PLAN COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 19, :00 PM WINNETKA VILLAGE HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 510 GREEN BAY ROAD

Transcription

1 PLAN COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 19, :00 PM WINNETKA VILLAGE HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 510 GREEN BAY ROAD Agenda 1. Approval of October 24, 2018 meeting minutes. 2. Public Comment Time. 3. Community Development Report. 4. Case No SD: 67 Brier Street: An application submitted by Rosemary Latter and Russell Gilchrist seeking approval of a Final Plat of Subdivision to subdivide the existing single lot into two buildable lots. The Village Council has final jurisdiction on this request. 5. Case No SD: 383 and 391 Hawthorn Lane: An application submitted by Janet and Thomas Leopold seeking approval of a Final Plat of Subdivision to relocate the lot line dividing the two properties. The Village Council has final jurisdiction on this request. Note: Public comment is permitted on all agenda items. NOTICE All agenda materials are available at villageofwinnetka.org (Government >Boards & Commissions > Agenda Packets). The Village of Winnetka, in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, requests that all persons with disabilities who require certain accommodations to allow them to observe and/or participate in this meeting or have questions about the accessibility of the meeting or facilities, contact the Village ADA Coordinator Megan Pierce, at 510 Green Bay Road, Winnetka, Illinois 60093, ; T.D.D

2 WINNETKA PLAN COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 24, 2018 Members Present: John Golan, Acting Chairman Mamie Case Layla Danley Chris Foley Bridget Orsic Jay Vanderlaan Non-voting Members Present: Joni Johnson Members Absent: Tina Dalman Louise Holland Village Staff: Brian Norkus, Assistant Director of Community Development Ann Klaassen, Senior Planner Call to Order: The meeting was called to order by Chairman Golan at 7:05 p.m. Approval of September 26, 2018 Meeting Minutes Mr. Vanderlaan made motion to approve the September 26, 2018 meeting minutes and the motion was seconded by Mr. Foley. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously. Public Comment There was no public comment. Case no SD: 1025 and 1035 Sheridan Road: An application submitted by Chicago Title Land Trust Company, as Trustee under Trust Agreement dated February 13, 2018 and known as Trust # seeking approval of a Final Plat of Subdivision to consolidate the existing two lots into a single lot of record and a zoning variation to provide less than the required minimum average lot width of 115 feet for a corner lot. Ms. Klaassen stated Chicago Title Land Trust Company, as the owners of 1025 and 1035 Sheridan Road, have filed an application seeking Final Plat approval to consolidate the existing two lots into a single lot of record, as well as a zoning variation to provide less than the minimum required average lot width of 115 feet. She stated the beneficiaries of the trust reside at 1035 Sheridan and have subsequently purchased the adjacent property at 1025 Sheridan. The residence at 1025 Sheridan was demolished by a homebuilder in May, in preparation for construction of a new residence. Ms. Klaassen stated prior to commencement of construction, the Applicant purchased the 1025 Sheridan property in August for the purpose of consolidating with its lot at 1035 Sheridan. If approved, the proposed subdivision would consolidate the two parcels into a single buildable lot with a net lot area of 71,499 square feet. Ms. Klaassen stated the Applicant s intent is to construct a new driveway leading to the 1035 Sheridan residence. The existing shared driveway with the other two lots in the neighborhood would remain.

3 October 24, 2018 Page Ms. Klaassen stated the proposed consolidated lot would have an average lot width of feet, requiring a variation of 2.05 feet or 1.78%. She stated the average lot width is determined by dividing the lot area by the lot depth. Ms. Klaassen stated the existing 1035 Sheridan parcel complies with the zoning standards for lot size and dimensions. However, the 1025 Sheridan parcel does not comply with the current zoning requirements for minimum lot area or the minimum average lot width requirements. She stated the proposed consolidation would eliminate the nonconforming lot area as the proposed lot is more than double the minimum required lot area. Additionally, no zoning nonconformities are created with respect to required setbacks or allowable building size. Ms. Klaassen stated previously, subdivisions that also required zoning relief went through a two-step review process where the Village Council would adopt an ordinance approving a preliminary plat of subdivision and the related variation prior to the Plan Commission considering a final plat. However, the Village Code does not require preliminary plat approval as a precondition of final plat approval. She stated in this case, the Applicant has chosen to directly proceed with the final plat review. Ms. Klaassen stated consideration of Final Plat approval also needs to consider the details of the final plat such as utility easements, final plat formatting and related matters. She stated minor adjustments to the Final Plat are required to comply with the Subdivision Code. Ms. Klaassen stated the Village Water & Electric Department is requesting a 10-foot utility easement along the south property line of the existing 1025 Sheridan parcel from Sheridan Road to 7 feet east of the transformer currently located at the southwest corner of the 1035 Sheridan parcel. She stated as the Subject Properties are owned by a trust, the Owner s Certificate shall be in the applicable format and provided for both 1025 Sheridan Road and 1035 Sheridan Road. Additionally, if there is a mortgage for either property, consent of the mortgagee is required. Ms. Klaassen stated the Applicant is in the process of addressing these issues. Ms. Klaassen stated this application is also scheduled to be considered by the Zoning Board of Appeals on November 12 th, with final consideration by the Village Council. She stated the Applicant requests that the Plan Commission recommend approval of the proposed Final Plat of Subdivision, which consolidates two lots into one Lot of Record, and requires a variation to reduce the minimum required average lot width. Following the closing of public comment, and upon completion of the Commission deliberation, if a majority of the Commission elects to recommend approval, a draft motion is provided on page 8 of the agenda packet. Chairman Golan then swore in those that would be speaking. Michael O Connor, with Fuchs & Roselli in Chicago, introduced himself as the attorney representing the owner. He stated that Chicago Title Land Trust Company, as Trustee under Trust dated 02/13/18 and known as Trust # ("Owner") owns the properties located at 1025 Sheridan Road in Winnetka, Illinois with a PIN of ("1025 Property") and 1035 Sheridan Road in Winnetka, Illinois with a PIN of ("1035 Property"; 1025 Property and 1035 Property, collectively, "Properties"). Mr. O Connor stated the Owner hereby submits this Land Consolidation Application ("Application") with the Village of Winnetka Plan Commission in order to consolidate the Properties into one combined lot. He stated the Owner wishes to consolidate the Properties for the purpose of creating a private driveway between the Properties. In addition, the Owner plans to landscape the Properties and secure the Properties with a fence. Mr. O Connor stated since the applicant has purchased that lot, if the Commission and Village Council approve the request, a home would not be built and the plan is to landscape the lot and build a

4 October 24, 2018 Page driveway leading up to the residence at 1035 Sheridan and fence it. He stated by consolidating these two lots, they would be removing a legal nonconforming lot that is dramatically smaller than the 24,000 square foot minimum requirement in the R-2 zoning district and resulting a larger lot which is much closer to the average lot width requirement. Mr. O Connor then stated it would be positive for everyone involved and asked if there were any questions. A Commission Member questioned the driveway and stated it was alluded to earlier that there is an existing driveway with an easement for the adjacent properties and asked if they are going to build a new driveway to reconfigure it off that driveway. Mr. O Connor referred the Commission to an illustration and noted the existing driveway began in the southwest corner of Lot 3 and runs to the northeast and along the north lot line. He stated if the plan is approved, the plan is to build a driveway that runs straight northeast through Lot 3 to the front door of the residence at 1035 Sheridan. Ms. Orsic asked if it would enter off of Sheridan or the road which existed for the other properties. Mr. O Connor referred the Commission to an illustration and responded it would not create a new curb cut off Sheridan and would use the existing curb cut and apron off Sheridan. A Commission Member asked if the portion of the driveway between the demolished home and the property line would disappear. Mr. O Connor confirmed it would remain and is needed to serve the properties to the northwest. He clarified that the driveway to the immediate north of the demolished home would cease to exist and the only driveway which would continue to exist would be the driveway straddling the north lot line of Lot 3. A Commission Member asked if the driveway would continue to exist for 1045 Sheridan and 1055 Sheridan. Mr. O Connor confirmed that is correct. He then described how the homes would be accessed from Sheridan. He added that the driveway for 1025 Sheridan would not exist. Ms. Johnson asked if the only access to 1055 Sheridan would be from the driveway portion of 1035 Sheridan. Mr. O Connor confirmed there would be no need for the owner of 1055 Sheridan to go onto the 1045 Sheridan property except to the extent the driveway straddled the north lot line between 1025 Sheridan and 1045 Sheridan. Ms. Johnson asked if the purple area at 1035 Sheridan would be eliminated. Mr. O Connor responded a lot of that existing parking pad in front of the home would remain and a portion of the driveway between 1035 Sheridan, the parking pad and driveway straddling the lot line would be removed. Ms. Johnson asked if they would keep the driveway that straddled the property. Ms. Klaassen responded the driveway located within the private roadway easement would have to remain just as they are proposing. Ms. Johnson then asked how they would get a permit if there is a nonconforming lot width. Ms. Klaassen stated a nonconforming lot is still considered to be a buildable lot whether it related to lot area or depth, etc. Mr. O Connor stated the permit for the new house that was proposed on the 1025 lot was issued because it was considered an existing nonconforming lot prior to the enactment of the ordinance establishing average lot widths. Mr. Norkus stated in being a mature community and since a lot of the lots were developed in the 1920's or earlier, at the time of the 1922 Zoning Ordinance which has been revised several times with development pressure or the Village determining that they were not regulating density adequately, both

5 October 24, 2018 Page minimum lot size and lot width standards have been modified over the years to reduce the number of subdivision opportunities. He stated a lot of lots including 1025 Sheridan were rendered nonconforming by the zoning change and are still considered buildable lots under the zoning code. Mr. Foley asked if someone wanted to return 1025 Sheridan to a buildable lot, would it be unlikely they would be unable to separate the pieces again. Mr. Norkus stated it is unlikely they would be able to in the current configuration and he could not envision where there would be a conforming alternative where they could change the boundaries between the two lots and re-establish the two lots. Ms. Johnson stated they have granted variances for subdivisions which do not comply. Mr. Norkus stated they would have to seek a variation. Mr. Foley stated it can be done but it would be difficult. He stated the reason is that they would have to merge the lots and not have a driveway going through a vacant piece of property. Mr. O Connor stated they would have to have a variance to have an accessory use on the lot. Ms. Johnson asked how old the home at 1035 Sheridan is. Mr. O Connor responded it was completed in May Chairman Golan asked if there were any other comments. Bob Scales, 1045 Sheridan, stated he and his wife look directly into 1025 Sheridan. Mr. Scales stated he is here to encourage the Commission to approve the request which would be very beneficial to him in terms of view. He stated they have been living with Birov construction for three years. Mr. Scales then stated the Village gave Mr. Birov a permit to build a 6,000 square foot home at 1025 Sheridan which is nonconforming and narrow and had a modest 1956 ranch home on it. He stated the applicants decided to purchase the property and want to put in a nice driveway instead and encouraged the Commission to accelerate the request as quickly as possible. Ms. Johnson informed Mr. Scales there was a similar case recently on Sheridan where the owner of the riparian home sought to tear down the Birov home built in front of it and create a similar lot from Sheridan to the home closer to the lake which they applauded as restoring the estate character of the home. Mr. Scales agreed there is a common driveway serving his home and 1055 Sheridan which would remain as is. Chairman Golan asked if it was an estate home when it was first built. Mr. Norkus confirmed in 1954, it was a single parcel and they do not know for certain where the original home was located. Chairman Golan asked if there were any other comments. No additional comments were made at this time. He then stated the Commission would now discuss the matter. Mr. Vanderlaan referred to page 8 and the draft motion which contained a couple of key items which would need to be recommended or agreed to relating to water and electric requirements and the 10 foot utility easement has to be satisfied as a condition as well as IDOT. He stated there would be no increase to any potential storm water issue and as a comment from the Commission, they should think about a master plan and what can be simplified in terms of what needs to be reviewed or if it should be

6 October 24, 2018 Page tabled for now. Chairman Golan asked the applicant if they had any issue with the easement. Mr. O Connor responded they did not and discussed it with Ms. Klaassen in connection with adding a utility easement to the survey. He stated he was told by the surveyor they would have that tomorrow which would be added to the plat which would be recorded. Mr. Vanderlaan asked if they are working with IDOT and the IDNR with regard to their requirements. Mr. O Connor responded they have contacted both agencies and they made it sound as if their review would be perfunctory. He stated they asked to see a copy of the survey and once the applicants receive a positive recommendation and approval by the Village Council, they would circulate the Mylar to IDOT and the IDNR as well as the Village departments. Chairman Golan asked if there were any other comments. Ms. Danley stated since the build of the new driveway did not impact the access to the other two homes, she did not have any issue with the request and her questions have been answered. Ms. Case also stated she felt positive about the proposal and agreed with the comment with regard to the estate feel of the property. Ms. Johnson also agreed the comments made. Chairman Golan asked if there were any other comments. Mr. Foley stated he also agreed with Mr. Vanderlaan's comments and appreciated the hard work of the Village staff on their work. He also stated the applicants made a good presentation and appreciated when neighbors provide comments either for or against. Ms. Orsic stated she has nothing to add. Chairman Golan asked if there were any water issues or impervious surface issues which are significant. It was confirmed there are no water management issues. Mr. Norkus stated they tend to be more related to grade and challenges with regard to the area. Chairman Golan described it as a great plan and asked for a motion. Mr. Norkus stated the motion can reflect incorporating the draft motion in the Village staff report. Mr. Vanderlaan moved to approve the request based on the outline and conditions contained on page 8 of the agenda report. The motion was seconded. A vote was taken and the motion was unanimously passed. AYES: Case, Danley, Foley, Golan, Orsic, Vanderlaan NAYS: None NON-VOTING: Johnson Other Business Chairman Golan asked if there was any other business. Ms. Johnson referred to the Business Development and there was an outside survey done of businesses by the ETC Institute and encouraged the Commission Members to go on the website to see the survey results. She indicated it may have been the first time businesses have been surveyed. Mr. Norkus stated he would send a link to the Commission Members to see the results of the survey. He agreed it was the first opportunity the Village has taken to survey the merchants in town. Mr. Norkus stated they previously have done more survey work with the residents and with the completion of the

7 October 24, 2018 Page Downtown Master Plan recently and as the Village Council embarks on streetscape planning, it was felt to be a good idea to check in with the merchants to take their temperature in terms of what the Village is doing or is not doing. He indicated some of it is complimentary and some of it showed where improvement is needed with parking getting the most frequent comment where there could be improvement which is not unique to Winnetka and which the Village is working on. He stated the Village Council is trying to figure out priorities with regard to these types of items. Ms. Johnson asked what the participation rate for the survey was. Mr. Norkus responded it was 20-25%. Ms. Case stated it was closer to 20% and asked if they were going to try to get the merchants to respond in greater numbers. Mr. Norkus stated there was a concerted effort for this project to reach out to merchants in the form of letters and s and they were contacted at least three times in order to get participation. He stated it is difficult to get merchants to come to meetings since they are running their businesses and they thought it would be easier to get the merchants to respond to a survey. Mr. Norkus then stated the Village Council may direct Village staff to perform additional follow-up and President Rintz is interested in having better participation and additional meetings, particularly as it relates to the streetscape discussion. Chairman Golan commented 20% seemed apathetic in terms of merchant response and who may be concerned their voices are not being heard. He indicated it would be interesting to talk to the 80% who did not respond. Ms. Johnson asked if it went to businesses on the second floor and Mr. Norkus responded it went to all known businesses in the Village. He estimated the survey went to several hundred businesses. Chairman Golan asked if there were any other comments. Mr. Vanderlaan stated as they start thinking about the upcoming opportunity to create a Comprehensive Plan, they can look to improve upon and simplify things, they should think about what qualifies as a special use permit or what the requirements are. He also stated based on what they heard tonight, for a 2-foot nonconformity, is that something which needed to go through two lower boards before the Village Council. Mr. Vanderlaan stated that may be something that can be looked at in terms of simplifying or streamlining the process. Ms. Case stated a lot of it had to do with Lot 2 remaining an empty lot with a driveway running through it which has always gone to the ZBA. Ms. Johnson confirmed the ZBA did not see a subdivision request unless there is a variation associated with it. She then stated they have had contentious and controversial cases and that Mr. Vanderlaan is not suggesting eliminating that. Ms. Johnson added they received final approval and it would have eliminated one step. Chairman Golan stated they have had several cases where he asked how it related to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan and he agreed it would be more of a ZBA issue as to how it relates to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. He agreed it would be a good idea as they embark on revising the 2020 Comprehensive Plan to look at situations like this which would also alleviate work for Village staff. Mr. Norkus stated Ms. Klaassen alluded to a change in thinking and process with regard to tonight's application. He referred to the 860 Lamson subdivision which the Commission saw twice, first for preliminary approval and after the ZBA reviewed it and the Village Council saw it for preliminary approval, the Commission saw it for a second time for final approval. He stated they have received legal advice from Village corporate council that the two step process is not necessary as had been interpreted

8 October 24, 2018 Page previously. Mr. Norkus stated for tonight's request, the 1025 Sheridan and 1035 Sheridan case was before the Commission for final approval. Ms. Johnson stated Ms. Dalman suggested at the last meeting to eliminate the final approval step but this made more sense. Ms. Orsic stated to Mr. Vanderlaan's point, as it related to how big or small the nonconformity is, if someone was trying to build on the lot, it would be a big deal. She then stated when they are reducing density, she did not see where there would be many instances where someone would object to that. Ms. Orsic stated if the request is for a minor nonconformity and the applicant is requesting to add on, they would want to see those cases for sure. Chairman Golan stated while decreased density is great, for the Village's purposes, he referred to tax dollar savings and the significant loss of tax revenue on a lot being taxed at 10%. Ms. Orsic asked how much of that kind of thing are they supposed to consider and referred to One Winnetka where there would be a lot of new taxpayers. Chairman Golan indicated that may not be part of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Norkus stated it might ducktail back into Mr. Vanderlaan's question of possibly looking at the Comprehensive Plan again. He stated he would not recommend the Commission make policy ad hoc on a case by case basis and a reduction in density on one hand and the impact on assessed tax value for other taxpayers. Mr. Norkus stated the Commission may want to expand on that as part of the Comprehensive Plan update to evaluate what the potential impacts would be on the teardown and consolidation of lots. Ms. Johnson stated one reason the Village Council was in favor of the Lamson subdivision related to the need for more affordable housing and having two lots instead of one big lot that someone could build on. She stated there are a lot of different considerations which come into play and she could not imagine anyone saying they want to build as much as possible. Ms. Johnson stated by that token, they should be promoting teardowns since every home which is a teardown would generate more tax revenue. Ms. Orsic stated in this situation, that home is so much larger than anything else which sat on the 1035 Sheridan property and which would more than make up for the loss of two homes. Chairman Golan stated he is not implying that should be a consideration of the Commission. Ms. Case stated if someone wanted to purchase a property and tear the home down, that is their right. Ms. Danley stated when they were discussing One Winnetka, someone in the audience questioned what was going on with Conney's Pharmacy and if they were having financial difficulty and the response was that they would be opening in September. She stated Conney's is still boarded up and asked what is going on. Mr. Norkus stated there have not been inspections of the new Conney's location in quite a while. Ms. Johnson asked if the building permit expired and Mr. Norkus responded it would at a certain point. He stated there may have been three months of inactivity. The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Antionette Johnson Recording Secretary

9 MEMORANDUM VILLAGE OF WINNETKA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO: FROM: PLAN COMMISSION ANN KLAASSEN, SENIOR PLANNER DATE: DECEMBER 12, 2018 SUBJECT: CASE NO SD: 67 BRIER STREET FINAL PLAT APPROVAL GILCHRIST RESUBDIVISION INTRODUCTION On December 19, 2018, the Plan Commission is scheduled to hold a public meeting on an application submitted by Rosemary Latter and Russell Gilchrist (the Applicants ), as the owners of the property located at 67 Brier Street (the Subject Property ). The Applicants have filed an application seeking Final Plat approval of a two-lot subdivision of the Subject Property. Preliminary Plat approval was recommended by the Plan Commission on December 13, 2017 and preliminary approval was subsequently granted by the Village Council on March 6, A description of the preliminary approval final approval process and its applicability is included later in this report. A mailed notice of the Plan Commission meeting has been sent to property owners within 250 feet in compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance. As of the date of this memo, staff has not received any written comments from the public regarding this application. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PLAT OF SUBDIVISION The proposed subdivision would divide the existing single lot measuring 13,345 square feet into two (2) lots, measuring 6,473 square feet (north lot) and 6,872 square feet (south lot). The property as it exists today is improved with a single residence, which would be torn down if the subdivision is approved to allow the construction of two new single family residences. Figure 1 on the following page depicts the proposed subdivision in the context of the surrounding neighborhood. The area was first platted in 1922 as part of the Manus Indian Hill Subdivision ( Manus ). The original 1922 Manus Subdivision established lots which complied with the then-minimum lot width of 50 feet (current requirement is 60 feet). The proposed subdivision would establish two new lots with an absolute width of 45.8 feet. PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 1

10 SUBDIVISION REVIEW PROCESS IN GENERAL Figure 1 Proposed Subdivision (map view) All changes to the configuration of parcels of land are classified as Land Subdivisions under the Village Code, and are subject to review and approval by both the Plan Commission and Village Council. As part of that review process, resubdivisions are subject to review for compliance with both the Village Subdivision Code as well as the Zoning Code. In the event a subdivision is fully compliant with the Subdivision Code and Zoning Code, an applicant would typically submit an application for Final Plat approval, with review by the Plan Commission, followed by final approval by the Village Council in a single step review process. However, in the event a resubdivision requires relief under the Zoning ordinance (as is the case with this application), such subdivisions may be reviewed in a two-step, preliminary approval / final approval review process. The two-step Preliminary Plat / Final Plat review process is generally established to provide a process for the consideration of more complex subdivisions such as those including design and dedication of new public roadways or design and dedication of new public water, sewer and electrical utilities. Preliminary approval of such subdivisions allows an applicant to defer the design of complex construction documents for such public improvements until after preliminary approval has been granted. Provided that the Final Plat is consistent with the Preliminary Plat, the Final Plat approval process is more ministerial in nature, addressing details such as design and construction of public utilities if any, as well as items such as utility easements, plat formatting and other technical requirements. At the December 13, 2017 Plan Commission meeting, consideration of the current Gilchrist Subdivision was limited to preliminary review due to the proposed subdivision also requiring consideration of associated zoning variations, with the proposal resulting in the creation of zoning nonconformities with respect to minimum lot width and minimum lot area. 2 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 2

11 Staff has recently been advised by the Village Attorney that a two-step preliminary / final approval process is not mandatory in the event of a subdivision involving zoning relief. Accordingly, the Plan Commission may expect to see fewer applications such as the current application appear on their agenda for a second review. PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF 67 BRIER STREET Because the proposed subdivision incorporated requests for zoning relief, this matter has been previously submitted for preliminary review. Accordingly, preliminary review has been completed by the Plan Commission, Zoning Board of Appeals and Village Council. Plan Commission - On December 13, 2017, the Plan Commission considered the application for Preliminary Subdivision to subdivide 67 Brier Street into two (2) lots. After hearing from the Applicants, the Plan Commission recommended, by a vote of 8 to 0, preliminary approval of the proposed subdivision and related variations subject to the final plat incorporating restrictive covenants requested by the Village Forester to protect mature parkway trees. No members of the public spoke at the meeting regarding this matter, however, the Applicants provided favorable written comments from five (5) neighboring property owners. Zoning Board of Appeals The ZBA held a public hearing on January 8, 2018 to consider the Applicants request for the zoning variations associated with their application for Preliminary Subdivision approval. After hearing from the Applicants, the ZBA recommended, by a vote of 4 to 2, denial of the requested zoning variations. No public comments were made at the meeting, however, the same favorable comments considered by the Plan Commission were provided to the ZBA. Village Council The Council first considered the Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals recommendations on February 6, 2018 for policy direction. After reviewing the application and hearing from the Applicants, the Village Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance approving the preliminary plat of subdivision and related variations. The Village Council approved introduction of Ordinance M on February 20, Subsequently, the ordinance was adopted by the Village Council on March 6, 2018, and is included in this report as Attachment C. CURRENT CONSIDERATIONS BY PLAN COMMISSION With the major land use policy having already been evaluated by both the Plan Commission and Village Council, the review process at this final stage focuses on refining details of the final plat such as utility easements, final plat formatting and related matters. The final plat stage is subject to approval by both the Plan Commission and Village Council. In response to the Plan Commission s condition of preliminary approval to include restrictive covenants to protect mature parkway trees, the Applicants have added the following restrictive covenant to the final plat: 1) LOT 2 In order to minimize excavation and disruption within the public right-of-way, and in the interest of preserving mature trees in the public right-of-way, the sole means of vehicular ingress and egress from Lot 2 shall be from the existing driveway apron and curb cut ("Existing Driveway ), as shown on a Plat of Survey prepared by North Shore Survey Ltd., dated June 19, 2018 and on file with the Village of Winnetka. No alterations to Lot 2 shall be permitted that would create a new vehicular ingress or egress point to Lot 2 or alter the location or increase the size of the Driveway apron. 2) LOT 1 - In order to preserve existing mature trees in the public right-of-way, any driveway constructed to serve Lot 1 must observe a minimum three-foot (3 ) clearance between the driveway and existing trees in the public right-of-way ( Parkway Trees ), as shown on a Plat of Survey prepared by North Shore Survey Ltd., dated June 19, ) These covenants shall run with the land in the subdivision shown on this plat, and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the owners of all lots of record therein, their respective successors, 3 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 3

12 assigns and grantees and all parties claiming by, through and under them. Enforcement of these covenants may be sought by the owners of any lots of record in this subdivision, any person with an interest in any of said lots of record, or the Village of Winnetka by any proceeding at law or in equity against any person or persons violating or attempting to violate any covenant, either to restrain violation, to compel affirmative action, or to recover damages, and against the land to enforce any lien created by these covenants. 4) The covenants created herein shall not be released or amended except by a duly adopted ordinance of the Village of Winnetka. REQUESTED RECOMMENDATION The Applicants request that the Plan Commission find that the Final Plat of the Gilchrist Resubdivision substantially conforms to the preliminary plat approved by the Village Council and that the Plan Commission recommend approval as presented. The Final Plat is subject to final approval by the Village Council. DRAFT MOTION FOR PLAN COMMISSION Following closing of public comment, and upon completion of Plan Commission deliberation, if a majority of the Commission elects to recommend approval, it is recommended that a motion be made as follows: Motion The Plan Commission finds that the proposed Gilchrist Resubdivision Final Plat subdividing 67 Brier Street into two Lots of Record meets the Subdivision Code standards for approving such final plat and substantially conforms to the preliminary plat approved by the Village Council, therefore the Plan Commission recommends approval of the Gilchrist Resubdivision Final Plat. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Application Materials Attachment B: Gilchrist Resubdivision Final Plat Attachment C: Council Ordinance M adopted March 6, PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 4

13 ATTACHMENT A PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 5

14 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 6

15 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 7

16 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 8

17 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 9

18 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 10

19 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 11

20 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 12

21 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 13

22 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 14

23 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 15

24 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 16

25 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 17

26 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 18

27 35.19 GILCHRIST RESUBDIVISION...IN... The West half of the Northeast quarter of Section 28 Township 42 North, Range 13, East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois. N W E Lot 1 (Manus Indian Hill) S SCALE: 1" = 20 ' 35 PLAT SUBMITTAL AND RETURN TO ADDRESS: This plat submitted for recording by, and return to: 89 53'34" '0" Name: Address: City: AREA = 6,473 f 1 Lot 2 (Manus Indian Hill) State: Zip: MAIL TAX BILL TO: 67 Brier Street Winnetka, Illinois PARCEL INDEX NUMBERS Line Between Lots 2 and Center Line of 50 ft. Public R.O.W. BRIER STREET '40" AREA = 6,872 f 2 Lot 3 (Manus Indian Hill) PUBLIC ( Previously Dedicated ) ALLEY ( Previously Dedicated ) '0" South Line of Lot 3 Existing 30 Ft. Building Line Lot 4 (Manus Indian Hill) VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES State of Illinois ) ) SS County of Cook ) Approved by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Winnetka, Cook County, Illinois, this day of, 20. By: Village President, Winnetka, IL. Attest: Village Clerk VILLAGE COLLECTOR State of Illinois ) ) SS County of Cook ) I,, Village Collector of the Village of Winnetka, Illinois, do hereby certify that there are no delinquent or unpaid current or forfeited special assessments, or any deferred installments thereon that have been apportioned against the tract of land in this plat of consolidation. PLAN COMMISSION State of Illinois ) ) SS County of Cook ) Approved by the Village of Winnetka Plan Commission at a meeting held the day of, 20. By: Attest: Chair Secretary WATER and ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT State of Illinois ) ) SS County of Cook ) Approved this day of, 20 by the Director of the Water and Electric Department of the Village of Winnetka, Cook County, Illinois. Water and Electric Director DECLARATION of RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS GILCHRIST RESUBDIVISION State of Illinois ) ) SS County of Cook ) IN CONSIDERATION OF AND AS A CONDITION FOR the approval of resubdivision of the property commonly known as 67 Brier Street, to be known as Lot 1 and Lot 2 in Gilchrist Resubdivision. THE UNDERSIGNED OWNERS OF THE LAND COVERED BY THIS PLAT OF SUBDIVISION HEREBY COVENANT AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. LOT 2 - In order to minimize excavation and disruption within the public right-of-way, and in the interest of preserving mature tree in the public right-of-way, the sole means of vehicular ingress and egress from Lot 2 shall be from the existing driveway apron and curb cut ("Existing Driveway"), as shown on a Plat of Surveyprepared by North Shore Survey, Ltd., dated June 19, 2018 and on file with the Village of Winnetka. No alterations to Lot 2 shall be permitted that would create a new vehicular ingress and egress point to Lot 2 or alter the location or increase the size of the Driveway apron. 2. LOT 1 - In order to preserve existing mature trees in the pubic right-of-way, any driveway constructed to serve Lot 1 must observe a minimum three-foot (3') clearance between the driveway and existiong trees in the public right-of-way ("Parkway Trees"), as shown on a Plat of Survey prepared by North Shore Survey, Ltd., dated June 19, These covenants shall run with the land in the subdivision shown on this plat, and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the owners of all lots of record therein, their respective successors, assigns and grantees and all parties claiming by, through and under them. Enforcement of these covenants may be sought by the owners of any lots of recooord in this subdivision, any person with an interest in any of said lots of record, or the Village of Winnetka by any proceeding at law or in equity against any person or persons violating or attempting to violate any covenant, either to restrain violation, to compel affirmative action, or to recover damages, and against the land to enforce any lien created by these covenants. 4. The covenants created herein shall not be released or amended excepted by a duly adopted ordinance of the Village of Winnetka, Dated this day of, 20. ( Owner ) It's (Title) Dated this day of, 20. Village Collector VILLAGE ENGINEER State of Illinois ) ) SS County of Cook ) Approved this day of, 20 by the Village Engineer of the Village of Winnetka, Cook County, Illinois. MORTGAGEE State of Illinois ) ) SS County of Cook ) This is to certify that, as holder of Mortgage No. on the property hereon described and depicted does hereby consent to the division of said property as shown on the Plat hereon drawn. By: Attest: ACKNOWLEDGMENT SURVEYOR I, Arthur R. Olson, hereby certify that I have prepared the plat shown hereon and the property described as Lot 2 and Lot 3 (except the South 9.8 feet thereof) in Block 1 in MANUS INDIAN HILL, a subdivision of the Northwest quarter of the West half of the Northeast quarter of Section 28, Township 42 North, Range 13, East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois; in accordance with the Winnetka Subdivision and Development Code; that the property is within the corporate limits of the Village of Winnetka which has adopted an official comprehensive plan; that the property is not within a Special Flood Hazard Area, as identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency on the most recent Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel 253 of 832, Community Panel No C 0235 F, effective August 19, Surveyor Village Engineer Address, a Notary Public in and for said County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that Russell Gilchrist and Rose Latter, personally known to me to be the same persons whose names are subscribed to the foregoing instrument, appeared before me this day in person and acknowledged that they signed and delivered said instrument as their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes therein set forth. Signed and acknowledged before me this day of, 20. My Commission Expires: Notary Public State of Illinois ) ) SS County of Cook ) I,, a Notary Public in and for said County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that, personally known to me to be the same person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, appeared before me this day in person and acknowledged that he signed and delivered said instrument as his free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes therein set forth. Given under my hand and official seal this day of, 20. ACKNOWLEDGMENT, a Notary Public in and for said County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that Russell Gilchrist and Rosemary Latter, personally known to me to be the same persons whose names are subscribed to the foregoing instrument, appeared before me this day in person and acknowledged that they signed and delivered said instrument as their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes therein set forth. Signed and acknowledged before me this day of, 20. My Commission Expires: Notary Public My Commission Expires: Notary Public Final Plat Prepared By: North Shore Survey, Ltd. 436 Catalpa Lane, Libertyville, Illinois (847) Northshoresurvey@gmail.com Professional Design Firm No Dated: November 20, 2018 File No R PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 19

28 ATTACHMENT C PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 20

29 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 21

30 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 22

31 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 23

32 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 24

33 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 25

34 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 26

35 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 27

36 EXHIBIT B PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 28

37 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 29

38 EXHIBIT C proposed GILCHRIST RESUBDIVISION...IN... The West half of the Northeast quarter of Section 28 Township 42 North, Range 13, East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois. W N E Lot 1 (Manus Indian Hill) S SCALE: 1" = 16' 35 PLAT SUBMITTAL AND RETURN TO ADDRESS: 89 53'34" North Line of Lot 2 (Existing) '0" This plat submitted for recording by, and return to: Name: Address: AREA = 6,473 f 1 Lot 2 (Manus Indian Hill) City: State: Zip: Line Between Lots 2 and 3 (Existing) BRIER STREET Center Line of 50 Ft. Public R.O.W. ( Previously Dedicated ) '40" AREA = 6,872 2 f Lot 3 (Manus Indian Hill) PUBLIC ( Previously Dedicated ) ALLEY '0" South Line of Lot 3 (Existing) Existing 30 Ft. Building Line Lot 4 (Manus Indian Hill) VILLAGE PRESIDENT Approved by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Winnetka, Illinois on this day of, 20. Village President VILLAGE TREASURER/COLLECTOR I certify that there are no delinquent or current unpaid special assessments on the property shown on this plat. Date: Village Treasurer ATTEST: Village Clerk PLAN COMMISSION Recommended by the Plan Commission of the Village of Winnetka, Illinois on this day of, 20. OWNER Russell Gilchrist and Rose Latter, husband and wife, owners of the property shown and described hereon, hereby adopts this plat of subdivision; establishes the minimum building restriction lines, dedicates the roads, streets, alleys, walks, and other areas indicated thereon to the public use; and establishes any other easements shown thereon. STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) SS COUNTY OF ) I,, a Notary Public in and for said County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that Russell Gilchrist and Rose Latter, personally known to me to be the same persons whose names are subscribed to the foregoing instrument, appeared before me this day in person and acknowledged that they signed and delivered said instrument as their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes therein set forth. Given under my hand and official seal this day of, My Commission Expires: REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER AND OWNER To the best of our knowledge and belief, the drainage of surface waters will not be changed by the construction of this subdivision or any part thereof, or, if such surface water drainage will be changed, reasonable provision has been made for collection and diversion of such surface waters into public areas, or drains which the owner has a right to use, and that such surface waters will be planned for in accordance with generally accepted engineering practices so as to reduce the likelihood of damage to the adjoining property because of the construction of this subdivision. OWNER REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER Name: Date: Chairman Notary Public Name: Firm: Date: (SEAL) PARCEL INDEX NUMBERS VILLAGE ENGINEER Approved by the Village Engineer of the Village of Winnetka, Illinois on this day of, 20. SURVEYOR I, Arthur R. Olson, hereby certify that I have prepared the plat shown hereon and the property described as Lot 2 and Lot 3 (except the South 9.8 feet thereof) in Block 1 in MANUS INDIAN HILL, a subdivision of the Northwest quarter of the West half of the Northeast quarter of Section 28, Township 42 North, Range 13, East of the Third Principal Meridian, in Cook County, Illinois; in accordance with the Winnetka Subdivision and Development Code; that the property is within the corporate limits of the Village of Winnetka which has adopted an official comprehensive plan; that the property is not within a Special Flood Hazard Area, as identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency on the most recent Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel 253 of 832, Community Panel No C 0235 F, effective August 19, STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) SS COUNTY OF COOK ) I,, a Notary Public in and for said County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that, personally known to me to be the same person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, appeared before me this day in person and acknowledged that he signed and delivered said instrument as his free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes therein set forth. Given under my hand and official seal this day of, 20. My Commission Expires: Surveyor Proposed Plat Prepared By: North Shore Survey, Ltd. 778 Frontage Road #110 - Northfield, Illinois (847) NSSURVEY@sbcglobal.net Professional Design Firm No Dated: August 15, 2017 Village Engineer Notary Public File No R PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 30

39 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 31

40 PC Agenda Packet 67 Brier p. 32

41 MEMORANDUM VILLAGE OF WINNETKA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO: FROM: PLAN COMMISSION ANN KLAASSEN, SENIOR PLANNER DATE: DECEMBER 12, 2018 SUBJECT: CASE NO SD: 383 & 391 HAWTHORN LANE FINAL PLAT APPROVAL T. AND J. LEOPOLD SUBDIVISION INTRODUCTION On December 19, 2018, the Plan Commission is scheduled to hold a public meeting on an application submitted by Janet and Thomas Leopold (the Applicants ), as the owners of the properties located at 383 Hawthorn Lane and 391 Hawthorn Lane (the Subject Property ). The Applicants have filed an application seeking Final Plat approval of a two-lot resubdivision of the two existing lots. Preliminary Plat approval was recommended by the Plan Commission on August 22, 2018 and preliminary approval was subsequently granted by the Village Council on October 16, A mailed notice of the Plan Commission meeting has been sent to property owners within 250 feet in compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance. As of the date of this memo, staff has not received any written comments from the public regarding this application. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PLAT OF SUBDIVISION The Applicants reside at 383 Hawthorn Lane, which they purchased in 1983 and which serves as their primary residence. Subsequently, the Applicants purchased the adjacent home at 391 Hawthorn Lane in May 2018 for the purpose of enlarging their lot at 383 Hawthorn Lane and to allow an addition to the west side of their primary residence. The proposed resubdivision would relocate the lot line dividing the two properties, moving the lot line 42 feet to the west. Currently, there is a significant difference in lot size between the two subject parcels. The east lot (383 Hawthorn Lane) currently does not comply with the minimum required lot area and the proposed resubdivision would bring it into conformity, whereas the west lot (391 Hawthorn Lane) is nearly twice the area of the east lot. The area of the east lot (383 Hawthorn Lane) would be increased to 16,952 square feet and the west lot (391 Hawthorn Lane) would be reduced to 12,714 square feet. The residence at 391 Hawthorn Lane was torn down in early October, The Applicants are in the process of re-grading the property and stabilizing the soil as a lawn area. The initial use of the west lot would be as a lawn, however, it would be considered a buildable lot. Figure 1 on the following page depicts the proposed resubdivision in the context of the surrounding neighborhood. PC Agenda Packet 383/391 Hawthorn p. 1

42 SUBDIVISION REVIEW PROCESS IN GENERAL Figure 1 Proposed Subdivision (map view) All changes to the configuration of parcels of land are classified as Land Subdivisions under the Village Code, and are subject to review and approval by both the Plan Commission and Village Council. As part of that review process, resubdivisions are subject to review for compliance with both the Village Subdivision Code as well as the Zoning Code. In the event a subdivision is fully compliant with the Subdivision Code and Zoning Code, an applicant would typically submit an application for Final Plat approval, with review by the Plan Commission, followed by final approval by the Village Council in a single step review process. However, in the event a resubdivision requires relief under the Zoning ordinance (as is the case with this application), such subdivisions may be reviewed in a two-step, preliminary approval / final approval review process. The two-step Preliminary Plat / Final Plat review process is generally established to provide a process for the consideration of more complex subdivisions such as those including design and dedication of new public roadways or design and dedication of new public water, sewer and electrical utilities. Preliminary approval of such subdivisions allows an applicant to defer the design of complex construction documents for such public improvements until after preliminary approval has been granted. Provided that the Final Plat is consistent with the Preliminary Plat, the Final Plat approval process is more ministerial in nature, addressing details such as design and construction of public utilities if any, as well as items such as utility easements, plat formatting and other technical requirements. At the August 22, 2018 Plan Commission meeting, consideration of the current T. and J. Leopold Subdivision was limited to preliminary review due to the proposed subdivision also requiring consideration of an associated zoning variation, with the reconfiguration of the two lots resulting in the creation of a zoning nonconformity with respect to side yard setback requirements. The proposed increase in lot width for the 383 Hawthorn Lane parcel increases the minimum required side yard setback to 12 feet, rendering the existing residence nonconforming. 2 PC Agenda Packet 383/391 Hawthorn p. 2

43 Staff has recently been advised by the Village Attorney that a two-step preliminary / final approval process is not mandatory in the event of a subdivision involving zoning relief. Accordingly, the Plan Commission may expect to see fewer applications such as the current application appear on their agenda for a second review. PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED RESUBDIVISION OF 383 AND 391 HAWTHORN LANE Because the proposed subdivision incorporated a request for zoning relief, this matter has been previously submitted for preliminary review. Accordingly, preliminary review has been completed by the Plan Commission, Zoning Board of Appeals and Village Council. Plan Commission - On August 22, 2018, the Plan Commission considered the application for Preliminary Subdivision to resubdivide 383 and 391 Hawthorn Lane. After hearing from the Applicants, the Plan Commission recommended, by a vote of 6 to 0, preliminary approval of the proposed subdivision and related variation. Zoning Board of Appeals The ZBA held a public hearing on September 10, 2018 to consider the Applicants request for the zoning variation associated with their application for Preliminary Subdivision approval. After hearing from the Applicants, the ZBA recommended, by a vote of 6 to 0, approval of the requested zoning variation. There was no public comment at either the Plan Commission or ZBA meetings. Village Council On October 16, 2018, the Council considered the favorable recommendations of the Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals. After reviewing the application and hearing from the Applicants, the Village Council voted 6 to 0 to adopt Ordinance M approving the preliminary plat of subdivision and the associated zoning variation (Attachment C). CURRENT CONSIDERATIONS BY PLAN COMMISSION With the major land use policy having already been evaluated by both the Plan Commission and Village Council, the review process at this final stage focuses on refining details of the final plat such as utility easements, final plat formatting and related matters. The final plat stage is subject to approval by both the Plan Commission and Village Council. 1. VILLAGE FORESTRY REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION Subdivision plats are subject to staff review to evaluate the potential impact on trees on private property (those greater than 8 inches in diameter) as well as for impact on public trees in the public right-of-way. Figure 2 on the following page highlights the location of mature trees in the public right-of-way. Four (4) trees located along the front lot line, on public property, range from 36 inches to 12 inches in diameter. The Village Forester has requested that a restrictive covenant be placed on the plat of subdivision requiring the re-use of the existing west driveway for the proposed west lot (391 Hawthorn Lane) to protect a 36 inch tree located in the parkway. 2. PLAT FORMATTING SIGNATURE BLOCKS The Applicants are in the process of addressing minor comments from staff related to the signature blocks and formatting of text on the final plat. 3 PC Agenda Packet 383/391 Hawthorn p. 3

44 REQUESTED RECOMMENDATION Figure 2 Street tree locations The Applicants request that the Plan Commission find that the Final Plat of the T. and J. Leopold Subdivision substantially conforms to the preliminary plat approved by the Village Council and that the Plan Commission recommend approval as presented. DRAFT MOTION FOR PLAN COMMISSION Following closing of public comment, and upon completion of Plan Commission deliberation, if a majority of the Commission elects to recommend approval, it is recommended that a motion be made as follows: Motion The Plan Commission finds that the proposed T. and J. Leopold Subdivision Final Plat re-subdividing the two existing lots meets the Subdivision Code standards for approving such final plat and substantially conforms to the preliminary plat approved by the Village Council, therefore the Plan Commission recommends that the proposed T. and J. Leopold Subdivision Final Plat be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That a restrictive covenant be placed on the Final Plat to require the re-use of the existing west curb cut location for the future development of Lot 2, in a format acceptable to the Village Attorney; and 2. That all necessary signature blocks be provided in a format acceptable to the Village Attorney. It should be noted that the Applicant has agreed to both of these conditions. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Application Materials Attachment B: T. and J. Leopold Subdivision Final Plat Attachment C: Council Ordinance M adopted October 16, PC Agenda Packet 383/391 Hawthorn p. 4

45 ATTACHMENT A PC Agenda Packet 383/391 Hawthorn p. 5

46 PC Agenda Packet 383/391 Hawthorn p. 6