Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1985MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF: EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION January 9, 1985 7:30 P.M. -- Room 2403 Civic Center Forkosh, Hill, Koester, Molumby, Peters, Perkins, and Saag Hartgering and Yas Breslin, Nevel and Petterson Carter PRESIDING OFFICIAL: Peters, Chairman APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF DECEMBER 12, 1984 Mr. Peters moved approval of the December 12, 1984 Minutes. Seconded by Libby Hill. Motion passed. No nays. REPORT OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE AND ELECTION OF OFFICERS Chairman Forkosh reported that the Nominating Committee had met and were recom- mending Phil Peters as Chairman for 1985 and Libby Hill for Vice-chairman. She asked for any further nominations from the floor, hearing none, Mr. Perkins moved nominations be closed and that the Commission accept the slate of officers offered by the Nominating, Committee. Seconded by Mr. Molumby. Motion passed. 110 nays. Mr. Carter conveyed dr. Yas' concern, who could not be present that evening, about the election process. He felt that it should be made more democratic by either having the Nominating Committee nominate two persons for each position with formal voting taking, place or by having the nomination process be handled by the entire Com- mission at a regular Commission meeting. Commission members felt that having four candidates out of a nine person commission would be a bit awkward and that many times it was difficult to find more than one person who would be willing to take on the res- ponsibility of chairmanship,. They thought a reasonable alternative would be to select the Nominating Committee at a regular Plan Commission meeting and invite all members to submit names to be considered to those individuals. DISCUSSION OF COV11-14ISSIO;. GDALS FOR 1985 Commission members reviewed the list of their goals for 1985, developed at the December meeting, and asked for any changes or additions. It was generally concluded that the list was all-inclusive and that the goals should be grouped under some broad headings. It was suggested by Chairman Peters that the Commission then form sub- comriittees around these broad headings to handle the assignments. He observed that this approach had worked well during 1984. Mr. Petterson suggested a method of group- ing thG goalr under the following categories: Central Business District, redevelopment proiects, zoning and legislation, the Comprehensive Plan, and capital improvements. I' vas decides to establis.". a committee for each one of these major areas. The goals te.o then rroure! n-ccrdin r'_;• and the Commission members expressed their interest in Evanston Plan Commisison Minutes - January 9, 1985 Page 2 serving on one or another of the Committes as followst Central Business District 1. Play a greater role in the development of Downtown II1 Research Park 2. Participate in the planning of a new library 3. Develop a downtown plan Members interested in serving: Saag, Perkins and dill Redevelopment Projects 1. Examine Custer Avenue for potential improvements 2. Study the old Greenleaf Neighborhood Business Area for potential reuse. Members interested in serving: Breslin, Nevel and Petterson Zoning and Legislation 1. Participate in the development of a design review process 2. Provide imput to the Zoning and Amendment Committee and amendments which impact the Comprehensive Plan 3. Complete a Commercial Land Study 4. Participate in the review of a new Sign Ordinance Members interested in serving: Koester, Petterson, and Forkosh Comprehensive General Plan 1. Complete the Comprehensive General Plan and push for its implementation 2. Review the Energy Plan 3. Examine the tools for implementing the Comprehensive Plan Members interested in serving: Peters, Koester, Hill and Nevel Capital Improvement Program 1. Follow-up on Capital Improvement recommendations 2. Work with the Community Development Block Grant Committee 3. Develop recommendations for the Green Bay Road Corridor Members interested in serving: To be determined RE:'1 ►'. OF THE DESIGN FOF. THE NOYES CULTURAL ARTS CENTER PARKING LOT Mr. Donald Wirth, Director of Parks, Recreation and Forestry, was present to give Commission members an overview of the development of the current design for the Noyes Cultural Arts Center parr:;nF lot. Mr. Carter introduced Mr. Wirth and summarized the situation as a controversial one whicr. hac been evolving over the past two years. De- siFnk for the improvement of the ole school yard; into a more attractive recreational c ^a. -erz nc" c. u- tnr. tr tat pa.^.:,n; to-. v;a--. Hr. Carte- explainec Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - January 9, 1985 Page 3 the pity had an obligation to do the best they could with parking since they had created this facility. Mr. Petterson asked whether there would ever be a geed for more than 50 spaces and commented that the placement of the playground seemed to preclude any expansion. Mr. Wirth commented on the reasons for the playground area being located close to the building where it could be observed and keeping it at an extreme end of the park so that the large open space could be preserved for field games. Mr. Carter also responded that neither he nor Mr. Wirth would like to see any further additions to parking and the placement of the playground would help preclude this. In further ela- boration on the need for parking, Mr. Carter commented that one of the difficulties the Arts Center faced now was in booking performances for the Center with the very limited parking available. Mr. Wirth stated that it was a day to day problem and not just a periodic one. Mr. Peters characterized the design approach as one dealing with two issues: 1) the need to make a public facility effective and 2) the open space issue. Mr. Perkins commented that he felt the design solution was a competent one which ought to be supported. Bonnie Forkosh moved that the Plan Commission support the plan as presented to them. Seconded by Mr. Koester. Motion passed. No nays. It was agreed that the Plan Commission would send a representative to the Planning and Development Committee on January 28, 1985 when the plan for the Noyes Cultural Arts Center parking lot would be presented. Mr. Molumby observed that the staff and others had done a thoughtful Job in serving a variety of needs with the design presented. COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN WORKSHOP SESSION Mr. Carter distributed two reports on.the Comprehensive Plan, the first showing the actual mock-up of the first two sections of the plan and the second one in rough draft form covering the last two sections of the plan. He explained that the first document was very near completion and lacked only a few pictures and captions. The second volume was not so far along as far as photographs, maps and illustrations were concerned. It also contained some text which the Plan Commission had as yet to finally approve. He pointed out the sections to be reviewed that evening included a generalized introduction to Transportation, a generalized introduction to the Environment and a final draft on Community Design. He said that once these sections were approved, the text for the Plan, would be complete. All that would remain would be the composition of the document in preparation for printing and a final overall introduction to the entire Plan. He reauestea to meet with a small committee of the Commission to work on the composition of the Plan. He felt a final look at the text, the policies and the illus- trations would be helpful. He asked if Libby Hill, Roger Koester and Bill Nevel would be willing to assist in this task. In response to a question from Mr. Petterson, Mr. Carter indicated that there would be a land use plan as part of the document and that I'. would loot: very similar to the present one. He indicated that there would be a few areas of chanze, but they were quite limited. In reviewing the section on Transportation, a few minor editorial suggestions were made and it was recommended that some mention of the Transportation Center be made. Some members fel. the section was a bit long; however, it was pointed out that a number of sub -topics are covered in the introduction and that it would also serve as a quick summary of major points to folloY.. Mr. Koester moved that the Plan Commission approve the introduction c the Transportation Section. Seconded by Mr. Molumby. Motion passed: Ne nags. Commission members then reviewed the introduction tc the section on Community Environment. Cc.mnissicn members felt that this section said what it needed to say and needed no further additions or changes. Mr. Koester moved approval of the introduction tc Community* Env-, ronmen:.. Secondet ny Mr. Saag. Moticr r-assed. No nays. Mr. Carver :el- tha- th- section or Commur.it; Design had been substantially im- Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - January 9, 1985 Page G Mr. Petterson felt that, while the community was fully developed, there would,be changes over time created by redevelopment and that opportunity ought to be recognized. Following on that observation, Libby Hill thought that the concept which Larry Perkins outlined at the December meeting of the Plan Commission ought to be incorporated. The statement dealt with the City virtually renewing itself about every 75 years. In es- sence it said, "In order for the City to stay virtually just as it is, it would have to reinvest 100% of the value of everything which exists today within 75 years. The money to rebuild Evanston will have been spent regardless of any policy or plan and therefore the design ideas articulated by the Plan Commission could give these deci- sions direction." Mr. Peters felt that the statement about the bridges was not clear and needed to be more specific regarding their appearance. Commission members discussed the uti- litarian appearance of the bridges and the apparent lack of opportunity to give direction to aesthetics. They also expressed concern over the fences which had been constructed on top of the bridges. Commission members expressed the view that this draft was substantially improved over older ones and now communicated the ideas effectively. Bonnie Forkosh moved approval of the Community Design section. Seconded by Larry Perkins. Motion passed. No nays. ANNOUNCEMENTS Libby Hill reported that she and Dick Carter had met with Don Wright to follow up on the Plan Commission's interest in participating in future library planning. Roger Koester reported on the activities of the Economic Development Committee and mentioned their dissatisfaction with the CD Committee recommendations. He also reported on the Committee's meeting with Ron Kysiak on the activities of Evanston Inventure. In particular, he mentioned the business retention program. This program would be aimed at new developments as well as existing businesses. There is great potential for effective leveraging of funds in a program such as this and the Economic Development Committee was anxious to trove it forward. One hundred ten businesses had been, targeted for this program. Libby Hill asked whether the Plan Commission was going to make any further effort on behalf of the Energy Conservation Programs, which had not been approved for funding by the Community Development Committee. She mentioned the potential link between the two programs of targeting businesses for retention and targeting businesses for energy conservation educat:ona'_ efforts. Cor:r:ission members expressed a willingness to con- tinue tc advocate for the energy programn. Mr. Carter indicated that additional money mlgnt be forthcoming fro; HUD which could be a possible source of funds for a reconsi- deration of either the CEEE program and/or the Energy Outreach program. Since the Coma. ssion was alread, on record in supporting both energy programs, they felt it was important for them to appear and make a statement at the next budget hearing. Mr. Perkin.-- observed that merely going on record was not sufficient, that the Plan Commis- sion should pursue its recommendations with personal effort. He felt that successful planning- was one part planning and nine par'.r lobb.,, inF for ,your reco-M. endations. Mr. h,olunb.; roved that the P=ar. Commission endorse the position on behalf of both energy programs and send a me=er to make tni-- statement on their behalf. Seconded by Mr. Koerter. Notion oassec. No nays. C;r:'e tnis war lixely to be the last meeting tc be attended by members Molumby and : or�:csr . CommiSSICn r^e:roers thankec tner. for their service and excellent leader- ,, tr in. .. 5" .._ _ comMentec tna� a'ter sc. man: ,ears Of service, it would be difficult co=enteL -a!C ::n-: TYa; the Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - January 9, 1985 Page 5 end of his seventh year and that professionally he had found it rewarding and personally he had enjoyed serving on the Plan Commission. He valued the chance to work with some very fine people and thanked the Commission members. Bonnie Forkosh also commented that she couldn't remember when she hadn't been on the Plan Commission and stated that it had been an excellent learning experience. She was especially pleased with the cooperation she had received from Commission members while she was chairman. Mr. Molumby commented about what an opportunity it was to learn how your community actually works. Both expressed willingness to help the Plan Commission in any way they could in the future. MEETING ADJOURNED approximately 10:00 P.M. Staff: C'L+rti, c✓ B,� t.� .y�' Date: 044t? t2+�•rra.�✓ /y�� EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES February 13, 1985 7:30 P.M. - Room 2403 Civic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: ASSOCIATE MEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF: PRESIDING OFFICIAL: APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 9, 1985 Breslin, Hill, Koester, Peters, Saag and Yas Perkins, Hartering and Nevel Petterson Carter Peters, Chairman Mr. Koester moved approval of the January 9, 1985 minutes as written. Seconded by Mr. Saag. Motion passed. No nays. Mr. Yas retorted that Mr. Hartgering was resigning from the Plan Commission, as a regular member, due to schedule conflicts. Chairman Peters offered congratulations to Jeanne Breslin on her appointment to the Commission as a full member. He also congratulated Libby Hill on her successful efforts to keep the energy conservation programs funded. REVIEW OF THE CITY'S SIGN ORDINANCE Mr. Carter reported that he had been working with a small committee from the design community cn problems with the Sign Ordinance. He asked if the Plan Commission wished to support and participate in the work of revising the ordinance. He indicated that he would be making an appearance before the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council to rea'uest their authorization to proceed to develop proposed revisions to the ordinance. He also stated that such work would ultimately involve the hirinz of a Consultant to az::izt in this effort. In commenting on why the issue =s cominx up, Mr. Carter stated that there were several sources of issues interest which had cone to a focus at the same time. He indicated that he, personally, had seen the need for re- visicn over the past year or so and had commented on it. Also, the City Manager had expressed strong interest. Also, the Planning and Development Co=. ittee had a reference frcm a fellow alderman on a particular sign problem and was awaiting a response from staff. Mr. Carter cccrmented that there was growing evidence of the sign problems con- nected with our own ccfimercial revitalization. Many healthy changes are taking_ place; however, with each new business comes an opportunity to put up a new sign. Under the present ordinance, the City is powerless to stop some of the worst abuses except under the particular circumstances where parking is allowed in the front yard. Under that part of the ordinance, tighter sign controls and landscaping requirements come into effect. He showed Cc=ission members a series of slides illustrating specific types of sign problems. In his opening comments he reminded Commission members that Evanston had been a pioneer in the area of sign regulation in the late 1950's. At that time they Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - February 13, 1985 Page 2 adopted an ordinance which not only prohibited overhanging signs, but contained provisions for their elimination. As a result, the appearance in the commercial areas was gradually enhanced. However, since that time the sign business has changed dramatically and new problems are arising. In illustrating the most severe problems, he began with the typical signs for automotive -oriented businesses, namely the pole sign. He felt that there should be a total ban on such signs or that they should be drastically reduced in size. He felt that it would be desirable to have a moratorium on the erection of pole signs while a new ordinance is being considered. Another problem illustrated was the amount of sign area allowed per establishment. The problem of paper signs was also pointed out. Mr. Carter stated that he had heard many complaints about the visual effects of paper signs and commented about the difficulty of controlling them. He demonstrated how there were excessively large letters allowed on a number of the chain stores, typical of the size needed to be seen at large shopping centers and not in circumstances such as our downtown. Rooftop signs were another question mark and perhaps should not be allowed. A series of commercial facades were shown to illustrate how often the signs were inappropriate for the storefronts. Too frequently, there is no relationship between sign size and design and the architecture of the building. He showed a number of facades which had been inappropriately covered. He stated that frequently such work is done out of ig- norance and if there were greater opportunity to discuss the sign with property owners such things might not happen. The facade rebate program was an example of one that was working to produce more tasteful facade work and signage. One of the more difficult problems cited was the franchises and chains who had their own logos or sign style which usually didn't harmoize with the rest of the business areas. He identified the large, internally illumi- nated box sign as one of the most offensive types. Karlson's Kitchens building was shown as an example of effective, tasteful signage. Other examples of restraint in signage were also shown. He went on to illustrate a number of examples of how awnings are starting to be used more and more as signs and are in need of greater control. Other problems cited were billboards, temporary signs and buildings which served as signs. Mr. Carter stated that he would be making a similar presentation before the Planning and Development Committee on February 25 asking for their approval to proceed with initiat- ing changes to the Sign Ordinance and possbly asking for a moratorium on pole signs. In the discussion that followed, Libby Hill asked whether the Chamber of Commerce would be involved in this effort and Mr. Carter replied in the affirmative. It was felt that the question of hcw much oppcsltion there would be would to to revising t'._ Sign ^rdinance mig!nt depend on the provisions for eliminating non -conforming signs. Mr. Carter felt that the Chamber would probably be supportive of strcnger sign ccntrcls, but we would have to have their participation in the process of revising the ordinance. Mr. Carter also felt that more was required than mere regulation of signs. He thought that a design advisory committee and informational handouts on alternatives would also be help- ful. Commission members felt that a brochure or a portfolio of appropriate sign designs should be prepared. There was some question as to who might be able to prepare such ma- terials and it was thought that perhaps Design Evanston might undertake it as a project. Mr. Koester felt that it was apropos for the Flan Commission to look at this problem. He felt that the appearance of many of the entrances to the City presented critical appearance issues and cited the Plan Commission's Green Bay Road project as an example. He asked whether the Plan Commission would be overstepping their bounds in dealing with appearance issues. Mr. Carter responded that there were very few agencies dealing with appearance issues and that the Plan Commission is an appropriate body to raise these . Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - February 13, 1985 Page 3 questions. Drew Petterson also felt that the signage in the town does much to create the character of the community and that a number of the signs seen this evening were very objectionable. He thought that different standards on signage might be a way to unite some of the commercial zones. While agreeing that the sign problem needed to be addressed, Libby Hill cautioned Commission members to go about their work in the right way and not create animosity in the commercial community. Mr. Peters observed that this would be a very time consuming undertaking and wondered whether or not it would interfere with other tasks the Plan Commission has for itself in the coming year. Mr. Carter confirmed that it would pro- bably take most of the year to complete a new Sign Ordinance. Mr. Koester felt that the subccmmitteee on legislation would be willing to work on this and put in the extra time and ask for any additional volunteers. Mr. Saag suggested working with a model ordinance and looking at what some other communities have done recently. In response to a question as to where he felt the priorities were, Mr. Carter responded that they were: 1) getting the size allowance reduced; 2) eliminating the pole sign; and 3? achieving greater harmony between the sign and the building's architecture. Mr. Petterson observed that major shopping centers have very strict sign controls because they think it contributes to their overall image and success. The City of Evanston ought to be looked at in the same way. Mr. Carter cited some of the success that their facade rebate program had had on Dempster Street and a number of instances in which the signs were improved through the program. It was the consensus of the Commission that they should be involved in recommendations for revising the Sign Ordinance. COMMITTEE REPORTS Comprehensive Plan Mr. Koester reported on behalf of the committee reviewing the Comprehensive Plan that they were making very good progress and were past the half -way point. They are doing a broad edit of text, graphics and pictures prior to publication. He felt that it would be a very impressive document and that committee members are very pleased with the work. He reported that the committee was targeting an April date for the completion of their work. The first draft will be printed on newsprint with a more polished document following the hearings. Libby Hill reported that the committee was making a few changes in policies and asked whether or not the Commission wished to review those as they carte up or do all of them at the completion of the committee's work. Commission members decided to wait until the committee had finished their review of the plan. Discussion followed on timing for presentation of the plan to the City Manager, the City Council and the public. Site Plan Review Mr. Carter gave commission members an overview of the background leading to staff's recommendation for a site plan review ordinance. He stated that there had been some marked changes in how development proposals got handled at the staff level. Staff members who had some responsibility or interest in looking at projects had begun to do so jointly instead of separately. Such an arrangement led to a speed-up in the review of plans and in a higher quality of review. The developer or petitioner appreciated being able to sit down and review his project with a number of persons all at one time instead of going from department to department. Many helpful suggestions, beyond the basic requirements of the codes, came out of these review sessions. The review pro- cessing became more helpful and creative as opposed to the older system which simply told the petitioner they couldn't do this or that and left them to go back and struggle with changes. He indicated that the staff had been fairly persuasive on some develop- ments to achieve a higher standard on landscaping and occasionally on signs. Evanston Plan Commisison Minutes - February 13, 1985 Page 4 The particular challenge has been with old gas station sites which are converting to new commercial uses. Each of these represents an opportunity to upgrade the appear- ance of their sites. The typical strip shopping or small centers have had a bad repu- tation as far as their visual qualities are concerned. There appears to be some trend to attempt to improve upon this and the City should work to make sure this happens. Mr. Carter used the example of how staff has advised on the development of small landscape plans and actually provided a service to some new developers looking for guidance in this area. He used other examples of how staff was able to negotiate more restrained signage than the code would have permitted. Mr. Carter cautioned that while they had enjoyed some successes, there were a number of cases where the developer was only in- terested in what could be done under the code and that the staff had no authority to require higher standards. He felt it was essential to strengthen the authority on a number of small details connected with site planning. Staff had begun to explore what kinds of standards might go into a site plan ordinance and have been looking at what other communities have been doing in this area. He characterized the site plan review as a method of getting at the details of a spe- cific site, such as the parking layout, the placement of the building, landscaping and signage. He :stressed that the Zoning Ordinance provided only a broad tool which often missed important aspects of individual sites. He stressed that this review had nothing to do with whether or not a petitioner could build a certain use nor did it have any control over the bulk, rather, it was designed to smooth out some of the details in the execution of the site itself. The site plan review did not include the question of appropriate building materials or the design of the building. He shared with Commission members the memorandum which went to the Planning and Development Committeee on this subject and the discussion which took place. Although a number of Committee members were interested in the process and supportive of the way staff was conducting the reviews, there was reluctance to consider the idea of an ordinance which would strengthen the staff's role in this review. Fir. Carter stated that the staff was enthusiastic about the process and felt that they had achieved excellent results to date, but were concerned about their ability to do a better job of control in some or the franchise development as far as signs were concerned. He felt that a great deal of service was being offered the petitioners through the advice of so many different professionals on aspects of the site's develop- ment. In discussion that followed, Mr. Yas and Mr. Saag commented on their experience with review processes in other cities. Mr. Yas stressed that his firm went in early to get an understanding of what the process was before any decisions were made so as to insure a smoother review of their project. Mr. Carter, commented that the major developers were not fo much a prcblem as were the franchises. f11r. Saag raised the question of how s'_aff review would ne kept objective instead of subjective. Mr. Carter replied that there :could be standards included in any such legislation to keep decisions from being arbitrary. There would also be an appeal process through the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council. Mr. Carter stressed that one of the advantages of site plan review was that it required both the developer and the staff to look at the development relationship to adjacent property. Mr. Carter used the example of South Point Plaza to illustrate the kind of con- trol which would be helpful to assure better development. In that development, staff wan given the authority to approve landscaping and signage regardless of what the Zoning Ordinance or Sign Ordinance may have required. This resulted in some negotia- tion with developers to achieve sign criteria by which individual tenants would have to abide. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - February 13, 1985 Page 5 Mr. Petterson underscored the need for site plan review by saying that more sensitive developers and architects will be willing to negotiate, but some of the others do not care about the appearance of the community. By not having a stronger review process, we are penalizing those who cooperate and have a sense of responsibility about the community's appearance when others are not required to match those standards. Mr. Yas suggested that in returning to the Planning and Development Committee for further discussion, staff should take with them some case studies to demonstrate their points. Mr. Petterson and Mr. Peters felt that if standards and guidelines were developed, that might reduce most of the objections by making the process more objective. Libby Hill suggested that the Legislative Committee take on the assignment of developing some strategies for presenting the idea of site plan review in a more acceptable way. She further suggested that members of the Plan Corrsnission talk to individuals on the Planning and Development Committee as to the nature of their objections to site plan review. Mr. Yas suggested that the Plan Commission schedule an agenda item dealing with strategies to accomplish Plan Commission programs. He felt that the recent successes that the Plan Commission had demonstrated the need to take extra time to inform Council members individually in advance of any request for action. Chairman Peters felt the Commission could be helpful in putting together some sketches or materials on what the criteria for site plan review might be to take back to the Planning and Development Committee. Libby Hill suggested the Commission write the Planning and Development Committee and advise them of their interest in site plan review and let them know the Plan Commission would like to come to them and discuss it. Report of the Legislative Committee Drew Petterson indicated that there had been no formal meeting of the Committee but that he and Mr. Carter had met to discuss the Committee's involvement in the pro- posal to draft a new Sign Ordinance. He also indicated that he would be attending the presentation on signs to be given at the Planning and Development Committee in the near future. Report of the Special Projects Committee Jeanne Breslin, Committee Chairman, distributed a brief initial report indicating that the Committee had been interested in studying a small area along Custer Avenue. The Cor-,mittee indicated their interest in examining possible ways to improve the area. She ccmmented on the urge number of zones in the area and the possibility of doing nne redevelopment. It was the Committee's intent to discuss with architects and developers what some of the possibilities might be for this area. Mr. Carter corrzented that if C.D. funds were going to be used, that an appropriate target date for developing recommendations would be sometime during the month of August. Committee members felt that they might have their recommendations put together by late June or July. Commission members then discussed some of the problems that the area has as well as some of the potentials. Downtown Committee There was discussion as to whether or not the Committee should become immediately active or whether it should wait until some of the other projects are finished. Mr. Carter commented that if the Preservation League held their proposed meeting on the research park, that might be an opportunity to get the Committee started. Mr. Peters commented that the Downtown Project would be an occasion for the Plan Commission to take a relative broad view of all the objectives it would like to see accomplished in Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - February 13, 1985 Page 6 the Downtown. Then, as projects proceed piecemeal, such as the research park, downtown maintenance district and others could be seen in the overall framework. Mr. Carter felt there were not sufficient staff resources to commit to an active downtown committee at this time. He thought it would be helpful to meet, however, and determine what sort of product or work program would be required. He suggested this be a topic at the next Plan Commission meeting. REVIEW OF THE GREEN BAY ROAD STATEMENT Commission members reviewed the statement on Green Bay Road which had been sent to them two months earlier. In response to a question from Chairman Peters, Mr. Carter indicated that a formal report on the Green Bay Road project would be prepared during the current year. He reported that staff was making incremental progress on the total Green Bay Road plan each month. Commission members agreed to forward their informational memorandum to the City Council with minor editing changes. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Carter reported that the City Council had approved the Noyes Cultural Arts Center parking lot and adopted the 1985 budget. In the final vote on the budget, the Preservation Commission got a full time preservation coordinator instead of the pre- vious half-time allocation. Mr. Carter announced that he had interviewed an organization called LEIS Intl., which specializes in helping to facilitate development of organizational consensus building, shared visions of the future and consensus strategy plans. He felt that it :night be an organization worth looking into in connection with the Comprehensive Plan. He suggested they might be an effective agency for bringing together all the different boards and commissions, as well as the City Council, to arrive at some common vision in the future. Mr. Carter raised the question of funding for Raymond Park. He reminded Commis- sion members that it did not get funded on the Community Development Block Grant program, r - .{ V r t i n i l Jc•m Y a fl _'� _ .,re '.!'?� ,1 �:'E'1t L3a 7f :n EI'�':�� n S�F' .: _tl .� parr. _.^:fro' ,tn :":�'J r3r'� r Commission members requested that Mr. Carter communicate their interest in Raymond Park to Mr. Wirth to see what the funding possibilities might be. Commission members felt that the park was highly visible and definitely in need of attention. t•?E LIiIG ADJOURNED approximately 10:00 P.M. Staff: �j�� Date: �2/_ZOIL�_ MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF: PRESIDING OFFICIAL: EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, March 13, 1985 7:30 P.M. -- Room 2403 CIVIC CENTER Hill, Peters, Petterson, and Yas Breslin, Hartgering, Koester, Nevel, Perkins and Saag Carter Peters, Chairman 13 APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 1-0, 1985 Since a quorum was not present, the minutes of the February meeting were held over to the next meeting. CCMMITTEE REPORTS Comprehensive General Plan Libby Hill reported that the work of the Comprehensive Plan Co=ittee was progressing steadily. She thought that the final edit would be cc�npleted by April 1, 1965. She was very pleased with the quality of work and thought Commission members would like the results. In response to Chairman Peters' question about the overall theme of the Plan, Libby Hill responded ;nat it seemed to 1,e one of an 31uGr town taking; charge of itself and learning to adapt to changes. She also emphasized that Evanston was engaging in a combination preservation, maintenance and redevelopment activities which is leading to a constant renewal of the City. There were a wide range of acti- vities in Evanston's planning, many of them not dramatic, but all :Waking ? contributicn to a better ,Thole. Mr. Peters asked if the Committee had :.iven thought to an intrc-- duction to t.^e plan ar:d Xr. Carter replied that they would do t:;at upcn Piet'_cn or the last section. Mr. Carter emphazized that the educatienal value of the plan is going to to cne of its chief strengt:ns and that point should to Wade in the introduc- tion. Mr. Petterson felt that there shculd be :aide distritution of the plan to the eomunity as a whole with the document so that people would have a better notion of what was involved in the planning of their community. Mr. Petterson brought up the far reaching implications of the research park development on the balance of the Dcwntewn. Mr. Carter arreed that the Commission should go to work on a Central Business District Plan as soon as the Comprehensive Plan was finished. He indicated that the Commission had already begun such a task in 1982, but this work had been interrupted by budget cuts and a need to concentrate on the Comprehensive Plan itself. In response tc Chairman Peters' question as to what the Ccrr.Wissicn could expect from the Ccmmittee at the next meeting on the Comprehensive Plan, "1r. Carter replied that they would be supplied with copies of the text as edited and typeset. He said that the Cemmittee :-could have done their work and staff would be concentrating on Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - March 13, 1985 Page 2 completing the composition of the plan document itself. Commission members would also be supplied with a list of policy changes suggested by the Committee, but since most text changes merely involved editing, they would not be brought to the Commission. He also hoped that at least a first draft of the introduction might be available by the next Commission meeting. A report on possible map changes or issues would also be made at this time. The Commission should then begin their discussion on strategy for present- ing the Plan to the Council, other interested bodies and the general public. He stressed the difficulty in bringing such a large document to any hearing and the need to only characterize its recommendations and theflavor of the plan in a fairly brief presenta- tion. He thought that it would require an emphasis upon defining the Plan and its purposes rather than outlining its specific recommendations. Mr. Carter felt that the land use designations would change very little because those have been well established over a long period of time. He did not anticipate a great deal of controversy over land use issues. Legislative Committee Chairman Peters reported that the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council had encouraged staff to go forward with a redrafting of the Sign Ordinance. Mr. Yas corsr.:ented upon Wilmette's new sign ordinance which was an extremely tight one. He stated that the standards were highly specific, even down to a color palatte. ,ir. Carter mentioned a number of things that the Legislative Committee might be Involved with in the near future including: continue to work on the sign ordinance, a reference from the Zoning and Amendment Committee on planned development, site plan re- view and additional zoning references. Mr. Carter reported that he would be talking to the Planning and Development Cc:-w ittee again on site plan review at their March 25th meeting. The Ccrmlittee had de- cided not to ask staff to go fc ward with arg ordinance at their last meeting and it was felt that most of the opposition was a concern that site plan review might run contrary to streamlining. Commission members urged that this point be clarified and that it be emphasized that site plan review is a streamlining mechanism. it would have to be de- ^cnstrated that streamlining was not being sacrificed or concern over appearance. Mr. Petterson emphasized that there is more than an appearance issue involved, that good de;irn improves the tax base of the cc=.unity. for. Yas urged that the review process oe a one-step process where the developer could meYt everyone inv .Ivcd witri hiz project at t*:e same t1me. Mr. Carter responded that that was the .approach the staff c=mittee is now using. Chairman Peters observed that the Legislative Committee had a much bigger agenda t^an manpower. Mr. Carter felt that problem could best be addressed once the Co-prehen- si,ie !an waz behind '.he Comp;-ssicn and staff. Libby 9111 '7ezt d t *rite the a ninz .;u. �� eat the Tian Ce^�mics,an :. _ n.� and 7 l p^�ent .. -m ittee indicating their interest in a ccntinui: dialogje on the rne_rits of site olar. review. Drew Petterson agreed to represent the Plan Commission at that neetinl; on the --*h. Mr. Yas suggested that photographs of other communities which use site plan re- view might be helpful. fir. Carter responded that as some of the projects already approved get developed this spring, he would be photographing them as examples. :7peclal Projects Committee Drew Petterson reported fcr the Committee cn their Custer Avenue study. After considerable study, they narrowed ti:eir focus to r blighted commercial block of several storefronts. They :get with developers for their ideas as well as with city staff and aldermen of the ward. The Ccrrmittee felt the best option was a residential one and is working to develop greater detail and support. "text, the economic feasibility has to be explored. Mr. Petterson stressed that they were roving cautiously so as not to raise Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - March 13, 1985 Page 3 false expectations. He felt the Committee might be able to return to the Commission in May with a more definite proposal. Mr. Carter reported that progress was being made on the Green Bay Road project with some clearing of old growth prior to a spring planting. He commented briefly on the status of the Foster "L" station landscaping project which was on hold awaiting a topographic base map. Downtown Plan Committee Mr. Peters reported attending a presentation on the research park and the pro- gress being Made on that project. He felt that, in spite of the present heavy workload, that the Plan Commission should attempt to stay abreast of this work and to begin thinking about a Downtown Plan. Because most other Commission members were already involved in more than one committee, Chairman Peters agreed to convene the Downtown Committee. Mr. Carter reported that he had been working with the Preservation League who wanted to conduct a community forum on research park and design. He felt this would be an excellent way to introduce a number of interested organizations in the research park development and its overall design. The Preservation League intended to have a presentation made on research park by the developer with possible other panelists from the City and the University. They would also show the urban design film, "The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces". He felt that this would be an excellent kick-off for the Central Business District Committee and a positive event for sharing information on the future of research park. From this understanding, questions could be raised about what the future of the rest of the downtown might be. Mr. Carter distributed outlines of a central business district plan that was developed earlier. He felt that these could be a starting point for the Committee. Chairman Peters suggested that the Committee sit down with the Comprehensive Plan and abstract all of the policies and ideas for the central businesz district as a first step. Mr. Peters was concerned with the timetable of presentations and whether or not the Plan Commission would have ample opportunity to get their concerns and in- terests expressed. Mr. Carter recommended that the Commission attempt to define what their expectations for research park might be, their concerns for the downtown, the design guidelines which would be appropriate. Chairman Peters suggested that he and Mr. Carter get together `o pick a time fcr the Central Business District Committee to meet. Libby Hill reported that she had heard nothing further from the Library Board since her meeting with Don Wright earlier. There followed brief discussion of the Library Board's strategy. ANNOUNCETE TS ..r. Carter recz-.mended that Commission members see the Perkins and Will exhibit on fifty years o.' that ccmpany's architecture. Mr. Yas recommended Commission members visit the exhibition on the Royal Institute of British Architect's old drawings at the Art institute. Mr. Yas :mentioned having talked to Mr. Kramer of the ;•lorld's Fair Committee about the new plan for the Fair of a core area with a couple of designated satellite sites. He said that they were looking for additional sites in nearby communities, but they will not act cn these unless there is community interest. He felt that if Evanston ever wanted to have anything they should go on record early. He suggested the possibility of acquiring pavilions which could be converted to other community uses after the Fair. Commission members briefly discussed possible sites. A number of residuals such as street furniture and lighting were also mentioned as potential benefits. Libby Hill inquired as to the status of the Mayor's informal committee on Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - March 13, 1985 Page 4 the Fair and asked whether it shouldn't become more formalized. It was suggested that these individuals be invited to attend a Plan Commission meeting and discuss the World's Fair and its relationship to Evanston. Mr. Carter announced that former Plan Commission member Bob Molumby was appointed to serve on the Evanston Zoning Board of Appeals. Meeting adjourned approximately 9:25 P.M. Staff: 2/11zd C Date: 31.20 � MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF: PRESIDING OFFICIAL: EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION' MINUTES Wednesday, April 10, 1995 7:30 P.M, - Room 2403 CIVIC CENTER Breslin, Hill, Koester, Peters, Patterson and Nevel Hartgering, Perkins, Saag, and Yas Garter Peters, Chairman APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR MEETINGS HELD MARCH 13, 1985 AND FEBRUARY IJ 1985 Mr. Koester moved approval of both the February and March minutes. Seconded by Mr. Navel. Motion passed. No nays. REPORT ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Mr. Koester reported that the Committee on the Comprehensive General Plan had complet- ed their edit on the text of the Plan. Commission Members then turned their attention to the memorandum which outlined the changes suggested by the Committee dealing with the, policies. Libby Hill suggested that the policies on city services be merged into those under Public Buildings and that the section be deleted due to duplication of topics covered else+.sere. Libby Hill moved that the City Services section be dropped and the remaining policies be merged into the Public Buildings section. Seconded by Mr. Navel. Motion passed. No nays. After further discussion, the Plan Commission felt that they should make a statement on behalf of the importance of preparing a plan for city services and human services as a worthwhile activity to be undertaken by the appropriate agency. Mr. Peters was asked for any examples of human services plans which his agency might have. He commented upon an apparent great need for some sort of overview and cited the examples involved with the difficulty in making decisions about the CD recommendations. Mr. Carter commented upon the difficulty of such a task because of the more rapidly changing human service needs. Under the Neighborhood section, Mr. Peters questioned why policy #9 on high density living areas had been modified concerning access to public transportation. Mx. Carter responded that it was partly directed at trying to get the policy to simply say one thing instead of several and that there was an intent to limit the high density living areas to those near the central business district. Under the Housing section, the last word under policy #13, "programs" was dropped. Under the section on institutions, Mr. Petterson suggested that under policy #7, the word "assessing" be dropped so that the statement reads, "Explore ways all of Evanston's institutions may provide their fair share in meeting municipal costs." Under Commercial and industrial Areas, Mr. Peters asked why policy 120 on establishing opportunities for mixed use developments had been eliminated. Mr. Carter responded that, typically, the type of mixed uses in mind were very intensive and were being en- couraged in the central business district, not everywhere. It was pointed out that small scale mixed -use development might occur in areas outside the central business Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - April 10, 1985 Page 2 district, but the plan simply was not advocating this. Under the section on the central business district, Mr. Petterson recommended the term "compatible" be used in the first objective and this objective was rewritten to state, "Encourage a compatible mixture of activities and land uses within the Central Business District." Policy i2 was modified to rend, "Encourage multiple use of facilities to conserve and to make,the most efficient use of the high value land in the central business district." Mr. Petterson brought up the question of including a policy on preser- vation within the central business district. Policy 17 dealing with redevelopment was modified to read, "Foster the redevelopment of portions of the central business district while preserving structures which distinguish its character." It was felt that certain map distinctions could be made which would define areas in which redevelopment should be encouraged and areas in which retention of existing struc- tures should be encouraged. Under the open Space, Parks and Recreational Facilities section, Mr. Petterson felt that the term "park improvements" should be substituted for the term "development" under the section titled "Moving Ahead: Examples and Possibilities". Mr. Peters asked about the discussion the Committee had on dropping policy 012 dealing with off-street parking and parks. Committee members felt that the statement was ambiguous because when a major recreational facility is built, parking is going to be required. Committee felt that the community was strong enough in its parkland ethic to adequately protect parks from being replaced by parking lots. it was felt that policy #1 "preserve existing parkland" was adequate. Mr. Novel felt that there should be a policy which was sensitive both to the issue of providing needed parking generated by recreational use and at the same time respecting parkland. Commission members concluded that a substitute policy #12 should read, "Temper the need for off-street parking with restraint on encroachment on parkland." Under Community Design, Mr. Peters wondered whether policy !6 on lighting could be eliminated since there is another policy under Community Utilities. Com- mission members felt, however, since the design aspects of lighting were an important part of the issue, the policy should remain. Policy 16 on lighting was modified to read, "Select lighting fixtures for the aesthetics, illumination and efficiency." At the conclusion of the Commission's review of the Comprehensive Plan policies, Libby Hill moved that all recommended changes be adopted. Seconded by Mr. Petterson. Motion passed. No nays. Chairman Peters complimented the Committee on their excellent work. nrsrussiON OF STRATEGY ON PRESENTING THE COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PT -AN Mr. Carter commented that, while most of the writing was done and the editing complete, there still remained the graphics to do and a review of the land use map. He anticipated the Plan Commission's approval of everything in the Plan by the May meeting. This would include: the introduction, land use crap, and a brief section an implementation. He felt the next step would be to go to the City Manager as the Commission had done with the Capital Improvement Program. His review, comments and suggestions should be helpful in formulating a strategy for approaching the City Council. Mr. Carter felt that there were two options. The first option might be for the Plan Commission to conduct their own public hearing at which time they would make an overall introduction to the Plan, having first sent copies out the the principal participants such as the Housing Commission, Preservation Commis- sion,Park and Recreation Board, Design Evanston, etc. The notification would include the comment about the Plan Commission's earlier solicitation of these groups in reviewing the initial plan material and invite them to come and give a final response to the Plan document as it has developed. We would ask for additional amendments or corrections at that time. We would also seek whatever general public interest there was in the Plan. With these responses, the Plan Commission could develop Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - April 10, 1985 Page 3 a report on the hearing, then go to the Planning and Development Committee and present the Plan and comments from the public hearing and ask them for their review and approval. Or, the process could begin with the Planning and Development Committee by asking them to review the present draft of the Comprehensive Plan and conduct their own public hearing. Mr. Carter thought that this was a less likely sequence and that the Plan Commission would probably ask to conduct a hearing and report to Planning and Development. Mr. Carter commented that the Planning Ordinance requires a public hearing, but does not specify how many. The Commission may want to schedule more than one if the interest is sufficient. He suggested that perhaps after holding an initial hearing, the Commission could hold the Plan open for a month or two awaiting any additional comments. Because the Plan will go through a process of hearings and possible revisions, the initial printing will be on less expensive material, possibly newsprint. He did not anticipate substantial changes to the Plan because he felt the material was well in tune with the community values. 'There may be an objection or two to a particular policy or there may be requests to add one or two topics not previously addressed, but he thought the Plan would probably go forward as the Commission has developed it. Libby Hill commented about her concern on the timetable for the Plan conflicting with summer vacations. Mr. Koester felt that this should not be a serious problem since most of the boards and commissions could probably find at least a single represen- tative to come to a hearing. He thought a full scale public hearing in September would then be appropriate. He thought the most important thing to do right now was to complete the Plan and get it out to the various boards and commissions as soon as possible. He reminded Commission members that the world was not waiting for this document and that it may take some time to get responses. He stressed that a timetable was difficult to formulate at this point. Mr. Havel suggested that a dune meeting to which the general public and the boards and commissions were invited would be helpful as an informational meeting to be followed later by a public hearing. Mr. Peters suggested that, given the difficulty of the length of the document, that it would be worthwhile to print a quantity of it and advertise the Plan's availability. Mr. Koester offered to help in the development of a half hour presentation format for the Plan. Commission members commented that it might be helpful if such a presentation could be video taped and go on the local channel. Libby Hill suggested that a notice go in the Headquarterty, letting people know that copies of the Plan would bd available. It was also suggested that the preliminary plan could be helpful as part of the materials orienting the new aldermen. Mr. Carter commented on having spent the day in a management training seminar and how department heads were articulating their management philosophies and their visions of the City. He felt that there was a great deal of momentum being generated for this kind of more forward looking approach. The Comprehensive General Plan would be a natural tool to assist Council, department heads, boards and commissions in developing goals and a vision for the future of the City. Commission members commented that it would be timely to do this type of work with a new Mayor and a new Council. Libby Hill suggested that Commission members consider distributing the Comprehen- sive Plan in the same way the Energy Plan was handled, namely, personally delivering copies to individual aldermen and making themselves available for explanation. Included should also be the new City Clerk and Mayor. Mr. Navel suggested that the committee working on the Comprehensive Plan bring a plan for presenting the document to the Commission for full discussion at the next possible meeting. Libby Hill agreed to act as leadership with the Committee in preparing this strategy plan. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - April 10, 1985 Page 4 COMMITTEE REPORT ON SPECIAL PROJECTS Jeanne Breslin reported that the Committee was making good progress on their Custer Avenue project. She anticipated that the Committee would present a written report at the next Plan Commission meeting. Mr. Carter stated that the Planning Department was, helping to supply the Committee with a windshield appraisal of the properties involved. They were also working with HUD to get a determination regarding eligibility of CD funds for the project. He went on to discuss using other funds such as a bond issue for land acquisition. Mr. Carter reported briefly on the Green Bay Road project, indicating that the planting program would be moving forward this spring along with the curb and sidewalk program. He thought the staff would be picking up on the Green Bay Road report over the sumra r once the Comprehensive Plan was behind them. Commission members discussed the necessity of careful scheduling for their various projects, given the priority of the Comprehensive General Plan. Mr. Patterson raised the question of whether or not the Legislative Committee should meet during the month and Mr. Carter suggested there might be an opportunity at the end of the month to meet on the Sign Ordinance. He felt that the activity on the sign Ordinance and site plan review would begin to pick up after May. These tasks will have to be piecemealed since there is not sufficient time to devote an intensive period to them to bring them to completion. He suggested that the Legislative Committee repre- sentative attend the Zoning and Amendment Committee's hearing on the proposed rezoning of the canal lands. He also reported that the Zoning Amendment Committee would be sending them a draft of the new Plan Development Ordinance and the Commission's role in reviewing plan developments. Mr. Carter mentioned that zoning reference on Custer Avenue and indicated that the Plan Commission should respond to that as part of their series of recommendations on Custer. Drew Patterson and Libby Hill volunteered to attend the Zoning Amendment Commit- tee hearing on the canal land rezoning. Mr. Carter mentioned an upcoming community panel on the implications of the World's fair for Evanston. ELECTION OF ASSOCIATE MEMBERS Mr. Carter gave a brief background on Mr. Hartgering's status and suggested the Plan Commission might want to nominate him for an Associate Member so that he could participate on the Plan Commission in the future. Mr. Peters reported that Mr. Hartgering was willing to serve as an Associate Member. It was felt that his continued representation of the Plan Commission on the CA Committee was important. Libby hill moved that Mr. Hartgering be appointed as an Associate Member to the Plan Comission. Seconded by Mr. Petterson. Motion passed. No nays. Mr. Nevel raised the point as to the desirability of getting additional associate members to serve on the Plan Commission, since Mr. Hartgering is now the only one. It was generally agreed that having more associate members at this time would be desirable and Chair- man Peters asked members to think of potential candidates. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Carter went back to the subject of the Comprehensive Plan and the land use map. He explained the process that he and Jeanne Lindwall had followed in review- ing the previous land use map on a block by block basis to identify possible changes and needs for reclassification. He stated that there were approximately a dozen areas which were likely candidates for change and showed some maps and a format which the Committee would use in conducting their review. He went on to explain some typical Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - April 10, 1985 Page 5 land use classification problems. Should the land use patterns reflect exsiting develop- ment, present zoning, and/or future redevelopment? He pointed out some of the difficult distinctions to be made between commercial and business land uses. Should the distinction be made between two such areas based upon the actual use, such as the types of stores, their physical arrangement or the way in which they are used? He used an example of Central Street where shoppers normally park once to visit several stores as opposed to strip shopping where customers are Likely to drive to individual stores. He pointed out that many of the business and commercial areas are changing and that zoning needs to look at how those changes can be made appropriately. He pointed out that the differences in the products sold in some of the newer shops found in strip shopping centers were not different from typical retail areas, but the physical arrangement of the centers were different.' In the older established business areas, he felt there would be a preference to main- tain the building at the sidewalk line and preserve the present physical pattern. Ha felt that the old distinction of "automobile -oriented" businesses in commercial areas was no longer adequate. Nr. Navel felt that a distinction could be made between the more service oriented shops of a commercial area versus the typical retail shops of a business area. Jeanne Breslin felt there was a difference in the social life within the two types of business areas as well. Mr. Carter cited the higher volumes of pedestrian traffic in the business areas and the general interest created by such things as window shopping. He also raised the question of how people value the different types of shopping experience including such things as the architecture and arrangement of build- ings. In the case of the new strip centers, for example, he felt we were talking about "non -architecture", stores which were display cases and little else. Some people like the storefront kept at the sidewalk they like windows, interesting buildings and a stimulating environment. Some people feel good about shopping in that kind of environment. He asked what the community response would have been if we had tried to do Jewel and Dominick's on opposite sides of Main Street. Chairman Peters suggested that land use definitions along these lines be included with the Comprehensive General Plan land use map. Mr. Carter stated that the dilemma was providing ways to accommodate new ways of shopping while still preserving certain business areas in their present torn. He indicated that it was not the task of the Comprehensive Plan to resolve this particular issue, but that the Commission had received a reference from the Planning and Develop- ment Committee on what appropriate changes might be made to the commercial areas. Bill Nevel suggested that some of these areas be pointed out on the potential change map in the Comprehensive Plan. MEETING ADJOURNED approximately 10:00 P.M. Staff: Date: MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF: PRESIDING OFFICIAL: EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION' MINUTES Wednesday, May 8, 1985 7:30 P.M. - Room 2403 CIVIC CENTER Breslin, Hill, Koester, Novel, Perkins, Peters► Petterson, Saag and Yas Hartgering Carter Peters, Chairman APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR APRIL 10, 1985 Mr. Koester moved approval of the minutes for the April 10, 1985 meeting. Seconded by Libby Hill. Motion passed. No nays. REVIEW OF THE INTRODUCTION TO THE COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN Mr. Carter explained that the introduction to the Comprehensive Plan had been drafted subsequent to the last Plan Commission meeting, thoroughly reviewed and amended by the subcommittee. He asked for any further comments and corrections from the full Commission. Mr. Petterson suggested a change in language under the statement defining a Comprehensive General Plan. After discussion, the statement was revised to read, "This Comprehensive General Plan contains value statements expressed as goals, objectives and policies." The subsequent sentence, "It does not provide a blueprint for how the community might look at some distant time." was dropped. Libby Hill sug- gested a one word change to paragraph on page 4 which clarified the status of this version of the Comprehensive Plan. Drew Petterson suggested an addition to the final paragraph of the section to read, "The Comprehensive General Plan for Evanston will be effective if it stimulates public thought and action based upon an evaluation of the relevant facts." He further suggested the next sentence be modified to read, "Thoughtful community involvement in the planning process is a way of reaching decisions about the future of the City." Mr. Perkins suggested that the final sentence read, "The Plan Commission believes that this document will establish a direction for each step of community planning." Mr. Perkins commented that he thought the introduction was a very good piece of work. He moved approval of the introduction to the Comprehen- sive General Plan. Seconded by Mr. Nevel. Motion passed. No nays. REVIEW OF THE IMPEMENTATION SECTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN Since this section was developed at the suggestion of Mr. Novel, Mr. Carter asked whether the material had covered the points he had in mind. Mr. Nevel responded that the section was largely complete and that the language was good. He had two suggestions to make, however. He felt that the section ought to mention the Planning Department staff and City staff role in seeing that the Comprehensive General Plan gets implemented. He also felt that the code enforcement program ought to be mentioned Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - May 8, 1985 Page 2 as one of the planning tools. Mr. Perkins emphasized that the reality of planning implementation had a great deal to do with the Planning Director making frequent com- ments at appropriate times on all aspects of the Plan. He said the actual measure of implementing a plan is, "a thousand small acts and no grand gestures". Commission members concurred that these thoughts should be incorporated into the section. Mr. Peters suggested that the time period for the Capital Improvement Program be specified as shorter than that of the Comprehensive Plan. Mx. Petterson moved approval of the Implementation section of the Comprehensive General Plan. Seconded by Mr. Yas. Motion passed. No nays. REVIEW OF I1ND USE DEFINITIONS FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN Mr. Carter demonstrated the range of colors and definitions to be used on the land use map and stated that they would be very similar to the previous Plan. He explained that the definitions would be incorporated as part of the legend of the map. Chairman Peters thought that the definition for commercial gave too great an emphasis on the automobile related commercial activities. It was suggested that the definition be turned around and the second part of it be the lead sentence. Mr. Koester moved aoproval of the Land Use Definitions section of the Comprehensive General Plan. Seconded by Mr. Perkins. Motion passed. No nays. Mr. Carter announced that this was the final approving action on the Plan by Commission members prior to its first printing. He acknowledged the efforts of the Committee which had worked so many evenings reviewing and perfecting the text. He felt it was an outstanding team effort and that they were a pleasure to work with. He was particularly impressed by how each member hail contributed. He believed that everyone felt good about the quality of the product which resulted. Libby Hill responded that it was a pleasure to work with the staff and the whole process was a very educational one. Chairman Peters observed that the Committee work appeared to be a real model for future Plan Commission projects. REVIEW OF COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE MAP CHANGES Mr. Carter commented on the extensive review of land use changes by the Committee. He stated that there were as many as 75 changes from the old plan, most of them were quite minor. If the last map and the current one were placed side by side, there would be very few changes noticeable to the eye. The most visible ones would be the absence of a boat harbor off Calvary Cemetery, and the more stricking pattern for the Downtown on the new Plan. Previously, the downtown was shown as entirely retail. On the new Plan the land use will by mixed use. The mixed use will include retail, office and residential. He pointed out a number of chd1ges which characterize the type of change being suggested in the new Plan. Many of these were a shift from business to commercial or commercial to manufacturing where the uses themselves had already changed. Changes more closely reflected the present land use. Some blocks shifted from mixed low density to single family and others from medium density to mixed low density. He showed Commis- sion Members large scale atlas sheets which documented each of the suggested changes. Mr. Nevel commented on the remarkable number of physical changes which had occurred between the two Plans. He also commented on the number of changes within the business and commercial zones. Mr. Carter emphasized that there were no large scale shifts or changes in the land use pattern. In particular, the residential pattern was very stable. Chairman Peters raised the question of changes in land use which should lead to changes in zoning. Mr. Carter responded that there were a number of cases which could become references to the Zoning Amendment Committee and that identifying and Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - May 8, 1985 Page 3 documenting these would be a subsequent task following up on the Plan's recommendations. In response to a question from Chairman Peters, Mr. Carter stated that maintaining, storefronts and windows at the sidewalk line in business areas such as Central Street and Main Street appeared to be a community value. There had been concern expressed about the character of strip shopping development where such development would be appropriate, and where it would not. He felt that there was a task of defining the difference in the character of the two types of shopping areas so that this could be embodied in an ordinance. He thought that this issue would be the subject of a separate report. Chairman Peters raised the question as to whether or not there were any residen- tial areas which were currently zoned for higher density than already exists. Mr. Carter replied that there were some such areas, but most of them had been redeveloped during the 60's and 70's. He felt that there was some remaining potential for apartment development remaining at certain commercial locations, but these would require zoning changes. The character of the remaining opportunities for redevelopment was that of isolated spots. He used the example of the public housing for elderly at Noyes Court and the lot at Greenwood and Sherman Place. Mr. Peters asked whether there was any thought given to using zoning as a means of upgrading certain residential areas through redevelopment. Mr. Carter responded that that thought was fairly prevelant during the 19701s, but the resulting increase in density brought other problems. Mr. Nevel moved approval of the land use map for the Comprehensive General Plan. Seconded by Mr. Yas. Motion passed. No nays. Mr. Carter commented that this concluded all of the approval work the Plan Commission needed to do on the Comprehensive Plan and that their next task would be taking it to the City Manager, City Council and the Mayor. Mr. Carter thought that within ten days all of the text corrections could be typeset and the complete Plan ready for at least limited reproduction within the month. Chairman Peters suggested that the Planning subcommittee get together to arrive at a schedule for presenting the Plan. COMMITTEE REPORTS Special Projects - Custer Avenue Study - Committee Chairman, Jeanne Breslin introduced the report distributed to Commission members earlier. She characterized the failing commercial uses on Chicago Avenue as a blighting influence on the balance of the neighborhood and touched upon some of the alternatives presented in the report. The Committee felt that the most reasonable alternative would be to redevelop the area for housing. She gave a history of past unsuccessful efforts to revitalize the commercia uses. She cited rapid turnover in ownership and progressive decline. Committee members felt that an investment in housing that was owner occupied would result in the ripple effect of positive influence on the rest of the area. There did not seem to be any economic future for the commercial area, especially given the new development taking place nearby on Chicago Avenue. In response to questions about other alternatives, Committee members responded that there was no need for additional parking lots or parks. Jeanne Breslin ran through a series of slides illustrating conditions in the area. She also illustrated some of the strong points of the adjacent neighborhood. Commission members were impressed by the evidence and felt that the proposal was a reasonable one to help strengthen what was an otherwise good neighborhood. Jeanne Breslin expressed the hope that the Plan Commission would endorse the Committee report and direct it to the City Manager. She felt that for anything to change, some subsidy would have to be given a developer, but she did not think that Community Development Block Grants was an appropriate way to go given the uncertainty of getting funds and the potential restrictions on that money. She hoped that the Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - May 8, 1985 Page 4 land acquisition bonds for Downtown II was an example of what might be appropriate here. It was thought that the City Manager might be helpful in exploring other options for financing the project. Mr. Nevel mentioned the active interest on the part of several developers pending some sort of write -down on land costs. Jeanne Breslin commented on the great amount of interest that has been shown on the part of the neighborhood. Mr. Saag raised the question of whether or not this action would set a precedent for other areas and increase the demands for financing. Jeanne Breslin pointed out that a major difference was that there was strong developer interest in this site and that is not always present. Mr. Saag felt that the resources for the necessary work in Downtown II shouldn't be diluted. Mr. Nevel observed that the Custer Avenue area had been deteriorating for years and was in need of some dramatic action. He felt that the proposal was both feasible and attractive. Jeanne Breslin felt confident that there would be a greater pay-off to the City than just from the project itself. The impact on the neighborhood would be substantial and property values preserved. Mr. Carter ob- served that perhaps a precedent was being set here and that it may be the kind of precedent we should start. The issue is how can a community address serious problems of blight with its own resources. He did not think that there were any other areas that were ready to go at this particular time, however. In response to a question from Chairman Peters on cost, Jeanne Breslin responded that after checking property records at Cook County on land transfers within recent years, she had a good sense of what the values were and thought the properties could be acquired for around $200,000. A definite answer would not be available until an official appraisal was made, however. She also stated that the adlermen of the ward were preparing their own report which should be ready shortly. She stated that the aldermen strongly favored the idea. Mr. Navel commented that the Committee had looked at other federal funding programs and that they were all night- marish in their cumbersomeness. Other communities that had tried some of these programs were giving up on them. Chairman Peters raised a question about the present zoning and whether the density allowed was what the Committee was seeking. The response was that they were looking for a substantially lower density than the present zoning called for, however, did not want to undertake rezoning of the property as a first step. It was felt that if the City participated on a financial basis they could have a voice in the allow- able density. In response to a question from Chairman Peters, Jeanne Breslin replied that the Plan Commission should have a continuing role in the project and be involved in such things as site plan review and design guidelines. Mr. Koester moved that the Plan Com- mission endorse the subcommittee's report and send it on to the City Manager with the Commission's strong recommendation. Seconded by Libby Hill. Motion passed. No nays. Jeanne Breslin thanked members of her committee for all of the time they spent on develop- ing the report. Committee members, in turn, acknowledged Jeanne Breslin's leadership and effort. Chairman Peters volunteered to join the Committee in their presentation of the report to the City Manager. Legislative Committee - Libby Hill reviewed the meeting of the Zoning Amendment Committee and their hearing on rezoning the canal lands. She reported that Mr. Hartgering had given the Plan Commission's position on recommending the rezoning and aroused the interest of the Zoning Amendment Committee. She reported that the newest member of the Committee felt that zoning just the canal lands would be spot zoning since it dealt with only one property owner. He convinced the others to send the reference back to the Planning and Development Committee so that it might be broadened to consider all parklands not owned by the City of Evanston. This would include the lands of the Ridgeville Park District and the Lighthouse Park District. The alternative to this would be to have all public lands in the same district. Mr. Carter reported that the Planning and Development Committee had broadened the reference at the request of the Zoning Amendment Committee and returned it to then. Chairman Peters asked whether the change in the reference meant that the Plan Commission should reconsider their position. Mr. Petterson observed that the effort was now going out on an erroneous tangent. He felt the thrust of the Plan Commission's Evanston Plan Commission ,Minutes - May 8, 1985 Page 5 concern should be preserving the open space along the canal lands. Mr. Perkins observed that the purpose was to protect.against pressures for other uses of the canal lands and cited two early examples, the veteran's housing, and a request for industrial development. He stated that it had taken courage to defend the canal lands. He saw no current pre3- sures on the land but asked about what would happen when the leases expired. Mr. Carter responded that when the leases were first drafted a few years ago there was a great community turnout at the hearings conducted by the Sanitary District. A clear community statement was made about maintaining the open space in this area and the investments made in the park development. The Sanitary ristrict had no quarrel with this position, and, in fact, their own land use plan for the canal lands showed recreational uses in this area. The only thing that was at issue was the terms of the lease. Mr. Carter cited the community's investment in parks, the arboretum and the golf course as evidence of the community's commitment to open space. Prior to this time, the canal lands were simply raw land and obviously vulnerable to development pressures. The land was held very tenuously on a 90-day revocable grant. Now they are held with 30 year leases. The community has the backing of the Sanitary District as far as our open space policies are concerned and the land is not under any threat of development. He pointed out that the land is currently zoned R-1 and did not believe that the Sanitary District was interested in developing subdivisions. There was nothing to indi- cate any such interest on the part of the Sanitary District. lie observed that the whole reference was now getting extraordinarily complex and that what was being called for was a lot of repair work on something that really did not need to be fixed. He did not feel that the rezoning would necessarily hurt anything, but questioned whether it was a worthy effort. lie felt from the community's commitment to open space and the invest- ments made, it would be extremely difficult for any Sanitary District Board to take totally cavalier action to overturn this. The community would turn out in great numbers and exert enormous influence in retaining their open space as they did the last time when the only real issue with it was the terms of the lease. He felt this was the greatest protection with the District and that zoning was little more than admonition. Libby Hill raised a question as to what the Plan Commission should do at this point. Mr. Koester outlined the options as: letting the current reference go without comment; commenting on the new reference before ZAC; or issuing a statement that the Commission no longer supports the idea of a recreational district. He went on to re- view the Plan Commission's earlier options which were: leave the canal lands zoned R-1 because such zoning was restrictive and, combined with what had already been done to develop the canal lands, would be a sufficient block to any change of use by the MSD; or establish a recreational zone as an additional restriction. It was also the opinion at the time that the zoning would be largely window dressing because the Sanitary District could probably do as it pleased. Chairman Peters raised the question whether the Sanitary District's authority superseded local zoning. Mr. Carter believed that this applied only to tho conduct of the necessary business of the Sanitary District and was not a license to allow them to speculate on land r1Pvelopment. Chairman Peters ob- served that the Sanitary District's policy throughout the metropolitan area had been to abide by local land use preferences and zoning. Mr. Saag asked what would happen when the current lease expired and Mr. Carter responded that the terns of the lease would he renegotiated. Chairman Peters asked what the Plan Commission's position would be on the new reference. Libby Hill pointed out that the staff recommendation had been to leave the property zoned R-1. Mr. Perkins moved that the Plan Commission withdraw from further discussion of the canal lands rezoning issue. Seconded by Mr. Saaa. Mr. Petterson asked that the motion be amended pending reviewing staff reports on the new reference. He felt the Plan Commission should monitor what goes on with the issue. There was further discussion on whether the Plan Commission should take a more active role and state a position. Chairman Peters called for a vote on the motion as it stood. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - May 8, 1985 Page 6 Motion failed. No ayes. Eight nays. Mr. Koester moved that the Plan Commission send a statement to the Zoning Amendment Committee that, after further consideration, the Plan Commission no longer believes the canal lands need to be rezoned recreational. The Commission also felt that the expended reference only complicated the issue. Motion pasand. Seven ayes. One nay. In summarizing their position, Commission members felt that the park lands were adequately protected and that the reference was moving in an unnecessary direction. Mr. Koester volunteered to represent the Legislative Committee at the Zoning Amendment Committee hearing. Mr. Carter gave a brief progress report an the revisions to the Sign ordinance stating that a lint of objectives had been drafted and requests for proposals from con- sultants was being developed. He felt there was no current assignment for the Committee since all of the ohjectives were based upon early discussions with the Committee. In response to a question from Jeanne Breslin, Mr. Carter stated that there would be pro- visions drawn to eliminate non -conforming signs. The amortization period would vary with the value of the sign to be removed. He further reported that Staff was drafting a model of a site plan review and as soon as that was complete, he would send copies to the Committee. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Carter announced that he had a call from Don Wright requesting a meeting with a committee of the Plan Commission on the new library. Libby [fill announced that the Community Development Committee would be meeting on June llth to conduct a public hearing to make public statements of need. She felt representatives of the Plan Commission's CD Committee should meet prior to this and determine what sort of statement they wanted to present. Chairman Peters suggested that the Plan Commission make a statement on procedures. He suggested that the Committee get together and review last year's statement to see what changes the Commission might want to make. Mr. Carter announced that the railroad embankments were currently being planted in accordance with earlier recommendations. It was announced that there would be a world's Fair meeting panel discussion at the Evanston Civic Center on Saturday, May 18th. Commission members interested in this topic were urged to attend. Meeting adjourned approximately 10:10 P.M. Staffs Dates EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 1985 7:30 P.M. - Room 2403 CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF: GUESTS: APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR MAY 8, 1985 Breslin, Hill, Koester, Nevel, Peters and Petterson Perkins, Sang, Yas and Hartgering Lindwall and Sullivan Bonnie Forkosh and Bob Alolumby The minutes of the May 8, 1985 meeting were approved as written. PRESENTATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN TO MEMBERS Jeanne Lindwall presented copies of the Comprehensive General Plan to Commissioners and guests. Ms. Lindwall noted that the Plan had been developed over a period of several years beginning with an examination of assumptions about Evanston's future and culminating in the draft document. Ms. Lindwall asked that Commissioners advise her of any errors so that they could be corrected before the document is sent to the printer in late June. Nis. Lindwall explained that much of the material contained in the Plan was similar to that of the previous plan, however, that there have been some shifts in emphasis and a few new sections including Preservation, Community Design and Implementation. The revised land use rnnp was also presented to the Commission. In response to a question from Mr. Nevel, Nis. Lindwall explained that the legend on the land use would he revised in accordance with the definitions previously approved by the Commission. Nis. Lindwall then thanked the Commission for their efforts in preparing the document. In response to a question from Mr. Nevel, Ms. Lindwall explained that the format of the draft would be the format used when it is sent to the printer as far as type style and layout is concerned. Mr. Nevel suggested including a listing of the City Council on the credits on the draft. PRESENTATION OF CERTIFICATES Chairman Peters presented Certificates of Appreciation to Bonnie Forkosh and Bob biolumby for their years of service to the Commission. Ms. Forkosh was recognized for her distinguished service to the Commission as a member from 1977 to 1984, as Vice-chairman in 1991 and as Chairman between 1982 and 1984 under whose leader- ship the first revision of the Comprehensive General Plan was completed. Bob Alolumby was recognized for his service to the Commission as a member from 1977 to I984 and as Vice-chairman in 1982 and 1983, and for his sound counsel and technical expertise which served the Commission well. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - June 12, 1985 Page 2 STRATEGY FOR PRESENTING THE COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN Libby Hill outlined the proposed strategy for presenting the Comprehensive General PIan to the community. Phil peters read an article which had been submitted for the August issue of the Newsource announcing completion of the Plan and inviting the public to attend a public hearing on Wednesday, September 11, 1985 at 7:30 P.M. in Council Chambers. There was discussion concerning presentation of the document to the City Manager, Mayor and City Council. The proposed method and timing of distributing the Plan to the Council, boards and commissions and public were also reviewed. Mr. Nevel and Mr. Peters both noted that it was essential that the draft be delivered to the City Manager as early as possible if the Commission was to be able to adhere to its timetable. OUTLINE FOR PRESENTING THE COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN Roger Koester reviewed his proposed presentation outline. Thesuggested length is between 15 and 30 minutes. Following a brief introduction, the proposed presentation would involve an overview of the four major sections followed by a discussion of how the document should be used by decision makers. Mr. Nevel stated that he felt it important not to try to communicate too much infor- mation. He also thought it important to tell the Council at the beginning of the presentation what was expected of them. There was discussion concerning the use of overhead slides or other visuals during the presentation. Mr. Nevel also suggested the use of a few examples to illustrate how the Compre- hensive General Plan might be used by decision makers considering nn issue. Mr. Koester stated that he would try to develop outlines using both approaches to present to the Commission at the July meeting. Mr. Peters asked how many people should be involved in the presentation. Following discussion, the consensus was that two members of the Commission would be appropriate. Mr. Molumby stated that he felt that it was important to remind the Council and the public that this was not a completely new document. The emphasis should focus on its function as an update and renewal of previoiLsly adopted Council policies. Mr. Petterson suggested that an outline be developed noting the differences between the 1974 and current Plan. There was discussion concerning how this might be accomplished. There was also discussion concerning what action the Council should be asked to take with respect to the document. It was consensus that the Council should be asked to review the policies contained in the document, and to adopt the Plan following the Plan Commission's public hearing with anv recommended changes. GREEN BAY ROAD STUDY Bob Sullivan reviewed the work being undertaken at the present time to clean-up the railroad embankment along Green Bay Road. The existing vegetation has been thinned and the embank- ment has been hydroseeded with prairie plants which should establish in two to three years. Annuals have also been planted to add color while the prairie vegetation is becoming established. Mr. Sullivan reviewed efforts to have the billboards removed and building facades improved. Sidwalks are also scheduled to be replaced this summer with CD funding. Mr. Sullivan then reviewed a series of staff proposals for CD projects to continue improvements along the Green Bay Road Corridor, these include: Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - June 12, 1985 Page 3 1) landscaping four traffic islands between Emerson and the canal 2) viaduct pavement replacement 3) additional embankment landscaping near Emerson Mr. Sullivan reported that cost estimates had been prepared for the traffic island planting projects, and that viaduct pavement replacement is included in the Capital Improvement Program. The additional embankment landscaping would complete planting between the canal and Emerson. He also noted that the Engineering Department had agreed to punch out openings in the sidewalk to allow street trees to be planted along this section this fall. Mr. Koester asked whether Dominicks and Jewel could be approached to plant street trees if the City were to agree to cut holes in the sidewalk. There was also discussion concerning developing an entry sign and planting at Isabella. Mr. Nevel asked whether there were other advocacy groups which could be enlisted to help promote Green Bay Road improvements, such as Design Evanston or Inventure. Chairman Peters suggested that the report be used as a focal point for bringing together interested groups. Mr. Koester asked how the draft report text and format differed from the work of the earlier committee. Ms. Lindwall stated that all of the material contained in the previous draft was being incorporated in the current version and that the original format would be followed as closely as possible. Mr. Nevel asked who the report was intended for and whether it would be completed in time for the CD hearings in the fall. Mr. Koester suggested that the language incorporate the consensus of other potential advocacy groups. Mr. Peters felt it important to acknowledge that some people, especially students do use the sidewalks, making it important that they be maintained. Air. Nevel commented that there should be a stronger emphasis on how ugly certain segments of Green Bay Road really were and that it is not consistent with Evanston's image. Mr. Peters suggested that use of photos in the section "The Road: Opportunities for Improvement" to illustrate the point further. There was discussion concerning funding improvements particularly in Areas I and If which are outside the CD Target Areas. It was the consensus of the Commission that staff should proceed with development of a more complete draft for review by the Special Projects Committee using the proposed format. Nis. Hill asked who would be making recommendations concerning proposed projects to the CD Committee. She noted that the Committee had been very strong in recommending that projects be prioritized. There was discussion concerning how best to approach making recommendations con- cerning proposed projects. Air. Peters requested writeups on proposed projects so that the Committee could establish priorities at the July meeting. COMMITTEE REPORTS Legislative Committee: Mr. Koester reported that no action had been taken by ZAC at their June meeting because they lacked a quorum, but that they appeared to be leaning toward the current Plan Commission recommendation that no action be taken. Mr. Koester stated that while he had not attended the June ZAC meeting, he would be present when it was considered at the July IIth meeting. Mr. Petterson reported that an RFP had gone out to request a consultant to assist with deve- lopment of a new sign ordinance. Mr. Nevel asked if the revised sign ordinance would take billboards into consideration. Mr. Petterson responded that it would. Special Projects Committee: Nis. Breslin reported that the Committee had met with the City Manager to review the Commission's proposal that funding options are currently being explored, and that the Committee is developing a draft request for proposal from developers. There was discussion con- cerning the need to be concientious in attempting to relocate existing businesses should the project proceed. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - June 12, 1985 Page 4 There was discussion concerning the applicability of this approach in other areas of the City. CD Needs Statement: Libby Hill reported on her presentation of the Commission's Statement of Needs to the CD Committee. She stated that the Committee palced strong emphasis on having groups prioritize projects and that staff had done an excellent job in pointing out how projects fit into the Capital Improvement Program. Ms. Hill felt it was important to urge the CD Committee to develop policies and criteria for determining what projects to include in the program. She suggested that the CD subcommittee continue meeting to draft a statement outlining what points were felt to be helpful. Staff was re- quested to provide the subcommittee with a copy of the CD Plan. CD Committee - New Library: Libby Hill reported on a meeting with the Library concerning development of a strategy for convincing the public of the need for a new library. The library staff was urged to try to emphasize what could be done better in a new building rather than what was wrong with the existing building, since the public generally perceives that the current facility is adequate. OTHER BUSINESS Ms. Hill recommended that the Energy Subcommittee be reconstituted to deal with oversite on implementation of the Energy Plan, especially in view of the major development which will be taking place in Downtown It. Ms. Hill moved that a committee be appointed to review past and present efforts to carry out the recommendations of the Energy Plan adopted by the City Council, especially with respect to new development in the downtown area. Seconded by Mr. Nevel. Motion carried, all ayes. Mr. Peters will discuss composition of the committee with Ms. Hill. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 P.M. Staff: - - V Date: / Ae / i EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION ' MINUTES July 10, 1985 7;30 P.M. - Room 2403 CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: STAFF: PRESIDING OFFICIAL: APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 12, 1985 Breslin, Koester, Nevel, Peters, Petterson and Saag Hill, Perkins and Yas Ald. Warshaw,Ald. Ream, Donald Borah Carter Peters, Chairman Mr. Nevel asked that his comments on Green Bay Road be modified to reflect that he was speaking of a particular section of Green Bay Road. With this correction, Mr. Petterson moved approval of the June 12, 1985 Plan Commisison minutes. Seconded by Mr. Koester. Motion passed: No nays. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN .SCHEDULE AND STRATEGY Chairman Peters reviewed t;ie schedule for the presentation of the Comprehensive General Plan and the work of the Comprehensive Plan Committee. The tentative date set for presentation to the City Council is August 12, 1985. An article will appear in the Headquarterly announcing the Plan Commission hearing on the Plan to take place one month later at a regular Plan Commission meeting on September 11, 1985. Chairman Peters announced that he and the Planning Director had met with Mr. Asprouth and discussed the Plan at length. The City Manager had a number of helpful suggestions and felt that the Commission should make a strong emphasis upon implementation of the Plan as a means of keeping it current and useful. Chairman Peters felt that the presentation of the Plan could stress the practical applications by demonstrating some past accomplishments. Mr. Koester commented that in developing the presentation he had consulted with staff on examples of case studies to use in his presentation. These will include: the West End Street Design and Paving PIan, establishment of a Preservation Commission, and the city yard redevelopment leading to the plan for a transportation center in Downtown H. Future agenda items would include Downtown I1, a new library, site plan review and a revised Sign Ordinance,. major entranceway improvements, solid waste mafnggement, and the new parking garage. He felt all these were issues in which the Council would become deeply Involved and that the Plan could then become the Councils. He commented further that Mr. Nevel would be developing an outline for some storyboards to be used in the presentation. As part of the presentation, the format of the old Plan and the new Plan will be illustrated. Chairman Peters suggested that the presentors of the Comprehensive Plan meet on July 22nd at 5:00 P.M. to coordinate the presentation and the materials. Mr. Carter reported that staff was working on a delivery schedule of plans to Individual Council members by Plan Commission members and that the list would be distributed with copies of the Plan as soon as the Plan is printed. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - July 10, 1985 Page 2 Commission members briefly reviewed the revised text that Mr. Koester had prepared for presenting the Plan. Mr. Koester commented that some further modifications would be made by including some mention of the major sections of the Plan. Copies of this revised text would be made available to individual Commission members prior to their delivery of copies of the Plan to Council members. Chairman Peters asked Mr. Carter about invitations to the Plan Commission's hearing on the Comprehensive Plan to be held on September 11th. Mr. Carter responded that he would invite, by letter, all members of boards, commissions and other bodies who have worked with the Plan Commission over the past few years in reviewing sections of the Comprehensive PIan which involved their area of special interest. These would include, among others, the Housing Commission, the Preservation Commissson, League of Women Voters, Design Evanston, the Recreation Board and the Economic Development Committee. The presentation to the Cite Council will be informational only and no action will be expected of the Council at that time. ubsequent to the public hearing held by the Commission in September, the Commission will return to the City Council and ask for their endorsement of the Plan. DISCUSSION OF ALDERMANIC OBJECTIVES FOR 1985/86 Mr. Carter commented that there were a number of objectives identified by the Aldermen which would have an impact on the Plan Commission's work program. In particular, he cited the re- novation of Raymond Park, the improvement to the appearance of railroad embankments and entranceways to the City, abandoned gas stations, the streetscape along Howard Street, and the redevelopment of the Custer/Callan commercial strip. He commented that the issue of improving the entranceways to the City was a very old issue, but one which was receiving increased attention recently. He felt that tackling an entranceway improvement program would be a challenge, one which could be handled in somewhat the same way as Green Bay Road. He reported that Mr. Kysiak, Director of Evanston Inventure, had mentioned the appearance issue as a problem in bringing new people into the City. He also mentioned that Mr. Jack Weiss had some ideas to present about the treatment of entranceways to the City. The discussion on appearance turned to the issue of some of the railroad embankments and Mr. Carter indicated that he was currently looking into the use of various types of vines to cover some of the abutments. He mentioned the eastern side of the retaining wall of the Chicago & Northwestern Roalroad in Winnetka as a very attractive example as well as our own efforts at the south end of the Main Street Chicago & Northwestern Station. Other possibilities included the kidzu vine, which is considered a nuisance in the South, but dies back in this northern climate during the winter. Mr. Carter felt that after the September Plan Commission meeting, individual committees should be assigned some of these references for follow-through, but for the time being everyone was fully occupied with other projects. He felt that the merger of interests between the Commission and the Council offered a very good basis for accomplishment. REPORT OF THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE Mr. Carter reported that the requests for proposals for the revision to the Sign Ordinance had gone out to prospective consultants. Responses were due by July 15th and selection would be made by mid -August. Mr. Carter reported on meeting with the City Chamber Committee and pre- senting a slide presentation on sign problems to them. He reported that they had a very positive response and that there was an expressed desire to do more than merely make revisions to the Sign Ordinance. It had been requested that the City use a positive approach of being able to offer mer- chants some guidance in the selection of signs. Mr. Carter said that he hoped to enlist the assistance of Design Evanston In developing some guidelines which would be then made available to applicants for sign permits. He mentioned that Design Evanston has lent assistance in the past on particular Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - July 10, 1985 Page 3 sign problems. Mr. Koester reported that he would be attending the Zoning Amendment Committee meeting the following evening and presenting the Plan Commission's position on the rezoning of the canal lands. He felt the Zoning Amendment might be willing to not pursue the rezoning of the canal lands based upon the Plan Commission's position. Mr. Petterson asked about the status of the site plan review ordinance and Mr. Carter responded that he and Mr. Ahlberg had completely redrafted an ordinance which they would be bringing to the attention of the staff development team in the next few days. He would also make a copy available to members of the Legislative Commitee for their review and comment . Subsequent to these reviews, staff would return to the Planning and Development Committee to ask for their endorsement on the adoption of such an ordinance. Mr. Carter felt the involved support of the Plan Commisison at this point would be most important. Mr. Carter reported further that the staff development team had been having good fortune with getting developers to do a decent job on landscaping plans for some of the small abandoned gas station sites. Als. Breslin raised the question of schedule on the Sign Ordinance. Mr. Carter responded that staff hoped to have a recommendation on the consultant to the Council by mid --August and that work would begin shortly thereafter. He wanted to see a Sign Ordinance in place by next Spring. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Mr. Peters reported that the Committee was to meet with a new project subcommittee of the CD Committee during July. The Commisison had already made their comments at the needs assessment meeting held by the CD Committee. Mr. Carter reported that there would be a 10%-24% reduction in CD funding available this next year. He mentioned the staff review and recommendations for CD and our revenue sharing for the next year and commented that there weren't enough funds available to cover even the most important needs. With revenue sharing shrinking and about to disappear and Community Development Block Grants also declining, the City was going to have to look at alternative means of funding some of their capital improvements. He emphasized that the need for the City to be on a solid, long-term funding basis for the routine capital improvements and maintenance items had to be faced or we would be back into the perils of deferred maintenance. fie did not believe that there was a general awareness of the continuing and the recycling of such needs. Chairman Peters observed that perhaps this theme should be made more pointedly in the next capital improvement program. Mr. Carter reminded the Commission that their ordinance called for them to comment on the capital improvement program on an annual basis and that this should provide them with opportunity to call attention to this circumstance. Chairman Peters asked Mr. Carter to point out the best timing for the Plan Commission to comment so that they would not miss it. Ms. Breslin suggested the use of some graphic examples of the results of deferred maintenance in other cities might be helpful to make the point. Chairman Peters reviewed the thrust of the Plan Commission's comments so far to the CD Committee which offered the Plan Commission's services for review and comment as done in the past, and mentioned several projects which the Plan Commission strongly supports and comments on process. STAFF REPORT ON GREEN BAY ROAD Mr. Carter commented that the work on the sidewalks had been completed and invited Commission members"to examine the results. He commented that the landscape designs had been prepared for several small areas along Green Bay Road and that these would be the ones for which funds would be requested for next year's CD program. He also indicated that the funding for the second segment of the railroad embankment landscaping plan be sought. Chairman Peters discussed priorities for the four sites and it was suggested that there be some slight reordering. The southwest corner of Emerson and Green Bay could probably wait until a later year when it might be designed to relate to the entrance to the research park. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - July 10, 1985 Page 4 Commission members raised questions about the timing on the development of the research park, its plans and the Commission's role. Mr. Carter explained that negotiations were still going on with regard to how the research park would be managed or governed, the covenants involved on the land, design guidelines and the overall design itself. At the point at which the University and the City representatives can generally agree,a.package on these proposals will go to the City Council. He did not knoN when that would be. Chairman Peters commented that this was one of the Plan Commission's objectives for the Year and he was concerned that time was slipping by without the Commission's involvement. Mr. Carter mentioned that the Preservation League had hoped to sponsor a large public meeting involving themselves, Plan Commisison, the Preservation Commission and others. At this meeting a presentation on the overall design concpet for the research park would be presented and the film "The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces" would be shown. This would serve as an introduction tr the research park. He commented that the agreements were not far enough along at this point to have such a meeting. Chairman Peters observed that the interests of the Plan Commission is likely to be very broad and that such interest should be expressed early on in the process not later. Mr. Carter described the approach to the project as one of trying to prepare a total plan rather than simply allowing building by building development without overall design considerations. Mr. Nevel suggested that the Central Business District Committee of the Plan Commission meet to review whatever is available at this point on research park so that -they may make comments early rather than having to deal with site specific details at a later date. Mr. Carter commented on the dilemma of when it is appropriate for the Plan Commission to become involved in the process. Chairman Peters commented that the Plan Commission should review the research park plan in terms of the objectives contained in the Comprehensive Plan. He felt the Commission would be helpful to the City in framing the overall objectives for the research park. He felt that the time to introduce broad concepts was now not at a later date after detailed plans had been developed. Mr. Carter agreed to meet with the Central Business District Committee of the Plan Commisison to begin discussions of Downtown II and research park. Chairman Peters suggested that the Committee meet initially without all of the detailed material to see what their objectives for research park might be. Mr. Sang agreed to pull the Committee together to set up a meeting. SPECIAL PROJECTS COMMITTEE REPORT Ms. Breslin introduced Alderman Roberta Warshaw and David Ream. Don Borah was also s introduced. . Ms. Breslin reviewed the time line for the Custer/Callan project and indicated that it would take at least 2 years from the initial start-up date if everything went well. She also reviewed the request for proposal. Mr. Nevel explained the details of the project timeline. He stated that at first the Committee had hoped to have the project completed within a year, but as they mapped out the steps involved, they found this was overly optimistic. He also cautioned that delays in getting under way could cost the project another full year if a construction season was missed. An overall estimate was made of the total value of the properties involved by an appraiser at $350,000. It was felt that this was a high figure which is likely to come down when full appraisals are made. Mr. Koester brought up the question of funding and whether or not Community Development funding was going to be ruled out in favor of a bond issue. Ald. Warshaw responded that CD funding would result in substantial delays and others questioned whether that much money would be available through the CD process. Mr. Nevel stated that at the conclusion of their conference with the City Manager it was his understanding that, pending the support of the Plan Commission, he would take the committee's report and make any additional comments he felt appropriate, then forward this to the Planning and Develop- ment Committee. The project would then receive the sponsorship of Ald. Warshaw. Ald. Warshaw commented that, with CD funding being reduced so radically, this project offered the City a good Evanston Plan Commission Minutes -- July 10, 1985 Page 5 opportunity to show how it could do redevelopment on its own through a public/private venture in the future. In the discussion of long term benefit from increased assessed valuation, it was felt that the strongest argument should be for improvement to the neighborhood rather than any long term fiscal gain. Mr. Koester moved approval of the -Special Projects Committee's report and that it be made the report of the full Commission. Seconded by Mr. Nevel. Motion passed. No nays. There was a general discussion of the outline for requests for proposals and how the disposition of the land might be handled. There was also discussion as to whether low bid would determine who got the project regardless of the quality of design. It was understood that while costs could be a considera- tion, the City was not obligated to take the lowest bid. Committee members were complimented on the thoroughness of their job. Don Borah commented that for the past twelve years he had tried to get some sort of positive action going on the Custer block with the help of many different people, but he felt that the Special Projects Committee had taken a bigger step than anyone had been able to in this time. He expressed his hope that it would 1;o through the Council and win their approval. his. Breslin felt the timing was better for this type of action now because of all the development taking place along Chicago Avenue. In the past there was always some hope that the commercial frontage could be revitalized. The aldermen present felt that the Council would consider it a worthy project, the only question would likely be on the financing. Ald. Ream asked if it were not possible to forward the Plan Commission's recom- mendation to P&D sometime during the month of July. Mr. Carter responded that he would get the report typed in final form and to the City Manager as soon as possible. Chairman Peters offered the Plan Commission's support and involvement to move the project ahead as it went before the City Council. In response to Ald. Ream's question, Committee members agreed to be present with the presentation to the Planning and Development Committee when it was scheduled. his. Breslin thanked Mr. Nevel and Mr. Petterson for their work on the project. ANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman Peters announced that he would be meeting with a committee on naming parks to consider the request that the small piece of parkland on the southeast corner of bake and Sherman be named Harper Park. Meeting Adjourned 9:45 P.M. Staff: Date:/gJ J N EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, August 13, 1985 7:30 P.M. - Room 2403 Civic Center MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: PRESIDING OFFICIAL: OTHERS PRESENT: APPROVAL OF JULY 10, 1985 MINUTES Peters, Hill, Koester, Saag, Yas, Breslin Hartgering, Perkins, and Nevel Carter Peters, Chairman Jack Wiese I With the correction of changing •low bid' to 'high bid", Mr. Saag moved approval of the July Minutes. Seconded by Ms. Hill. Motion passed. No nays. DISCUSSION OF PRESENTATION ON THE COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN Mr. Petterson complimented Mr. Peters and Mr. Koester on their presentation of the Plan to the City Council saying that he was proud to be a member of the Plan Commission that evening. Commission members then discussed the reactions they had received from individual City Council members as they had distributed copies of the Plan to them. Many favorable comments were reported, particularly on the organization and format of the Plan. A number of Council members thought it would be helpful because of the current content of the material in the document. There were also appreciative comments on how easy the document was to read and how helpful the diagrams and photographs were. Commission members also reported a number of challenging and interesting questions raised on specific topics such as energy conservation, institutional expansion, the large house issue, office vacancies, traffic circulation for the research park, entranceways to the city, plans for the fire stations, and advice on how to replace the loss of Revenue Sharing and reductions of Community Development funding. Some had reported interest in seeing a companion document similar to the Comprehensive General Plan done for social services. Plan Commission members went on to discuss preparations for the public hearing to be held in September. Mr. Carter asked that all Commission members attend and spend some time prior to the meeting refamiliarizing themselves with the content of the Plan so as to be prepared for questions. Chairman Peters brought up the issue of whether or not there Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - August 13, 1985 Page 2 % should be a presentation as part of the public hearing. It was agreed that a complete presentation on the Plan was really not feasible, but that the Chairman could give a generalized introduction as to what the Plan was and what people could expect from it. Mr. Carter distributed copies of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map which had not been previously available. He noted that the map did have a few errors, but this was only a limited edition and that the final map printed after the public hearing would correct those errors as well as accommodate any suggested changes. Commission members suggested that a date be included on the next edition of the map. DISCUSSION OF ENTRANCEWAYS Mr. Carter commented that the issue of entranceways and pathways through the city is one which keeps recurring. Many years ago, the Plan Commission had made some recommendations on how to improve the appearance of same of the entranceways, but very little work on them had resulted. He had forwarded to the Plan Commission recent comments by Ron Kysiak on this subject and mentioned the comments of others on the appearance issue related to entranceways. Mr. Carter introduced the Plan Commission's guest, .lack Wiese, who had approached him with some of his ideas on how to make the entranceways more attractive. Mr. Wiese explained that he had been hired by the City of Des Plaines to develop some ideas for accenting the entranceway to the central business district of that city. As graphic designer, it was his task to come up with something which would enliven the streets. His idea was to incorporate a flag and banner system. The flags were large in scale and would be placed at the gateways to the central business district. They were to be made out of silk or nylon, very durable and bright. He showed Plan Commission members illlustrations of the designs. He felt that it was a very vivid and relatively inexpensive way to create visual interest at the gateways. He felt that the concept was economical and would work well for Evanston. In response to a question, he felt that this system was more long-term than short-term, but the banners would probably be changed seasonally. The flags could be used to announce events or merely be an abstract, colorful design. As far as location was concerned, there could be as many as a dozen, but it would probably -be more limited to just the major entranceways to the City. It was felt that if this system was used, that landscaping should accompany it. Mr. Yas suggested that there be a hierarchy of scale with different sizes for different entranceways. Commission members further discussed possible maintenance problems and overall'costs of the system. Mr. Yas expressed his interest in seeing this system used upon the Green Hay Road Corridor. Other Commission members also felt that the system had good promise for Evanston. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - August 13, 1985 Page 3 Mr. Carter stated that in the year ahead, 'thestaff would be working upon -some survey of the entranceways to determine where the trouble spots were, develop some strategies for making improvements and look at such systems as Mr. Wiess had proposed. The entranceways and pathways would be looked at in a very comprehensive way similar to what had been done on Green Bay Road. He though that a pilot project on a single entranceway might be.a good way to introduce the ideas and test their effectiveness. It was felt that a recommendation for this type of entranceway accentuation could be made as part of the Green Bay Road report. Mr. Petterson commented that Wilmette had just issued an RPP for a Green Bay Road study in their community and that he would forward a copy to Mr. Carter. Mr. Peters suggested that staff get together with representatives of Wilmette to see if there were any opportunities for coordination. Commission members thanked Mr. Wiese for his eresentation and Mr. Carter offered to keep him posted on the progress of the staff work. COMMITTEE REPORTS Ms. Breslin asked Mr. Carter if there was any further progress on his ideas of using vines to cover retaining walls. Mr. Carter responded that he had been taking photographs of various types of vines in different situations in Evanston and other communities, but did not have them available this evening. He indicated that he was going to schedule a field trip with the City forester and City horticulturalist to evaluate the use of vines on railroad structures. He discussed with Commission members one or two examples he had been looking at. Ms. Breslin wanted to encourage the use of vines on railroad structures as a means of covering some of the unsightliness and discouraging graffiti artists. Mr. Carter announced that he had written the RTA and requested their cooperation in getting some of Evanston's viaducts painted, particularly along the Green Bay Road Corridor. He pointed out that the Northwestern Railroad did have such a painting program about 10 years ago, but it had been discontinued. He was in hopes that the RTA might respond to Evanston's request and begin to schedule viaducts for painting. Legislative Committee Mr. Petterson reported that his committee had commented on the Site Plan Review Ordinance prepared by staff and Mr. Carter indicated that the staff draft was now ready to be forwarded to the Planning and Development Committee in the near future. Mr. Yas requested that all Commission members receive a copy of the latest draft of the Site Plan Review Ordinance. Mr. Peters commented that the site plan review may have some difficulty in being accepted. Mr. Petterson commented that many developers are beginning to see site plan review regulations as a means of protecting themselves against other developments with lesser standards. Mr. Carter reported that Evanston Plan Commission Minutes -- August 13, 1985 Page 4 initially the Planning and Development Committee felt that site plan review was dictating aesthetics, but now had a better understanding of this tool. Chairman Peters mentioned the Lake County planning ordinance which uses requirements for buffer yards between different uses. It was felt that some of the standards used there might be helpful in site plan review. In reporting on the progress on the new Sign ordinance, Mr. Carter stated that consultants had been interviewed and a selection would be made shortly. He further reported that the Planning and Development Committee would be considering the reference not to rezone the canal lands at their next meeting. Chairman Peters asked if there were any outstanding references for the Plan Commission and Mr. Carter replied that the study of the commercial zone zones was still pending. There had been some staff work on this but there still remained additional work ahead. He did not feel that the Commission would be ready to consider this item until' after the Comprehensive General Plan hearing. Mr. Petterson mentioned a second reference from ZAC which deals with the appropriate zoning for the Custer Avenue block that the Plan Commission is studying. Custer/Callan Mr. Petterson expanded his comments on the passible rezoning of the Custer/Callan area under his Committee report. With the aid of a map, Mr. Petterson reviewed the land use in the immediate vicinity of the area and noted one site which had a commercial use, now vacant, which could be considered for rezoning to residential. He pointed to the land use across the street, which was a townhouse development as an ideal type of development for thin site. Mr. Carter suggested that the Committee develop a recommendation for a rezoning including the rationale for the Plan Commission to review and pass on to the Planning and Development Committee. Ms. Breslin pointed out that the property is now up for sale and raised the question as to whether or not this would constitute a problem for rezoning. Mr. Carter felt that the circumstances probably strengthen the case for a rezoning since it represented an opportunity to change the use., Ms. Breslin reported that two of the residential developers she had been talking to expressed an interest in the site. Chairman Peters.asked whether this property was the reference from the Planning and Development Committee and -Mr. Petterson replied that it was •part of a larger segment of Custer Street under consideration. The reference also had recommended a change from a manufacturing designation to a commercial designation, while the Plan Commission is considering a change to residential. Chairman Peters pointed out that the Commission had shown this block on its 'opportunities for Change• map. Mr. Carter observed that merely changing the zoning was not going to create the change in land use by itself. The Legislative Committee agreed to develop a recommendation and return with it to the Plan Commission by the next meeting. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes — August 13, 1985 Page 5 special Projects Committee Ms. Breslin reported on the Committee's success.with the Planning and Development Committee who endorsed their proposal for the Custer Avenue redevelopment and forwarded that recommendation to the Administration and Public Works Committee for consideration of financing. The Special Projects Committee was scheduled to appear before the Administration and Public Works Committee on Monday, August 24, 1985. The Commission's recommendation for financing was to be with General obligation Bonds not Community Development Block Grant funds. Mr. Carter reported on behalf of the Green Bay Road project and distributed a draft copy of the Green Bay Road report to Commission members. He felt that the special Projects Commitee had too many tasks and recommended that a new, smaller subcommittee be formed to follow through with the staff on the development of a final Green Bay Road report. He feat the report was in very good shape and really only needed some refinement and some photographs to bring it to its final form. He felt that the report should be completed before the budget season has ended so that it could be submitted along with some specific recommendations for improvements along Green Bay Road for the next year. He felt it was important for the Council to see the long range context for specific recommendations being made in any given year. Mr. Roester and Mr. Yas agreed to serve on this committee and any other Commission members interested are welcome. The report should be completed by November to be helpful in the budget work. Commission members discussed the possibility of using low altitude oblique aerial photos to identify each of the sections of Green Bay Road included in the report. Community Development Chairman Peters reported on his meeting with Ms. Bill and a subcommittee of the Community Development Committee composed of Ald. Radon and Bill Hargering. Chairman Peters said that the Plan commission reiterated their interest in the types of capital improvements that had been previously funded along with projects such as energy conservation, improvements to Green Bay Road, and railroad station landscaping. He also underscored with the subcommittee the Commission's interest in seeing greater advance planning done on how funds would be allocated and prioritized. Ms. Bill felt that the Committee members were receptive to the Plan Commission's position. Mr. Peters reported, however, that Ald. Raden was opposed to the committee playing a strong role in advocating allocations of funds by category in advance of the hearings. She felt that the Committee should be more reactive than proactive. Mr. Carter observed that the Commission had made some progress with their approach in asking for greater advance planning of projects. At a CD Committee meeting, he reported that members had expressed a desire to avoid a piece; --,"al approach to funding of projects and that they would be looking to the Plan Commission Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - August 13, 1995 Page 6 for some help on planning of larger projects. Also requested was a review of the planning of park projects funded by CD. There seemed to be a general consensus from the subcommittee members that the Plan Commission should continue to play the role that they had in the past and should feel willing to make critical comments about proposals and projects. In their discussion with the subcommittee members on allocation of funds by percent according to large categories, members of the CD Subcommittee were reluctant to assign figures based upon past allocations. Chairman Peters reported on the bus tour of CD projects. He mentioned, in particular, the triangular site at Pitner and the Chicago and North Western Mayfair division as one in need of redevelopment. Mr. Carter commented on the effectiveness of such tours to show Council and Committee members, who often don't have the opportunity to get out and see the projects themselves. He felt it was also helpful for Committee and Council members to see the results of their work as these completions have accumulated over the years. In the Committee meetings they are more frequently dealing with problems than successes. ANMUNCEMENTS Ms. sill stated that she would like to see the Energy Committee reconstituted. one of the first tasks would be to deal with some of the aldermanic questions about the effectiveness of energy conservation and provide some solid documentation. Ms. Hill distributed a newsletter from Northwestern university describing Research Park and the University's involvement. Meeting adjourned 9:40 P.M. staff : J Date: �4df*I s , /??15 � r 007Y C EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION 0 MINUTES Wednesday, September 11, 1985 City Council Chambers, 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER 'MEMBERS PRESENT: Breslin, Hill, Koester, Nevel, Perkins, Peters,,Petterson, Saag, and Yas MEMBERS ABSENTt Hartgering STAFF: Carter and Lindwail PRESIDING OFFICIAL: Peters, Chairman Meeting was called to order following the Public Hearing on the Comprehensive Plan at 9:10 P.M. ; APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR AUGUST 13, 1983 Mr. Koester moved approval of the August Minutes. Seconded by Ms. Hill. Motion passed. No nays. COMMITTEE REPORTS Legislative Committee Mr. Carter reported on behalf of the Legislative Committee and announced that the draft Site Plan Review Ordinance which had been circulated to the Commission for comment would be going before the Planning and Development Committee early in October. He also announced that the Planning and Development Committee would be reviewing the question of rezoning the canal lands on the 23rd of September. He indicated that the Committee appeared to be leaning in the direction of overruling the recommendation of the Zoning Amendment Committee and recommending that the canal lands be rezoned recreational. He briefly stated staff's position as not favoring the rezoning as an unnecessary legislative act. Mr. Koester expressed his surprise since he thought the arguments had been well made and accepted at the Zoning Amendment Committee hearing. Mr. Carter commented that the change was largely in response to the minority opinion statement made by one of the ZAC members. Commission members discussed whether there was any real threat to the status of the open space along the canal lands and if a threat existed, how best to hand it. Mr. Carter pointed out that sufficient control existed under the City statues with the Comprehensive General Plan showing the land as park so that any subdivision approval could be denied. Chairman Peters offered to attend the meeting of the Planning and Development Committee on the 23rd to represent the Plan Commission's position. Mr. Carter also announced that there was a public hearing on the strategy plan of Inventure and that a Plan Commission member should be present for comment on how the strategy plan might relate to the Comprehensive General Plan and what might be expected from the Plan Commission. Mr. Carter reminded Commission members that Mr. Kysiak had been before them to present the strategy plan but the Commission had never taken any position on it. Mr. Koester explained that what Inventure was seeking was a consensus from the City, the University and the business community on the strategy plan or their alternative suggestions as to how to proceed. Chairman Peters agreed to attend and comment on behalf of the Plan Commission. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - September 11, 1985 Page 2 In returning to a discussion on the Site Plan Review Ordinance, Mr. Petterson asked if the spirit of the ordinance was not in the direction of providing a more speedy review for projects such as was requested in tonight's hearing. Mr. Carter agreed and added that It would also help to insure a somewhat better quality of development as far as parking layout, landscaping and placement of structures are concerned. Chairman Peters commented on the helpfulness of having a site plan review procedure spelled out in advance so that the developers knew what was expected of them. Mr. Yas commented on his experience in working with communities where no one can tell you what the development approval process is. He contrasted this to Peoria which has a one-step review process similar to the one being proposed where the developer can meet with all the appropriate department heads and know what is expected. He felt this worked very well and, in fact, encouraged development. Mr. Nevel felt that any covering memo introducing the ordinance should definitely stress the positive aspects as far as streamlining is concerned to demonstrate this is not just another hoop for developers to jump through. It was recommended that a check list be produced so that the developer could see all of the steps required. Mr. Carter reported that the firm of Teska Associates had been selected to assist the City in preparing a revised sign ordinance. He Indicated that Mr. Heckman, the principal In charge of the project, had a great deal of experience with sign ordinances both in drafting them and In administering them. Special Projects Committee Ms. Breslin reported on behalf of the Committee that they had been before the Administration and Public Works Committee with their proposal for funding for the Custer Avenue project. The Committee had approved $350,000 for the project over a two year period. The A&PW Committee will now take their recommendation to the full Council for final approval. Ms. Hill commended the Committee for their Impressive piece of work. Mr. Carter also added his compliments saying It was a demonstration of how the Plan Commission can work to be effective in the community. Ms. Breslin reported that the Committee had been asked to remain involved with the project throughout its development. The next step would be to select an appraisor to negotiate with the property owners. Committee members discussed the difficulty of negotiating for the land when the amount of money set aside for the project was public information. Libby Hill suggested that the RFP contain requirements for highly efficient energy conservation measures. It was acknowledged that the Custer Avenue project would remain a Plan Commission agenda Item for the months ahead. Green Bay Road Committee Steve Yas reported that the Green Bay Road Subcommittee had been reconstituted and now consisted of himself, Bill Nevel and Roger Koester. They are reviewing the current .draft prepafed by staff, discussing goals and looking at strategies for implementation. They expect to report back to the full Commission with their recommendations by the November meeting. Energy Subcommittee Libby Hill suggested that a representative of Commonwealth Edison come to discuss the new ice storage method of cooling at the next Plan Commission meeting In October. She ,was concerned that energy efficient techniques such as these were being � ignored in new construction and wanted to see a stronger public role for encouraging such techniques while there was still opportunity to do so. Mr. Carter pointed out that the value In having Evanston Plan Commission Minutes -September 11, 1985 Page 3 Commonwealth Edison representatives appear was first In getting the Plan Commission generally familiar with the technology available and secondly developing a strategy which would give the City r.oco,::thing to say about getting developers to consider such measures. Mr. Hill mentioned Mr. ,'Jandfeldt's comments at the public hearing about the research park being a major energy conservation research facility and added that she would like to see the complex Itself concentrate on energy efficient operations. Motion was passed to send Libby Hill and Roger Koester to discuss energy conservation measures in the GIRL Lab and Research Park with Northwestern University. CD Committee Chairman Peters announced that he had received the packet of neighborhood revitalization projects to be funded under CD and that the CD Committee required the Plan Commission's response by November 6th. Commission members discussed the difficulty of covering the results of the hearing on the Comprehensive Plan as well as making recommendations on the CD funding for neighborhood revitalization projects at the same meeting. It was suggested that the Comprehensive Plan subcommittee be reinstituted to bring the Commission recommendations for amending the Plan based upon the results of the public hearing. In order to avoid asking CD applicants to come to still another meeting, Chairman Peters suggested that Plan Commission members attend the October 1st meeting of the CD Committee so that they could participate in those hearings prior to making their recommendations for funding. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Chairman Peters asked for comments from Plan Commission members and their reaction to the evenings public hearing. Ms. Hill thought the Commission should take another look at the housing section. It was suggested that Ald. Warshaw has some expertise In the area of housing and the Commission might ask her to evaluate some of the comments. Mr. Perkins observed that any discussion of low cost housing involving subsidies must necessarily involve who is to pay and that the Plan Commission should deal fully with the subject if it deals with It at all. This raised the question of whether affordable housing and low cost housing was in fact the same thing. Mr. Carter observed that the community did not have a consensus on how all housing problems were to be addressed and that there were a variety of advocates for different positions. it will be difficult for the Commission to come out with recommendations on housing that are going to be acceptable to everyone. Mr. Koester suggested that the Plan Commission review their housing section and take some of the recommendations made this evening at the public hearing back to the Housing Commission for their comment. It was concluded that the subcommittee would have to restudy the housing section and develop some recommendations based upon the public hearing. They were to discuss some of these ideas with the Housing Commission and then report back to the PIan Commission. Commission members noted that the Commission on Aging did not appear to be as concerned about a housing shortage for their cpnstitutency as did some of the other speakers. Chairman Peters announced that he had receeved a letter addressed to him personally from Teska & Associates congratulating the Plan Commission for a thorough, informative and generously illustrated Plan. Chairman Peters mentioned that the editors of the Evanston Revelw had received a copy of the Plan and that Mr. Sidenberg was in the audience and had requested a chance to discuss the Plan with them. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - September 11, 1985 Page 4 NEW BUSINESS Steve Yas reported on attending the community meeting on the Chicago/Kedzie proposed redevelopment project. He felt it brought up some new Issues which the Plan Commission should look at, namely, whether the zoning ordinance was outdated If it would allow such development. In particular, he was concerned about the encouragement of strip commercial development in neighborhood shopping areas. Mr. Carter responded that the staff had under study the commercial zone and that the Commission would be dealing with this topic In the future. Mr. Carter pointed out it was difficult to prohibit redevelopment within business and commercial districts to make sure that development only took place in a certain way. With the provision In the commercial zones for parking in the front yard, at leat there was some control over landscaping and signage. The Commission further discussed the difference between business and commercial use and how they might draw distinctions which would be more appropriate for today's situation. MEMBERSHIP Jeanne Breslin proposed a new associate member for the Plan Commission, Al Belmonte, Executive Director of the Paulina Development Association and Evanston resident. He Is a city planner with whom she had worked professional and felt that he would be a good addition to the Plan Commission. Mr. Carter suggested that if he was interested, Mr. Belmonte should fill out an application form for associate membership which would then be distributed to the Commission. The question of his membership could be taken up at the October meeting. Date: �f i MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF. PRESIDING OFFICIAL: APPROVAL OF MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, October 9, 1935 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER Breslin, Hill, Koester, Nevel, Peters, Petterson and Hartgering Koester, Perkins, Saag and Yas Lindwall and Birr Peters, Chairman Libby Hill noted that the reference to Mr. Hill on the top of page 3 should refer to Ms. Hill. Ms. Hill also requested that the minutes reflect under the Special Projects Committee section, that she was also impressed with the speed at which the Custer/Callan project was carried out. The minutes of September 11, 1985 were then unanimously approved with these revisions. PRESENTATION ON ICE STORAGE COOLING TECHNIQUES Dave Birr announced that Mark Morris of Commonwealth Edision was unable to attend the meeting due to a family emergency. However, Mr. Morris had sent along the slide presentation on Ice storage cooling techniques. Mr. Birr introduced Al Butkus who was present to help answer any questions Commissioners had concerning the technology. Ice storage cooling allows a shift in energy use to off-peak periods when energy rates are much lower and there is not a demand charge for energy. Mr. Birr noted that summer demand charges have tripled over the past seven years. While it takes 20% more energy to make ice, the fact that the energy cost is about 50% lower in off-peak periods results in an overall cost savings. Mr. Butkus indicated that the use of this technique generally only makes sense for buildings of at least 100,000 square feet. There was discussion concerning the fact that developers often are more concerned with minimizing the initial project cost than with long term operating cost savings. A typical payback period was between 3 and 5 years. Mr. Peters asked Mr. Birr and Mr. Butkus if the use of this technique should be required in all buildings above a certain size. Mr. Birr related the poor experiences that Commonwealth Edison had had in encouraging developers to use the technology in Evanston. It was the consensus of the Commission that the City should require studies and evaluation of alternative energy saving techniques in projects where the City has an interest. Such a policy was viewed as an Important means of protecting Evanston's financial investment. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - October 9, 1985 Page 2 RECOMMENDATIONS ON CD NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION PROJECTS Mr. Peters reviewed the subcommittee's recommendations and prioritization of proposed Community Development projects under the neighborhood revitalization category. He stated that the subcommittee had made a distinction between projects included in the original Capital Improvement Program and those in the update. All projects included In the original Capital Improvement Program had been rated as high priority. There was discussion concerning the importance of developing a development plan for the Fleetwood Jourdain Center. It was the consensus of the Commission that Don Wirth should be advised of the Commission's interest in seeing such a plan developed. Mr. Petterson suggested switching projects 8 and I I in order to reinforce the notion that the Fleetwood Jourdain/Foster projects be considered as part of an overall plan. Brief statements as to the reasons for the project prioritizations were also developed. Libby Hill also asked that the Plan Commission request a summary of the percent of the grant that had been devoted to neighborhood revitalization so that this information could be included in the report to the CD Committee. Ms. Hill moved to accept the committee report as revised by the Conimisslon and forward It to the CD Committee. Seconded by Mr. Nevel. Motion carried, unanimously. COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN Bill Nevel thanked staff for the format used to organize the report on the Comprehensive General Plan public hearing. Jeanne Lindwall reviewed the changes which had been recommended by the CGP Committee and outlined subjects that remained to be addressed. There was considerable discussion on whether or not a section on population should be included in the Comprehensive General Plan. Mr. Peters expressed concern that the time Involved in developing a population section would result in a lengthy delay in getting the Plan to the City Council. Mr. Nevel, Ms. Lindwall and Mr. Petterson explained that what was planned was a demographic profile based on the 1980 census with comparisons with neighboring communities. It was not the intent to analyze population trends within the community. This was believed to be beyond the scope of the Comprehensive General Plan and more appropriately dealt with by publlsing additional issues of Census Notes. The consensus of the Commission was to include a brief section on population. There was discussion concerning the addition of a policy on neighborhood shopping areas under the Neighborhood section. Ms. Hill made a motion, seconded by Mr. Petterson to include the following policy: 12. Retain the character of neighborhood shopping areas which contribute to the strength of the neighborhood. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioners reviewed the proposed changes to the Housing section. There was discussion concerning the desirability of sending the revised housing text to the Housing Commission for their consent. Mr. Nevel moved approval of the revised text and it being sent to the Housing Commission for their comment. Seconded by Ms. Breslin. Motion carried unanimously. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - October 9, 1985 Page 3 i It was agreed that consideration of the Comprehensive General Plan amendments would continue at the November meeting. COMMITTEE REPORTS Mr. Peters suggested that a subcommittee be appointed to study how the question of public involvement should be handled in Plan Commission projects. Ms. Hill moved approval of creation of such a subcommittee. Seconded by Mr. Petterson. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Peters announced that the Planning and Development Committee would be considering the site plan review ordinance on October 28th. There was discussion concerning the desirability of contacting members of the Planning and Development Committee to answer their questions concerning the ordinance. Mr. Petterson, Ms. Breslin and Mr. Peters agreed to contact the aldermen. MEMBERSHIP The Commission voted unanimously to appoint Al Belmonte as an associate member of the Plan Commission. ANNOUNCEMENTS Ms. Lindwail announced that the City of Evanston had received Design Evanston's annual award. Ms. Lindwall also announced that the Planning and Development Committee had voted to establish a recreational zoning district and to rezone all parks in addition of the canal lands. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:15 P.M. III-D 01 Approved: r a-1U4L-7_& 1� Date: 7Y5-7 MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBER ABSENT: STAFF: OTHERS ATTENDING: PRESIDING OFFICIAL: APPROVAL OF MINUTES EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, November 13, 1995 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER Belmonte, Breslin, Hill, Koester, Petterson, Saag and Yas Ha rtge ri ng Carter Amy Seidman, Aid. Beth Davis Peters, Chairman I Nevel, Perkins, Peters, I Mr. Perkins moved that the Wednesday, October 9, 1985 Minutes of the Plan Commission be approved as written. Seconded by Ms. Hill. Motion passed. No nays. WORKSHOP ON CREATING THE VISION STATEMENT Chairman Peters introduced Cynthia Vance and Bruce Williams of LENS International and explained that they would be assisting the Plan Commission in developing their overall vision statement for the next ten years for the City of Evanston based upon their work with the Comprehensive General Plan. He explained that he and Mr. Carter had met with the representatives of LENS on several occasions and were familiar with the work they had been doing in the Chicago metropolitan area. He felt that it would be a most helpful process for the Plan Commission to engage in. Ms. Vance explained that they were part of the Institute for Cultural Affairs and the LENS stood for "leadership effectiveness and new strategies". She said the organization had been working in the metropolitan area for the past ten years and has been involved with some 21 other northwest suburban communities and organizations. The process which they would focus on that evening was called the LENS process and is made up of five parts. It begins with first defining what the Plan Commission wants to see in place 10 years from now in the City of Evanston. Next would involve identifying the blocks to that vision which exist within the community or the external obstacles which would have to be removed. Next, new strategies would need to be developed followed by a scheduling of the activities required over the next year and an implementation plan for the next 3 months of the following year. She said that at the end of the process, the organization receives a document of their own writing and which the LENS people merely facilitate. Mr. Williams initiated the process by having Commission members introduce themselves, tell what it is they do on their job and name one thing which the Plan Commission accomplished last year of which they are especially proud. Following the introductions, he asked Commission members to identify the various strengths of the community. The LENS representatives worked with the Plan Commission members through a series of questions and responses designed to draw out the vision contained in the detail of the Plan and to organize it under progressively broader headings. The result was a draft statement which synthesized the Plan's hopes in the eyes of the Commission members. The vision statement included more than items mentioned in the Plan and dealt with some of the human resources as well. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - November 13, 1983 Page 2 Commission members were highly pleased with the results and assigned the draft statement to a subcommittee for further refinement. Subcommittee will bring a final statement back to the Commission for approval at their December meeting. Plan Commission members thanked Ms. Vance and Mr. Williams for a very worthwhile and stimulating evening. They looked forward to working with them further in the near future on the remaining part of the process. APPOINTMENT OF NEW ASSOCIATE MEMBER Mr. Carter called attention to the application of Amy Seidman for Associate Members to the Plan Commission. Upon review of the application, Commission member unanimously voted to accept the application for membership. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Carter announced that the Site Plan Review Ordinance would be before the Planning and Development Committee at their November 19, 1983 meeting and he felt that it would be forwarded to the full Council for approval. He also announced that the Community Development Block Grant Committee would be meeting on Tuesday, November 19th for final recommendations on funding for CD projects. Ms. Hill distributed a brochure on cogeneration and the substantial dollar savings which might be realized by using cogeneration with in the Research Park. She reported on a positive response with a meeting with Northwestern University's architect and indicated there would be follow-up meetings with NI Gas, the City administration and others responsible for the development of Research Park. She felt it was an excellent opportunity to do some advance planning for energy conservation. Chairman Peters observed that this was an appropriate topic for the Plan Commission to be involved in. !Meeting adjourned approximately 10:30 P.M. r Staff: 1L Date: MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: EVANSTON PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, December I1, 1983 Room 2403 - 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER Belmonte, Breslin, Perkins, Peters, Seidman and Petterson Hartgering, Hill, Koester, Nevel, Saag and Yas STAFF: Carter OTHERS ATTENDING: Gwen Sommers Yant PR E51DING OFFICIAL: Peters, Chairman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Since a quorum was not present, approval of the November 13, 1983 minutes was held over to the next regular Plan Commission meeting. REVIEW OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGES Chairman Peters Introduced Gwen Sommers Yant, staff person for the Preservation Commission, and invited her to elaborate upon the Commission's concern over housing policy #10. Ms. Yant stated that the Preservation Commission felt the intent of the policy was good but that the language was a little too vague. Further, that the policy seemed to anticipate a problem which was not yet present. It was the Preservation Commission's desire that the policy be deleted. Commission members discussed whether the policy in question actually promoted premature adaptive reuse of large single-family homes and whether or not such things as high maintenance costs, and changing lifestyles were making any of these homes obsolete. Commission members were in agreement that they did not want to encourage adaptive reuse of such homes until it became absolutely necessary to prevent their demolition. It was clear that under present circumstances, few homes were actually threatened. After considering several alternative wordings to the policy, Commission members finally agreed to reword policy #10 to read as follows: "Consider creative, adaptive reuse of large single-family homes only as a last resort should they become unmarketable due to size, energy and maintenance costs, and changing lifestyles." Commission members felt this statement should answer the Preservation Commission's concerns about encouraging premature adaptive reuses or conversions, while at the same time, alerting everyone to the potential problem. Mr. Perkins moved approval of the policy as reworded. Seconded by Mr. Petterson. Motion passed. No nays. Mr. Carter reviewed for the Commission how the Comprehensive Plan Commission had taken the Vision Statement drafted at the November meeting and Incorporated Into the Comprehensive General Plan as part of the introduction. Commission members felt the statement accurately reflected the spirit they wanted to capture and that the statement blended well with the rest of the Plan. Mr. Petterson moved that the Plan Commission endorse the new text as part of the Comprehensive General Plan. Seconded by Mr. Perkins. Motion passed. No nays. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - December 11, 1985 Page 2 Commission members went on to discuss the strategy of bringing the Comprehensive Plan before the City Council. Mr. Carter announced that the Commission would have an opportunity on the 16the of December to talk to the Planning and Development Committee about bringing the Plan before them for their consideration. At this time, It was hoped that a date could be set with the Committee for the Commission to start a dialogue with them about the Plan. He is not sure how the Committee would want to proceed, but thought perhaps they would set one or two special rocetings to deal with the plan. He thought an effective presentation of the Plan would be a challenge because of its length. He suggested abstracting the policy pages from the Plan and sending those to P&D to focus the discussion. He thought the likely starting date for Committee consideration would be on January 6th. Mr. Perkins suggested that the Commission also consider a one on one approach with Council members to facilitate communication on parts of the Plan. Mr. Carter suggested that Commission members could contact the individual aldermen to whore they had delivered Plans and ask them if they had any questions or reservations the Commission could help them with. Mr. Petterson felt this would be more helpful following the initial presentation to the Planning and Development Committee. Chairman Peters agreed to contact the present chairman of the Planning and Development Committee, Aid. Juliar, in advance of the meeting and discuss how he wanf:s to have the Plan brought to his Committee. PLAN COMMISSION OBJECTIVES FOR 1986 Chairman Peters referred to Mr. Carter's letter to the Commission which 'identified a number of tasks that were either incomplete or that the Commission had expressed some interest In. Among these were: the Central Business District Plan; the Green Bay Road Plan; the study of business and commercial zones; and the Custer Avenue Project. He asked if there were other objectives Commission members wished to add to the list. Mr. Petterson suggested that Commission members meet with a number of other boards and commissions during the course of the year to find out what they are doing and what the Commission might be doing to assist them, especially in relationship to the Comprehensive General Plan recommendations. Mr. Petterson brought up the question of a Central Business District plan and traffic plan as It might relate to the development of Research Park. Mr. Carter responded that he didn't foresee profound changes in the rest of the central business district, but that a plan would be highly desirable at this time. He also observed that it was a difficult undertaking. There were some very large questions about who plans the Central Business District and what ought to be In such a plan. 4e felt one of the things that belonged in a Central Business District Plan was the idea of a Managements and Maintenance District. Mr. Carter emphasized that undertaking a Central Business District Plan was a large effort. It was a challenging task to merely organize and conceptualize such a plan, let alone prepare one and carry it out. Mr. Belmonte observed that with the growing strength of the retail base in downtown Evanston, that this might be a good time to undertake setting up aManagement District. Chairman Peters asked Mr. Carter to comment further on the Commercial and Business Zoning study. Mr. Carter reminded Commission members that there was an old reference to them from Planning and Development Committee to take a look at the Business and Commercial zones to see if they were still adequately regulated for today's development. Mr. Carter observed that there were a number of changes taking plan in small business development. These changes were in the marketing, the structure of commercial building, and developer Interest. He felt the first task would be to define just what these zones were intended to do. They were developed some 25 years ago and a number of conditions have changed. Of particular concern was the so-called "strip shopping" which carries a very negative image. He felt that it was time to examine the values behind each of these zones which were merely implied and not very clear. He thought it was important to have a close examination of what It is we want to retain and encourage as well as what we wish to prevent. Evanston Plan Commission Minutes - December 11, 1983 Page 3 Ms. Breslin expressed an Interest in seeing something further done for residential renovation and rehab. She thought It would be timely to evaluate the need and some of the City's programs and felt that there would be a growing interest, particularly in the Custer area as that project moved forward. There was discussion on current income limitations and how the community -wide rehabilitation needs fall outside such income guidelines. The question to be asked is how sweat equity rehab can be encouraged. There does not appear to be either an advocacy group or a program for this type of rehab. There was general discussion as to what agency might be the most appropriate to address this issue and Mr. Carter suggested the Preservation League was the kind of organization that might want to take on such a project. Chairman Peters observed that Evanston did not do very much neighborhood planning and that this might be an appropriate approach. Mr. Carter commented that at one time the Planning Department did do neighborhood planning and was very active in the Main Street area, but In recent years there has been no staff to do this type of labor-intensive planning. It was thought unlikely that any money could be made available for a City -financed program, but questions were raised as to how the proper chemistry could be created to encourage more sweat equity rehabilitation. Mr. Perkins pointed out that blight was not the only thing that spreads, if a small group of homeowners in a single area made an obvious effort, the Influence of their commitment would produce similar results. Chairman Peters brought up the topic of treating entryways and felt that that should be on the list of project for the Plan Commission in 1986. Chairman Peters brought up the topic of citizen involvement and said that he Intended to appoint a committee to look into more effective ways of involving citizens in planning. Chairman Peters requested that the minutes be prepared in such a way as to reflect the list of topics considered for the Plan Commission's work program In 1986 and request that Plan Commission members come to the January meeting with any suggested additions so that the list can be completed, committees assigned, and objectives developed (see attached). COMMITTEE REPORTS Community Development Chairman Peters reported on behalf of the Community Development Committee and announced that all of the recommendations the Plan Commission had made to the CD Committee had been included in their final list of projects for funding. Following a public hearing on these recommendations, they will be forwarded to the City Council for final Council approval. It was suggested that the Commission draft a statement thanking the CD Committee and send a delegate to the public hearing.. Special Projects Ms. Breslin reported on behalf of the Special Projects Committee stating that the City had hired an appraiser who has been In contact with the property owners and work is proceeding. Legislation Mr. Petterson reported on behalf of the Legislation Committee and stated that it had been a very quiet month. He Inquired as to the status of the Sign Ordinance and Mr. Carter responded that the consultant was at work on the project. A meeting involving the staff, the consultant, and an Informal sign committee were scheduled to meet on December 19th to review progress. Mr. Carter reported that site plan review was still in the Planning and Development Committee awaiting final disposition. Consideration has been postponed on a number of occasions. Mr. Carter distributed proposed language for the new Canal Lands Recreational District requested by the Planning and Development Committee. He indicated that this would be up for discussion in the near future. Evanston Plan Commission 7' Minutes - December 11, 1983 Page 4 Mr. Carter characterized the work on the Sign Ordinance as merely tightening up on some of the loopholes, reducing the size of signs and their number. He did not foresee a dramatically different ordinance. He also observed that a decision may be made not to eliminate the billboards as part of the present thrust of the ordinance, but rather as an amendment later. He indicated that the billboard interest had very strong lobbies and were always willing to litigate. He did not want to risk the entire ordinance by taking on the billboard lobby at the same time. Green Bay Road Committee Mr. Carter reported on behalf of the Green Bay Road Committee and stated that while there had been no meetings, staff had been reorganizing the text of the report. The next step was to do some Intensive editing of the text. He expected to be sharing a new draft of the report with the committee in January. He announced that there was a possibility of having the two viaducts of the Mayfair division removed In 1986 because the railroad line is being abandoned. He felt this would be the most dramatic action to happen on Green Bay Road and it would not cost the City anything. He announced that some landscape projects would go forward on the west side of the road with the CD funding made available. He reported on difficulty with the landscaping of the railroad embankment due to the lingering effects of the herbicide program the railroad had been using. The planting program may receive a setback of a few years until the herbicide is out of the soil. By the Spring of 1986 the City would have a better notion of what soil conditions are. He commented that the railroad is working on a special maintenance plan for the suburban areas as a result of their poor public relations from their herbicide program. Mr. Perkins commented that at one time the railroad used a flame thrower to burn back plant material Immediately adjacent to the tracks and wondered if this less damaging program could be reinstituted. NEW BUSINESS It was suggested, now that the Commission has completed the Comprehensive Plan, that they plan a social event to celebrate. Chairman Peters agreed to look into forming a committee to select a time and place for an event in January. MEMBERSHIP Since a quorum was not present, voting on the terms for associate members was postponed until the January meeting. Meeting adjourned approximately 9:40 P.M. 6Z�Staff: r Date: d 7Y3-6