Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1988MINUTES Planning and Development Committee January 11, 1988 Room 2403 -- 7:30 P.K. Ald. Present: S. Brady, R. Warshaw, J. Korshak, J. Bleveans and J. Rudy Ald. Absent: L. Morton Staff Present: R. Carlson, C. Powers, B. Ahlberg and R. Rudd Presiding Official: J. Rudy Minutes of December 21, 1987. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of December 21, 1987 as submitted. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATIONS Memo re Zoning Board of Appeals and Planning & Development Committee Joint Meeting. The Committee discussed alternative meeting dates for the joint meeting since the original date of February 1 needs to be rescheduled due to the City Council budget hearing. The Committee suggested as alternative dates for the joint meeting Monday, February 15 or Monday, February 29, 1988. Staff Indicated that the Zoning Board of Appeals members would be contacted regarding those dates. ZBA Public Notice for January 19, 1987. Ald. Warshaw suggested that the public notice be placed on a letter size sheet of paper to allow for ease of reading and handling. October -December Monthly Rehab Report. The Committee received a three month rehab report. OLD BUSINESS Docket 256-118-87. Ordinance 111-0-87. Amending Building, Zoning and Related Fees. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the proposed amendment regarding sworn contractor's statements. Staff explained that this matter would not be discussed at the City Council meeting of January 11, 1988, but would be introduced with other amendments to numerous building codes at the January 25, 1988 meeting. The additional amendments are being held until January 25, 1988 so that the thirty (30) day waiting period is not disrupted for the current amendments that were original introduced in November 1987. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the amended Ordinance 111-0-87. 4 P & D Minutes January 11, 1988 Housing Rehabilitation & Property Maintenance and Building & Zoning Departments Inspection Procedures. Chairman Rudy stated that since this information was requested by Ald. Morton absent) this matter would be held over to the January 25,1988 meeting. Ald. Brady requested that staff forward copies of the reports to the Housing Commission members for their information. NEW BUSINESS Docket 3-1A-88. Request from Northwestern University (owner) and Nordon Investments Corporation re Plat of Consolidation for 1727-35 Benson Avenue. Mr. Martin Norkett was present and explained that the plat of consolidation was necessary to allow for proper building permits to be issued. Kr. Norkett explained that his development (southeast corner of Benson and Clark) would be a man's clothing store. Norkett further stated that the structure basically was in good condition but had a very poor roof which he would be repairing. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the subject plat of consolidation. Committee voted 5-0 to approve. Docket 4-I,A-88. ZAC 87-1. Zoning Amendments re Transitional Housin&. Ald. Warshaw stated that her reading of the ZAC transcript finds that this was one of the worst that she had encountered. She felt that ZAC was not prepared or informed to allow for discussion of the transitional housing topic. She suggested that ways be developed to better prepare ZAC for complex topics such as this. She objected to a statement in the transcript where it was felt that transitional housing property would automatically be removed from the tax rolls. She stated that this would not necessarily be the case. Ald. Brady stated that she seconded Ald. Warshaw comments. She stated that she believes that a lack of understanding of exactly what transitional housing consists of led to this transcript. Ald. Brady stated that she would like the P A D Committee to consider amending the recommendation to allow, as a special use In all zoning districts, transitional housing. She stated that to do so may require referring the issue of licensing to the Human Services Committee which was similar to the residential care provisions. She felt that the transitional housing issue would be easier to address than was the residential care (group home) issue. Ald. Warshaw stated that the Committee should also consider allowing transitional Housing as a special use in Industrial and Commercial Districts. At this point the Committee had a lengthy discussion regarding the definition of family and how that applied to transitional housing. Bob Ahlberg, Zoning Planner, was present and explained various options set forth in the zoning ordinance regarding definition of family. Ald. Brady stated that she felt that transitional housing would consist of possibly two (2) to three (3) families that share a home similar to congregate living facilities. 2- r P & D Minutes January 11, 1988 Ahlberg discussed with the Committee the ZAC report dated November 5, 1987 in which four (4) concepts were explained on pages 3 and 4 of said report. Ald. Warshaw stated that she concurs with and understands concepts 1, 2 and 3. Chairman Rudy informed the Committee that he was contacted by Ms. Laura Baren of the YWCA and was informed that her organization was in the process of developing a transitional housing project that would meet the current zoning requirements. Ahlberg explained that the Committee basically had two alternatives: (1) to create a new term, "transitional housing," in the zoning ordinance and (2) to continue to authorize concepts 1, 2 and 3 and create a new concept 4 in the zoning text. Ald. Brady stated that in her opinion a true" transitional housing project probably would not meet concepts 1, 2 and 3. The Committee discussed how the Cradle would be classified' Ahlberg stated that it could be possible that if the Cradle complied with the zoning ordinance and rooming house requirements that it would fall under concept 3. The Committee discussed possibly allowing for rezoning for transitional housing in lieu of a text amendment. Ahlberg cautioned the Committee about rezoning which could be challenged as "spot zoning." Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded to direct staff to develop proper wording to allow a text amendment to implement the new concept number 4 as explained in the aforementioned November 5, 1987 ZAC recommendation. The Committee considered whether numerical limitations should be placed on various types of transitional housing in the various districts. The Committee recommended that the staff's draft require that transitional housing be a special use in all districts and that the issue of number of occupants will be discussed after the Committee reviews the draft. Staff was directed to bring this matter back before the P b D Committee when proposed wording was developed. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Committee is January 25, 1988. Staff: obert T. Rud 70(2/4) 3- The next regular meeting of the P & D MINUTES Planning and Development Committee January 25, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.H. Ald. Present: S. Brady, R. Warshaw, J. Korshak, J. Bleveans, L. Horton and J. Rudy Ald. Absent: None Staff Present: E. Szymanski, C. Powers, B. Ahlberg and R. Rudd Presiding Official: J. Rudy Minutes of January 11, 1988. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning 6 Development Committee meeting of January 11, 1988 as submitted. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes (Aldermen Rudy and Horton absent). Docket 14-lB-88, Plat of Consolidation re 2502 Princeton. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the plat of consolidation for property located at 2502 Princeton (northwest corner of Princeton and Harrison). Committee voted 4-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the plat of consolidation Aldermen Rudy and Horton absent). Housing Rehabilitation & Property Maintenance and Building & Zoning Departments Inspection Procedures. Rudd provided a brief explanation of the procedures for inspection of building projects between the Housing Rehab and Building & Zoning Departments. Catherine Powers, Director of Housing Rehabilitation and Property Maintenance, explained to the Committee the procedure for approving field changes with respect to rehabilitation projects. Powers explained that any work outside of the scope of rehabilitation guidelines must receive prior approval of the City before it can be undertaken. Ald. Brady noted that the current rehab guidelines allow homeowners to choose their own contractors and she finds that in most cases homeowners elect to do so rather than have the City select contractors for them. Ald. Horton questioned if staff could explain situations when rehab clients have alleged that work was not done properly or not completed per their expectations. Staff explained tQ the Cormittee that in many situations all needed repairs are not undertaken in a rehab project since the guidelines limit the amount of money available to the applicant and also the applicant's ability to repay further limits the funds utilized. Staff also explained to the Committee that once a project is completed the owner signs -off and accepts the work. Experience has shown that over several years, in many instances, some applicants have not provided proper maintenance, thus leading to deterioration of previous rehab work. Ald. Morton questioned whether the City provided maintenance t.aining programs for rehab clients? Staff indicated that the City currently does not have such a n I, i i i - 111 i1 1 1 . i i i i i i i A I i i i M , I I ' i i i, I I 10 P & D Minutes January 25, 1988 program. Ald. Horton suggested that the City contact Neighbors At Work to inquire as to whether that agency can develop a training program for rehab clients to teach them proper maintenance procedures. Staff indicated that they would be in touch with Neighbors At Work to follow up on this suggestion. Docket 4-1A-88, ZAC 87-1. Zoning Amendments re Transitional Housing. Ald, Bleveans stated that he would support the proposed zoning amendments if transitional housing projects would be viewed as special uses. Ald. Korshak stated that his initial reaction was that there was evidence in the transcript that some members of ZAC were uninformed regarding the issue. However, he stated further review finds that staff memorandums in July and August, 1986 introduced -nd explained the concept of "transitional housing." Ald. Korshak questioned whether the P & D Committee should establish a joint meeting with ZAC similar to the upcoming meeting with ZBA to discuss various issues? Ald. Warshaw stated that a joint meeting might be helpful since that would allow a more constructive forum to discuss different points of view between P & D and ZAC rather than having to react to the ZAC transcript in the course of a P & D Committee meeting. Aid. Brady stated that she sees in the ZAC transcript the traditional, philosophical point of view that is often reflected. She stated that she doesn't necessary have a problem with the joint meeting. Chairman Rudy suggested that the Committee consider the problem that ZAC wrestled with regarding transitional housing with respect to allowing such a use in R-1 zoned residential districts. Ald. Brady reviewed the transcript dated August 6, 1987 (page 53) in which Bob Ahlberg, Zoning Planner, provided a description to ZAC by comparing the parallel process of review for group homes. In that transcript Ahlberg also explained the relationship between R-1 Districts and the proposed uses. Ald. Brady stated that she favors a maximum occupancy of eight (8) in the lower "R " Districts. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether special uses could be conditioned by the size of the building? Ald. Warshaw also stated that she was concerned about making zoning requirements so prohibitive that the City would not receive any transitional housing proposals. She further stated that since the City proposes a special use process and a licensing procedure that there appears to be no need for a specific number limiting occupants to be set forth in the ordinance. She stated that this could be determined during the zoning and licensing hearings. Ald. Horton expressed a concern that not -for -profit agencies could be developing transitional housing. She felt that it is possible that such agencies may be viewed in a more favorable light than a private concern and receive special consideration even through the special use process. Ald. Morton also expressed concern with monitoring such a proposal as a transitional housing project. Ald. Brady explained to the Committee that occupancy of a transitional housing project would most likely be a young woman with one (1) or two (2) children who have not had the opportunity to structure their lives in a productive manner. Ald. Brady stated that it is expected 2- P & D Minutes January 25. 1988 that residents of transitional housing would remain in the home for three (3) to six (6) months. Ald. Horton questioned whether battered women would be eligible for transitional housing? Ald. Brady stated that it was possible, but that transitional housing would be more inclined to be occupied by a lower income population with problems different from a battered woman's situation. Ald. Morton questioned whether a transitional housing program could be viewed as another welfare program? Ald. Brady reminded the Committee that the City would not be supporting the transitional housing project and that it would be operated by an outside agency. Chairman Rudy stated that at this time the City was only proposing guidelines to allow transitional housing in the zoning ordinance and with licensing regulations. Ald. Warshaw stated that the intent of transitional housing was to provide help to allow possible welfare recipients to establish a stable family situation with the end goal that of being removed from welfare. Ald. Horton questioned whether transitional housing could be limited to only City of Evanston residents? Chairman Rudy reminded the Committee that the issue at hand was only that of zoning and some of these other issues would be addressed through licensing if the Committee proceeded in that manner. Ald. Brady stated that the licensing requirements would probably state a preference for City of Evanston residents, but that would be determined later. Ald. Horton expressed concern with possible City expenses for various subsidized programs. Ald. Horton stated that she felt that this could be an additional expense for the City somewhere in the future and was concerned that the City appears to be losing its upward mobile population since that segment may view the City as being a welfare City on the northshore. She questioned whether there is a better way to handle perspective residents of transitional housing? Bob Ahlberg explained to the Committee the proposed limitations of occupants based on the square footage and other restrictions on living area contained in the BOCA Existing Structures Code, Ald. Brady stated that she was willing to limit transitional housing projects to no more than two ??) within the City. Ald. Brady moved that staff draft an ordinance to allow no more than two (2) transitional housing facilities, as currently defined, be allowed in the City of Evanston at one time. Ald. Warshaw seconded the motion. Ald. Korshak questioned whether neighboring towns have been involved with group homes as indepth as the City of Evanston? He further questioned whether the agencies operating transitional housing will have a difficult time relocating residents within a three (3) to six (6) month time frame.? He felt that it was possible that there would be no alternative laving arrangement and that residents of transitional housing may stay longer than the three (3) to six (6) month period. Ald. Korshak suggested that during the licensing process that consideration be given requiring the agency operating a transitional housing project to relocate residents within a specific time period. Upon the call of the question the Committee voted 5-1 to direct staff 3- P & D Minutes January 25, 1988 to draft the aforementioned ordinance. Voting Aye: Aldermen Brady, Bleveans, Korshak, Warshaw and Rudy. Voting May: Ald. Horton. Ald. Bleveans requested an updated list of ZAC references. Ald. Brady requested that staff develop a memo explaining the definition of family as discussed at the January 11, 1988 P & D meeting. Ald. Warshaw requested that staff also provide a clarification of her reference to ZAC regarding an amendment to the definition of family. Ad.7 ournmen t The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is February 8, 1988. Staff: Robert T. Rudd 70(2/5) 4- DRAFT,10T APPROVED MINUTES Planning and Development Committee February 8, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: J. Bleveans, S. Brady, L. Horton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw Ald. Absent: J. Korshak Staff Present: E. Szymanski, G. Yant, B. Ahlberg and Reed Carlson Presiding Official: J. Rudy Minutes of January 25. 1968. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of January 25, 1988 as submitted. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes (Aldermen Korshak absent). Staff Report re Site Plan Review Committee Opinion Survey Results. A staff report indicating an approximate 10% return from an anonymous opinion survey sent to all persons appearing before the Site Plan Review Committee was discussed. Ald. Brady suggested that the opinion survey be discontinued due to the fact that all respondents indicated a satisfactory experience with the Committee and that the low percentage return may indicate satisfaction with the system. Ald. Warshaw questioned the process used in the mailing and the return of the opinion survey, and that respondents who had a negative experience may have been reluctant to return the survey form. Carlson replied that the survey form was sent out in a completely anonymous manner with returns being to the Building & Zoning Department. Ald. Bleveans suggested that the opinion survey be handled on a yearly one time mailing basis for all those who have appeared before the Committee in the past year. Ald. Warshaw endorsed the yearly mailing suggestion and commented that the extended time frame may prompt additional responses. Ald. Bleveans moved that staff be instructed to continue the opinion survey with a single mailing at the end of each year, and a subsequent report on the results to the P & D Committee. The motion was seconded by Ald. Warshaw. The Committee voted 5-0 to approve the motion (Ald. Korshak absent). Revised List of Pending References to ZAC. A staff memo dated January 26, 1988 was reviewed by the Committee. Ald. Brad% - inquired as to the reference regarding the 800 block of Chicago Avenue. Ahlberg replied that ZAC voted to refer this matter to the Zoning Commission for inclusion in the comprehensive zoning, amendment as part of a forthcoming report on the Commercial Districts. He further noted that ZAC will be requesting that two of the three remaining be referred to the Zoning Commission. Ald. Brady commented that such referral to the Zoning Commission is in accordance with the proposed comprehensive zoning amendment. No action was required by the Committee. P g D Minutes February 8, 1988 Occupancy of Dwelling Unit Regulations - Summary Memorandum. A staff memo dated February 2, 1988 was reviewed by the Committee. There was no formal action required by the Committee. Clarification of Ald. Warshaw's Reference re Occupancy of Dwelling Units. A staff memo dated February 2, 1988 regarding a reference to the Zoning Amendment Committee to amend the zoning ordinance to permit two type A families to occupy single-family dwellings was reviewed. The Committee discussed the intent of this ordinance would be to limit authorizing two unmarried people and their respective children to reside in a single-family detached or single-family attached home. Ald. Warshaw suggested that there could possibly be another level of definition of family that being type D, to allow two adults and their children to reside together in a single dwelling unit. She further noted that any authorization for this type of housing should be worded so as not to cause undue alarm. Ald. Horton moved to eliminate this item as a reference to ZAC and instead referred it to the Zoning Commission for review in conjunction with the comprehensive revision to the zoning ordinance. The motion was seconded by Ald. Bleveans. The Committee voted 5-0 to approve the motion. ZBA 87-29-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 2600 Orrington Avenue. A copy of the report of the final decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals granting a variation for construction of a second story addition was received by the Committee without comment. ZBA 87-30-V(F), Final Variation Decision re 3247 Park Place. A copy of the ZBA report granting a variation for construction of a one story addition on the above noted property was received without comment. ZBA 87-31-V(F), Final Variation Decision re 2408 Hartzell Street. A copy of the ZBA report on the final decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals for construction of a one story addition at the above noted property was received without comment. Minor Changes for 1100 Forest - Planned unit Development (PUD). A memo from the City Manager dated February 2, 1988 outlining several minor changes approved for the 1100 Forest planned unit development was discussed. Ald. Brady commented on the meeting scheduled with the homeowners and that said owners may be sending a report to the Committee regarding various change: made or contemplated to be made by individual owners. Ald. Warshaw commented that owners purchasing in the planned unit development project should receivr information on the obligations of their purchase as they relate to control over the exterior features of their individual buildings. Sommers -Pant replied that this is now in the process of being done and has been delayed du. to the fact that certain owners identity Was not revealed to the City until December, 1987. No formal action was required by the Committee. 2- t p & D minutes February 8, 1988 Docket 4-1A-88. Ordinance 6-0-88 . Zoning Amendments re Transitional Housinf, and Proposed Reference to Create Licensing Requirements. The proposed Ordinance 6-0-88 and a staff memo dated February 4, 1988 were discussed by the Committee. The staff memorandum suggested reference to the Human Services Committee to develop licensing requirements for transitional housing prior to introduction and adoption of said zoning ordinance amendments. Ald. Brady commented that it is probably preferable to develop licensing regulations prior to adoption of the zoning amendments, as recommended by staff. Ald. Warshaw suggested that the zoning ordinance amendments should be forwarded to the Human Services Committee for consideration of licensing regulations along with a memo explaining the concerns of the Committee regarding the ordinance. Ald. Morton expressed reservations regarding the number of homes that could be established under the ordinance and regulations. Ald. Brady explained that it was the intent to allow a minimal number of said homes (only two). Szymanski stated that prescribing a specific maximum number of homes in either the zoning or licensing ordinance maybe difficult. She suggested as an alternative consideration of a minimum distance requirement that could serve the same limiting purpose. She stated further the distance regulations such as contained in the group and residential care ordinance and regulations would be defensible. Ald. Brady noted that of all the population groups that the City has tried to serve in the housing area that this type of housing seems to be the least controversial and that the special use process would be a wise control. Ahlberg noted that the opepation by a non-profit entity has been deleted from the definition and that the previous references to alcohol or narcotic use have been replaced with substance abuse. He also noted that the public need section in the special use conditions would be a controlling factor. Ald. Bleveans moved to accept the staff report and refer Ordinance 6-0-88 to the Human Services Committee for drafting of license regulations. Motion was seconded by Ald. Warshaw. The Committee voted 4-0 to approve the motion (Ald. Horton absent). Docket 27-2A-88. Ordinance 4-0-88. Amending. Building, Zoning and Related Fees Ordinance 111-0-87. Ordinance 4-0-8B and a staff memo was reviewed by the Committee. The staff memorandum explained that this amendment to the existint ordinance would require submission of a sworn contractor's statement for any construction project in excess of $100,000. projects with a cost of less than $100,000 could upon request of the Director of Building & Zoning be required to submit a sworn statement. Ald. Warshaw moved to approve introduction of Ordinance 4-0-88, the motion was seconded by Ald. Bleveans. The Committee voted 4-0 to approve the motion (Ald. Horton absent). Docket 28-2A-88, Ordinance 5-0-88, Amending BOCA National Building Code. Ordinance 5-0-88 and a staff memo were reviewed by the Committee. Ald. Bleveans stated his feeling that tenants should have a choice of which type of 3- P & D Minutes February 8, 1988 locks to install in their doors and that the double cylinder key dead bolt in his opinion offer greater security. Ald. Brady endorsed the concept of no double cylinder dead bolt locks in single entry apartments as a way to lessen the hazard of fire. Ald. Brady moved to approve introduction of Ordinance 5-0-88, the motion was seconded by Ald. Warshaw. The Committee voted three ayes and one nay (Ald. Bleveans) to approve introduction of said ordinance Ald. Morton absent). Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is February 22, 1988. Staff: aa_/n- Reed Carlson 70(215) 4- DRAFT. NOT APPROVED ar DRAFT. NOT APPROVED G 0 Ald. Present: Ald. Absent: ZBA Members Present: Staff Present: Presiding Official: MINUTES Special Joint Meeting Planning & Development Committee and Zoning Board of Appeals February 29, 1988 7:30 P.M. - Room 2403 J. Bleveans, S. Brady, J. Korshak, L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw None W. Whitney, R. Claessens, R. Carey, S. Peters, R. Molumby and V. Fields D. Rasmussen, E. Szymanski and R. Rudd J. Rudy 1Q Minutes of Planning & Development Committee of February 24. 1988. Ald. Bleveans requested that the minutes reflect that he was briefly in attendance at the subject meeting though he did not vote on the items on the agenda. Ald. Brady stated that with respect to page 4 of the subject minutes, Docket 36-28-88, the Committee vote should be 114-1" (Ald. Korshak voting nay) rather than the 5-0 as indicated. Ald. Morton moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee as amended. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes. Communications The Committee received a memorandum indicating that the new chair of the P & D Committee would be Ald. Warshaw beginning March 7, 1988. Joint Meeting - P A D Committee and ZBA. Chairman Rudy reviewed briefly with the Committee a list of agenda items on a memorandum dated February 25, 1988. After introduction of all members of ZBA and the P & D Committee. the group reviewed item #1 on the agenda which addressed the "operating procedures of each group and any perceived problems one group has with the other group's procedures". Ald. Bleveans began by stating that it was his opinion that a joint meeting is not an attempt to have P & D members influence ZBA decision making. He stated that he felt that the joint meeting provided an opportunity to exchange information and to educate each group on the other's concerns and procedures. Bill Whitney, ZBA Chairman, stated that sometimes a lack of sensitivity is expressed between both bodies to the cases reviewed by the two groups. He stated that it is his feeling that a joint meeting will allow for an exchange of ideas, concerns and provide a better understanding of each groups processes. Ald. Horton questioned an earlier request at the P & D Committee to have in written form Minutes - Special Joint Meeting P & D Committee and ZBA February 29, 1987 the Zoning Board's hearing procedures to allow audience members to know in advance how the meeting will be conducted. Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, stated that an outline of procedures is available at each hearing for all members of the audience to review. Rasmussen stated that he would forward a copy of the procedures to the P & D Committee. Ald. Brady stated that she was pleased with the recently adopted procedure to have audience members sign in and indicate whether they are for or against a proposal. Chairman Whitney reviewid briefly with the Committee his opening remarks for each Zoning Board meeting which details the procedures to be followed that night. Ald. Morton questioned whether the Zoning Board noticed any difference since an explanation sheet of the hearing process has been provided? Peters indicated that there appears to be no difference but also noted that since the use of the explanation sheet the ZBA has not had any hearings of a controversial nature. Ald. Brady discussed with the group the P & D Committee's Rules of Procedure. She asked that copies of the Rules and Procedure be forwarded to the ZBA for their review. Ald. Warshaw stated that the P & D Committee oftentimes has a different duty than ZBA, i.e. a political role. She stated that the P & D Committee deals not only with zoning issues but also the politics of the issues. Ald. Warshaw felt that the P & D Committee needed to deal with the effect of a request on the constituents and not just the letter of the law. Chairman Whitney indicated that ZBA members will often receive calls as do P & D Committee members. He stated that in cases when he received a call he informs the caller that he cannot discuss the case if it has not been heard. Ald. Brady questioned whether the ZBA has adequate information in the P & D Committee's minutes to understand the P & D Committee's reasoning, particularly when the P & D Committee overturns a ZBA recommendation? Chairman Whitney stated that most times enough information is provided. Ald. Bleveans questioned how the ZBA Rules of Procedure are changed? Rasmussen indicated that ZBA can change their procedures and that changes can be initiated by staff, subject to approval by the ZBA. Ald. Korshak questioned ZBA members as to whether steps have been taken to control the length of a meeting and also the time allowed to hear lengthy cases? Whitney indicated that as Chairman he attempts to obtain from the applicant an estimate as to how long a case will run. Whitney also stated that attempts are made to control the number of cases on each docket in order to hear and complete as many cases as possible in one meeting. Peters indicated that it is often difficult to predict the length of case. Claessens indicated that he would like to see the ZBA try to do more in controlling the length of hearing for complex cases and that ZBA may do so by determining the number of witnesses and the expected length of testimony. Molumby stated that it is difficult to predict how well some petitioners are prepared. He stated that sometimes it is necessary to draw out of the petitioner the information requested and to lead the petitioner in addressing the variation standards that must be met. Ald. Korshak suggested that the Chairman should not try to limit unprepared petitioners and give them as much aid as possible. Ald. Horton questioned what ZBA does with petitioners who are without legal 2- Minutes - Special Joint Meeting P & D Committee and ZBA February 29. 1987 representation? Rasmussen explained that standards are reviewed with the applicant and it is often recommended that new applicants attend a ZBA hearing prior to their own hearing so that they fully understand the procedures and how the hearing is conducted. Peters stated that whether a case is large or small the standards do not change. and that the applicants must attempt to address the specific standards. Ald. Brady suggested that applicants be supplied some sample transcripts pertaining to similar applications for their review. Ald. Horton observed that she prefers the current formality of the ZBA procedures and structure versus her own experience with the ZBA several years ago, which was very informal. Chairman Whitney stated that he tries to be formal and provide structure, but not to be imposing or intimidating. The Committee reviewed agenda item #2 which questioned "how should variation standards be applied until comprehensive amendments to the Zoning Ordinance are adopted?" The P & D Committee briefly reviewed the reasons for not adopting previously suggested variation standards by both the ZAC and ZBA. It was felt at the time that the zoning consultant and Zoning Commission could better comprehensively review the standards and all of the issues involved and provide a better set of rules. Both groups acknowledge that to do so accepts that variation standards may not be changed for two (2) years. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether it was possible to discuss with the ZBA any clarification of standards now so that both groups feel more comfortable in the interim? Peters stated that he doesn't have a problem with the P & D Committee delaying the decision until the comprehensive amendment is made but believes that the P D Committee is satisfied with the current standards and the way they are applied, at least until a new ordinance is developed. Peters stressed that the ZBA tries to apply the standards in a realistic manner even though it is oftentimes difficult due to the applicant's preparation or the wording of the standards. The P & D Committee explained that their review of the variation standards found that the recommendations on cases to be realistic and provide obvious and needed relief but could be construed to open up Pandora's Box when viewed in another light. Therefore, it was recommended to have the zoning experts and Zoning Commission address the matter. Ald. Korshak reviewed the Inadequacy of the current standards, particularly related to the issue of desire to make a profit". Ald. Korshak stated that he feels the variation standards should be addressed and that use variations should be eliminated from the Zoning Ordinance. Chairman Rudy stated that in his opinion bulk variations sometime are more unsettling and difficult to visualize but can be a much larger problem than a use variation. Fields questioned whether the zoning consultant would meet with ZBA? Ald. Brady indicated that the zoning consultant is scheduled for a number of meetings and that a ZBA member Peters) is on the Zoning Commission to pass on the concerns of the ZBA. Ald. Rudy questioned whether all the ZBA members voted the same way on most cases? Chairman Whitney indicated that in many cases the votes are unanimous, 3- Minutes - Special Joint Meeting P & D Committee and ZBA February 29, 1987 but that is not necessarily true in all cases. Chairman Whitney stated the ZBA always tries to be true to the standards in making a decision and also be fair to the applicants. Claessens indicated that the cases that cause the greatest problems are those of "use elimination" (Gordon's Drug, Yesterday's Restaurant, 319 Dempster). Ald. Brady indicated that the P & D Committee has the same problems when addressing the "use elimination" cases. Ald. Warshaw indicated that many times the neighborhood testified and supported a retention though the P & D Committee does not simply make their decision based on neighborhood support. She stated that the P & D Committee looks for the end -purpose of the legislation in making their decision. The Committee discussed item #3, which addressed "clarification of when comments made by a board member during the deliberations of the board on a case are considered testimony". This issue came to light recently when a variation for 1414 Pitner was sent back to ZBA at the direction of the P & D Committee and the request of the applicant's attorney who alleged that she did not have an opportunity to rebut comments made in deliberation by the ZBA chairman. Ald. Brady stated that she feels that ZBA members can and should bring out in deliberations some of their own knowledge and understanding of the case. She questioned whether legally there was a problem with this. Peters stated that the question is whether a ZBA member can talk about what he has seen or reviewed. Peters stated that situations can arise Where a ZBA member and the applicant may be looking at the same thing but view it differently. Molumby stated that the discussion among the ZBA members during deliberation is probably the most important aspect in determining a case. Carey stated that the standards are not difficult to address when putting on a case. He stated that the 1414 Pitner was a procedural glitch that may never happen again and had not happened prior to that point. Ald. Korshak questioned whether discussion by ZBA members should be based on evidence presented during the hearing and at what point can ZBA member's, during deliberation, not bring in their own personal observation? The Committee reviewed with the Board various ways to control comments made by Board members during deliberation and at the same time allow a free -flow of communication so that the decision making process was not hampered. Ald. Warshaw stated that she believes that the ZBA members should have the opportunity to express opinions, and she concurred with Carey that the issue has only arisen once and may be only a fluke. Chairman Whitney stated that he always tries not to impose his thoughts and feelings in an attempt to influence other ZBA members. He stated that he does not make any comments regarding his opinion until a motion is made. He explained his need to express his observations and concerns on an issue and is greatly concerned if he is limited in making personal comments during deliberation. Whitney stated that discussion among ZBA members must be open and as free as possible. He questioned what is determined to be evidence, observation, or opinion? Peters noted that to allow rebuttal of any comments made by ZBA members during deliberation could create an endless hearing process. Whitney noted that his comments on the 1414 Pitner Avenue case were only made after no one on ZBA seemed willing to make a motion with respect to the case. 4- Minutes - Special Joint Meeting P & D Committee and ZBA February 29, 1987 The Committee then discussed item #4, which addressed "the right to cross-examination of witnesses at ZBA hearing". The ZBA reviewed with the Committee a legal opinion rendered by Ellen Szymanski, Assistant Corporation Counsel, which stated that cross-examination of witnesses should be permitted by the audience. The group agreed that cross-examination cannot be limited to only attorneys, but is open to all property owners within 250 feet if the cross-examination is relevant and not redundant. The group reviewed the pros and cons of such a process and how it may lengthen significantly controversial zoning board hearings (i.e. St. Francis Helipad). Ald. Morton emphasized that at both the ZBA and the P & D Committee the main goal should be to seek the truth in the process. Chairman Rudy emphasized that for both bodies it is also necessary to arrive at a decision in a just fashion. The Committee reviewed the issue of "referrals back to ZBA by City Council." Ald. Brady observed that only two (2) cases have been sent back to ZBA in recent years (Taco Bell, 1414 Pitner). Ald. Brady emphasized that the P & D Committee's Rules prohibit that committee from hearing new evidence. Chairman Whitney requested that when cases are returned to ZBA that the specific reason be expressed so that the rehearing will be limited to only that issue and not reopening the entire. case. Ald. Bleveans recommended that a staff memo accompany any referral back to ZBA with explicit wording as to reasoning for the request for rehearing. In the same vein, the groups discussed the transmittal of P & D Committee reasoning when that Committee reverses a ZBA recommendation. Ald. Bleveans suggested that as in a referral, the staff provide detailed reasoning to the ZBA as to the P & D Committee thinking in reversing a decision. Both groups discussed the merits of providing greater detailed P & D minutes to elaborate on the reversal decision. Peters stated that it is his experience in working with various municipalities that Corporation Counsel would not prefer such detail in the minutes regarding a reversal since a case may be litigated. Peters recommended that staff convey in a different form the P & D Committee's reasoning. Chairman Whitney stated that he feels that it is important that ZBA know the reasons why the P & D Committee overturns a recommendation. Whitney stated that he finds the joint meetings extremely helpful and would recommend that the meetings be held annually. Ald. Bleveans expressed agreement and both groups agreed to meet annually. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Committee will be March 14, 1988. Staff: ItoertT. Rdd J 2 Dave Rasmussen 70(7/11) 5- The next regular meeting of the P & D DRAFT, 11OT APPROVED DRAFT. NOT APPROVED MINUTES 21anning and Development Committee February 22, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.K. Ald. Present: S. Brady, J. Korshak, L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw Aid. Absent: J. Bleveans Staff Present: C. Powers, D. Carter, B. Ahiberg D. Rasmussen, R. Carlson, E. Szymanski and R. Rudd Presiding Official: J. Rudy Minutes of February 8. 1988. Aid. Korshak moved and Aid. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of February 8, 1988 as submitted. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes (Aid. Horton absent). Docket 193-9A-87. Ordinance 99-0-87. ZBA 86-41-V(R), re Variations for 319 Dempster Street. Chairman Rudy provided a brief background on the request which was originally discussed at the P 5 D Committee meeting of October 26, 1987, Aid. Brady questioned whether the attorney for the applicant (Mr. Roselli) had an opportunity to review the proposed ordinance and staff report, and questioned whether he concurred with the suggestions? Mr. Roselli stated that he had reviewed the ordinance and requested that instead of a letter of credit that his client be allowed to provide an escrow in an amount acceptable to the City to cover the remaining deficiencies (placing screens on the windows of the building). Aid. Warshaw stated that she also would prefer an escrow account rather than a letter of credit. Ald. Korshak questioned whether the applicant agreed with the staff's suggestion of deleting condition #2 on page four which stated that any future violations would not abrogate the granting of the variance. Kr. Roselli stated that he opposed deleting this condition because he feared that the variation could be construed as being only one of a temporary nature. After a brief discussion Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee delete condition #2 on page four of the ordinance. Committee voted 5-0 to delete the subject section. Ald. Warshaw questioned why the ordinance refers to the property as a hotel? Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, stated that was the correct terminology as set forth in the zoning ordinance. Upon further discussion it was agreed that the ordinance would be amended to delete the term hotel and replace that term wherever it appeared with "rooming house". It was felt by the Committee that the term rooming house better reflected the project. I ti P & D Minutes February 22, 1988 Upon a question from the Committee, Mr. Roselli agreed with the rewording and confirmed that the subject rooming house would fall under the Landlord Tenant Ordinance. Ald. Brady questioned whether Mr. Roselli agreed with the rent restrictions as recommended earlier by the P & D Committee? She stated that they appeared to be quite generous. Mr. Roselli confirmed his agreement with the rent restrictions. Ald. Warshaw also stated that she was in concurrence. Ald. Korshak suggested that a date be stated regarding the annual report on, the rents. Staff indicated that the ordinance would be amended to include a date. It was also recommended that the money for the escrow be in place prior to City Council voting on the ordinance on March 14, 1988. Rasmussen informed the Committee since their recommendation is one to overturn the Zoning Board of Appeals recommendation that it would take a two-thirds vote of the City Council to grant the variation request. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the subject variation. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the requested variation. Docket 281-12A-87, ZBA 87-26-V(R) or T(E'), re Variations for 1414 Pitner Avenue. The attorney for the applicant, Janice Sylvestri was present and informed the Committee that her client was unable to attend the meeting due to an injury suffered on the job. Ms. Sylvestri informed the Committee that her client was very much in need of the variation and requested the Committee approve the variation. Ald. Warshaw stated that her review of the most recent ZBA hearing finds that no evidence was brought forward to change her inclination to vote against the variation. She stated that ZBA denied the time extension and that the P & D Committee could not act on that matter but could only make a recommendation to City Council on the variation request. Ald. Morton stated that she favored the variation. She compared the 1414 Pitner issue with the previously discussed 319 Dempster variation which was also a nonconforming use. She stated that there is an issue of the applicant (Mr. Lytle) knowing whether a covenant existed on the property when he purchased it. Ald. Horton stated that she is personally familiar with the site and the neighborhood. She stated that the current house is not large enough and needs to be expanded. She reminded the Committee that no neighbors opposed the request and therefore recommended that the variation be approved. She stated that the applicant fully expected to receive the same consideration as his predecessor who was granted a time extension in the past. Ald. Morton further stated that the applicant needs to bring the trucks to the site and that she would be willing to place restrictions on the variation request if granted. Ald. Brady stated that this appeared to be a very clear-cut land use issue. She further stated that this appeared to be a land use that is incompatible with the neighborhood. Ald. Brady felt that even though no objectors were present, the use was still incompatible and that the hardship was self induced since the applicant did have an attorney when he purchased the site who informed him 2- P & D Minutes February 22, 1988 of the covenant or should have informed him of the covenant on the property. She stated that the applicant needs to find a proper location and that she would be willing to allow a reasonable amount of ,time for the applicant to relocate prior to enforcement of the denial for a variation, if that was the City Council's position. Aid. Warshaw stated that she concurs with Ald. Brady in that the use is incompatible and questioned whether the City could delay enforcement action to allow a reasonable time for the applicant to relocate. Aid. Korshak reviewed with the Committee some of the legal issues involved in the ZBA decision as discussed in the transcript by ZBA member Peters. Aid. Korshak reminded the Committee that to overturn the ZBA recommendation, City Council would require a two-thirds vote. Ald. Korshak further noted that there were no objectors to the application and that possibly conditions on a variation could alleviate some problems. Aid. Warshaw stated that she still is troubled with the incompatible land use aspect of the of the project and would not favor granting a variation. Ald. Morton further stated the 1414 Pitner nonconforming use request with the aforementioned 319 Dempster use request. The Committee reviewed, with the applicant's attorney. numerous photographs illustrating site conditions. Chairman Rudy stated that his position is similar to that of Aldermen Warshaw and Brady in that the use is not compatible with the neighborhood, and that he would not favor granting the variation. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the P & D Committee recommend to City Council denial of the variation request and stay enforcement of the request for a 120 day period to allow time for the applicant to relocate. Committee voted 3-2. Voting Aye: Aldermen Brady, Rudy and Warshaw. Voting May: Aldermen Korshak and Horton. Aid. Brady requested that the issue of sending cases back to ZBA for further hearing and discussion be placed on the agenda for the joint meeting of ZBA and P & D on Monday. February 29, 1988. Review ZAC Report on Commercial Districts. Aid. Brady questioned whether staff was looking for any action by the P & D Committee. Bob Ahlberg, Zoning Planner, was present and stated that the ZAC recommendation, which is based on the Plan Commission Commercial District Report of approximately two years ago, is to send the matter to the newly formed Zoning Commission and ask that the zoning issues in the 800 block of Chicago Avenue be given a high priority. Ald. Brady stated that she is very concerned with that block of Chicago Avenue since over the past few years there have been various proposals and pressures for development. Ald. Warshaw expressed a similar concern for a nearby area west of the tracks. She stated that there are some areas which may be facing pressure for development and for uses which are incompatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood. Ald. Korshak expressed his reservations with sending the matter to the Zoning Commission since such a process could take up to two years. He felt that aldermen may place themselves in a difficult position if in the interim 3- Y P & D Minutes February 22, 1988 undesirable proposals are made. Ald. Brady felt that though that may be true, there are probably several areas in the City where aldermen of the rest of the wards have similar concerns. Dick Carter, Planning Director, reminded the Committee that they took no action two years ago 'to rezone the 800 block of Chicago Avenue and at that time they recommended moving the matter to ZAC with the resulting recommendation to the Zoning Commission. Chairman Rudy questioned why the matter should not be sent back to ZAC to review possible rezoning? Ahlberg stated that a comprehensive review can best be accomplished through the comprehensive zoning ordinance amendment and that the Zoning Commission is the body to review that amendment. Ald. Morton questioned page 3, item #8 which discussed development of a Greenbay corridor, north of Emerson. Ald. Horton questioned whether staff was aware of any specific plan. Staff indicated that the report only proposed zoning districts which better reflected the area and not any specific request. The Committee discussed the pros and cons of sending the matter to the Zoning Commission versus ZAC. Due the lateness of the hour and items on the agenda Chairman Rudy recommended that the matter be held over to the March 14, 1988, P & D Committee meeting to allow additional discussion. Docket'36-2B-88, Consultant Contract for Plan Review and Building Inspections. Ald. Korshak questioned whether by entering into such a contract for a third year there would be a sufficient number of City employed inspectors to observe and enforce building activity underway in which proper permits were not obtained? Ald. Korshak stated that he would oppose the inspection aspect of the contract but would approve the plan review portion for that reason. The Committee briefly reviewed the reasons for entering into such a concept which was discussed approximate two years ago when it was felt that for large, more complex projects, an outside inspection service has advantages over limited City staff expertise. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council hiring the firm of Criezis, Associates, for plan review and building inspections. Ald. Warshaw further recommended that the discussion of the number of City inspectors be discussed at a future P 6 D Committee meeting. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council. Voting Aye: Aldermen Warshaw, Brady, Horton and Rudy. Voting Nay: Ald. Korshak. Docket 37-2B-88, Proposed Contract for Consulting Services for New Zoning Ordinance. Aid. Brady stated that she is always in favor of ample citizen participation, but would not favor the option as proposed by the consultant. She felt that the selection of key groups would be quite controversial. Ald. Brady further felt that the numerous meetings set forth in the base contract would supply ample opportunity for any group or individual in the City to be heard. Chairman Rudy stated that under the option the consultant now appears to 4- F & D Minutes February 22, 1988 feel the need for additional citizen participation and input. Ald. Korshak stated that he would rather see the consultant time spent addressing the Zoning Commission since the P & D Committee and City Council had earlier recommended expanding the broad base of the Zoning Commission for the purpose of gaining the input of various groups. Ald. Brady moved and Ald.'Morton seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council approval of the contract, without the option, in the amount of $118.000, to Camiros, Ltd. Ald. Warshaw also recommended that the minutes reflect the desire of the Committee to have the consultant work as closely as possibly with the Zoning Commission in obtaining citizen input. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to the City Council approval of the hiring of Camiros, Ltd. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & A Committee is March 14. 1988. The next special meeting of the P & D Committee is Monday, February 29, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: Robert T. itudd 70(2/6) DRAFT, NOT APPROVED 5- a DRAFT. NOT APPROVED MINUTES Planning and Development Committee March 14, 1988 Roots 2403 - 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: S. Brady, J. Bleveans, J. Korshak, L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw Ald. Absent: Hone Staff Present: D. Carter, B. Ahlberg, L. Talkington, D. Rasmussen, R. Carlson, E. Szymanski, G. Sommers -Pant and R. Rudd Others Present: Phil Peters, Chairman of Plan Commission Presiding Official: R. Warshaw Minutes of Special Joint Meeting of Planning g Development Committee and Zoning Board of Appeals of February 29, 1988. Ald. Morton moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the special joint meeting of the Planning & Development Committee meeting and Zoning Board of Appeals of February 29, 1988 as submitted. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes (Ald. Bleveans absent). ZBA 87-32-V(F), Final Variation Decision re 800 Dempster Street. Chairman Warshaw expressed her interest in the significant amount of deliberations concerning the procedure for delivery of goods as reviewed by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ald. Brady stated that she was surprised that the parking variation was a final decision by the Zoning Board. Ald. Rudy also questioned ZBA's final decision making authority on parking. Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, stated that this decision was per zoning ordinance regulations. Ald. Rudy recommended that the P A D Committee and the City Council need to develop a method for addressing parking issues in zoning cases. He stated that for the City (ZBA) to waive, in the fora of a variation, the requirements of two (2) parking spaces provides an "economic gift" to the applicant. Chairman Warshaw stated that she finds this case did not have any negative effect on the neighborhood by granting the parking variation. January -February Monthly Rehab Report. Ald. Brady questioned how the past year's expenditures compared to the prior year. Rudd indicated that the dollar amounts far exceeded the prior year expenditures for rehabilitation and that the goals for single family/multi-family were exceeded in multi -family and close to being met in single family. P & D Committee - minutes March 14, 1988 Docket 149-7A-87, ZBA 87-4-SU(R), Special Use for a Taco Bell Restaurant at 1900-80 Dempster Street. The Committee received a letter withdrawing the special use request for a Taco Bell at Dodge/Dempster shopping center. Implementing the Comprehensive General Plan Through the Creation of a New Zoning Ordinance. Ald. Brady stated that she always finds helpful the comments from the Plan Commission regarding issues such as on the new zoning ordinance. Ald. Norton questioned how the comprehensive plan was developed and what bodies reviewed the plan? Chairman Warshaw stated that P & D Committee reviewed page by page the comprehensive plan and that the Plan Commission developed the plan in conjunction with other boards and commissions and interested groups. Phil Peters, Plan Commission Chairman, was present and confirmed that the Plan Commission met with numerous boards and commissions in developing the comprehensive plan. Ald. Morton questioned the notification procedure in the comprehensive plan for rezoning properties? Ald. Brady explained that the comprehensive plan does not provide for rezoning but is a land -use map. Rezoning matters are reviewed by ZAC and notification procedures are set forth in the zoning ordinance. Peters further explained that the comprehensive plan is a land -use document and does not specify zoning changes. Ald. Rudy questioned whether the newly formed Zoning Commission has yet developed a schedule of meetings? Bob Ahlberg, Zoning Planner, stated that the Zoning Commission will conduct its first meeting on Monday, March 21, 1988 and will set a schedule of meetings for the next year at that time. Docket 193-9A-87, Ordinance 99-0-87, ZBA 85-41-V(R), re Variations for 319 Dempster Street. The Committee received a clean copy of Ordinance 99-0-87, setting forth variations for 319 Dempster. This matter is on the City Council agenda with a recommendation to approve the variation request. 1100 Forest Planned Unit Development (PUD) Minor Changes. Chairman Warshaw stressed that proper procedures must be followed in the future by the developer regarding PUD minor changes. The Committee expressed dismay at the developer constantly making changes and then requesting the Preservation Commission and the P & D Committee to approve the changes after the fact. Gwen Sommers-Yant, Preservation Coordinator, stated that the new homeowners, the developer and the City have now been educated on the Planned Unit Development review system and expects that there should be fewer changes brought to the Committee. Ald. Korshak stated that he is disturbed with the developer continually making changes and then requesting the City to sanction those changes after the fact. Yant explained that in some instances the new homeowners are making the changes without the approval or the knowledge of both the City and the developer. Yant felt that all parties are now better versed in the workings of the Planned Unit Development Ordinance. 2- P & D Committee - Minutes March 14, 1988 Docket 40-3A-88, Ordinance 11-0-88, ZBA 87-33-SU(R), re Special Use for 2126 Ashland Avenue. Cheryl Williams, Attorney for the Jehovah Witness Church, was present and stated that she would provide City staff with evidence of a lease regarding the parking arrangement as requested at the hearing. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Horton seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council granting a special use for an addition to the church. Ald. Brady expressed concern at the testimony in the transcript and the difficulty in understanding the request. Ald. Brady applauded Scott Peters. ZBA member, for sorting out the issues at the very end of the ZBA hearing. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the special use (Ald. Bleveans absent). Consider Reinstatement or Deletion of Sign Ordinance Section re Appeal of S.R.A.B. Decisions to P & D Committee. Ald, Korshak reviewed a letter by Ira Golan, Executive Director of the Evanston Chamber of Commerce, which supported reinstatement of the appeal process. Ald. Korshak stated that he was in sympathy with Golan's position and believes there Faust be available to the applicants an appeal to elected officials. Ald. Korshak wanted it noted that he was in no way criticizing the Sign Review and Appeals Board which he feels has done an excellent job as evidenced by the one (1) appeal of their decision to the P & D Committee. Ald. Rudy cited other instances of lay -commissions that have final authority i.e. ZBA). Ald. Rudy stated that he would support deleting the appeal provision to the P & D Committee. Ald. Brady stated that she supports Ald. Rudy's position and cited another example of final decisions being with the Rehab Board of Appeal. Ald. Brady stated that she feels that there is no need for an appeals process from a decision by a technical board such as the Sign Review and Appeals Board, BOCA Building Code Appeals Board, etc. Ald. Morton stated that she agrees with Ald. Korshak that an appeals process is necessary. She stated that she represents citizens and she wants those constituents to have the right to appeal to her. Ald. Korshak acknowledged that applicants denied by the appeals board have the right to go to court, but was concerned with the cost for attorney's fees if that route was selected. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council the deletion of the appeals process to the P & D Committee. Under discussion, Ald. Rudy stated that if the aldermen are not satisfied with the way the process is working, they have the ability to make a change. He stated that the expertise on the Sign Review and Appeals Board has as much ability, or more, than do members of the City Council in reviewing such matters. Ald. Korshak expressed his concern with the applicant having the right to appeal if they thought they were not given a fair hearing. He stated that it was his opinion that all applicants would not appeal. Chairman Warshaw wanted the minutes to note that the P & D Committee was very supportive of the Sign Review and Appeals Board and was not questioning the quality of the Sign Review and Appeals Board decisions by suggesting the appeals process be 3- J P & D Committee - Minutes March 14, 198B continued. On the call of the question the Committee voted 2-4 to delete the appeal process. Voting Ayes: Aldermen Rudy and Brady. Voting Nays: Aldermen Korahak, Norton, Bleveans and Warshaw. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Horton seconded that the Committee reinstate the appeals process for a twelve 12) month period. Committee voted 6-0 to direct staff to develop an ordinance amendment providing a continuation of the appeals process for another twelve (12) months. Ald. Brady reviewed with the Committee a letter dated March 14, 1988 from Mr. O'Meara from the Sign Review and Appeals Board, which provided several suggestions to the P & D Committee. Of primary interest to the Committee was the recommendation by the Sign Review and Appeals Board to establish an amortization period for all non -conforming signs. The Committee reviewed briefly the discussion that took place during the adoption of the sign ordinance regarding this matter. Ald. Brady felt that the Sign Review and Appeals Board offered some interesting ideas for further discussion. Staff was directed to request the Sign Review and Appeals Board to expand in writing their ideas and establish an agenda item in the future for discussing ideas with the Sign Review and Appeals Board. Docket 41-3A-88. Consider Ordinance 12-0-88. Amending 1987 BOCA National Building Code to Clarify Language re Double Cylinder Deadbolt Locks. Ald. Korshak questioned whether the wording in number 4, on page 2 of the ordinance was clear to explain that dwelling units with a single means of egress could not use a double -cylinder deadbolt lock. After a brief discussion the Committee directed staff to review the language and if there was a need to further clarify, to provide a clean copy of the ordinance for the next City Council meeting. Ald. Morton moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council introduction of Ordinance 12-0-88, amending the BOCA Code to allow for a double -cylinder deadbolt locks. Committee voted 6-0. Information Memorandum on Implementation of the Comprehensive General Plan as It pertains to Housing. Chairman Warshaw questioned why the Plan Commission would recommend studying the housing issues before the 1990 census data for the City of Evanston was available? She stated that it may be premature to conduct such a study before the availability of the census data. Phil Peters stated that the data may not be available for more than a year or two after it is collected in 1990. He expressed the concern of the Plan Commission that there was a lot of motion going an without really defining the City of Evanston's housing objectives. Chairman Warshaw agreed with the Plan Commission comments regarding the collection of some data by in-house staff, but felt that much information will need to come from the census. Ald. Rudy questioned What percent of Evanston household's are paying 30% or more of their income for housing costs? Laurel 4- P 6 D Committee -- Minutes March 14, 1988 Talkington, Housing Planner, stated that approximately 20% of Evanston's households are paying 30% of more of their income for housing expenses. Ald. Rudy questioned whether housing on the Northshore was generally higher than other areas in metropolitan Chicago? Talkington explained that the intent in the City of Evanston is to maintain rent levels for individuals currently residing in the City. Ald. Rudy questioned whether the housing patterns are different in the City of' vanston when compared with the City of Chicago? Talkington explained that it depends what geographical areas in Evanston and Chicago are being compared. Ald. Rudy questioned what was meant by using the new zoning ordinance to address housing issues? Talkington explained that it was necessary to coordinate housing concerns with the development of a new zoning ordinance so that new regulations do not conflict with City of Evanston housing policies. Ald. Brady provided an example of down -zoning in areas in southeast Evanston several years ago that effectively did away with many rooming houses. She conceded that today a more sensitive view may be provided since down -zoning displaced a certain segment of population. Ald. Rudy asked what the comprehensive housing plan would entail? Ald. Brady stated that the Housing Commission is currently reviewing, at a subcommittee, the composition of a housing plan and will be developing the parameters in the next year. Ald. Horton questioned whether any Sth Ward residents or elected officials are on the Housing Commission? Ald. Morton was informed that at one point Ald. Summers was a representative to the Housing Commission. Ald. Horton expressed concern that there was a need for representation of the westside on the Housing Commission. Ald. Brady indicated that Rev. Michael Curry and Ald. Dennis Drummer (2nd Ward) were currently members of the Housing Commission. Since there was no action required on this matter, the issue was left with the Housing Commission to continue its exploration of a Comprehensive Housing Plan and coordination with the Zoning Commission regarding housing issues. Docket 281-12A-87, ZBA 87-26-V(R) or T(F), re Variations for 1414 Pitner Avenue. Chairman Warshaw reviewed with the Committee a legal opinion, from Corporation Counsel Herb Hill, stating that the City Council could grant a stay of enforcement of a period not to exceed 180 days (6 months). It was the opinion of Corporation Counsel that to grant a period longer than 6 months effectively would grant a time extension, which the City Council did not have authority to do. After a brief discussion, Ald. Rorshak moved and Ald. Brady seconded that in the event the City Council recommended to deny the variation request that the P b D Committee recommend to City Council to grant a 180 day (6 months) stay of enforcement to allow the petitioner time to relocate the landscaping business. Committee voted 5-0 (Ald. Bleveans absent). 5- P & D Committee - Minutes March 14, 1988 Review ZAC Report on Commercial Districts. The Committee briefly reviewed the discussion at the prior meeting regarding this matter. Ald. Brady questioned whether a moratorium could be utilized to stop any further rezoning in certain areas along Chicago Avenue' Ald. Korshak stated that there Would be a need to establish the appropriate scope of a moratorium. After a brief discussion, staff was directed to provide a report to the P b D Committee reviewing mechanisms to stop inconsistent zoning changes. Staff indicated that such a report would be provided to the Committee in the near future. Adi ournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is lurch 28. 1988. Staff: /'10 Robert T: Rudd 70(2/7) 6- DRAFT. NOT APPROVED. H IT 1 11 i I i i .. i i i i 111 1 i 1 P DRAFT. NOT APPROVED Ald. Present: Ald. Absent: Staff Present: Others Present: Presiding Official: MINUTES Planning and Development Committee March 28, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. S. Brady, J. Bleveans and R. Warshaw J. Rorshak, L. Morton and J. Rudy B. Ahlberg, D. Rasmussen, E. Szymanski and R. Rudd Dr. Thomas Stafford R. Warshaw Minutes of March 14. 1988. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of March 14, 1988. Committee voted 3-0 to approve the minutes. ZBA Public Notice for April 19, 1988. Committee received the ZBA public notice for April 19, 1988. ZAC Report on Commercial District and "Mechanism" to Prevent incompatible Development. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee accept the staff report and refer the commercial districts report to the Zoning Commission. Ald. Brady also recommended that the Committee adopt the staff recommendation contained on page 3 of the report, which recommends (1) referring the Plan Commission report and ZAC comments to the Zoning Commission, (2) rely upon existing regulations to control against inappropriate development throughout the City as well as in the 800 block of Chicago until the comprehensive revision process is completed and (3) consider asking the Zoning Commission and consultant to consider at what point, if any, a city -Wide moratorium on rezoning may be appropriate. The Committee voted 3-0 to refer the report and recommendations to the Zoning Commission. Docket 53-3B-88, Consider Plat of Consolidation for Jehovah Witness Congregation at 2126-28 Ashland Avenue. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council approval of a plat of consolidation for the Jehovah Witness Congregation at 2126-28 Ashland Avenue. Committee voted 3-0 to recommend approval. P & D Minutes March 28, 1988 Docket 55-3B-88, Ordinance 21-0-88, Extending the Right to Appeal Decisions of the Sign Review and Appeals Board to the P & D Committee for a One (1) Year Period. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council introduction of Ordinance 21-0-88, reinstating for a one (1) year period the appeals of decision of the Sign Review and Appeals Board to the P & D Committee. Committee voted 3-0 to recommend to City Council introduction of the subject ordinance. Docket 54-38-88, Ordinance 19-0-88, ZBA 88-2-SU(R), re Special Use for 1501 Central Street (Dvche Stadium and McGaw Hall). Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the special use request for the 1988 North American Maccabi Youth Games to hold an opening ceremony in Dyche Stadium and two championship basketball games and a closing ceremony in McGaw Hall. Chairman Warshaw questioned whether there would be any cost to the City in the form of police and traffic control? Jim Perry, an attorney for Northwestern University, stated that there would be no cost to the City of Evanston. Jeff Colby. Maccabi Games organizer, stated that any cost incurred by the City would be paid to the City by the organizer. Ald. Brady questioned whether any extra effort should be made to notify the neighborhood of this event? Ald. Bleveans stated that he doesn't think this would be necessary since the Intensity of the use will be comparable to a football game or possibly less. Chairman Warshaw questioned the appropriateness of ZBA member Fields voting on a matter dealing with Northwestern University since Ms. Fields is a graduate student at Northwestern University. Chairman Warshaw questioned whether the Ethics Board has ruled on this matter? Ald. Brady stated that she does not have a problem with Ms. Fields voting on this matter. Ald. Bleveans stated that he disagrees with Ald. Warshaw's position and believes that Ms. Fields has been appropriate in voting. Staff was requested to investigate whether the Ethics Board has ruled on this matter and report back to the Committee. Committee voted 3-0 to recommend to City Council introduction of Ordinance 19-0-88, approving a special use for the Maccabi Games. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is Tuesday April 12, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: A; 'GAG// Robert T. Rudd 70(2/3) 2- DRAFT, NOT APPROVED DRAFT, NOT APPROVED MINUTES Planning and Development Committee April 12, 1988 Room 2403 - 8:45 P.M. Ald. Present: S. Brady, J. Bleveans J. Korshak, L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw Ald. Absent: None Staff Present: R. Rudd Others Present: Dr. Thomas Stafford Presiding Official.: R. Warshaw Minutes of March 28, 1988. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of March 28, 1988. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes. ZBA 88-1-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 1021 Hull Terrace. The Committee received the final variation decision without comment. ZBA 88-3-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 1726 Ashland Avenue. Ald. Rudy questioned why the City permitted the owner of 1726 Ashland to Obtained a building permit to replace a roof on the property when it was subject to elimination. Rudy noted that the ZBA records indicate that the owner spent approximately $3000 in repairing the roof before he realized he may have to tear the building down. Rudd confirmed that a building permit was required for the roof and stated that in most cases zoning analyses are not conducted for roofing permits since they are not necessary and can cause a lengthy time delay in issuing a roofing permit. Ald. Brady questioned whether buildings that are subject to elimination could be so indicated on the titles? Rudd stated that was possible and that Ald. Korshak, had made the same recommendation that buildings subject to elimination be identified as so on the title. Rudd informed the Committee that most of the buildings subject to elimination by the current zoning ordinance have been addressed and only a few are remaining. If the new zoning ordinance will create additional elimination cases, a requirement for recording should be part of the ordinance. Ald. Warshaw asked if ZBA members could provide more rationale for their decisions in the transcript of the ZBA hearing? Chairman Warshaw suggested that the ZBA be contacted and requested to give summaries of their rationale for the record. P & D Minutes April 12, 1988 Ald. Brady questioned why the ZBA was final authority on the 1726 Ashland case? She understood that since there was a setback and use issue that City Council would be the final authority. The Committee requested a memo from staff explaining the final decision making rules of the ZBA. Rudd indicated that a memo would be supplied to the committee at the next meeting. ZBA 88-4-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 2522 Ashland. Ald. Brady requested that staff send the issues involved with floor area ratio and livable space in this case to the zoning consultant. Ald. Brady felt that this was a matter that should be addressed in the new zoning ordinance. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is April 25, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: Robert r. Rudd 70(2/3) 2- DRAFT, NOT APPROVED DRAFT. NOT APPROVED MINUTES Planning and Development Committee April 25, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: S. Brady, J.-Bleveans J. Korsbak, L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw Ald. Absent: None Staff Present: R. Carlson, G. Sommers-Yant and R. Rudd Others Present: Dr. Thomas Stafford, Mary McWilliams, Steve Knutson and Phil Peters Presiding Official: R. Warshaw Minutes of April 12, 1988. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of April 12, 1988. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes. ZBA Public Notice for May 17, 1988. The Committee received the public notice without comment. 1100 Forest - Planned Unit Development (PUD) Minor Changes. The Committee discussed at length additional minor changes to the Planned Unit Development at 1100 Forest. Ald. Korshak questioned whether the developer started without a permit? Ald. Warshaw asked how the Committee felt the City could address the continued abuses by Mr. Chou of the City's ordinances. She felt that his arrogance was unacceptable. Ald. Korshak questioned what sanctions the City could take against Mr. Chou to impress upon him the need to follow the standards set by the City? Ald. Bleveans suggested that the City invite Mr. Chou to the next meeting to review the problems on the subject PUD. Ald. Brady stated that she was at a meeting with residents at 1100 Forest approximately one week ago. She stated that the result of the meeting was that the new homeowners were dissatisfied with the City of Evanston and expressed admiration for Mr. Chou. She questioned whether it would be prudent to invite Mr. Chou to a P & D Committee meeting. She stated that at the aforementioned meeting with homeowners she took issue with the developer on many of the points that he made. Ald. Korshak stated that he understood that when dealing with government oftentimes the fault is assumed to lie with the City of Evanston. He felt that this was not necessarily an accurate belief. Ald. Korshak stated that he is very concerned that Chou deliberately ignores City of Evanston ordinances. He suggested that the Com=ittee invite Chou to a P & D Committee meeting to discuss the problems he is having at 1100 Forest. rl 11- . A I 11 1 r n ^ -Ir I ^i 11, P 6 D Minutes ' r April 25, 1988 In response to a question from Ald. Korshak, Rudd explained that the City has the ability to initiate action to revoke or suspend a general contractor license and/or place a stop work order on a project where continued abuses are taking place. Ald. Morton stated that she would like to see a list of the violations. Ald. Bleveans suggested that the Committee invite Chou to come -in to discuss the general concerns of working under the PUD Ordinance. Ald. Rudy suggested that the Committee might also consider educating the homeowners and try to examine with the homeowners the PUD process. Ald. Brady stated that she was concerned with bringing Chou before the Committee. She stated that a number of the questions are in gray areas with regards to responsibilities under the PUD Ordinance. Ald. Korshak stated that the issue is whether Chou makes a change before or after the request is made. He stated that Chou needs to be reminded that there is a specific procedure for handling changes to a PUD. Ald. Morton questioned what the practice has been in the past? Gwen Sommers-Yant, Preservation Coordinator, stated that prior to the start of the PUD at 1100 Forest, written procedures were supplied Mr. Chou at a meeting with the City Manager. Yant stated that claims of delays in reviewing changes by the developer are unjustified. Yant further stated that the Preservation Commission has made timely decisions and has been available for requests. Yant recommended that the Committee not call -in Mr. Chou since in her opinion he doesn't response to admonition. She felt that a meeting with Chou may be counter-productivo. Ald. Morton suggested that a letter be sent to Mr. Chou expressing the concerns made at the P & D Committee meeting. Ald. Brady stated that she would be willing to contact the developer and convey the seriousness of the situation. Mary McWilliams, Chairman of the Preservation Commission, was present and stated that it is the impression of the homeowners that the City forced the PUD on Mr. Chou and thus caused the problem. It was the consensus of the Committee to have a letter forwarded to Mr. Chou expressing the concerns that the developer is not following the procedures set forth in the PUD and if abuses continue, actions will be undertaken by the City to end such activities. Chairmanship Memorandum The Committee received the chairmanship memo indicating that Ald. Bleveans would be the chairman of the P & D Committee starting with the first meeting in May. Staff Report re Clarification of When ZBA is a RecomaendinA Body to the City Council on Variations. The Committee received a staff memo clarifying when the ZBA is a recommending body to the City Council on variations. 2- P & D Minutes April 25, 1988 Docket 81-4B-88. Plat of Consolidation for 1941-61 Dempster and 1318-26 Dodge. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee approve the plat of consolidation for the property near the intersection of Dempster and Dodge. Chairman Warshaw noted that Ald. Drummer has indicated his approval of the consolidation. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the plat of consolidation. Triennial Review of Building Code Board of Appeals. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee recommend the retention of the Building Code Board of Appeals. Ald. Rudy questioned whether the P & D Committee or another current body could act as the board of appeals' Reed Carlson. Director of Building & Zoning, stated that there are technical requirements for members of the Building Code Board of Appeals. Committee voted 6-0 to retain the Building Code Board of Appeals. Public Place Names Committee. Ald. Korshak stated that the report is concise but foresees endless disagreements because the language is broad and indefinite. The Committee reviewed a report dated April 7, 1988 from Phil Peters, Chairman. of the Public Place Names Committee. The report recommended that "significant contribution requires exercise of judgment in each case, and the contribution Is to include, but not be limited to, contributions and or achievements which are generally known to and remembered by a major portion of the community, or whose efforts contributed to the development or acquisition of the site to be named". The report further recommended that there not be a program initiated to place markers other than within the scope of past practices because it would be very difficult to limit the number of markers. Ald. Bleveans stated that he is not troubled with the kind of standards established for naming public places. He equated the standards with many zoning standards. Ald. Brady questioned how many requests the Public Place Names Committee has reviewed? Chairman Peters stated that the committee reviews one or two a year. Ald. Brady stated that it was her opinion it was beat not to make standards too specific and that she would prefer to keep them more general. Ald. Brady further stated that she concurs with the recommendation not to issue place markers. Ald. Morton questioned what the procedure was for the Avenue of the Righteous? Chairman Peters stated that the placement of markers, such as for the Avenue of the Righteous, has not heretofore been in the purvue of the Public Place Names Committee. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee accept and endorse the report of the Public Place Names Committee dated April 7, 1988. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the report. 3- P & D Minutes April 25, 1988 r . The Committee discussed the process for memorials such as markers for City of Evanston's employees that have died in the line -of -duty. A1d. Horton questioned whether markers have been placed by trees in the Ladd Arboretum for deceased firemen or policemen? Don Wirth, Director of Parks. Recreation and Forestry, was present and stated to the Committee that a process is already in place for memorializing a person. He stated that any citizen or aldermen could make a request. The Committee concluded by requesting staff to prepare a report summarizing the current process for placing memorials for City of Evanston employees and also to detail the associated costs. Ad9ournment The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Next regular meeting of the P S D Committee is May 9, 1988. start: R bert T. Rudd 70(2/5)) 4- DRAFT. NOT APPROVED DRAFT, NOT APPROVED MINUTES Planning and Development Committee May 9, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.K. Aid. Present: S. Brady, J. Bleveans, J. Korshak, L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw Aid. Absent: None Staff Present: D. Rasmussen and R. Rudd Others Present: None Presiding Official: J. Bleveans Minutes of April 25. 1988. Ald. Warshaw moved and Aid. Korshak seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of April 25, 1988. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes. Docket 85-5A-88. ZBA 88-5--V(R) re Variations for 1218 Sherman Avenue. Chairman Bleveans stated that a request by Committee member Korshak has been made to hold -over the variations for 1218 Sherman Avenue, since the applicant is i11 and unable to attend. Chairman Bleveans stated that the Committee may want to briefly discuss the case if time permits at the end of this meeting, but not to deliberate or take a vote. Dog Litter Ordinance. Aid. Korshak questioned where this reference originated? The Committee discussed the reference which was proposed at A P & W by Aid. Rainey. Aid. Warshaw stated that she felt that the ordinance may belong in the P & D Committee since it does deal with parks. Aid. Warshaw also felt that the City may have a dog litter problem. but it is primarily because the current ordinances are not enforced. She felt that the problem may be cured by a stricter enforcement of laws presently on the books. Ald. Brady suggested that the Committee send the reference back to A P & W with a recommendation that the leash and pooper-scooper ordinances be reviewed to see if they can be better enforced. Ald. Horton stated that her review of documents provided to the Committee finds that current laws would address the issue raised by Aid. Rainey. Aid. Horton also stressed that the City should undertake a new dog census. She stated that there was a need to get a collar on the dog population in Evanston. She also felt that the publicity regarding the need to license dogs will help bring about a zensitivity to the dog problems in parks. Aid. r P & D Minutes May 9, 1988 Warshaw agreed with Ald. Brady in that she felt A P & W was the proper committee to monitor and discuss the enforcement of current ordinances. Chairman Bleveans stated that he was cynical about the City drafting legislation to control this matter. He stated that it was difficult to modify the human behavior of a majority of the population with respect to cleaning up after their dogs. Ald. Brady questioned whether a program could be developed to educate and train citizens to issue citations regarding provisions of the current ordinances to people found to be in violation? Chairman Bleveans highlighted difficulties with empowering non -sworn police officers to issue citations. Ald. Warshaw concurred that it is difficult to legislate civility. She stated that she would like to see more police effort to enforce the current laws. Chairman Bleveans suggested that the matter be sent to the Police Services Committee to discuss wich the police chief the current ordinances. The P & D Committee recommended that the Police Services Committee bring the results of the discussion with the police chief back to P & D for further review of the reference. Ald. Morton stressed that public awareness of the issue would help solve the problem in addition to conducting a dog census. It was the consensus of the Committee to refer the matter to Police Services Committee for further discussion at the June 2, 1988 meeting of the Police Services Committee and also to invite Ald. Rainey to that meeting to discuss the issue. Docket 83-5A-88: Plat of Resubdivision re 3420-22 Park Place. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the plat of resubdivision. Ald. Rudy questioned whether with the resubdivision would the two lots have appropriate set -backs and be buildable? Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, was present and stated that the lots would appear to be buildable with setbacks provided in the zoning ordinance. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the resubdivision. Docket 84-SA-88, Ordinance 28-0-88. ZBA 88-6-SU(R) re Special use for 2118 Jackson Avenue. Ald. Morton moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of Ordinance 28-0-88, granting a special use for a child care institution serving a maximum of thirty-three children. Ald. Morton questioned the difference between a day care facility and a child care institution? James Murray, attorney for the applicant, stated that a day care facility is limited to eight (8) or less children, while a day care institution is limited to a maximum of thirty-three (33). The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the special use. 2- P & D Minutes May 9, 1988 Ald. Rudy's Reference re Comprehensive Planning Process. Ald. Rudy explained that several years ago the City talked about developing a library prior to any proposal for the Church/Chicago project and the Research Park. He stated that there hasn't been sufficient comprehensive planning to address issues that would allow for a coordination of projects such as the three (3) mentioned above. Ald. Rudy stated that he discussed with the City Manager the lack of comprehensive planning and was informed that current City staff planners are allocated to various projects such as Preservation and Community Development Block Grant activities. The City does not have on staff a full time comprehensive planner. Ald. Brady stated that she concurs with Ald. Rudy and sees this issue as primarily a budgetary problem. She stated that it is her belief that the City needs to beef -up its comprehensive planning efforts. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee refer this reference to the Plan Commission for further discussion of the City's role in comprehensive planning. Docket 85-5A-88, ZBA 88-5-V(R) re Variations for 1218 Sherman Avenue. Ald. Rudy questioned whether the issue was one of a non -conforming building? Rasmussen stated that the issue was one of a "non -conforming residential building". Ald. Korshak stated that it was a matter of record that the building was subject to elimination. However, once the property was purchased the current owner found that he may not have understood the full ramifications of attempting to obtain zoning relief. Chairman Bleveans highlighted that according to the transcript the current owner factored -in the non -conforming depreciation in the purchase price. Ald. Korshak stated that it is possible that the current owner may now have some new evidence that was not brought out at the hearing before the ZBA addressing substantial problems related to construction. The Committee reviewed briefly with Ald. Horton the zoning history of parcels such as the one being discussed in addition to past cases Lytle) that the P 6 D has wrestled with regarding non -conforming status. staff informed the Committee that a review of the non -conforming and elimination provisions of the current zoning ordinance will be reviewed by the zoning consultant in the process of developing a new zoning ordinance. Ald. Rudy stated that it was his opinion that the City changes over a period of time and land uses that were once compatible can become incompatible with new uses. He stated that the City needs policies to address the deterioration associated with certain incompatibility of uses. Ald. Korshak stated that deterioration and incompatibility of uses is not always clearly delineated. Ald. Rudy stated that what happens in one ward can effect another ward when setting zoning precedent. Ald. Brady stated that it is possible to have some incompatibility among uses and still have a livable neighborhood; it all depends on the particular neighborhood. Ald. Rudy agreed 3- it q0 P & D Minutes May 9, 1988 that there are degrees of incompatibility of land uses. Ald. Brady stated that with respect to 1218 Sherman that little discussion was given to the extreme cost for repair of exterior and interior remodeling to the subject property. It appears that it would be an extraordinary cost to rehabilitate this structure. Ald Rudy stated that the City must deal justly with everyone and to do so everyone must be treated the same way. Ald. Horton disagreed with the City's policy with elimination. At the request of the applicant the Committee agreed to hold this matter over to the P & D Committee meeting of May 23, 1988. Ald. Horton questioned the procedure for placing some ZBA items on the City Council "yellow" agenda. Of particular concern was the scheduling of the 1218 Sherman case on the agenda for "decision" and not for "introduction". Staff explained that "introduction" items were matters requiring an ordinance and since the 1218 Sherman case was a recommended denial, and no ordinance required, there was no need to have an "introduction" period. Ald. Morton requested that her previous reference to the Rules Committee, regarding City Council agenda items, be expanded to include the review of the procedures for placing ZBA cases on the agenda and to provide written procedures for such actions. It was the consensus of the P & D Committee to forward this reference to the Rules Committee. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee will be May 23, 1988. ff /,/ Staff: /yid Robert 2. Rudd 70(2/5) 4- DRAFT, NOT APPROVED DRAFT. NOT APPROVED Ald. Present: Ald. Absent: Staff Present: Others Present: Presiding Official: MINUTES Planning and Development Committee May 23, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. S. Brady, J. Bleveans. J. Korshak, L. Morton. J. Rudy and R. Warshaw None D. Wirth, 0. Sommers -Pant, C. Brenniman, D. Rasmussen and R. Rudd Dr. T. Stafford J. Bleveans Minutes of Mav 9. 1988. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Morton seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & development Committee meeting of May 9, 1988. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes (Ald. Brady absent). Tree Dedication Policies - Ladd Arboretum. The Committee received a memo dated May 11, 1988 from Don Wirth, Director of Parks, Recreation and Forestry setting forth the current tree dedication policies in the Memorial Section at the Ladd Arboretum. The Committee voted 5-0 to accept the memorandum (Ald. Brady absent). 1100 Forest - Planned Unit Developmant (PUD) Minor Changes and Correspondence to Mr. Chou. Ald. Korshak questioned whether this was another change request after action had already taken place? Staff responded that was correct. Ald. Brady questioned what would happened if the homeowner decided to erect a screen porch around the subject patios? Staff indicated that the applicant would need to apply to the Zoning Board of Appeals with a $2,000.00 filing fee. Also, it was uncertain whether an approval would be granted. Gwen Summers-Yant, Preservation Coordinator, stated that the owners were aware of the ZBA procedure. Chairman Bleveans questioned what options the City would have to cause removal of the patios if approval of the minor change were not granted' Staff indicated that the City could cause the physical removal of the patios by the owners and/or developer. Ald. Rudy suggested that the Committee consider writing the State Licensing Department for architects Department of Licensing and Registration) about the problems that have resulted in working with Mr. Chou. Ald. Brady stated that with respect to causing removal of the patios, the request is for a minor change and has already been administratively approved by the City Manager. Ald. Brady reviewed with the Committee a letter to be forwarded to Kr. Chou, via certified mail, verbally reprimanding him for past transgressions. The Committee also recommended that, with some minor amendment to the text of the letter, copies be forwarded to all of the homeowners at the PUD. Ald. Rudy also suggested that the ,letter contain a mention of the City's intent to inform the State Licensing Board of Architects. Dave Rasmussen, Assistant P & D Minutes May 23, 1988 Director of Zoning, was present and informed the Committee that recently a violation letter has been sent to Mr. Chou regarding illegally installed air conditioning units. Ald. Rudy questioned whether saving the main coach house and the fence has been worth what the City has gone through with Mr. Chou on this project? Ald. Brady stated that she felt that most neighbors were generally pleased with the outcome of the project. Ald. Morton questioned the procedure for minor changes? Yant stated that requests are sent to the City Manager, preferably before the changes occur. Ald. Brady stated that there are some flaws in the PUD process and not all of the fault is with the developer. Yant stated that the City uses nationwide historic preservation standards, procedures and documentation and that Mr. Chou is aware of these since he has utilized this process on an earlier structure in Evanston. It was the consensus of the Committee that, after revisions to the letter by Chairman Bleveans, the letter in final form be forwarded certified mail to both Mr. Chou and all of the homeowners at the 1100 Forest PUD. Docket 85-5A-88. ZBA 88-5-V(R) re Variations for 1218 Sherman Avenue. Chairman Bleveans reviewed with the Committee the Rules of Procedure regarding ZBA cases (i.e. Winfield Rule). The Committee reviewed a letter from the applicant, Mr. Brock, dated May 18, 1988 (copy attached). Ald. Korshak requested that the Committee allow Mr. Brock to make a presentation to the Committee. Mr. Brock reviewed with the Committee the aforementioned Kay 18, 1988 letter in which he stated his intent to clarify points misunderstood by the ZBA during the hearing process. In response to several statement in the aforementioned letter, Rasmussen provided clarification to the Committee. Rasmussen presented the following comments on the written statement which had been presented to the Committee by Mr. g Mrs. Brock, dated May 18, 1988. He stated that item 2A of the statement was a paraphrase of the letter of September 9, 1986, and the wording of the second sentence of paragraph 2 of his letter read "if the building is altered, remodeled or converted, it must be brought into compliance with all the requirements of the district in which it is located;" with respect to the second paragraph of item 2A he noted that this matter was brought out at the hearing before the Zoning Board; with respect to item 2B, he stated that in his conversations he did not use the wording that it was a viable alternative use but said instead that it was interesting in that it was proposing to deconvert the two family dwelling in the front to a single family dwelling and install that unit in the rear building; he went on to note that of all the staff of Building & Zoning he was most careful to advise potential applicants that they must prove they met the standards for variation; with respect to items 3B and C, he noted that in conversations with Mr. Brock subsequent to the Zoning Board hearing, he was advised that these were items that were known at the time of the hearing but which were not presented; with respect to item 2- P & D Minutes May 23, 1988 5, he stated that the allegation of a miscalculation of lot area may or may not be correct since it had not been rechecked, but under either of the lot area figures provided the lot still did not provide the 1n,000 square feet that would be required under the zoning ordinance. In response to questions from the Committee Rasmussen stated; the 931 Sherman Avenue and the 1131 Sherman Avenue addresses contained in Mr. & Mrs. Brock's statement were existing by virtue variations granted and that with respect to the rest of the properties noted in, the last page of this statement no variations had been granted by the Board of City Council and that currently he was unsure of the zoning status of these properties; that at the hearing one of the Board members had raised questions with respect to the removal of an addition to the rear building and that Mr. Brock had been represented by counsel at the hearing. Ald. Korshak questioned whether there was anyway to resolve this matter? He asked if modification to the rear building could bring about an equitable solution? Brock reviewed with the Committee building plans for the site. Brock stated that he was trying to adapt, within reason, the building to satisfy the City. He stated that the exterior of the rear building would be all fixed -up" (tuckpointed, new windows). Ald. Brady stated that she is concerned with the aesthetics of the rear building. She stated that the U:ty should be concerned with the exterior appearance. Ald. Rudy stated that he was concerned with the fact that the City should deal with the zoning issue. Ald. Rudy felt that the applicant was on notice and had in hand a letter setting forth the elimination provisions and that the applicant did not accept that fact. Ald. Warshaw questioned what information the P 6 D Committee now had in hand, would allow it to refer the case back to ZBA? Chairman Bleveans questioned why the applicant didn't follow through on exploring the restriction on the property since he was on notice? Ald. Morton stated that she is troubled with the term in the zoning ordinance "two family dwellings". Ald. Brady stated that she doesn't think that the P b D Committee should send this matter back to ZBA. Ald. Brady suggested that the applicant and architect attempt to bring the building more into conformity with the district. Ald. Korshak stated that all attempts should be made to provide a more sensitive treatment to the rear building. It was the consensus of the Committee that after the applicant and his architect met with staff that the matter be brought back to the P & D Committee. Ad_i ournmen t The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee will be ,tune 13, 1988. Staff: .G Ro ert T. Ruddy 70(2/4) 3- DRAFT, NOT APPROVED or May 18, 1988 TO: Members of the Planning and Development Committee City of Evanston, Illinois SUBJECT: ZBA 88-5-V(R) 1218 Sherman Avenue We request reconsideration of a Zoning Board of Appeals recommendation regarding the demolition of the rear building at 1218 Sherman Avenue based on the following facts: 1. During the ZBA hearing, the Board thought that the cost of demolishing the back building was factored into the purchase price of the property. In fact, our first offer in May 1987 for $75,000 was the only one which did factor this in. In August 1987, we offered $96,000 for the property, following three months of investigation regarding the property. (See *2 below). We also were looking at other properties within the school district at this time. The final purchase price agreed on was $100,000. 2. Based on our research, we thought that our proposal of deconverting the front house to single family and converting the rear building to single family was in compliance with R3 residential (2-family residential classification). Specifics illustrating this point: a. Letter from Mr. David Rasmussen dated 9/9/86 (only noted exception to the purchase contract) to previous owner, Mr. Michael Ward Jr., lard Manufacturing Company, stating that "the non- conforming building . . . is subject to elimination on September 25, 1987. . .or to alter, remodel or convert said building to a use permitted in the district". We felt that converting the property from its current manufacturing use to two single-family homes was in compliance with the R3 zoning designation, and anew that there were several examples of homes with rear coach houses in the district. (See Page 3 for list of addresses). Why would Evanston single out this one for demolition? b. We presented our plan to Mr. Rasmussen to demolish a 1600 square foot metal building and to convert both the two -flat and the 2-story brick building to single family homes. Se indicated that it was a viable alternative use of the property, but would have to be approved by the ZBA. c. There was no mention made of the fact that R3 two-family designation meant two families in the same structure. We did not learn this until after the purchase of the property. d. The real estate listing sheet for the property advertised the brick building as a 2-story coach house. 3. The demolition of the rear building will cause us a financial as well as family hardship. a. Under our proposed plan, our monthly housing cost would be 25% of gross income; with the added demolition cost for the rear building and loss of the 2nd residence, that cost rises to 38% or $6300 more annually. This cost would force us to relocate to more affordable housing, necessitating the withdrawal of our son from the Lincoln School district, b. Because of the length of the property, an additional electrical pole will have to be erected to bring electricity to the front house if the back building is demolished. c. Because of the length of the property, either a heating mechanism for the waste system pump station (currently located in the rear building) must be provided, or a new sewage system constructed to the sewer at Sherman Avenue instead of to the alley sewer line. 4. There was erroneous testimony from the neighbor to the south who objected to our proposal on the basis of invasion of privacy. Contrary to what he stated, the existing coach house and rear buildings in the area already have windows looking into his yard. 5. The Staff Report to the ZBA members incorrectly calculated the total lot size (approximate) as 7163 square feet rather than the correct 8120 square feet. This miscalculation created an opinion that the property would be too crowded. SUBMITTED BY : David and Kathryn Brock 41 -64171, Examples of addresses with rear buildings: 931 Sherman Single family house with music studio in rear brick building. 1113 Sherman Single family house with business in back. 1119 Sherman Two -flat with brick building in rear. 1132 Sherman Two -flat with boarded up two-story brick building in rear. 1136 Sherman Single-family with two- or three -flat in two-story brick building in rear. 1210 Sherman Single-family home with single family two- story brick building in rear. DRAFT. NOT APPROVED MINUTES Planning and Development Committee June 13, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.R. Ald. Present: S. Brady, J. Bleveans, J. Korshak, L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw Ald. Absent: None Staff Present: B. Ahlberg, G. Sommers -Pant, C. Powers, D. Rasmussen, E. Szymanski and R. Rudd Presiding Official: J. Bleveans Minutes of May 23. 1988. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of May 23, 1988. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATIONS ZBA 88-11-V(F), Final Variation Decision re 2316 Park Place. The Committee received the final decision from the Zoning Board of Appeals without comment. ZBA 88-12-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 1017 Central Street. The Committee received the final decision from the Zoning Board of Appeals without comment. March -April and May Quarterly Rehab Report. The Committee received the March -April and May Quarterly Rehab Report without comment. Docket 106-6A-88. Plat of Consolidation re 1919 Dempster Street. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council approval of the request from McDonald's Corporation for a plat of consolidation for the property at 1919 Dempster. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the plat of consolidation. Docket 107-6A-88, Ordinance 40-0-88. ZBA 88-9-SU(R), re Special Use for 825 Church Street. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of a special use for a type 2 restaurant at 825 Church Street. Ald. Brady expressed concerned at the request from the applicant to suspend the rules to allow introduction and passage of the special use ordinance at the June 13, 1988 meeting. She felt that the Committee should act cautiously, particularly since the restaurant was a type 2. Staff confirmed that the request from the applicant was due to the need to order equipment and to be issued a building permit. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council introduction of Ordinance 40-0-88 for special use r P & D Minutes June 13, 1988 for 825 Church Street. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council to deny the request for suspension of the rules. Ald. Rudy stated that he was not sure that anything would be gained by holding the matter up for an additional two weeks. He stated that he was inclined to grant the request for suspension of the rules. Ald. Korshak felt that to suspend the rules should only be done in an extraordinary situation. He further expressed concerns about items such as litter when dealing with a restaurant in the downtown area. He reminded the Committee that the City acted cautiously with the McDonald's and the same standards should be applied here. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council not to suspend the rules and to allow the matter to be introduced only at the June 13, 1988 City Council meeting. Docket 108-6A-88, Ordinance 41-0-88, ZAC 88-1 re Rezoning of 2734 Central Street. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council rezoning of a parcel of property from a B1 Business District to an R6 General Residence District. Ald. Korshak questioned what other uses could be placed on the property if rezoned to R6? Staff indicated that the uses would be limited to multi -family or less intense uses than are currently allowed in the B1 District. Staff confirmed that rooming houses and shelters would require a special use. Ald. Rudy stated that his review of the zoning map finds that the requested rezoning would bring the property more into conformity with the surrounding zoning. Ald. Morton questioned what was done to notify the neighboring community about the zoning change? Ahlberg stated that State Statutes require advertising with a fifteen (15) to thirty (30) day notice, but that the City goes further by posting the property with a sign indicating a zoning hearing, in addition too sending public notices to property owners surrounding the site. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council introduction of Ordinance 41-0-88 to rezone the property at 2734 Central Street From B1 to R6. Docket 109-6A-88, ZBA 88-10-V(R), re Variations for 500 Sherman Avenue. The applicant requested that the Committee continue this matter since he only received a copy of the transcript from his attorney on this date (June 13, 1988). It was the consensus of the Committee to continue this matter to the June 27, 1988 P & D meeting. Burglary Prevention Ordinance. Chairman Bleveans recapped with the Committee the past review of this ordinance. The ordinance originally appeared at P S D Committee in the fall of 1987. Subsequent to an initial review the Committee requested the Preservation Commission, Housing Commission, Evanston Property Owners Association, T.O.E., and the Police Department to review the RCPC draft ordinance and respond by May 1 to the P & D Committee. Chairman Bleveans 2- Z P & D Minutes June 13, 1988 stated that he was more inclined to apply this ordinance to tenant occupied properties and not to single family homeowner occupied units. Ald. Brady questioned whether the City could legally apply different standards for new versus old multi -family buildings. She felt that there was a need to differentiate between these two types of structures. The Committee requested that the Legal Department provide a legal opinion on this matter. Ald. Warshaw stated that as a Housing Commission member she tried to weigh and provide a balance between cost and security. The Committee discussed briefly the issue that all interested parties have had ample time to provide input and participate in the process. The Committee elected to review the Housing Commission's draft ordinance on an item by item basis. Chairman Bleveans reminded the Committee that P & D earlier voted to exclude single family, owner occupied units from the ordinance. The Committee reviewed Section 5-7-2 of the Housing Commission draft which provided for a two year phase -in period for existing multi -family to comply with aspects of the ordinance. Ald. Horton expressed a concerns with such a short time frame since she felt that to comply could be costly. Ald. Warshaw explained that inspection for compliance would be conducted in the normal multi -family inspection program procedure and that no inspection would be made within three (3) years of the passage of the ordinance. She felt that three 3) years would be sufficient time for the landlords to comply and spread the cost for compliance. Ald. Warshaw further stated that the Housing Commission's draft was similar to the Chicago ordinance and felt that the City of Evanston's ordinance should at least be as strict as the Chicago Ordinance. Ald. Rudy expressed reservations with requiring certain types of doors (solid core wood or steel) to the detriment of aesthetic and historic preservation. The Committee discussed at length whether to include existing multi -family and whether to address doors, windows, and locks. Aid. Rudy questions whether under Section 5-7-4-1 what performance standards would be followed? He stated that he felt it was desirable to have performance standards rather than have brand names applied. The Committee further discussed the philosophies of allowing single family homeowners to elect not to implement security safeguards and at the same time require renter occupied units to comply with a burglary prevention ordinance. Ald. (Morton felt that single family homeowners should have complete control over tneir own security system, but felt that there may be a need for a mandate to develop a burglary prevention ordinance for "the public good". Ald. Korshak stated certain standards are necessary for all parties since any individual could endanger another such as, police or firemen, and therefore society can place certain rules which protect the overall good. 3- R . 41 P & D Minutes June 13, 1988 Chairman Bleveans opened the discussion to members of the audience to present their views. Mr. Andy Atkinson, an Evanston property manager, stated that he feels that if someone wants to get into a unit, they can. He expressed his concerns that regardless of how many locks are placed in the foyer or on unit doors if locks are not utilized burglaries Will happen. Mr. Jim Matykiewicz, President of the Evanston Property Owners Association, stated that the Association was not anti -security. He felt that the ordinance should be considered to apply to single family, owner occupied and Questioned whether it was legal to exclude single family if applied to multi -family? Matykiewicz further stated that the Property Owners Association could live with the Housing Commission's draft except for Section 5-7-6-2G, which requires certain types of break proof exterior lighting. He felt that the vandal proof lighting was a good idea for backdoors, but that it could damage aesthetics if required for front doors. Mr. Albert, a property manager with several units on Clyde, stated that no matter how many locks are placed on the doors if the tenants do not use them the locks will provide no security. He felt that tenants need to protect each other and that the landlords can only do so much. Mr. Shapiro, a representative of Parliament Property Management, stated that a number of buildings have recently changed doors to meet fire codes and that these doors may also meet burglary prevention standards. He stated that in many cases it is not the locks that break during a forced entry but the door or the door jam. Due to the lateness of the hour the Committee recommended that this matter be held over for further discussion at the June 27, 1988 meeting. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is June 27, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: Robert T. Rudd 70(2/5) 4- DRAFT, NOT APPROVED 1' 6 DRAFT, NOT APPROVED MINUTES Planning and Development Committee June 27, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: S. Brady, J. Bleveans, J. Korshak, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw Ald. Absent: L. Morton Staff Present: Office Kuempel, Brenniman, G. Sommers-Yant, C. Powers, D. Rasmussen, J. Asprooth and R. Rudd Presiding Official: J. Bleveans Minutes of June 13. 1988. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of June 13, 1988. Ald. Rudy moved that the minutes be amended on page 3, the last paragraph, line 10 to reflect "standards rather than have two types of materials specified." Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes as amended. COMMUNICATIONS Chairmanship Memorandum. The Committee received the memo regarding the change of chairmanship effective July a, 1988. 1100 Forest - Planned Unit Development (PUD) Minor Changes. The Committee accepted a report from the City Manager approving minor changes to 1100 Forest - Planned Unit Development. ZBA Public Notice for July 19. 1988, The Committee received a ZBA public notice for the July 19, 1988 meeting. Appointment of Aldermanic Liaisons to the Plan Commission and Preservation Commission. Chairman Bleveans asked that members of the Committee cont_:_ ,nim prior to the July 11, 1988 meeting and indicate their preference of bei~F a liaison to either the Plan Commission or Preservation Commission. The :^,airman asked that this matter be placed on the July 11, 1988 P & D ager» Ald. Rainey Reference re Amendment to Residential Landlord :-rant Ordinance. Chairman Bleveans recommended that this reference be forwar:. to the Housing Commission since that body deals with the Landlord Tenant Cr:nance and other housing issues. Ald. Brady asked that staff contact Ald. Fa:nay and request additional documentation regarding this reference. Ald. P,,-.r stated that he believes he understands why landlords require more than a mi)nth's rent as P & D Minutes June 27, 1988 security deposit, because oftentimes tenants move out and do not pay the last month's rent and therefore money over and above a one month's period is necessary to pay for any damages. It was the consensus of the Committee to refer this matter to the Housing Commission. Temporary Exception During Construction re Request from Presbyterian Home,_ 3200 Grant Street. Ald. Brady expressed concern that the neighbors most effected by this temporary parking be notified of the decision. She also questioned how this temporary parking would be enforced? Peter Mulvey, Chief Executive Officer of the Presbyterian Home, stated that all employees have stickers and can be identified and required to park in certain areas. He further stated that the Presbyterian Home has parking spaces available for visitors. Ald. Brady questioned whether a sign could be installed indicating that the spaces are reserved for construction workers only? She further expressed her concern that since this temporary parking will last for more than one (1) year that parkers may become accustomed to it and will have a difficult time adjusting when the temporary approval is removed. In response to a question from the Committee, Mulvey stated that any damage to the parkway sod would be restored by the Presbyterian Home. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the temporary exception requested by the Presbyterian Home. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the request. Docket 134-6B--88, Municipal Use Zoning, Exemption For Construction of Fire Station No. 4 - 1817 Washington Street. Joel Asprooth, City Manager, was present and reviewed with the Committee a site plan for the new fire station at 1817 Washington Street. Asprooth explained that the new station would basically use the same foot print and existing footings and foundations of the present station. He further explained the the current building encroached in both the front and side yards. As a justification for the zoning exception Asprooth explained that no new or undue intrusion is being forced upon neighboring residents. Asprooth reviewed with the Committee photos of the surrounding area and explained that the current building, and its non -conformity, dates to the 1920's. He stated that the City proposes to meet the parking requirements and exceed those stated in the zoning ordinance since there is a need for additional parking. The site plan proposes visitor's parking to be located in the front yard to avoid impacting the neighborhood by having visitors park on -site rather than on the street. Ald. Warshaw stated that she was opposed to losing any more green area and felt that it was easy to park on the street. Asprooth indicated that to eliminate the front yard visitor's parking would not cause an operational problem. Ald. Brady stated that she was concerned that the neighbors had not been involved in the process to date. Asprooth further explained that the site plan proposed a decorative wall to be constructed in the front yard so that an existing tabloid from the current fire station could SP40 IMF 11 ' I' 1 1 1111I il11l11,' I! '!!' III, I111 ^II I I I!I I III I I i'I'lll!I Ill ll l l ll i ll' , I i i , i I„ , 11111 ,All^1 iTI! ' ' .1 ''1 1111 1 1 - 11 P & D Minutes June 27, 1988 be located in the wall. Ald. Warshaw questioned why the tabloid could not be mounted on the wall of the new fire station? The Committee felt that the City should review places to mount the tabloid that would not require the need to construct an additional wall in the front yard. Asprooth suggested that the Committee approve zoning exception #1 of his memo dated June 23, 1988, which would grant the front and side yard encroachment variations and that the Committee hold in abeyance items 112 and #3, which address the decorative wall and the parking in the front yard. Items #2 and #3 would not be incorporated in the site plan unless it was felt necessary and which would necessitate the matter coming back to the P & D Committee. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council approval of zoning exception Ill, for the proposed Fire Station #4, at 1817 Washington Street. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend approval to the City Council. Preservation Commission re Triennial Review. Ald. Brady stated that she feels the Commission is doing an excellent job. She questioned what the Preservation's timing would be in responding to some existing issues before the Commission?. Gwen Sommers-Yant, Preservation Coordinator, stated that the Commission would soon be undertaking a review of the current Planned Unit Development Ordinance. Yant also stated that the Commission has been working for the past three (3) years toward revising the Preservation Ordinance to allow for binding review. She felt that this matter could be brought to the City Council within the next year. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend continuation of the Preservation Commission and forward the review to the Rules Committee. Committee voted 5-0 to approve. Docket 85-5A-88, ZBA 88-5-V(R) re Variations for 1218 Sherman Avenue. Mr. Brock, the applicant, presented an artists rendering of the facade for the rear building. Brock reviewed with the Committee his proposal calling for demolition of the rear portion of the rear building, thus eliminating the need for a rear yard variation. Ald. Brady questioned Brock as to whether he would be willing to stipulate to demolishing the back one-third of the building. Brock stated that he would. Ald. Brady further questioned Brock as to whether he would be willing to commit to restoring the exterior in accordance with the rendering he was submitting to the Committee at the June 27, 1988 meeting? Ald. Brady further questioned what the time frame would be do the majority of the work on the back building? Brock stated that the .- house would take between one (1) and two (2) years to complete. Brock __sted that the outside of the rear building could be finished very soon. lid. Korshak stated that he would want assurances in writing from Brock that the work on the exterior of the rear building would be completed in a timP'y manner. Brock stated that he has already been approved by the Bank of Ravenswood for a loan that would allow him to complete the remodeling of the front house. Ald. Korshak stated that he would like to have an estimated cost of the rehabbing 3- P & D Minutes June 27, 1988 of the rear building. He expressed concerns that for him to recommend approval he would want assurance that the exterior of the rear building would be completed in approximately twelve (12) to eighteen (18) months. Chairman Bleveans suggested that staff should work with Ald. Korshak and the applicant in an attempt to reduce these concerns to writing and possibly incorporate into an ordinance. Bro-.k stated to the Committee that it was necessary to install sewer and water lines from the front of the property to both the front home and the rear home, since the current lines were made of lead. He stated that he needed to know how the Committee was going to vote on this matter since to run the sewer and water lines to the rear building would be at great expense. The Committee indicated that if all of the concerns previously addressed could be reduced to writing and placed in the ordinance that he should take that as a strong indication the Committee would approve his request. Ald. Korshak stated that he would work with the applicant and staff in developing the proper wording and assurances for an ordinance. Ald. Rudy stated that he has not come to an agreement yet that would allow him to vote in favor of the request. Ald. Rudy questioned why the applicant could not demolish the front portion of the rear building and leave the rear portion? Brock stated that due to the construction of the building he felt it was more appropriate to demolish the rear portion and attempt to rehab the front. Ald. Rudy stated that he was concerned that the proposal, even with all of the agreements by Kr. Brock, did not meet the zoning ordinance requirements. He expressed concern that the City was not following the standards set forth in the zoning ordinance. Ald. Brady stated that she agreed somewhat with Ald. Rudy, except with the fact that the site contained a unique building. She stated that the existing building is a sound structure and doesn't interfere with the ambience of the neighborhood. Ald. Rudy reiterated that he would feel better if the building were located more to the rear of the lot. Ald. Warshaw stated that the current zoning allows two (2) units in one building, but that the site offers an even better situation since it will allow two (2) units in two separate buildings. It was the consensus of the Committee to hold this matter to allow Ald. Korshak, staff and the applicant to meet and attempt to develop an ordinance addressing all of the concerns expressed by the Committee. Docket 109-6A-88, ZBA 88-10-V(R), re Variations for 500 Sherman. Ald. Warshaw stated that she was in favor of deterring any i:lega: conversions in the City. She stated that she supports the ZBA recomme^elation to deny. Ald. Brady stated that she has reviewed the site and is convinced that the current owners are not at fault. Ald. Brady moved that the Committee grant the variation for retention of a sixth dwelling unit and e:iminate the need for additional parking space requirements. Ald. Rudy stated tha_ he agreed with Ald. Warshaw. Ald. Warshaw stated that she would agroe with converting the current illegal sixth unit back to a five unit buildin, without requiring 4- P & D Minutes June 27, 1988 any additional parking. Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, was present and clarified that the off-street parking variation request was only dealing with a dimension variation and that the applicant did not request a variation to eliminate the additional parking need. Mrs. Popodopoulous was present and requested an opportunity to come back with a revised parking plan. She stated that her and her husband did not realize the history of the building when they purchased it. She stated that they have put a significant amount of money into improving the property. Ald. Brady stated that her review of the transcript finds that there is no question that the standards were not met to warrant the variation. However, she feels the Zoning Board in both a subtle and not -so -subtle way made it clear that the P & D Committee and City Council could overturn their recommendation. Chairman Bleveans stated that he doesn't agree with ZBA's position that the City Council has unfettered discretion to overturn ZBA recommendations and waive zoning ordinance requirements. He stated that the City Council also must abide by zoning ordinance standards. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the P & D Committee concur with the ZBA recommendation to deny the variations and recommend same to the City Council. Committee voted 3-2. Voting Aye: Aldermen Bleveans, Rudy and Warshaw. Voting Nay: Aldermen Brady and Korshak. Burglary Prevention Ordinance. Due to the lateness of the hour the Committee recommended setting Tuesday, July 12, 1988, 7:30 p.m. as a special meeting of the P & D Committee to discuss the Burglary Prevention Ordinance. Also, Ald. Rudy submitted to staff some requests for information regarding performance standards. Ald. Brady also recommended that at the special meeting of July 12, 1988 that the Committee address the draft ordinance prepared by RCPC rathtzr then the Housing Commission draft. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meet:nL of the P b D Committee is July 11, 1988; next special meeting of the P & D Committee is July 12, 1988. Staff: Robertr T. Rudd 70(2/6) 5- DRAFT, NOT APPROVED DRAFT.'NOT APPROVED MINUTES Planning and Development Committee July 11, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: S. Brady, J. Bleveans, J. Korshak, L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw Ald. Absent: None Staff Present: E. Szymanski, J. Zendell, D. Rasmussen, D. Carter, R. Ahlberg and R. Rudd Presiding Official: J. Korshak Minutes of June 27. 1988. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of June 27, 1988 as submitted. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATIONS ZBA 88-14-V(F), Final Variation Decision re 280E Sheridan Place. The Committee received a final decision from the ZBA without comment. ZBA 88-15-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 1130 Michigan Avenue. The Committee received a final decision from the ZBA without comment. Arts Council re Art in Public Places. The Committee received a memorandum from the Arts Council describing future activities regarding the establishment of a comprehensive public arts program without comment. Request for Anti -Nuclear Zone Signs. Ald. Bleveans questioned why this matter was not before Human Services' He felt that the matter had been previously discussed before that Committee and this matter should be referred to Human Services. Ald. Brady expressed her dismay at the request to construct twenty-two (22) signs at entrance locations to the City of Evanston. She felt that signs in general were becoming quite overwhelming. Ald. Brady felt that the City needs to develop a policy on municipal signs and suggested establishing a Blue Ribbon Committee to develop such a policy. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the P & D Committee recommend to the City Council that the Sign Review & Appeals Board be given the status of a "Blue Ribbon Committee" for a limited term to develop a policy dealing with municipal signs. Ald. Brady felt that since the Sign Review & Appeals Board is composed of experts in the area of design, signage and advertising that this group would be most appropriate to review the matter. The Committee discussed the motion and felt that the reference to the Sign Review & Appeals Board went beyond the issue of nuclear weapon free zone P & D Minutes July 11, 1988 signs and that it could be several months or a year before the Board could report back. The Committee amended the motion to recommend that the Sign Review & Appeals Board provide a phased recommendation and address the nuclear weapons free zone signs first and then address municipal signs. Ald. Rudy felt that the scope of review by the Sign Review & Appeals Board should not just be municipal signs but should be broadened to include "public signs". Ald. Warshaw estimated that the Sign Review & Appeals Board could report back to P & D within ninety (90) days regarding the nuclear weapons free zone signs. Ald. Morton questioned, by making such a reference, would discussion at P & D Committee be closed -off and the policy decision be made by a special committee? The Committee clarified that the Sign Review & Appeals Board would only be making a recommendation back to P & D, initially for the nuclear weapons free zone signs, and at a later date for "public signs". Dick Carter, Director of Planning, stated that several years ago the Plan Commission did develop such a report regarding municipal signs. He suggested that it may be helpful for the Committee to review that report. By the consensus of the Committee Ald. Morton moved that the matter be held -over to the next P & D Committee meeting of July 25. 1988 to allow the Committee an opportunity to review the Plan Commission report. Appointment of Aldermanic Liaisons to the Plan Commission and Preservation Commission. Former Planning & Development Committee Chairman Bleveans indicated that in discussing the appointments with Committee members the following volunteers would be named to the following committees: Plan Commission - Ald. Korshak; Preservation Commission - Ald. Rudy. The Committee voted 6-0 to approve the appointment of the volunteers to the committees. ZAC Request to Eliminate Reference on Manufacturing Districts. Chairman Korshak reviewed the ZAC recommendation to eliminate a reference to the Zoning Amendment Committee and to send another reference regarding manufacturing districts to the Zoning Commission so that the issue can be comprehensively studied and included in the upcoming zoning ordinance. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Morton seconded that the Committee approve the ZAC recommendation and make the requested reference. The Committee voted 6-0 to concur. Docket 138-7A-88, Review Operating Hours for Domino's Pizza at 3333 Simpson. Chairman Korshak questioned whether Aldermen of the ward had been contacted and whether their comments had been solicited? Staff indicated that the aldermen had not been contacted but were forwarded the information. Chairman Korshak stated that in future instances that involve cases specific to a ward he is directing staff to contact those aldermen to obtain their comments. 2- P & D Minutes July 11, 1988 Aid. Brady stated that this issue arose in the Rules Committee and that it was the direction of the Rules Committee that Chairman of the committees make the contact with aldermen. Chairman Korshak stated since it was his prerogative to make contact with aldermen of the ward, he was now so directing staff to make that contact. Aid. Bleveans stated that he would discuss with aldermen of the ward prior to this issue being discussed at the City Council meeting on July 11, 1988. Aid. Warshaw moved and Aid. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council that the Domino's Pizza hours of operation be maintained in the future as they have been for the past year and as established in Ordinance 99-0-86. Appeal of Decision of Sign Review & Appeals Board re 1015 Chicago Avenue - Sims Subaru. Aid. Warshaw questioned why the Committee has not received the minutes of the Sign Review & Appeals Board. Jack Weiss, Acting Chairman of the Sign Review & Appeals Board stated that he also did not have the minutes and was unable to provide additional explanation. Gerald Murphy, representing the applicant, stated that he did have a copy of the minutes and provided the material to the P & D Committee. Chairman Korshak read the minutes of the subject Sign Review Appeals Board meeting to the P & D Committee to provide as much information as possible. Mr. Weiss also stated that the Sign Review & Appeals Board has not received the material submitted to the P & D Committee for the July 11 meeting and would have a difficult time in responding to the issue. Aid. Bleveans suggested that the Committee direct staff to provide all interested parties all of the information pertinent to the issue and that the matter be continued to the next meeting of the P & D Committee on July 25, 1988. Aid. Morton felt that it would only be fair for the P & D Committee to make a decision based on the evidence submitted and that it could not do so until all parties had received all information. The Committee discussed whether to decide at the July 11 meeting whether to hear an appeal or to wait until assurance was given that all parties had the same information in hand. Aid. Rudy stated that he did understand the situation and was prepared to make a decision. Aid. Morton stated that she was not prepared to make a decision and felt that time was needed to work out an agreement with the applicant which could be done at the July 25, 1988 meeting. Aid. Brady stated that she concurs with Aid. Rudy and that she has sufficient information and understands the request. Aid. Morton discussed with the Committee the development of the Sign Ordinance. She felt that the Sign Ordinance is not perfect and that it possibly did not address the situation such as proposed by Sims. Aid. Bleveans reviewed with Aid. Morton the long hours the P & D Committee spent developing the Sign Ordinance and the compromises and complicated issues that was discussed with all interested parties which included the Chamber of Commerce, staff, professional sign people, etc. Aid. Morton questioned whether the Sign Ordinance should be viewed as perfect and whether the whole process allowed for any new ideas. 3- P & D Minutes ' July 11, 1988 Weiss stated that the Sign Review & Appeals Board took its deliberations seriously regarding an applicant's request and in all cases has offered helpful suggestions and alternatives to applicants. Applicant Les Sims was present and stated that the Subaru sign was necessary since the current sign doesn't differentiate between "new" and "used" car sales. He stated that the used car sales were necessary for the success of his business. Sims also Indicated that it was his opinion that the Sign Review & Appeals Board was significantly slanted against car dealers and made several derogatory comments about that business and this particular request at the Sign Review & Appeals Board meeting. He concluded that he felt his application did not receive a fair hearing and was doomed to failure because of the biases of the members of the Sign Review & Appeals Board. It was the consensus of the P & D Committee to hold this matter over to the July 25, 1988 meeting, until staff had provided all interested parties with the requested information. 139-7A-88, Ordinance 46-0-88, ZAC 88-2. Zoning Amendments re Churches. Chairman Korshak review with the Committee the background of this matter. The issue involved a law suit by the Love Church which resulted in a Federal Judge's order that the City amend the zoning ordinance to allow churches as a permitted use in certain districts. Ald. Warshaw reviewed the ZAC Report which confirmed her belief that per the report churches would be identical to meeting halls, thus being permitted uses wherever meeting halls were permitted uses. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council adoption of the ZAC Report. Ald. Bleveans questioned that since this is such an important issue wouldn't the Zoning Commission be more appropriate to comprehensively review this matter and incorporate in the new zoning ordinance' Bob Ahlberg, Zoning Planner, indicated to the Committee that the ZAC Report recommends amending immediately the zoning ordinance to address the order by the Federal Judge and also recommends that P a D Committee refer to the Zoning Commission the more comprehensive issue of churches and to be included in the new zoning ordinance. Ald. Warshaw moved to amend her motion to include the reference to the Zoning Commission to address the church issue. Ald. Brady stated that though she will support the amendment based on the judge's order, she finds the telling comment in the ZAC transcript was that research found that no other ordinances allow churches as permitted uses without at least some specific regulations. She stated that she shared ZAC's frustrations in not having the opportunity to deal with the issue in a comprehensive fashion but feels the City is in a difficult position with the judge's order. Ald. Bleveans reiterated his concern that the Zoning Commission could be comprehensively considering this matter during the next 4- P & D Minutes July 11, 1988 eighteen to twenty-four (18-24) months. His concern is that in this time period numerous new churches could be established in areas that the new zoning ordinance may not allow. Ald. Bleveans questioned whether it would meet the intent of the judge's order if the City were to refer this to the Zoning Commission at this time and not take action on the subject ordinance. Ellen Szymanski, Assistant Corporation Counsel, stated that she felt that would be acceptable if the City could assure the judge that it is was taking diligent steps to resolve the issue. The Committee discussed at length whether to send the matter to the Zoning Commission, to recommend introduction of the ordinance, or to recommend introduction of the ordinance and send the overall issue to the Zoning Commission. Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, stated that he is currently holding a request for a church and if the matter is not resolved soon, will be required to notify the church that a special use is needed. The Committee voted on the original motion as amended by Ald. Warshaw to recommend introduction of Ordinance 46-0-88 and at the same time refer the overall issue to the Zoning Commission to comprehensively review. Ald. Brady also requested that the Legal Department supply the Committee a legal opinion as to whether it would be appropriate to send this matter to the Zoning Commission and not amend the zoning ordinance at this time. The Committee voted 5-1 on the motion. (Ald. Rudy voting nay.) Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Committee is July 25, 1988. Staff: Robert ?.'Rudd 70(2/6) 5- The next regular meeting of the P 6 D DRAFT, NOT APPROVED DRAFT. NOT APPROVED Ald. Present: Ald. Absent: MINUTES Special Meetint Planning and Development Committee July 12, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. S. Brady, J. Korshak, L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw J. Bleveans Staff Present: C. Kuempel, G. Sommer -Pants and R. Rudd Presiding Official: J. Korshak Review of Burglary Prevention Ordinance. Chairman Korshak opened the meeting by informing the members of the audience that the first thirty minutes would be allocated to comments by the Committee followed by an opportunity for those in attendance to also comment. Ald. Horton moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee attempt to close the meeting at 9:30 p.m. but no later than 10:30 p.m. It was the consensus of the Committee to attempt end the meeting no later than 10:00 p.m. Both Aldermen Warshaw and Brady stated that they would prefer, at this point, to hear from the audience and then have the Committee comment later. Ald. Horton questioned staff regarding the BOCA Code and whether it covered the same items as the Burglary Prevention Ordinance? Rudd indicated that the BOCA Code did require locks but it was a minimum building code and did not cover, for the most part, the items addressed by the proposed Burglary Prevention Ordinance. In response to Ald. Morton, Rudd gave a brief history of the Burglary Prevention Ordinance from the point where City staff was involved which was about two and one-half years ago. Ald. Morton questioned whether other security devices such as alarms were considered by RCPC in the development of the Burglary Prevention Ordinance. Rudd stated that the Committee primarily addressed multi family, renter occupied residences and thus did not review indepth burglary alarm systems. Also, in response to a question from Ald. Morton, Rudd indicated that the major portion of the burglary prevention ordinance, when being developed, was dedicated to renter occupied multi family, though the RCPC representatives did address single family. Ald. Korshak read from his memo to the Committee dated July 12, 1988 (attached) which highlighted several concerns he had and suggested approaches to addressing this issue. Ann Graff, a representative of the Residential Crime Prevention Committee (RCPC) reviewed briefly the crime prevention figures published recently in the Chicago Tribune. Figures indicated that Evanston had a relatively high burglary rate, Ivan Lippitz, a RCPC representative, stated that the RCPC addressed single family mostly due to, at the time, a legal opinion which stated that multi family and single family must be addressed by the proposed ordinance. Lippitz also recommended that the P & D Committee accept certain sections of the proposed ordinance which are acceptable and not controversial and proceed to review only those areas that P & D Minutes Special Meeting July 12, 1988 appear to be controversial. Linda DeWoskin, representing TOE, stated that her organization endorses the ordinance. DeWoskin proceeded to list several Illinois Municipalities that have enacted similar ordinances (Alsip, Tinley Park, St. Charles, Evergreen Park and Morton Grove). DeWoskin stated that it was recognized that increased cost would be borne by the tenants but the tenants also would receive increased security. She stated that the human cost of burglary victims far outweighed any increases to be experienced by tenants due to increased rents necessitated by improved security for the units. She further stated that tenants do not have the choice of installing their own security and must rely on landlords. DeWoskin reviewed with the Committee numerous complaints received by TOE constituents that centered on the lack of security in various buildings. In response to a question from Ald. Brady regarding the implementation phase -in for security standards, DeWaskin stated that regulations vary from suburb to suburb. Robert Heibergev, a representative of Evanston Property Owners Association, read from a letter from that organization stating that if the City should enact a burglary prevention ordinance, it should apply to both single family and multi family. Mr. Tomich, a custodian for over forty years in the City of Evanston, stated that no matter what device was put in place for security, it would always rely on the tenant using the device. He stated that the City cannot force people to build fortresses. Albert Bowen stated that he recently purchased a twenty-three unit building and had to replace the furnace at an expense of approximately $16,000. He stated that he cannot afford the burglary prevention improvements and that tenants may not use the locks anyway. Louis Urbanik stated that ideas such as the burglary prevention ordinance oftentimes have merit in part, but when all of the sections are put together, the ordinance doesn't make sense. Urbanik questioned whether there were statistics to justify solid core doors as a requirement. Like Bowen, Urbanik stated that locks will only work if the tenants use them and questioned whether there were statistics indicating the number of burglaries where the locks were broken or where burglaries took place where the locks weren't locked. Urbanik stated that in his opinion the City of Evanston requirements were driving up rents and causing higher vacancies. He stated that efforts should be directed at going after the burglars and not the landlords. Mr. Manji, stated that he was a former tenant and is now an apartment building owner. Mr. Manji stated that he supported aspects of the burglary prevention ordinance but recognizes that the ordinance is a trade-off of coat -versus -security. He stated that he supports enforcing the lock provisions of the ordinance. Manji stated that he is opposed to the requirements of new doors and jambs. Manji also questioned whether statistics were available indicating how many times burglars broke the doors and jambs versus the locks. He further suggested that the installation of intercoms would significantly increase security and decrease unauthorized entry. 2- P `& A Minutes Special Meeting July 12, 1988 At this point Chairman Korshak reviewed with the Committee a legal opinion from Herb Hill, First Corporation Counsel, stating that the City could develop a distinction between single family and multi family. Police Officer, Curt Kuempel, was present and provided the Committee with a number of statistics regarding the percent of residential multi family burglary victims. Kuempel stated that in 1986 there were 1004 burglaries in Evanston. Of that number, 669 were of the multi family nature (66.5%). In 1987 the City experienced 1010 residential burglaries with 664 in multi family buildings (59.9%). In the first five months of 1988 Evanston has had 260 residential burglaries with 119 in multi family buildings (45.7%). Kuempel further stated that burglaries generally were in the area of forced entry at or around a door or window. Ald. Warshaw observed that many burglaries in residential buildings take place in the basement entries. Kuempel reviewed statistics with the Committee that excluded burglaries in storage areas, garages, etc. which found the following. In 1986, 50% of the burglaries were in multi family units. In 1987, 26.9% were in multi family units and in 1988 (the first five months) 31.5% were in multi family units. Ald. Rudy reviewed with the Committee an ASTM Report, page 21, which detailed methods of entry. In response to Ald. Rudy`s question regarding similar City of Evanston information, Kuempel stated that the City did have the information but that it was not readily retrievable. Ald. Rudy observed that the statistics in the ASTM Report found that 32% of home entries were not forced entries (were through unlock doors). Chairman Korshak summarized with the Committee some of the open issues. Chairman Korshak observed that the Committee needs to decide whether to apply the ordinance to multi family, single family or to further break down the categories to existing and new multi family, and existing and new single family. Chairman Korshak suggested that the Committee may want to consider phasing -in aspects of the ordinance to different types of units. Korshak stated that his findings are that the cost of replacing a door may run between 300-500. Ald. Brady stated that she could support applying the ordinance to new single family and multi family buildings. Ald. Morton stated that she would not support applying the ordinance to single family homes that are being built by the homeowner. She stated that the homeowner should have the right not to apply burglary prevention standards. She stated that she would support applying the ordinance if a builder is constructing a home to sell. Ald. Rudy questioned whether the issue really was a legal one- does the City have the ability to differentiate between new and old and single and multi family? He stated that he has difficulty with Ald. Morton's analysis and division of single family because eventually a person building their own house could sell the unit. Ald. Rudy further stated that the Committee needs 3- I III q 1 II 1 I I i I .e I I .^ i II iIN 11 i - - I ' I I 1 II P & D Minutes Special Meeting July 12, 1988 to come to grips with historic preservation issues. Ald. Warshaw suggested that the Committee may need to propose an exemption for historic preservation aspects of a building. Ald. Korshak questioned whether the Committee wanted to include new construction, single family and multi family? Ald. Morton asked whether thought had been given to the cost of the prevention regulations? Aldermen Morton, Rudy and Brady concurred in eliminating existing single family units from all aspects of the code. Ald. Warshaw stated that she did not agree and felt there was at least a need to educate that component because approximately one-half of break-ins take place in single family homes. Chairman Korshak stated that he has concerns regarding the safety of policemen and firemen. Ald. Brady questioned how the City would regulate single family homes since the City does not inspect these homes? Ald. Morton followed up with, if the City did inspect single family homes, how would the City pay for additional inspectors? Under one proposal, Ald. Brady stated that if only multi family units were inspected the current staff would inspect those units with respect to burglary prevention ordinance on a regular schedule, which is currently three to five years. Ald. Brady recommended that the Committee, due to practical considerations defer any regulations applying to existing, free standing, owner occupied, single family homes exclusively). Heiberger questioned what category the Committee would place townhouses. Ald. Brady stated that she would include townhouse in her definition of free standing single famA'ly homes. Graff stated that RCPC supports applying the ordinance to all residential units. Jeff Wisnewski, stated that he is a member of RCPC and Peels that enforcement of the ordinance will help slow down burglaries but will not necessarily eliminate burglaries. Karen Carlson, a representative of RCPC, suggested that the Committee may want to consider inspecting single family homes at the point of sale (title transfer) and require that the home be brought up to code at that time. Chairman Korshak indicated that the City may be taking on substantial liability and may not want to enter into that type of inspection. Mr. Goldman, stated that he just came from an Elk Park Neighbor meeting and that all members of that group were against the entire ordinance. Jim Matykiewicz, representing Evanston Property Owners Association (EPOA), stated that it was his opinion that the ordinance was too expensive and that under the current discussion of the P & D Committee, the ordinance would be applied to multi family structures occupied by tenants which in his opinion are of a low economic strata and the one least able to pay. He further stated that the Committee appears to be leaning in the direction of excluding the single family owner occupied homes which are in a higher economic strata and which would appear to be better able to pay. 4- P '& D Minutes Special Meeting July 12, 1988 Officer Kuempel reviewed with the Committee the costs that he received from Evanston Lumber, Hines Lumber and Courtesy Lumber regarding costs for pre -hung doors, metal doors and solid core doors. Ald. Rudy suggested that rather than basing decisions on estimates received from these companies that the Committee rely more on an estimating catalog. Due to the lateness of the hour it was the consensus of the Committee to continue discussion for one hour starting at 7:00 p.m on July 25, 1988. Since that is a regular meeting of the P & D Committee other agenda items would be taken up between 8:00 and 9:00 p.m. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Staff:e /,//// Robert T. Rudd 71(11/15) 5- DRAFT, NOT APPROVED jury 12,1988 To: Members of P and D Committee Fr: Jack Korshak, Current Choir Re: Burglary Prevention Ordinance I have prepared this to be savi ng of your time at the special meeting called for tonight. First, unless you disagree, I propose to ask for a cut-off time so that the ending of the meeting is made known to everyone. I suggest that one of you propose a time not later than 10 PM. Second, I would like to reserve the first 30 minutes for such preliminary comments as each of you wish to make. Then I would like to turn to those present who have given this much study and ask for brief comments. The Res Crime Prey Unit is one such. The Tenants Organization has asked to be heard. The Police may have a comment. Members of our Staff may wish to comment. Finally, there may be individuals. (including property owners). A sign-up sheet would be helpful, I think I suggest we hear each of them without comment by us, while we take such notes as may facilitate the response you wish to make to any point. Many present may feel our study of this problem is overlong. But our obligation as AIderpeople is different than those in th audience. We are all agreed that strong safety measures are desirable. However, Only we must accept responsibility for any ordinance we recommend. Only we have a responsibility both to property owners and tenants. We must consider the costs of any procedure we recommend. We must consider the time to be allowed for compliance with an ordi nonce. And above all we must consider the realistic efficacy of any measures we propose. For example: knowing that 60%of break-ins occur in multi -family units, we might ask In what percentage of cases was break-in attributable simply to a lock''' '1n .,het percentage was a forcible entry made by breaking the door or the )amb?" (The best lock in the -world won't help if the door or jamb can be easily forced). We must decide whether from a practical point of view, the beat we can do is establish a standard for locks on the theory that delaying a break-in, making it necessary for an intruder to take more ti me and create a noise which may attract attention. I don't know the answers. But working together on this we may evolve a solution. if we can do that tonight well and wood. But I suggest it is more important that we reach come rrsus on a sound and defe nsi ble solution than simply placate people by moving too quickly. DRAFT. NOT APPROVED r Ald. Present: Ald. Absent: Staff Present: Others Present: Presiding Official: MINUTES Planning and Development Committee July 25, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:00 P.K. S. Brady, J. Korshak, L. Morton and J. Rudy J. Bleveans and R. Warshaw C. Kuempel, G. Sommers -Rant, J. Zendell, C. Pourers, D. Rasmussen, D. Carter, R. Carlson and R. Rudd Phil Peters J. Korshak Minutes of July 11(regular meeting) and July 12 (special meetinK). 1988. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning 6 Development Committee meeting of July 11, 1988 as submitted. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the special meeting of July 12, 1988. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATIONS ZBA 88-16-V(F), Final Variation Decision re 1001 Maple Avenue. The Committee received, without comment, the final variation decision from the ZBA. Reference to P & D from Ald. Larson. Ald. Brady recommended that the reference from Ald. Larson regarding Sanctuary City" be discussed when the Committee reviews the Request for Nuclear Weapons Free Zone Signs. 1100 Forest - Planned Unit Development (PUD) Minor Changes. Th Committee accepted a City Manager memorandum regarding minor changes to 1100 Forest. OLD BUSINESS Burglary Prevention Ordinance Chairman Korshak reviewed with the Committee his memo dated July 25, 1988. That memo suggested that the Committee attempt to phase -in the burglary prevention standards by addressing at this time only the dead -bolt lock issue. Ald. Korshak suggested that to deal with hinges, jambs, doors, etc. would hinder the enactment of a minimum burglary prevention ordinance. The memo recommended that every multi family building owner be required to advise the City the address of the property. the number of units having plus those needing dead -bolt locks and that the owners be allowed a three (3) month period to accomplish the installation of the locks and advise the City when P & 0 Minutes July 25, 1988 r completed. Ald Korshak further suggested that in the meantime the Committee could work gathering data on what other communities have done, consider practical problems, and develop a sensible and practical plan for continuing to move on the burglary prevention ordinance. Officer Kuempel reviewed with the Committee statistics indicating that from January to May 1988 there have been 182,multi family (apartment and condo) burglaries. The Committee reviewed with Kuempel the types of entry (kicking and splitting door, door frames or defeating locks). In response to a question from Ald. Brady, Kuempel stated that 170 of the above cited burglaries were in multi family units while only 12 were in condos. Kuempel further stated that from June 1 to this date, the City has experienced 150 multi family burglaries. Ald. Norton questioned whether the burglaries to apartments were at a rear door, common door or other entry points? In response from a question from Ald. Brady, Kuempel stated that it is possible to defeat any type of lock if a burglar is given enough time. Ald. Marton questioned whether there were types of security available other than locks? Officer Kuempel stated that the Crime Prevention Bureau has programs such as "Neighborhood Watch" and "Building Watch". Ald. Rudy questioned whether the burglaries took place in "walk-up" buildings or elevator buildings? Kuempel stated that the majority of the burglaries took place in older buildings which were primarily walk-up buildings. The Committee discussed the issue of replacing doors, frames, and whether they should be solid wood or metal. Ald. Rudy suggested that to meet certain aspects of the building code, it may be necessary to replace a wood frame with a metal frame and thus could result in a major change to the building. Ald. Rudy expressed concern regarding changes resulting in architectural and historical preservation issues. He further stated that it is unknown whether people in buildings want this type of increased security at the expense of architectural change and financial burden. Ald. Rudy suggested that tenants and owners need to meet and decide whether they need this type of additional security. He felt that new buildings should meet a new standard. Ald. Morton stated that she agrees with Ald. Rudy in part and is opposed to applying the security standards to existing structures. Ald. Morton suggested the City consider starting education programs with tenants and attempt to have tenants obtain redress through the landlord and to work with the Crime Prevention Bureau. Chairman Korshak observed that simply due to the existence of TOE, it has been proven that landlords and tenants cannot just agree on matters and resolve problems. Chairman Korshak reiterated his earlier concern for the safety of policemen and firemen in buildings that may not have proper security devices. Chairman Korshak reviewed with the Committee again his memo which addressed the Preservation Commission's concerns, would now require dead -bolt locks which would increase security by necessitating more time during attempts of entry and thus retard a burglary attempt. Chairman Korshak further felt that to require the installation of dead -bolt locks could be easily accomplished and that it would not be that costly. Ald. Brady stated that the Housing Commission proposal basically addressed the Issues proposed by Chairman Korshak. She stated that the problem was that the locks would provide minimal delay in unauthorized entry and that the frame and 2- P & D Minutes July 25, 1988 the door could be the weak link. Ald. Brady suggested that any new ordinance consider allowing tenants to mandate that dead -bolt locks be installed. She stated that it may be difficult to require all doors and possibly frames to be replaced. Ald. Rudy suggested that the City could develop an ordinance mandating annual tenant meetings to review the lock issue. Under such a proposal.the City could require each building owner to have a meeting and to provide the results of the meeting to the City for review. He stated that it is important that agreement is not forced upon tenants and landlords by the City and that it is decided upon by those two groups. Ald. Morton stated that regardless of how the lock issue is resolved, she feels that it is necessary that the City develop an ordinance requiring a "door scope" be installed on every door. She stated that she continued to oppose the requirement of installing dead -bolt locks. Ald. Rudy stated that he continues to believe that the City should address performance standards such as ASTM in any ordinance that is developed. Jerry Sharp, an Evanston property manager, suggested that the committee not limit locks to just double cylinder dead -bolt locks since they pose a fire danger, but also allow vertical dead -bolt locks in addition to horizontal dead -bolt locks. Sharp also offered alternatives that are available to replacing an entire door frame. Ivan Lippitz, a representative of RCPC, informed the Committee that one inch dead -bolt locks and one and one-half inch mortisse locks are allowed in the proposed RCPC Ordinance. Lippitz further recommended that the P 6 D Committee develop a consent agenda and adopt those aspects of the RCPC Ordinance that are not controversial. Due to the lateness of the hour it was the consensus of the Committee to meet at 7:00 p.m. on August 8, 1988 to continue discussion on the Burglary Prevention Ordinance. Ald. Brady also suggested that the Committee consider to tentatively set a special meeting date for August 15, 1988 to further address this matter. It was the consensus of the Committee to evaluate the special meeting date at the end of the August 8, 1988 meeting. Docket 139-7A-88. Ordinance 46-0-88. ZAC 88-2. Zoning Amendments re Churches. Upon review of a legal opinion from Herb Hill, Corporation Counsel, it was the position of the Committee to recommend to the City Council that the item be removed from the City Council agenda. Appeal of Decision of Sign Review & Appeals Board re 1015 Chicago Avenue - Sims Subaru. Chairman Korshak briefly reviewed with the Committee updated information that indicated that two (2) items in disagreement regarding the proposed sign have been resolved and that both the petitioner and the Sign Review and Appeals Board request that the matter be referred back to the Board for further hearing. It was the consensus of the Committee to refer the appeal back to the Sign Review and Appeals Board. Docket 141-78-88. Consider Authorization to City Manager to Increase Building Zoning Department Staff. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City 3- P & D Minutes July 25, 1988 Council to authorize the City Manager to increase the Building & Zoning Department staff by one (1) Zoning Officer. Ald. Morton questioned how this position would be paid for in future budgets? Rudd indicated that it was expected that revenue generated by the Department would pay for the position in the current budget year and in the future years. Docket 142-7B-88, Municipal Exemption - Noyes Cultural Arts Center (Temporarx Use). Ald. Morton moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council approval of the municipal exemption for the Noyes Cultural Arts Center for a temporary theater use in the gymnasium. Ald. Brady questioned when the gym was in use for a theater, what normal activities would be eliminated? Joe Zendell, Director of the Noyes Cultural Arts Center, stated that a few day dance classes and some gymnastics classes would be required to rearrange schedules. Ald. Morton questioned whether a formal agreement to return the gymnasium to its original condition was worked out with the theater group' Zendell said that would be a part of the lease agreement. The Committee voted 4-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the municipal exemption. Docket 143-7B-88. Approval of plat of Consolidation for Property at 2650 Sheridan Road. Ald. Morton moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of a plat of consolidation for the property at 2650 Sheridan Road. The Committee voted 4-0 to approve the plat of consolidation. Docket 144-7B-88, Ordinance 48-0-88, ZAC 88-3, Rezone Part of 2205 Lee Street. Ald. Morton moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the requested rezoning of a portion of 2205 Lee Street from M1 District to M3 District. Chairman Korshak indicated that the request was located within his ward and he found no objection. The Committee voted 4-0 to recommend to City Council introduction of Ordinance 48-0-88 recommending the rezoning. Request for Nuclear Weapons Free Zone Signs. Chairman Korshak stated that not all entrances to the City appear appropriate for such signs. Ald. Brady stated that it is not a question of being for or against the proposed signs but feels the City should separate regulatory versus non-regulatoty signs. She stated that the Committee should decide to send the matter to the Plan Commission or to a special subcommittee of the Sign Review and Appeals Board. She stated that she is not trying to postpone the decision regarding Nuclear Weapons Free Zone signs and Sanctuary City signs, but feels that there are substantive policy issues that need to be addressed. Ald. Rudy suggested that it would be helpful to have photos of all of the entrances to the City to aid in determining what signs are already in existence. Sid Orlov, an advocate for the Nuclear Weapons Free Zone signs stated that his group proposed to place the subject signs under the "Tree City" signs located at some entrances. Chairman Korshak questioned whether 4- it ii• .i or•I w• P & D Minutes July 25, 1988 Orlov's committee has attempted to prioritize the signs! Orlov stated that no alternatives were reviewed. Orlov further stated that his committee has written letters to synagogues, churches, and other organizations, in addition to representative Bowman, all of which have responded favorably to the proposal. Orlov stated that the signs being proposed will have the nuclear weapons tree zone symbol and are approximately 12x18 inches in size. Chairman Korshak suggested that Orlov supply the Committee with a rendering and dimensions of the proposed signs. Mrs. Levinson, an advocate of the nuclear weapons free zone sign, stated that the group would provide any information requested when it was told which committee would discuss the matter. Ald. Brady stated that the Committee needs to develop standards and policies before they address specific signs such as Nuclear Weapons Free Zone and Sanctuary City. The Committee reviewed a 1977 report from the Plan Commission regarding regulatory signage in the City. Dick Carter, Planning Director, stated that it is his recollection that the report was never adopted by the City Council. In response to a question from the Committee, Carter stated that the Plan Commission could render an opinion but if a study regarding control of regulatory and non -regulatory signs were required, the Plan Commission and staff at this time could not undertake such a study. Chairman Korshak questioned whether the matter should be sent to the Human Services Committee since it would appear to be more in that area? Chairman Korshak further stated that even if the Human Services reviewed the matter, the P & D Committee would need to review the mechanics of implementation at a later date. Ald. Rudy suggested that the Committee recommend approval of the Sanctuary City and Nuclear Weapons Free Zone signs and suggested a consultant develop a plan to organize the signs at the entrances to the City. Ald. Morton suggested that possibly the signs should not be located at entrances but possibly be located at other locations. Orlov stated that his group felt that the entrances were the logical location and had not explored other areas. It was the unanimous decision of the Committee that this matter continue to be addressed at the P & D Committee. It was the consensus of the Committee that opinions and concerns from the Plan Commission be received regarding both regulatory and non -regulatory signs. The matter will await further input from staff and Plan Commission in addition material from Mr. Orlov's group. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is August 8, 1988 at 7:00. Staff: A, RobeKt T. Rudd 70(2/10) 5- DRAFT, NOT APPROVED ti DRAFT. NOT APPROVED 14INUTES Planning and Development Committee August 8, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:00 P.H. Ald. Present: S. Brady, J. Korshak, J. Bleveans, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw Ald. Absent: L. Horton Staff Present: C. Kuempel, G. Sommers-Yant, C. Powers, T. Clarke, D. Rasmussen, E. Szymanski and R. Rudd Presiding Official: J. Korshak Minutes of July 25. 1988. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of July 25, 1988 as submitted. The Committee voted 3-0 to approve the minutes (Aldermen Warshaw and Bleveans absent). COMMUNICATIONS ZBA 88-8-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 90 Kedzie Street. The Committee received a final variation decision regarding 90 Kedzie from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ald. Brady stated that she has received several calls from neighbors that feel that the house will be too large for the parcel. Mary Singh was present and stated that she feels the question of diminution of value of the adjoining property was not a':-assed by ZBA. She stated that it is her opinion that the 'ZBA should have placed as a condition on the variation the prohibition of adding further to the rear of the building. She felt that "ZBA did not properly address the variation standards. Ald. Warshaw stated that upon reading the ev dence as presented in the transcript, she could not believe the conclusion reA:hed by "ZBA. NEW BUSINESS Docket 149-8A-88, Ordinance 49-0-88. 'ZBA 88-18-V(R) re Variations for 425 Lee Street. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council to grant the variations to permit the subdivision into two lots and the sale of each lot separately. She stated that tha :natter is in her ward and she has no difficulty with the request. Ald. R::,:y noted that the City basically doesn't have much of a choice in this ma*:-r Committee voted 4-0 to recommend approval of the variations (Ald. Bleve int-ont). r P & D Minutes August B. 1988 Docket 150-8A-88, Ordinance 50-0-88, ZBA 88-17-V(R) re Variations for 931-33 Sherman Avenue. Chairman Korshak provided some background to the Committee on the subject. Sometime ago a variation was granted for the continuation of a sound studio. The current request is to permit conversion of the rear building into a single family dwelling. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the variation request. The Committee voted 4-0 to recommend approval of the variations (Ald. Bleveans absent). Docket 148-8A-88, "RFP for Custer/Callan " Proiect. Chairman Korshak provided some background to the Committee detailing the City's purchase of the property and elimination of the commercial stores on the project. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the RFP. Ald. Brady questioned how much money the City has put into the project at this point? Tim Clarke, of the Planning Department, stated that the City has paid approximately $475,000 thus far. Ald. Brady questioned that the issue of affordable housing was not directly spoken to in the RFP. Ald. Warshaw stated that construction costs has risen substantially in the last 3 112 years since the concept of affordable housing was proposed. She stated that the RFP still reflects the same concept and will attempt to seek below market mortgages to make the housing affordable to a moderate income population. Ald. Brady expressed her preference that the City try to recapture all of the $475,000 already in the project. Ald. Warshaw stated that that might make the project unmarketable and the housing too expensive. Clarke stated that the Economic Development Committee felt that affordable housing must be on the site, but had reservations about providing a subsidy for first-time buyers and letting them reap significant benefits at a later date. Ald. Rudy questioned the feasibility of placing ten (10) units on a site of this size. Ald. Warshaw stated that it was necessary to allow the market to decide the type of redevelopment; whether it will be mixed, commercial or residential. Upon review of the RFP, Ald. Brady felt that certain sections were extremely limiting to future developers of the site. The Committee discussed conditions of the RFP which addressed "in -kind contributions" and warding that indicated the site should face the street and neighborhood and not be turned inward. Ald. Brady stated that there should be a reference to bedroom size and would prefer more bedrooms and less units on the site. Ald. Warshaw stated that the RFP is to be as broad as possible to allow some creative prop-sals. The Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council approval of the RFP. Docket 147-8A-88, Plat of Consolidation re 2130 Jackson Avenue, Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the request for a plat of consolidation for Hanson Roofing Inc. Committee voted 5-0 to approve. 2- qt P & D Minutes August 8, 1988 OLD BUSINESS Burnlary Prevention Ordinance. Ald. Norton, through Chairman Korshak, requested that her position be made clear that she is opposed to all elements in the ordinance, except for the view scope (peep -hole) for existing construction, but is not opposed to requirements for new construction. Officer C. Kuempel was present and reviewed with the Committee material they submitted detailing ways to attack doors and locks. Kuempel's material highlighted deadbolts and various types of deadbolt locks. He stated that deadbolt locks were superior to other types of locks, but that they must be properly installed. Kuempel shared with the Committee photos of doors damaged in recent residential burglaries. Chairman Korshak suggested that the Committee narrow the discussion to a type of lock and not address the doors, jambs and hinges. Chairman Korshak stated that he was not eliminating all future discussion but felt that a weak jamb. frail door, etc could be discussed forever and never reach a consensus. He felt that it was possible to agree on locks more readily and allow a more practical approach to be immediately implemented. Ald. Warshaw moved to require all rental units have deadbolt locks with a minimum one inch bolt. Ald. Brady seconded the motion. Ald. Rudy stated that he was troubled with the proposal because such locks can be defeated. He stated that it does not make sense to require the deadbolt locks because we have no indication that such a lock will limit illegal entry. Ald. Rudy suggested that the AS7H requirements be utilized to enhance the entire system (jamb, door, hinges, locks) to be successful. However, he stated that the requirements should apply to new construction. Ald. Rudy further expressed his position, as at the previous meeting, that the City should not impose itself on landlords and tenants, but rather should let them decide whether they want to install locks. Chairman Korshak noted that the Police Department strongly recorranends the installation of deadbolt locks. Kuempel stated that locks can not sake apartments and homes totally burglary proof. He stated that additions: security devices are buying time by delaying entry and hopefully will discourage intruders. Ald. Bleveans stated that locks are more difficult for entry and by requiring deadbolt locks the City is adding a layer of protection, thus escalating the defense against burglary. Ald. Bleveans stated that locks are a basic first step in the security of a home. He felt that the locks are the essential pieces of a burglary prevention ordinance which are re'.atively inexpensive to install. Ald. Warshaw stated that the Committee is tr ,ng to balance safety/security with the least amount of intrusion int: peoplo's lives. Shp stated that no home is completely secure. Ald. Warshaw suggested that the Committee consider requiring that locks be placed on the outermost doors of a rental building instead of only on inner doors leading to individual units. 3- r P & D Minutes August 8, 1988 Chairman Korshak questioned whether the Committee intended the locks to apply to Northwestern's dormitories, hotels/motels, nursing homes and other similar institutional type living arrangements? Staff reviewed with the Committee the current landlord/tenant ordinance which eliminated dormitories, nursing homes and other similar institutions from coverage. The Committee discussed that the development of a security ordinance may wish to exclude areas such as those excluded by the Landlord Tenant Ordinance. The Committee discussed an implementation period for whatever ordinance is developed. The Committee discussed six months, twelve months and twenty-four months as possible timeframes to implement the ordinance. Chairman Korshak developed another formula which basically provided that 25% of all the units would be required to comply with the ordinance within ninety (90) days. Teresa DeGroh, a tenant in Evanston, stated that she has the ability to move around and find a safe place. She stated that she is monitoring the P S D Committee activity for those who do not have the same ability to find a safe apartment. She stated that all tenants would be for the Burglary Prevention Ordinance. Constance Draper, an Evanston tenant, stated that deadbolts are helpful but weak doors can easily be kicked -in. She stated that tenants need protection in older dwellings and that the City should require full implementation of the ordinance for those units. She stated that Evanston is not the City it once was and that there is now substantial crime and that a Burglary Prevention Ordinance is necessary. Judy Johnson, a TOE representative, stated that when the Landlord Tenant Ordinance was passed it was made effective immediately. She feels the Burglary Prevention Ordinance should be made effective immediately upon passage and that no timeframe should be allowed for installation of the locks. The Committee discussed further whether a one year period was reasonable to have all locks installed. The Committee further discussed whether to include condominiums as part of rental and multi -family units that would be covered by the ordinance. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee include condominiums as part of the coverage of the ordinance. The Committee voted 5-0. Due to the length of the agenda the Committee recommended that the next P b D Committee meeting on August 22, 1988 start at 7!00 p.m. to further discuss the Burglary Prevention Ordinance. Docket 85-5A-88, Ordinance 51-0-88, ZBA 88-5-V(R) re Variations for 1,18 Sherman Avenue. Chairman Korshak expressed concern about the vague langukZe regarding the commitment to complete the rear building within eighteen (18) months. Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, clarified that the completion of the rear building only addresses the exterior work. Chairman Korshak stated that 4- iF IIIpI'I i III I I' 11111 P & D Minutes August 8, 1988 if the work was done, he would recomarnnd that a covenant be filed which would cause the removal of the rear building at no cost to the City if the owner failed to meet all requirements. The applicant, Hr. Brock, was present and stated that the exterior work of the rear building would only take two (2) months. However, he can not afford to do the work on the rear building until he completes the front building and sells his current townhouse, at which point he would move into the front building. Ald. Rudy expressed concern that the elevation submitted as an attachment does not coincide with the floor plan submitted. Brock stated that he agrees with that but understood that the Committee was interested in the final exterior elevations and that he would develop interior floor plans at a later date. Ald. Rudy questioned whether the Committee has reached the point of accepting two (2) units on a lot? And if so, why? Chairman Korshak stated that he has little difficulty when applying the strict interpretation of the ordinance in new construction. However, he felt to do so in this case, with an existing building, would be unfair. Ald. Bleveans stated that the Committee is trying to maximize housing opportunities when they can be made reasonably compatible with the surrounding areas. Ald. Warshaw stated that she is offended by the thought of demolishing usable residential buildings. The Committee discussed some revisions to Sections 5 and 6 of the proposed ordinance so they would reflect the issue of the exterior elevations only and also the condition that the building would be demolished at the expense of the owner, if the timeframes were not met. The Committee also approved an amendment to the ordinance proposed by Ald. Brady which delegated to the Site Plan Review Committee the final approval of the exterior elevations at such time Hr. Brock submits for building permits for the rear building. Tho Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council to overturn the ZBA recommendation and to introduce, as amended, Ordinance `.1-0-88, reflecting the P & D Committee's opinion. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is August 22, 1988 at 7:00 p.m. Staff. Z, Robert T. Rudd 70(216) 5- DRAFT, NOT APPROVED DRAFT. NOT APPROVED Ald. Present: Staff Present: Presiding Official: Others Present: MINUTES Planning, and Development Committee August 22, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:00 P.M. S. Brady, J. Korshak, J. Bleveans, L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw K. Brenniman, R. Carter, C. Kuempel, C. Powers, D. Rasmussen, and R. Rudd J. Korshak P. Peters, Plan Commission Chairman Minutes of August 8. 1988 Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve the min- utes of the Planning and Development Committee meeting of August 8, 1988. Ald. Warshaw moved that the minutes be amended on page 3, last paragraph, to reflect "consider recommending" rather than "consider requiring." The Com- mittee voted 3 - C to approve the minutes as amended (Aldermen Bleveans. Morton and Rudy absent). Burglary Prevention Ordinance Chairman Korshak questioned the Committee as to whether it was the consensus to recommend dealing with only the lock issue of the security ordinance. Chairman Korshak reviewed with the Committee a memo from him with a copy of the Chicago Lock Ordinance. Ald. Brady suggested the Committee eliminate, for the time being, the discussion of doors for existing buildings. She stated that she still wanted to consider windows, jambs, locks, etc. Chairman Korshak polled the Committee and gained a consensus that locks were the first step in developing the security ordinance. The Committee began review of the original ordinance submitted by R.C.P.C. Section 5-7-(A): Committee recommended that this section be unchanged and pertain to all new residential construction. Section 5-7-(B): Ald. Brady recommended that this section be amended to read all existing multi -family buildings." Section 5-7-4-2 Tests: Ald. Rudy stated his desire to use ASTM standards. He stated that he feels it is necessary to name specific tests. Planning and Development Committee August 22, 1988 Page 2 Section 5-7-5 Definitions: X) Ald. Brady stated that the Committee may want to review this de- finition as the Committee progresses in developing the ordinance. G) The Committee questioned whether a doorscope could be obtained with a 180 degree field division? Officer Kuempel stated that he would investigate the matter. Ald. Rudy questioned what U.L. Standard 972 meant? Rudd indicated he would contact Underwriters Laboratory and obtain a copy. S) Ald. Brady recommended that the word "five' be changed to "two." Section 5-7-6-1: The Committee recommended that this section be changed to read Single Family:New Construction. Ald. Rudy recommended that the Committee strike most of the section regarding the standards and require that the ASTH Standards be met. The Committee discussed as to whether requiring detail and ASTM Standards would delay the issuance of building permits. Rudd indicated that it was possible since in many cases such detail is not supplied at such an early stage of permit review and in some cases such detail would not be re- quired under the current procedures. Ald. Brady questioned whether the Com- mittee wanted to eliminate A thru Q of this section? Ald. Rudy recommended that only "doorscopes" be eliminated from this section. Section 5-6-2 ?Multi -Family Existing: The Committee recommended that (P) be added to the earlier reviewed new residential construction section. The Com- mittee also recommended that (C) be eliminated from this section on page 5. Chairman Korshak requested that the minutes reflect that though Sections (D), C) were being eliminated from this draft, the Committee was not ruling out for all time these issues regarding doors. The Committee at this time was only deferring consideration in an effort to develop an ordinance that could be implemented 'in a relatively short time. Due to the length of the rest of the Planning and Development Committee agenda and the time remaining, the Com- mittee directed staff to prepare a new working draft of the subject ordinance for review at a future meeting. Ald. Rudy's Reference Regarding Comprehensive Planning, Process Phil Peters, Chairman of the Plan Commission, reviewed with the Committee a memo responding to Ald. Rudy's reference regarding the need for a more compre- hensive planning process. Ald. Bleveans stated that he agreed with the review of the Plan Commission's position and recommendation regarding the need for additional staff if the Plan Commission and staff were to become more involved in the comprehensive planning process. Ald. Brady observed that her reading of various minutes indicate that the Plan Commission has been very much in- volved in zoning matters and other issues that have taken away from their time that could be spent on comprehensive planning. She stated that she foresees many additional items contained in the Plan Commission's recommendation that will require even more time spent away from comprehensive planning. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether the Plan Commission should be expanded in light of the proposed increased responsibilities? Peters indicated that a trade-off of doing items of less significance such as review of side yard and front yard Planning and Development Committee August 8, 1988 Page 3 fences be eliminated and allow the Plan Commission to concentrate on more sig- nificant matters. Ald. Brady suggested that the Plan Commission should con- sider removing some of its members from serving on the various bodies in order to concentrate on the added duties and responsibilities. Ald. Horton ques- tioned whether the Plan Commission could be re -structured so as not to hire an additional staff person? Ald. Brady stated that it was her opinion that the work needed to be undertaken with staff work and it was not for the policy makers on the Plan Commission. Ald. Rudy moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Plan Commission recommendation be forwarded to the City Manager with com- ments from the Planning and Development Committee indicating a favorable de- cision about expanding the current Planning Department staff to provide an ad- ditional planner. The Committee voted 6 - 0 to make that recommendation to the City Manager. Dick Carter, Planning Director, was present and in response to the question from Ald. Morton, indicated that several years ago the City had 4 planners. Currently, there is only a part time planner to address com- prehensive planning issues. Special Use for 601 Ridge Avenue Chairman Korshak indicated that Ald. Warshaw has requested that this matter be held over until the next meeting. Since Chairman Korshak will not be at the next meeting, he wished to pass on an observation to the Planning and Develop- ment Committee. it was Chairman Korshak's concern that when the subject sat- ellite antenna ordinance was passed, possibly it did not take into account a topographical situation where there would be a sloping piece of property such as the case at hand. He asked that the Committee members take this into con- sideration when reviewing this matter. Variations and Special Use for 2105 Ashland Avenue Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee concur with the ZBA recommendation to grant a variation and special use to permit the instal- lation of a parking lot. Ald. Rudy stated he has trouble with the one foot south side yard setback. He felt that such a limited area would eliminate possible landscaping even though the site plan provided for landscaping. Ald. Rudy questioned whether that was what the City really wanted in its residen- tial districts? Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director for Zoning, was present and stated that the design provided for screening on other sides of the parking lot which were bordered by residential uses. Ald. Warshaw stated that the church was lessening the parking problems even though the design may not be ideal, a better situation for the neighborhood is being created. Ald. Rudy stated that he is bothered that the City has different standards for different parts of the community and such a proposal would not be approved in other areas of the City. The Committee voted 4 - 2 to recommend to the City Council the approval of the variation and special use (Bleveans and Rudy voting nay). Special Use for 2416 Dempster Street Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council approval to grant a special use to permit structural alterations to the rear of the existing building for the purpose of installing a garage door and bay for the detailing of automobiles. Ald. Warshaw observed that though she supports the special use, she wishes there was a better way to ac- commodate the long lines of traffic generated by this use. The Committee r Planning and Development Committee August 22, 1988 Page 4 voted 6 - 0 to recommend to the City Council approval of subject special use request. Variations for 1500 Asbury Avenue Aid. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council to concur with the ZBA recommendation to (1) deny a variation for the location of an air conditioning unit, and (2) grant a variation for a piano studio in an accessory building. Ald. Brady questioned the applicant as to whether the air conditioning unit could be relocated? The applicant re- sponded that the contractor was in the process of relocating the air condi- tioning unit. The Committee voted 6 - 0 to affirm the ZBA recommendations. Aid. Raden's Reference Regarding Design Review Board Ald. Bleveans stated that he was opposed to a Design Review Board concept. Aid. Bleveans moved not to refer this matter to various groups for comments. Ald. Brady observed that the matter was currently being studied by the Preser- vation Commission, but was limited to Historical Preservation issues. Ald. Brady stated that the Committee may want to limit a Design Review Board to just preservation and move slowly on this matter. The Committee was informed that the Zoning Commission recently began discussion of a Design Review Board. Ald. Brady asked that a memo be sent to the Site Plan Review Committee, Preservation Commission, Plan Commission and Zoning Commission requesting input from those groups. Aid. Warshaw asked that the memo also seek comments from the groups regarding their possible limited scope in participating in a Design Review concept. Staff indicated that a memo would be forwarded to the respective groups seeking their input. Plat of Consolidation for 2516-22 Green Bay Road Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council approval of the plat of consolidation for the former Berry Tire Company property. The Committee voted 6 - 0 to approve of consolidation. The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. The next regular meeting of the Planning and Development Committee will be held Tuesday, September 13, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: W;Iobert'T. Rudd DRAFT, NOT APPROVED MINUTES Planning and Development Committee September 13, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.K. Ald. Present: S. Brady, J. Bleveans, L. Morton, and R. Warshaw Ald. Absent: J. Korshak and J. Rudy Staff Present: B. Ahlberg, J. Zendell, C. Powers, D. Rasmussen, K. Brenniman and R. Rudd Presiding Official: L. Horton Minutes of August 22, 1988. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of August 22, 1988. The Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATIONS Memo from Ald. Rudy re Variations and Special Use for 2105 Ashland. Ald. Brady questioned staff as to whether the recommended changes by Ald. Rudy could be accomplished with the present site plan? Staff indicated that the current proposal was designed in a manner to provide a greater modular width than required by code. To reduce the modular width as recommended by Ald. Rudy would allow the additional landscaping buffer. Chairman Morton questioned whether by reducing the modular width would the turning and backing area be impacted? Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, indicated that the turning area would be reduced. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether the applicant had been contacted regarding Ald. Rudy's response? Staff indicated that the applicant has not as yet been contacted. Ald. Brady suggested that staff contact Rev. Curry, of the Church, and at the same time prepare a revised ordinance for passage at the September 26, 1988 City Council meeting. Chairman Morton expressed concern that a two week delay may be unreasonable. After further discussion the Committee concurred with staff that the proposed change was of a relatively minor nature and that the ordnance could be passed at the September 13 meeting and that staff could work w::h the Church to make sure the plans were implemented in a manner in substantial compliance with the proposal. All parties agreed that efforts would be made to incorporate Ald. Rudy's change to the site plan. ZBA 88-20-V(F), Final Variation Decision re 142 Ridge Avenue. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether the zoning ordinance allowed a more dense use in an R5 as compared to an Rb? Dave Rasmussen stated that under the current ordinance that was correct. It was the Committee's recercnendation that the Zoning Commission address this issue in the new ordinance to make the zoning districts consistent with density policies. P & D Minutes September 13, 1988 ZBA 88-21-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 2812 Lincoln Street. The Committee received the final decision from the Zoning Board of Appeals for 2812 Lincoln Street without comment. Ald. Korshak's Memorandum re U-Districts in Evanston. Ald. Brady questioned whether this matter should be discussed in the absence of Ald. Korshak? She stated that the City of Evanston's Zoning Ordinance has incorporated U-Districts for many years during which time they appear to have worked well. She stated that she agrees with Ald. Korshak with his point regarding 2020 Ridge. Ald. Brady further stated that she would like an answer to the issue raised in point #3 in Ald. Korshak's memo, which requested Corporation Counsel Jack Siegel to outline what legal steps the City can take to restrain the University from acquisition of property outside of the campus area. Ald. Brady stated that she does not agree with Ald. Korshak's recommendation to abolish the U-Districts since they have accomplished a specific purpose and are necessary in Evanston. Ald. Bleveans moved that the P & D Committee recommend to City Council to retain the U-Districts. He reminded the Committee that prior to any of the Committee members being on the City Council that a substantial amount of time and hard work was put into the Zoning Ordinance to draft the U-Districts. He felt that it was not sensible or responsible to abolish the districts. Ald. Brady seconded Ald. Bleveans' motion. Aid. Warshaw stated that she did not concur with Ald. Korshak's point 2, which was a recommendation to rescind immediately the U-District classification nor to send the matter to the Zoning Commission for review. Ald. Warshaw felt that this matter may be most appropriate if it was referred to the Zoning Commission to review the U-Districts in conjunction with a new zoning ordinance. Ald. Bleveans stated that he feels to send the matter to the Zoning Commission sends a message that the City Council is targeting a specific district (U-Districts) for elimination. Bob Ahlberg, Zoning Planner and staff person to the Zoning Commission, Informed the Committee that the Zoning Commission is currently reviewing all districts including the U-Districts. After a brief discussion the Committee voted 3-1 (Ald. Warshaw voting nay) on Ald. Bleveans' motion. Ald. Brady recommended that Corporation Counsel Siegel be requested to assist the Zoning Commission in developing regulations to restrain Northwestern University outside of the current U-Districts. It was the consensus of the Committee to make that request, per Ald. Korshak's point #3, to Corporation Counsel, Docket 166-BB-88. ZBA 88-13-SU(R), re Special Use for 601 Ridge Avenue. Chairman Morton and Ald. Warshaw informed the Committee that due to the religious holiday, the applicant has requested that this matter be held over to the September 26, 1988 P & D Committee meeting. The Committee members concurr-d with this request. 2- P & D Minutes September 13, 1988 ZAC Report on Zoning Ordinance Parking Amendments. Ald. Brady stated that she has reviewed the staff report and compliments the staff on a concise, well written report on a very difficult and complex topic. Ald. Brady further stated that she agrees with the practical, equitable, and creative recommendations of ZAC in addressing this issue. She stated that she strongly recommends and moves that this matter be forwarded to the Zoning Commission. Ald. Warshaw seconded the motion. Chairman }Horton questioned the issue of accessory buildings on page 8 of the ZAC report which requires that accessory buildings maintain a 10 foot setback from the principle building on a lot. Discussion ensued regarding some issues about accessory buildings. Ald. ?Horton requested that the Zoning Commission review closely the issue of accessory building setbacks. The Committee voted 4-0 to refer the parking amendments to the Zoning Commission. Docket 177-88 re Plat of Consolidation for 1450 Sherman Avenue (N.W. corner Sherman and Lake). Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the plat of consolidation for the property at 1450 Sherman Avenue (northwest corner of Sherman and Lake). Ald. Brady questioned whether there were any specific tenants for the proposed retail building? Scott Gendell, developer of the site, stated that his company had no firm commitments. He stated that they expected to break ground in the very near future for the development. The Committee voted 4-0 to approve the plat of consolidation. Docket 178-9A-88, Ordinance 66-0-88, ZBA 68-25-V&SU(R), re Variation and Special Hospital Use for 2650 Ridge Avenue. Ald. Bleveans stated that though he was not able to attend the neighborhood meetings he was informed by aldermanic seat -mate Collens that the meetings were well attended and neighbors raised good questions. He stated that he was informed that the Hospital answered all of the questions and explained in detail the project. Ald. Bleveans further stated that Evanston Hospital has set a good example on how to inform the neighborhood and respond to Neighborhood's concerns. Ald. Warshaw stated that the proposal appears to be a positive move to enhance the hospital campus. Chairman Morton pointed out that the City of Evanston has also been responsive in the neighborhood with improvements such as the cul-de-sacs to control traffic congestion. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the variation and special use requests. The Committee voted 4-0 to approve. Ald. Davis' Reference re Arts Council. Chairman Horton stated that she was not sure if the Committee was requested to take a specific action. Ald. Warshaw stated that she was disturbed by some of the references cited in the attachments to the memo, since they were not 3- P & D Minutes September 13, 1988 related to the City of Evanston situation. Ald. Brady stated that it was her opinion that arts are important to the City of Evanston and that the City Council should be behind arts being incorporated in downtown projects. She further stated that the City Council should help promote arts and questioned whether the Arts Council wanted to identify a particular space? Ald. Warshaw questioned the Committee as to whether there was any particular way to attack this problem. Steve Fiffer, Chairman of the Arts Council, was present and stated that the memo was an effort to bring to the forefront that there is a need to identify a location for performing arts in the downtown area. He stated that it appeared to be particularly timely since the City was deeply involved in the Research Park and a new Library. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether a special reference should be made to the Plan Commission to develop a subcommittee to look at a performing arts space in the downtown and to work in conjunction with the Arts Council? Joe Zendell, Director of the Noyes Cultural Arts Center, stated that the Arts Council is looking for the City Council to take a stand and get behind the promotion of arts in the downtown. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether the Arts Council was looking for some kind of incentive to offer to developers to include art in their projects, such as tax abatement, density bonuses, etc. Zendell stated that the Arts Council does have support for bringing these issues to the negotiating table with developers and incorporating arts in developing in conjunction with the City's Planning staff. Zendell further stated that it was his understanding that there will be a performance space in the new library. He felt that the Arts Council's job was to see that the space was the best that it could be. He further informed the Committee that the Arts Council on a number of occasions has indicated a strong interest in arts in the library to the Library Board. Ald. Warshaw suggested that the Arts Council or Arts Council staff formally be included in the library project planning. Ald. Brady moved that the Arts Council come back to the P & D Committee with a plan to explain how arts can be incorporated in the development process and bring back to the Committee a specific plan. Ald. Bleveans seconded the motion. The Committee voted 4-0 to refer the matter back to the Arts Council. Ad.i ournmen t The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is Monday, September 26, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. S t of f : Robert T. Rudd 70(2/5) 4- DRAFT, NOT APPROVuD DRAFT. NOT APPROVED MINUTES Planning and Development Committee September 26, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.H. Ald. Present: S. Brady, J. Bleveans, L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw Ald. Absent: J. Korshak Staff Present: D. Carter, E. Szymanski and R. Rudd Presiding Official: L. Morton Minutes of September 13, 1988. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of September 13, 1988. The Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATIONS BurRlary Prevention Ordinance. The Committee received a draft copy of the proposed ordinance and indicated that this matter would be held over to the October 10, 1988 meeting to afford Ald. Korshak the opportunity to chair this on -going item. Ald. Raden's reference re Design Review Board. Ald. Brady requested that the Site Plan Review Committee, Preservation Commission, and Plan Commission receive copies of materials sent to the Committee by The Southeast Evanston Association. Ald. Rudy requested that staff develop a review similar to that prepared by Ms. Singh comparing activities that are currently undertaken by the City of Evanston with respect to Design Review. Ald. Rudy requested that this matrix be forwarded to the Committee for review. Ald. Brady requested that the minutes reflect that the zoning analysis status report now being forwarded to all members of City Council is very helpful in keeping the aldermen aware of activity in their respective wards. OLD BUSINESS Request for Nuclear Weapons Free Zone SiRns. Dick Carter, Planning Director, presented a slide show depicting various entrances to the City. These photos were requested by the P & D Committee at an earlier meeting during discussion of the Nuclear Weapons Free Zone Sign issue. The photos illustrated the clutter at entrances to the City in the form of various regulatory and award type signs. Drew Petterson, representing the Plan Commission, stated that it is the Commission's position that all P & D Minutes September 26, 1988 entrances should have only City of Evanston name indicated. It is recommended that six (6) major locate well designed signs with landscaping. It Commission recommendation that the entrances be lieu of proclamations, awards and signs of servi Commission feels that a more proper place to dis specific downtown location or in City Hall. The recommends that the development of entrance sign done under the auspices of the Sign Review and A Commission currently is limited in the time it c The Plan Commission feels that if the signage is manner, and uniform size with landscaping, that enhanced. Ald. Brady stated that recently Aid. develop kiosks in one or two prominent places to received by the City. signs and with population entrances be identified to Is further the Plan identified with the signs in ce organizations. The Plan play such signage may be in a Plan Commission further s and criteria could better be ppeals Board. The Plan an spend on such an issue. presented in a unified the entrances can be Collens proposed the idea to display certain awards Ira Golan, Executive Director of Evanston Chamber of Commerce, stated that the Chamber has been discussing this issue and agrees with the Plan Commission. Golan stated that the Chamber advocates the development of an ordinance or sign that states it is unlawful to post on public property such as street lights and other public fixtures. He stated that the Chamber has expressed concern about the general appearance of entrance points to the City and does not favor the erection of Nuclear Weapons Free Zone or Sanctuary City signs at those locations. Ald. Brady questioned Golan whether the Chamber of Commerce has a program to police its own members that are in violation of the City's Sign Ordinance. Golan stated that the Chamber is concerned about their violations, but does not have policing authority and that all businesses are not members of the Chamber. Carter indicated that the Plan Commission sees that there is currently no policy, standards or control for the erection of entrance signs. Petterson indicated that it may be difficult to gain adherence to a regulation when in many cases the City of Evanston is the greatest violator with its proliferation of signs. Ald. Warshaw stated that the City needs to spell -out a policy on the issue. Sid Orloff, an advocate for the Nuclear Weapons Free Zone Signs, stated that it was not necessary to place the Nuclear Weapons Free Zone Signs at the entrance. He stated that his organization was quite willing to accept placing the sign a block or so into the City. The Committee discussed whether to ask the Plan Commission to develop a regulatory scheme. Chairman !Morton suggested that maybe the Sign Review and Appeals Board is a more appropriate body. Ald. Bleveans stated that he feels the Plan Commission is a more policy oriented group whereas the Sign Review and Appeals Board is more regulatory oriented. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the P g D Committee recommend that the Plan Commission and Sign Review and Appeals Board form a ,point subcommittee to develop criteria and a scheme for signage on the public rights -of -way. The Committee discussed whether to hire an outside designer to help with the 2- I 111 R I 1 III r I I ' 1 n 111 ^ 1 I U i Ih IIII 1 11111 IRi ' P & D Minutes September 26, 1988 program. The Committee expressed some concern with the cost associated with hiring a professional designer and discussed whether it was appropriate to ask that the work be done free of charge. The Committee voted 4-1 (voting nay: Ald. Morton) to recommend that the Plan Commission and the Sign Review and Appeals Board form a joint subcommittee to review the issue and if necessary recommend back to the P & D Committee the need to hire a professional designer. Orloff stated that if the concern is the cost of erecting the Nuclear Weapons Free Zone Signs, his organization would try to raise the dollars necessary for the cost of the signs. Haywood Blake, a member of the Sign Review and Appeals Board, stated that the joint committee should be given enough freedom to make a recommendation regarding the criteria back to the P & D Committee. He stated that the current Sign Ordinance really does not address regulatory signs but only commercial signs. It was the consensus of the Committee to have the joint subcommittee report back to the P & D Committee. Docket 166-SB-88, ZBA 88-13-SUM , re Special Use for 601 Ridge Avenue. Ald. Warshaw moved that the Committee recommend to overturn the ZBA recommendation to deny the request for a special use permit for an 8 foot diameter satellite dish antenna. Ald. Warshaw stated that on behalf of the applicant it is her understanding that when the original dish was installed, many towns did not regulate such obstructions. Further she stated that if the applicant had known a permit was required they would have sought the permit. She further noted that the topography of the lot is such that it is of a sloping nature which mitigates against the visual impact of the antenna. She further stated that the applicant has agreed to remove the existing dish antenna and erect a new antenna of a mesh construction that would be in harmony with City of Evanston's requirement. Ald. Warshaw finally noted that the original vote was 4-3 on the ZBA and was not a-resoundingdenial. She felt to prevent totally the satellite antenna for aesthetic reasons was not appropriate. Ald. Brady seconded the motion and stated that she agrees with Ald. Warshaw. Ald. Brady questioned whether the new zoning ordinance standards would address this issue? Ald. Warshaw stated that she felt that the City could condition the special use on the mesh satellite dish, limit the height, and control the colors. Ald. Bleveans stated that he was opposed to the motion and felt that the antenna was aesthetically unpleasing. He stated that the ordinance was written in the early '80's to address issues such as the one at hand. He stated that the 601 Ridge case is the epitome of what was expected to require a special use and if it did not meet the standards would be denied. He stated that he feels that the antenna has the same impact as being in the front yard, even though it is not. Ald. Warshaw stated that she agrees that the antenna is ugly, but feels that the proposed mesh satellite dish resolves some of the problem. She also noted that the neighbors are not offended by the satellite dish. Ald. Bleveans commented that being the case, however, motorists on 3- P & D Minutes September 26, 1988 Ridge Avenue still see the antenna and it may not be acceptable to them. He further felt that the color change and modification to a mesh dish Was not a significant improvement. Ald. Rudy stated that he agrees with Ald. Bleveans and feels that the Committee needs to project this request to the and potential. He feels that the Committee must be fair to all future requests and respond in a similar way. Chairman Morton stated that the Committee needs to consider what the neighborhood feels and since the neighbors are not opposed the Committee may want to consider acting favorably on Ald. Warshaw motion. The Committee discussed whether it would be more applicable if the current antenna could be landscaped and screened from neighboring areas. Ald. Bleveans stated that he would be willing to look at a proposal. Mr. Frankel, the applicant, stated that it would not be possible to provide landscape screening for the antenna due to the slope of the lot. Mr. Kent Yowell, attorney for the applicant, briefly reviewed legal background of the issue for the Committee. After further discussion Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council that the ZBA denial be overturned and direct staff to develop an ordinance, with conditions earlier mentioned, and return the matter to the Committee at the October 10, 1988 meeting. The Committee further directed that the proposed ordinance not appear on the October 10, 1988 City Council agenda to afford the P & D Committee an opportunity to review the ordinance. Voting Aye: Aldermen Morton, Brady and Warshaw. Voting Nay: Aldermen Bleveans and Rudy. At the conclusion of the meeting Mr. John Thompson, an advocate for the Burglary Prevention Ordinance, stated that he is concerned with the recent sexual assaults in the City and feels there is a strong need for a Burglary Prevention Ordinance. The Committee indicated to Hr. Thompson that the matter would be discussed upon Ald. Korshak's return on October 10, 1988. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P 6 D Committee is Monday, October 10, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: Robert' T. u 70(2/5) 4- DRAFT, NOT APPROVED Q DRAFT. NOT APPROVED MINUTES Planning and Development Committee October 10, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: S. Brady, J. Bleveans, J. Korshak. L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw Ald. Absent: None Staff Present: C. Powers, E. Szymanski, D. Rasmussen, C. Kuempel and R. Rudd Presiding Official: L. Horton Minutes of September 26. 1988. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of September 26, 1988. The Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATIONS ZBA 88-24-V(F). Final Variation Decision re 2424 Prospect Avenue. The Committee received without comment. ZBA 88-26-A(F), Final Notice of appeal Decision re 2001 Seward Street. Ald. Warshaw stated that it appeared that the applicant should not have been before ZBA. Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, stated that he tried to dissuade the applicant from making the appeal but the applicant did have the right to appear before ZBA. Electrical Commission Triennial Review. Leroy Young, a member of the Electrical Commission, was present and reviewed with the Committee the purpose of the Commission. Young stated that the Commission reviewed the BOCA and National Electrical Codes prior to making recommendations to the City Council for adoption. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to the Rules Committee continuation of the Electrical Commission. The Committee voted 6-0 to continue the Electrical Commission. Request from Center for Public Ministry re Extension of Homeless Shelter. It was the consensus of the Committee to set at 7:30 p.m. at the regular meeting of the P & D Committee on October 24, 1988 as a public hearing to hear testimony and to decide whether the Homeless Shelter should be continued for another year. The Committee received correspondence from the Center for Public Ministry, dated October 10, 1988 making said of request. P & D Minutes October 10, 1988 Docket 166-8B-88, Draft Ordinance, ZBA 88-13-SU(R), re Special Use for 601 Ridge Avenue. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend approval of the draft ordinance supplied by City staff. The ordinance allows, with conditions, a special use for a satellite dish antenna at the subject address. This ordinance, if approved by the P & D Committee and City Council, would overturn ZBA's decision to deny the special use request. Dave Rasmussen, Assistant Director of Zoning, explained that since this is a special use and not a variation, that a simple majority of the City Council is needed to overturn the ZBA decision. Ald. Bleveans stated that he is still opposed to the recommendation to overturn the ZBA decision in that such a decision would set a terrible precedent. He stated that though the dish antenna is technically in the side yard it has all of the impact of being in the front yard. He stated that the regulations are drafted so that the only way the City can deny a satellite antenna is based on aesthetics and in his opinion this fails to pass that test. Ald. Bleveans further felt that the City may never be able to deny another dish antenna based on aesthetics. Ald. Brady stated that she was against the original special use request but since then the FCC has develop new regulations. Ald. Brady felt that the City may have a difficult time in court sustaining an argument. Also, the owners have made some concessions since the original request in addition to the evidence that was brought out in dealing with the unique configuration of the property. Ald. Warshaw stated that the owner was not asking for a significant variation and that the applicant is offering a compromise with respect to type of construction and color. Ald. Warshaw also pointed out that the neighbors were not oppose to the request though that should not be a determining factor. Ald. Rudy stated that the ordinance was primarily geared to concealing the satellite dish antenna. He stated that this case appears to be a conflict of two valuc-a: aesthetics versus a need or desire to have a satellite dish. The Committee discussed the definition of "neutral color". Ald. Warshaw stated that the applicants would be willing to erect either a white or black mesh color antenna. The Committee voted 4-2 to recommend to City Council to overturn the ZBA decision denying the special use and introduction at the October 24, 1988 City Council meeting of an ordinance granting the satellite dish antenna with conditions. Voting Ayes: Aldermen Warshaw, Brady, Korshak and Morton. Voting Hay: Aldermen Bleveans and Rudy. Burglary Prevention Ordinance. Mr. John Thompson, a resident at 749 Sherman Avenue expressed concern with the recent spate of crimes in his neighborhood. He expressed dismay that anyone would be opposed to the subject Burglary Prevention Ordinance, Marlene Birch, a resident in the same area, stated that some buildings are occupied only by women and children during most of the day. She stated that she is aware of numerous break-ins in the area and suggested that a provision of the ordinance be amended to require landlords to take extraordinary actions to prevent break-ins after a certain number of break-ins are documented. Ald. Warshaw observed that the subject area is within her ward and it appears that the 2- P & D Minutes October 10, 1988 perception of break, -ins is higher than the actual number based on Police Reports that she has received. Linda DeWoskin, a TOE representative, reviewed with the Committee the issue of providing adequate exterior lighting. The Committee discussed the difficulty of measuring the lighting factor. Officer C. Kuempel offered corrections of typographical errors in the ordinance. Kuempel also questioned the Committee as to whether it was their intent to delete references to doors, jambs, frames, etc. Ald. Korshak stated that the Committee decided at an earlier meeting that the issue of doors and jambe would not be addressed in the current ordinance since to do so would prolong the review for several more months. He stated that the Committee did not foreclose the issue of addressing doors but would do so at a later date. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether the new regulations regarding sliding glass doors should apply to balconies that are not accessible from the ground. The Committee reviewed the definition of accessible which appeared to solve the issue. Chairman Morton suggested that the ordinance should only apply to single and multi -family commercial properties and recommended that the proposed ordinance be amended to extend the one year compliance period on multi family residences to two years. Also, Ald. Horton recommended that if a dwelling unit became vacant within the first two years, that the unit be brought up to the standards of the ordinance. Finally, Aid. Morton suggested that all provisions pertaining to entrances and exits be required to be complied with within one year. Ald. Morton continued to express concern with the costs to existing multi family property owners. Ald. Bleveans observed that the ordinance will make the residential units more burglary repellant but will not make the units burglary proof. He stated the intent of the ordinance was to slow down illegal entry. Ald. Brady stated that she agrees with Ald. Morton regarding the two year compliance period. Ald. Warshaw stated that she still favors the one year period. The Committee discussed what "new residential construction" meant. It was recommended that section 5-7-2 "scope enforcement" (A) all new residential construction; be amended to read "all new residential construction; or change or use". Due to the lateness of the hour the matter was continued for further discussion to the P & D Committee meeting of October 24, 1988. Ad ournmen t The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is Monday, October 24, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. Staff: ,4 Rober T. Rudd 70(2/4) 3- DRAFT, NOT APPROVED 0 DRAFT, NOT APPROVED MINUTES Planning and Development Committee October 24, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: S. Brady, J. Bleveans, J. Korshak, L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw Ald. Absent: None Staff Present: C. Powers, B. Povalla, C. Brenneman and R. Carlson Presiding Official: L. Morton Minutes of October 10, 1988. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of October 10, 1988. The Committee voted 5 ayes, 0 nay (Ald. Rudy absent) to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATIONS Chairmanship Schedule. A memorandum regarding chairmanship change was reviewed without comment. Update Plans for Lakefront Pathway System. A memorandum from Donald Wirth, Director of Parks, Recreation and Forestry updating the proposed plans for changes in the Lakefront Pathway System was reviewed. There were no questions or comments. ZBA Public Notice fnr November 15. 1988. A copy of the ZBA public notice for the aforementioned date was reviewed. There were no questions or comments. Homeless Shelter re Public HearinR. The Chairman opened the public hearing regarding the request for the Center for Public Ministry to extend the operation of the homeless shelter at the First Baptist Church at 606 Lake Street for an additional one (1) year period, ending November 1, 1989. The following persons spoke for or against the shelter operations. Carol Morchanduas, representing the shelter, reviewed the program with emphasis on the addition of the health care clinic for the homeless clients. She felt that this was an ideal opportunity to provide the only health care that clients of the shelter receive. Mr. Warren Schnider who lives near Hinman and Lake noted that persons have been found sleeping in the vestibule of his building and noted sleeping on park benches during the day. He asked that zoning approval be revoked or that the shelter be moved to another part of the City. Ald. Rudy entered the meeting at this time. P & D Minutes October 24, 1988 Mrs. Brash of 600 Grove noted that homeless persons made use of adjacent parks prior to the shelter being established. She has not been aware of any problems for the past two (2) years and endorsed the shelter and cited the great need for affordable housing for the homeless and low income persons. Royce Scharf endorsed the shelter and noted that in his position as Chairman of the Homeless Committee of the Ecumenical Council there was a recognition of the great need for the homeless shelter. Mr. Scharf also reviewed the operation of the daytime center for the homeless operating at St. Mark's Church, six days per week , Monday thru Saturday, that is serving 70-80% of the night residents of the center with daytime activity. Hilda Carper, Director of the shelter noted an almost complete lack of police contacts with the residents of the shelter. She also noted that she checks the park regularly and has observed no residents making daytime use of the park. The need for Sunday daycare was also noted. Ald. Brady stated that she was impressed with the professional nature of the operation of the shelter and specifically the new health care program offered to the residents of the shelter. She noted further that shelter guests are spending a decreased number of nights in the shelter before being guided into other programs. She noted a complete lack of complaints received as the Alderman living closest to the shelter. Ald. Rudy also stated that he has not received complaints regarding the operation of the shelter or the conduct of the residents. Upon a motion by Ald. Brady to recommend to the City Council for an extended one 1) year period of operation for the homeless shelter and a second by Ald. Rorshak the Committee voted 4-0 (Aldermen Bleveans and Warshaw temporarily absent) to approve the motion. Peter N. .Tans Golf Course Presentation of Capital Development Plan. Dr. Richard Fischl, President of the Evanston Community Recreation Association which operates the golf course was present to review the operation of the course and future plans for renovations. The following points were noted by Dr. Fischl. The course is almost self supporting with Evanston submitting 3,800 and Wilmette providing $1,200 over the past year. A need was cited for a new master plan for the course with the old plan dated 1919. The existing course layout has some conflict with neighbors plus there is a great need for an underground watering system to be installed to replace the expensive, labor intensive hand -watering which now must take place. Johnson Landscape Planner of Madison, Wisconsin have provided a new master plan which calls for an approximate $600,000 renovation cost and will be completed in increments. The termination date of the present Metropolitan Sanitary District property lease in the year 2000 was noted as well as council assistance being needed in renegiotating a new lease before a commitment is made for the renovation program. Ald. Brady noted that staff should work with the Association to opei, negotiations for a new property lease. Fischl noted that disposition of the adjacent Fire Department property should also be settled. He stated that the Association will pursue cooperate and individual funding for the renovation due to the fact that the Association does not have any bonding power. 2- P & D Minutes. October 24, 1988 Ald. Warshaw entered the meeting at this time. Ald. Rudy questioned Dr. Fischl as to the desired length of a new lease. Fischl replied that at least a twenty (20) year lease renewal is desired. The actual lease of the Association is a sublease from the City with the City leasing from the Metropolitan Sanitary District. A sum of $1,200 per year has been paid to the City by the Association. Fischl noted further that a special fee of $1.00 per round is being charged and put in a segregated fund for capital improvements with that fund currently being at the amount of $15,00. He further noted that playing the Jans Course is only 1/3 the cost of playing on private courses, thus making this activity extremely attractive to senior citizens and young people. There was no official action required on this report. Economic Development Committee Triennial Review. Ald. Bleveans entered the meeting at this time. Ald. Nelson and Assistant City Manager Aiello reviewed the report of the Economic Development Committee. Ald. Nelson noted the past years activity that has taken place regarding the Zera property in southwest Evanston for Industrial park development. Consideration has also been given to the Rust-Oleum property due to the fact that Rust-Oleum will be closing their facility. Activity has also taken place on a study of neighborhood shopping districts and their needs. He noted that the committee has found those districts for the most part in a healthy condition. He stated further that he felt that the Economic Development Committee is a vital part of the community and a worthwhile activity to retain. He also noted that the committee has been working in smaller task force groups on specific questions rather than working in full committee sessions. Ald, Warshaw questioned why the Economic Development Committee does not change from the twelve (12) mandated full committee meetings per year to a task force meeting meeting schedule. Ald. Brady stated that she feels that sufficient information has not gone out to Council members and asked that task force reports in the future be distributed to the entire Council. Ald. Rudy stated his concern with planning considerations been coordinated with the activity of the Economic Development Committee. Ald. Nelson stated that the Plan Commission and other boards and commissions are represented on the Economic Development Committee in a specific effort toward coordination, and that the Plan Commission is specifically requested to comment on development plans. Ald. Nelson stated that the present triennial review process is less than desirable and asked that the Rules Committee consider a revised system. Upon a motion by Ald. Brady seconded by Ald. Rudy, the triennial review report form of the Economic Development Committee was approved 6-0 with a recommendation that the committee continue in operation. 3- P & D Minutes October 24, 1988 Ald. Korshak stated that the triennial reporting process is faulted and that he would be making a reference on the Council floor to the Rules Committee for a revised system of reporting. Docket 195-1OB-88, Resolution 48-R-88 re Housing Assistance Plan. Catherine Powers, Housing Rehab & Property Maintenance Director and B. Povalla, Housing Planner were present to review the 1988-1991 three year Evanston Housing Assistance Plan which must be on file with HUD prior to the City submitting its application for Community Development Block Grant Funds. This HAP three year plan is for a period from October 1, 1988 until September 30, 1991 and must be submitted to HUD by October 31, 1988. Powers and Povalla reviewed the report and an amendment which was presented to the Committee. Ald. Warshaw stated that the displacement activities of the City working above federal guidelines should be mentioned in the report. Ald. Brady noted that the zero displacement activity referred only to federally funded projects and It should be mentioned that federal guidelines for displacement are being surpassed by the City. Ald. Korshak stated his displeasure with the receipt of information at the meeting at which approval is expected. Powers and Povalla noted the short working time allowed to the City by HUD for completion of the report. Ald. Bleveans temporarily left the meeting at this time. Ald. Warshaw noted that the late receipt of material by the Committee inhibits discussion by the Committee and in fact limits discussion almost totally to the Council floor. Ald. Brady stated that the Housing Assistance Plan forms do not speak to the real housing issues of the City. Ald. Horton inquired as to statistics in the report being binding on the City and possibly requiring abandonment of houses with numerous housing code violations. Powers replied that the report will only note that those types of homes would be eligible for rehab. Ald. Morton stated the need for the City to give preference in housing programs to Evanston residents. Ald. Bleveans reentered the meeting at this time. Ald. Morton further questioned the meaning of the "expected to reside" statistic. Povalla replied that this figure is the number of low income persons who woulu desire to live in Evanston. Upon a motion by Ald. Bleveans with a second by Ald. Brady, Resolution 48-R-88 approving the City of Evanston 1988-91 Housing Assistance Plan was recommended for approval by the City Council as amended. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the motion. Burglary Prevention Ordinance. Ald. Korshak assumed the chair for discussion of this item. Ald. Korshak suggested a special meeting for October 31, 1988 in order that the Burglary Prevention Ordinance could be introduced to the City Council on November 7, 4- i ^ ° m I 1,' v P & D Minutes October 24, 1988 1988. Ald. Brady stated that with changes being made in the ordinance it was not fair to the public to have the ordinance introduced prior to an opportunity for review. Ald. Warshaw stated that enforcement of the provisions of the Burglary Prevention Ordinance should commence at the end of a one year period due to the infrequent inspection schedule of multi -family buildings. Ald. Morton objected to the one year provision as a hardship on building owners especially those of low income and endorsed a two year waiting period before enforcement. Upon a motion by Ald. Warshaw, seconded by Ald. Brady a one year waiting period for enforcement was approved 5-1. Voting Nay: Ald. Morton. Ald. Rudy stated that further definition of condos and co-ops should be contained in the ordinance. Ald. Brady stated that single family dwellings should be defined as a owner occupied single dwelling units, condominium or cooperative, this would place rented single family dwellings under the ordinance. Due to the late hour, Ald. Korshak suggested that staff should rewrite the ordinance inserting comments forwarded by the Aldermen at the meeting of November 7 and at this meeting. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next regular meeting of the P & D Committee is Monday, November 7, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. Staff RA Ca(I on 70(2/6) 5- DRAFT, NOT APPROVED DRAFT, NOT APPROVED Ald. Present: Ald. Absent: Staff Present: Presiding Official: MINUTES Planning and Development Committee November 7, 1988 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.K. S. Brady, J. Bleveans, J. Korshak, L. Morton, J. Rudy and R. Warshaw None C. Powers, E. Szymanski, C. Kuempel and R. Rudd S. Brady Minutes of October 24. 1988. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of October 24, 1988. Chairman Brady moved that the minutes reflect the correct spelling of the names of Kr. Snyder, Ks. Brasch and Rev. Scherf. The Committee approved the minutes as amended 5-0 (Ald. ?Morton absent). COMMUNICATIONS None NEW BUSINESS Docket 207-11A-88. Ordinance 80-0-88. ZBA 88-27-SU(R). re 2045 Sheridan Road. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Rudy seconded that the Committee approve the request from Northwestern University for two curb cuts on Sheridan Road to serve parking lot #6. Ald. Rudy expressed concern that if the openings are too far apart there could be a traffic congestion problem. Jim Perry, Attorney for Northwestern, stated that the openings will be adequately marked to allow for left and right hand turns from the egress lane. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether exiting during the rush hour would cause a traffic jam on Sheridan Road? She questioned whether "right turn only" should be permitted from the lot? Chairman Brady stated that she shares the same concern about the amount of traffic on Sheridan Road and the volume of traffic entering and exiting the subject lot. Ald. Rudy stated that the proposed entrances will improve the situation and that possibly something could be done by controlling the traffic flow on Sheridan Road. Perry stated that Northwestern was also concerned and may look at providing a person to direct traffic in conjunction with the proposed improvements. Ald. Bleveans moved that proposed Ordinance 80-0-88 be amended to reflect a new condition which would read "signage with regard to egress from the subject lot will be coordinated with the City of Evanston Traffic Engineering Department and the Illinois Department of Transportation". Ald. Warshaw seconded the motion. The Com=ittee voted 6-0 to approve the amendment. P & D Committee - Minutes November 7, 1988 Ald. Warshaw wished the minutes to reflect her objection to ZBA member Ms. Fields, for participating in the discussion of Northwestern since Ms. Fields is a graduate student at Northwestern. Ald. Korshak expressed a similar concern. Ald. Bleveans stated that he also would like the minutes to reflect that he does not take issue with Ms. Fields participating in a hearing dealing with Northwestern University. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the special use to the City Council with the aforementioned amendment. Docket 206-11A-88, Plat of Subdivision re 425-429 Lee Street. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Morton seconded that the Committee recommend approval of the plat of subdivision. A member of the audience stated that the property has been sold and the buyer intends to use the existing rooming house as a rooming house in the future. The Committee voted 6-0 to approve the plat of subdivision. Docket 205-11A-87. Mavor's Special Housing Fund re Over the Rainbow Association Loan. Ald. Warshaw reviewed with the Committee the request from Over the Rainbow for a $100,000, unsecured loan from the City's Mayor's Special Housing Fund. Ald. Warshaw explained that the Housing Commission favors going forward and approving the subject loan request. She explained that the loan would eventually be paid back through a grant from the Robert McCormick Foundation to Over the Rainbow. She explained further that the McCormick Foundation stated that it would not guarantee the loan and that it would not allow for its grant to be paid directly to the City, but rather will require that the McCormick Foundation $100,000 grant be provided to Over the Rainbow which in turn may reimburse the City. Mitchell Milner, a representative for Over the Rainbow, was present and reviewed with the Committee the overall financing package for Over the Rainbow at its project at the former Community Hospital. Milner explained that the total cost of the project is S1,750,000. Of that amount, HUD has provided financing for $1,733.000. Additional costs for construction interest, insurance and architectural services, bring the total project cost to $2.2 million dollars (excluding the Vocational Center). Ald. Korshak questioned Milner whether Over the Rainbow would be doing the work themselves or hiring a general contractor? Milner explained that Over the Rainbow has hired a general contractor to do the construction work. Ald. Bleveans questioned what was meant by "barrier -free living environment"? Milner stated that the proposal is for the rehabilitation of the former Community Hospital for residency by developmentally disabled and thus the need for a barrier -free living arrangement to allow wheelchair and other forms of accessibility. Ald. Morton moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the $100,000 loan to Over the Rainbow Association. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the loan. 2- P & D Committee - Minutes November 7, 1988 Old Business B,urglary Prevention Ordinance Upon review of the draft ordinance, Ald. Rudy made the following recommendations.: Page 8: strike from (A) the wording starting with "in lieu of" from the subject section. Page 8 (B) change the word glass to "glazing". Page 9: (H) obtain a copy of the subject bulletin. Page 10: (B), change the section to provide for a "one inch minimum throw" and. reword the subject section. Ald. Warshaw suggested that section (C) on page 10 be amended to read accessible vision panels". Ald. Rudy recommended the following changes, Page 11: (K) should read aluminum sliding glass windows" and section (L) should read illuminated with a minimum of 5 ft. candles". Ald. Korshak suggested that page 5 should read as follows: " A device combining a dead -latch operable by knobs or non --removable key from the Inside and outside by a key, both of which can be retracted from the inside by turning the knob or non -removable key from the outside by a key". Ald. Morton questioned whether the requirements were realistic to apply to owners of income properties that were not generating a significant amount of income? She stated that some things should be done in one year or less while others should be given a period of at least two years to be installed. Chairman Brady stated that she could not support an amendment that would provide for anything other than a one year application. Ald. Warshaw stated that she sees the ordinance as primarily a lock ordinance and that the deadbolt and cylinder guards are most important and are needed now. Ald. Morton questioned whether the issue of locks was as big of a problem as it seems to be reflected in the ordinance? Officer C. Kuempel was present and reviewed with the Committee previous reports submitted to P b D indicating the problem with illegal entry due to weak locks. Ald. Horton continued to express her concern with the high cost to landlords. Alai. Horton suggested that the Committee consider utilizing the Mayor's Special Housing Fund dollars to provide funds to landlords that cannot afford to implement the requirements of the ordinance. Ald. Horton moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee refer to the Housing Commission the issue of developing a program utilizing either CDBG or Mayor's Special Housing Fund dollars to be :Wade 3- i i ^ i 11 11