Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1985MINUTES Planning and Development Committee January 14, 1985 7:00 P.M. Ald. Present: Drummer, Korshak, Juliar, Uleveane and Neems Ald, Absent: Romain Staff Present: R. Carlson, Grimmer, Witt, Siegel and Rudd Presiding official: Neems Minutes of December 17, 1984 Ald. Hleveans moved, Ald. Juliar seconded to approve the minutes of the P & D Committee meeting of December 17, 1984. Rudd indicated that on page 2 of the minutes, Docket 319-128-84, Rehab Case should be identified as 352-84 rather than 352-85. Committee approved the minutes as corrected 5-0. Communications Housing Planner Peggy Witt was present and gave a brief presentation on the second bi-monthly report submitted to the Committee in regard to tenant/landlord complaint calls. As in the previous report, there were no lease non -renewal complaints received by the staff. In total, staff received 147 telephone calls in the form of either complaints or requests for information regarding landlord/tenant relationships. Rehab Case 238-80 The Committee accepted the rehab case as submitted. Ald. Korshak requested that in instances where the City has previously approved a loan that the date of that approval be indicated on the form. The staff indicated that in the future that date would be supplied. Response from Northwestern University re Athletics Event Upon reivew of a letter submitted by Jim Perry of Northwestern University dated January 7, 1985, the Committee directed staff to draft a letter for Jack Siegel's review and forward to the University detailing that it was the Committee's position that the international volleyball event held on December 2, 1984 at McCaw Hall was not permitted as detailed by the zoning ordinance and was therefore a violation. The letter was also to indicate that the Committee could find no ambiguity in the zoning ordinance and that the Committee wanted to be on record that it opposes such violations of the ordinance, and that it did not expect a repetition of this violation . P & D Minutes January 14, 1985 Page -2- Docket 7-1A-85, Greenwood Beach Shore Erosion Project (Proposed Vacation of a Portion of Lake Shore Boulevard). Ald. Korshak moved, Ald. Juliar seconded to adopt the resolution providing for a vacation of a portion of the subject Lake Shore Boulevard right-of-way. As indicated in the previously submitted memorandum, this portion of Lake Shore Boulevard would continue to be utilized as a parking area and vacation would essentially be a housekeeping matter. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend vacation to City Council by the adoption of ordinance 97-0-84 which was introduced on August 13, 1984. Docket 319-12B-84, Rehab Case 352-84 Ald. Bleveans moved, Ald. Korshak seconded to approve the case. Nancy Grimmer was present and indicated that at the request of the P S D Committee at the 12/17/84 meeting staff has now provided additional information regarding prior housing expense break -downs. Grimmer indicated that on the back of the worksheet, item 12 now provided three categories instead of two, thus dealing with the mortgage situation prior to the City's 38 loan, including the City's 4% amortizing loan, and finally the proposed 0% amortizing loan. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the rehab case. Docket S-IA-85, Rehab Case 359-84 Ald. Drummer moved, Ald. Juliar seconded that the Committee approved the rehab case. Ald. Korshak questioned the amount of taxes on the subject rehab case. He indicated that on the previous case (352-84) that the appraised value of the home was $57,000, while the taxes was $97.00 per month, where on the present case the appraised value of the home was $41,000 and the taxes $129.00 per month. Grimmer indicated that in cases identified with differences in taxes that staff provides direction to the owners in attempting to resolve the problem, which is sometimes due to lack of filing homestead exemption. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the case. Docket 9-lA-85, Resolution 7-R-85, Rental Rehabilitation Program Rudd indicated that presently the City is involved in the 1964 Rental Rehabilitation Program, but due to the program being approved in October, 1984 followed by guideline approval that the program was only able to be marketed starting in December, 1984. Therefore, the City at this time had no track record as to the success of the subject program. Aid. Drummer questioned where the balance of the funds (above the 50% rental rehab grant) would come from. He indicated that it was originally his understanding that the 50% balance Would be in the form of a rental rehabilitation laon from the City's Multi -Family Rehabilitation Program (CDBG). Rudd indicated that it was originally anticipated that this would be the procedure, however, the Federal government has indicated to the City that in the case where CDBG funds would be used, the CDBG guidelines and regulations would prevail. in this situation the CDBG guidelines and the rental rehabilitation guidelines are not compatible, therefore, in almost every instance the remaining 50% (above the 50% rental rehab grant) of the funding P & D Minutes January 14, 1985 Page -3- for the rehab under the rental rehabilitation program will be required to come from a private source. Committee voted 5-0 for the City to recommend to City Council that the City participate in the 1985 Rental Rehabilitation Program with the expectation of a $74,000 allocation from the federal government. Docket 10-1A--85, ZBA 84-29-V-(R), ordinance 3-0-85, re Variation for 2000 Green Bay Road. Ald. Korshak moved, Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee approve the subject variation request. Attorney Bernstein for the petitioner was present and briefly detailed that neighborhood support was demonstrated at the ZBA hearing and that ZBA had recommended unanimously for the variaton to allow for a fast food restaurant primarily for the purpose of carry -outs at the subject address. Committee voted 5-0 to approve. Under discussion of a item not contained on the P & D agenda, Ald. Juliar provided further update to the Committee with respect to the response he received from the Army Corps of Engineers re the Greenwood Beach Ad Hoc Committee Report. of significant importance was the point that the Army Corps indicated, as they had in previous discussions, that the presently constructed rip -rap along the lake was installed without the benefit of a permit or engineering design by the Army Corps, and that if further reinforcement or expansion of same were to take place as indicated by the Ad Hoc Committee Report, a permit and design review would need to be completed by the Army Corps for issuance of a permit. Discussion of this matter with respect to the acceptance of the Ad Hoc Committee Report would be continued at the City Council's meeting of 1/14/85. Adjournment Ald. Bleveans moved, Ald. Korshak seconded that the meeting be adjourned. Meeting adjourned at 8:45 P.M., next meeting January 28, 1985 at 7:30 P.M. Staff: �_ezo� Robert I. Rudd #154 MINUTES Planning and Development Committee January 28, 1985 7:30 P.M. 6 Ald. Present: Drummer, Rorshak, Juliar, Neems and Romain Ald. absent; Bleveans Staff Present: Asprooth, Carlson, Siegel, Wirth and Rudd Presiding Official: Romain Minutes of January 14, 1985 Ald. Neems moved, Ald. Drummer seconded to approve the minutes of.the P 6 D Committee meeting of January 14, 1985. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes. Communications Elevator Maintenance Report Rudd provided a brief oral review of the position taken by the City. The report indicates that at this time it is felt that no additional legislation is required. A review of the existing BOCA Mechanical and ANSI standards allow for the City to enforce the code whereby elevators that are not operating must either be partially disassembled per the standards of the code, or be placed back in service. Beverly Huckman, Chairman of the Housing Commission was present and further elaborated on the position that at this time based on only one incident, it was felt that the existing ordinance allowed for proper action to be taken to cause elevator services to be maintained. ZBA 84-30-V(P), Pinal/variation Decision re 355 Ridge Avenue, St. Prancis Hospital Siqns. Ald. Neems questioned the size of the signs as requested via the variation, and Ald. Druruner questioned the location of the flashing red light for a stop sign. Chairman Romain indicated that this was a phased process for sign installation by St. Francis and that the signs were not of an extraordinarily large size. He also indicated that the flashing red light could not be viewed from outside of the property of St. Francis. Letter to Cove School re Extension of Special Use Permit to 2/27/85. The Committee received a letter from Building & Zoning Director Reed Carlson granting a one year extension to Cove School per zoning ordinance provisions, P & D Minutes January 78 , 1965 & Docket 24-lB-85, Multi -Family Rehabilitation Guidelines. Housing Commission Chairman Buckman was present and described on the guidelines as forwarded to the P & D Committee. She indicated that due to stringent requirements of HUD the proposed guidelines Will be limited in their effectiveness, however, every effort was extended to make the guidelines as flexible as. possible in an attempt to spur a successful existing multi -family rehab program. Buckman stated that the guidelines were not a panacea for the lagging multi -family rehab program,.aut were a first step in developing a more productive program. Chairman Buckman also indicated that the multi -family guidelines and the single-family guidelines are presently under review by the Rehab Subcommittee of the Housing Commission. Their findings, subsequent to review by the Housing Commission will be forwarded to the P & D Committee. Aid. Juliar moved, Aid. Neems seconded that the Committee approve the guidelines and recommend approval by the Council. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the guidelines as presented. Aid. Korshak requested that the staff provide an update an to the statue of the Multi -Family Rehab program after it was marketed and under way. Docket 26-1B-85, ordinance 8-0-85, Amendinq Buildinq & Zoninq Fees. Aid. Neems moved, Aid. Drummer seconded to approve the subject fee ordinance as submitted. Aid. Korshak asked if there was anything new in this ordinance that did not appear in the existing ordinance. Rudd indicated that the only change with the exception of the increase in fees was the inclusion of an annual fee permit. Aid. Xorshak questioned the logic with regard to the progression in the fee schedule. Rudd explained that the fees represent charges to cover services rendered by the City (i.e. plan exam, administrative costs and inspections) and that when the cost of construction doubled did not necessarily mean that the cost of services increased at same rate. The Committee recommended approving the ordinance and forwarding to City Council 5-0. Docket 23-113-85, Evanston Art Center Request for Temporary Event Permit. Aid. Neems moved and Aid. Korshak seconded to approve the request for a temporary indoor/outdoor sculpture scheduled from April 14 through May 19, 1985. The Committee voted 5-0 to approve the request. Consider request of Reba Place Church for an extension of Special use permit to permit operation of the Loaves and Fishes Foods Co-op at 620 Madison Street. Aid. Neems moved, Aid. Drummer seconded that the Committee approve the request for the extension of the food co-op for a one (1) year period. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the request. Docket 22-1B-85, "Additional services (Engineerinq/Greenwood Beach Shore Erosion Project)•. Aid. Juliar moved, Aid. Neems seconded that the Committee approve the additional services contract. Committee discussed the additional services as detailed in the attached memorandum as being required due to the recently adopted change in plans for the Greenwood Beach Shore Erosion Project. Committee approved the additional services 5-0. - 2 - P i D Minutes January 28, 1985 ip Consider Request of Attorney for McDonald's Corporation re Issuance of Sian Permit for 1700 Orrinqton Avenue. In discussion Rudd explained that a review of McDonald's submittal for a construction plan indicated that in addition to a sign above the south door on the south side of the building and emblems on the canopies that McDonald's had also requested for sign permits for three (3) 'golden arches' signs, two (2) on the south side and one (1) on the east side of the building. 5igce it was felt by staff that these signs were never discussed at previous meetings and due to the intense and thorough discussion on all signs at the subject location at previous P & D meetings, the application for the three (3) 'golden arches' was denied. Attorney for McDonald's was present and presented copies of an exhibit illustrating the location of the three (3) 'golden arches' on the building. He indicated that it was McDonald's contention that the Committee, in addition to the aforementioned signs and canopies, had also reviewed and approved the three (3) 'golden arches' at the P & D Committee meeting that approved the signs. Discussion among Committee members found that few could recall either seeing or not seeing the 'golden arches' on the building. It was the consensus of the Committee that the arches may had been detailed on the approved rendering, though they were not discussed. Committee directed staff to review the City sign ordinance and if the plans and the request for 'golden arches' as submitted by McDonald's meet the standards of the sign ordinance that a permit could be issued. As a clarification, McDonald's stated that it was their intention to request a permit only for the sign for 'golden arches' that was previously submitted in December, 1984 and not to request signs to the maximum limit that might be permitted by the sign ordinance. Docket 21-IB-85, Noyes Cultural Arts Center Parkinq Lot. Dan Wirth, Director of Parks & Recreation for the City of Evanston provided an overview of the existing parking lot and the proposed parking lot. After lengthy discussions and meetings with staff and neighboring residents, the plan as presented was sensitive to and addressed many of the concerns expressed by the neighborhood. The plan called for the removal of two (2) trees, and a change in configuration of parking on the lot. Wirth also indicated that some existing paving around the Noyes Cultural Arts Center building will be removed and replaced with turf. There were several neighbors present in the audience and due to the lateness of the hour, did not have an opportunity to be heard, therefore the Committee voted to continue this matter with a special meeting of the P & D Committee, scheduled for 7:00 P.M., February 4, 1985 at the Civic Center. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M., next meeting February 4, 1985 at 7:00 P.M. Staff Robert T. Rud 171 - 3 - MINUTES Special Keating of Planning 6 Development.Committee February 4, 1985 7:00 P.M. A1d.'Present: Drusamse, Korshak, Juller, Neems, Romain, Bleveans Staff Present: Asprooth, Carlson, Carter, Ceplecha, Di Canic, Eiseman, Gullen, Jennings, Rudd, Walsh, Wirth, Zendel Presiding Official: Romain Minutes of January 28. 1985 Ald. Drummer moved, Ald. Korshak seconded that the committee approve the minutes of the Planning and Development Committee meeting of January 28, 1985. The Committee voted 3-0 to approve the minutes as submitted. Communications The Committee received a communication to Northwestern University regarding the December 1984 volleyball event at McGaw Ball. The Committee also received a letter from R. Carlson to McDonald's Corporation detailing the height and width of signs indicated on plans for'the McDonald's Restaurant at 1700 Orrington. Old Business Noyes Cultural Arts Center parking lot. Don Wirth, Director of Parks b. Recreation provided a brief overview of the plans that were previously Introduced at the 1/28/85 P S. D meeting. The plans illustrated the reconstruction and expansion of the existing parking lot at the Noyes Arts Center from its present 27 space parking size to 51. In response to a question from Ald. Bleveans, Rudd explained that the present zoning ordinance requires a total of 67 spaces for the Noyes Arts Center. Due to the existing non -conformity of the Center (27 spaces), the zoning ordinance allows for the ability to decrease noncompliance, though not requiring full compliance. Therefore, the City is permitted by the ordinance to increase the parking from 27 existing to the proposed 51 and still remain within the limits of the zoning ordinance. Several members of the audience requested time to mate statements and were permitted in the following order: Joyce Lopez, a tenant at the Arts Center, presented a graph indicating a traffic count taken at 4:15 P.K. on 2/4185 finding that there was a significant parking demand at the Center and showing that all parking spaces were full. Additionally, five cars were parked illegally on the site. Joe Zendell, city staff member, in response to a question from the audience detailed the permit issuance procedures for the Center explaining that due to the uses after 7:00 P.M., permits were not required after that hour. Robert Jaynes, an area resident, opposed the proposed counterclockwise, circulation pattern in the parking lot. As an alterative. Jaynes suggested a "turn-off" or "drop-off" be located on the north side of Noyes Street in P & D Minutes Febcuary'4, 1985 front of the building to allow easier access for handicapped patrons to the ramp at the west end of the building. In response to that proposal, Wirth Indicated that while the handicapped patron is certainly a concern, the turn-off would not be warranted since the handicapped access ramp is utilized only 5-8 times per year. Wirth further explained that with the proposed pattern handicapped patrons are still provided relatively easy access to the building and its facilities. Elise Lerman, a tenant at Noyes Arts Center expressed concern with the lack of lighting and the present configuration of the parking lot, both leading to a hazardous situation due to the large number of small children being dropped off or moving through the parking lot to the park. Ks. Lerman recommended the proposed plan be implemented. Tony Kelly, an area resident, read a statement from the Northeast Evanston Neighborhood Association. The statement questioned the need for the parking In that it was felt that the need had not been adequately demonstrated. It also expressed concern for the trees that would be removed and questioned if adequate precautions would be taken to protect and care for the trees proposed to be left in the center island of the parking lot. Kelly further questioned the legitimacy of the city surveys indicating the usage of the parking lot. Most specifically, Kelly questioned the surveys in that they took into account the illegal parking in the lot. Prank Dahlkamper representing the Northeast Evanston Neighborhood Association discussed the history of the Center and the philosophical issues involved. Mr. Dahlkamper essentially opposed the expansion of what he felt was non -artistic usage and felt that the proposal was inappropriate in that the need had not been demonstrated. Dahlkamper felt that the non -availability of parking essentially is not related to the use of the building. Tom Green, an Arts Center tenant, expressed his concern that additional parking is needed due to parking demand and also for safety purposes. He expressed his position that there was both a day and an evening demand due to the teachers and students during the daylight hours in addition to the theater demands at night. Jack Lerman, another tenant in the building, related that the parking deficiencies go back as far as 1956. Lerman indicated that the parking was originally only for teachers, thus, the explanation for the low number of parking spaces. Peg Randall, an area resident for a number of years, expressed her opinion that there was not a parking problem in the area and, therefore, not a need to construct additional off-street parking spaces at Noyes Center. Hen Henson, also an area resident, stated that parking was not a problem and thus there was not a need to increase the parking at Noyes. -2- P & D minutes February 4. 198S Barbara Jaynes, a neighborhood resident, questioned the parking study done by the city to determine the need. She felt the study was inadequate and not valid. Don Wirth responded that there were three separate counts taken at varying times illustrating the need for additional parting. Jaynes further presented several questions: would the proposed plan provide enough parking for peat. time usage of the facility (i.e., theater and nighttime use)! Zendell responded that the parking was not intended to provide enough spaces for pert time use of the theater and tenant space. Jaynes questioned if the ei W ing parking lot could be beautified and upgraded without expanding. The staff responded that it could be, however, in attempting to beautify it, it would only be logical to expand at the same time, reduce the non-conformancy and satisfy what the staff felt was a demonstrated need for additional parking. In response to questions about the proposed playground equipment area, Don Wirth and staff members provided a detailed explanation of the type of equipment and the location of said equipment. Tony Kelly questioned if the funds for the park and the parking lot were linked. Wirth explained that the funds were not linked, however, it was only logical to hold off on the expenditure of funds for the park area until a decision was made on the parking lot since the construction of one could impact the other. Della Werner, a 33-year resident of the neighborhood and tenant of the Arts Center, spoke in favor of the plan feeling that parking was a definite need and that the upgrading of the park area would also be of significant benefit to the neighborhood and the Center, Sally Dumont questioned why parking meters were not in the present lot and asked if parking meters would be placed in the proposed lot. Zendell responded that meters were removed from the present lot some years ago, at which time the permit system was installed. It was felt the permit system was more effective in controlling the use of the lot and more equitable. Wirth explained that the issue of meter vs, permit for the proposed lot has not yet been decided upon and that it was possible there might be a mix. The determination of this issue would be forthcoming. Judy Fisk. a resident of the neighborhood and President of the Preservation League. stated that the League had met several times with staff and had rejected the first plan but was quite satisfied with the revised plan presented before the committee on 2/4/85 and that the Preservation League endorsed said plan. Sally 8utell, a tenant of the Arts Center, explained that additional parking was in need. Steve Knudsen, Chairman of the Evanston Preservation Commission. stated that the Commission had reviewed the proposed plan and recommended its approval with commendation. -3- P & D Committee February 4, 1985 Jean Thompson, an area resident, believed the proposal was.'a viable compromise, a good plan, and endorsed the proposal. Chairman Bomain closed the public hearing at 8:50 P.M. to allow discussion by the Planning and Developacent Committee members. Ald. Neems summarized that when the building was for sale the city recognized the goal of extending arts programs, and when institutions of this type are established there must be parking to meet those needs. Ald. Neems further stated that numerous goals for the use of the Center are being met by this revised plan. Ald. Neems moved to approve the plan as proposed and also the two exceptions as noted in the report, {l.) To allow for an 18' front yard setback instead of a 27' a required by the zoning ordinance, and, (2.) To allow for the reduction of non-conformancy in the parking spaces. Ald. Drummer seconded the motion. Ald. 3uliar felt that the staff and the neighborhood had worked together to develop a plan that was a compromise and also solved many of the problems in the area. Ald. Summers stated that he also felt the plan was a compromise and accomplished the goals of both the city and the neighborhood. Chairman 8omain stated that every effort crust be made to assure that the plan proposed, since It is in its conceptual stage, should be followed as closely as possible in the final construction drawings. Ald.' Bleveans also stated that he felt the plan was a compromise satisfactory to all parties and that the city with the proposed plan was able to stay within the regulations of the zoning ordinance. The committee voted 6-0 to approve the plan and recommend same to the City Council. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.K., next meeting Feb. 11, 1985 at 7:30 P.M. Staff: obert T. Rudd` -4- Ald. 'Present: Staff Present: Ald. Absent: Presiding Official: MINUTES Planning & Development Committee February 11, 1985 7:30 P.M. Drummer, Korshak, Juliar, Romain, Bleveans Carlson, Rudd, Carter, Aiello, Stuart, Syzmanski, Pudlosk! Heems Romain Minutes of February 4, 1985 Ald. Korshak moved, Ald. Drummer seconded, that the committee approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of the Planning and Development Committee of February 4, 1985. The committee voted 3-0 to approve the minutes as submitted (Aldermen Romain, Drummer, Korshak present at this time). Communications The committee received a copy of the public notice of the agenda scheduled for the Zoning Board meeting of February 19, 1985. Old business Control of Window Air Conditioners: The committee reviewed a report submitted by staff that recommended that the installation of window and through -wall air conditioning units be prohibited if the units exceed 12,000 BTU's and adjoin a side yard of loss than 5' or where two adjoining side yards total less than 101. The regulation would permit the installation of units of less than 12,000 BTU's in side yards of less than 5'. It was also discussed that upon adoption of this amendment, it would not be retroactive to presently installed units. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Drummer seconded to direct staff to prepare ordinances reflecting the recommendation and present the ordinance at the next (2/25/85) Planning & Development Committee meeting for review and City Council introduction. The committee voted 4-0. (Aldermen Bleveans, Korshak, Drummer and Romain present.) Flood & Pollution Control Commission Reference: Ald. Bleveans discussed the Flood & Pollution Control Comrmission's review of the reference regarding the amount of impervious surface allowed in the City. It was the conclusion of the Commission that engineering controls rather than zoning restrictions are more appropriate and also more effective for regulating water run-off. Director of Public Works, Steve Pudloski was present and provided a brief explanation of frequency of storms and storm water run-off measurements. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the committee accept the report on the reference from the Flood & Pollution Control Commission. The committee voted 5-0. (Aldermen Juliar, Romain, Drummer. Bleveans, Korshak present.) Planning & Development Committee Minutes February 11, 1985 Requests for Development of Building Fee waiver Criteria: Upon review of the report of the proposed Building Fee Waiver provision submitted by staff, Aid. Korshak felt the wording was adequate with the recommended change to add the word "substantial" before the word "hardship". This change would allow the wording to read as follows: "An applicant for such a hardship waiver must present his request in writing to the Planning & Development Committee outlining the degree of substantial hardship." Aid. Bleveans expressed concern that -if procedures for fee waiving were added to the ordinance the City may be inundated with requests to waive building and zoning fees. His concern was that fees requested to be waived could be quite substantial. Aid. Bleveans felt that there should not be a procedure set forth in the ordinance for waiving building and zoning fees. Aid. Bleveans moved, Aid. Juliar seconded, a motion to reject the proposed Building & Zoning Fee Waiver criteria. The committee voted 4-1 (Aid. Korshak voting nay) to reject proposed fee waiver provision. Rudd explained that if it was the committee's desire to eliminate both Building & Zoning Fee Waiver mechanisms, that the committee would have to amend Ordinance 8-0-85 on the Council floor to reflect the removal of an already existing Zoning Fee Waiver provision. The committee agreed to eliminate both waiver provisions and moved to amend the subject Ordinance on the Council floor. Request of Family Focus for Refund of $220.00 Building Permit: Aid. Drummer moved, Aid. Romain seconded, to grant a refund of $220.00 to Family Focus. Aid. Drummer felt that the character of the Family Focus organization presented a legitimate reason for refunding the Building Permit Fee. Aid. Bleveans expressed the same concerns as previously stated regarding fee waivers. The motion to approve the reimbursement failed on a vote of 4-1 (Aid. Drummer voting aye). Ordinance 2-0-85 Rezone Northwest Corner of Green Bay Road and McCormick Blvd.: The committee considered a report from ZAC recommending rezoning the subject location from C2 to R3. Aid. Bleveans felt that R3 zoning in the area was much more appropriate than the C2 and also more compatible with the area than the R5 zoning proposed by the school district. Aid. Bleveans moved, and Aid. Korshak seconded, that the P&D Committee concur with the ZAC recommendation and recommend to the City Council introduction of Ordinance 2-0-85 to rezone the subject site from C2 to R3. The committee voted 5-0 to approve the ZAC recommendation. There were no representatives from the school district present. New Business Triennial Review - Preservation Commission. Steve Knutson, Chairman of the Preservation Commission, and Allie Stuart, Preservation Coordinator, were present to review the report of the subject commission. Knutson briefly explained the accomplishments of the commission over the past 12 months and offered to answer any questions of the P&D Committee. Aid. Juliar questioned other members of the P&D Committee as to which member of P&D is to act as the ex officio member of the Preservation Commission. The committee recommended to Chairman Knutson to have the Preservation Commission review the system of -2- Planning & Development Minutes February 11, 1985 having an ex officio member of P&D as part of the Preservation Commission and to comment if this should continue. Ald. Bleveans moved, Ald. Drummer seconded, to recommend to the City Council to accept the report and recommend the continuation of the Preservation Commission. The committee voted 5-0 to approve. Sign Permit Fee Waiver: The committee reviewed a request for a Sign Permit Fee Waiver from the ETHS Booster Club. The waiver would be in the amount of $25.00 to permit the erection of four temporary signs on Chicago and Northwestern Railroad property at various intersections in the City. Ald. Juliar moved to deny the request and Ald. Drummer seconded. The committee voted 5-0 to deny the Permit Fee Waiver Request. It was reported to the committee that a donation was recently made to the ETHS Booster Club to cover the cost of the permit fee. Consideration of an Amendment to City Code to Provide for Site Plan Review: Planning Director, Dick Carter was present to expand upon a memorandum forwarded to the Planning and Development Committee from City Manager Joel Asprooth, explaining some recent trends of development in the City. The memo highlighted growing trends toward revitalization of commercial and business properties and the growing concern about aesthetic qualities of such developments, including landscaping, lighting, signs, etc. Carter and Rudd explained present staff procedures which are to bring together various staff members such as Engineering, Traffic Engineering, Building, Zoning, and Planning to meet as a group with developers. The purpose of such meetings is to expedite reviews in a coordinated, systematic manner. It was explained that staff, in the course of these reviews, makes various suggestions to the developer, such as realigning of parking circulation, landscaping layouts, and plant species suggestions in order to bring about a development more appealing to the City and also to the applicant. Ald. Bleveans indicated his favor of a site plan review process, however, he felt that the present informal continuing review appeared to be successful and should continue. Ald. Bleveans expressed his reservations about establishing a more formal site plan review in the form of an amendment. Ald. Korshak concurred with Bleveans' concerns and recommended that the informal procedure continue and that before further discussion, staff come back to the committee with a list of items that are reviewed in the informal site plan review process. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Korshak seconded to reject the staff request for an amendment at this time. The committee voted 4-1 to deny the amendment (Ald. Romain voting nay). Ad.iournment Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Drummer Next meeting February 25. 1985. 7:30 Staff: 10 � Robert T. Rudd seconded to adjourn. Time: 8:58 P.M. P.K. -3- MINUTES Planning & Development Committee February 25, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Drummer, Romain, Bleveans, deems Staff Present: Carlson, Rudd, Carter, Grimmer, P. J. Witt Ald. Absent: Juliar, Korshak Presiding Official: Romain Minutes of February 11, 1985 Ald. Bleveans moved, Ald. Neems seconded, that the committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of February 11, 1985. Voting aye: Aldermen Romain, Neems, Bleveans. Voting nay: none. Communications Extension of Variation and Soecial Use for Central School. The committee received a copy of a letter from School District 65 superintendent Campbell requesting an extension of the variation and special use for Central School per Section 6-12-4-(C) of the zoning Ordinance. There were no objections for Central School from the committee to the extension being granted by the Director of Building & zoning. Old Business Request for Building Fee waiver Criteria At the suggestion of Chairman Romain the committee held over further discussion of this matter Which was referred back to the committee by the City Council on February 11, 1985. The matter was directed to be held over to the 3/11/85 P & D meeting when additional Committee members may be present. Ordinance 19-0-85 Regarding Control of window Air Conditioners Ald. Neenn noved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the committee introduce at the City Council the subject ordinance. In response to a question from Ald. Bleveans, Rudd indicated that central air conditioning condenser units are allowed in non -required side or rear yards. Units are prohibited in front yards. The subject ordinance does not address the central air conditioning units which will continue to be governed by the Zoning ordinance. Those voting aye: Aldermen Drummer, Bleveans, Romain, teens. Voting nay: 0. New Business "Nuclear Weapon Free zone Siqns' Rudd gave a brief description of the present problem. To the best of City staff's knowledge, the existing nuclear Weapon free zone signs located on both single family home property and church properties, appear to be in violation of Section 6-5-1-3(A) and (C) of the zoning Ordinance. City staff has Planning s Development Minutes February 25, 1985 Page Two recently received a complaint from a single family neighbor of a church which has erected such a sign. Alderman Raden was present and suggested that the committee consider making the `nuclear weapon free zone' signs legal based on the fact that some time ago the city passed a nuclear freeze resolution. Ald. Hleveans explained that he had some difficulty with the relationship of the resolution previously passed and the present problem with the signs and felt that this was not an adequate solution to the problem. Ald. Neems felt that the Zoning Ordinance was quite clear in stating that the subject 'nuclear weapon free zone' signs were not permitted on single family properties and felt that thel should be removed. With respect to churches, both Ald. Bleveans and Neems questioned as to whether the subject signs could be qualified as 'church bulletin signs' as permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Rudy} indicated that even if that interpretation were permitted to prevail, in most instances churches already had an existing bulletin sign in addition to the nuclear weapon free zone aign and that the Zoning Ordinance presently permits only one such church bulletin sign (with the exception if the church is on a corner property then two signs are allowed). Mr. Warren, representing the Wheadon Church, indicated that their sign is 21.3 sq. ft. in size, thus, larger than permitted by the Zoning Ordinance (12 Sq. Ft.). Mr. Warren gave a brief explanation as to his churches meaning and intent of the sign and felt that they should be allowed to remain. Mr. Al DeWolf indicated his stand against the proliferation of signs in general, but suggested that this particular sign be specifically identified and permitted in the sign or Zoning Ordinance. Mrs. Kasen, a neighbor of the Evanston Priends Meeting church (which was the subject of the original complaint) spoke in favor of allowing the subject signs throughout the city. A Mr. Levenson spoke and suggested that the committee explore the possibility of somehow grandfathering the subject signs since they may have been erected on previously approved sign pouts. A Mr. .Tack Bishop indicated that he had submitted written testimony in favor of the signs to the corunittee and would not read the statement aloud. Mr. Clyde Baker also spoke in favor of the signs encouraging the committee to find Nome method to allow the continued existence of the subject signs. chairman Romain advised the committee that later on in the meeting a presentation would be made by Dick Carter, Planning Director, detailing the need to revise the existing city sign ordinance. Chairman Romain asked the Committee if they felt the subject could be more appropriately reviewed and researched in the context of a new sign ordinance. in light of the future sign ordinance review, Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that existing signs be allowed to remain on church property until the revised sign ordinance is adopted. Voting aye: Aldermen Bleveans, Drummer, Neems, Romain. voting nay: none. Bleveans moved and Romain seconded that the existing subject signs be allowed to continue on single family home property. Voting aye: Aldermen Romain, Bleveans. voting nay: Aldermen Planning 6 Development Minutes Pebruary 25, 1985 Page Three Neems, Drummer. The motion failed. Aid. Neems moved to reconsider the vote an single family residences. Aid. Neems moved and Aid. Bleveans seconded to include single family residences. Voting ayes Aldermen Romain, Bleveans, Neems. Voting nay: Aid. Drummer. The motion was approved. Plat of Consolidation 1101-15 Chicago Ave. Aid. Bleveans moved and Aid. Drummer seconded, to approve the plat of consolidation which would allow for the issuance of a driveway permit for the construction of a parking ramp at the subject address. Voting aye: Aldermen Bleveans, Neems, Drummer, Romain. Voting nay: None. Rehab Case 357-84 Aid. Bleveans moved and Aid. Neems seconded, to accept the staff recommendation to deny the loan application. Charlotte Walker, Executive Director of ECDC was present and requested the opportunity to present some additional background on the case. Walker indicated that the ECDC recommendation for a deferred loan was incorrect and that ECDC would agree with city staff that the loan should be 50 amortizing, if approved. However, ECDC felt that the disqualification with respect to the amount of rehab not meeting the qualification of being greater than 50% of liquid assets should not apply in this case. Nancy Grimmer, Director of Housing Rehabilitation b Property Maintenance was present and indicated that she had discussed this matter with Walker and concluded that the recommendation to deny the case was still appropriate. Aid. Bleveans withdrew his original motion and Aid. Neems moved to place this matter on hold until the March 11, 1985 P&D meeting. Proposed Siqn Ordinance Revision Planning Director Carter presented a slide show detailing various types of signs located throughout the city. The purpose of the presentation was to visually demonstrate the present inadequacy of a 27-year-old sign ordinance that is not capable of dealing with the problems facing the City of Evanston at this time. Steve Knutson, Chairman of the Preservation Commission Indicated the Commission's support for a new sign ordinance as did Drew Pederson, a member of the City Planning Commission. Hayward Blake, a member of Design Evanston, who participated in sign reviews and design, also indicated a need for an updated ordinance. Ira Golan, Executive Director of the Evanston Chamber of Commerce, indicated his support for the review of a new sign ordinance and strongly recommended that participation be sought from members of the business community in order to gain a broad perspective of the Planning & Development Minutes February 25, 1985 Page Four - sign issue. Aid. Neems moved and Aid. Bleveans seconded to direct staff to take the steps in developing a new sign ordinance for the city. Voting aye: Aldermen Neems, Bleveans, Drummer, Romain. Voting nay: 0. Adiournnent 9:05 P.M. Next Meeting March 11, 1985 Ro ert T. Ru Zd MINUTES Planning & Development Committee Febemazy 11, 1985 Nam, 7:30 P.H. Ald Present: Romain, Neems, Bleveans, Drummer, Juliar, Rorshak Staff Present: Carlson, Rasmussen, P. Witt, Siegel, Aiello Ald. Absent: None Presiding official: Romain Minutes of February 25, 1985 Ald. Bleveans moved, Ald. Neems seconded, that the committee approve the minutes of the Planning & Development Committee meeting of February 25, 1985. Voting aye: Aldermen Romain, Neems, Bleveans. Voting nay: None. Communications Zoninq Waiver - 825 Noyes Street The committee received a copy of a letter from the owners of the aforementioned property requesting a waiver of the requirement for construction of a screening fence at their North property line in conjunction with construction of their new building. This waiver may be granted by the Director of Building & Zoning as per the Zoning Code. There were no objections to the granting of this waiver. Memorandum and Letter Reqardinq Window and Thru-Wall Air conditioners The committee received a copy of a letter from an interested resident questioning several aspects of proposed ordinance 19-0-85 and that ordinance's regulation of window and thru-wall air conditioners. A memo from the Director of Building & Zoning answering the points made in the letter was discussed. There were no additional questions from the committee. Copy of ZBA Public Notice for March 19, 1985 Meetinq_ There were no questions from the committee in regard to this notice. ZBA 84-31-V(F), Final Variation Decision Reqardinq 1305 Grant Street The committee received a copy of the ZBA final decision report on the aforementioned case. There were no questions from the committee. Old Business Proposed Amendment to Section 5--4-4-3 of the Condominium Ordinance The committee received a copy of Ordinance 18-0--85 and a staff memorandum outlining the proposed changes to the ordinance. said changes adjust the income limitations for qualification for reimbursement of moving expenses for persons who must relocate due to condo conversion. Upon motion of Ald. Neems and a second of Ald. Drummer, ordinance 18-0-85 was approved for introduction to City Council. Voting aye: Aldermen Romain, Neems, Bleveans, Drummer. Planning & Development minutes February 11, 1985 Page Two Request for Development of Building Fee Waiver Criteria At the suggestion of the Chairman, consideration of this item was put over to 3/25/85. Rehab Case 357-84 The Committee on 2/25/85 received a copy of the case review and a staff memorandum containing a recommendation that this case not be approved by the committee and council. Ald. Korshak stated that rejection of this case may well be penalizing the applicant who has chosen to invest her assets in a else manner. Neems stated that the program guidelines have been designed in order that those persons without large assets may receive rehab assistance. Ald. Juliar noted that housing rehab has in the recent past not met the goals of the program and that a considerable amount of money is available, also, that this is a modest loan that would circulate some of the available Funds. Charlotte Walker, Executive Director of ECDC stated that without the income from the invested assets, the applicant would qualify under every aspect of the program. She stated further that with ECDC and the City not meeting their rehab goals, that perhaps a reinstitution of a grant program should be considered. Ald. Neems remarked that the question of grants has been discussed many times in the past by the committee and the City Council and that she still looks upon grants with some disfavor. Walker noted that grants are now given for the commercial rehab program but remain unavailable for the residential rehab program. Upon a motion by Ald. Korshak to approve Rehab Case 357 and a second by Ald. Drummer, the committee voted 6-0 to reject the staff recommendation and recommend approval of the case to the City Council. Voting aye: Aldermen Romain, Neems, Bleveans, Drummer, Juliar, Korshak. Ald. Korshak stated that the committee's nonacceptance of the staff recommendation should not be viewed as a criticism of the staff recommendation or the staff report, which he felt was an excellent report. New Business Proposed Amendment to 1985 Rental Rehabilitation Program Application The committee received a staff report outlining the proposed change in the program application which would move the emphasis for rental rehabilitation units from two bedrooms to three bedrooms in order to be of greater benefit to large families. Upon motion of Ald. Neems and a second by Ald. Drummer the proposed amendment was approved to be recommended to City Council for adoption. Voting aye: Aldermen Romain, Neems, Bleveans, Drummer, Juliar, Korshak. Voting nay: None. Special Use for 1501 Central Street - Northwestern University/McGaw Hall The committee received a copy of ZBA 84-34 recommending the granting of a special use for a fund-raising event in McGaw Hall October 2, 1985 through October 5, 1985. Ald. Bleveans questioned what will be sold or exhibited at the fund-raising event. Northwestern University Attorney, Perry, replied that specialty items such as toys, clothing, paper items, etc. will be sold in 40 booths leased mainly by merchants from outside of Evanston. It is an attempt to exhibit merchandise that is both unusual and not usually sold in the Planning 5 Development Minutes February 11, 1985 Page Three Evanston area. Ald. Neems questioned how often and how long has this event been held. Perry answered that this has been a yearly event for the past 13 years. Neems also questioned the serving of food at the event. Perry noted that there will be a first night dinner and on subsequent days only concession stands will be open. He noted further that attendance at last year's event was 2,200 persons over the full period of the event. Ald. Korshak questioned handling of traffic. perry replied that Northwestern University personnel and City police, paid by Northwestern University, would handle traffic and that free parking would be available. Upon motion by Ald. Neems, second by Ald. Juliar, Ordinance 24-0-85 was recommended fbr introduction to city Council. Voting aye: Aldermen Romain, Neems, Bleveans, Drummer, Juliar, Korshak. Voting nay: None. Special Use and Variation for Blind Faith Cafe, 525-27 Dempster Street The committee received a copy of ZSA recommendation 84-33 recommending approval of the variation and special use (with certain restrictions). Aid. Neems questioned the need for only three additional parking spaces and whether the special use would go with the land or with the owner and/or operator of the restaurant. Rasmussen replied that the three spaces only cover the net increase of required parking over the previous use. Attorney Siegel replied that the special use as noted in the Ordinance would be limited to the ownership and operation of said business by David Lipschutz. Ald. Korshak noted that the zoning code definition of a fast food restaurant is unclear and that any interpretation of that definition is difficult at best. He also felt the ZBA recognized the difficulty inherent in the definition and felt they had worked well with that definition. From the transcript he stated he also noted that there was little objection to the applicant's conduct of his present business to the West nor to his proposed operation except for traffic and congestion problems that may be created. Ald. Korshak also noted that property owners of nearby residences have improved their property greatly over the past few years and that the Salvation Army operation was not by its nature a neat and tidy operation. He also cited from the zoning code many permitted uses in this zoning district that would allow various types of carry -out material. Ald. Neems noted that a restaurant without fast food is permitted in this area with the special use being a device to explore special conditions of a particular proposed operation. she noted that there are a range of take-out establishements, from a McDonald's type to a regular restaurant which has only occasional take-outs. She also noted that with the negative effect that the accumulation of certain special uses that have been granted to rejuvenate the Chicago Avenue business district may be bringing us close to spelling the end of special uses for this Chicago Avenue area. Ald. Davis stated that she had attended the ZBA hearing and joins in the concerns of the residents regarding the effect of the operation on the adjoining residential neighborhood. She also agreed that there were no objections to the present operation of the applicant but agrees in the problem of business zoning directly adjacent to residential zoning. Traffic is now excessive and this operation will increase that problem. She noted further Planning & Development Hinutes February 11, 1985 Page Pour that the ZBA has tried to minimize the fast food carry -out aspect of the proposed operation by elimination of the carry -out counter. She also stated that while the parking variation is minimal, being only three spaces, the principle behind this regulation is what is important to maintain. She felt that the variation for parking would negate the parking protections afforded by the Zoning Ordinance which were enacted to offer protection to residential areas from adjoining business areas. Ald. Rorshak stated that as times change business redevelopment will come and along with it, parking and other problems. He felt that this operation does not fit the true definition of a fast food restaurant. The applicant is presently operating in a similar manner with little or no objections. Ald. Davis stated that the cumulative effect of business redevelopment in the area is becoming serious. Ald. Davis requested permission of the Committee to enter some remarks forwarded by Ald. Pabst, who was attending another committee meeting. Ald. Pabst feels that no hardship was proven in the hearing; that no recognition of the cumulative effect of the variations and special uses was taken and that the special use and variation for this fast food restaurant would increase traffic and other congestion. Ald. Drummer inquired as to the hours of the proposed restaurant. Mr. Lipschutz (applicant) stated 7:30 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. A petition with approximately 50 signatures endorsing the granting of the variation and special use was presented to the committee by Mr. Lipschutz. Ald. Neems questioned Mr. Lipschutz as to the possibility of obtaining extra parking spaces and he replied that they could possibly be found on other property but would not qualify as required parking due to the fact that the property was under different ownership. Ald. Neems inquired further as to any special permit needed for entertainment. Rasmussen stated that no special permit is required as long as the entertainment is and remains incidental to the main use of the operation. Several residents of the area testified as follows: Mr. Charles Reman. Mr. Reman stated that he had reviewed the parking requirements and submitted a data sheet to support his argument that six spaces may in fact be required for the new development as opposed to the three spaces specified in the zoning analysis. Mr. Rasmussen explained that the 2,000 ft. exemption was applied to the restaurant, thus the need for only three additional spaces. Mr. Jim Ratteree stated that the cumulative effect of the redevelopment of the area negates reasoning for variances. He stated that there are no vacant stores in the area and that retailers need no bonuses to relocate to this area. He further stated that his biggest concern was that the standards for variation were not discussed by the ZBA at any time during the meeting. He further stated that Hinman Avenue has greatly improved over the past few years from a collection of boarding houses to very valuable rehabbed single family dwelling. Carol Gustis stated that the applicant should be required to lease parking and that currently cars are parked in crosswalks and in school zones and the police department is very lax with parking enforcement and that the City should take citizen safety into primary consideration. Deborah Golden stated that Hinman Avenue used to be R7 zoning and was rezoned to R3 in order to act as a buffer to the business zone and that the business zone is now in Planning 6 Development Minutes February 11, 1985 Page Five fact having a negative effect on the residential zoning. Ashur Punje stated that the Blind Faith Cafe would not provide 20 full time jobs and that any jobs that were provided would be of a menial variety. He stated that the applicant currently runs a good establishment and that Evanston would not lose the Blind Faith Cafe if this request for a variance and special use were turned down. He felt this special use would set a precedent for the area and that there are no clear-cut guidelines to cover possible expansion of their entertainment activities beyond what was described in the hearing. Applicant David Lipschutz and Atty. Bernstein stated that under the definition of the Zoning Ordinance, almost any restaurant in town could be required to qualify as a special use. Lipschutz further stated that 65% of his business comes after 6:00 P.A. when additional parking is available in the lot across the street and most other businesses in the area are closed. He stated a history of two other restaurants that have existed in the block and that this new restaurant will not hurt adjacent property values. He stated that many nearby residents have signed a petition (previously presented to the committee) endorsing approval of his proposal. He cited many permitted uses that could be established in this area that could create more traffic than his proposed restaurant. He suggested that parking time limits on the side streets may help the parking and congestion problem and that a great deal of the parking problem was caused by commuters who park and then use public transportation. He further stated that the imposition of a special use requirement upon his restaurant is inconsistent enforcement citing the White Hen Pantry, 7-11, etc., that serve carry -out sandwiches, soup and beverages without the requirement of special use permit. Chairman Romain inquired of the committee as to their wishes to either recommend introduction to City Council this evening or continue the item to 3/18/85 when it would be the only order of business on the agenda. Ald. Bleveans felt that many other points remain to be discussed. Aid. Neems endorsed the idea of carrying the item to 3/25/85 in order to explore additional points of contention. She also inquired of the owner as to his consideration of a restaurant of less than 2,000 sq. ft. in size. Ald. Korshak moved to approve introduction of the ordinance granting the variation and special use to City Council this evening with the stipulation that this was no guarantee that the ordinance would be moved for approval on 3/25/85. Second by Ald. Drummer. The motion failed on a 3-3 tie vote. Chairman Romain announced that with the failure of this introduction motion, the matter would be held over to a special meeting of the Planning s Development Committee with this item to be the only item on the agenda for March 18, 1985 at 7:30 P.M. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M. MINUTES Special Meeting Planning and Development Committee March 18, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Romain, Neems, Bleveans, Drummer, Juliar, and Korshak Aid. Absent: None Staff Present: Carlson, Rasmussen and Rudd Presiding Official: Romain Minutes of March 11, 1985 Ald. Bleveans moved, Ald. Korshak seconded, that the committee approve the minutes of the Planning and Development Committee meeting of February 11, 1985. Voting aye: Aldermen Korshak, Bleveans and Romain. Voting nay: none. Docket 56-3A-85, ZBA 84-33 V b SU(R), Ordinance 25-0-85, re Special Use and Variation for 525-27 Dempster Street. Bennett Johnson was introduced by David Lipschutz, the applicant. Johnson, an architect and resident of Evanston is the architect for the interior and exterior improvements proposed for the restaurant. Johnson stated that the improvements to the building facade would be an attribute to the neighborhood. Johnson further stated that the applicant has approached the city with full disclosure regarding the proposed type of establishment, and that the customers are mainly Evanstonians as are the employees of the establishment. Johnson stated that it was his opinion that the parking problem discussed was not only a Dempster/Chicago problem, but a citywide problem with no easy solution. The next speaker in favor of the restaurant was Mr. harry Major, a co-owner of the building with his father. Major stated that the Salvation Army was moving due to the need for larger quarters. Major further stated that attempts to rent the property have not been successful, and that the type of tenants that have expressed interest would not be complimentary to the neighborhood. Major felt that the proposed restaurant was an excellent use and had an excellent reputation at its present location. Major stated that under certain regulations three separate businesses could open up in the space proposed to be utilized by the restaurant without any additional parking being provided and could bring in more traffic to the neighborhood. John Rudy an area resident expressed concern about parking. Rudy stated that it was his opinion that the city should follow the regulations net forth in the zoning ordinance and that failure to do so would allow for the further creeping of parking problems into the residential neighborhood. Bonnie Wilson, an opponent to the restaurant expressed her concern about an increase parking problems in r P b D Minutes March 18, 1985 addition to the noise generated by the parking and also possible noise generated by the night time entertainment. Ms. Wilson also provided an exhibit in the form of a bag of garbage highlighting the various items that she has picked up in front of her home. The items were from Baskins and Robbins and other food establishments in the area. Ms. Wilson pointed out that the restaurant would generate additional litter in the neighborhood. Kirk Bennett, resident of the area spoke against the proposal explaining that the restaurant could only be detrimental to the area by bringing in', additional traffic and noise, and that the type of use was not appropriate adjacent to the residential neighborhood. Bennett stated that within a two block area there are numerous homes that have been designated as architecturally or historically significant and that the more intense commercial use by the form of a restaurant would only damage that neighborhood. Bennett stated that some time ago the residential area was up zoned from R7 to R3 which encouraged many residents to improve their homes. To allow this development to infringe in that area would only cause the homes to depreciate. llext speaker was Carolyn Guistolise a resident of the area who also has an interior design business in Evanston. Ms. Guistolise spoke both as a resident and a business person. She felt that in many instances the attitudes of pro business has proven detrimental to the residential area. The case in hand is particularly illustrative of that issue since the single family residential area borders so closely to the business area. She felt that the Montessori School in the area has attracted a significant amount of traffic that previously was not there when the school was a public school. Ms. Guistolise said that she has found out that the Police Department has agreed not to enforce certain parking restrictions within the Montessori School area which has further exacerbated the parking problems in the neighborhood. Robert Dolt, an opponent of the restaurant felt that he would support the statements made previously by Mr. Bennett. Dolt also felt that the owners of the property knew the zoning regulations when they purchased the property and should abide by those regulations. The next speaker George Williams an opponent of the restaurant stated that it was his opinion that business should be required to abide by the zoning laws and in so doing both business and residential could live in harmony. The next speaker opposing the restaurant was Ashur Punje. Mr. Punje stated he felt that the zoning ordinance was vague on the issue and that the Zoning Board of Appeals did not fully understand the issue at hand. He discussed the 'boundary issue' identified in the comprehensive plan, he felt this was critical to the issue at hand. Ile felt that to allow the restaurant via a special use and variation would be in direct conflict with both the standards of the zoning ordinance and the city`s comprehensive general plan. Punje stated that a number of other uses would be permitted and could be placed at the subject location and would not be detrimental to the neighborhood. He also felt that the applicant had not made the case regarding the hardship requirements as establishment in the zoning ordinance. The next speaker was applicant David Lipschutz. Lipschutz indicated that he understood the parking and traffic concerns of the neighborhood. He felt he had an understanding of these issues since his - 2- A P & D Minutes March 18, 1985 present business is located one and one-half blocks west of the proposed location. He felt that he has been a good neighbor and operated a fine establishment. He also felt the problem was not the Blind Faith Cafe, but rather parking in the area and that the parking problem would continue whether he did or did not move to the proposed location. The next speaker was Steve Bernstein, attorney for the applicant. Bernstein felt that the Zoning Board attempted to split hairs and provide a compromise by restricting the applicants special use for carry -outs. He felt that the structure of the zoning ordinance provided selective enforcement of conditions of the ordinance, in this case detrimental to his client. He noted that the White Hen, Jewel and Dominick's which allows for fast food carry -outs in the form of deli products are not classified as special uses though that function would be very similar to his client. At this point Chairman Romain closed the testimony since there were no further speakers. rn deliberation Ald. Neems stated that the committee could only make a decision based on the criteria set forth in the zoning ordinance and not on the character, intent, or past performance of the applicant. Ald. Neems stated that she could not agree to the Zoning Board's conclusion with respect to the special use. Ald. Drummer stated that the special use mechanism is to protect the neighborhood by requiring the applicant to meet various criteria. He felt that the applicant did not meet those requirements and therefore he would vote against a special use. However, he stated he could support a variation. lie also felt that reading the transcript and discussing the issue at the P & D meeting that the restaurant did not have the support of the neighborhood. Ald. Korshak stated that ZBA did conduct a hearing and upon his reading of the transcript and the findings of the ZBA, he cannot find where that conclusion is so wrong that he cannot agree with them. Fie stated that he doesn't like the autos, noise and the litter generated by various commercial establishments, but that this is a matter that is associated with urban life. He felt that actions were recommended by the ZBA to condition the special use and restrict and control the negative impacts. fie indicated that he could support the special use and the variation. Ald. Juliar addressed the issue of restaurants abutting residential areas, and stated that he was quite familiar with the problems since the Burger King and Colorado Company both abutt residential areas and are in his ward. He stated that he is quite familiar with the problems generated by such close proximity of restaurants and residential units. He felt that the parking problems in the area of the proposed restaurant is of such a magnitude that he could not support the special use or the variation. Ald. Juliar moved, Ald. Neems seconded to deny the special use. Voting aye: Aldermen Juliar, Neems, Drummer and Bleveans. Voting nay: Ald. Korshak. Discussion ensued regarding the variation request. Ald. Juliar moved, Ald. Neems seconded to deny the variation. Voting aye: Aldermen Juliar, Neems and Bleveans. Voting nay: Aldermen Romain, Korshak and Drummer. Meeting adjourned 9:55 P.M., next meeting March 25, 1985 at 7:30 P.M. -3- P & D Minutes March 18, 1985 NOTE: With the above action being resolved in the special P & D,Committee meeting of March 18, 1985, proceedings of the City Council on March 25, 1985 should be as follows: 1. Introduction of Ordinance 25-0-85. 2. Motion to suspend rules to permit adoption of Ordinance 25-0-85. Vote on motion. 3. Motion to amend Ordinance 25-0-85 to delete granting of special use per P & D Committee's action of March 18, 1985 and to deny special use by 5-1 vote. Vote on notion. 4.. Vote on amended Ordinance 25-0-85 with variation remaining due to 3-3 vote of P & D Committee. Staff 6f<f� flobert T. Ru d 1231 -4- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee March 25, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Bleveans, Korshak, Drummer, Romain, Neems and Juliar Ald. Absent: ' None Staff Present: R. Carlson, Wirth, Stuart, Siegel, Ahlberg, Carter and Rudd Presiding Official: Romain tS Minutes of March 2% 1985 Minutes of special meeting of March 18, 1985, Ald. Bleveans moved, Ald. Drummer seconded that the committee approve the minutes. Vote 4-0, absent Aldermen Juliar and Neems. Communications Lease Non -Renewal Report Jan -Feb. The committee reviewed the report submitted by Peggy Witt, Housing Planner for the period of January and February 1985. Rudd indicated that as previously discussed the report for March and April 1985 would for the most part capture any lease non -renewal for the May renewal period. Chairman Romain stated that when the decision was made by the committee to require these reports, it was the intent primarily to capture the spring lease non -renewal period. That report will be presented to the committee in May 1985. The Steerinq Committee, Central School Neighbors The committee received a cormunication from the neighbors of the Central School asking several questions about the proposed high rise elderly home for the site. That communication indicated that a meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, March 26, 19B5 in the City Council Chambers for further discussion. Ald. Korshak indicated to the committee that he would have additional information that he had recently received available to distribute at the above captioned meeting. Docket 65-39-85, Amendment to Preservation ordinance Allie Stuart, City Preservation Coordinator and Barbara Buchbinder-Green, a member of the Preservation Commission were in attendance to present a brief elide program highlighting several of the fifty-nine (59) proposed r P 8 D Minutes Match 25, 1985 landmarks. Upon conclusion of the slide presentation and several questions from the committee pertaining to the evaluation criteria utilized in the determination, Mn. Buchbinder-Green indicated all of the landowners subject to the landmark status have agreed to the proposed designation. Originally two proposed landmark owners had concerns regarding taxes, building construction, encumbrance, etc. However, after meeting with both staff and the Preservation Commission members, both parties agreed with the proposed landmark designation. Ald. Julair moved, Ald. Bleveans seconded that the committee recommend for introduction proposed Ordinance 23-0-85. Committee approved the motion 6-0. Docket 63-3D-85, World's Fair Authority City Clerk Gross was present and gave a short presentation regarding the request from the World's Fair Authority to the City of Evanston to co-sponsor with the authority an informational meeting for Evanston residents on the proposed 1992 Chicago World's Fair. The date for the informational meeting is scheduled for May 11, 1985. Gross made clear that no cost would be incurred by the City nor should this co -sponsoring of an informational meeting be construed to mean City support at this point for the Chicago world's Fair. At the informational meeting, members of the World's Fair Authority will be present to answer questions and make presentations in addition to various representatives of a cross-section of the City. Ald. Bleveans moved, Ald. Juliar seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council that the City act as a co-sponsor with the World's Fair Authority for an informational meeting for Evanston residents. Committee approved the motion 6-0. Request for Development of Building Fee Waiver Criteria Ald. Bleveans expressed his concerns that having building fee waiver criteria provisions in the ordinance would only encourage regL is for building fee waivers. Also, it was hiz feeling that the existing zoning fee waiver provision should also be removed from the ordinance, thus not encouraging zoning fee waiver requests. Ald. Korshak stated that various organizations will still find .rays to have their respective zoning and/or building fee waiver requests before the Committee and City Council, even if there are no provisions in the ordinance. Ald. Juliar stated his general disagreement about waiving fees and he feels that neither zoning or building fees should be waived. Ald. :Teems felt that both zoning and building fee waivers should have compatible criteria or similar criteria and that non profit status in and of itself is not sufficient reason for a waiver. Ald. Korshak stated his agreement with Ald. teems in that whether an organization is profit or non-profit is really not meaningful as to determination of their hardship to receive a fee waiver. He felt that there should be criteria that would provide a basis for consideration of the various fee waiver requests. Ald. Juliar felt that if criteria were developed that -2- P 6 D Minutes March 25, 1985 applicants would merely construct their case in a manner to meet the criteria. Ald. Neems moved, Ald. Bleveans seconded to have staff prepare an ordinance for building fee waiver similar to zoning fee waiver criteria which are presently in the fee ordinance. Motion was approved 4-2. Voting aye: Aldermen Romain, Neems, Drummer and Korshak. Voting nay: aldermen Bleveans and Juliar. Docket 64-38-85, Greenwood Beach Authorization to Proceed Aid. Bleveans moved, Ald. teems seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council approval of the request. Ald. Neems questioned whether the Lee Street Beach without renourishment would suffer in quality. Wirth stated that the Lee Street Beach is stable at the present time and would be renourished at a later date. Ald. Neems questioned the time schedule for Greenwood Beach. Wirth indicated that in all likelihood it would not reopen until after June 1, 1985. Ald. Juliar questioned how long the working period would be on Greenwood Beach. Wirth replied that with good weather the project would take approximately three weeks. Aid. Korshak questioned the time lapse from the submission of the Greenwood Reach Ad -Hoc Committee final report and the request before the Committee tonight. It was his concern that after what he felt was lengthy delay this was a request for expedient action. He felt that the Committee and Council should have had more time to review this request and not requested to act upon it with such a short notice. Wirth indicated that this request was held up due to the need to gather engineering data, which could not be compiled until the ice broke which was only recently. Wirth indicated that staff would be back to City Council on April 8, 1985 for consideration of the bids for the rip -rap and sand. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to the City Council to authorize proceeding with the sand renourishment and rip -rap restoration at Greenwood Beach. Supplemental Memorandum on Site Plan Review Dick Carter was present to respond to any questions from Committee members regarding his memorandum dated March 25, 1985 to the Committee, explaining in greater detail the purpose of site plan review. This matter was originally before the Committee approximately one month ago and at that time the Committee directed staff to come back at a later date with additional information. Drew Petterson, a member of the Plan Commission was present and stated the Commissions support for the enactment of a site plan review ordinance by the City. Ald. Neems stated her total support for the site plan review process citing the South Point Plaza is an example of the site plan review process. Ald. Juliar stated that he was troubled with aspects of the issue, but that in general he likes the product of site plan review. His major concern was that there should be no architectural review. Carter stated that the site plan review process was only site plan review dealing with landscaping, the type of signage and in sone cases location of the -3- P b D Minutes March 25, 1985 building on the property. Site plan review is not intended to be architectural or design review. Ald. Korshak questioned the proposed appeal process whereby due to disagreement an applicant could appeal to the P & D Committee. Ald. Korshak felt that P s D Committee may not have expertise in the area of site plan review and that there should be another body to review disagreements between staff and applicants. Ald. Bleveans indicated that he . was originally opposed to a site plan review process because he felt it was ' another layer'of bureaucracy and that he felt that we could not impose our taste of appearance on an applicant. Ald. Korshak felt that the staff and the Plan Commission should develop greater specificity of criteria primarily with the respect to the appeal process and present this to the Committee. Ald. Bleveans stated his opinion that any appeal process should be kept within the City. Ald. Korshak moved, Ald. Bleveans seconded that the staff prepare an ordinance per the direction of the Committee and return the proposed ordinance to the Committee at a later date. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the motion. Northwestern University Letter re 'Gazebo 851 N.U. Attorney Perry was present to answer any questions regarding the subject letter. The letter was requested by Ald. Bleveans at the March 11, 1985 P 5 D Committee meeting. The letter listed tentative exhibitors for the Junior League of Chicago's use at McGaw Hall. There were no questions from the Committee regarding the prospective exhibitors. Plat of Consolidation, 1819 Church Street The Committee received during the meeting a request for review and approval of a plat of consolidation for 1819 Church Street. The consolidation would allow for the owner of the property to obtain building permits. The subject property was sold by the City to the applicant for parking area for a medical clinic. Ald. Bleveans moved, Ald. Drummer seconded to forward this item to City Council as an emergency item since it did not appear on the Council agenda and to be voted upon by the City Council at the March 25, 1985 meeting. Committee voted 6-0 to forward the request and the plat of consolidation, and for the request for approval of the plat. Ald. Korshak remarks re 525-27 Dempster - Variation and Special Use Ald. Korshak indicated his concern regarding an item previously addressed by the Committee - 525 Dempster Street (Blind Faith Cafe). Ald. Korshak stated that after consulting with several zoning experts it was the conclusion of those experts, upon review of the transcript of the Zoning Board hearing of the case, that no findings of facts were found in the transcript. Upon a request for intrepretation, Attorney Siegel indicated that there is a provision of the City Zoning Ordinance that would allow the issue to be referred back to the Zoning Board of Appeals without the need for publishing -4- p & D Minutes March 25, 1985 for a new hearing, with the intent being that the Zoning Board would return the case with written findings -of -facts. Ald. Korshak indicated that that would be his recommendation at the City Council meeting and that he felt at this point this was only a form of informing the Committee of his intent and he was not seeking a motion from the P & b Committee at this time. Adjournment ` The meeting adjourned at 9.05 P.M., next meeting April 8, 1985 at 7:30 P.M. Staff: Robert T. Rud t242 Q-M MINUTES Planning and Development Committee April 8, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Korshak, Drummer, Romain, Neems and Juliar Ald. Absent: Bleveans Staff Present: Carter, R. Carlson, Siegel, Asprooth, P. Witt and Rudd Presiding official: Drummer Minutes of March 25, 1985 Ald. Romain moved and Ald. Neems seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of !larch 25, 1985 meeting. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes (Ald. Juliar absent). Communications ZBA 85-1-V(?), Final/variation Decision re 1220 Main street ZBA 85-2-V(F), Final/Variation Decision re 2049 Pratt Court. The Committee received the above final determinations without comment. Zoninq Amendment Committee Public Notices The Committee received the above without comment. Rehab Case 360-84 .he Co„,.'_tFe received the cane review sheet for the Subject rehab case which i3 within the required 3lidelines. .110 action needed by the Committee. OLD BUS?'1ESS Docket 79-4A-35, Ordinance 35-0-85, Building Fee Waiver Criteria Ald. ,seems :;owed and Ald. rorsr:ak seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council introduction o: the proposed ordinance getting forth waiver criteria for building pernit fees similar to that already provided by ordinance for zoning fee waiver:,. Ald. vorshak moved to amend the proposed ordinance to add the word 'substantial' preceeding the word hardship in both the building fee waiver and the zoning fee waiver sections. Ald. Neems seconded the notion. Voting aye: Ald. Korshak, Neems, Juliar and Drummer. Voting nay: Romain. Motion passed. With respect to the main motion voting aye: Ald. Romain, 2leems, Drummer and Korshak. Voting nay: Ald. Juliar. Ald. Korshak questioned if this, would be a good time to also amend the fee ordinance to provide for the penalty to be increa3ed for those licensed contractors that began work without permits. Presently the ordinance P s D Minutes April 9, 1985 provides for a 501 penalty. Ald. Korshak proposed a 1008 penalty for the second time that they are caught. Rudd indicated that staff is preparing to bring before the Committee an amendment to the subject ordinance with respect to certification of construction costs and at that time staff would also address the issue brought up by Ald. Korshak. NEW BUSINESS Docket 75-4A-85, Bikeway Alternatives Dick Carter, Planning Director was present to review a memorandum from the City Manager, Don Wirth and himself, detailing the request to obtain authorization from the City Council to proceed with plans for the final design to implement a revised lakefront bikeway and pedestrian path system. Carter stated that the purpose of the revised system is to separate as .uch a, possible pedestrian traffic from bicycle traffic. The proposed system will add capacity in both of those area.;. Carter stated that the staging of the design and the construction of the system will be done one section at a time in order to cause minimum disruption of the lakefront. He indicated that the system will be funded with existing allocations for lakefront improvements as .yet forth in the five year capital plan and that construction would be scheduled to start in the fall of 1985 or spring 1986 in order to minimize disruption of summer lakefront activities. in response to a question from Ald. Juliar, Carter indicated that a very rough !figure for a project cost would be approximately 520,000 spread over two to three years. The Committee indicated that the cost for this revised plan is significantly lower than previous estimates for a more extensive proposal. Ald. ;teems asked if Northwestern University could add a cinder path adjacent to their asphalt path along the landfill. N.J. attorney Perry was present and indicated that he would convey that request back. to appropriate officials. Aid. Neems :roved, Ald. Jt:liar seconded to recommend to City Council that the City Manager be authorized to proceed with the final design Dian to impien,_nt the proposal, voted :-n to aPprov; the notion. Docket 81-4A-35, ZBA 35-3-SU(t ), 0r:ir.ar.ce 34-0--95, re Special Us? far 1501 Central Street. Jim Perry and representatives of Evanston and Glenbrook Hospital Auxiliaries were present to answer any questions of the Comilittee. Aid. Korchak clarified for the recorJ that :tens cne thru three in the ordinance with respect to the University providing free par�lnq, security for the parking lot and traffic control devices and.'or personnual would be provided at no cost to the City. Parry confirmed that that was the caa-2. Perry also indicated that the University during the recent events (home show) had been taking traffic counts and would continue to do so for various events at McCaw Hall in order to provide a report on actual parking demands. Ald. Neems moved, Aid. Romain seconded that the Committee approve the special use and introduction of Ordinance 3:-0-85 to City Council. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the notion. -2- P & D Minutes April 9, 1985 Review Reference to ZAC re Definitions of Restaurants Ald. Romain moved, Ald. Neems seconded that the reference be forwarded to the Zoning Amendment Committee. Ald. Korshak suggested that it be recommended to the Zoning Amendment Committee to use the term 'carry -out' instead of 'fast food'. He felt that the 'fast food" term presented a very negative image and was not descriptive of many of the restaurants in the City classified as 'fast food'. Ald. Juliar suggested that a high priority be assigned to the reference. The Committee recommended placing this reference on the Zoning Amendments Committee priority list immediately following the Canal Bank rezoning reference. Committee voted 5-0 to approve forwarding the reference to the Zoning Amendment Committee. Docket 76-4A-85, Rehab Case 393-85 Aid. Korshak moved, Ald. Romain seconded that the Committee approve the staff request for a loan in the amount of $11,165. Rudd explained that the subject loan would be split with $5,486 for rehab at a D% amortizing and $5,679 for the redemption of delinquent taxes as a 7% title transfer loan. Ald. Neems stated that she felt that it was improper to use CD Rehabilitation dollars for the payment of back taxes, therefore she would vote against the proposal. She suggested that if there waa such a problem that the City should look at developing a program specifically for payment of taxes and not use housing and rehabilitation money for that case. Ald. Juliar echoed Aid. deems concerns. Voting aye: Ald. Drummer, Romain and Korshak. Voting nay: Ald. Juliar and Neems. Committee voted 3-2 to a recommendation that City Council approve the subject rehab case. Docket 77-4A-85, Rehab Case 158-79 Ald. Neems moved, Ald. Ronain seconded that the Committee approve a $4,708 title transfer loan at 31 interest. Committee voted 5-0 to a recommendation to City Council to approve the subject request. Docket 78-4A-85, Pesolution 30-R-85, Cook _ount--., Mortirige Revenue 3ond Program for 1985 Ald. Romain mov-ad, Ald. Neer seconded that the Conmi`_t<_e recomnend approval of the subject resolution to City Council, Housing Planner Peggy Witt was present and gave a brief discription of the prcgram. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council to approv=a the resolution. Docket 82-4A-5`, Pesolution 19-n-85, Autho:izinq the Purchase of Real Estate Ald. Romain roved, Aid. KorshaK seconded a notion to authorize the City Manager to negotiate for and on behalf of the City with owners of the properties located at 1021-35 Univer^pity Place and 1100-1102 Emerson Street. Aid. c:orshak questioned whether the subject resolution was authorizing the City Manager to proceed with condemnation proceedings if negotiation failed. City Manager Asprooth was present and stated that if condemnation proceedings were necessary that farther authorization would be sought from City Council. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council to approve the subject resolution. -3- P 6 D Minutes April 9, 1985 Docket 80-4A-85, Ordinance 31-0-85, Downspout Program Ald. Romain moved, Ald. Neems seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council to approve the subject ordinance for introduction. It was outlined in the attached memorandum that this section of code was inadvertently deleted during the processing of adoVticn c` the new BOCA Plumbing Code in 1984. It was also the concensus of the Committee that it would be requested on the Council floor that the rules be suspended in order to approve the subject ordinance at the same time. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the motion. AdJournment The meeting adjourned at 8:35 P.14., next meeting April 22, 1985. Staff Robert T. Rudd #254 -4- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee May 6, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Drummer, Brady, Juliar, Bleveans and Warshaw Ald. Absent: Korsshak Staff Present: R. Carlson, Eiseman, Ahlberg, Lloyd -Still and Rudd Presiding official: Drummer Minutes of April 8, 1985 Ald. Hleveans moved and Ald. Juliar seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of April 8, 1985. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Drummer indicated that items A and a under communications were final decisions on variations by the Zoning Board of Appeals for 2106 Asbury and 2810 Harrison Street. The final decisions were accepted without comment. Rehab Case 370-84 Ald. Warshaw questioned the income as indicated in the left hand column regarding primary and secondary residents. After a discussion Rudd suggested that the Committee forward the case on to City Council for approval and indicate on the floor of the Council that if the verification of income is incorrect that the case would not be approved. It was the consensus of the P & D Committee to proceed in that manner. Rehab Case 376--84 and Rehab Case 386-85 Both cases were received without comments. Greenwood Beach Don Wirth explained the purpose of the memo was to clarify some previous points made in the report by the Greenwood Beach Ad -Hoc Committee. Wirth stated that he had net with the Illinois Geologic Survey and had reached agreement with them in regard to the amount of sand to be placed on the beach. 1985 Evanston Chamber of Commerce Home Show Report - ZRA 84-27 (Northwestern University) The Committee received a letter from Jim Perry, Attorney for Northwestern indicating an exhibitor and automobile count from the Evanston Chamber of Commerce Home Show held at McGaw Hall. There were no comments on the report. P & D Minutes May 6, 1985 Updated Listing of Pending References to ZAC The Committee received a copy of the above captioned, with no comments. NEW BUSINESS Planning and Development Committee Tour of Library Facility The Committee received a memo from Don Wright, Director of Library requesting that the P 5 D Committee tour the Library facility to obtain a first-hand view of the space problems. The Committee agreed to tour the Library on Monday, June 3, 1985 at 7:30 F.M. Docket 98-SA-85, Ordinance 56-0-85, Easement Agreement 1700 Orrinqton - McDonald's Corporation Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Juliar seconded that the Committee approve the easement for McDonald's to allow for planter boxes along Orrington Avenue. The Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to the Council introduction of the Ordinance. Docket 94-5A-85, Rehab Case 361-84 Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Juliar seconded that the Committee accept the staff recommendation to approve the rehab case. Aid. Warshaw questioned the amount of income used for housing expense, Ald. Brady suggested that the maximum percentage of income spent for housing in the Rehab Guidelines should be reviewed. Ald. Brady indicated that since she is a member of the subcommittee of the Housing Commission reviewing the Rehab Guidelines that this would be a item for review by that Committee. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the rehab case. Docket 95-SA-85, Rehab Case 382-85 Ald. Juliar moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the subject rehab case. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether the present debt of the resident could not be restructured to allow lower monthly payments and thus a smaller percentage of income going to housing cost. Rudd indicated the present debt was not addressed by this particular application. This application was for $699.00 for emergency furnace repairs which would be handled as a 08 Title Transfer. Ald. Warshaw asked if applicants were counseled by the City with respect to financing. Rudd indicated that since this particular case was referred from ECDC that ECDC in their intake process may have counseled this individual. Ald. Warshaw felt that the City should counsel applicants in various manners such as notifying senior citizens of tax deferral programs, etc. The Committee voted 5-0 to approve the rehab case. Docket 97-5A-85, zBA 84-35-SU(R), Ordinance 52-0-85, Regardinq Special Use for 922 Davis Street Ald. Juliar moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the special use for 922 Davis Street for a fast-food restaurant. Ald. Brady questioned the two (2) negative votes by zoning Board members with respect to the proposals. She indicated that the transcript did not really provide insight to the reasons for the two (2) no votes by members of the Zoning Hoard of Appeals. Ald. Juliar questioned the owner, Mr. Ceccini and his -2- P b D Minutes May 6, 1985 attorney Dave Heller, as to what type of entertainment is being proposed. Mr. Ceccini indicated that the entertainment would be primarily jazz and classical and he hopes to offer said entertainment for approximately five (5) nights a week. Ald. Thiel was present, who at the time of the hearing before the Zoning Hoard of Appeals was a member of that board. Ald. Thiel indicated that her negative vote at the Zoning Board of Appeals was primarily due to her feeling that there was a negative impact with respect to the cumulative effect of restaurants, a bakery, a deli and a fast-food restaurant in the proximity of 922 Davis Street. Ald. Drummer questioned the ownership of an alley behind the proposed restaurant. Attorney Heller for the applicant indicated that a plat of survey indicates that the alley is not privately held, but is a public alley. Ald. Brady felt that the cumulative effect of another restaurant in the area was not significant in that some of the other establishments cited are more in nature of a bakery and a carry -out type deli operation rather than a fast-food restaurant. Ald. Juliar concurred with Ald. Brady with respect to cumulative effect. The Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City council introduction of the Ordinance for a special use for a fast-food restaurant at 922 Davis Street. Docket 13-1B-81, ZAC 85-2, Request for Expansion of Reference re Rezoninq of Canal Banks Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the reference be expanded to include not only the MSD canal banks property, but also City owned park in addition to Light House Park District and Ridgeville Park District property. Ald. Warshaw questioned if the negotiations presently underway between the City and MSD regarding the Community Hospital property would be jeopardized with this proposed rezoning of MSD property. Ald. Bleveans recapped an exchange of letters between the MSD and the City several months ago with the respect to the question of rezoning the canal banks. it was Aldermen Bleveans and Juliar's belief that MSD indicated they did not object to the rezoning of their property. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council the expansion of the canal bank rezoning reference to ZAC. Dockets 75-3A-81 and 86-4A-82, ZAC 85-1, re Recommendation Not to Amend the Nonconforninq Use Provisions of the Zoninq Ordinance. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Juliar seconded that Committee recommend to the City Council not to amend the nonconforming provisions. Rudd explained that the instances that resulted in the reference had since been resolved through other amendments to the zoning ordinance and the variation process and therefore, no recommendation was required. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to the City Council not to amend the ordinance. Ald. Rainey's Reference Due to the extent of the agenda for the May 6, 1985 meeting, the Committee recommend that this item be held over to the next meeting scheduled for May 20, 1985. Ordinance 57-0-85, Amendinq Buildinq Fee Ordinance Ald. Drummer indicated that since Ald. Korshak had suggested the proposed changes that the item be held over until Ald. Korshak could be present. The item was postponed to the June 10, 1985 P s D meeting. -3- r P 6 D Minutes May 6, 1985 Docket 326-128-84, ZAC 84-9, ordinance 50-0-85 re Zoninq ordinance Amendments to Authorize Temporary Shelters for Homeless. The Committee reviewed the two (2) related items on the agenda with respect to temporary shelters for the homeless. Rudd indicated that Ordinance 50-0-85 addresses the zoning ordinance amendments as proposed by the Zoning Amendment Committee. Ordinance 51-0-85 addresses amendments to the City Code to regulate temporary shelters for the homeless as approved by the Zoning Amendment Committee. Rev. Thompson from the First Baptist Church was present and indicated three (3) particular points of the ZAC recommendation that he feels that are over regulated. They were as follows: 1. The limit of a twelve (12) day stay for any occupant; 3n 2. Limiting the temporary shelter operation to six (6) months per year; and 3. The administering of emergency medical care Rev. Thompson indicated that in his opinion the length of stay for clients varied greatly as dictated by their circumstances. He felt it was the responsibility of agencies other than the shelter to aid in locating the shelter residents elsewhere. Contained in the material regarding the shelter was a memo from City Manager, Joel Asprooth and Director of Health and Human Services, Helen McCarthy, indicating that the present shelter was allowed by City Council to remain in existence until April 30, 1985. The staff at this time recommends to the P & D Committee and City Council that the present shelter be allowed to remain in existence and regulated as contained in the memo until such time that the ZAC Report and issue has been disposed of. Ald. Brady questioned if it would be better to recommend a specific time period for the extension of the shelter. She felt that with a specific deadline that the P & D Committee and City Council would be urged to move on the issue and make a final determination. Ald. Brady suggested that the present shelter be allowed to operate until September 1, 19B5 at which time she would hope that the City would have resolved the issue. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded the above recommendation to the City Council. The Committee voted 5-0 to make said recommendation to the City Council at the May 6, 1985 meeting. Ald. Brady requested that staff develop a reverse chronology working back from September 1 to establish prospective meeting dates. It was the consensus of the Committee that due to the lateness of the hour that the issue on homeless shelters would continue to the May 20, 1985 P & D meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M., next meeting May 20, 1985. Staff*-Roert T. Rudd 1277 -4- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee May 20, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Drummer, Brady, Juliar, Bleveans and Warshaw Ald. Absent: Korshak staff Present: R. Carlson, Hill, Ahlberg and Rudd Presiding Official: Drummer Minutes of May 6, 1985 Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Juliar seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of May 6, 1985 meeting. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes. Communications The Committee was presented an updated memo from Dick Carter regarding the progress on the sign ordinance revision. The memo indicated that 12 objectives were developed in meetings between staff, the Planning Commission, Preservation Commission and Design Evanston. These objectives would be incorporated in a request for proposals which would be sent out to various consultants by the end of May, 1985. Rehab Cases 331-63 and 379-84 Ald. Warshaw and Aid. Brady ask questions regarding certain items on the two rehab cases which were within the City guidelines. Both Aldermen expressed concerns that review of the Rehab Guidelines be continued by the Housing Commission. OLD BUSINESS Aid. Rainey's Reference Aid. Rainey was present and expressed her concern that back taxes should not be paid in order to make a particular case acceptable for rehabilitation purposes. She expressed her concern that the P & D Committee should make a recommendation regarding a policy on payment of back taxes by the City. Aid. Brady suggested that consideration be given to a separate program to pay back taxes not necessarily associated with a rehabilitation case. Airs. Bleveans moved and Aid. Warshaw seconded that the Housing Commission be encouraged to consider as expediently as possible development of a recommendation regarding P & D Minutes May 20, 1985 payment of back taxes and to report back to the P & D Committee as soon as possible. Committee voted 5-0 to make that recommendation to the Housing Commission. During discussion Rudd indicated that the Housing Commission's Rehab Subcommittee has for several months been reviewing all of the rehabilitation guidelines. This review could encompass any discussion regarding the payment of back taxes. It was the expectation of the Housing Commission to be able to report back to the P & D Committee possibly as early as July, 1985. Docket 326-12B-84, ZAC 84-9, Ordinance 50-0-85 re Zoninq Ordinance Amendments to Authorize Temporary Shelters for the Homeless. Chairman Drummer reviewed a time frame submitted by staff at the request of the P & D Committee which indicated that if all issues were handled expediently by the P & D Committee and Human Services Committee, a recommendation regarding zoning regulations for temporary shelters for the homeless could be completed and passed by City Council prior to September 1, 1985. With respect to an issue regarding general assistance payment to people that reside at the existing temporary shelters for the homeless, City Attorney Herb Hill was present to provide an update on a recent Township appeal regarding eligibility. Hill explained that the recent ruling which the City received on Monday, May 20, 1985 concerned a person staying at the temporary shelter for the homeless who had filed for general assistance with Evanston Township. After being denied, the party appealed and was granted the assistance after a recent hearing. There was much concern expressed from all members of the Committee that such a ruling may make all residents of the shelter eligible for general assistance from the Township. Hill indicated that since the City had received the opinion only hours before the P & D meeting that a thorough analysis of the possibility of appeal and the ramifications of the decision had not as yet been undertaken, and therefore he would have to limit his comments. Township Supervisor, Edna Summers was present and indicated that she also had only recently received a copy of the opinion and had not had an opportunity to review it. Ald. Brady stated that this recent opinion has complicated in her mind the questions revolving around temporary shelter legislation. Ald. Juliar stated that this most recent issue regarding general assistance payments piled on top of the basic issue regarding shelters for the homeless makes the problem at this point harrendous. Ald. Warshaw felt that Evanston shelters should be restricted in some manner to care for only Evanston's homeless, and that this may be accomplished possibly through a referral system. Ald. Bleveans suggested to Supervisor Summers that the Township may want to give every consideration to appealing the decision of the hearing officer regarding the general assistance case. Ald. Juliar inquired of Hill as to whether the church as a private residence could limit the intake of homeless to only Evanston residents. Hill indicated that such an arrangement may be unconsititutional. Ald. Warshaw asked for a legal opinion from the City regarding the extent that regulations regarding the intake of clients could be placed on shelters by the City. Ald. Brady inquired as to whether a restriction placed on the shelters for the homeless limiting that operation ff4M P & b Minutes May 20, 1985 to six months would eliminate the possibility of residents applying for general assistance? Hill indicated that it would probably not. Ald. Bleveans questioned whether the City should consider permitting the shelter to operate while the City decides on the zoning and regulatory legislation and risk an increased load of general assistance cases based on this recent decision. Aid. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee hold further action on this issue of temporary shelters for the homeless until legal opinions are rendered by the City and the Township has had an opportunity to respond to possible financial problems based on the potential general assistance cases. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the motion. Ald. Juliar moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded to recommended to City Council that the existing temporary shelter at the First Baptist Church be closed effective June 1, 1985, and remain closed until such time as the issue is resolved. Voting aye: Ald. Drummer, Bleveans and Juliar. Voting nay: Ald. Brady and Warshaw. Committee voted 3-2 to make this recommendation to City Council. Review Request to Re�,riortlze ZAC Pendinq References Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee assign the next highest priority to the ZAC reference regarding setbacks for garages from rear lot lines. This is an issue resulting from a number of residents attempting to reconstruct or build new garages that due to present zoning regulations often necessitate the owners to go to a greater extent and expense to construct buildings. Committee voted 5-0 to assign this reference the highest priority. Adjournment Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the meeting adjourn at 9:00 P.M. Staff• •Robert T. Rudd 1296 -3- i MINUTES Planning and Development Committee .Tune 10, 1985 7:00 P.M. Ald. Present: Drummer, Brady, Juliar, Korshak, and Warshaw Ald. Absent: Bleveans Staff Present: Ahlberg, Siegel, Szymanski and Rudd Preeiding official: Drummer Minutes of May 20, 1985 Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Juliar seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of May 20, 1985 meeting. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes (Ald. Warshaw Absent). COMMUNICATIONS ZBA 85-5-V(P), Final/Variation Decision re 1208 Judson Avenue and ZBA 85-7-V&SU(P), Final/Variation and Special Use Decision re 145 Ridge Avenue. The Committee received the above final determinations without comment. Rehab Cane 348-84 The Committee received the case review sheet for the subject rehab case which is within the required guidelines. The Committee requested that additional back-up information be provided in instances where rehab cases have been before the Committee previously. Rudd indicated that on future agendas, second time rehab cases will be accompanied by the previous write-up sheets. OLD BUSINESS Planninq and Development Committee Tour of Library Facility The Committee suggested touring the facility on Monday, July 15, 1985. The suggested tour date will be forwarded to Don Wright, Director of the Library. Docket 326-128-64, ZAC 84-9. ordinance 50-0-85 re Zoninq Ordinance Amendments to Authorize Temporary Shelters for the Homeless and Docket 96-5A--85, ordinance 51-0-85 re Amendments to the City Code to Requlate Temporary Shelters for the Homeless. Ald. Juliar suggested that the Committee hold this item for two (2) weeks to discuss it at the June 24, 1985 P & D Committee meeting. He felt that P & D Minutes June 10, 1965 additional information or a feel for the situation may be at hand over the next two (2) weeks. Aid. Brady indicated that in recent days she has been contacted by residents of the area of the existing shelter about loitering, ` drinking and sleeping in Raymond Park by occupants of the shelter. Aid. Brady stated that the information that she has received from residents in the area is that the behavior and action of the shelter occupants is not acceptable in Raymond Park. Aid. Juliar stated that the City should be able to enforce proper behavior in the Park and thus at least partially address this problem. It was the consensus of the Committee to hold this issue until June 24, 1985 meeting , which would still allow for ample discussion on these items and possibly a final resolution or recommendation to City Council by September 1, 1985, the original target date. NEW BUSINESS Aid. Brady prefaced all discussion of the agenda rehab cases with an update regarding recent actions by the Rehab Subcommittee of the Housing Commission. Ald. Brady indicated that the Rehab Subcommittee had met recently and will continue to meet to address proposed changes to the Rehab Guidelines. The Rehab Guidelines often cause problems for the P & D Committee and City Council. Aid. Brady indicated that the Housing Commission will attempt to make a final recommendation to the P & D Committee at the Housing Commission's July 25, 1985 meeting. Docket 130-6B-85, Rehab Case 357-84 Committee members expressed a concern with this case due to the substantial assets apparently held by the applicant (interest on notes and dividend on stocks totaling over $800.00 per month). Rudd indicated that this case had been to the P & D committee and City Council on March 11, 1985, at which time staff had recommended to deny the request. At that time, the Committee and City Council recommended to approve the request. However, the applicant is now requesting different types of rehab totaling $2,145. Rudd stated that the work previously approved by the Council has already been done at the expense of the applicant who now desires to have different work done for a greater amount. Aid. Brady moved and Aid. Korshak seconded that the P & D Committee recommend to the City Council denial of this rehab request. Committee voted 4-0 to deny with Chairman Drummer abstaining. Docket 134-60-85, Rehab Case 374-B4 Aid. Korshak observed that the staff memo noted that present child support could cease thereby making this client fall within the guidelines. However, that is not the present case and the Committee must make recommendation on the facts at hand. Aid. Brady stated that under the proposed guidelines being reviewed by the Rehab Subcommittee, the candidate would fall within all guidelines. Aid. Brady further stated that item 16, the proposed debt ratio in this case is 80%. Aid. Warshaw observed that the 64% percent of income allocated to housing cost is somewhat high and unreasonable (60% being the guideline limit). Aid. Warshaw further commented that if the -2- P : D Minutes June 10, 1985 rental unit should be vacant for one month the applicant may very well default. Rudd indicated that potential rental unit vacancy is a risk in several of the rehab cases. Rudd also stated that the $5,318.o0 loan request is to correct code violations, both in the owner's unit and the rental unit (rear porch). Ald. Brady moved to deny the application, Aid. Warshaw seconded. Further discussion ensued centering on the fact that the loan was to correct code violations and that the violations affect both the applicant/owner and the tenant of the rental unit. Ald. Brady withdrew her original motion to deny. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. .luliar seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of this case based primarily on the fact that all of the requested money is to correct code violations which impact both the applicant/owner and tenant. Committee voted 5-0 to approve. Docket 127-6B-85. Rehab Case 176-79 Rudd provided background information on this case. In 1979 the applicant had originally requested and was granted a 312 loan in the amount of �39,500.00 through the Percy Wilson Mortgage institution. At that time the City approved, in the form of a second mortgage, $6,325 for additional rehab work. Rudd stated that the contractor for the original rehabilitation stated that the portion of the roof to be repaired needed roll roofing and not the shingle roofing required by the City's specifications. However, the roofer was required by the City to utilize shingle roofing which led to the leakage problem predicted by the contractor. Since the installation of the roof and the associated leakage problems, substantial damage has been done to the interior of the applicant's home. currently, the City is requesting approval of a 'grant' in the amount of $3,368 to correct the improperly installed roof and resulting interior damage. Ald. Warshaw questioned the City requirement to have the owner sign a hold -harmless agreement. Rudd indicated that the City had requested a hold -harmless agreement to gain assurance that once the roof was repaired correctly, no side issues unrelated to the roof would become involved. The purpose of the hold -harmless was to contain the existing problem and eliminate further arguments. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the committee approve the proposed request. committee voted 5-4 to approve the request. Docket 131-6B-85, Rehab Case 358-84 Ald. Warshaw expressed her concern that in this particular case there is little equity left in the project (93% debt ratio). Also, the percent of expenses afford to housing cost (611) leaves little income for other purposes. Ald. Warshaw also expressed concern that a rental unit vacancy of a month or two could lead to a default in payments. Ald. Warshaw inquired as to whether this client, being disabled, receives any SSI payments and whether the applicant had been counseled regarding financial matters. Rudd indicated that this was a referral from ECDC. In previous meetings ECDC has indicated that it does provide some financial counseling services. Ald. Korshak expressed concern that the applicant had not received any disability payments and questioned once more whether ECDC had provided the applicant -3- P b D Minutes June 10, 1985 Financial counseling. The Committee directed staff to refer this issue to ECDC regarding the applicants possible eligibility for disability payments. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the subject rehab case. Committee voted 5-0 to approve. Docket 132-6B-85, Rehab Case 366-84 Rudd indicated that the subject case was a referral from ECDC. The primary deficiency in this case is delinquent taxes and mortgage. Also, the review sheet indicates that the applicant has been on public aid since August, 1983. Ald. Juliar moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee concur with staff recommendation to deny the subject request. Committee voted 5-0 to deny the request. Docket 129-68-85, Rehab Case 347-84 Ald. Brady was particularly concerned that the case at hand was outside of the present guidelines in three (3) areas which are not under discussion for possible revision by the Rehab Subcommittee. Thus, it may be appropriate that this case be denied since it is not within the current guidelines and not expected to be within the proposed guidelines. Concern was expressed by members of the committee that the low present debt ratio (32%) may qualify the applicant for a loan by a private lender. Rudd indicated that since the applicant has been a full time student, student status may prevent a private lending institution from making a loan. Rudd indicated that if the requested amount in this particular case was approved the City would require a one (1) year review instead of a two (2) year review due to the expectation that the applicant would soon enter the job market on a full time basis. Ald. Korshak observed that the repairs requested are somewhat obvious (replaced joist under kitchen, install concrete basement floor, repair exterior walls, etc.) and that these deficiencies should have been noted during the original purchase period. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded to deny the request. Committee voted 4-1 to deny (Ald. Drummer voting nay). Docket 133-68-85, Rehab Case 368-84 Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Brady seconded approval of this request. Ald. Warshaw and other members of the Committee expressed concern that too much of the applicant's income was allocated to housing costs (811). Ald. Warshaw questioned how the yearly income was derived and how the applicant was self employed. Rudd indicated that the applicant was a painter and that the income amounts on the write-up sheet were provided from the applicant's income tax return. Ald. Juliar questioned whether the rent ($485.00 per month) could be raised. Rudd indicated that, in his opinion, the rent could exceed more than $500.00 per month. Ald. Warshaw suggested that the request be placed on hold and that staff meet with the applicant to discuss reducing the loan request. Of particular interest to the Committee for possible reduction was the owner's request items ($4,916.00). The original motion to approve was withdrawn. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. -4- P b D Minutes June 10, 1985 Juliar seconded that the case be returned to staff to restructure and renegotiate a proposed loan with the applicant. Committee voted 5-0 to direct staff to renegotiate with the applicant. Docket 135-6B-85, Rehab Case 381-85 Rudd indicated that as stated on the write-up sheet that all of the requested loan is allocated to correct code violations. The Committee once more expressed concern that the debt ratio was significantly high (93%) and that the percent of income allocated to housing costs was also high (65%). Rudd indicated that in this particular instance that the couple was younger than many of the rehab applicants. Also the family has a handicapped child which has kept the female of the household from working. The types of improvements requested are somewhat of a long-term nature (aluminum siding, front porch, windows, roof, etc.) and that it is expected that this will not only improve the mechanical characteristics of the structure, but also the aesthetic and thus lead to an increased valuation of the home. Ald. Juliar moved and Aid. Korshak seconded that the Committee recommend approval of this rehab case. Committee voted 5-0 to approve. Docket 128-6B-85, Rehab Case 214-80 'Rudd detailed that in this particular case the City has already invested over $27,000 (first mortgage) for previous rehab work. The applicant is a seventy-nine year old handicapped widow, whose previous taxes were paid in recent years by a former employer who is now no longer willing or able to pay the taxes. If brought current, it appears that the applicant will be eligible for a Cook County Tax Deferral Program. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the Committee recommend approval of the subject rehab case. Committee voted 5-0 to approve. Docket 136-6B-85, ZBA 85-6 SU(R), Ordinance 63-0-85, re Special Use for 825 Roves Street. The Committee considered a ZBA recommendation to grant a special use for a fast -Food restaurant (hot dogs, hamburgers, etc.) at a building presently under construction at the subject address. The owner of the operation was present and indicated that the proposed fast-food restaurant was very small in size (approximately 800 sq. ft.), and would not generate automobile traffic from outside the neighborhood since the proposed restaurant would be primarily frequented by customers on foot. Aid. Juliar expressed concern with the litter problem which often accompanies fast-food restaurants. The owner of the proposed establishment indicated that he would make every effort to minimize the litter problem in the neighborhood. Aid. Warshaw moved and Ald. Juliar seconded that the Committee recommend to City Coucil approval of the special use. Committee voted 5-0 to approve. Docket 137-68-85, ZBA 85-8-SUM, Ordinance 64-0-85, re Special Use for 2014 Central Street. The Committee reviewed the recommendation from the Zoning Board of Appeals to grant a special use for a fast -Food restaurant at 2014 Central. The -5- P & D Minutes June 10, 1985 applicants were present and indicated that the business would serve carry -out gourmet pizza, and hot dogs. Committee members questioned whether there was sufficient parking in the area for such a use. The applicants stated that there are six (6) on -site parking spaces at the rear of the building. The Committee was still concerned that the nature of the business (carry -out) would lead to double parking along Central Street. After discussion on this subject the Committee felt the nature of the businesses and the traffic flow on Central Street did not lend to such double parking and may not be a problem in the area. Ald. Warshaw moved and Aid. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval for a special use for a fast-food restaurant at 2014 Central Street. Review ZAC Request to Rename Park The Committee reviewed a request from the Zoning Amendments Committee to rename St. Paul Park North to Harper Park. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the P & D Committee refer the ZAC request to the Citizens Advisory Committee on Public Place Names. Committee voted 5-0 to make the reference. Docket 126-68-85, Lakefront Lagoon Dedication - Evanston Symphony The Committee reviewed a memorandum from the City Manager seeking authorization to guarantee the expenditure of $3,000.00 to fund the participation of the Evanston Symphony at the Lagoon dedication. The $3,000.00 was to guarantee the money if other sources (donations) could not be obtained. Holly Reynolds, a liaison between the Evanston Symphony and City of Evanston, indicated that the $3,000.00 was necessary due to Musicians Union requirements and the need to hire a quest conductor, The Committee was questioned if other bands, orchestras or forms of entertainment were available in lieu of the Evanston Symphony. After discussion it was the consensus of the Committee that there was a reluctance to spend $3,000.00 for the subject event in lieu of other spending constraints in the City. Ald. Juliar moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of an expenditure of $1,000.00. Committee voted 5-0 to make that recommendation to City Council. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M., next meeting June 24, 1985. Staff : t+�e'f. obert . Rudd #318 -6- t Ald. Present: Ald. Absent: Staff Present: Presiding official: MINUTES Planning and Development Committee .Tune 24; 1985 7:30 P.M. Drummer, Brady, Juliar, Korshak, Warshaw and Bleveans None R. Carlson, Rasmussen, Ahlberg, Wirth, Siegel, P. Witt and Rudd Drummer Minutes of June 10, 1985 Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Juliar seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of June 10, 1985 P & D meeting. Ald. Bleveans questioned Docket 137-6B-85, ZBA 85-8-SU(R) in which was not reflected in the minutes. A review of the minutes indicated that in fact a vote was not noted. The minutes were corrected to read that the P & D Committee had voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council approval of a special use for 2014 Central Street. COMMUNICATIONS Landlord/Tenant Concerns Ald. Korshak questioned whether the landlords had met with the Rental Condo Committee to discuss their concerns regarding tenants that use a security deposit as the last months rent. Peggy Witt, Housing Planner and Ald. Brady indicated that the Rental Condo Committee had met with the Evanston Property Owners Association to discuss this matter. Additionally, another meeting is scheduled for Thursday, June 27, 1985 at 7:00 P.M. with the Evanston Property Owners and the Rental Condo Committee to continue discussion on this issue. At Ald. Korshak's request, staff indicated that TOE would also be invited to the meeting. Update List of Pending References to ZAC The Committee received a list of references without comment. P a D Minutes June 24, 1985 OLD BUSINESS Docket 326-128-64, ZAC 84-9, Ordinance 50-0-85 re Zoninq Ordinance Amendments to Authorize Shelters for the Homeless. and Docket 96-5A-85, Ordinance 51-0-85 re Amendments to the City Code to Requlate Temporary Shelters for the Homeless. Ald. Brady felt that the Committee should discuss initially the proper zoning districts. She indicated•that she had a little problem with the R-7 District recommended by ZAC. Ald. Bleveans indicated that he had difficulty in discussing the zoning issue before the General Assistance case is resolved, since that case may have a major impact. Jack Siegel, Corporation Counsel indicted that not addressing the zoning case at this time Would only remove one alternative location for possible GA clients to locate. With respect to the hearing officer's decision in the subject GA case, Siegel felt that that officer did not address the Township Residency requirements of Evanston. Ald. Brady felt that zoning protection was important now for the neighborhoods adjoining the shelter and that it was more important now to enact zoning with rt�gulatiors than to continue the existing unregulated shelter. Ald. Juliar indicated that with the respect to the present shelter, Raymond Park is now a location of anti -social problems and that the park is no longer available to elderly or children in the neighborhood who want to use the park. Ald. Warshaw stated that we must separate the issue of the shelter care from the litigation as a basis for future judgments. Ald. Bleveans stated that he was not heartless toward the homeless, however he was concerned since City Council approximately two years ago increased the Township Tax Levy primarily for general assistance, which since then has grown steadily and at that time a significant number of citizens protested the increase. Ald. Korshak commented that, in his ward, the park immediately west of the Ridgeview also experiences some anti -social behaviors, and has been a problem. He further explained that it was his opinion that even if the court opinion went against the City that Evanston may very well need to accept a shelter in the future. Ald. Korshak also wanted to make it clear that if the City approved the zoning, it did not mean that the City would assist other churches with financing a shelter. Ald. Korshak stated that paralleling the group home situation that even when the shelter zoning designation would be approved by City Council that it would not go into effect until other regulations were passed by City Council. Rev. Thompson from the present shelter was in attendance and stated that the Raymond Park problems to some extent preceded the establishment of the shelter of October, 1984. also, Thompson stated that representatives from the shelter have been policing the park on their own in an attempt to control any problems created by the shelter residents. Ald. Juliar suggested that further discussion on this matter be held over to the July 8, 1965 P & D meeting. Ald. Brady questioned, whether based on a previously submitted timeline by staff, could the Committee still meet the September, 1985 - 2- P & D Minutes June 24, 1485 deadline for establishing controls for a shelter? Rudd indicated that if the Committee moves on the various issues at the'following meetings, it was still possible to meet that deadline. NEW BUSINESS Docket 150-6C-85, Avenue of the Righteous Project Me. Suzanne Katz was present to detail to the Committee the proposal from an ecumenical group requesting the City of Evanston to allow for planting of trees (a grove of approximately 15) in Ingraham Park, directly west of the Civic Center, as an honorarium for those people who risked their lives to save Jews during the Nazi Holocust. A memorandum from City Manager, Joel Asprooth and Don Wirth, Director of Parks, Recreation & Forestry to the P & D Committee indicated that the anticipated cost for the total project would be approximately $20,000.00. The memorandum continued to explain that since the trees will be an asset to the total City, it would seem appropriate for the City to assume the responsibility for the cost of maintenance after a certain period of time. Ald. Korshak questioned whether at this point the Committee should be dealing with the details of the plans (i.e. nameplate, Committee to select the honorarium, etc.) and that the Committee and City Council should be dealing instead with the concept and the site. Ald. Bleveans felt that Evanston was uniquely suited for such an honorarium due to the diverse makeup of its population. Ald. Juliar felt that such an honorarium was an appropriate symbol for the City of Evanston due to the past history of its citizens in such involvement (i.e. underground railroad). Aid. Bleveans moved and Ald. Juliar seconded that the P & D Committee recommend to City Council general approval of the proposed concept and also agreement on the Ingraham Park site. It was also agreed by the Committee that at a later date a formal proposal and agreement would be forwarded to the P & D committee and City Council for their review and approval. The Committee voted 6-0 to make the aforementioned to City Council. Review Suqqested Reference to ZAC from ZBA re Variation Standards Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the subject reference be forwarded to ZAC. Chairman Michael Schiltz of ZBA was present and provided background as to the reason for the ZBA request. Schiltz explain that over a period of several years, ZBA and in turn the City Council has wrestled with the difficult and sometime nonapplicable present standards for granting variations. Schiltz indicated that all of the ZBA members felt that the proposed reference was a good starting point to rework the present standards. Siegel, Corporation Counsel was present and provided historical background as to zoning variation standards nationwide and more closely to his experience in participating in the draft of the State of Illinois State -3- P s D Minutes June 24, 1985 Statute requirements for zoning variations. Aldo Brady upon review of the proposed standards from the ZBA was concerned with their over generality. Schiltz indicated that that may well be a legitimate concern, but to keep in mind that the proposal was only a starting point and outline which the zoning board Was forwarding on for further discussion. Committee voted 6-0 to make the recommendation to ZAC and to direct ZAC to review the proposed standards together with any alterations or modifications that ZAC deems necessary. Docket 151-6C-65, consider Plat of Consolidation for Kendall College Property at 2408 Orrinqton. Aldo Bleveans moved and Aldo Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the subject plat of consolidation. Ald. Bleveans asked if the only portion of the property not involved was the corner of Orrington and Colfax. Staff indicated that he was correct in assuming that the remainder of the block was to be consolidated with the exception of the three lots on that corner. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the plat of consolidation. Consider Temporary Exemption from Pavinq Requirements for Northwestern University Parkinq Lot at University Place and Maple Avenue. Aldo Bleveans moved and Ald. Juliar seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council to approve the one (1) year exemption from paving the temporary parking lot. This need is caused by the relocation of University activities at the site of the proposed Basic Industrial Research Lab south of University on Maple Avenue. The Committee voted 5-0 to direct the City Manager to grant Northwestern University a temporary exemption from paving for one (1) year (Ald. Bleveans absent). Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:05 P.M., next meeting July 80 1965. Staff AobertT. Rudd #348 -4- IL . . Ald. Present: Ald. Absent: Staff Present: MINUTES Planning and Development Committee July 8, 1985 7:30 P.M. Brady, Juliar, Korshak,.Warshaw,'and Bleveans Drummer Rudd, R. Carlson, Siegel, P.,.Witt Presiding Official:. Korshak Minutes of June 24, 1985 Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of June 24, 1985 P & D meeting. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATIONS The committee reviewed items A through E under Communications without comments. Rehab Case #390-85 The committee reviewed the subject case without comment. Ald. Juliac moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the committee approve the case. The committee voted 5-0 to approve the case. NEW BUSINESS Rehab Case #368-84 Chairman Korshak gave a brief review of the rehab case before the committee. This particular case was discussed by the committee at the meeting of June 10, 1985, and referred back to staff to consult with the applicants to reduce previous request of $34,095 to a lesser amount. The present request from the applicant has now been reduced to $23,243. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Juliar seconded that the committee approve the case as presented. The committee voted 5-0 to approve the case. Rehab Case #383-85 Ald. Warshaw suggested that due to the financial condition of the applicants in this case that the staff should conduct an annual review rather than the proposed two year financial review. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the committee approve the rehab case with the stipulation that a one year financial review be conducted. The committee voted 5-0 to approve the case. P & D Minutes July 8, 1985 OLD BUSINESS Temporary Shelters for the Homeless Chairman Korshak reviewed the status of the Planning and Development Committee's consideration of legislation for Shelters for the Homeless to date. Chairman Korshak stated that in an effort to have as much citizen input as possible, the committee would entertain comments from the audience for the moat part of this meeting. The first speaker was Jerry Stephens, a resident of 607 Lake (First Baptist Church -Shelter For the Homeless). Stephens indicated that he was in favor of the shelter because it provided a necessary service for a certain segment of the population. The next speaker was Michael Koenigsknecht of 1423 Hinman. He spoke against the proposed shelter. This speaker suggested that shelters may be more appropriate if limited to the winter months rather than year round. He also indicated that a troublesome question has been and will be in the future regarding defining Evanston residents versus outside shelter residents. He expressed a concern that many people will be coming from Chicago to stay in this shelter as opposed to staying in Chicago. He also indicated that the population of the shelter has grown significantly from the original, estimate of 8 to 10 to approximately 35 in April 1985. Koenigsknecht also stated that as a result of the shelter population, anti -social problems are on the increase in Raymond Park across the street from the shelter. The speaker offered as an alternative solution that help should be given to shelter residents on an informal or one to one basis and not to create an institution type setting. He also stated that recent interviews indicate that 63% of the population of the shelter is from outside of the City of Evanston. He noted that the population during the warm weather has grown to be twice the population of what was originally located at the shelter during colder weather (October). Al White of 2124 Ewing spoke in favor of the shelter. White stated that any community is judged on how it treats its less fortunate. White also stated that the shelter is a refuge and sanctuary for the homeless. He further noted that the location of the shelter in the downtown area is an ideal location. Joyce Lyon of 525 Grove Street, spoke against the shelter indicating that her investigation has found that other towns are referring homeless to Evanston. Vince Warther of 500 Lake Street, (condo president of that building) stated that he is concerned with the safety of his family due to the "vagrancy" in the area caused by the existing shelter. Wu rther stated that he has read that there are 10,000 homeless in Chicago and felt that many of those could come to Evanston. Judy Pfeiffer, 233 Hartrey, spoke in favor of the shelter and stated that she has never observed any problems in the park. She expressed her opinion that it is the responsibility of those that have the ability to help those that cannot help themselves. John Lind, 425 Grove Street. expressed his concern regarding the safety of little children which he observes in the park on daily basis. He felt that the safety of those children and adults in the area should be the utmost consideration and is therefore against the shelter at that location. Tobin Karts, 500 Lake Street, spoke against the shelter and stated that he saw people sleeping in the park in the mornings and observed numerous anti -social acts during the day. He further stated that the area is one of residential use and a shelter is not a compatibile use for the area. The next speaker was -2- P & D Minutes July 8, 1985 Ann Karagh of 2408 Lincolnwood Drive, Evanston. This speaker advocated the shelter and stated that her children and other children continue to go to the park without incident. It is her opinion that the parks are by definition for all people and therefore cannot prohibit residents from the shelter from entering into the park. She stated that if neighboring residents do see problems that they should notify the Police Department. Rita Reingruber of 507 Lake (shelter resident) suggested a common effort between Evanston and the City of Chicago to establish a joint shelter use. Anthony Keating, 1415 Judson, expressed his opinion that people on both sides of the issue must recognize the need for the shelter and also the necessity to protect the residential neighborhood and that a compromise solution should be sought. Richard Willis, of the Evanston Bond and Mortgage Company and manager of the 531 Grove Street building, questioned what constituted a temporary shelter? At the request of Chairman Korshak, Corporation Counsel Siegel stated that the temporary nature of the shelter is limited to the stay of the residents, but that a shelter as proposed would be somewhat of a permanent use as limited by the special use. The next speaker was Matt Kennelly of 1400 Hinman Avenue and he spoke in favor of the shelter. Kennelly indicated that he lives in the neighborhood and uses the park with his wife and son and has never observed a problem in the park. He further stated that he believes fewer than one-half the shelter people utilitze the park. As a possible solution to the fear of a large number of people in the shelter, he suggested that a limit be placed on the number of residents in the shelter. He further stated that the Church should be praised and not criticized for its attempts to address a very serious problem for the homeless. Joel Blake, 1500 Hinman spoke against the shelter and stated that the Raymond Park area is an established neighborhood and that a shelter is an infringement into that residential setting and is not compatible. Vary Signator of 221 Hartrey spoke in favor of the shelter and stated that shelter residents are not criminals, but are simply homeless and should be treated as such. She also indicated that she has been a volunteer at the shelter and has not felt threatened and has not experienced any problems. Fran Adams, 1500 Hinman, has had similar experience as the previous speaker and finds that the shelter is a necessity and should be approved. William Hoyer of 1219 Greenleaf advocated the shelter, but recognized that there may be great difficulty in defining exactly what a homeless person is. Bob Thompson, pastor of First Baptist Church and operator of the shelter, stated that the shelter does take concerns of the neighbors seriously. He also offered that if neighbors observe any anti -social behavior in the park that they should call him immediately. In particular, Thompson indicated that since April 30. 1985, the shelter has been sensitive to overcrowding and only accepts referrals from six agencies within the City of Evanston. The next speaker, Joel Connor, 500 Grove Street, questioned Thompson as to whether the shelter provided jobs for the occupants. Thompson responded that the shelter does not have the resources to operate a job program, but will attempt to work with residents and members of the shelter. Margaret Beck, 1215 Greenwood, spoke in favor of the shelter and indicated that she also has worked there. She suggested that a survey be undertaken on an hourly basis to determine exactly what the problems are at Raymond Park. -3- P & D Minutes July 8, 1985 At the conclusion of citizen input, Chairman Korshak requested comments from the committee. Ald. Warshaw questioned if there could be an alternative daytime location for the occupants when they are let out of the shelter in the early morning. Ald. Juliar stated that he did not think an alternative daytime location would solve the problem since most of the occupants would prefer to be out of doors as would any other person during good weather. Ald. Brady indicated that she had spoken to Chief Logan and expressed concern with the problems of the park. Ald. Brady stated that Chief Logan is willing and able to provide monitoring of the•park and will respond to citizens calls regarding problems in the park. It was suggested that more specific times of the problems whether they be in early morning or late evening be provided to the Police Department so that they can better monitor the situation. Ald. Juliar agreed with Ald. Brady that the issue is just not Raymond Park, but one of the homeless and the whole community. It was the consensus of the committee to hold further discussion of this matter until the next regularly scheduled Planning and Development Committee meeting on July 22, 1985. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the committee adjourn. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m., next meeting July 22, 1985 Staff A.T. Eudd 00246C -4- Ald. Present: Ald. Absent: Staff Present: Presiding official: MINUTES Planning an .Development Committee A22, 1985 7:30 P.M. Korshak, Brady, Juliar, Warshaw, Drummer and Bleveans (7:45 P.M.) None R. Carlson, Ahlberg and Siegel Korshak Minutes of July 8, 1985 Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of July 8, 1985. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATIONS ZAC Public Notice for August 1, 1985 Hearing. The Committee reviewed the notice without comment. OLD BUSINESS Proposal to Amend Ordinance 57-0-85 (Buildinq Fee Ordinance) Ald. Korshak summarized the two amendments proposed for the building fee ordinance (1) a proposed amendment to increase the penalty fee for building permits issued to contractors who have started work prior to issuance of a permit; (2) a proposed amendment to authorize the Director of Building S Zoning to receive a notarized copy of the final contractor's statement prior to issuance of a final certificate of occupancy. Ald. Warshaw suggested that a suspension of permit privileges or suspension of a contractor's license may be more appropriate in cases where the second or additional violations of obtaining a permit have occurred. Ald. Drummer suggested that the suspension should come after three (3) violations. Carlson stated that if the suspension of a license was to be included in the ordinance, criteria for such suspension would have to be included in the ordinance. Attorney Siegel stated that any suspension of a license or permit privileges would require a hearing before an appropriate body. Ald. Korshak stated that his original intent in suggesting amendments to the building fee ordinance was to increase the penalty fee from the present 50% to 1001 for the second violation and 200% for the third violation. He felt that the 50% penalty is not sufficient to discourage work proceeding without permits. He also stated that suspension of a license may well serve to solve the problem. Ald. Bleveans entered the meeting at 7:45 P.M. Ald. Bleveans stated that P & D Minutes July 22, 1985 his thinking that notification of any increased permit fees should be forwarded to the owner of the property. Carlson replied that such notification could be built into the ordinance and should not provide any great problem for staff. Discussion then took place on the second proposed amendment regarding submission of a sworn contractor's statement. Ald. Brady questioned the need for item 1-A-4 in Ordinance 35-0-85, which allows the Director of Building & Zoning to make an estimate of construction cost. Carlson replied that this regulation has not been used in the past two (2) years and would not have any great affect whether the item was taken out of the ordinance or remained in. Ald. uorshak suggested that the proposed amendment regarding submission of a final contractor's statement be inserted into the ordinance as item A-4 and the present A-4 be inserted as item A-5. Ald. Warshaw moved to instruct staff to prepare an amending ordinance taking into account the provisions for license suspension and an increase to 100% and 200% in penalty fees for second and third violations, and the provisions for the submission of a sworn contractor's statement. Ald. Brady seconded the motion. The Committee voted 6-0 to approve the motion with the provision that the ordinance be returned to the Committee for review on August 12, 1985. Temporary shelters for the Homeless Aid. Korshak summarized the problem of shelters for the homeless and the action taken to date by the Committee regarding Ordinance 50-0-65 to amend the zoning code, and Ordinance 51-0-85 regarding regulations for temporary shelters. Aid. Juliar moved to reject the recommendation of the Zoning Amendment Committee and instead recommend to City Council the appointment of an Ad -hoc Committee to report back to the Planning & Development Committee within sixty (60) days on alternative methods to solve the problem. The motion was seconded by Aid. Bleveans. Aid. Warshaw noted that the Committee is bound to act on the ZAC recommendation to City Council or the temporary shelter will have to close unless the present September 1, 1985 closing date is extended by action of City Council. Ald. Juliar stated that his reasoning behind the motion was his thinking that all alternatives to serving the needs of the homeless population have not been considered and that there may well be more satisfactory methods of dealing with this type of dependent population. Ald. Brady stated that this type of shelter is really the last housing choice left for a certain population and that she supports the continuation of shelters for the homeless, but on a regulated basis. Aid. Juliar noted that existing law has been disregarded in the establishment of the present shelter at First Baptist Church, and that the community must have an acceptable set of standards by which shelters operate. He felt that these standards do not exist at this time and that many persons are being drawn to the shelter who are not residents of Evanston nor have any connections in the City. He also noted that numerous acts of snit -social behavior have occurred not only in Raymond Park, but that this activity has now spilled over into the adjacent business area, involving persons that are either turned down for shelter space or when the -2- P & D Minutes July 22, 1985 residents are released from the shelter at the morning closing time. Ald. Korshak noted that Evanston seems to have more churches than christian charity with only one church of seventy-six having a homeless shelter. He noted further that crime, littering and other types of anti -social activity have taken place in Evanston to his personal knowledge since 1932 and not all of it by non Evanston residents. Ald. Juliar noted that since the shelter opened through July 8, there have been thirty-nine (39) calls for police assistance at the shelter and during the same time period for the previous year only eight (8) calls had been received. Ald. Bleveans noted the question of shelter residents applying and being approved for general assistance payments and the resulting enlargement of the already expanded general assistance caseload. He stated further that he is not yet convinced of a need for the shelter and cited figures of 65% of the users being from outside of Evanston. He also cited that according to a survey at least 50% of the shelter residents are suffering from some type of mental disorder. He also noted that many social services are provided by the City as opposed to neighboring communities and the fact that these social services are proving to be a magnet attracting the homeless. He stated that his thinking that the zoning ordinance should not be amended to enable a further increase in our dependent population. Ald. Drummer stated his favoring the shelter and his thinking that the shelter could continue to operate with a series of temporary grants while an Ad -hoc Committee considers other alternatives. He stated that he has seen acts of anti -social behavior and that these problems absolutely must be overcome. lie stated further his feeling that the shelter would continue to operate outside of the law even if the zoning code is not amended to lawfully allow such shelters. Ald. Juliar stated his thinking that he would like to see the needy homeless population being served on a smaller scale or in some other alternative manner than that which has been suggested. He stated further that the problem must be dealt with, but he did not feel that the best way possible to deal with that problem has been recommended. Ald. Drummer stated that he can support Ald. Juliar's motion for a sixty day Ad -hoc Committee report if the shelter was allowed to continue to operate in that sixty day period. Aid. Juliar's motion to recommend to City Council an Ad -hoc Committee with a sixty day reporting period failed on a 3-3 tie vote. Voting aye: Ald. Juliar, Bleveans and Drummer. Voting nay: Ald. Korshak, Brady and Warshaw. Ald. Drummer moved that the P & D Committee recommend to City Council appointment of an Ad -hoc Committee with a sixty day reporting period to consider alternative solutions and a further recommendation to Council that continuation of the present shelter be extended to November 1, 1985. Motion seconded by Ald. Bleveans. Ald. Brady stated her concern and the concerns of the Committee regarding the shelter operating without detailed regulations and that the shelter should not be extended for further operation beyond September 1 without detailed regulations. Ald. Warshaw stated her fear that City Council may not approve any extension beyond September 1. Ald. Drummer stated that he saw no immediate need for detailed regulations and that the shelter seems to be operating satisfactorily under the temporary City -3- B p & n Minutes July 22, 1985 Council authorization. Aid. Brady stated that there are no quick sixty day solutions to this problem and that the shelter should only continue operating in an approved manner with strong detailed regulations and not be allowed to continue to operate in the present unregulated manner beyond September 1. Aid. Juliar stated that while for the sixty day study by an Ad -hoc Committee may well result in a recommendation identical to that received from ZAC, no alternative solutions have apparently been considered. Aid. Korshak noted that the temporary authorization to the shelter which ends September 1 may well not be extended by City Council, and that any recommendation from the Committee should contain a provision for operating permission beyond September 1. Aid. Juliar stated that he can not support operation of the shelter beyond September 1, in the present unregulated manner. Aid. Brady stated that without amendments to the zoning code and adoption of operation regulations for the shelter, that the shelter should be close on September 1. She stated further that final action by City Council can not possibly be completed by the September 1 date, thus the First Baptist Church could not possibly receive a special use before November or later and that the shelter should not operate in a temporary unregulated manner until that time. Aid. Brady suggested a special meeting to consider the subject for Monday, July 29, at 7:30 P.M. With the concurrence of the Committee, Aid. Korshak stated that the special meeting would be held on the aforementioned date and time. The motion of Ald. Drummer remains on the floor, not having been voted on. Docket 168-7s-85, ZDA 85-11-SU(R) or T(F), re Special Use for 601 Ridge Avenue. Aid. Bleveans moved and Aid. Brady seconded to accept the recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals to deny a special use for retention of a ground mounted earth satellite station at 601 Ridge Avenue. The Committee voted 6-0 to accept and approve the recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals and forward same to City Council. AJOURNMEAT The meeting adjourned at 8:55 P.M., next meeting July 29, 1985. Staff: /�O/ Reed Carlson 1383 -4- MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING Planning and Development Committee July 29, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Korshak, Brady, Juliar, Warshaw and Drummer Ald. Absent: Bleveans Staff Present: R. Carlson, McCarthy, Witt and Rudd Presiding Official: Korshak Aonointment of Liaison to Preservation Commission Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Planning and Development Committee appoint Ald. Juliar as a liaison to the Preservation Commission. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the appointment. Docket 168-73-85, ZBA 85-11-SU(R) or T(P), re Soecial Use for 601 Ridge Avenue. Chairman Korshak summarized the previous meetings proceedings stating that at the regularly scheduled P & D meeting of July 22, 1985, that the Committee had voted 6-0 to concur with the Zoning Board of Appeals recommendation to deny the request for the special use for the satellite dish antenna. Aldermen Brady, Warshaw and Drummer felt that the applicant had at the previous meetings and hearings had sufficient time to present evidence to make his case. Most members of the Committee felt that the height of the antenna and not necessarily the color was the major factor in the decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals and the concurrence by the P & D Committee. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee confirm the previous Committee decision of July 22, 1985 to deny the request for a special use for the retention of a ground mounted Earth satellite station at 601 Ridge Avenue. Committee voted 5-0 to confirm their previous decision. Docket 326-12B-84, ZAC 84-9, ordinance 50-9-85 re Zoninq ordinance Amendments to Authorize :enporary Shelters for the Homeless, and Docket 96--5A-85. Ordinance 51-0-85 re Amendments to the City Code to 17eoulate Temporary Shelters for the Homeless. Chairman Korshak presented a brief summary as to the history of the issue of Temporary Shelters for the Homeless in the City of Evanston. Chairman Korshak recognized Rev. Norwood in the audience. Rev. Norwood stated that he felt the prohibition by the City of letting churches Establish shelters for the homeless was an invasion of privacy of the church and a violation of the separation of church and state principles. Ald. Drummer withdrew the previous motion which was on the floor since the July 22, 1985 P & D meeting. That motion stated 'that the P & D Committee recommend to City Council appointment of an Ad -hoc Committee with a sixty day reporting period P & D minutes Special Meeting July 29, 1985 to consider alternative solutions and the further recommendation to City Council that continuation of the present shelter be extended to November 1, 19850. Ald. Brady reviewed a memo from herself to members of the P & D Committee dated July 16, 1985 that was distributed at the July 22, 1985 p & b meeting. She detailed several changes throughout her proposal for definitions of shelters for the temporarily homeless and various regulations. Those changes in this proposal differ from the recommendations of the Zoning Amendment Committee. (Note: the various changes detailed by Aid. Brady are reflected in a revised ordinance that is forwarded to City Council for the August 12, 1985 P & D Committee and City Council meetings.) Aid. Warshaw moved to forward Aid. Brady's recommendation in lieu of the ZAC recommendation to City Council. Motion died for lack of a second. Ald. Juliar moved to table the ZAC recommendation and further moved to establish an Ad -hoc Committee that would report back to the P & D Committee within sixty (60) days. Upon questioning by other Committee members with respect to the status of the existing shelter, Aid. Juliar stated that he was not prepared to allow the shelter to go beyond the currently established September 1, 1985 deadline. Ald. Juliar's motion failed for the lack of a second. Aid. Brady moved :o re -introduce her previous motion incorporating the changes and revisions that she made. Ald. Warshaw seconded the notion. Ald. Warshaw questioned a provision of Ald. Brady's recommendation regarding the twenty-four hour period for referral contained in Section 2.c. Ald. Warshaw felt that this provision was fine for :reek days, but does not take Into account the time period over a weekend. Ald. Warshaw recommended for the weekend a seventy-two hour period be inserted. Ald. 3rady accepted this revision to her proposal. Ald.-Juliar stated that he opposed this recommendation at this time, because he feels that all alternatives have not been reviewed. He stated that more careful consideration of the broad scope of homeless people is needed and that a shelter is only one avenue for addressing the problem. Ald. Drummer ask Aid. Brady why under the definition of Section il.) she was eliminating `_he term 'on an emergency basis'? Aid. Brady replied that she felt that it was redundant. Ald. Drummer recommended that the term 'on an emergency basis' be inserted in her definition. Ald. Brady agreed to allow that term to be inserted. Ald. Brady's definition for the shelters for the temporarily homeless would now read "a building, or portion thereof, in which only sleeping accomodations on an emergency basis for the temporarily homeless are provided. All shelters for the temporarily homeless shall be licensed pursuant to the provisions of 'title 8, Section 20 of the City Code." Ald. Drummer questioned Aid. Brady further about her recommendation to delete from her original motion Section 2.b. the provisions regarding storage facilities. Aid. Brady stated that she felt that with the elimination of storage facilities and allowing only sleeping accomodations, it would be more difficult for occupants to established a residency argument and therefore would help the City within its current case. With respect to the number of occupants restricted to any single shelter where Aid. Brady's proposal recommends a maximum number of 20 occupants, Aid. Warshaw felt that a total of thirty would be more appropriate. Chairman Forshak concurred with Ald. Warshaw. Aid. Juliar remarked that his recommendation would be to limit the maximum per shelter to no more than fifteen, because that would be -2- P & D Minutes Special Meeting July 29, 1985 consistant with the City's current group care home regulations. Ald. Drummer indicated that his preference would be a maximum of thirty occupants. Ald. Brady indicated that nhe felt that thirty was too much and fifteen was too little, and she had arrived at the figure of twenty and felt more comfortable with that number. Chairman Korshak called for a consensus of the Committee and ask for a vote on the number of Committee members that preferred thirty. Aldermen Warshaw, Drummer and Korshak voted for thirty. Aldermen Brady and Juliar voted against thirty. Chairman Korshak indicated that thirty as a maximum number of occupants was the consensus of the Committee and would be included in the revised proposed ordinance. With respect to the ZAC recommendation and also the proposed revised recommendation from Ald. Brady, Ald. Drummer questioned why the establishment of shelters was limited to a special use in churches only in R-7 Districts. On the question from Chairman Korshak, Rudd indicated that a review of the transcript of the ZAC meeting indicates that that Committee felt most comfortable with the R-7 District because it is of a multi -family nature and that the use of a shelter contained several people and was also multi -family in nature and that the R-7 District contained a similar type of density. Ald. Juliar stated once more that his concern was that the full scope of the problem is not as yet known to the Committee or to City Council. He questioned whether this is the best way to handle Evanston's homeless and whether the City can in some way establish regulations to only address the problem of Evanstonians. Chairman Korshak requested a vote on the entire Ald. nrady's proposal with the various changes that had been recommended and agreed on by the Committee at tonight's meeting (July 29, 1985). Committee voted 4-1 (Ald. Juliar voting nay) to recommend to City Council the revised ordinance. Ald. Juliar moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the P & D Committee recommend to the Mayor and City Council that an Ad -hoc Committee be selected to review the issue of alternatives for addressing the problem of Evanstonian's homeless. it was further recommended that upon the establishment of the Ad -hoc Committee that the Committee report back to the P & D Committee within a sixty (60) day period. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the motion. Chairman Korshak moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that upon the passing by City Council of the zoning regulations regarding the Temporary Shelters for the Homeless that the issue of regulations for the shelters be sent to the Human Services Committee and that Committee act as expediently as possible to report their recommendation back to City Council. Committee voted 5-0 to make this recommendation to City Council. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M., next meeting August 12, 1985. Staff : �ea� Robert T. Rudd i389 -3- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee August 12, 1985 7:30 P.M. Aid. Present: Korshak, Brady, Juliar, Warshaw, Drummer and Bleveans Aid. Absent: None Staff Present: R. Carlson, Siegel, Eiseman, Carter and Rudd Presiding Official: Korshak Minutes of July 22 and July 29, 1985 Aid. Brady moved an►' Aid. Bleveans seconded to approve the minutes of the Planning and Development Committee meetings of July 22 and July 29, 1985. Under discussion Aid. Warshaw recommended that the following changes be made on page 2 of July 29, 1985 minutes. Starting with the tenth line, Ald. Warshaw recommended that it reads 'Aid. Warshaw moved to forward Aid. Brady's recommendation without requlatory portions in lieu of the ZAC recommendation to City Council. Then Ald. Brady moved to forward her recommendation. Motion died for a lack of a second." '?he Committee voted 6-0 to approved the minutes as amended. COMMUNICATION The Committee received without comment two Final decisions by the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding variations at 2400-26 ,"lain Street and 1136 Oak Avenue. Rehab CasF 379-84 Upon accepting the subject rehab case without comment, the case will stand as approved. Review of Plan Commission Proposal for the Funding and Implementation of the Custer/Callan Project. Aid. Korshak ask for a leave following the agenda in order to allow representatives of the Plan Commission to maize a slide presentation regarding the Custer/Callan Project. The Plan Commission membFrs, brew Petterson, Jeanne Breslin and Stephen Yas were present for a narration of the slide presentation. The proposal entailed a recommendation from the Plan Commission for the City to acquire certain commercial properties at Custer and Callan, clear the site and request proposals for a townhouse development from a developer. Aid. Warshaw moved that the P & D Committee concur with the Plan Commission recommendation and forward this proposal to Administration and Public Works Committee. Ald. Brady seconded the motion but questioned the price category ($60,000-75,000) as being suitable for moderate income persons. The representative from the Plan Commission stated that some unfinished buildings which could be finished through "sweat equity' would allow for the price to be adjusted downward and thus available P & D Minutes August 12, 1985 to low and moderate income residents. The Committee voted 6-0 to concur with the Plan Commission recommendations and forward said to Administration and Public Works Committee. Docket 175-8A-85, Consider Approval of Plat of Consolidation for Northwestern University Prooerty on Maple Avenue from Clark Street to University Place. Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of plat of consolidation for the subject property which would be the site of the Basic Industrial Research Laboratory Building. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend approval of plat of consolidation to City Council. Docket 176-8A-85, Consider Approval of Plat of Consolidation for 1017 Chicaqo Avenue. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the subject plat of consolidation. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend approval of plat of consolidation to City Council. Docket 178-8A-85, ZBA 85-10-V(R) or T(F), Ordinance 81-0-85, re variation 1700 Payne Street. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the P & D Committee concur with the Zoning Board of Appeals' recommendation to grant a variation for a building and use to continue beyond the termination date. Committee voted 6-0 to make said recommendation to City Council and to introduce the ordinance on Auqust 12, 1985. Docket 179-8A-85, ZRA 85-16-SU(R), Ordinance 83-0-85, re Special Use for 1827 Emerson Street. Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the P & D Committee concur with the Zoning Board of Appeals' recommendation to grant a special use for a fast-food restaurant at said location. Ald. Brady moved to amend the motion to limit the special use to only the present owners of the business and to the type of fast-food restaurant as described in the transcript from the ZBA meeting. Committee votF-d 6-0 to concur with the Zoning Board's recommendation an amended by the P & D Committee and to introduce the ordinance at the August 12, 1985, City Council meeting. :he Committee also requested that a clean copy of the ordinance be forwarded to the P & D Committee at their August 26, 1985 meeting for a final review tefore passage at the City Council r,&Eting on that date. Docket 326-12B-84, ZAC 84-9, ordinance 50-0-85 rc Zoninq Ordinance Amendments to Authorize Shelters for the Temporarily Homeless and Docket 96-5A-85, Ordinance 51-0-85 re Amendments to the City Code to Regulate Shelters for the Temporarily Homeless. Ald. Brady distributed a revised proposal and made a motion that the Committee reconsider the action of the special meeting of the P & D Committee of July 29, 1985 in regard to ordinance 50-0-85. Ald. Juliar seconded. Committee voted 6-0 to reconsider previous actions. Ald. Brady's -2- ~ P & D Minutes August 12, 1985 amended proposal called for the tabling of Ordinances 50-0-85 and 51--0-85 until the City Council meeting of November 4, 1985, at which time a special committee appointed by the Mayor would have an opportunity to make recommendations regarding alternatives which address the housing problems of Evanston's homeless (see attached for entire proposal from Ald. Brady). In Discussion Ald. Brady suggested amending her proposal, Section l.a. to read an follows: that all residents of the shelter will be referred by the Department of Health and Human Services, whose criteria shall include present or prior family, work, or community association with Evanston, this referral being necessary except for the first night or the first available business day thereafter, or until a final determination is made by said department.' Ald. Drummer expressed concern that at this time there may not be sufficient City personnel available to supply the service as set forth in the proposal by Ald. Brady. Ald. Drummer suggested that shelter staff could contact the City by telephone to make arrangements for adm€zs€on to the shelter. Ald. Drummer also objected to the specificity of the ordnance as proposed by Ald. Brady and the regulations contained therein. He felt that these additional regulations were unnecessary during the proposed additional existing period of the shelter operation from September I until November 4, 1985. Ald. Brady commented that her conditions and her notion were meant to be guidelines and not necessarily regulations for an ordinance. Commenting on Brady's proposal, Ald. Juliar stated that the number of occupants should be reduced from the proposed twenty to fifteen. Ald. Drummer took exception to the cut and felt that the number should be thirty and felt that if there would be any reduction in the number it should be gradual over a longer period of time: to allow proper placement of shelter people. Ald. Warshaw concurred with Ald. Drummer and felt that this was a significant issue. Aid. Brady moved to adopt her proposal as amended. Ald. Juliar seconded. Ald. Warshaw moved to .-amend Brady's motion to allow thirty occupants rather than twenty. Motion died for lack of a second. Ald. Juliar felt that twenty to thirty occupants was far too many, he felt that fifteen was much more 3p7ronriate, he 31 nn felt that the irff period t —twee cn this m.euting and September was sufficient time to reduce the occupancy. Ald. Juliar moved that the limit of twenty occupants be reduced to fifteen. `lotion failed for the lack of a second. Ald. Warshaw ;roved to increase the number of occupants from twenty to thirty, Ald. Drummer seconded. Committee voted 3-3. Voting Aye: Aldermen Korshak., Warshaw and Drummer. Voting tray: Aldermen Bleveans, Brady and Juliar. A vote was called for on the main motion proposed by Ald. Brady which had previously been seconded by Ald. Juliar. Committee voted 5-1 to recommend to City Council Brady's motion. (Voting nay Ald. Drummer). ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M., next meeting August 26, 1985. Staff; CIO✓ �� Robert T. Rudd Attachment #407 -3- ATTACHMEUT I move to cable Ordinances 50-0-85 and 51-0-85 pertaining to shelters for the homeless until the City Council meeting of November 4, 1985 by which time the special committee appointed by the Mayor Will have made their recc=endations regarding alternatives which address the housing•prob-lems of Evanston's homeless. In place of the above ordinances, I Hove that the temporary permit given to the Center for ?ublic Ministry for the operation of a shelter for the homeless ac the First Baptist church be extended beyond September 1st until the same City Council meeting of November 4, 1985 if the following conditions are met: 1. That a letter of agreement be drafted by the Director of Health and Human Services, the director of the Center for ?ublic Ministry, and two alderman appointed by the Mayor from the Planning and Development Committee incorporating the following conditions and any others that are deemed necessary for the safe and sanitary operation of :he shelter: a. That all residents of the shelter will be referred by the Department of Healzh, and human Services, ::hose ' criteria shall include present or prior fami'_v, work, or community association with Evanston, this referral being necessary except for the first 24 hours or the first 72 hours Friday ,hru Xonday; b. Thac all residents only be allowed to remain at the shelter for a maximum of 30 days, unless an additional period of time, not to exceed 30 days, is authorized by t;e Director of Health and Human Services; c. That the maximum number of people allowed at the shelter on any given night is limitdd to 20 people; and d. That the shelter Will only remain Ofopen for a maximum of 10 hours. 2. That this letter of agreement is approved by the City Council at its August 25th meeting MINUTES Planning and Development Committee August 26, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Korshak; Brady, Warshaw, Bleveans and Drummer Ald. Absent: Jultar Staff Present: R. Carlson, Ahlberg, Siegel, Carter, Eiseman, Wirth and Rudd Presiding official: Korshak Minutes of August 12, 1985 Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of August 12, 1985. Ald. Warshaw moved that the third line on page 2 be amended to read as follows: 'forward said to Administration and Public Works Committee for funding'. Committee voted 5--0 to approve the minutes as amended. COMMUNICATION Committee received a communication in the form of revised Ordinance 83-0-85 for a special use for a fast-food restaurant at 1827 Emerson Street. The revised ordinance which was introduced at the City Council meeting of August 12, 1985 reflected P & D Committee's changes with respect to details as to limiting the special use to the present operators of the restaurant and also to the current menu offered by the restaurant. Under communication the Committee also received a final decision from the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding a variation at 1316 oakton Street. The Committee also received ZAC public notice for a hearing on September 5, 1985. NEW BUSINESS Consider Letter re 'Avenue of the Righteous" Project Chairman Korshak requested leave from the agenda to address an item under new business regarding 'Avenue of the Righteous'. Korshak reviewed the item as it appeared earlier before this Committee. Korshak stated that he had discussed with Ald. Summers of the ward where the proposed 'Avenue of the Righteous' would be located and was made aware of neighborhood opposition. After a brief discussion Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the P & D Committee reaffirm their previous recommendation that the 'Avenue P & D Minutes August 26, 1985 of the Righteous' project be located in Ingrahm Park, west of the Civic Center pending the Committee's review of an explicit plan and confirmation by the representatives of the •Avenue of the Righteous• that funds were received for the project. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the motion. Docket 188-8B-85, Revised Rehabilitation Proqram Guidelines and Docket 177-8A-85, Ordinance 70-0-85, Proposed B.O.C.A. Existinq Structures Code 1984. Chairman Korshak suggested that since a representative of the Housing Commission was unable to be present at the August 26, '1985 meeting, that the subject rehab guidelines be held over to the September 9, 1985 meeting. Chairman Korshak also suggested that the proposed B.O.C.A. Existing Structures Code 1984, be held as a second issue at the September 9, 1985 meeting, or if it could not be addressed on that date be held over until the next regular meeting of the P & D Committee which would be September 23, 1985. The Committee concurred with these suggestions. Review Staff Request for Reference to ZAC Ald. Bleveans moved and Aid. Brady seconded that the reference be made to ZAC. Under discussion Aid. Bleveans suggested that the reference to ZAC be expanded to include discussion and evaluation about what determines floor area (i.e., elevator shafts, stairwells, hallways, storage, etc.). Staff indicated that a revised reference would be drafted to allow the Zoning Amendment Committee to address this broader issue. Committee voted 4-0 to make this reference to ZAC (Aid. Warshaw absent). Letter of Agreement -Shelter for the Homeless Chairman Korshak and Aid. Bleveans summarized a meeting held which they attended in addition to City staff and representatives of the shelter. Aid. Bleveans related that the meeting was one in which a compromise agreement was reached which is reflected in the letter of agreement attached to a memorandum from Helen McCarthy, Director of Health and Human Services, dated August 22, 1985. Rev. Robert Thompson of the shelter was present and confirmed that the agreement reflected the meeting held between the two groups. Aid. Bleveans suggested a slight change in item 2b to read as follows: 'the center may accept a person who has made application to the Department of Health and Human Services until such time final approval has been obtained or denied'. Aid. Bleveans+moved and Aid. Drummer seconded that the Committee recommend to City council to adopt the agreement as amended. Com.ittee voted 4-0 to recommend to City Council the adoption of the agree",t (Ald. Warshaw absent). Docket 191-BB-85, consider Ordinance 93-0-85 re Plantinq Easement for 845 Dodqe Avenue (S.E. corner Dodqe and Main). Ald. Drummer moved and Aid. Bleveans seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council introduction of said ordinance which would allow landscaping -2- P 6 D Minutes August 26, 1985 planting for a proposed commercial center at the S.E. corner of Dodge and Main to be located on public right-of-way. Committee voted 4-0 to recommend for introduction (Ald. Warshaw absent). Docket 189-BB-85, Plat of Consolidation and Docket 190-68-85, Plat of Easement (S.W. corner of Livinqston and Green Bay Road). Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded the introduction of Ordinance 87-0-BS for the plat of easement. Ald. Bleveans requested staff to provide to the Committee the names of the beneficiaries of the land trust for the subject property. Committee voted 5-0 to introduce Ordinance 87-0-85 and hold these items until the next meeting at which time the staff would provide the subject report. Under discussion of this matter Ald. Bleveans questioned whether the Dunkin Donuts' operation would require a special use hearing. Staff explained that the Dunkin Donuts' operation is treated as a bakery similar to Bennison, Tags, etc. and did not tinder the present zoning ordinance require a special use for a fast food restaurant. Docket 246-10A-84, ZAC 85-3, Ordinance 86-0-85 re Parkinq Setback Zoning Ordinance Amendments. Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council introduction of said ordinance to change net back requirements in residential areas for garages and parking. Committee voted 5-0 to approve. Dockkt 13-lB-81, ZAC 85-2 re ZAC Recommendation not to Rezone the Canal Banks and all Parks in Evanston. Attorney Siegel reviewed the background of the case with the Committee as it pertained to responses from Metropolitan Sanitary District. Siegel indicated that it was his recollection that the District had informed the City that it did not object to rezoning of the property to an open space classification. Dick Carter, Planning Director was present and reviewed the Plan Commission's original recommendation to rezone the property and then at a later date a reconsideration of that position which resulted in a recommendation not to rezone the canal banks. Ald. Bleveans noted his objections to not rezoning the canal banks. Ald. Brady noted that a dissenting opinion was supplied from ZAC member Ellis. Ald. Brady suggested that staff develop a memo detailing in synopsis form the positions of the prevailing side of ZAC. Aid. Drummer moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee hold this item for further discussion at the September 9, 1985 meeting pending receipt of the requested report from staff. Committee voted 5-0 to hold this item. Docket 186-88-85, Resolution 64-R-85 re to •Build Illinois Funds.' Don Wirth, Director of Parks, Forestry and Recreation was present and detailed that the resolution was to authorize the City Manager to apply for 'Build Illinois Funds' to be utilized for rebuilding various structures -3- P & D Minutes August 26, 1985 along the lakefront. The committee questioned whether this application would endanger other applications that the City has made to the State for "Build Illinois Funds?' Wirth indicated that 'Build Illinois Funds' are set aside for various categories of projects and that this request would not endanger any previous applications made by the City. Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council passage of Resolution 64-R-85 authorizing the City Manager to apply for •Build Illinos Funds' up to $200,000. Committee voted 5-0. Docket 187-BB-85, Proposed Comprehensive Siqn Ordinance Amendment - Recommendation of Consultant Services. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Drummer seconded to recommend to City Council that Teska Associates be retained to develop a comprehensive sign ordinance amendment. Committee approved the staff recommendation to hire Teska Associates and recommend to City Council 5--0. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:55 P.M., next meeting September 9, 1985. Staff• •R birt T. Rudd 423 MEIC v I. Ald. Present: Staff Present: Presiding Official: MINUTES Planning and Development Committee September 9, 1985 7:30 P.N. Korsbak, Brady, Warshaw, Bleveans, Drummer, and Juliar Budd, R. Carlson, Ahlberg, Carter and Szymanski Korshak Minutes of August 26, 1985 . 'Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded:.that the Planning and Development Committee approve the minutes of August 26. 1985. The Committee voted 6-0 to approve the minutes as submitted. COMMUNICATIONS the committee received several communications from the Zoning Board of Appeals reflecting final decisions. The Committee also received the ZBA Public Notice for September 10, 1985, and a revised reference listing to ZAC without comment. OLD BUSINESS Revised Rehabilitation Program Guidelines Sid Ross, Chairman of the Housing Commission's Rehabiliatlon Sub -Committee was present and gave a background on the proposed new rehabilitation guidelines. Ross detailed several new programs proposed and also changes in the existing programs. Ald. Drummer questioned the proposed Rehabilitation Board of Appeals and why the board does not have any elected officials on it. Ross and Ald. Brady stated that the Sub -Committee and Housing Commission felt that there could possibly be a conflict of interest if an Alderman was placed on the Appeals Board. Therefore, the Housing Commission recommended that the Appeals Board consist of a non -elected member of the Housing and Community Development Act Committee, the chairman of the Housing Commission and the chairman of the Housing Commission Rehabilitation Sub -Committee. Ald. Bleveans noted to the committee that the Downspout Board of Appeals has similar decision making powers (final) and is not composed of any elected official. Ald. Juliar questioned the lower loan limits and the matter of not being able to correct all code violations due to the lower loan limits. Staff Indicated that in those instances the matter could be appealed to the Rehabilitation Appeals Board and that Board could grant additional monies to correct any life threatening violations. Ald. Warshaw suggested that financial counseling be a mandatory part of the program for those clients that Planning and Development Minutes September 9, 1985 are above the specified percentage for income to housing cost. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether ECDC could handle the financial counseling. Rudd indicated that this is presently the responsibility of ECDC and that ECDC has stated they do financial counseling. Ald. Brady suggested that in the future any ECDC contracts should contain specific wording with respect to the function of financial counseling and should report regularly to the City on the results. Ald. Drummer questioned the proposed and existing procedure with respect to title transfer loans where heirs may have to pay off the loan. Ald. Drummer further inquired about the possibility of title transfer recipients and grant recipients being required to carry mortgage insurance. Ross indicated that under the new guidelines heirs of the client would be eligible for the program if they qualified income wise and therefore would not have to actually pay the City at the time of inheritance . Ald. Juliar agreed with Aid. Drummer's proposal about mortgage insurance and suggested that it should be further explored. Ross indicated that a new aspect of the proposed guidelines would be for monthly amounts to be escrowed for payment of taxes at the end of the tax year. Chairman Korshak questioned whether the escrow money would draw interest. Rudd indicated that if the money was at a private institution that would be the case. However, the City Was exploring establishing an in-house accounting procedure for escrowing tax monies. Due to the extent of the agenda, Chairmen Korshak suggested that further discussion of the Rehab Guildelines be held for the meeting of September 23, 1985. the Committee concurred with the suggestion and will continue discussion at that meeting. Proposed B.O.C.A. Existing Structures Code 1984 Chairman Korshak suggested that this item should also be held over to the September 23, 1985 meeting. The Committee concurred this suggestion. Plat of Easement and Plat of Consolidation Livingston Street and GreenBay Road Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee recommend that the City Council approve Ordinance 87-0-85 for the Plat of Easement and recommend to the City Council approval of the Plat of Consolidation for the subject property. The Committee voted 6-0. Variation Request for 2525 Hartrey Avenue Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee recommend the City Council approval of the variation. Chairman Korshak noted the lack of findings of facts within the transcript of the ZBA Hearing. Chairman Korshak suggested that Staff develop a memo citing the reasons the Planning and Development Committee is recommending a variation be granted. He felt that this would be necessary so that no precedent would be set in the future where another church could simply state that a previous church was granted a similar type of use. Reverend Scott of the church was present and in response to questions from Ald. Bleveans and other Committee members detailed the proposed use for a design studio and stated that the prior use was much more intense than that which is proposed, which should not intensify any traffic problems In the neighborhood. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council introduction of the Ordinance for variation. -2- Planning and Development Minutes September 9, 1985 Ordinance 85-0-85 Revision of Penalty Clause For Contractors Working Without Permits Ald. Warhaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council introduction of the subject Ordinance. Committee voted 6-0 to recommend introduction of the Ordinance. Ordinance 97-0-85, re Variations, Special Use and Release from Prior Conditions for 120 Dodge and 111 Dodge Avenue Chairman Korshak indicated that Ald. Rainey had requested that 120 Dodge and 111 Dodge Avenue request for a special use and release from prior conditions be held over to September 23, 1985, until she had an opportunity to review the transcript. The Committee concurred with this recommendation. Rezoning the Canal Banks and All Parks in Evanston Chairman Korshak suggested that this matter should also be held over to September 23, 1985 to allow further discussion. The Committee concurred in this recommendation. Reference from Ald. Morton Regarding Pole Sign Moratorium Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council introduction of an Ordinance setting forth a Pole Sign Moratorium. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m., next meeting September 23, 1985. Staff: -3- w I MINUTES Special Meeting Planning and Development Committee September 18, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Korshak, Brady, Drummer, and Warshaw Ald. Absent: Juliar and Bleveans Staff Present: Wirth, Walsh, Cullen and Rudd Others Present: Aldermen Morton and Summers Presiding Official: Korshak Chairman Korshak opened the meeting by giving a brief overview of the original proposal which appeared before the P & D Committee at the meeting of June 24, 1985. Chairman Korshak indicated that the P & D Committee had approved two aspects of the •Avenue of the Righteous'" proposal: (1) the concept and (2) the general location of the project to be located in Ingraham Park without a specific location being identified at that time. The City Council that same night concurred with the P & D Committee in the concept approval and the location to be in Ingraham Park. After that meeting a special neighborhood meeting was called. As a result of that meeting, a somewhat negative position of the neighborhood was expressed to members of the P & D Committee which revisited the same subject at the August 26, 1985 Committee meeting. At that time the Committee reaffirmed its original decision on the concept and the general location of the project, but recommended that a meeting be held in conjunction with ward Aldermen Summery and tiorton and with the neighbors to review the project more in-depth. Muriel Glick, a r.prc-3entativu of thF- •Avenue of the Rightenu3• Made a presentation explaining the project and background. Glick explained that the concept is one of an 'Educational and humanitarian project.' An interfaith Steering Committee of the `Avenue of the Righteous" group had reviewed a number of communities and decided that Evanston was uniquely suited for such a project and also that the project could best be situated in Evanston. Glick further explained that though the project was not initially conceived as a beautification project, it will result in that with the planting of twelve to fifteen trees, park benches and small plaques. Glick felt that Ingraham Park was ideal due to ample parking and high visibility since it is located immediately adjacent to the City of Evanston's Civic Center. Glick further stated that the 'Avenue of the Righteous' had received numerous endorsements from civic groups throughout the area. Cindy Walsh, of Parks, Recreation and Forestry Departments made a presentation highlighting a site plan. The diagram showed three alternative areas for the project at Ingraham Park. P & D Minutes Special Meeting September 18, 1985 Louis Silverstein, 1211 Leonard Place spoke in opposition to the location of the project, but in favor of the Concept. Silverstein questioned who would make the final decision? Would it be the neighborhood or City Council? Robert Harmon, 2235 Asbury questioned the Committee and staff as to whether any other alternative sites were considered. Mr. Harmon was told by staff and the Committee that other sites were considered, but that Ingraham was felt to be the most appropriate. Another resident Dan Whitmore, felt that possible other sites should be reviewed and that the pros and cons of those sites should be presented to the neighborhood. At this point Dan Wirth, Director of Parks, Recreation and Forestry stat�•d that the City had offered four or five other locations, but that as indicated earlier in the meeting it was felt that Ingraham Park offered the best location. Dan Garrison, 1220 Simpson stated that upon review of the plan presented at the September 18, 1985 special meeting that Area B, north of the Steam Plant was the best of the three alternatives presented. Garrison offered that Area A is used for sun bathing for many of the residents in his opinion and that Area C immediately west of the Civic Center and east of the viaitor's parking lot :ran too shaded and not appropriate as stated by staff members earlier. Margaret Roach, 2223 Ridge questioned whether City Council had decided against Ladd Arboretum? Chairman Forshak stated that City Council and the P & D Committee did not reject any specific site, but rather approved Ingraham Park as the most appropriate. Don Wirth stated that the Arboretum was initially offered, but wan subsequently rejected because it was currently over -planted and did not have adequate parking facilities. Eduardo Schova repre.;r,nting human Relations made a speech supporting the proposed site and stated that the spirit of the project is to honor those who helped the Jews during the Holocust. Schova stated the City of Evanston prided itself in its civic consciousness and this would be a good Example. Victor Marnolin, 1207 Leonard stated that being a planner by profession, he felt that this concept had not been vary well thought out and planned since• various alternatives were not fully Explored. Margolin star_r;d tha*_ he suaportcd thc- concept but wants other sires reviewed. Ben Benson, 2149 Ridge stated that he thought the proposals as presented looked like the project was 'shoe hornc;d' into small spaces and that adequate space was not available at Ingraham Park. Bob Harmon felt that Benson description was appropriate and that he was concerned with the use of apace. He felt that the Committee should consider Noyes' Park or the Arboretum. Wirth at this point once nore stated that a list of potential sites had been supplied to the 'Avenue of the Righteous" representativ6s and that sites were eliminated leaving ingrahan Park which was felt offered the best location. At this point Chairman Korshak stated that some of the c_iteria utilized in the decision making process were (1) the need for parking; (2) central location and (3) not to displaced any current activity and that the Civic Center (Ingraham Park) met these criteria. Helen Squires, 2144 Asbury stated that she opposed the location due to the added traffic the project may generate (i.e. school children, week -end visitors, (:tc.). She questioned whether this was considered in the decision making process? Joan Golder, Chairman of the 'Avenue of the Righteous' project stated that it was that group's feeling that the project would not generate an extraordinary amount of visitors. Golder further stated that a similar project is located in Wilmington, Delaware. Golder indicated that the project is expected to draw children and adults, but -2 P & D Minutes Special Meeting September 18, 1985 not in large numbers. Louis Silverstein, 1211 Leonard stated that the current lack of parking and speeding of existing traffic in the area was damaging the residential character. Silverstein felt that the current parking lot was presently filled to capacity and could not accept further traffic. Herm Ainis, 2236 Wesley stated that the site is symbolic and recommended combining some of the areas of the proposal presented at tonight's meeting. Helen Kamerling, 1311 Grant urge the Committee to review all of other sites, particularly those locations that did not border residential areas. Ald. Morton questioned how many at the meeting tonight were at the original meeting. A show of hands indicated that four people present at tonight's meeting Were present at the earlier meeting. Ald. Morton was concerned that the issue was being discussed with two different groups and that it was difficult to get a good reading from the neighborhood. Ald. Brady offered a summary of the background of how the project had reached this stage. She further recommended to the Committee that staff and the 'Avenue of the Righteous' people prepare a list of alternative sites detailing the pros and cons of each site and send that report back to the P & n Committee to review again and further discuss this issue. In this manner the concerns of the residents as Expressed at tonight's special meeting of 9/18/85 regarding alternative sites would have a full discussion. Ald. Summers stated that alternative sites were reviewed and that all sites were eliminated with the exception of Ingraham due to various problems discussed already. Dan Whitmore, representing Marywood Neighbors, a local neighborhood group gave a detailed history of that organization and its fight with the City regarding the conversion of Marywood Academy to the Civic Center. Whitmore felt that it was necessary that the City Council and Committees listen to the neighbors and address their concerns. Ald. Summers stated meetings had been held and that at no time would any action be taken regarding this project without neighborhood input. Ald. Summers further stated that this is Evidenced by the fact that to date two meetings have been called and that nore may be necessary to gain valuable neighborhood input. Mae Ainis stated that she was not opposer) to the project, but l-)okcd Ej:wjrd to an analysis of other sztcs. Robert Harmon reiterated concern that the project would generate additional traffic, have a negative impact on the neighborhood and that the parking burden generated by the site was Extreme. Chairman Korshak summarized that as a result of this meeting the Committee concludes that all members present appear to endorse the concept, but the question is where to locate the project? At the conclusion of the meeting Chairman Korshak recognized Rabbi Knoble of Beth Emet Synagogue, which is a supporter of the 'Avenue of the Righteous' proposal. Rabbi Knoble indicated that it was important that Evanston be the place to make this moral statement represented by such a project. He urged the Committee and neighborhood give serious thought to the location at the Civic Center, which he felt was the most appropriate. Adlournment The meeting adjourned at 9:35 P.M. Staff:�// 442 Robert T. Rind -3- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee September 23, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Korshak, Drummer, Bleveans, Warshaw and Brady Ald. Absent: Juliar Staff Present: Ahlberg, Carlson, Wirth, Eiseman and Rudd Presiding Official: Korshak Minutes of September 9, 1985 Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approved the minutes of September 9, 1985. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATION The Planning and Development Committee received a memo from staff detailing the authorization of final authority in various zoning board cases. OLD BUSINESS Docket 211-9a-85, ZSA 85-27-SU(R), Ordinance 106--0--85, re Snecial Use for 1501 Central Street. Jim Perry, representing Northwestern University was present regarding the case. Ald. Bleveans questioned if the University was maintaining attendance records for the special use Events? Perry stated that the University was maintaining the attendance records at the request of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ald. Warshaw asked if there would be any cost to the City for police during the event? Perry responded that there was not expected to be any use of City police, but if there was the City would be reimbursed by the University. Chairman Korshak questioned the waiver by ""BA of free parking for the event. Perry stated that since the event was following a permitted activity which the University would normally charged parking fees, the University requested that parking fees be allowed in this case. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council introduction of Ordinance 106-0-85 granting a special use for a volleyball match on October 25, 1985 at McGaw Hall. Committee voted 5-0 to make the introduction. Docket 209-9B-85, Consultant Buildinq Inspections. Chairman Korshak reviewed a memo from staff detailing the recommendation to City Council to authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract for consultant building inspections for certain projects. Ald. Bleveans questioned whether any of the firms, particularly the recommended firm, Were engaged in design services or review services with perspective clients of P & D Minutes September 23, 1985 the City. Rudd indicated that Kelly Reynolds, the recommended consultant, was a plan reviewer and an inspection firm and not an architectural design firm. Staff felt that it was unlikely that this consultant would be engaged with firms doing work in the City and create a conflict of interest. Ald. sleveans felt that in some way, possibly in the contract, that stipulations should be included to address this concern of the City. Staff indicated that a clause would be placed in the contract to attempt to alleviate any possible conflict of interest with the consultant, the City, and developeru. Staff detailed that such a proposal to have consultants provide not only plan review cervices but also inspection services is necessary in more complex structures. in these type of structures the City cannot always afford the expertise necessary to provide full service. The consultant allows the City to have expertise available but not have to pay the entire cost during slow building periods. Ald. eleveans moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the P & 0 Committee recommend to City Council to authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract for consultant building inspections services. Docket 177-8A-85, Ordinance 70-0-85, Proposed A.O.C.A. Existinq Structures Code 1984. Present for discussion regarding the ordinance were Sid Bona, Chairman of the Housing Commission Rehabilitation Committee, Firr_, Dr_partnent Deputy Chief Robert Schumer, Sgt. Henry White from the Police Department's Crime Prevention Bureau. Also present to read a statement supporting the rehabilitation guidelines aspect of the proposed code was Stephen Knutson, Chairman of the Preservation Commission. White and Schumer Explained conflicting positions of the Police and Fire Departments regarding locks. Schumer indicated that the Fire Department was consistent with all of the B.O.C.A. Codes in requiring the prohibition of double cylinder dead -bolt locks in residential units. White indicated that from a burglar -security point of view, the double cylinder dead -bald lock provided additional security in residential units. Ald. Sleveans stated that his original thought would be to leave the decision to having a dead -bolt lock or not having a dead -bolt lock up to the individual homeowner or tenant and let that party weigh the pros and cons regarding security versus safety. However, he also thought that it may be possible to differentiate between single family homes and multi family buildings. Chairman Korshak stated that it may be appropriate to differentiate between single family and multi family since single family homes most often have- more than one means of ingress and egress and are located closer to the ground in case of required escape from an upper level. Ald. Warshaw stated that she thinks that it is necessary for the City to make a legislative decision regarding the locks and not leav_ it up to the individual tenant or homeowner. Her major concern was with the tenant Who may not have the ability (due to lease provisions) to require or not require certain types of locks. Ald. Drummer stated that locks needing keys to lock and unlock a unit could very well be a danger with regards to small children. _2- P & D Minutes September 23, 1985 White stated that the Police Department would have no objection to differentiating between dwelling units with one means of egress and those with two or more means of egress with respect to installing double cylinder dead -bolt locks. Ald. Bleveans moved and Aid. Warshaw seconded that with respect to further discussion of the entire B.O.C.A. Code that a compassion chart between the proposed B.O.C.A. Code and the City's current Housing Code be developed. Rudd indicated that such a comparsion would take a few to several months to construct and that upon completion of that document would return the matter back to the P & D Committee. Chairman Korshak moved that the item be removed from the Committee's agenda pending receipt of the staff report. Chairman Korshak further stated that on the next agenda the issue regarding the use of double cylinder dead -bolt locks should be further discussed and if at all possible decided upon by the Committee. Docket 196-9A-85, ZBA 85-18-V&SU(R), Ordinance 97-0-65, re variations, Special Use and Release from Prior Conditions for 120 Dodge Avenue and 111 Dodge Avenue. Ald. Warshaw moved and Aid. Brady seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council introduction of the special use and variation requests. Aid. Bleveans commented that after viewing the site and reviewing the plan as proposed that the addition did not seem out of character with the neighborhood. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend approval to City Council. Docket 197-9A-85, ZBA 85-13-V(R), Ordinance 95-0-85, re Variation for 2525 Hartrey Avenue. The Committee reviewed the revised ordinance which had been previously discussed by the Com.,mittEe and introduced at the St-ptErh(ir 9, 1985 City Council meeting. Committee- reviewed a staff memorandum submitted with the ordinance detailing various reasons why the Committee found in favor of granting the variations for a professional office in a church building. Aid. Brady suggested that staff follow-up With a report to the Committee regarding the statement from the pastor of the church that a portion of the church would be placed on the tax roll. it was the consensus of the Committee to report this item at the City Council meeting and ask Council for adoption of the previously introduced ordinance. Report and Recommendation re Erosion Project at Lee Street Beach. Aid. Brady suggested that the Committee take no action and accept the report. She stated that the report recommends to do nothing and wait until Spring 1986 to review the condition of the Lee Street Beach. Aid. Brady moved and Bleveans seconded. Committee voted 5-0 to accept the report as submitted. -3- P & D Minutes September 23, 1985 Docket 210-9B-85, ZBA 85-23-SU(R), Ordinance 96-0-85f re Special Use for 624 Davis Street. Chairman Korshak stated that upon request of the attorney of the applicant For a special use at 624 Davis Street that the Committee should continue the matter to October 14, 1985. The Committee voted to conduct a special meeting scheduled for Thursday, October 3, 1985 at 7:30 P.M. to address a back -log of agenda items. AdIournment The meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M. Staff R bert T. Rudd 447 -4- MINUTES Special Meeting Planning and Development Committee October 3, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Bleveans, Drummer, Brady, Juliar, Warshaw and Korshak Ald. Absent: None Staff Present: R. Carlson, Bannister, P. Witt and Rudd Presiding Official: Korshak S,(�t f g i 4r� .�3 Minutes of Wc'tober `4. 1985 Ald. Juliar moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the P 6 D Committee approve the minutes of the special meeting of September 18 and also the minutes of the regular meeting of September 23, 1965. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes (Ald. Bleveans absent). COMMUNICATIONS The Committee acknowledged the receipt of a statement from the Preservation Commission which was previously read to the Committee at the meeting of September 23, 1985 by Stephen Knutson, Chairman of the Preservation Commission. OLD BUSINESS Ald. Rainey's Reference re Proposal that the Planninq and Development Committee study the imposition of a moratorium on the demolition of multi -family housinq for purposes other than providing housinq. At the request of Chairnan Forshak, Rudd read two memos from Ellen Szymanski, Assistant Corporation Counsel. First memo was dated September 27, 1985 and a second memo dated October 2, 1985. Chairman Korshak recognized a member of the audience Dan Lauber, a local planner -attorney -housing expert. Lauber advocated the imposition of a moratorium on demolition of multi -family housing since it was his opinion that the City can not afford to demolish housing that serve low and moderate income residents. His primary concern was that new affordable housing, nor existing affordable housing, is available in the City of Evanston. Therefore, to demolish any existing multi -family housing that is not presently government subsidized would put a burden on low and moderate income residents and thus force them to leave the city. Lauber cited the current 1.3% vacancy rate in Evanston as evidence of the tight multi -family rental housing situation. Lauber felt that a moratorium imposed at this time would give City Council an opportunity to explore the long-term housing questions with respect to low and moderate income rental units. Ald. Bleveans questioned the authority of the City to restrict property owners from demolishing buildings on their property. Lauber stated that it was his opinion that the City had every right to do P b D Minutes Special Meeting October 3, 1985 so. Chairman Korshak stated that to restrict that right of demolition through a moratorium for a specified period would be appropriate. Ald- Warshaw and Lauber cited numerous California legislative acts (Santa Monica, L.A. and San Francisco) that had upheld similar moratorium to prohibit the demolition of multi -family structures without the construction of new rental units somewhere within those cities. Lauber stated that the City may wish to consider granting density boriuses to allow developers to construct more units than the zoning ordinance presently allows if the developer agreed to keep a certain percentage of the units as low and moderate income dwellings. Aid. Brady was concerned that the City would need a reason to impose a moratorium on demolition. she stated that she had not as yet been convinced that there was a significant loss of rental units to require such a moratorium. Lauber stated that courts have been considerably liberal in viewing city reasoning for housing controls. Ald. Drummer upon review of materials submitted by Lauber with respect to the loss of rental units over the past few years requested that staff provide an update of the number of units that have been lost since 1980 to demolition, conversions or other means. Ald. Bleveans moved to forward the issue of a moratorium on demolition of multi -family units to the Housing Commission, Ald Juliar seconded. Under discussion Ald. Brady stated that she was not as yet convinced that there was a need for a moratorium and suggested that holding the issue over to the next P 6 D meeting of October 14, 1985 and requested a more thorough legal opinion from the Legal Department in addition to the materials requested by Ald. Drummer. Ald. Juliar stated that at this point he felt that there was no need for a moratorium and that the matter should be forwarded to the Housing Commission. Ald. Warshaw moved to table forwarding the issue to the Housing Commission until the issue is discussed at the P & D Committee meeting of October 14, 1985. It was her intent that after receipt of the Legal Department's opinion the Committee could better decide whether it should recommend to the City Council the moratorium or forwarding th6 issue to the Housing Commission for further analysis. Committee voted 4-2 to table the matter until October 14, 1985 (Aldermen Juliar and Bleveana voting nay). Docket 188-88-85, Revised Rehabilitation Proqram Guidelines. Chairman Korshak recognized Sid Ross, Chairman of the Housing Commission as present to review with the Committee the previously submitted and discussed Rehabilitation Guidelines to the single family program. Ross gave a brief overview of the previous meeting stating that the new loan programs (8% and 10% Amortizing Loans and Grant/Loan) provided a balanced proposal allowing both higher income (still low moderate) and very low income people to participate. Ald. Warshaw questioned if the Housing Commission had discussed tying the loan rates for the amortizing programs to a floating rate (i.e. T-Bills, T-Notes). Ross stated that the Rehab Sub -committee and Housing Commission had discussed this but had recommended the fixed rate loans. Ald. Juliar felt that tying the loans to a floating rate particularly the 8% and -2- P & D Minutes Special Meeting October 3, 1985 10% amortizing programs, would hurt the programs when the interest rates rose. Ald. Warshaw felt that the reverse would be true to when the floating rate factor decreased a significant amount of applicants would apply. Robert Bannister, new Director of Housing Rehabilitation and Property Maintenance stated that he had had some experience with floating rate proposals and that they had worked quite well in his previous experience. Chairman Korshak requested that Bannister provide a study to the Committee reflecting a revised proposal to establish floating rates for the amortizing loan programs. Rosa then reviewed the Grant/Loan Program and its relationship to other aspects of the Rehabilitation Guidelines. Aid. Juliar stated that he was troubled with the grant program and felt that a title transfer and/or 0% Amortizing Loan were sufficient. Charlotte Walker, Executive Director of ECDC was present to reiterate the position of her agency. Walker stated that often times clients are reluctant to enter into a title transfer because they wish to leave a legacy to their heirs that is free of any debt. Therefore, many clients prefer to have an amortizing loan or a grant. Walker also stated that it was her opinion that a rehabilitation program should not be viewed as one to generate income but rather to help low and moderate income people. Therefore grants are needed. Ald. Drummer agreed with Walker, particularly with her respect to grants, but felt that the City should consider limiting grants only to the elderly and or handicapped. Ald. Juliar stated that he did not feel that creating a debt free Estate was a legitimate goal for the rehab program. Ald. Bleveans felt that a grant was not appropriate and that the title transfer addressed the same problems and also allowed for income back to the City. Bannister stated that he had faced similar obstacles to title transfer type issues in past programs. He felt that he could sell the various programs once he had an opportunity to meet with the numerous applicants and neighborhood groups throughout the City. Walker reiterated that lower income residents citywide, not only on the west side, had a fear of the City's overly strict code Fnforcenent program. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether there presently was financial counseling offered to rehab recipients? Rudd stated that currently the City offered help in making applicants eligible for the program. He stated that if the definition of 'financial counseling' is to aid the residents in developing an overall household budget to address all issues, that the City did not have such a program nor did it have on -going counseling with applicants. Ald. Warshaw moved that the grant program be amended to drop the grant aspect but add $7,500 to the current $15,000 maximum to allow for a new maximum title transfer of $22,500. Ald. Juliar seconded. Committee voted 4-2 to drop the grant apsect but to increase the title transfer loan limit to $22,500. Voting aye: Aldermen Bleveans, Juliar, Warshaw and Korshak. Voting nay: Aldermen Drummer and Brady. Ross next proceeded to review the composition of the Housing Rehabilitation Board of Appeals. Both Ross and Brady explained the Housing Commission - 3- P & D Minutes Special Meeting October 3, 1985 concern with respect to having or not having an alderman sit on this board. Ald. Juliar moved with a second by Ald. Drummer to require that no more than two aldermen will be members of the Rehabilitation Board of Appeals nor less than one. The Board of Appeals will continue to consist of Chairmen of the Housing Commission, Rehabilitation Sub -committee and also a member of the Housing and Community Development Act Committee. The next item was that of the Tax Assistance Program. Ald. Brady explained that this program was included as a staff submittal and in prioritization of staff programs was not forwarded on to the C.D. Committee. Ald. Brady stated that the Housing Commission felt that the proposal was not necessarily one of staff development but should be forwarded to the C.D. Committee for review with the housing programs as a Housing Commission recommendation. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the P & D Committee approve the proposal and forward it on to the C.D. Committee for review at the October 22, 1985 C.D. Committee meeting regarding housing programs. Committee voted 6-0 to approve. Upon review of inheritance of property with title transfer loans the Committee recommended that those loans be held in abeyance with respect to situations where a minor would inherit a home. It was felt by the Committee that current state law would address the status of a minor inheriting property and that the City should not take any action to call -in the loan at that time. Any unique problems with respect to this issue would be referred to the Appeals Board for review. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the P & D Committee approved the entire Rehabilitation Guidelines proposal with an exception to further review at the October 14, 1985 P & D Committee meeting of the study regarding the floating rate issue. It is the Committee's direction upon a final disposition of the overall package at the October 14, 1985 meeting that a clean copy of complete guidelines be forwarded to City Council members and placed on the Council agenda of October 28, 1985 for adoption. Docket 13-1B-81 re ZAC Recommendation not to Rezone the Cana! Banks and All Parks in Evanston. Phillip Peters, Chairman of the Plan Commission was recognized by Chairman Korshak in the audience and offered an opportunity to Explain the Plan Commission's position. Peters stated that the Plan Commission's position was well known that it opposed any rezoning of the canal banks since it felt that action was not required to guarantee future open space of the canal banks. Jonathan Stimson, a city resident and an employee of MSD, stated that he was in support of the MSD proposal for development of the canal banks as a marina. Mr. Stimson was informed by Chairman Korshak that that was not the issue before the P & D Committee. Chairman Korshak stated that the issue under review was whether the City should create an open space recreational -4- P b D Minutes Special Meeting October 3, 1985 district and rezone the MSD property and other open lands property to a zoning district other than R1 Single Family. Ald. Brady stated that she had not been convinced that it was necessary to create a new zoning district and rezone various properties to a recreational zone. Aldermen Bleveans and Warshaw stated that they were concerned that without a new zoning district the valuable open space could at some future date fall to some development. Chairman Korshak stated that since the property is controlled by a different governmental entity (MSD) and since that governmental body constantly changes in their composition, that assurances from that body are not sufficient to guarantee that the property will not be developed. Ald Juliar stated that he did not feel strongly about the issue but since the issue of rezoning has now been raised and if the City did not take some action that the City may have prejudiced its case in the future and may signal to the MSD that it is not concerned with maintaining the open space. Therefore he felt that it was necessary to review further the issue of rezoning. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the City staff be directed to develop an ordinance creating a new zoning district for recreational use -open space and that this district be applied to North Shore Channel and adjacent MSD property, Lighthouse Park District property, Ridgeville Park District property, Forest Preserve District property and City Park property. Committee voted 6-0. Rudd stated that staff would begin developing a proposal creating this new district and supply a draft ordinance to the P 6 D Committee at a future meeting. Docket 177-8A-85, Ordinance 70-0-85, Proposed B.O.C.A. Existinq Structures Code 1984 (limitinq discussion to dead -bolt cylinder locks). Chairman Korshak moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend that the City Police Department not advocate the use of double cylinder dead -bolt locks in the C.D. funded lock security program. Committee voted 6-0 to make this policy recommendation. The broader issue of the entire B.O.C.A. Code and the use of double cylinder dead -bolt locks will be discussed at future meetings in conjunction with discussion of the overall adoption of the B.O.C.A. Code. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 11:35 P.M., next meeting October 14, 1985. Staff .A�n/ e�e Robert T. Rudd 452 -- 5- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee October 14, 1965 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Drummer, Brady, Juliar, Warshaw and Korshak Ald. Absent: B1eveans Staff Present: Szymanski, Ahlberg, Rasmussen, Aiello, Bannister, P. Witt, Wirth, Sommers-Yan=, Siegel and R. Carlson Presiding official: Korshak Minutes of October 3,, 1985 Ald. Juliar moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the P b D Committee approve the minutes of the special meeting of October 3, 1985. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes. COM MUNICAT:Oi1S Communications presented to the Committee received no discussion. Docket 227-1OB-65, Resolution 70-R-85. Authorizinq the City Manacier to Proceed with Application for and to Accept a 52,000 Matchinq Grant for Historic Preservation Staff Support. Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded motion to recommend to the City Council approval of a resolution authorizing the City Manager to apply for and to accept a 52,000 matching grant for Historic Preservation staff support services. Ald. Drummer questioned whether this application was the first of its kind or a continuing practice. Sonners-Yant replied that this was the second application of this type. Cor-ittec voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the resolution to City Council. Docket 228-100-85, Resolution 71-R-85, Authorizing the City Manager to Proceed with Application for and to Accept a Historic Preservation Grant to Complete the Citv's Historic Resources survev. Ald. Brac'.y moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded motion to recommend to City Council approval of Resolution 71-R-85. Committes voted 5-0 to rccommend approval of the resolution to City Council. Docket 229-103-85, ZBA 85-26-V(R), ordinance 107-0-05, re Variation for 3200 Grant. Ald. Korshak requested that the Committee holdover consideration of this matter to October 28, 1985 in order that he may transmit additional information to the Committee. Docket 188-SB-85, Revised Rehabilitation Proaran Guidelines. Ald. Warshaw moved and Aid. Drummer seconded a motion to approve revised amortizing loan guidelines for insertion into the previously approved P 6 D Minutes October 14, 1985 revised Rehab Guidelines document. Ald. Brady questioned the wording in the memo and whether the intent of the memo was that the adjustable rate was to apply to only 88 and 10• loans. Bannister replied that it was the intent of the memo that only the 88 and 10% loans would be affected, but other types of loans were noted in the memo as information only. Ald. Warshaw questioned wording in the memo as possibly referring to floating interest rates through the life of the mortgage. Carlson Explained that the rates for the 8% and 10% loans could fluctuate only at the time of inception of the loan, but that the interest rate would then remain constant at the initial rate throughout the life of the loan. Ald. Warshaw questioned the selection of the thirty year mortgage rate from State National Bank as opposed to using the current treasury -note rate as the index. Bannister replied that a local index rate would be more convenient and that the thirty year mortgage rate is relatively as stable as the rate on :-dotes. Ald. Juliar concurred in Bannister's statement. Ald. Brady requested distribution of the completed revised guideline document to the Committee as soon as possible. Carlson replied that the revised document could be ready for the agenda packets distributed to the Aldermen on Friday, October 18, 1985. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the motion for insertion of the rates in the Bannister memo into the revised guidelines. Docket 210-9S-85, ZBA 85-23-SU(R), Ordinance 96-0-85, re Special Use for 624 Davis Street. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the Committee approve ZBA recommendation 85-23 and Ordinance 96-0-85 for introduction to City Council. Ald. Korshak reviewed a letter from the applicant, dated September 13, 1985 in which the applicant's attorney, Garfield questioned the use, of the designation of the business as "number one (1) incorporated*. Garfield further questioned the Committee on its intent as to the special use running with the property or merely with the current ownership. Carlson replied that the Ordinance states the special use is limited to current owner. Ald. Juliar questioned the attorney on the percentage of gross business that would be carry -outs. Garfield replied that an approximate 30% of their business is projected to be carry -out. Ald. Juliar reminded the attorney of the concern of the Committee and Council with litter in the business area and objections that may be received from neighboring businesses. Ald. Warshaw noted wording in the transcript regarding the u:tique packaging of carry -out foods by this establishment that should deter a litter problem. She also noted their testimony as being more sensitive to the litter problem than other fast-food restaurants in the downtown area. Ald. Brady spoke in favor of the ZBA rEcommendation, stating that she Was very impressed by the transcript testimony and her feeling that the large number of seats contained within the restaurant may tend to discourage carry -out business. Ald. Korshak stated his agreement with the ZBA recommendation and noted the only objector being present was attorney hurray representing State national Bank and Washington national Insurance Company. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the ZBA recom.,sendation and introduction of Ordinance 96-0--85 to City Council, amended to remove the *number one (1) incorporated* designation. - 2- P 6 D Minutes October 14, 1985 Docket 231-108-85, ZBA 85-25-SU(R), ordinance 111-0-85, Special Use for 1817-21 Howard Street. Ald. Juliar moved and Ald. Drummer seconded approval of ZBA 85-25, and Ordinance 111-0-85 for introduction to City Council. Ald. Korshak summarized the ZBA report and noted that no objectors were present at the special use hearing. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the report and introduction of Ordinance 111-0-85 to City Council, Docket 230-1OB-85, Ordinance 108-0-85, ZAC 85-5 Recommendation to Rezone 1900 Lake Street. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded motion to approve ZAC 85-5 and introduce Ordinance 108-0-85 to City Council. Chairman Korshak reviewed the ZAC report. Ald. Drummer noted his concerns regarding the proximity of this property to the high school and traffic congestion with the entrance and or exit arrangement being of particular concern. Ald. Brady expressed her concerns regarding the location and number of curb cuts as well as screening that would be required. Ahlberg replied that the zoning code should adequately cover both items. Ald. Juliar stated his concern with traffic ingress and egress, especially to and from Lake Street. He further suggested that the minutes contain" a sense of the Committee to have no traffic onto or from Lake Street. Committee voted 5-0 to approve ZAC 85-5 and introduction of Ordinance 108-0-85 to City Council. Docket 225-10B-85, Renaminq of St. Paul Park (North). Ald. Juliar moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded approval of authorization to the City Manager to negotiate the purchase or lease of St. Paul Park (North) to permit the renaming of the site as 'Harper Garden.' Motion was approved 5-0. Attorney Siegel stated that any further action on this matter such as a lease or purchase would require additional action on the part of the P 5 D Committee and City Council. Docket 226-1OB-85, Plat of Consolidation for Noyes Cultural Arts Center propecty at 927 Naves Street. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Drummer seconded recommending approval of the plat of consolidation to City Council. Committee voted 5-0 to approve. Ald. Rainev's Reference re Proposal that the Planninq and Development Committee study the imposition of a moratorium on the demolition of multi -family housing for purposes other than nrovidinq replacement housinq. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded referral of this item to the Housing Commission with a suggested 120 day reply time back to the P & D Committee. This reference is made with the following suggestions: (1) to review possible legislation that would prohibit the demolition of multi -family units without replacements (2) to review methods whereby new mutti-family housing construction would be encouraged. Ald. Juliar questioned the imposition of a moratorium when he does not see this as an emergency situation. He stated that this seemed to be a reaction to the proposed plan of one developer for demolition of a 15 unit building and :XZ p F. D Minutcy October 14, 1985 commented further that sufficient new units are being constructed in. Evanston. Chairman Korshak reviewed the memo of attorneys Hill and Szymanski as well as a letter received from realtor, George Cyrus and a P. Witt memo citing demolition activities over the past five year period. Chairman Korshak, suggested holding this item over for a two -week period in order that Ald. Rainey would have sufficient time to review the legal memo and the Witt memo. Ald. Warshaw stated that her feeling that an emergency is present and that a moratorium shoulO only be looked upon as a temporary measure :o preserve the status quo while a Iona term lwgisla=ivF- answer is considered. Ald. Brady noted the Witt memo stating that only 11 single family units had been demolished in Evanston over the last five year period and that this low number may not create an emergency situation. she noted further, however, that the the proposed development at Chicago and Kedzie showed a great neighborhood surge of concern for 15 units that would have been lost to the rental market. She stated further that she would not be in opposition to referring this matter to the Housing Commission for their comment. Ald. Rainey inquired of the Committee as to their thinking of what would constitute an emergency need for a moratorium? Chairman Korshak noted that a shortage of rental units may be apparent in certain sections of the City without such a shortage being an overall City situation. Ald. Drummer commented that he did not see in any reports submitted a large amount of demolition that would justify in his mind the need for a moratorium. Ald. Rainey noted that multi -family demolitions have probably not taken place in Evanston over the past five year period due to the rental unit shortage and profitability of ownership of multi -family housing, as well as Evanston's fixed boundaries and shortage of buildable land. she stated further that the word "moratorium' nay not be an appropriate term or answer to this problem and that possibly a total ban on housing demolition may be needed. She also stated her belief that future street widening, improvements, etc. may lead to the demolition of many single family units as well as rental units due to the development of Downtown II. Ald. Rainey noted the high incidence of neighborhood involvement in the Chicago/Kedzie situation as reasoning for consideration of some type of legislation. Chairman Korshak stated that the debate should go forward on long term legislation as he does not see an imminent Emergency situation. He stated further that referral of this item to the Housing Commission seems proper. Ald. Drummer stated that as a condition of the referral, the Housing Commission should be looking at a replacement policy for demolished units and the encouragement of construction of new rental units, including low and moderate income housing. Ald. Warshaw stated her agreement with the aforementioned statement by Ald. Drummer. Committee voted 4-1 to approve the reference of this item to the Housing Commission. Voting nay: Ald. Juliar. ADJOURNEIANT Meeting adjourned at 8:40 P.H., next meeting October 28, 1905 at 7:30 P.H., Ald. Bleveans new Chairman. •r Staff : i7 Reed Carlson 0003 -4- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee October 28, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Drummer, Brady, Juliar, Warshaw and Korshak Ald. Absent: Bleveans Staff Present: R. Carlson, Siegel, Witt, Aiello, Carter, Wirth, Sommers-Yant and Rudd Pry:aiding Official: Juliar Minutes of October 14, 1985 Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Korshak seconded that the P & D Committee approve the minutes of the meeting of October 14, 1985. Committee voted 5-0 to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATIONS The Committee accepted the communication of the Zoning Amendment Committee's public notice for November 7, 1905. Report on Landlord/Tenant Ordinances Complaints Peggy Witt, Housing Planner was present to review a summary report of complaints for the past fourteen (14) months received by the City. Ald. Korshak expressed his opinion that the matter should be dealt with tonight with a final resolution of either amending the ordinance or not amending the Landlord/Tenant ordinance. Ald. Brady concurred with Ald. Korshak and felt that some action should be taken on the memo tonight. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether there was a request at this point to the Committee to make a recommendation. Aid. Korshak questioned a section of the memorandum which addressed a number of complaints regarding sublet fees. Ald. Brady indicated that the subject regarding sublet fees is presently before the Housing Commission and a communication would be provided to the P & D Committee within the next two to three months. Ald. Korshak moved that the matter be continued for six (6) months and that the monitoring also be continued for six (6) months, and that staff report back to the Committee at that time. staff indicated that they would report back to the P & D Committee in May, 1906. Ald. Brady seconded the motion. The Committee voted 4-1 to continue monitoring for six months. Voting aye: Aldermen Korshak, Brady, Drummer and Warshaw. Voting nay: Ald. Juliar. Docket 229-108-85, ZBA 85-26-V(R), ordinance 107-0-85, re Variation for 3200 Grant Street. Ald. Korshak moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the P & D committee deny the request for a use variation. Ald. Korshak felt that the Zoning Board did not make a proper finding of fact detailing particular overwhelming evidence of a hardship. Ald. Korshak acknowledged that the standard P s D Minutes October 28, 1985 regarding a lack of desire to make a profit is difficult to prove, but felt that the hardship is not overwhelming in this case and was not demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt by the applicant. Ald. Korshak stated that he finds that there is no indication in the transcript that a hardship exists. Ald. Korshak further felt that to approve such a request would be setting a precedent that could detract from viability of downtown Evanston, whereby doctors may opt to locate in non-profit institutions similar to the Presbyterian Home at a much lower cost than what would be available in downtown Evanston. Ald. Brady stated that she felt comfortable with the past liberal interpretation of hardship expressed by the Zoning Board and City Council. Ald. Brady stated that she can not find any overwhelming reason to vote against the proposal. Ald. Warshaw expressed her objection to the 50% reduction for payment in lieu of taxes as proposed by the Presbyterian Home. Ald. Brady expressed her position that it may be necessary to table the matter and have the Executive Director of the Home, the Township Assessor, City Manager and two aldermen revisit the issue of payment in lieu of taxes. Ald. Korshak questioned whether the clients of such proposed facilities are Evanston residents. Director Mulvey replied 'no.' At this point Aid. Korshak read the various standards for granting a variation as set forth in the Evanston Zoning Ordinance and felt that the standards were not met or demonstrated in the transcript of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ald. Drummer questioned whether the clinic was free or operating at a reduced rate for clients. Ald. Warshaw stated that it was her understanding through the transcript that it was a not -far -profit Home but that the clinic was for outside residents who would be required to pay for the services. Ald. Brady noted the limitation imposed on the Home by the Zoning Board of Appeals of twenty (20) people per day and which would, if granted, expire in five (5) years. She felt that the impact on the neighborhood would be negligible. Sam Sibley, a resident, living one (1) block from the Nome was opposed to the proposal and felt that it was unfair and provided special treatment to a limited number of doctors. He also felt that the business as proposed by the Home would grow and would mean also automatic approval for expansion of this use in a residential area. Peter Mulvey, Executive Director of the Presbyterian Home, was recognized and stated that the Home was a not -for -profit organization. In addition to residents that have paid access to the clinic, the operation presently cares for one hundred and fifty (150) people who have little or no resources to pay for the service. Mulvey also stated in response to a concern expressed by the Committee that public transportation via bus lines is available on Grant and Simpson Streets. Mulvey stated that the subject clinic space has been operated as such since 1967 and is servicing over Five hundred (500) in-house patients. Mulvey explained that the proposed operation would be a pilot program and he felt that it was necessary that in order to test the market, the Presbyterian Home must start out on a small scale which their proposal indicated. If there was a demonstrated out -patient geriatric need in the area of the home the program may move to another location if the business grew. Jack Siegel, City Corporation Counsel gave a brief history of issues involved between the City, the Presbyterian Home and the Georgian Home in -2- P 6 D Minutes October 28, 1985 early 1960's. Siegel indicated that through court action the Georgian was placed back on the tax rolls. Several issues arose regarding comments from Siegel regarding taxable property. Mulvey felt that the issues of taxable versus exempt have been explored by the Presbyterian Home's attorneys and that the new use would not interfere with their exempt status. Dan Masla, area resident questioned if there would be any new construction. Mulvey indicated that there would be none attributed to this clinic. Carl Peters, a resident located on Hastings was concerned with the traffic that would become a burden to the homeowners. He also questioned whether there would be parking problems. Ald. Drummer suggested further research by the Legal Department regarding questions raised by Siegel's comments. Motion by Ald. Brady to table the issue until the questions raised by several of the Committee members to the Corporation Counsel were answered. Staff indicated that prior to the next meeting of P b D at which this issue would be an agenda item a mailing would be made to the people at the Committee meeting on October 28, 1985 that did not receive notices, in addition to the mailing of the originally notified eighty-seven (87) local residents. Docket 256-1OC-85, Ordinance 118-0-85, ZAC 85-6, Authorize Convenience Blueprintinq. Photocopyinq and Printinq Establishments., Ald. Warshaw questioned the lack of a definition of convenience photocopying in the ordinance. Rudd explained that the Zoning Amendment Committee felt that the issue was defined by using the term convenience. Ald. Korshak felt that he had difficulty with the lack of a definition thus making it difficult to differentiate between larger scale blueprinting, photocopying printing establishments and any chemical rather odor causing or hazardous material, etc. that may be associated therewith. The Committee directed staff to send the matter back to the Legal Department for preparation of a definition of photocopy. Staff indicated that this matter would be returned to the Committee at the November 18, 1985 meeting. Docket 255-10C-85, Resolution 73-R-85, Housinq Assistance Plan. Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the committee approve the three (3) year housing assistance plan as presented. Ald. Korshak questioned how many Elderly Evanston residents were on the waiting list. Peggy Witt stated that she would supply that information. Committee voted 5-0 to recommend to City Council approval of Resolution 73-R-85, for the Housing Assistance Plan for the City of Evanston. Docket 254-1OC-85, Avenue of the Righteous Project Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee approve the location of the Avenue of the Righteous Project located at the alternative site provided in Ingraham Park south of the Civic Center building between the Civic Center and the heating building. Committee voted 5-0 to approve subject location. -3- P & D Minutes October 28, 1985 Ald. Rudy's Reference re Reference to the Planninq and Development Committee the Problem of Smoke and Odors Emanating from Restaurants. The Committee briefly reviewed a memo submitted by staff detailing information gathered to date. Staff recommended and the Committee concurred that the matter be held over for thirty (30) days to allow staff additional time to receive further information. Staff indicated that if the material was received an additional memo would be supplied to the Committee at the second meeting of December, 1985. Ordinance 89-0-85, Amend City Code to Establish Site Plan Review. Present to speak on behalf of site plan review were Jim Gamble and Haywood Blake of Design Evanston, Dick Carter, Planning Director, Steven Knutson, Chairman of Preservation Commission and Drew Petterson, member of Evanston Planning Commission. Gamble stated that the proposed site plan review ordinance was not an architectural design review. Rather the site plan review ordinance attempts to provide input to allow for suitable integration of buildings with a site and surrounding properties. Gamble stated the Interfacing of the developments with neighborhoods was an important goal of site plan review. He felt that it was extremely important that such a process be formalized where input of the City would be mandatory. Tom Pontarelli, Vice President of the Evanston Chamber of Commerce stated that he was concerned with site plan review even though he concurred with the goals of the process. He felt that the Chamber of Commerce had several questions and would need answers. Due to the late hour Ald. Brady suggested that this matter be continued for further discussion at the November 4, 1985 P & D Committee meeting and that the matter appear on the City Council agenda of November 4, 1985. ADJOURNMENT Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee adjourned. Committee voted 5-0. Adjournment 9:00 p.m., next meeting November 41 1985. S to f f :,�7�1/r / Robert T.' Rudd 0028 ao MINUTES Planning and Development Committee November 4, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Warshaw, Drummer, Brady and Korshak Ald. Absent: Bleveans and Juliar Staff Present: Carlson, Witt, Carter, Aiello, T. Thompson, Bannister and Rudd Presiding Official: Korshak Minutes of October 28, 1985 Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the P 6 D Committee approve the minutes of October 28, 1985. Committee voted 4-0 to approve. COMMUNICATIONS Rehab Cases 408-85 and 407-85 The Committee reviewed cases 408-85 and 407-85, both of which were within the guidelines. Ald. Brady questioned why one case was an amortizing loan when the applicant could have been eligible for a title transfer. Staff indicated that in several cases the applicants, though they are eligible for title transfer, desire to make some monthly payments and that may be the case with the current applicant. ZBA 85-28-V(F), Final variation Decision re 424 Barton Avenue. Committee received a final decision from the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding a variation at 424 Barton Avenue. Chairman Korshak reviewed a memo he previously sent to the Committee detailing his concerns that the Zoning Board of Appeals is not preparing the necessary finding of facts. Korshak questioned whether a meeting should be held between the P 5 D Committee and the Zoning Board of Appeals. He further offered the suggestion that staff would meet with the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals and express the concerns of the P 6 a Committee. If the finding of facts continue to be prepared as in the past, the P s D Committee would review a possible meeting with the Zoning Board of Appeals to discuss this issue. The Committee agreed to have staff meet with the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals at this time. Waitinq List for Senior Citizen Housing The Committee also received a communication from Peggy Witt, Housing Planner per a previous request from the Committee detailing the number of Evanston Senior Citizens on a waiting list for housing within the City. P b D Minutes November 4, 1985 OLD BUSINESS Docket 265-11A-85, ordinance 89-0-85, Amend City Code to Establish site Plan Review. Chairman Korshak reviewed for the Committee a memo from Dick Carter, Planning Director, which detailed in a question and answer format several concerns that had previously been expressed by committee members and other Aldermen. Korshak felt that the memo answered a concern previously expressed by Ald. Bleveans, with regards to another layer of bureaucracy created by such an ordinance. Korshak also felt that the memo addressed concerns expressed by a member of the Economic Development Committee, Ald. Thiel, which had requested that the term •aesthetically pleasing' be deleted from the ordinance. Ira Golan, Executive Director of the Evanston Chamber of Commerce was present and expressed the following concerns with the proposed site plan ordinance. Golan felt that streamlining was good for the city and that a developer's handbook would be helpful in that respect and should be developed prior to the site plan review. He felt that the site plan review was possibly a reversal in efforts to gain better development for the City. Golan stressed that develgpers was not aware of the process and had not had input into the process. He stated that he had spoken with a number of developers who opposed the ordinance though they were not against the concept in its current informal manner. Golan offered that he had met with Ron Kysiak of Inventure and stated that Kysiak was willing to bring in outside consultants to educate the city Council in the ways of economic development. Judy Aiello, Assistant City Manager, was present and stated that site plan review ordinance had been forwarded to four (4) current or past developers in the City who found that the ordinance was acceptable, workable and helpful in the development process. Aiello further stated that the developers expressed opinions that possibly the City was even too generous in signage allowance and felt that more specific details were necessary with regards to the technical aspects of the ordinance. The developers also felt that the 'one stop' review was helpful. Golan questioned why it was necessary to have site plan review become an ordinance. He felt that the current informal process was probably workable. Chairman Korshak indicated that Design Evanston, the Plan Commission and the City's Economic Development Committee have endorsed the ordinance and the concept. Ald. Brady mentioned that a sunset provision was proposed to be added to the ordinance to provide protection in case the ordinance became onerous. She felt that this proposal was timely and that the ordinance for a site plan review is needed. She cited as an illustration the proposal at Chicago/Kedzie. Korshak further stated that there was an appeal process (before the P b D Committee) to expeditiously - 2- P a D Minutes November 4, 1985 address any grievances of a developer. Aiello offered to forward copes of the site plan review ordinance to Golan and any other developers. Ald. Drummer stated that he sympathizes with Golan's concerns and feels ghat the ordinance should be shared with those developers that Golan said object to the ordinance. Ald. Brady stated that the proposed ordinance has had a lengthy review for several months (starting in Pebruary, 1985). Chairman Korshak asked the Committee if it was their desire to have the ordinance held over for discussion until the November 18, 1985 P 6 D meeting. The Committee agreed to hold the matter over until that time in which the City could work with Golan and the Chamber in soliciting comments possibly via a questionnaire from developers. Ald. Rudy Reference re Ownership and Use of University by Universities Property outside of University Districts. Wendell Adair was present and provided background regarding litigation stemming from the Hampton Parkway project. Adair, previously, a member of the Zoning Amendment Committee, stated that at that time ZAC had two (2) references before it: (1) University Uses and (2) Institutional Housing. He stated that at that time the argument arose regarding uses versus use discussion. Adair stated that ZAC came to view that this was a proper exercise of the power of the City to set aside special districts. He felt that it was the intent of the ordinance to strike a fair balance between Northwestern held land within the City and other privately held land in the City. He stated that ZAC recommendation regarding institutional housing, which was a separate issue from the university uses was never enacted into law via a zoning ordinance amendment. Adair proposed that the P b D Committee and the City Council take the following steps: (1) convince .Tack Siegel to withdraw his previously written legal opinions; (2) the City should figure out a way to grant a special use for 2020 Ridge. Adair stated that he does not oppose the University use of that property. (3) the City should resurrect the institutional housing concept and refer that issue to the Zoning Amendment Committee for further discussion. Dick Stillerman was recognized and stated that ZAC and the P & D Committee over the years have spent numerous hours of review related to university uses versus university district questions. Stillerman was concerned that City Council policy, as he understood it, could be undercut by the action of a legal opinion by Corporation Counsel without City Council consultation. Stillerman indicated that the university districts were developed in the early 1950's and came about because of a concern of the City trying to protect its tax base and limit expansion of the university within the corporate limits. Stillerman indicated that in his opinion ZAC recommended an amendment to the ordinance with the purpose clause several years ago with the intent of doing just that] limiting university expansion outside of the university districts. Stillerman felt that Siegel's opinion undermined what has been the position of the City Council. 3 - P & D Minutes November 4, 1985 Ald. Warshaw moved to accept the Adair recommendation. Ald. Drummer agreed with the second and third points, but was concerned that with Siegel not present he could not concur with recommending Siegel to withdraw his previous opinion. Ald. Brady stated that it was important to clarify the position of the City Council regarding the intent of the ordinance. She further stated that she was not in favor of asking Siegel to withdraw his opinion. She suggested that the ordinance be amended to clearly express the City Council's position. Adair stated that in his opinion it was critical that Siegel withdraw his previous opinion or at least modify that opinion. Adair felt that if the Siegel opinion stands that it would prejudice any change in the City ordinance regarding a new amendment and thus render a new ordinance amendment unenforcable. Due to the lateness of the hour the Committee recommended that this matter be held over to the meeting of November 18, 1965, at which time it was requested that Corporation Counsel Siegel be present to participate in further discussion of this issue. Docket 267-11A-85, ZBA 85-30-SU(R), Ordinance 127-0-85, re 1919-25 Dempster Street (McDonald Restaurant). Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee recommend to the City Council introduction of an ordinance to grant a special use for expansion of a drive-in restaurant. Committee voted 4-0 to recommend to City Council introduction of the ordinance. At the conclusion of the meeting Ald. Warshaw indicated that she had been in contact with Charlotte Walker of ECDC, who desires to be reopen the discussion on the Rehabilitation Guidelines and to bring back before the Committee the suggestion to allow third mortgages as being within the guidelines. Chairman Korshak in an effort to expedite the discussion on the Rehab Guidelines suggested that Walker be notified to reduce her thoughts to writing and supply Chose in advance to the P 6 D Committee. in an effort to address several items remaining on the November 4, 1985 P & D agenda, the Committee called for a special meeting for Monday, November 11, 1985 at 7:30 p.m. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m., next meeting November 11, 1985, a special meeting. 0060 -4- MINUTES Special Meeting Planning and Development Committee November 11, 1985 7:30 P.M. Ald. Present: Drummer, Brady, Warshaw and Korshak Ald. Absent: Bleveans and Juliar Staff Present: Carter, Eiseman, Witt, Bannister, Aiello, Catison and Rudd Presiding Official: Korshak ti Minutes of November 14, 1985 Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Warshaw seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of the P & D meeting of November 40 1985. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes. COMMUNICATIONS None OLD BUSINESS Docket 266-11A-85, ZBA 85-11-V(R), 1025 Emerson Street. Chairman Korshak addressed a letter from John Balch, a Zoning Board member, which Ald. Korshak felt was out of order. Ald. Korshak felt that the letter that Balch wrote to fellow Zoning Board of Appeals' member indicating his future recommendation against a zoning petition that had not as yet been heard by the Zoning Board was improper. Ald. Warshaw upon review of the zoning board case before the P & D Committee tonight felt that once more the Zoning Board did not deal with the issues, but rather with extraneous points and that the findings of fact were not properly dotailed in the transcripts. Ald. Warshaw moved that the P & D Committee grant the variation at 1025 Emerson Street for continued use as a beauty shop. Ald. Brady seconded the motion. _ Ald. Warshaw stated that the City would be ill-advised to ask for a demolition of businesses. She felt that the City can not turn its back on small tusinessman of this nature. Ald. Drummer further supported the motion as being a convenience to the neighborhood residents. Ald. Brady stated that it would appear that the beauty parlor use would be more consistent with the neighborhood, since it is immediately across the street from the future Research Park. Ald. Warshaw further expanded upon the motion by adding 'the beauty shop should be permitted indefinitely' rather than for only a three (3) or five (5) year time extension. chairman Korshak allowed Betty Paden, attorney for the petitioner, and also a Zoning Board of Appeals member, to make any statement. Paden stated that she feels that the zoning Board has not been addressing pertinent issues in this particular case nor on other cases. She further stated that her request if approved as proposed before the P & D Committee would be comparable to the City's previous action on Gordon Drug Store, several years ago. Ald. Horton was present and spoke in favor of the petition. The Committee voted 4-0 to make a recommendation to the City P & D Minutes November 11, 1984 Council for introduction of an ordinance to allow the indefinite continuance of a beauty parlor at 1025 Emerson Street. With the respect to this particular case, Ald. Korshak further stated that he wanted in the minutes his concerns that Balch's letter and statement of position to the Zoning Board was premature since the case had not as yet been heard. Ald. Korshak further urged that the Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman and other members of the Board re -study the zoning ordinance and confine their discussion to the pertinent criteria of variations and special uses and develop more refined findings of fact. Ald. Warshaw questioned if new members of the Zoning Board of Appeals could have training by either old members or staff. Ald. Korshak recommended that staff provide a program of training for any and all new members of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ald. Rainey's Reference re Displacement In Downtown II Project. Ald. Korshak reviewed a memo from City Manager Joel Asprooth, dated October 30, 1985 which detailed the City's displacement policies for the Downtown II project. Ald. Warshaw stated that she spoke with Ald. Rainey, maker of the reference, who expressed concern with the condition that property owners and tenants have valid written yearly leases. Ald. Warshaw stated that she would feel more comfortable if there is a provision taking into account 'prior length of stay.' Ald. Brady stated that she was not at all pleased with the process as detailed in the memo. She suggested that a subcommittee composed of one or two P & D and Economic Development Committee members meet to develop new guidelines with the aid of staff. Ald. Brady felt that it Was necessary that citizens have input to the subcommittee. Ald. Brady also felt that it was imperative that the subcommittee meet as quickly as possible and report back to the P & D Committee at the earliest possible date. Ald. Warshaw questioned whether federal guidelines would be adhered to. Judy Aiello, Assistant City Manager stated that with the respect to the Downtown II Project, no CDBG dollars were being used and the federal guidelines were not applicable. Ald. Drummer expressed his concerns for the need for early notification to property owners and store owners. Aiello stated that two (2) notifications to property owners were originally sent. A third notification was sent by the City Manager at a later date. Ald. Korshak stated his concern that the City should receive acknowledgement of the notices possibly in the form of certified mail. Aiello stated that that had been the practice in some cases, as required by the T.I.P. district. Chairman Korshak suggested that Ald. Warshaw of the P & D Committee, Ald. Rainey, and a member of the Economic Committee be selected to serve on the special subcommittee. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the subcommittee be developed and report back to the P & D Committee within sixty (60) days. Committee voted 4-0. Reference from Ald. Raden to Planninq and Development Committee re Re-examining City's Policy of Land-Bankinq. Chairman Korshak stated his understanding of Ald. Raden's request for the subject re-examination. It was felt that the City should supply a specific -2- P & D Minutes November 11, 1984 list of properties acquired, date acquired, amount purchased for and size of property. It was also felt that it was necessary to have a forecast of the property to be acquired in the future. In response to a question from Chairman Korshak, Aiello stated that the T.I F. Plan contained dollars allocated for purchase of property and also designated the area and identified the various properties within the area that would be subject to purchase. Ald. Brady felt that it was not necessary to provide a listing as suggested by Ald. Korshak of the individual properties. Ald. Warshaw requested that this matter should be held -over until Ald. Raden could be present. Consideration of Amendments to Landlord/Tenant Ordinance Reqardinq Residency at YMCA and Other Similar Institutions. Michael Pensack of TOE was present and presented background and his point of view of the issue. He stated that TOE feels that proper screening instead of lock -outs would address the issue of the YMCA. He further stated that it was TOE's recommendation that the YMCA be placed under the Landlord/Tenant Ordinance. Ald. Brady stated that she is convinced after hearing the testimony, as a new member of the Housing Commission, to vote against placing the YMCA under the Landlord/Tenant Ordinance, because it was not realistic due to their operation and clientele. Ald. Brady proposed to postpone consideration of this matter for another six (6) months and to bring it back to the P & D committee at that time, since two (2) issues were as yet unresolved: (1) Homeless Shelters issue was pending before the City Council, and (2) the Y Board has stated that they will be deciding what they will do with the 177 rental units at the YMCA sometime in the fall of 1985. Ald. Warshaw stated her opposition to plugging of locks in any establishments. She stated that it was something that she could not condone. Ald. Warshaw stated that she was willing to wait only thirty (30) to forty-five (45) days to allow the Y time to explain their policy. Ald. Brady asked that staff notify the Y that the issue was before the P & D Committee and that they be present to provide any information. In a lengthy discussion regarding the practicality and or the legality of placing the YMCA under the jurisdication of the Landlord/Tenant Ordinance, Sharon Eiseman, Assistant Corporation Counsel detailed to the Committee the difficulty of including the YMCA. It has been the Legal Department's position that the Y is not included under the Landlord/Tenant Ordinance. Aid. Warshaw stated that she believes the exact opposite. She believes that the Y is covered currently under the Landlord/Tenant Ordinance and feels that no amendment is necessary. It was Ald. Warshaw's position that the City should change its opinion, state that the Y is covered under the Landlord/Tenant Ordinance, take approporate legal action to write citations for violation of said ordinance and if necessary let the court system rule on the specific point. After further discussion, the Committee recommended to holding this matter over to December 16, 1985 to further discuss the issue and to invite representatives of the YMCA to be present that night. Docket 188-8B--85, Revised Rehabilitation Proqram Guidelines. Charlotte Walker, Executive Director of ECDC was present and stated her concerns as outlined in a memo from her to the P & D Committee, dated November 6, 1985 as follows: (1) allow grants to families whose income levels are 50% -3- P & D Minutes November 11, 1964 below the median income; (2) that the City assume third mortgage position if adequate equity existsi (3) that the City increase the amount of tax assistance from $15,000 to $50,000 to pay delinquent property taxes. Aid. Brady stated that she had discussed this memo with Sid Ross, Chairman of the Evanston Housing Commission, and that Ross had expressed concerns with an increase in the tax assistance program since this was only a pilot program and also the fact that it would be possible that any tax assistance increase allocated by the CD Committee would be taken from the rehabilitation dollars. Aid. Brady also questioned the use of grants since the applicant could receive the same amount of money through a title transfer program. She reminded the Committee that the Housing Commission originally recommended a $15,000 limit in title transfer loans and $7500 in a grant above that if needed by the applicant and also if the applicant fell within the 50% or below median level. The P & D Committee previously voted 4-2 to delete the grant portion but to increase the overall title transfer loan limit for the subject category from $15,000 to $22,500. Aid. Warshaw felt that to allow grants would not encourage any further applicants because the dollar amount received would be the same and the impact on the applicant would be the same since they would be title transfer under the proposal previously approved by the P & D Committee. Aid. Warshaw stated that the goal of the program was to benefit the current clients, it was not necessarily the goal of the program to provide future benefits to heirs of the clients. Aid. Brady stated that since the vote was 4-2 on the issue of grants at the previous P & D meeting that addressed this issue and since two of those members were not present it would not be proper to have a vote on the issue tonight. With respect to Walker's concern about the Tax Assistance program, Aid. Brady stated that that program was not authorized by P & D but was rather endorsed by P & D and is a Community Development Block Grant proposal currently before the CD Committee. Aid. Brady expressed her concern since the program is a pilot program, the City may be fortunate to be allocated $15,000 and to request for $50,000 is unrealistic. Aid. Brady suggested that the Committee review the tax assistance program after six (6) months of existence and determine if there are any modifications necessary. Regarding Walker's request to allow third mortgages as within the guidelines, Aid. Brady stated that in her conversation with Ross, that he felt that cases with third mortgages and with adequate equity are proper cases to bring before the Rehabilitation Appeals Board. He felt that these issues could be better handled before that board as each application would be different. chairman Korshak than obtained concensus of the P & D Committee to request Walker to submit in writing a more detailed argument for her proposals and to send the same to the all members of the City Council. The Committee further agreed that with respect to the discussion of the third position that this matter should be held over to the P & D meeting of November 18, 1985, at which time additional discussion could take place. ADJOURNMENT Aid Warshaw moved and Aid. Brady seconded that the Committee meeting adjourn, 10 :15 P.M., next mee� nag November 18, 1985. Staff: Robert T. Rudd 3(17-25) -4- lliNU ES Planning and Development Committee novsmber 18, 1965 7:30 P.m. Ald. Present: Drummer, Brady, Warshaw, Korshak, Bleveans and Juliar Ald. Absent: Nonr: Staff Present: Aiello, Carlson, Szymanzki, .Ahlberg, Carter, Summers -'cant and Rudd Presiding Official: .luliar Minute; of Novambe• r 11, 1905 Ald. Bl6veans moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the P L D Committee approve: the minutes of the spacial meeting of November 11, 1985. Committee, votod 6-0 to approve the minutes. CU:il UNICA'.I0'1S Report from :lorthwcatorn tiniver ov on Par:ina CountG for Nvont3 Reauirirn'4 succ._t1 :]se. Ad d. Rl yr ]ns statod that with the e'{c nt ion of ! ho ;'ol Kyball nvont the special u,c3 at McCaw Hill had little parking impict an t`o neighborhood. Howevr.r, Ald. Rlnvj.ww noted that in miny inntilnci; tho cars Plocted not to park in th_ McCaw Hill-Ayche St:tKum car:inq lot, Pat rathvr on neighbir ng stryetn. In this insta*t�n .angonUnn i : often .a iind 1% the neighborhnod by the additional cars. -1 r.r a 7-T! "} !Olt Vne r. on Alto-,. The Conmittr a°.- p l Y__`luK .onnv-nt an or:inanco . -c^•,n*nding that City Council grint a ._riition fsr 1025 Emerson Stroot for ._tention of a beauty salon. OLD 3US:NES.; Doerr-*. �'i`-il',-:5, r..ai ,ors 30-0-35, , nn•1 City Cod _a _.'ahllsh sits- Plan try.e `flaw. Aid. 91ev-nn.. _._stei thin his conc_rn i-. _haL 1V n`lbjVC% lrlinance is in aCtu.allty " esign r:View". No cxpron5e.l his [_r}nourn tLOL he mould VOK- against the or•linnnce hazel on that under_tandinlj. All. Juliar statod !hat he concirrQ WiLh _ho cnn--rn3 of Aid. 91nucans. Aid. Bls -'in:i st"tal thit he had nuvu r3l probl _mc with Kta plan _=view, primarily t .inj that A" felt that this was a anot:._. hoop" for a KV00PIE to lot ?rAncts Mra _.1 within the. City. niak -40c, .lannLng 7.rccto. stat.l -'. ai the rlinnn: . was not an al:inLonal .:gvir_..;ant, Lut rither . simQUicatign in streamlining of c;r rent - . l'll =omontn. UK Brady st tol tKit: oh, had a differunt uint o: wiAw 01n :.kv.an,. EnS QK thit it ij 100,_' to imP3=— nG Of -V rsqukor-ntz vjA sit, plan r•.'Jiew on _ 3me of tnu projects char. P & D 1linut,�-.; November 18, 1125 are' built in the City. Ald. Nliar stathd that h+_ is oppo.,cd to arahitSctura: .�:vi w and al^o is oppo5c to le.—ign f6'JiF'.i. He furtZGr stated that hs• is Uf1r07.fortahle With th1- sitC plan CE'Jlc'n ordinancc- as ,'7ropo5crl.. Ald. ©leveans 2tat<'(: that hdd 1.3, not iilr:• that anything that ray oCrr,nd him that has ht';£n '.oui '.3 t1:xV£ h, e,n C,}Crr:+" .r: or <IV+JidE'i if a plan rr_'Ji'= or',iinanct_ ',!r-_ _ intact. AI(-1. furr_he r thlit hoi would b£. np)o-CrJ to tiny dcaign r,r-pl :ion this «oild inhi'nit fro:! Corlinu to F'Ia'.-.iton. %tat.=-j that if to#, ?r•3C• (vo1'Sn'_aryl is .-urrc•ntly orkinrj, 1�-iv,: it as it is. Aid. Warshaw st:1t�. 3 t:l it. lh£ Iid not think that you coin,! have, ,tarillar` -, and not =ii ,Ct;'SrtT- :71] ;ini .,., :n Evin..^.tun. 5hf i_: c7n rn+,,i It talc or:linanc', is suffici•_r,tly •Ja(3s!,_ t') '.l.3crJlr:r}� Tc1+3y Aic ] 1'7, ',_ ;i_,t,nt Cit'f -anr :;r_,ltr:ri t:,_Iw `.hc. "r ii l.3flcc: i ; n.7t in addition,il lays r, but rath.- r an-_ff.)rt to br i::o 'to] th- c r- : inuti Cit:•.1 departments thi- ,r•: involvJ : in in ont place at 0nr: time- t0 ['+27i +3i-+ `.::£ 1'£'. i _+1 DrC.^.'::sy of _^.r t lr :Q l'-r':. .11.d. Rji v,, an.-i $r lt£rj t'lr,t hr. is :11£s i ri"_t; it -i- .a volunt,. _ pro:-. process. i1.d. ..7r-•ha". ,t3CLli tl+dt hl.: _7:Ci' .+_ f1 3. t:^.,3t r]._;c.lrj(]£.r3 r)o not ca.i;l a l l y '•7 :'r, f rr)m oni- t0"171 to [Ulo'_ 1,+: i .^ i l-,,]'.: :.1 ;r. l on thr. : c V it;'w proccs5. _:_ fr-._ that ?n 3r_r._-cal ,,l:r vir'„r <iny r-_:::laticn a an i;npc.dlGiE;14. .,1`.. V.or. tl,l,•. ,t .t .3 t:r',.3t 1; !ir:. n-. `.he- r-Ii.-,cd in the or iir in `,'r3-t-,h.,•i P"—U 'ri `'j .i �' n� t, h�. C; (1 (l.i :: ~ir7n (.,r.rr[-ntIy 7n�• J1 .!1in t':._ t's:,r 1 n.,in _ i'_« or�iiriancc. '.could be h"�-17f111 fir ctor ')E t , nr,tr,n [: ,��=r ;i Co: ..-,rc •_ _ 13 frn.i 1 1�_t:c. :ua�litta<3 h� [eF.00?.= �'•r:3 _ Cy, 1,-, t -r i ?rct,11 rl Ln Fri It the hurtl+_n of nroDf in t'— 'fir i :n :_11�')-tl:_xri on '",_ a^plic'-int, but r.3th=:r )f , :'�:7f :'ln'l:`l '. r_1+_1_'_ n rr-r;ts£ :t. �c :i n f r 't: - r ,. _ 1 J11 1 .y• 's-1 1 ar o r 1 nanc+. rc .11 •`rnwr *'li:. ir, iiti,Jr,.,n •_1;... r+}c r l',tin7 11i;G.7ti `,r _1,_"C _. t9 i�7i-1':�:: ,'r ', t:'- ]`. .. .'�•1,1 ': r. -i'I •1'ril t_lil?I li't})O :e.+i i7 1 '3•-, .. ri.. -.,, vp III,!.; prOC<- 1. or a 7 E .:top' _ ail <Jl.itl 1 1. T)r!'A 7._ttr.C.;nf],-.;r-nt3t_ _ 1_ r.'r,In,- n inns-. t:he orininrj onj '1::1i}. - rr_v 3r�1.. •. _. P'::tterL;<_�n .,_a` nl-inn ln'1' :c. R - r-)fC on 11 t'.,r]:; ull(3OrjCt.'Jr Qr - ^rCi•_c.__ -.•.: _ �'l.}..r �i�:1 i _ .h r7t:1 C�1 .1 - r`.-ir:93n JUl11C a_-1. f''r ::t ra'a vote 8i `_o .h£t.._C t,._ Ci1.-.14 t-_ .-hou1", cc) tltinu'_ tt] rW in d;-t _i i.e ;,r-J;Yi. ,' Or,linan: . Or Ctlitrl'.;7r1 •.;5«<. if '-.1l<_rr fC rlel into:;t. ,_.,ill`' of r. .,_i1•. rUiili.r, lf!Cl'-,r1-_-d Various ..u-- f -. 'a �r - 1.. C7: -.. = tleCtr_d to rr_vit',r v" -Et: forth in a ::r7:rcnbtr 4, 1 55 nc-•-a from tho conomic ')i --lonpi.nt Conn fr:)n A'_:. .1'7nn ;i•�1won, Chairnan of th. economic D,VGlo7'ient it'r-<. r?;tu'-1 -2- P & D Minutos November lo, 1915 November 14, 1985. ne point; dW7usar-_d primarily were the one year sunset provision, a fifteen W) day review period for ;taf`, a fifteen f I5) dAl period for any appeals to b, hoar; by 06 p u D COMMA.tee. A diicu5iion ensued among Co mittos msmh rs an to whuthtr to include :lnivFr;ity Di tric"_8 within the sit, plan reviow proco3.i. 7A consons2s of Cho C_oI mitto was for the staff to discuss this n«tt•_. with Narthwo nt-,rn Cniv,_.sity, obtain ti:•_ir cCl:lments and forward ,'`,in c% to tho t 5 D C onni`_t: _, ;he rd],MMI tt_ _- directed ,staff to supply -a revi ned ordinance por tA, A:.:unsion of the pw SeVera l P & D C.am ni tten m:.stings incorporating the ._o7ni"+,r.��_ l s i:s7:'"��•ni ed changes. staff ind&atod `.slit a rsviand o.rdinln•__ wi id-ho .iupplAl as soon as Northaestcrn's canment.. w.ro .c-�MA ind nne annndnd or Mnan n could h_ droEten Dock t 56-W-31, Ord in i non 118-0-15. 7AQ 5-A, izq Canvtnigic,--.. l3Iur,---)rintzn'z, Ph ".no }'.U'?'IiI1s, 1 '1 l�C1rIt11] I :r oI Whmnots. _ - Ald. Brady novel and All. Dr'a:] er nucondcd that the Committee rocnnn,nd t City Cnuncil to intreducc W .>>ibject ordinanan. All. What+aw expro.,;,•l har concern this: r_hn or :in_:nce an ..caftodl did not contain a nPucHic enouji definition and did not an5wer her pr=J pun r1ii".;tLoN,. Rudd indicated that the definition a5 inovirlod ..•i. Colt tc aaieq ,_,t sly jef inc the U nr and that it wan not pr:cnicir ;o arivi u is •1'.taii Qn t pi of .h,_1i ain, nizc K .^.l,'. chines, U _, 's: th ..1r 1ou, .iI'.i_)w''J:?', inn ,,r .'it.:] j - ni[)rl-'Ir . c ommitt . voted U-'i t7 . n vA to City ..r un;__ l int. .duo _ inn if the W Ir ct or Enanng. Mck .M �;I}-l��;^°.i� !' :1 - _ .j i:''" �� .}�lI V; �i.. it :n ,',;;nl i'• L'la -:].j Transcrin` -_ �• • �,:,� inn4. id.. ,-w IT! rnnt-.r.3 Aldl. l]I-um7vr :'::1 1;11 Al 1. •] e .._'1 _nand- 1 t';,"i- thy Ci:'mit -.. _ _. ]i]:",i_nd to City council .a WHUY the nunj=._ i•_.3. ltafE C' 1iin:'1 that CTA anA l•'_:, nubcontrlC irn ..1'._ U. n .cry optr''-i.= in 111ra oinl .;quo of the con'.ern�; exprCo _A n: . . _ City. W ]Cf nzplainnd thit CIA . i . .'I r._iightnn t.._ . r= ..] 74 ] 0 w. . i I nZ .0,i new ft.ncc. y 1 ; 0 it of i . um _- • . i V ,lyd, - - 13 _ lrt'1�. explaine . Kat . . ivid On !n act Mot] ,. s, -'1` 11 c ,•,po it iQn. Co13m to . vot _d 0-0 Li ran=40 to City 'Coon i . wa:vrr of Un , application. 7gakrt 2AI-.11P_ - n s i .--: is._ if '':n_o1 17t1i' -. ,n_- n v lJan Cf-M in 01 1 r,y -n '7_ _r l _•C-i. ..7 _.l ..'a AIdl. I I M i1 a;},.)'+ Yl'1•. „l= 3 ttr. . _co rend to City _awi: i 1. ip .r:. i l Of I ;tat of CO11...1 i i'a _ 0a Q- 00 AM, . 1?t i Oni _ address. -hair". n .i'Jl . 1 _ not _'1 tha" MY . 7tS 01 plaMusly grantad a zoning v.rinnign for the •,o_ of th!3 properly. To] tt_- Vocal 0-0 to rocommund a; , _ . al plot of cnn.,& i i .. i. n. Docket ?i - 13-,35 n. itio r I ino. _ . Pior •:-n i4 _a L ]r M,f fron Section or 'fl I -sr Ti .1:] 'c- 1. -il:.s{- in of �1 IilrW p'dn 1 r]�i . —--�------'- - --- All. rigs.. , ._ w move! anq AW. 91 & 1s ]n_, aon 1 d ttat On C7-:7« - . . : . -_d."Jn:lend to City Council ipgr.val A ..l-.f frim Suction := I H:n -3- P s D :'linutv7 ;10VE:'lbF. i6� :9%i5 ordinancE to allow installation of a lighted :vrnin7. I.. Morth o; thy- :forth American Sign Co^;7an7 insr'3llinu the awning waf ; pr,. ent. stated tile• rr:connv=ndation for waivc-r an the subject ;;•rc'ticn would h., conditionc-ci upon tl:: fact that i-r i import :rottld that n ad litianal signagr, wot,ld b pl.ace-j oo tn,� biill.-iin:;. Also tc:F. Cut!ni .t_c(, c3ir :ct(:ci that the minute's reC1Er_t that H.,� of t-.(: s+;r•_t that Chta lightinq would h,: hEld :t: ;1: ninum no cl:, n!" `_o f1E+; 3t i le:ly ln! c3tljrlrEnt ?YOntCti 11;^C:R:1 1<<. } 1', .11= �'� i !!,i.�'-t't ! , ct('n:1vaI of thf• Building 7-,`nln3 C-0 t.] requc-^t. Dock,:t n t i ro t.cu 7 f"`�i` �i ;l_,,.1�,'iy^:_ 1 ' `', n� ---�' r•�r Thi _ 1 Pi_r"v 1 n C7t r: :r'j i A Iei. B11 i _'C,n-1 Ai(i. .,, _�c:'p' C,"+fl.� f: `�tl .m i ti7' l„li;:ill fit•;(; �l i rF_C" t",IC. 6.13riagvr tr) ntc:r .rite, t}. _ .; :'. j. .. -c.._ . „ r_. ;l...r ';u!. ;t.. nn+_ 1 aa._the•r B.O.C.A. could PrDvV_i-: Ftl. 13.(�.C,A. wi l l do 1 Rt(. r[JL _t `. 1 ]R and Cc vi•. .. of !v)v _)rovifle can in. -;portion Votiti•.J a*i-: AIJ rl-,,frl D'-17!.:Y) E''J��::n�. c3C1Y tin.] J!tliar. Voting nay: Ai'l. K.o.aha--. AId. D14V_an.; and A I d ?rac'.;' :,,:1--uti:ut rS.. C:011'littefr- a IjoLirn at 9: or) p.71. nc-xt rig- e t: inr} D-.CC-i':I r- T ') 35. Staff :.A7 � �,(�i/ _ Roh.. r t T. Rurkl 030 —4— Ald. Present: Ald. Absent: MINUTES Planning and Development Committee December 9, 1985 7:30 P.H. Bleveans; Brady, Warshaw, Juliar, Korshak and Drummer None Staff Present: R. Carlson, Ahlberg, Siegel, Aiello, Bannister; Carter and Rudd Presiding Official: Juliar Minutes of November 18. 1985 Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Brady seconded that the P 6 D Committee approve the minutes of November 16, 1985. Upon review of the minutes Ald. Bleveans stated that With respect to Pier 1, upon his review of the newly lighted canopy he feels that the light level is too intense and is not acceptable per the discussion at the November 18, 1985 meeting. Staff indicated as a condition of the granting of the lighted canopy that the light level was to be reviewed and approved by the City. Reed Carlson indicated that he would be forwarding a letter to the owners of Pier I indicating that actions must be taken to lower the light level. Committee voted 4-0 to approve the minutes of November 18, 1985 (Aldermen Korshak and Drummer absent). COMMUti 1 CAT IONS The Committee accepted without comment Single Family Rehab Case 397-85, Multi -Family Rehab Case 014-65 and Multi -Family Rehab Cane 016-85. The Committee also approved Rental Rehab Case 008-85 with the request that staff provide a memorandum to the Committee detailing the method used for determining appraisals. The Committee also accepted without comment two (2) final variation decisions from the Zoning Board of Appeals for 1510 Church and 1100 Colfax. OLD BUSINESS Docket 297-12A-85, ordinance 137-0-85, ZAC 85-7, Exempt R3 District Nursi.nq Homes from Elimination. Ald. Bleveans moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council approval of the subject zoning ordinance amendment. Ald. Warshaw asked if this was the only nursing home in the R3 District. Staff indicated that this was a one of a kind situation. Committee voted 6-0 to approve the Zoning Amendment Committee recommendation. P & D Committee Minutes December 9, 1985 Docket 296-12A-85, ZBA 85-29-V or SU(R), Ordinance 136-0-85, re 1740 Orrinqton Avenue (surger Kinq). Ald. Bleveans moved and Aid. Drummer seconded that the Committee recommend approval of a special use of a fast-food restaurant. Lawrence Freedman, Attorney for the petitioner was present and indicated the petitioner objects to a condition in the special use requiring that the hours of operation be limited to 20-hours in a 24-hour period. Both Aldermen Bleveans and Korshak indicated their opposition to a currently constructed sign within the Burger Ring directing patrons to bag their own food. Freedman stated that he was not aware of the exact wording of the sign, but would take action to have it removed. Freedman further stated that currently the operation of the Burger King is a 24-hour one and that a limitation of 20-hours would be a burden to the operator. Freedman stated that if the 20-hour operation were a condition of the special use that he would discuss the matter with his client which could very well lead to a withdrawal of the petition before the Committee. This would result in a continuation of the current form of operation with patrons bagging their own food. Chairman Juliar stated that the Burger King restaurant in his opinion has been a constant problem often due to its 24-hour operation. Juliar felt that the intensity of the operation causes more harm to the neighbors than would a limitation of a 20-hour operation cause harm to the operators of the business. The Committee voted 6-0 to recommend to the City Council approval of a special use for a fast-food restaurant at 1740 Orrington with a condition of a 20-hour operation being imposed and also that a litter clean-up condition be approved as in the proposed ordinance. Consider and Establish Priority for Reference to ZAC re Allowinq Homeless Shelter to Operate at lat Baptist Church as per Resolution 89-R-85 Adopted by City Council on November 18, 1985. Ald. Warshaw moved and Ald. Brady seconded that Committee approve priority number three (3) for the shelter reference. This would allow the matter to be discussed by the Zoning Amendment Committee as soon as possible allowing time to meet the deadline of June 1, 1986 as proposed in City council Resolution 89-R-85. Committee voted 6--0 to approve the reference. Docket 295-12A-85. ZBA 85-22-SU(R), Ordinance 114-0-85 re 1334 Wesley Avenue. Ald. Drummer moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the Committee recommend approval of a special use to reduce the off-street parking requirements for the subject church. Aid. Warshaw stated her opposition to the permanency of the special use reduction since it is possible that the congregation may increase in size and thus necessitate greater parking. Ald. Warshaw suggested that a review be made of the situation in approximately five (5) years. Ald. Drummer stated that attendance has dropped over the past several years and that even prior to that reduction there were no parking problems in the neighborhood. Ald. Drummer further stated that the church can not obtain any parking lot closer to the church since all the lots are - 2- P s D Committee Minutes December 9, 1985 built on. He further stated that it is the church's desire to sell the current unused lot that was originally designated for parking and that if this is accomplished, the five (5) year review would not make any sense since the church could not build parking since they would no longer own the lot. Committee voted 5-0-1 to recommend to City Council to approve the special use to permit a reduction to off-street parking for the church at 1334 Wesley Avenue (Ald. Warshaw, abstaining). Docket 294-12A-85, Single -Family Rehab Cane 385-85 Ald. Warshaw questioned why this case was now three (3) units when in the past it was two (2) units. She also questioned if the rent was too low. Ald. Brady questioned the title transfer 3% aspect of the loan. Staff suggested that this case be held over to December 16, 1985 to allow a written response to the questions posed by the Committee. Committee voted to hold the case over to the next meeting. Consider Allowinq Certain 84 and B5 Ordinance 75-0-82 to Expire. Ald. Bleveans moved and Aid. Warshaw sunset provision as detailed in the January, 1986. Committee voted 6-0. District Parkinq Requirements in seconded that the Committee allow the staff memorandum to take effect in Docket 186-8B-85, Revised Rehabilitation Proqram Guidelines. Ald. Drummer reviewed his memo included in the December 9, 1985 packet, Ald. Bleveans stated that he was originally opposed to grants but that Ald. Drummer's memo convinced him of the need exhibited by clientele of a low and moderate income nature. Ald. Brady pointed out that Ald. Drummer's memo actually lowers the total amount of dollars that would be available. Ald. Xorshak stated that he concurs with both Aldermen Bleveans and Drummer on the issues detailed in Ald. Drummer's memo. Chairman Juliar stated that he has not been in favor of grants and is still troubled by the amount of dollars that could be Expended in the form of grants thus depleting total dollars available for the Rehab program, particularly in time of reduction in CD dollars. Ald. Warshaw stated that she liken the original Housing Commission recommendation of $15,000 title transfer and 0% interest, and the $7,500 grant rather than Ald. Drummer's proposal of $12,000 title transfer and $8,000 grant. Upon discussion by all members of the Committee and staff, it was the Committee's position that with respect to percent of allocations for grants for median and 125% median income applicants that the basis for such decisions should be determined on the single, current year's allocation rather than the overall pot of money for residential rehabilitation. Ald. Brady moved and Ald. Bleveans seconded that the formula for determining grants and funds for median income and 125% median income be 201 of the current year's allocation or $50,000, which ever is greater. The Committee also -3- P a D Committee Minutes December 9, 1985 recommended that the determination of these amounts and the Guidelines would go into effect, if approved by City Council, for the 1986-87 fiscal year, Ald Brady amended her motion to also state that in the first year ('86-'87) only, an additional $50,000 from the overall CDBG Housing Rehabilitation fund should be added to the previously recommended $50,000 thus allowing in 1986-87 that $100,000 to be utilized as grants and $100,000 be utilized for those clients in the median and 125% median income categories. The Committee voted 4-2 to make these changes to the proposed Guidelines. Voting Nay: Aldermen Warshaw and Juliar. The Committee also reaffirmed the position regarding emergency loans which will be limited to $2,500. With respect to third mortgages Ald. Brady asked staff to develop a memo indicating a suggested percent to determine equity percentage in cases where third mortgage would be recommended. M With respect to the entire Rehabilitation Guidelines, Committee voted to have the revised guidelines discussed at the January 13, 1986 City Council meeting. Chairman Juliar stated that due to the length of the present.meeting, the Committee did not have the opportunity to discuss with Richard stillerman and Jack Siegel the issue of Ownership and Use of University Property outside of University Districts. It was agreed by all parties that this agenda item would be held over until January 27, 1986 when both Stillerman and Siegel could be present. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m., next meeting December 16, 1985 at 7:00 p.m. Staff: Robert T. Rud 70 -4- MINUTES Planning and Development Committee December 16, 1985 7:00 P.H. Ald. Present: Bleveans, Brady, Warshaw, Juliar, Morshak and Drummer AM Absent: None Staff Present: Carlson, Witt, Ahlberg, Eiseman, Carter and Rudd Presiding official: Juliar Minutes of December 9, 1985 Aid. Warshaw moved and Ald. Drummer seconded that the Committee approve the minutes of December 9, 1985. Committee voted 5-0 to approve (Ald. Bleveans absent). COMMUNICATIONS Committee received a revised list of the pending references to ZAC reflecting City Council's actions of the meeting of December 9, 1985. The Committee reviewed a staff memorandum detailing the appraisal process for rehabilitation cases. Ald. Korshak stated that he has provided a memorandum expressing his position on the appraisal process and requested that it be copied and distributed to other members of the P & D Committee. Ald. Brady recommended that discussion of the appraisal process be forwarded to the Housing Commission's Rehabilitation Subcommittee for further review. Committee by consensus directed that issue to the Rehabilitation Subcommittee. Plan Commission Discussion of Review of Comprehensive Plan. Phillip Peters, a representative of the Evanston Plan Commission, was present to discuss with the P & D Committee the possibility of scheduling a special meeting between members of the Plan Commission and the P & D Committee to review the proposed Comprehensive Plan. Committee set a special meeting of the P & D Committee for Monday, January 6, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. to began the review process. Docket 229-1OB-85, ZBA 85-26-V(R), Ordinance 107-0-85, re Variation for 3200 Grant StrF•et. Peter Mulvey, Executive Director of the Presbyterian Home was present and provided background on the Presbyterian Home request for variation to allow for an out -patient clinic. Ald. Nelson was present and spoke on behalf of the Presbyterian Home's proposal. Ald. Nelson indicated that a neighborhood meeting was recently held which he attended and heard concerns of the neighbors mainly regarding parking. Ald. Nelson explained that the neighbors felt that the principle concern be that all parking would be contained on -site and not filter into the neighborhood. Ald. Nelson praised the Presbyterian Home for the manner in which they have approached the variation process by conducting neighborhood meetings and trying to gain input from residents. Nelson indicated that both he and fellow Ald. Wold P & D Agenda December 16, 1985 were in favor of the pilot project which could be monitored easily and which would be beneficial to the neighborhood and community. Mulvey stated that the pilot project would have very limited effect on the neighborhood in ghat it was limited by the variation request to no more than twenty out -patients per day. He stated that if the Home wanted to expand the program they would be required to come back to the City to seek that expansion. Mulvey further stated that if the program were to be extremely successful the home might look for another site to expand the program. Mulvey addreased several issues presented at the prior meeting with respect to the tax exempt status of the [tome and possible advantages to certain physicians and emphasized that the program was a pilot program. Mulvey distributed several pieces of information to the Committee with respect to a legal opinion from the Home's attorney on the tax status and financial documents with respect to the Presbyterian Home. Aid. Brady stated that she had not had an opportunity to read the material since she had only received it at the meeting and requested that .tack Siegel, Corporation Counsel provide his comments with respect to the legal opinion on tax exempt status presented by attorneys for the Presbyterian Home. Aid. Warshaw stated that she would like to have the matter held -over to the next regular meeting of January 13, 1986 to allow Siegel an opportunity to provide his comments and also for her to have a chance to review the materials presented tonight by the Presbyterian Home. Dr. Blanford of the Presbyterian Home made a brief presentation with respect to the goals and objectives of the program. Committee voted to hold this matter over to January 13, 1985 and requested that Siegel provide the aforementioned comments with respect to tax exemption status. Docket 188-88-85, Revised Rehabilitation Proqram Guidelines. Aid. Brady moved that the proposed guidelines be approved by the Committee and that third mortgages not be included within the guidelines restrictions. Aid. Brady explained that if an application with a third mortgage should be submitted that the Rehabilitation Appea13 Board could review said request and make a determination. Committee voted 6-0 to forward the Rehabilitation Guidelines to City Council for dincussion at City Council's meeting of January 13, 1966. Docket 294-12A--85, Single -Family Rehab Case 385-85. Aid. Brady moved and Aid. Drummer seconded that the Committee recommend to City Council that the current loan be restructured from a 0a amortizing to a 08 title transfer. Committee also directed that the $17,160 request for additional work be rejected. Committee 6-0 to approve the case. ADJOURNMENT The Committee adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Next meeting of the•P & D Committee will be a special meeting on January 6, 1986 at 7:30 p.m., next regular meeting of the P & D Committee will be January 13, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. Staff oberk� // T. Rudd t 39 6a