible solution, what fJ objection does the City have to extending that parking from curb to curb so as to maximize the number of underground spaces and minimize the bulk of the building above ground? Because of the design of the dwelling units above, extending the R parking to curb creates additional problems as it relates to design of mechanical systems resulting in an inefficient garage -development to curb line would impact on the utilities currently existing in the park and would add to the cost of development. 2. Did the City in its Request For Proposals or anywhere else request Q designs for a parking structure alone or a parking structure with apartments which complied with the zoning ordinance? If so, what did those proposals show? If not, why did the City not do so? A See answer 2 and 3 from Mrs. Singh's.questions. 3. .lack Siegel has rebutted citizen testimony that percentages representing amount of lot coverage and floor area in excess of that allowed by the ordinance and the percentages by which the east and west side yards fall short of the requirements (to wit: "Lot coverage exceeds the maximum allowable area by 42%, floor area ratio exceeds the maximum allowable by 26:, and substantial reductions of 25% and 60% respectively in the required east and vest side yards") are incorrect, in light of the Zoning Analysis of Scheme D completed in early Ma'y, please explain why these percentages are incorrect. It was not Mr. Siegel's recollection of these statements, but rather that A the variations requested were minor in actual number of feet being required. 4. What effect will abrogation of its own ordinance by the City have on current and future litigation by the City to defend its Zoning Ordinance? AThis is not an abrogation of the Zoning ordinance. Each zoning case stands on its own and the Zoning Board of Appeals and Courts look at each case to see if the standards have been met. This is what has been in the past, for this case, and will be done in the future. r VJ 0-i - r % ( T WNE8EA5, the Evanston Zoning Board of appeals conducted a -public hearing on January.20, 1981 and again on February 17, 1981 upon the ' application of the American National Bank of Chicago as Trustee under Trust 42965, Bernard Kron, sole beneficiary, for variations from the yard , ' obstruction, gross lot.coverage, building height, rear yard, side yard, off- } street loading berth and off-street parking regulations of the Zoning Ordinance to permit retention of: (1) the portion of the 'parking structure which is above grade and.the four ventilators located thereon, which obstruct the required front, side and rear yards; (2) two electrical transformers ob- structing the required rear yard; (3) a canopy obstructing the required north side yard; (4) two fences each 7 feet 6 inches in height instead of the maximum of 6 feet allowed, located in the required front yard and north side yard; (5) a north side yard of 29 feet instead of the 35 feet required; (6) a south side yard of 22 feet instead of the 28 feet required; (7) a rear yard of 34 feet instead of the 40 feet required; (8) a gross lot coverage of 90.51A instead of the G5: allowed; (9) a building height of 95 feet instead of the 85 feet allowed; (10) no off-street loading berth instead of the 1 required; (11) 4 off-street parking spaces with a vertical clearance of 5-1/2 feet instead of the 7 feet required; (12) 48 off-street parking spaces each with an average area of 167 square feet instead of the 130 square feet required; (13) an aisle to serve required parking spaces with a width of ap- proximately 17 feet instead of the 27 feet required; (14) some off-street parking spaces and aisles which are obstructed by pillars instead of being clear; and (15) 54 off-street parking spaces instead of the 55 spaces required; and also a special -use to permit the retention of'(i} one planter 2b inches in height located in the required rear yard; (2) two planters.26 inches in height located in the required north side yard; (3) three planters 26 inches ` i ri riei i:ht located in the required ; :-cn = yard; and f 4) . 3 fence located in the rE required front yard; said hearing having -.been conducted pursuant,to notice and publication thereof in the dianner. prescribed by - law; -and: AHU, IMERFAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals has ..recommended -that . certain of the variations be grafted, WON, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAI?fiED ,BY'.THE` CITY -COUNCIL, OP _THE CITY OF. EVANSTON, COOP: COURTY, ILLINOIS: SECTIUli 1: That the application of the American National Bank of Chicago as Trustee under Trust 42965 as to .certain variations,•specifically, variations from the yard obstruction gross lot coverage, building height, rear yard, side yard, and off-street parking regulations of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the retention of the portion , of the parking structure which is above grade and the four ventilators located thereon which obstruct the required front, side and rear yards; two electrical transformers obstructing the required rear yard; a canopy obstructing the required north side yard; two fences, each 7 feet 6 inches in height, instead of the maximum of 6 feet allowed, located in the required front yard and north side yard; a north side yard of 29 feet instead of the 35 feet. required;. a south side yard of 22 feet instead of the 28 feet required; a rear yard of 34 feet instead of the 40 feet required; a gross lot coverage of 90.51% instead of the 65: allowed; a building height of 95 feet instead of the 85 feet allowed; four off-street parking spaces with a vertical clearance of 5-1/2 feet instead of the 7 feet required; forty-eight off-street parking spaces, each with an average area of 157 square feet, instead of the 180 square feet required; an aisle to serve required parking spaces with a width of approximately 17 feet, instead of the 27 feet required;.some off-street parking spaces and aisles which are obstructed by pillars, instead of being clear; and special uses to permit the retention of one planter 26 inches in height, located in the required rear yard; two planters 29 inches in height,'located in the required north side yard; titre planters 26 inches in height, located in the required front yard; and a fence located in the required fr:�nt yard; on- the proper_, located at 1738-44 Chicago Avenue, and legally Described as fo;lows:- Lot "A" in the Consolidation'Plat of the East-150.0 feet of Lot 1 and the Northerly 22.0 feet of the Easterly 150.0 feet of Lot 18 in Block 15 in the Village of Evanston, in Section 18, Township - 41 North, Range 14 East of the Third Principal Meridian, together with the Borth 40.0 feet South or and adjoining the north 22.0 feet of Lot lE in Block 15 in the Village of Evanston, in Section T8, Township 41 (forth, Range 14 East of the Third *Principal ► Meridian, all in Cook County, Illinois, according to the Consoli- dation Plat thereof recorded August 24, 1978 as Document Number 24593160, with the Office of the Recorder of Deeds, of Co- r—" County, Illinois is granted, subject to compliance with all other provisions of the Zoning ` Ordinance and other applicable laws. SECTION 2: The Director of Building and Zoning is .hereby directed to issue such permits pursuant to the terms of this ordinance. SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be in.full force and effect from and after its passage and approval`-in'.the manner provided b_v law. REPORT ON THE FZ2r'AL DECISION 'r- OF TEE ZON'03 BOARD OF APPEALS The application of ) Cane The Cantral Terrace Condominium; Associative ) before far The- Zoning Board . of Appeals Variations from the gross lot coverage and accessory build— ing and use regulations Hay 160 1978 at ): continued to , 2333 Central Street Jima 20, 1978 Public Notice: An application by the Central Terrace Condominium Association for variations from the gross lot coverage and accessory building and use regulations of the Zoning Ordinance to permit: 1. Construction of a garage with a setback from the alley line — of three feet instead of five feet and a gross lot coverage of 77 per cant instead of 65 per term or in the alternative; 2. Coustrruction of a garage with a setback from the alley of three feet instead of !ive feet and a gross lot coverage of 69.36 per teat instead of 65 per cent, or in the alternative; 3. Retention of the existing building, parking and drives with a gross lot coverage of 7r cent instead of the 65 per cent required. All an property which is located is an R6 General Resilience District. This application was considered at a public hearing conducted by the Zoning 8oard,of Appeals on Tuesday evening, May 16, 1978. Notice of the date, place and purpose of the. hearing vas published in the Evanston Review on April 27, 1978, and a copy of said notice was sent to each of tea residents nearest the Location in question. Following the initial hearing this matter was continued by public announcement to June 20, 1978. FINDINGS A21M DECISION OF TEE BOARD Application of Variation *Standards a. Based on the application and testimony presented we find that there is a particular hardship in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the Zonink Ordinance in this case with respect to applicant's first request, namely: -2- (1.)- The owners would be deprived of all reasonable use of the property if it is permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations in the zoning district, since they are attempting to provide one enclosed parking space per dwelling unit located in the building thereby providing additional off-street parking within the neighborhood. (a) The property owner would suffer'a particular hardship as dis- tiugulshed from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out since the building is presently a condominium and some of the residents are iuequi- tably treated with reu+�pect to off-street parking unless the garage is coas=ucted. Also, weather conditions at times maka it difficult to park in the open location to the rear of the building. ' (b) TTbA% purpose of the variations is' not based exclusively on a desire to make more money out of the property but is based i=Zaad on the owner � s desire to increase the security of the occupants who now must park in the open, provide a better means of ingress and egress to the existing enclosed parking structure, and to correct a long standing defect with respect to the existing gross lot coverage. (a) The hardship does not rest upon the particular financial situation of the applicant but rests instead on the inability • under present zoning to construct a garage for the purpose o: T increasing the security of the residents who are not parking in the open. (d) The alleged hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property since the present ovmers did not acquire an interest in the property until it was already developed. (2) The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances which are not applicable generally to other property Within the same zoning clas- sification. In support of such finding we further find that: (a)&(b) Unique circumstances in this case consist of the fact that there is insufficient area at any other location upon the premises to construct the proposed garage. b. We find that the proposed variations, if granted, will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance and: (1) Will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood since the area in which the property is located has many multiple -family dwellings fronting on Central Street and the off-street parking problens in the neighborhood wiIII is part be alleviated by construction of additional parking spaces. (2) The proposed variations will not be injurious to or depreciate the value of other property or improvements in the area since the er-4st- ing gross lot coverage problem is long standing, and tine constructiot o: a garage urill raiieve the congestion on the public stree_s. -3- M The proposed variations will not have an adverse effect on an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property not substantially in- crease the danger of fire or othetti.�ise endanger .the public safety. The proposed garage will have a mjni=um separation from the property line of the properties to the east of 23 feet, and to the vast of approximately 29 feet. We would note for the record that wince our following decision to grant pro- posal numbar one grants all the relief necessary to allow applicant's pro- posal to go forward that no consideratioa was given to applicant's subsid- iary proposals two and three. DECISZQN , It is, therefore, the decision of Zoning Board of Appeals to grant the ap- plication of The Central Terrace Condominium Association for variations from the gross lot coverage and accassory building and use regulations of the Zoni=R Ordinance to permit construction of a garage with a setback from the alley line of three feet instead of five feet and a gross lot coverage of 77 per cent instead of 65 pea cant on the property located at 2333 Central Street, subject to compliance with all other provisions of the Zouink Ordinance, other applicable Isws and the condition that it be con- structed in conformance with the plans submitted and identified as exhibit #3. Paul F. Boyer, ChaIrmA The Zoning Board of Appeals Paul F. Boys Joseph L. Budloug Leonard W. Dodson Sheldon Gardner Dona P. Gerson Joyce Mims William E. Strasser Decision rendered an May lb, 1978. Report adopted on June 20, 1978. Gran: Adopt Variation Revert Alye Nay Ave r a g X z X X X g X X X X Absent Cii-Y OF =VANSTON CITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM y%r Information Only c cheduled For Committee Consideration 9/9/85 Committee PIA V v2'A6f- .AEv�LopCrE.v r Scheduled For Council Consideration ...9131 e; introduction 919185 ... Adopfon9/23/85 S0: Cltairrea and Members Planning and Development Comittee FROM: The Zoning Board of Appeals SUBJECT: Zoning Board of Appeals Recommendation on Case 85-18-V&SU(S), for the Properties at 120 Dodge Avenue and 111 Dodge Avenue. Beard on August 20, 1985. Based on the application, documents and testimony. it is the recommendation of the Zoning Hoard of Appeals that the City Council grant the application of Dobson Plaza, Inc. owners of 120 Dodge Avenue, and Morris Stern and Margaret Stern, owners of Ill Dodge avenue for (1) variations from the use, non -conforming structure and use. height, floor area ratio. front yard, rear yard, side yard, and yard obstruction regulations of the Zoning Ordinaace, release from conditions 1 and 2 of Ordinance 96-0-70 and the covenant recorded ws documents 21403814 to permit construction of a fourth story addition and expansion of the number of nursing home beds from: 60 to 94 patient beds; (2) a special use to permit retention of an identification sign on the property located at 120 Dodge Avenue; and (3) a special use to permit installation of an 8 car parking lot at 111 Dodge Avenue to serve the nursing home, subject to the conditions that; 1. A six foot high solid cedar fence shall be installed along the north line of the proposed parking lot is place of the planting strip depicted on the plan; 2. She proposed four foot high screening hedge adjacent to the vest of the westernmost parkins spaces of the proposed parking lot'shall consist of a double row of plantings on alternate centers; 3. , In all other respects the construction shall be in substantial conformity with the plans placed on file in connection with this application; A. She property shall never be used to accomodate more than ninety-four beds In the nursing home; �isc-.si:ic Adct:ed Nct Add' fed meld Cver io Case 8S-18-VSSUCR) 320 DodBr drenu�, 111,Dodi*;A��aus.;, gecoamendatioa Pap 2 August 26, 1985 S. 6. No farther additions or ealacgesents of the building shall be undertaken, and all land not occupied by said building after the construction allowed herein' Is completed shall remain open and unobstructed to the sky; The properties shall remain on the tax rolls of Cook County as long as 120 Dodge Avenue shall be used for a nursing home and 111 Dodge Avenue shall bo used as a parking lot in conjunction therewith and the applicants shall agree on behalf of thesiselves, their heirs, successors and assigns not to seek tax exesption for said property, and this condition shall be binding upon all successors in title, whether or not such successors in title would be otherwise eligible for a tax exemption under the laws of the State of Illinois; 7 s` covenant of agroement to the above terms and conditions shall be executed and recorded by the applicants, and copies of the ` recorded covenant shall be filed with the Law Department and the Director of Building and Zoning prior to issuance of any building permits authorized herein. wet X hael E.vSchAtz, Chairman The Zoning Board or Ape'Qals Date:�•� i Vote to grsnt expansion of nursing home. Voting Are: Claessens, Paden, Schiltz and Whitney. Voting May: Balch and Zweig. Vote to grant special use for sign. Voting Aye: Balch, Claessens, Paden, Schiltz, Whitney and Zweig. Vote to grant special use of parking lot. Voting Aye: Balch, Claessens, Paden, Schiltz, Whitney and Zweig. The property commonly known as 111 Dodge Avenue has a frontage on Dodge Avenue of 25 feet and a depth of 118 feet. It is located in an R5 General Residence District. and this district continues to the north and across Dodge Avenue to the ~rest. across the alley to the south is a Cl Caamercial District, and to the east is an R2 Single -Family Residence District. This lot is presently vacant. She property commonly known as 120 Dodge Avenue has a frontage on Dodge Avenue of 129 fast 6 inches and a frontage on Dobson Street of 118 feet I inch. It is located in an R5 General Residence District, which continues to the north and east. Adjacent to the south is a Cl Commercial District, and across the alley to the west is an R2 Single -Family Residence District. The property at 120 Dodge Avenue is improved with a three-story 60-bed nursing home and a 13-car open improved parting area. The nursing home was originally constructed pursuant to Ordinance 14-0-6S which granted a special use. In 1971 the special use previously granted was amended by Ordinance 96-0-70 (copy attached to zoning analysis) which allowed an increase in patient beds from 56 to 60, subject to six conditions in said ordinance and a covenant of agreement recorded as document 21403814 on Dispcsition: Adopted Not Adopted Held Over To , ZBA85-fig February 23, 1971 (copy attached to zoning analysis). In 1974 nursing _. �. bows wom deleted from the -:list of special uses in the R5 General - Residence District by Ordinance 35-044, rendering th*.nursing hone non-confaraina. Recent actions by the Zoning Amendment Committ" provided permn*nt relief for the nursing hose which would otherwise have been subject to wlisinatioa-. IT. PROPOSAL ?he applicant now proposes to: mow" I. Coustiuct a fourth -story addition with a gross floor area of 6,507 square -feet and increase the number of patient beds -from 60 "to 94 on -the property at 120 Dodge Avenue; and 2. Install an 8-csr autombile parking lot at 111 Dodge Avenue to provide a portion of the required parking for the nursing •has*. �L. CONPLUXCE WM THE ZONING ORDINANCE , Zoning Analysis 84-460(5) of tbase proposals found: 120 Dodge Avenue 1. Rho use and building became nonconforming in 1974 when the Zoning Ordinance was amended by Ordinance 95-0-74 so as to delete'4nursiag homes" from the special use category in the R.5 General Usidence District. This action made both the use and building subject to Section 6-10-5(B) of the Nonconforming Structure and Use Regulations which prohibits expansion of a non -conforming use or building. 2. She proposed addition to the nursing home, an expansion of the facility from 60 patient beds to 94 beds, would not be permitted, since Section 6-5-5(A) does not list nursing hoses as a permitted use and Sections 6-10-5(A) and (B) permit only ordinary repairs and maintenance to structures designed for a nonconforming use. The expansion beyond 60 patient beds now contemplated would also be prohibited by condition 1 of • Ordinance 96-0-70 and condition 1 of the covenant recorded as document 21403814 on February 23, 1971. Also, condition 2 of f Ordinance 96-0-70 and condition 2 of the covenant recorded as -documeat•21403814 each require "all portions of the land not occupied by a building constructed pursuant to Ordinance 14-0-65, adopted by the City Council of the City of Evanston, shall remain open and -unobstructed to the sky and no expansion, addition or enlargement of said building shall be undertaken." 3. The floor area ratio of the building would be increased Z B A 8 5- �1. 8 ���,.� � rl'�rw•r'... .•rfie„++•r+r--. ��' 'e.�i.�•- .....::.L. ..►�i�R7l'►L�.:+.... y.ir". _ j• '- frog :71 to 7,,-V"reas a -V=1 as floor� area- vatic . allvwd Kt3oa�b-S-S(E)-ot-the Zoning Ordlnsara. mood:.-. Sectioir-5-1O'!tZMJL(B) 'Melt an:64 only ordinary.=aintenance _•n:.�'.�: p_ -acad'aa enlos araent:of the building. '=3h3s' increase "' ��•-•�-� im floor aiWiatio twald also•,violatr-condition- 2 of brdinanew-9b-4:7D end •conditionr-2 of the covenant recorded as ..,;►.: r* , Y : Document. 21�1.4....., �.. .- -• 4 a i+•i * ^*,the building:mould be Increased -to tour stories, includini the cafllar, whereas Section 6-5•-SQ) of throe stories, Including the �- :ca►11a�;==dS�on.6-10-5(S) prohibits any enlarg"Wat not In «.caator=itl.arith the Tesulations.• This- proposal would also ~'�--• elate condithn 2 of Ordinance 96-0-70 and condition 2 of covanastt.�;z rded as Document 21403814. S. The addition would reduce tare required front yard frame :.26.52-feet-Zo-,23:52 feet. whereas a 27-root front yard is required per Section 6-5-5(G}lead Section 6-10-5(S) which -. prohibits any enlargemnt not in conformity with the • regulations. This proposal would also violate condition 2 of Ordinance 96-0-70 and condition 2 of the covenant recorded as docnsent 7140=4, 6. The proposed addition would reduce the rear yard from 22.52 feet to -U.52 feet, whereas a rear yard of 25 feet is =equired per :ection 6-5-5(0)3, and Section 6-10-5(B) .:.�-prohibits Any -enlargement not in conformity with the 1Wulations. Also, condition 2 of Ordinance 96-0-70 and .condition 2 of the cotenant recorded as Document 21403814 would both prohibit the proposed enlargements. 7. The proposed addition would reduce the east side yard from 20 feet -t0 17 Peet, vhereas a 20-foot side yard is required per Section 6-5-5(G)2. and Section 6-10-5($) prohibits any enlargement not in conformity with the regulations. Also, condition 2 of Ordinance 96-0-70 and condition 2 of the covenant recorded as document 21403814 would both prohibit the proposed enlargement. S. The e=isting identification sign reading Dobson Plaza Nursing Some gas -never been approved through the special use process as required by Section 6-5-5($)7 of the Zoning Ordinance. 9. The proposed addition would project into the required front yard, east side yard, and rear yard, whereas Section 6-3-1 does not permit such obstruction of required yards. r� Z$A85 7 �_ . Lii Dodge Avenue • :_ • �... . She proposed 8-car automobile parking lot requires-.appcosal�.,,,...� _. ...�.a_special use per Section 6-5-S(B)2 of the Zoning Ordinance. ' *,pow-: - I4'. =A" SDccEMaNS r...,..... -If.the 3ord aconcurs with the proposed special use for six, . parkins lot at ill Dodge Avenue. City staff suggests the following I. A sir foot high solid cedar fence shall be installed along the north lot line instead of the planting strip now depicted an the;plan. and 2. the proposed four foot high screening hedge adjacent to the war of -the westernmost parking spaces shall consist of a double row of -plantings on alternate centers. (/171 ) 9/3/B5 � �1Fn F1LE ---� 2 B 97-0-85 SEP 56 . AN ORDINANCE Granting Variations and Special Use.. at 120 Dodge Avenue and 111 Dodge Avenue- WHEREAS, the Evanston Zoning Board of Appeals conducted a public hearing on August 20, 1985 upon the application of Dobson Plaza, Inc., owners of 120-bodge Avenue, and Mo;ris:Stern and Margaret Stern, owners of 111 Dodge Avenue, for (1) variations from the use, nonconforming structure and use, height, floor area ratio, front yard, rear yard, side yard, and yard cbstruction regulations of the Zoning Ordinance, release from conditions 1 and 2 of Ordinance 96-0-70 and the covenant recorded as document 21403814 to permit construction of a fourth story addition and expansion of the number of nursing home beds from 60 to 94 patient beds; (2) a special use to permit retention of an identification sign on the property located at 120 Dodge Avenue; and (3) a special use to permit installation of an 8-car parking lot at 111 Dodge Avenue to serve the nursing home, both properties located in an R5 General Residence District; said hearing having been conducted Fursl;ant to notice and publication thereof in the manner prescribed by law; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals has recommended that the application for said.variations and special use be granted, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED.BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EVANSTON, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS: SECTION 1: That the application°of-Dobson Plaza, Inc., owners of 120 Dodge Avenue, and Morris Stern and Margaret Stern, owners of 111 Dodge Avenue, for (1) variations from the use, nonconforming - structure and use, height, floor area ratio; front yard, rear yard, side yard, and yard obstruction regulations of the Zoning and 2 o: Ordinance 96-0-7: 97-0-85 e sn and the covenant recorded as document 21403814 to permit construction of a fourth Story addition and expansion of the number of nursing home beds from 60 to 94 patient beds; (2) a special use to permit retention of an identification sign on. the,property located at 120 Dodge Avenue, Evanston, Illinois; and (3) a special use to permit installation of an 8-car parking lot at ill Dodge.Avenue to serve the. nursing home, said properties legally described as follows: Lot W -in Dobson Plaza Consolidation of Lots 1, 20 3, 4 and 5 in -Block 4 in V. Hayden Bell's Howard -Dodge Subdivision of the South 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4, except the South 2.572 chains thereof,.of Section 25, Township 41 North, Range 13 East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois (except the East 7.0 feet thereof, taken for widening of Dodge Avenue), Lot 22 in Howard California Addition, being a Subdivision of the West 1/2 bf the West 11.976 chains of the South 8.35 chains of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 25, Township 41 North, Range 13, East of the Third Principal' Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois, are granted, subject to compliance with all other provisions of the Zoning Ordinance other applicable.laws and the following conditions: I. A six foot high solid 'cedar fence shall.be installed along the north line of the proposed parking lot in place of the planting strip depicted on the plan; 2. The proposed four foot high screening hedge adjacent r to the west of the westernmost parking spaces of the proposed parking lot shall consist of a double row of plantings on alternate centers; 3. In all other respects the construction shall be in substantial conformity with the plans placed on file in connection with this application; 4. The property shall never be used to accommodate more than ninety-four beds in the nursing home; ; 5. No further additions or enlargements of the building shall be undertaken, and all land not occupied by said building after the construction allowed herein is completed shall remain open and unobstructed to - the sky; 6. The properties shall remain on the tax rolls of Cook County as long as 120 Dodge Avenue shall be used for a nursing home and 111 Dodge Avenue -shall be used as a parking lot in conjunction therewith and the applicants shall agree on behalf of themselves, their _ heirs, successors and assigns not to seek tax exemption for said property, and this condition shall be binding upon all successors in title, ,che%her or not such successors in title would be otherwise r}^ II 97-0-85 eligible for a tax exemption under the laws of the state of Illinois; 7. A covenant of agreement -to the above terms and. - conditions shall be executed and recorded by the applicants, and copies of the recorded covenant shall be filed with the Law Department and the Director of 'Building and Zoning prior to issuance of any building permits authorized herein. SECTION 2: Tre. Director of•Building and Zoning is hereby directed to issue such permits pursuant to the terms of this ordinance. SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be in full force and affect from and after its passage, approval, and publication in the manner provided by law.. Appr ved: 1985 • V. Mayor MINUTES Planning and Development Committee August 24, 1987 7:30 P.N. Ald:f Prea'ent: S. Brady, R. Warshaw, J. Kdrshak, J.`9leteane, L. Morton and J. Rudy Ald. Absent: None Staff Present: R. Carlson, J. Aiello, R. Ahlberg, D. Rasmussen, B. Szymanski, C. Powers and R. Rudd Presiding Official: J. Korahak minutes of August 10. 1987. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee approve the ,minutes. Ald. Rudy recommended that the minutes be amended on page 4, paragraph 1. Ald. Rudy recommended that the minutes reflect that Mrs. Singh was opposed to the "variationa" and not the "project". Ald. Rudy also requested that the minutes reflect the staff -"=a to City Council referred to by Mrs. Singh. (memo dated March 19, 1937). With respect to paragraph 3 on page 4 of the August 10 minutes, Ald. Rudy recommended that the minutes reflect Mrs. Ferdinard referring to the traffic "going to" instead of "to the east". On page 5, Ald. Rudy requested that the "City's traffic engineering consultant" be identified as Hr. May with his correct title as "parking consultant". On page 3, Ald. Rudy recommended that the :minutes be amended on the third line from the bottom to reflect "prior to" rather than "prior". Ald. Warshaw requested that with respect to discussion about the variation for 1700 Payne reflect that she voted nay and that the final vote of the Committee should have been 5•-1. Ald. Warshaw also suggested that last line on page 2 reflect that "Fields Was a part-time, graduate student". Committee voted 6•-0 to approve the August 10 minutes as amended. Minutes of Special Meeting of August 12, 1987. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the special meeting of August 12, 1987. Ald. Rudy requested that the names of the consultants be reflected in the heading of the minutes as "others present". He stated that those individuals should be Messrs Katz, Strub, Tuba, Hedveai. Ald. Rudy also recommended that on page 2 that the reference to $960.000 refer only to one level and not two levels. Ald. Rudy also recommended that on page 3 that Siegel stated "variations on Hinman and Clark, and Hinman and Chicago" should be reflected. On page 5, Ald. Rudy reflected that the description of John Young, as "an old City employee" should be more accurately described as a "former City emplayee". Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes as amended. P & D Minutes August 24, 1987 Minutes of Special Meeting of Aujtust 17. 1987. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes. Ald. Rudy suggested that under "others present" that Keasrs Zuba, Kacsai, Strub, Hedvegi, Griffith be listed. Also Rudy recommended that on page 1, paragraph 2 that Kr. Zuba's statement should reflect that the special use for the parking garage would only be required if the garage was more than 12 ft. in height. On page 2, paragraph 1 Ald. Rudy recommended that Kr. Dale Strub be identified as a structural engineer and not the traffic engineer. Comittee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes as amended. Docket 185-88-87. ZBA 87-13-V&SU(R). Ordinance 83-0-87. re Variation and Special Use for 2024 Ewing Avenue. Ald. Warshaw moved and Aid. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council approval of the variation and special use for the construction of a room addition and a raised patio. Chairman Korshak wanted the minutes to reflect his appreciation for the manner in which the variation standards were sezplicitly set out in the transcript. Ald. Warshaw questioned the necessity for the special use for the patio. nave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, was present and indicated that due to the height of the patio and the fact that the patio was partially located in the required side yard the special use was required. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to the City Council approval of the variation and special use. July 1987 Monthly Rehab Report. The Committee received the monthly report without comment. ZBA 87-1 4-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 2000 Green Bay Road. Chairman Korshak once more indicated that he was pleased with the manner in which the variation standards were setforth. Ald. Brady suggested that issues such as those discussed on this variation decision should be brought to the attention of the consultants reviewing the zoning ordinance. Ald. Warshaw questioned how the members of the P A D Committee could be made aware when an item was a final decision or a recommendation from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Staff indicated that the public notice indicates to the form of an "R" or "F" as to whether ZBA is a recommending or final authority. If the ZBA is a final authority, aldermen are permitted to testify at the bearing. Docket 174-BA-87, ZBA 87-8-V&SU(R), Ordinance 78-0-B7 re Variations and Special Use 519-31 Church Street. Ald. Rudy questioned how this matter could be placed on the City Council agenda for action. Ald. Bleveans stated that there is precedent for docket Items without a recommendation from the Committee. Chairman Korshak indicated -2- P & D Minutes August 24, 1987 that this would be discussed at the City Council. Ald. Norton questioned the five (5) alternatives setforth in the memo from the City Manager to the City _ Council dated August 20, 1987. Ald. Rudy stated that he had discussed the numbers mentioned in the memo with the City Manager and stated that he has trouble accepting those figures. He stated that he feels that the numbers are grossly exaggerated and wants the City's parking consultant to review those numbers. He also made note that the numbers were apparently furnished by the developer. Docket 183-88-87. Citizens' Advisory Commiittae on Public Place Haines re Naming, of lakefront Pathway and a Park. Chairman Korshak indicated that he had spoken with Aldermen Radon and Rainey and that they had requested that the matter be continued to the next meeting (September 14, 1987 of the P b D Committee) to allow their participation. it was the consensus of the Committee to continue this matter until that date. LDocket 186-88-87. Ordinance B5-0-87, Zoning Ordinance Parking Provision Subject to Sunset Provision. Ald. Norton moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committoe approve the ordinance extending certain parking provisions of the zoning ordinance. Ald. Rudy stated that this issue was currently a subject matter of the Parking Committee of which he is a member. Ald. Rudy questioned what initial problems were anticipated when this provision was enacted. Ald. Rudy stated that tha City has a parking shortage problem and was doing nothing to correct it. He stated that the City is helping to create the problem by allowing change of uses, which may generate additional parking, to take place without providing any new parking. Rudy suggested that the City consider requiring now uses to make payments in lieu of parking if the City is to waive parking requirements. Bob Ahlberg, Zoning Planner, reviewed with the Committee discussions that ZAC has had regarding "payments in lieu of parking". Ahlberg went on to review with the Committee the memo requesting the indefinite extension of the subject parking provision. old. Bleveans reviewed with the Committee the issue of change of use and rouse of downtown properties that has been discussed at length over the past few years by both the P 6 D Committee and ZAC. Ald. Bleveans suggested that the Committee remember why the original parking provisions were adopted. He stated that the intent originally was to stimulate economic developement which was felt, in 1983. to be desirable in the downtown area. Ahlberg stated that ZAC has reviewed in the past and is currently reviewing "worse case scenarios" and finds that in many instances these have not been realized in the B4 and B5 Districts. Ahlberg reminded the Committee that even if the provision would sunset there would in many Instances be no opportunity to create parking by any change of use project. -3- P & D Minutes August 24, 1987 . .. A .Aid. Rudy stated that he is not opposed to the extension of the ordinance but is not satisfied with the lack of solving the parking problem. Rudy suggested extending the ordinance provision another year but not Indefinitely. Aid. Brady stated that now businesses are not expanding into Evanston on a great scale and not to have this provision would further st)mie economic growth in the B4 and B5 Districts. Aid, Warshaw moved that the Cozittee recommend to City Council extending the subject zoning ordinance provision until the adoption of the now Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. Seconded by Ald. Bleveans. Committee voted 6-0 to amend Ordinance 85-0-87 to reflect the motion. Docket 184-88-87, ZBA 86-40-SU(R). re Special Use for 2424 Oakton Street. Aid. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committeo accept the Zoning Board of Appeals recommendation to deny the special use. Ald. Warshaw stated that her review of the transcripts provided an excellent picture of the ,argument on both sides. Aid. Brady stated that she also felt that the transcripts were helpful but finds that the arguments against the special use were overwhelming. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council denial of the special use at 2424 Oakton . Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Next regular meeting of the P b D Committee is September 14, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: Robert T. Rudd 14 (14/17 ) -4- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee September 14, 1987 7:30 P.M. Ald. -Present S. Brady, R. Warshaw,, J. Korshak,.J. Bleveans, L. Morton and J. Rudy 'Ald.-'. Absent None Staff Present': R. Carlson; D. Rasmussen, C. Powers, L. Talkington, S. Eiseman, D. Carter.and.R.- Rudd. `. Presiding Official: L. Morton .minutes of August 24. 1987 Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approvi'th0 minutes of the Planning is Development Committee meeting of August 24, 1987 as submitted. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes (Aldermen - Korshak and Bleveans absent). Communications The Committee received a letter from Mark Kahan, attorney'for Banbury Development, requesting that the Taco Bell use variation be continued. The Committee scheduled the said use variation for the September 28, 1987 P & D Committee meeting. ZBA 87-18-SU(F), Final Special Use Decision re 1310 Lee Street. The Committee received a final decision from the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding a special use for 1310 Lee Street. ZBA 87-19-V(F), Final Variation Decision re 2715 Elgin Road. The Committee received a final decision from the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding 2715 Elgin Road, Minor Changes for 1100 Forest - Planned Unit Development (PUD). The Committee reviewed a memo from City Manger, Joel Asprooth explaining the approval of minor changes for 1100 Forest, Planned Unit Development. A Memorandum from the Housing Commission re Variation for 319 Dempster Street. The Committee reviewed a memorandum from the Housing Commission supporting the retention of the rooming house at 319 Dempster. Chairman Morton moved that this memo be discussed in conjunction with the variation for 319 Dempster Street. New Business Docket 193-9A-87, ZBA 86-41 -V(R), re Variation for 319 Dempster Street. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee accept the Housing Commission recommendation to retain the subject building and use and also to recommend to City Council to reverse the Zoning Board of E P & D Minutes September 14, 1987 Appeals decision to eliminate the subject use. Ald. Rudy stated that there are no major problems with the subject property, though there is some deterioration in that quarter of a block. Ald. Rudy suggested that the Committee, if it recommended approval to the City Council of retention of the subject premises, that conditions be attached. Ald. Rudy recommended that one condition be that the property is better managed and a second condition be that the property is upgraded in such areas as fire prevention. Ald. Brady questioned what is meant by upgrading? She stated that the Committee needed to be more specific to provide directions to the owners/operators and also to the City staff. Ald. Warshaw suggested that Instead of attaching these conditions to the ordinance that staff should be directed to look into the use of rental rehabilitation funds to work with the the owners in correcting housing violations. Ald. Warshaw w3rnod against placing conditions on the variation request if there would be no specific list. Ald. Warshaw also requested that staff take steps to attach to the title of the property, and to record in the County Clerk's office, the non -conforming status of the property so that future purchasers will be aware of the issues involved. Ald. gorshak suggested that the Committee consider holding over the matter until the owner has an opportunity to return to the P & D Committee to provide a list of items that will be corrected and also a time frame for correcting those items. Ald. Xorshak also stated that the transcript revealed that most of the renters are of modest means that the Committee consider conditioning the approval of the variation request by having the owner freeze the current rent levels to include annual increases of no more than 5% in addition to including the expenditure of dollars for repairs that would be pro rated over a period of time. Ald. Brady stated that she felt such a rent freeze should not be a part of the ordinance and that if the Committee pursued that line of thinking a legal opinion should be sought. Ald. Brady elso stated that the rental rehabilitation dollars prohibited rent control, and are based solely on the requirement that the tenants be of low and moderate income. Ald. Warshaw questioned an issue brought up in the transcript regarding transiency. She suggested that the renters have at least month -to -month tenancy and possibly attempt to have have annual leases. Ald. Rudy stressed that there is a need for improved management and better screening of tenants. John Roselli, attorney for the owner, was present and stated that he foresaw no problems with the conditions proposed by the P & D Committee. Roselli stated that he would meet with staff over the next two weeks to develop responses to the conditions proposed by the Committee. The Committee voted 6-0 to hold the matter over to the September 28, 1987 P & D Committee meeting, and directed staff to prepare an ordinance permitting the retention of the building and use for possible introduction at the City Council meeting of September 28, 1987. &a P & D Minutes September 14, 1987 Docket 191-9A-87. Resolution 55-R-87 re Housing Assistance Plan. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee approve the updated Housing Assistance Plan. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the Housing Assistance Plan as recommended by the Evanston Housing Commission. Docket 192-9A-87. ZBA 87-15-V(R), re Variations for 2642 Gross Point Road. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee concur with the Zoning Board of Appeals and recommend that City Council denial of the requested variation for construction of four attached single-family dwelling units. In addition to the recommendation for denial Ald. Brady suggested that the City take steps to look at the property in order to have the current house either repaired or demolished. Ald. Brady also requested that the Committee encourage the owner to come back to the Committee if a less dense plan can be developed (two units). The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council denial of the requested variation. Docket 194-9A-87. Ordinance 88-0-87. ZBA 87-16-SU(R). re Special Use for 2525 Church Street. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee concur with the ZBA recommendation and recommend to the City Council to grant a special use for additional off-street parking in the front yard of the subject site. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the spec=al use. Docket 189-9A-87. Revised Multi Family and Rental Rehabilitation Guidelines. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed guidelines. Ald. Brady stated that shrl would ask the Committee to amend the guidelines to allow "two or more units" to be eligible under multi family versus the proposed "three or more". Ald. Bleveans concurred with the amended motion. Ald. Brady stated that the Mayor's Special Housing Fund Committee has learned quite a bit through its process, as have members of the Housing Commission, and felt that the multi family guidelines needed simplicity and also similarity to the Rental Rehabilitation Program. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the amended Multi Family and Rental Rehabilitation Guidelines. Docket 190-9A-87. Resolution 54-R-87, Preservation Grant Assurance of Compliance. Aid. Warshaw moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the Resolution. Gwen Sommers -Pant, Preservation Coordinator was present and stated that the City will receive -3- E P & D Minutes September 14, 1987 a grant to cover the expense of a summer intern and expenses involved in preliminary consolidation/update of historic structures data. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the Resolution. Request for Review of Decision of SiRn Review & Aoveals Board for 1901 Green Bay Road. Aid. Warshaw moved and Aid. Brady seconded that the Committee accept the Sign Review & Appeals Board decision and not hear an appeal. Ald. Korshak stated that he feels that a legal opinion may be necessary so that the Committee could have a full airing of some of the questions posed by the appellant. Aid. Korshak suggested that the matter be held over while a legal opinion is being developed. Ald. Bleveans stated that his reading of the ordinance requires the Committee to either to set a hearing or to deny the request for a hearing. !le questioned whether the Committee could take no action tonight and allow time for a legal opinion. Aid. Bleveans questioned the owner of the property, Fred Wertymer, as to whether he would agree to allow the Committee to not take an action, and thus not set a hearing date. and allow a two week period to obtain a legal opinion. Wertymer stated that he feels he is entitled to a hearing and the reversal of the Sign Review & Appeals Board decision. Wertymer requested the Committee to direct staff to respond to a memorandum previously submitted to the Sign Review & Appeals Board and to staff from his attorney. Wertymer also stated that he would agree to the two week delay if the legal opinion would respond to his attorney's legal memorandum. The Committee informed Wertymer that the City's Legal Department would provide a legal opinion and it may or may not address the legal memorandum prepared by Wertymer's attorney. Aid. Warshaw moved and Aid. Bleveans seconded that the Committee vote to not hear an appeal and also request a legal opinion be provided by the City's Legal Department. Aid. Brady stated that she felt that there was extensive discussion by the P & D Committee and the sign consultant in adopting the ordinance and reels comfortable with the appeals process contained in the ordinance. She also stated that she is quite comfortable with the Sign Review & Appeals Board's decisions over the past few months. Aid. Warshaw concurred with with the high degree of satisfaction and excellent conclusions of the Sign Review & Appeals Board in their decision making process. The Committee voted 5-1 on'the motion. Voting Nay: Alderman Morton. Ad ournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Next regular meeting of the P & D Committee, Monday, September 28, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: 00, obert ?Tr/dd 39(18/21) -4- k MINUTES Planning and Development Committee September 28, 1987 7:30 P.M. ,Minutes of September 14..1987 Ald. Bleveans Moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of September 14,.1987 as submitted. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes. Co, unications ZRA 87-17-V&SU(F). Final Variation and Special Use Decision re 1620 Asbury Avenue. The Committee received a final decision of the zoning Board of Appeals regarding a special use for a fence at 1620 Asbury. Ald. Brady requested a status report from the Plan Commission regarding a reference from the P & D Committee to that Commission to review fences. September 24, 2987 "Evanston Review" Article re St. Francis Hospital Heliport Proposal. The Committee received a notification correcting the date published by the Evanston Review for the St. Francis Hospital Heliport hearing. Ald. Warshaw requested that staff attempt to notify the community, in the event of future changes in hearings, as early as possible. Old Business Docket 193-9A-87. ZBA 86-41-V(R). re Variation for 319 Dempster Street. The Committee reviewed a letter from John Roselli, attorney for the applicants of 319 Dempster Street. Roselli requested that the matter be continued to the October 26, 1987 P & D Committee meeting. The Committee continued the matter as requested. New Business Docket 214-98-87. ZBA 87-20-SU(R), re Special Use for 838 Dodge Avenue. The Committee reviewed a recommendation by the Zoning Board of Appeals to deny a special use permit for the establishment of a type 2 restaurant at 838 Dodge Avenue. Ald. Varshnw moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee accept the ZBA recommendation for denial. Ald. Rudy stated that one of the main reasons he opposes such a special use request is the cumulative effect of P & D Committee - Minutes September 28, 1987 similar restaurants. He stated that the City needs to begin to define the saturation point when too many restaurants exist in close proximity. Aid. Bleveans stated that the comprehensive amendment to the zoning ordinance would take this issue into account. Aid. Warshaw questioned staff as to the method In which objectors to petitions are counted? Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, stated that the report counts only those objectors that speak at the hearing. Aid. Korshak suggested that a sign -in sheet be provided to account for all objectors present, though they may not speak due to repetitious comments. Aid. Warshaw questioned staff as to the notification procedure in the neighborhood surrounding Fun In the Bun as compared to the 838 Dodge project. Rasmussen explained the notification procedure. Ald. Warshaw stated that she feels that there is a need to regulate convenience stores possibly in a manner similar to fast food restaurants. She stated that she has been informed that the owner of the Seven -Sloven at Dodge and Main has stated that 851. of the business is of a carry -out nature. Aid. Brady stated that she agrees there is a factOL' c:' cumulative effect in this particular instance, but feels l.hat tho Seven -Eleven is the greatest offender in the area. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend acceptance of the ZBA denial for the special use for a type 2 restaurant. Docket 213-98-87. ZBA 87-21-SU(R), Ordinance 100-0-87 re Special Use for 1551 Sherman Avenue. Ald. Warshaw moved and Aid. Korshak seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council concurrence with the ZBA recommendations to grant a special use for a type 2 restaurant at 1551 Sherman Avenue. Ald. Rudy stated that he has had no negative response to this request and is supportive of the request. Aid. Brady stated that she is in favor the special use request since the type of operation is limited by menu and type of operation set Forth in the ordinance. Aid. Rudy requested the owner to limit the late night use of the dumpster in the alley so that noise does not become a problem with the adjacent residential uses. Ald. Rudy also suggested that the owner consider securing the private alley in some manner to limit access. Aid. Brady questioned the hours of operation by the owner, particularly with respect to the 2:00 a.m. closing on some nights. Applicant David Woods was present and stated that the hours were based on what he views as his competition (Bennigan's, Burger King, McDonald's). Aid. Korshak suggested that the Committee consider an annual review of the hours of operation. Ald. Bleveans suggested that the Committee consider a review in one (1) year, but not annually thereafter. Ald. Bleveans moved and Aid. Rudy seconded that the Committee add as a condition of the special use ordinance that the P & D Committee will conduct a review one (1) year after passage of the ordinance. Rasmussen added that the Committee should amend condition 2 on page 1 of the proposed ordinance to include "pro -packaged snack items". The Committee agreed to accept the two (2) amendments and voted 6-0 to recommend introduction of the special use ordinance. -2- P & D Committee - Minutes September 28, 1987 Consider Possible Reference to ZAC re Encouming Handicap Access. Ald. Warshaw moved that the P & D Committee hold over this item until the November 9, 1987 Committee meeting to allow some handicapped constituents to conduct further research on this matter. During discussion Gerald Gordon stated that it is an important subject and that handicapped accessibility should be implemented now. Staff informed the Committee that handicapped accessibility requirements are presently contained in the current ROCA Code in addition to the State of Illinois Handicapped Accessibility Code. The Committee requested that when this item cones before the Committee in November that a report be provided as to the manner in which handicapped accessibility codes are implemented through the Building Code. ockat 149-7A-87 .ZBA 87-4-SU(R), re Spacial Use for 1900-80 Dem2stor Street (Taco Bell). Mark Kahan, attorney for the shopping center, was present and stated that he had new evidence and wished to introduce that material to the P & D Committee. He stated that the new evidence addressed the issue of cumulative effect. Ald. Bleveans stated that the Committee has not had the opportunity to review what may or may not be new evidence, and it was his opinion that this matter should be referred back to the ZBA which is the proper forum to hear this material. Rasmussen stated that new evidence would be material that could not have been presented at the earlier ZBA hearing and therefore it would be appropriate for P & D to refer back to ZBA for a determination if a rehearing is justified. Rasmussen also stated that if the matter is referred back to ZBA, the P & D Comittee must be specific as to what narrow issue would be addressed by ZBA. Gordon stated that he was opposed to any new evidence being presented to the P & D Committee or ZBA and felt that due we the lengthy hearing process the P & D Committee should make a decision tonight. Ald. Bleveans stated that he feels that the P & D Committee should not hear the new material because proper notice has not been given to all interested parties and that ZBA is the proper hearing body and not the P & D Committee. Ald. Brady stated that she did not want to hear expert testimony but would be open to accept a brief two or three minute presentation by Kahan. Ald. Warshaw agreed that she would be willing to listen to some new evidence at the P & D Committee. Kahan stated that he would be willing to go back to ZBA to present what he feels is new evidence. Bennett Johnson was present and stated that he feels that it is unusual to go back to ZBA and due to the many delays on the Taco Bell issue that it would be inappropriate to once more send it back to ZBA. Ald. Korshak stated that he feels that the applicant has a right to go back to ZRA and argue that he has new evidence that was not available at the original hearing. If the ZRA agrees to hear new evidence, objectors would also have an opportunity to review the material. Ald. Bloveans questioned whether the applicant wanted to go back to 'ZBA to address the issue of now evidence or to ask the P & D Committee to proceed to vote, without viewing the supposed new evidence at tonight's meeting? Ald. Bleveans stated that even if the P & D Committee and City Council should turn -3- SIR P & D Committee - Minutes September 28, 1987 down the current special use request, the applicant would have an opportunity to go back to ZBA, based on the argument of new evfdence and have another hearing. Kahan stated that he wanted to go back to ZBA to only address the issue of new evidence and he preferred to have the P & D Committee not take a vote a tonight's meeting. Ald. Rudy stated his discomfort with the matter since there is no knowledge as to whether the material Kahan has in hand is actual new evidence. Ald. Korshak stated that if the matter should go back to ZBA he would require that the applicant file for ZBA hearing in a timely manner. It was agreed by the Committee that the applicant would file for a ZBA hearing no later then October 15, 1987. Ald. Korahak moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee vote to refer the question of new evidence back to ZBA subject to the time constraint, and if ZBA determines the after of new evidence is sufficient to grant a rehearing, to limit said hearing to testimony dealing with cumulative effect, and to not take a vote on the current matter before the P & D Committee at this time. Committee voted 5-0 to refer the matter back to ZBA to review the question of new evidence and rehearing. Reauost for Review of Decision of Sign Review and Appeals Board Denial of Variation from Approved Unified Business Center Sign Plan for Evanston Plaza. Dodge Avenue and Dempster. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee decline to hear an appeal requested by the applicants for an additional sign at 1970 Dempster Street (Payless Shues). Committee voted 6-0 to decline to hear the appeal. Homeless Shelter Continuation - Annual Review. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee schedule a public hearing to discuss the continuation of the homeless shelter at 607 Lake Street at the nest regular meeting of the P & D Committee at 7:30 p.m. on October 12, 1987. Docket 183-8B-87, Citizens' Advisory Committee on Public Place Names re Naminp, of Lakefront Pathway and a Park. Ald. Bleveans stated that he favors the upholding of the five year rule for both of the requested proposals. However, since the issue of the tot -lot is dealing with a deceased of between four and five years he would consider voting at the Committee level to approve the naming of the tot -lot but hold in abeyance the actual action until the five year period expired. Ald. Rainey was present and stated that the tot -lot has recently been rehabilitated and that to hold for the five year period would place the dedication ceremony in the fall of 1988. She requested Ald. Bloveans to amend his action to allow the dedication ceremony to take place after May 1, 1988. Ald. Bleveans stated that he would amend his motion to allow for action by the P & D Committee and the City Council to allow for dedication to take place after May 1, 1988 and thus allow approximately a three month waiver to the five year rule. The motion was seconded by Ald. Warshaw. Therefore the request for renaming the -4- P & D Committee - Minutes September 28, 1987 tot -lot for Mr. Levinson would be recommended by the P A D Committee and approved by the City Council at the September 28, 1987 meeting but not become .effective until May 1, 1988. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend this proposal. The second proposal regarding the pathway hearing was continued to the October 12, 1987 P & D Committee meeting. Docket 212-9B-87. Amendment to the Existint Structures Code to Include Enforcement of the Graffiti Removal - Ordinance 98--0-87. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of Ordinance 98-0-87 amending the Existing Structures Code to include graffiti removal enforcement procedures. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the amendment. #jdournment The meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Next regular meeting of the P b D Committee, Monday, October 12, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: 'n� Lr 0 aR l�ec;l. R dd 39(18/22) -5- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee October 12, 1987 7:30 P.K. ald: Present: S: Brady., R: Warshaw, J..Korshak,'.'J: Bleveane, L.-Morton _and J: Rudy Ald. Absent* None Staff Present:. J.' Aiello, S..'Sisoman. 6.., Szymanski, and .R::` Rndd Presiding Official: L. Morton Minutes of September 28. 1987 Aid. Warshaw moved and Aid. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning 6 Development Committee meeting of September 28. 1987 as submitted. The Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes. Communications Auxust-September 1987 Monthly Rehab Report. The Committee received the combined monthly report. Reference on Front Yard Fences - Plan Commission. The Committee reviewed a memo from the Plan Commission which indicated that the Commission would make no recommendation at this time regarding front yard fences. The Commission recommended that the issue of special uses for front yard fences be addressed during the comprehensive amendment to the zoning ordinance process. Aid. Warshaw questioned whether the Plan Commission addressed the particular issue raised by the P & D Committee, namely the question of the eighteen (18) inch height for front yard fences? Ald. Brady concurred that she had hoped to address the eighteen (18) inch height limitation but as long as the ordinance will be amended and that matter will be addressed, she is satisfied with waiting. Aid. Rudy asked the Committee if the original reference was made with the intent of eliminating front yard fences? Aid. Brady stated that the elimination of front yard fences was not necessarily the reason for the reference but that the Committee was more interested in what the background was for determining an eighteen (18) inch height limitation for front yard fences. The Committee decided to take no further action and await the comprehensive amendment to the zoning ordinance. New Business Public Hearing: Homeless Shelter Continuation. Chairman Horton called to order the public hearing for a one year extension to the Homeless Shelter operated by the Center for Public Ministry at 607 Lake Street. In addition to the extension request is a proposal to amend Ordinance P & D Minutes October 12, 1987 49-0-86 to allow thirty (30) inhabitants year round versus the current limitation of twenty (20) from June 1 through October 31 and thirty (30) from November 1 through May 31. Carol Moachandreas, a representative of the Shelter, was present and requested the Committee approve the one (1) year continuation and also the increase in occupancy on a year-round basis. Ald. Brady questioned Ald. Rudy, in whose ward the shelter is located, as to whether he has received any complaints. Ald. Brady stated that she has not received any complaints over the past year. She also stated that she would be in favor of increasing the occupancy level from twenty (20) to thirty (30) year-round. In response to the question, Ald. Rudy stated that he has not received any complaints and that he supports both the extension of the Shelter and also the requested increase. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council extension of the Shelter for a one (1) year period. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council continuation of the Shelter. A menbar of the audience questioned whether the City Police Department or other departments have received complaints regarding the operation of the shelter. Jeanne Fox, Executive Director of Mental Health, indicated that the City had received only one (1) call on the hotline from a neighbor over the past year. She stated that the Police Department has received two or three calls over the punt year regarding some behavioral problems of Shelter occupants, but that the Shelter has cooperated in every way to resolve these problems to the satisfaction of the City. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council amending Ordinance 49-0-86 to allow for the increase from twenty (20) to thirty (30) occupants on a year-round basis. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to the City Council the increase of the occupants. An amendment to Ordinance to 49-0-86 will be prepared for introduction at the October 26, 1987 City Council meeting reflecting the change. Docket 183-88-87. Citizens' Advisory Committee on Public Place Names re Haminik of Lakefront Pathway. Mr. Michael Maltz was present and stated that he supported naming the path for Mr. Fredric DuBow. Mr. Maltz read a letter from Peggy Tarr, another supporter, indicating the support of the Nichols Neighbors for the renaming. Maltz explained to the Committee that Mr. DuBow helped institute the Police -Beat Program and has always provided assistance and support in civic endeavors. Mr. Maltz reviewed the standards for renaming the path in Mr. DuBow's name and concluded that Mr. DuBow met the criteria set forth. Ms. Lonnie Stansfield, a member of the Evanston Running Club, was present and stated that the Club was unanimously in favor of naming the running path for Mr. DuBow. She stated that Mr. DuBow was the founder of the running club and had worked with the Recreation Department in planning the running path. Ms. Liz Heller, Fitness Director at the YMCA, was present and stated that she -2- P & D Minutes October 12, 1987 supports naming the path for Mr. DuBow and sees this as an incentive and motivation for others to run. Phil Peters, Chairman of the Citizens' Committee on Public Place Names was present and stated that the Committee recomsended against naming the path for Mr. DuBow since no compelling evidence or information was submitted to the Committee to satisfy the fifth standard which requires that an individual be deceased for at least five (5) years. Mr. Maltz stated that he feels that sufficient evidence has now been supplied to the P A D Cor ittee to satisfy the fifth requirement. Aid. Brady stated that she does not believe the City should break the five year rule at this point but would be willing to reevaluate that standard in the near future. Ald. Korshak stated that he has spoken with Ald. Radon who conveys strong support for naming the running path for Mr. DuBow. He further stated that he has received numerous calls from supporters in favor of naming the path for DuBow. Korshak stated that the five year rule was not arbitrary but that it also was not applicable in every instance. Ald. Bleveans stated that he was against waiving the five year rule and that he felt that it was important to evaluate after a five year period an to whether the veneration of an individual has withstood the test of time. lion Wirth, Director of Parks, Recreation and Forestry, was present and in response to a question from Ald. Norton indicated that if the naming was approved, a concrete plaque would be embedded in the path honoring Mr. DuBow. He stated that unless otherwise directed the City would finance the cost of the plaque and installation. Ald. Rudy stated that he supports the comments made by Aldermen Brady and Bleveans and would recommend against waiving the five year requirement. Ald. Bleveans moved that the Committee recommend to the City Council supporting the Citizens' Committee for Public Place Names recommendation not to name the path for Mr. DuBow at this time and to place this matter on the Citizens' Committee for Public Place Names and P & D Committee in early 1992 (end of five year period) to allow for the review. Ald. Brady seconded the motion. Ald. Warshaw suggested amending the motion to include a condition that the running path would not be named in the interim period for anyone else and that Mr. DuBow's name would be specifically considered in 1992. Aldermen Brady and Bleveans accepted the amendment as part of the motion. The Committee voted 5-1 (Ald. Korshak voting nay) to make the subject recommendation to City Council. Chairman Morton asked that a reference be forwarded to the Citizen's Committee for Public Place Names to discuss the difference between placing a marker acknowledging achievement versus identifying the path or other property in someone's name. Docket 230-10A-87. Lake Michi,xan Corridor of Opportunity. Chairman Morton indicated that she would request of Ald. Korshak that this matter be removed from the City Council consent agenda. Ald. Korshak stated that it was his opinion that the City should follow the Chamber and Ynventure positions and not provide monetary support for this request. Chairman Morton -3- P b D Minutes October 12, 1987 raised questions about the Articles of Association and whether the total budget of $175,000 would obligate the City to further contributions. Judy Aiello, Assistant City Manager, was present and reviewed with the Committee the Articles of Association and the overall proposal. Aiello stated that the proposal was primarily for the promotion of tourism along the lakeshore. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether there would be expectations for an additional $5,000 each year. Aiello stated that the amount requested could be expected to be $5,000 but that the City would vote on that expenditure each year. Ald. Korshak stated that he felt that the proposal was well suited for some undeveloped communities with extensive lakeshore but was not intended for a mature City like Evanston. Aiello stated that the proposal would be coordinated with the lakeshore communities and would address all facets of the area. Ald. Brady questioned whether a new organization would need to be established or whether some current agency would administer this request. Aiello stated that most of the work would be conducted by volunteers and coordinated with NIPC. Ald. Brady questioned the reasons for the Chamber of Commerce and Inventure not joining. Aiello stated that it was her understanding that the Directors of those two groups rejected the proposal but that the issuo was not taken before their respective boards. Ald. Bleveans stated that he felt that the request merited a $5,000 contribution from Evanston. Ald. Korshak cautioned the Committee that due to a tight budget the $5,000 could be better spent on more serious problems within the City. Korshak asked whether Wilmette, Winnetka and Glencoe had joined! Phil Peters, a representative of NIPC, was present and stated that those three (3) communities voted not to join the Lake Michigan Corridor Council because the matter was one of tourism and those communities are not tourist oriented towns. Ald. Brady recommended that the Committee table the matter until Inventure and Chamber of Commerce boards make a recommendation on the request. It was the consensus of the Committee to hold over until further Information was received. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for Monday, October 26, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: Abaert T: Rudd 39(18/21) -4- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee October 26, 1987 7:30 P.N. Ald. Present: S. Brady; R. Warshaw, J. Bleveans; L. Norton `and J. Rudy Ald.:Absent: J: Korshak Staff Present: J. Aiello, R. Carlson-,, E.. Szymanski,, D.-Rasmussen; R. Ahlberg, Frank Kaminski and R. Rudd. .: Presiding Official:. L. Morton Minutes of October 12. 1987 Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve -the •; minutes of the Planning 6 Development Committee meeting of October.12, 1987 as submitted. The Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes.* Communications Chairman Norton indicated to the Committee that an error was made in a prior meeting with reference to a request by the applicant for the Dodge/Dempster Shopping Plaza to submit new evidence for review by the Planning 6 Development Committee. Chairman Morton reminded the Committee that this matter was referred back to the Zoning Board of Appeals but indicated that, per P & D Committee Rules and Procedures, the new evidence could have been reviewed by the Committee if it was submitted in writing by the applicant. She suggested that the Committee be aware of this rule in future instances. Docket 193-9A-87, Ordinance 99-0-87, ZBA 86-41-V(R), re Variation for 319 Dempster Street. Ald. Brady stated that it was her expectation that a housing code compliance plan should have been submitted by the applicant. Ald. Warshaw also stated that she expected an agreement to have been reached between the City and the applicant and to condition the variation request upon the applicant resolving all of the housing violations. Rudd explained to the Committee that at a very late date the applicant submitted an agreement addressing rent limitations and leases in addition to the housing code matter. Rudd stated that the Committee should keep in mind that there are actually two (2) distinct issues involved: one being the zoning variation request and the second being a desire of the Committee to leverage the zoning request to attempt to obtain compliance with the housing code. Rudd explained to the Committee that they have an option of passing the variation request and placing a covenant on the property with respect to requiring the applicant to settle all of the housing code violations within a certain time period. The Committee also has the option of holding the ordinance and requiring compliance with the Housing Code within the next several weeks. in response to a question from the Committee, Ellen Szymanski stated that it was possible to put conditions on an ordinance but that it would not be advisable to pass the variation ordinance and then attempt to rescind or revoke the variation at a later date due to non-compliance with the housing code. Rudd indicatel that,tt Ccoomi should be aware that there currently is a mechanism or g P & D Committee Minutes October 26, 1987 with the housing code via the court system. Ald. Brady stated that she is troubled with placing a conditions on this property to gain compliance with the housing code due to the precedent it would set. Ald. Warshaw stated that she understands the applicant's point of view in that he may be required to expend several thousand dollars for improvements and in the end not be granted the variation. Ald. Bleveans stated that the long list of violations (approximately 150) are items that should have been addressed by the applicant prior to this request and that the applicant shouldn't necessarily need a guarantee of being granted the use variation. In response to a question from Chairman Morton regarding past violations, Catherine Powers, Director of Housing Rehab & Property Maintenance, stated that the nature of the deficiencies appear to be violations caused by deferred maintenance over the past two (2) years. Aid. Rudy moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee hold this matter over for ninety (90) days (or the first P & D Committee meeting in February, 1988) to give the applicant an opportunity to correct all violations. Committee voted 5-0 to hold this matter for ninety (90) days. John Roselli, attorney for the applicant, stated that he was opposed for the same reason cited earlier in that his client has received no guarantee that if the violations are corrected the variation Will be granted. He stated that his client has attempted to correct all past violations and that the new list could require as much as $40,000-$50,000 of investment without any guarantee the variation would be approved. Ald. Bleveans question Roselli as to whether his client would provide a cash bond or a letter of credit in an amount to cover the cost of the repairs. Roselli indicated that could cause a problem. Roselli stated that his client has agreed to provide written leases and limit rent increases per a proposal attached to his letter dated October 22, 1987 to Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Zoning Director. Roselli questioned whether the proposed rent limitations and leases on a month -to -month basis were acceptable to the Committee? Ald. Brady stated that she favors the rent limitations proposed and cited similar experiences with the Mayor's Special Housing Fund Committee in imposing rent limitations on approved projects. Ald. Warshaw stated that though the rent limitations are for a period of five (5) years she finds them acceptable because the units are single room occupancy only and that the size of the rooms most likely would limit any expected escalated rents. She felt that the benefit far out weighed the risks. Roselli indicated that the rent would increase by 4.25% plus a portion of the increased annual operating expense (real estate taxes and energy cost). Concern was expressed by the Committee that significant increases could result from the owner applying the real estate and energy costs to rents and that the City would have a difficult, if not impossible, time in administering this condition. After further discussion it was agreed by the Committee and applicant that the applicant would begin making repairs over the next ninety (90) days and that Mr. Roselli would meet with staff to finalize an agreement to bring back to the Committee in February, 1988 addressing the rent limitations. -2- P & D Committee Minutes October 26, 1987 Docket 230-1OA-87. Lake Michigan Corridor of Opportunity. Ms. Dee Clancy, Director of Lake Michigan Corridor Council, was in attendance and provided background on the Council and distributed to the Committee a brochure detailing the proposal. As at the previous meeting, the Committee questioned as to why the Chamber of Commerce and Inventure did not get involved. Judy Aiello, Assistant City Manager, stated that a request has been made to those two (2) bodies to provide an answer to the City before City Council is expected to make a decision. Ald. Warshaw stated that she was not necessarily opposed to the program but that the City of Evanston has other demands on the budget and the requested $5,000. Aiello stated that the matter would be brought back to the Committee when a response from the Chamber of Commerce and Inventure was received. Docket 238-1OB-87, Ordinance 113-0-87, ZBA 87-23-V&SU(R), re Variation and Special Use for 3200 Grant Street. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council approval of the variation and special use for the construction of two additions and remodeling of the Wilson/Sid-well, Wing of the Presbyterian Home. Ald. Rudy questioned whether the issue of water retention was resolved. Rasmussen stated that the applicant must meet HSD requirements in addition to City of Evanston engineer guidelines. Ald. Rudy question if the applicant did meet the required guidelines would the neighbor raising the question not have additional problems? Rasmussen stated that the current water problem would not be exacerbated by the future development. Ald. Rudy also questioned that in his opinion the model did not appear to be in conformance with the plan submitted in his packet. Of particular concern was the closeness of the proposed addition to the existing townhouses. He questioned the applicants as to whether consideration was &Ivan to moving the building further away from the townhouses? Pete Mulvey, Director of the Presbyterian Home, was present and stated that except for one resident, the people living in the townhouses closest to the new addition signed petitions supporting the addition. He further stated that the Presbyterian Home had no other choice but to build in that location due to other restrictions. He stated that if occupants of the townhouses were unhappy the home would attempt to move the residents and if extreme measures needed to be taken, relocate or demolish the townhouses. Ald. Rudy moved that a substitute amendment be made that the building be moved a distance from the townhouses equal to the height of the proposed addition. The motion failed for the lack of a second. Ald. Warshaw questioned as to whether the aldermen of the ward were in favor of the project. Mulvey indicated that both Aldermen Nelson and Wold supported the project. The Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council introduction of Ordinance 113-0-87 to grant a variation and special use for the subject project. Update on Recent Activities re the North Shore Channel. The Committee received a staff report detailing recent Metropolitan Sanitary District activities regarding the North Shore Channel without comment. -3- P S D Committee Minutes October 26, 1987 Ald. Larson's Reference re Public Place Names Committee. Ald. Brady suggested that a review of criteria #4 (the meaning of contribution) also be asked of the Public Place Names Committee. Committee voted 5-0 to refer this reference to the Public Place Names Committee. Docket 236-1O8-87. Plat of Consolidation ro 2400 Dempster Street. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the subject plat of consolidation. Committee voted S-0 to recommend the approval of the plat. Docket 234-1OB-87. Selection of Consultant and Creation of Blue Ribbon Committee, Ald. Warshaw expressed concern about the composition of the Blue Ribbon Committee. She stated that she received numerous phone calls from. Individuals stating that it was felt that the current composition was introspective and composed of current members of zoning Boards/Commissions and that the Committee needs to have an outside perspective. She suggested that the P b D Committee consider expanding the proposed six member Blue Ribbon Committee to nine members by including three citizen -board members. She further suggested that the three citizen -board members be experienced zoning attorneys in the area and/or architects/planners. Ald. Rudy questioned the process for the Blue Ribbon Committee. Bob Ahlberg, Zoning Planner, reviewed the memo with the Committee which detailed the selection of the Blue Ribbon Committee as proposed in the earlier RFP. Ald. Brady stated that she concurs with adding three citizens to the Committee and moved that the Committee recommend to the City Council expanding the Blue Ribbon Committee to nine members (three citizens) and that appointments be made by the Mayor. Aid. Bleveans seconded the motion and the P 6 D Committee voted 5-0 to make that recommendation to City Council. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the recommendation to direct the City Manager to negotiate a contract with the consulting team of Camiros, Ltd. and Siemon, Larsen, Mattlin b Purdy to comprehensively revise the Zoning Ordinance. f Committee voted 5-0 to make that recommendation to City Council. Buralary Prevention Ordinance All members of the Committee expressed concern in that they were unaware of the background that led to the proposed Ordinance 69-0-87 which calls for significant improvements to single family and multi family residential units with respect to security matters. Ald. Warshaw stated that she would like to receive comments from the Fire Department with respect to this matter and In particular related to the requirement to change doors. Chairman Morton expressed concern with the requirement that this ordinance would apply to single family homes. Other Committee members requested that a detailed history of the ordinance in addition to technical material be supplied to the Committee so that it could be reviewed. Ann Graff, a representative of the -4- P & D Committee Minutes October 26,• 1987 Residential Crime Prevention Committee (RCPC) was present and provided a brief background. Ald. Bleveans questioned whether any estimates were developed by the drafters of the ordinance to determine the cost of complying with the proposed ordinance? Graff and Ivan U ppitz, also a member of the committee, stated that at this point they were not aware of any estimates. The Committee directed that the matter be held over to the November 9, 1967, P & D Committee meeting and that further information be supplied. Rudd stated that the Committee should be aware that the proposal is one developed by the RCPC and that any reports and background material would need to be supplied by that committee since staff only provided limited technical assistance during the review process. The Committee agreed to hold this matter over until November 9 and await further material from RCPC. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting is scheduled for Monday, November 9, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: Aobrt T.` Ztudd 39(18l22) -5- HIN[JTES Planning and Development Committee November 9, 1987 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. Ald::-,Present: S. Brady, R. Warshaw,"J.,Korebak, J- Bley'lRans;. L . Horton and J. Rudy Ald... Absent: Bona Staff Present: R. Carlson, D. Rasmussen, E. Szymanski,..Otficsr.F. Kaminski, Officer K. Kempol and R. Rudd Presiding Official.r' S. Brady hinutes of October 26, 1987. Ald. !Gorton moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning g Development Committee of October 26, 1987. Ald. Warshaw moved that the minutes be amended on page 4 under Burglary Prevention Ordinance to reflect that she requested in addition to comments from the Fire Department regarding doors, that the Department also review the proposed "locking" requirements. Committee voted 6-0 to approved the minutes as amended, Communications ZBA Public Notice for November 17. 1987. The Committee received a copy of the notice without comment. Consideration Possible Reference to ZAC re Creating Two Zonint Boards. Chairman Brady provided some background regarding this reference from Ald. Nelson. in response to a question from Ald. Rudy regarding the approximately $44,000 budget item attached to the creation of two zoning boards, Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning explained an itemized and detailed expense budget accounting for the dollar amount. Ald. Norton questioned why the staff would need to be doubled! Staff explained that it was understood that the amount of zoning board meetings would need to be doubled in the some timeframe when currently one meeting is held, thus generating twice as much work. Ald. Bleveans questioned that possibly the new zoning ordinance would lessen the need for variations and special uses and thus not require two zoning boards. The Committee discussed whether the purpose of the creation of two zoning boards was to decrease the hearing time or to provide two separate zoning boards to handle residential versus commercial/industrial requests. Ald. Norton moved that this matter be referred to the consultant reviewing the new zoning ordinance. Ald. Bleveans concurred that this issue and the issue of alternatives to two zoning boards be reviewed by the consultant. Committee voted 6-0 to refer this issue to the zoning consultant. Docket 242-11A-87. Ordinance 116 -0-87. ZBA 87-25-V&SU(R), re Variation and Svecial Use for 1801 Emerson Street. Ald. Eorshak moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council approval of the variation and special use to permit construction of an addition and handicapped accessibility ramp for the church at the subject site. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the zoning request. Bnrttlary Prevention Ordinance. Ald. Brady introduced the matter by suggesting that the Committee, at some point during the meeting, outline a proceeding for hearing this issue. Ald. Rudy stated that he would very much like to have the input of the Preservation Cosimission since the ordinance impacts on the charges of that body. Ald. Rudy questioned whether the housing Commtission would also be an appropriate eoss.iasion to comment on the ordinance. Chairman Brady suggested that the P b, D Comittee forward the ordinance to various groups and at a later date consider holding joint meetings with those groups. Ald. Rudy questioned whether the P b D Committee ,should go through each section of the ordinance and vote to accept, modify, or reject each section! Ald. Rudy stated that he had difficulty with some sections particularly those requiring owner/occupied single family residents to meet the ordinance requirements. He also stated that he was concerned with requirements that those not as economically well-off be required to expend a disproportionate share of their income for this purpose. Ald. Warshaw stated that some aspects of the ordinance are acceptable but that a different timeframe for compliance needs to be reviewed. She also stated that she would like to discuss alternatives and options to mom of the requirewnts. Ald. Warshaw stated that she feels that security should be strengthened but not necessarily at the expense of architectural quality. Ald. Morton stated that she feels that owner/occupied single family residences should be removed from the ordinance. She stated that she feels that landlords should provide adequate locks, but like Ald. Warshaw, is troubled with the one and two year compliance period. She feels that all new construction should comply totally with the ordinance. Ann Graff, president of the Residential Crime Prevention Committee (RCPC), was present along with Ivan Lippitz, another member, and stated to the Committee that the purpose of RCPC was to increase the physical security in the City and to stake barriers as formidable as possible to prevent burglary. Office K. Eempal was present and demonstrated various locking systems to the Committee. Graff stated that she is aware of the concerns about including single family homes in the ordinance, but that the committee was only requiring single family homes based on what she understood was a legal opinion requiring that single family homes be included if ,multi family homes are part of the -2- e ordinance. Ald. Brady requested that a written legal opinion be obtained from Corporation Counsel clarifying this matter. Ald. Bleveans suggested that the Housing Commission review the ordinance since that body is charged with addressing all housing related issues. Ald. Bleveans felt that the Housing Commission was a good "compass" for a citizen organization proposal such as this ordinance. Ald. Morton questioned whether numerous organizations should be invited to come to the P & D Committee to have their comments heard. Ald. Brady stated that she believes there is good community support to strengthen overall security in the City, however she was not sure if referring this to the Housing Commission was appropriate. Ald. Korshak stated that the P & D Committee should obtain written cements from various organizations before having a public meeting with those groups. Ald. Morton questioned the cost and manner of enforcement of the ordinance. In response to a question from Chairman Brady, Officer Xermpel stated that there is a significant difference in the quality of various locks and that those locks range from $15.00 to S35.00 to $100.00, based an quality. He stated that those dollar figures do not include installation. Kemrpel also stated that the purpose of a security ordinance is to delay the burglars entry and hopefully discourage the burglar from continuing to attempt illegal entry. In response to Ald. Bleveans, Kespel stated that the typical method of entry is through the door, although since additional door security is being added there appears to be a slight trend now to enter through windows. Chairman Brady stated that the P & D Committee would continue to review the proposal, requested a legal opinion regarding the inclusion of single family residences, and directed that staff develop a list of various groups to be notified to solicit comments. This matter will be placed on the November 23, 1987 P & D Agenda if the legal opinion is received. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & A Committee to November 23, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff:dlT. Rudd 70(2/4) -3- MINUTES • Planning and Development Committee November 23, 1987 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. Ald,'-.Present: S.:. Brady, R. Warshaw,:. J.`4 rahak;.'J. _Blevean's and L. Norton Ald.' 'Absent: J: ' study = Staff Present:, R. Carlson, D. Rasmussen, B. Szymanski,` C. Stainbuek, A. Ahlberg, C. Powers, J. Mersch, C. Smith and,R: Budd Presidisig .Official:-:' S. Brady Minutes of November 9. 1987. Ald. Norton moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning b Development Committee meeting of November 9, 1987 as submitted. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes. Communications None Burmlary Prevention Ordinance Chairman Brady reviewed with the Committee the past actions regarding the proposed Burglary Prevention Ordinance. The Committee reviewed a legal opinion from First Assistant Corporation Counsel, Herb Hill, which found that owner/occupied residential units could be excluded from the ordinance. Hill recommended that owner/occupied residential units could be excluded since such a classification is not a "fundamental right" or "suspect category". Hill continued that the "legislation must be reasonably related to a legitimate governmental objective". Chairman Brady suggested that the P b D Committee decide whether to exclude owner/occupied residences prior to sending the draft ordinance on to various groups for review. Ald. Norton questioned whether a tenant could provide locks on doors! Ald. Bleveans stated possibly the lease with the landlord would prohibit such an action. Ald. Brady stated that she Is aware of situations that if a tenant places a lock on the door that the lock cannot be removed when the tenant leaves. Aid. Warshaw stated that she is aware of situations where it is ok for a tenant to place a lock on the door, but the tenant must provide the owner with a key. Ald. Morton stated that she is in sympathy with owners of multifamily units in that they need more than one (1) year to comply with the ordinance as it is currently drafted. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Norton seconded that the Committee forward a draft ordinance on for review to various groups and delete owner/occupied residences from control of the ordinance. Chairman Brady P & D Minutes November 23, 1987 questioned whether owner/occupied two (2) or three (3) unit buildings would be required to comply with the ordinance. It was the consensus of the Committee that the owner/occupied unit in a two (2) or three (3) unit building would be the only unit excluded from the ordinance. Chairman Brady stated that she would vote for eliminating the owner/occupied units, but feels that a previous program offered by the City to inspect all single family residences should be reinstituted. The Committee voted 5-0 to amend the ordinance as discussed and forward on to various groups for their review. Ald. Morton moved that the ordinance only apply to new construction and that new construction would include single family and multifamily dwelling units. Ald. Korshak questioned whether there is a reasonable basis for including new construction of single family units under the ordinance, but not including existing owner/occupied single family units? Ellen Szymanski was present and stated that she would provide a written response to that question. Ald. Norton raised the question as to what locks would be best to use? She stated that the demonstration by Officer Eempel of the Police Department indicated that there was varying Quality among acceptable locks. Ald. Warshaw stated that she would like the review groups to discuss alternatives to certain aspects of the ordinance. As an example, she would like the review groups to consider an alternative to changing all panel doors to hard core doors of Individual units versus accepting a security system in the outer corridor or exterior ingress and egress of a building. Chairman Brady recommended that staff provide a memo to the various groups simplifying sections of the ordinance, addressing the concerns that have been brought up by the P & D Committee over the past two (2) meetings and provide background information to the various groups. Ald. Morton stated that she would rather see energies of the City directed to working with the Police Department to fight burglary rather than to attempt to legislate various types of locking devices on homes. It was the consensus of the Committee to allow review of the ordinance by the various groups and to bring the matter back to the P & D Committee by May 1, 1988. The Committee also suggested that the North Shore Board of Realtors be added to the following list: Preservation Commission, T.O.E., Evanston Property Owners Association, Fire Department, Police Department and Housing Commission. Ald. Bleveans also suggested that the review groups consider at what point should the ordinance apply: possibly after substantial rehabilitation and what is substantial rehabilitation? Docket 257-118-87, Ordinance 121-0-87, ZBA 87-24-V&SU(R). re Variation and Special Use for 1714 Hinman Avenue. Ald. Morton moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of a variation and special use request for the construction of an addition, installation of a loading berth and expansion of -2- P & D Minutes November 23, 1987 the use as an institutional headquarters. Chairman Brady stated that she received a message from Ald. Rudy which indicated that Mary Singh, a neighborhood resident, had requested that the current sign on the front of the building at 1714 Hinman be removed as a condition of the special use and variation request. The current sign identifying the building as Sigma Chi is located on the face of the frame above the entrance doors. Ellen Szymanski indicated that conditioning the removal of the sign is not related to the variation and special use zoning request and could not be added as a condition. Staff explain that the current sign is legal, but nonconforming. If the subject sign were to be changed in any way, it would be required to be brought into compliance with the Sign Ordinance, Chairman Brady questioned the representative of Sigma Chi, a Mr. Brigham, as to whether he could offer any alternatives to the current sign. Mr. Brigham stated that the organization would be willing to appease the neighbors if a satisfactory alternative could be found, but would rather keep the current sign. Aid. xorshak Questioned whether the building was owned by the foundation and if it was currently on the tax roll. Brigham indicated that the building at 1714 Hiraaan was owned by the foundation and was tax exempt. Mr. Brigham further Indicated that the building at 1726 Hinman, also owned by the foundation, was not tax exempt. Brigham also stated that it was his understanding that Sigma Chi paid various fees for fire and other services offered by the City. Mary Singh was present and stated that the neighborhood concern was that the sign Identified the building as an institutional use and felt that prior to the construction of the sign the building looked just like other residences in the neighborhood. The Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the variation and special use request. Chairman Brady questioned staff as to the Byers Museum burned -out building. She questioned whether the City could require that the windows be replaced in lieu of the boards. Reed Carlson, Director of Building g Zoning, stated that he would contact the Byers Museum and inquire if that was possible. Ald. Horton stated that the same problem is in the 5th Ward with boarded -up structures and felt that the same approach should be taken for everyone. Ald. Warshaw stated that she is aware of attempts to make buildings look like they are occupied by painting various window appearances on boarded -up structures. Docket 251-11B-87, Ordinance 106-0-87. 1987 BOCA National Buildinz Code, Docket 252-118-87. Ordinance 107-0-87. 1987 National Electrical Code, Docket 253-118-87. Ordinance 108-0-87. 1987 BOCA National Plumbinz Code, Docket 254-11B-87. Ordinance 109-0-87. 1987 BOCA National Mechanical Code and Docket 255-118-87. Ordinance 110-0-87. 1987 BOCA National Fire Prevention Coda. The Committee reviewed in general with staff issues contained in the codes such as smoke detectors, PVC (plastic plumbing) and demolition requirements. Ald. Morton expressed concern that current codes do not provide specific time -3- P & D Minutes November 23, 1987 periods which owners must demolish structures if they are boarded up or unoccupied. Staff explained that every effort is made to cause repair of structures and that the court is the last resort. It was further explained that once a demolition request is made, judges often are reluctant to order the City to demolish a structure if there is any chance that the structure can be rehabilitated. Staff explained to the Committee that the adoption of the BOCA Codes is something that is done every three (3) years when a new edition is published by BOCA. All of the past changes the City has adopted are contained in the current proposed ordinances. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Horton seconded that the Committee adopt Ordinances 106-0-87 through 110-0-87. The Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council adoption of the ordinances. Docket 256-118-87, Ordinance 111-0-87, Modifying Building, Zoning and Related Pees. Ald. Korshak recommended that Ordinance 111-0-87, Section II M - Zoning Pee Waiver be amended to include the word "substantial" in three points preceding the word "hardship". Ald. Morton questioned whether this would be the proper ordinance to address the issue of providing adequate inspection of construction work. After a discussion with the Committee it was recommended that web a issue not appropriate for the fee ordinance. Staff indicated that a memo from the Building b Zoning Department and the Housing Rehabilitation b Property Maintenance Department detailing inspection procedures would be provided to the Committee. Ald. Korshak recommended that the Committee amend I A - Basis of Building Permit Fees to provide wording requiring a "post construction, sworn statement" in addition to the current requirements. It was the consensus of the Committee to amend the subject ordinance with the aforementioned suggestions. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Counsel approval of Ordinance 111-0-87, allowing for approximately a 10% increase in all Building 6 Zoning Fees. Docket 259-11B-87. Ordinance 123-0-87 re Adoption of the BOCA National Sxistinx Structures Code. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council adoption of the 1987 edition. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council. All of the BOCA Codes, by State Statutes, must sit for review for a thirty (30) day period prior to adoption. The Committee and City Council will be forwarded clean copies of the amendments made by the P b D Committee prior to adoption of the codes in January, 1988. -4- P 6 D Minutes November 23, 1987 Docket 258-11B-87. Ordinance 122-0-87 re Bee Increase for Rooming House License. Ald. 'Warshaw moved and Ald. Morton seconded that the Committee recomend to City Council approval of a fee increase of rooming house licenses. Committee voted S-0. Docket 250-118-87. Resolution 77-R-87 re DesiRnation of Blue -Ribbon Committee for Comprebensive Revision to Zoning Ordinance. The Committee reviewed the resolution to constitute the earlier formed Blue -Ribbon Comittes as a Zoning Commission to parallel State Statutes. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council approval of Resolution 77-R-87 forming a Zoning Commission to undertake s comprehensive revision to the zoning ordinance. ADJOURNNM The meting adjourrmed at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P a.D- Comittee is December 7, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: AcbertWT.Rudh 7O{2/6} -5- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee December 7, 1987 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. S. Brady, R..Warshaw, J. Korshak, J.. Bleveans, J. Rudy and L. Morton Staff Present: Others Present: Presiding Official: .-S." Brady Minutes of November 23. 1987. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Morton seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning S Development Committee meeting of November 23, 1987. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes. Ald. Rudy posed questions to staff regarding the BOCA organization and staff participation in that group. Staff indicated that members attend various BOCA Regional Conferences and the National Conference at which time editions of the BOCA Codes are discussed. Ald. Korshak asked whether a legal opinion regarding the Single Family Existing/new Residential units issue of the Burglary Prevention Ordinance would be presented? Staff indicated that this opinion would be rendered when the ordinance was brought back to the Committee. Korshak questioned whether staff had followed -up on the request to the Byers Museum representatives regarding the removal of the boarded -up windows? Reed Carlson, Director of Building & Zoning indicated that he has a phone call in to representatives of the Byers Museum, but has not had a response. Korshak questioned when the memos regarding the Housing Rehabilitation & Property Maintenance and Building L Zoning Departments inspection procedures would be presented to the P 5 D Committee. Staff indicated that those issues would be presented at the December 21, 1987 meeting. Korshak further questioned when staff would amend wording to the Fee Ordinance regarding verification of construction costs? Staff indicated that the material would be presented at the December 21 meeting. Docket 281-12A-87, ZBA 87-26-V(R) or T(F), re Variations for 1414 Pitner Avenue. Chairman Brady informed the Committee that she had been requested, through staff, by the attorney for the petitioner to continue this matter to December 21, 1987. Staff informed the Committee that the applicant's attorney requested the matter to be continued to allow time to prepare material for the Committee. Committee reviewed with staff the procedures for new evidence if that was the intent of the applicant. Staff informed the Committee that the applicant was informed of the P & D Committee Rules of Procedure and the matter of addressing new evidence. P & D Minutes December 7, 1987 Docket 277-12A-87, Request for Plat of Consolidation re 2020 Greenwood. Ald. Morton moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the plat of consolidation for property at 2020 Greenwood. Committee voted 6-0. Docket 280-12A-87. Ordinance 128-0-87. ZBA 87-28-SUM , re Special Use for 715 Howard Street. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council the approval of a special use for establishment of an animal hospital. Ald. Warshaw stated that she had spoken with Ald. Larsen of the Ward and found that he did not object to the proposal. The Committee discussed whether boarding of animals would be permitted at the location. Applicants indicated that they did not want to board animals at this location. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the special use. Docket 279-12A-87. Ordinance 127-0-87, ZBA 87-27-SU(R), re Special Use for 1966 Dempster Street. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee recommend approval of a special use for a type 2 restaurant. Ald. Brady noted that there were no neighborhood objectors at the ZBA hearing. Ald. Bleveans questioned the applicants as to whether the Dewey Conference objected to the proposal? Mark Kahan, attorney for the development, stated that the Dewey Conference did not object to the proposal, though they did not endorse the restaurant. Chairman Brady noted that the applicant has requested a suspension of the Rules to allow passage of the special use at the December 1, 1987 meeting, so that the ordering of major equipment and construction could be facilitated. Ald. Warshaw expressed concern for suspending the rules for a type 2 restaurant which could cause consternation to those that may not be fully informed about this particular restaurant which would appear not to cause neighborhood problems. Ald. Horton stated that the P 6 D Committee was acting on evidence presented during the ZBA hearing and felt that the Committee should recommend suspension of the Rules and explain why. Ald. Bleveans stated that the Committee could ask for suspension of the rules and If there was an objection the ordinance could still be introduced on December 7 and would be passed on December 21. Aid. Warshaw reiterated her concern and felt that some may be concerned with the procedure of suspending the rules, particularly for a type 2 restaurant. Committee voted 6-0 for introduction of the ordinance for a special use for a type 2 restaurant at 1966 Dempster. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee also recommend to the City Council suspension of the rules to allow passage of the special use for the restaurant. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council for suspension of the rules to allow passage of the special use. -2- P & D Minutes December 7, 1987 Ald. Morton stated that she felt that Ald. Warshaw put her finger on a issue regarding proper notification to aldermen of the ward where any type of activity was to take place. Aid. Morton felt that aldermen of the ward should be notified as soon as staff knows anything about a project in that ward. Chairman Brady explained that the ZBA notice is sent to all Aldermen prior to the Zoning Board hearing. The notices also indicate in which ward the development is located. Several suggestions were made to allow for the earliest possible notification to aldermen of the ward when any activity of any sort is taking place. The Committee recommended that the public notice, currently in the form of a small notification, be provided in a letter size form and sent to the all aldermen of the Council at the same time it is forwarded to the Evanston Review for publication. This procedure would allow for an additional weeks notice prior to any other notification to the public. Chairman Brady further suggested that a generic cover memo be provided to forward to all aldermen of the ward in which a project is being discussed and requesting that the subject aldermen contact staff or the Chairman of the P & D Committee to express their point of view. Docket 278-12A-87, Request Approval of a Plat of Consolidation re 1000 Emerson Street. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve a plat of consolidation for the southwest corner of !Maple Avenue and Emerson Street. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the plat of consolidation. Consider Request From ZBA Chairman for Joint Meeting of ZBA and P & D. Bill Whitney, Chairman of ZBA was present and suggested that the P & D Committee arrange a joint meeting with ZBA similar to the one that was held in 1986. Whitney stated that the Board views the meetings as a productive effort to improve the communication and relationship between the two committees. In response to a question from Ald. Horton regarding an opening statement to explain the procedures to those less informed about zoning, Whitney stated that there is a handout available to all members of the audience explaining the hearing process in addition to the Chairman's remarks at the opening of the meeting stating the procedures to be followed. Whitney further stated that over the past year the Board has implemented a sign -in sheet indicating those in favor of and those opposing the development; a request that applicants estimate how long a presentation will take; notification to applicants that if the presentation goes over the agreed time limit, the ZBA may continue the hearing at the convenience of the Board so as not to inconvenience other cases where applicants and opponents/proponents may be in the audience and are expecting to be heard. Whitney further stated that the Board does not view the cross examination of witnesses as part of the time frame allocated to the applicants. -3- P 6 D Minutes December 7. 1987 It was agreed by both Whitney and members of the P & D Committee to attempt'to establish a meeting for either January 4, 1988 or February 1, 1988. Chairman Whitney will poll members of the Zoning Board of Appeals to attempt'to established a firm meeting date and notify the P & D Committee. Both groups where also requested to submit agenda items. Chairman Brady indicated that there was an item not appearing on the P & D agenda but one Which Ald. Rudy would litre to discuss. Ald. Rudy expressed his concern with the lack of grassroots representation on the newly formed Zoning Commission. Ald. Rudy moved that the P & D Committee recommend to the Mayor and City Council that the Zoning Commission be expanded from nine (9) members to eleven (11) members and that the two (2) additional members not necessarily be experienced from the Zoning Board point of view, but provide a view point from the other side. Ald. Warshaw seconded the motion and felt that the P 6 D Committee may not have conveyed their intent specifically enough to the Mayor when making a recommendation on the formation of the Zoning Commission. Ald. Korshak felt that the Committee preferred to have some "victims" of zoning on the Commission to provide the graasroot view point. Ald. Morton Questioned the procedures whereby the Mayor names members to boards and commissions: Chairman Brady explained the procedures and suggested that vacancy announcements be made at City Council meetings so that as many people as possible can be made aware of openings. Ald. Bleveans stated that in some instances the Mayor may have difficulty in getting interested parties to served on boards and commissions, particularly a Zoning Commission where a substantial time commitment will be required. Members of the Committee Indicated they had knowledge of numerous people with a strong interest to serve on the Zoning Commission. Chairman Brady directed staff to prepare a resolution for the December 21, 1987 City Council meeting providing for the expansion of the Zoning Commission by two {2} additional members. The Chairman also directed that staff prepare a cover memo from the Chairman and Members of the P b D Committee to the Mayor and Aldermen explaining the reasons for the request for an additional two (2) members to the Zoning Commission. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend the motion to expand the Zoning Commission to the City Council. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Commnittee is December 21, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. S taf f : "Ov/ o rt T. Rudd 70(2/S) -4- Ald. Absent: Staff Present: .Presiding Official:', Hone Minutes of December 7, 1987. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee approve the, minutes of the Planning g Development Committee meeting of December,7, 2987 as submitted. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes. Communications Chairmanship Schedule The Committee received a memo indicating that Ald. Rudy would assume the chairmanship of the P & D Committee effective January 4, 1988. Memo to Zoning Board re Joint Zoning Board and Planning A Development Committee Keating. The Committee reviewed a memo from the Zoning Board of Appeals indicating that a joint meeting between the P A D Committee and ZBA has been scheduled for February 1, 1988. Chairman Brady requested that a reminder be placed under communications for the January 11, 1988 , P 6 D Committee meeting soliciting from Committee members agenda items for the joint meeting. Docket 281-12A-87. ZBA 87-26-V(R) or T(F). re Variations for 1414 Pitner Avenue. Chairman Brady reviewed with the Committee a letter submitted to the Committee at tonight's meeting by Attorney Janice Silvestri for the applicant. The Committee briefly reviewed the Winfield Rule of the P 6 D Committee. which addresses procedures for new evidence. Ald. Korshak questioned whether the attorney's request centered an pages 54 and 55 of the ZBA transcript which reflected a lengthy commentary by ZBA Chairman, William Whitney. Ald. Korshak agreed with the applicant's attorney that the comments made were done so after the close of testimony and did not allow the attorney or applicant to rebut. Chairman Brady questioned whether once testimony is closed could ZBA members discuss their own opinions on the issue? Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Diractor of Zoning, stated that in the past ZBA members were allowed to bring their own personal knowledge to the deliberations of a case. Ald. Korshak felt that after testimony was closed the chairman brought up new issues. Ald. Korshak further felt that any statements or comments made after testimony is closed P & D Minutes December 21, 1987 should be confined to the issues presented during testimony Ald. Rudy stated that he agrees with Ald. Korshak and would request that the attorney for the applicant explain exactly what she was referring to in her letter. The Committee reviewed once more the Winfield Rule and the options that the P 6 D Committee had before them. Ald. Bleveans questioned whether the applicants heard the deliberations? Ald. Korshak recommended that the Committee put Ald. Rudy's question to Attorney Silvestri. Chairman Brady questioned what the attorney was basing the request upon? Ms. Silvestri stated that bar concern is what Ald. Korshak earlier described. She feels that pages 54 and 55 of the transcript indicate that new evidence and personal knowledge was entered into the record during the deliberations after the public hearing was closed by the chairman. She stated that she felt that the applicant did not have an opportunity to rebut any of the statements made. Ald. Warshaw stated that she feels uncomfortable because the matters in question were somewhat addressed during earlier testimony. She stated that she believes earlier testimony indicates that maintenance appears to have deteriorated over a period of time. She further felt that the issues during deliberations were elements that were addressed peripherally during the testimony. Ald. Korshak stated that he reviewed the chairman's testimony and was concerned that the chairman was acting more as a witness during the deliberations period. Chairman Brady stated that the Chairman of the ZBA brought to the deliberations personal knowledge that was important. Ald. Korshak stated that he did not object to personal knowledge being brought into the issue but felt that it must be done during the public hearing to allow rebuttal from the applicant. Ald. Warshaw stated that she agrees with Ald. Korshak in that personal knowledge should be brought forward during testimony but that part of the transcript in question was out weighed by other issues and information brought forward. Ald. Norton questioned the Committee as to their opinion as to whether the ZBA would have voted against the applicant if Chairman Whitney's comments were not made? She stated that it was her opinion that Chairman Whitney should deal just with the points under consideration which were brought out during public testimony. Chairman Brady stated that the Committee had an opportunity, due to a short agenda, to address this issue at tonight's meeting and that the overall matter was not that complicated and possibly need not be held -over. Rasmussen, upon review of the Chairman's comments, stated that Mr. Whitney's concerns were expressed after the ZBA had addressed all of the standards. Rasmussen reviewed with the Committee the rules of new evidence. Ald. Bleveans felt that the P & D Committee's Winfield rule did not contemplate a situation such as this. He further stated that he does not agree with the criticism of the ZBA. He stated that he thinks that Chairman Whitney's remarks were important with respect to the Outcome of the decision. Attorney Silvestri stated that in reading the transcript one get's a different flavor of the discussion than -2- .. . P 6 D Minutes December 22, 1987 if one is in attendance. She stated that she did not know how the ZBA would have decided if Chairman Whitney's comments were not made but felt that they had a significant impact on the final decision. Ald. Korshak stated that upon his reading of the transcript he observed initially a favorably leaning of the ZBA prior to Chairman Whitney's comments. Ald. Rudy moved that the case be referred to the ZBA regarding the comments made by the chairman on pages 54, 55 and 56 and to allow the applicant and attorney to address these matters before the board. He further stated that the applicant and attorney should not be limited only to the aforementioned pages. Ald. Rudy also requested that the P & D Committee's comments and concerns be forwarded with this matter back to ZBA. Ald: Warshaw seconded the motion. Chairman Brady stated that she would vote against the motion since she feels that ZBA members should be allowed to draw upon personal knowledge during the deliberations. Ald. Morton feared that by sending the case back. to ZBA would reflect a direct criticism of the chairman which may result in an unchanged decision. Ald. Morton further questioned why the ZBA would recommend denying the request when there was no neighboring opposition! Ald. Bleveans stated that the number of people for or against should not be a determining factor, but rather the cases should be based on meeting the zoning standards. Ald. Bleveans further stated that he would vote to refer back to ZBA but that he was not at all criticizing the comments made by the chairman. Committee vote 4-2 to refer the matter back to ZBA. Voting aye: Aldermen Rudy, Warshaw, Korshaw and Bleveans. Voting nay: Aldermen Brady and Morton. Docket 256-118-87. Ordinance 111-0-87. Amendint Buildinx. Zoning and Related Fees. Ald. Rudy questioned the objective of providing this provision in the ordinance. Ald. Korshak stated that this clause would provide sufficient means to review projects where it is obvious that the cost of the project, initially estimated for building permits was underestimated When final constructed. Ald. Korshak stated that he was requesting a sworn statement at the end of a project and not verification of cost as staff has indicated. Questions arose as to whether additional language should be placed in the ordinance after a sworn statement is supplied allowing for further documentation for verification. The Committee directed staff to work with the Legal Department in developing additional wording so that this matter could be brought back to the Committee at the January 11, 1988 meeting. Docket 293-128-87, Resolution 84-R-87, Increase in Zoning Commission Membership. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council approval of Resolution 84-R-87 increasing the number of members on the Zoning Commission from nine (9) to eleven (11). Committee voted 6-0 to approve the resolution. -3- P b D Minutes December 22, 1987 HousinK Rehabilitation 1G Property Maintenance and Building b Zoning Departments Inspections Procedures. Chairman Brady stated that due to the length of the meeting this matter should be held -over to January 11, 1988 meeting. Docket 230-10A-87. Lake Michigan Corridor of Opportunity_ The Committee voted 6-0 to request the City Council to remove the subject matter from the City Council agenda since there appears to be no further comments from the Chamber of Commerce as was requested. If there is additional information in the future, this matter Can be placed back on the P A D Committee and'City Council agendas. Ad.i ournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the, P D , Committee is January 11, 1988. St aff: obert T.'Rudd 70(2/S) -4-