Village of Glenview Zoning Board of Appeals

Transcription

1 Village of Glenview Zoning Board of Appeals STAFF REPORT May 14, 2018 TO: Chairman and Zoning Board of Appeals Commissioners FROM: Planning and Economic Development Department CASE MANAGER: Michelle House, AICP, Senior Planner CASE #: Z LOCATION: PROJECT NAME: Pfingsten Road & 2760 Willow Road Glenbrook Marketplace & Starbucks SUBJECT: Zoning Variation request from Chapter 98 of the Municipal Code ACTION REQUESTED: Staff requests consideration of a final determination regarding the petition. APPLICANT / OWNER: NP Glenbrook LLC 445 N. Wells Street, Suite 302 Chicago, IL Tel: (312) CONTACT: Marshall Proehl Northpond Partners 445 N. Wells Street, Suite 302 Chicago, IL Tel: (312) PROPOSAL: The petitioner, Northpond Partners, represented by Marshall Proehl, requests a Variation from the provisions Section (b), (10), (2) of the Glenview Zoning Ordinance to allow current and proposed land uses in various combinations within a shopping center with a total of 257 parking stalls instead of a minimum of up to 416 parking stalls, fewer than the minimum number of required landscape rows and islands and at intervals greater than the minimum required, parking lot landscape islands less than the required dimension of 9.00 feet by feet, and wall sign area greater than 8% of the façade area two (2) building elevations, each as required by said ordinance. SITE DIRECTIONS: From Village Hall, turn right onto East Lake Avenue. Turn right onto Pfingsten Road and proceed north to Willow Road. The subject property is located at the northeast corner of Willow Road and Pfingsten Road. Staff Report Disclaimer: Village staff makes no representations regarding support, endorsement, or the likelihood of approval or disapproval by any Glenview regulatory commission or the Village Board of Trustees.

2 Site Assessment VILLAGE OF GLENVIEW ZONING: PIN: & Current North East South West Glenview B-2 General Business District Village of Northbrook Village of Northbrook Glenview B-2 General Business District Village of Northbrook AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY: 2

3 PICTOMETRIC PHOTOGRAPHY: South Elevation West Elevation 3

4 PICTOMETRIC PHOTOGRAPHY: North Elevation East Elevation 4

5 Project Summary BACKGROUND: The applicant, Northpond Partners, owns and manages an existing shopping center at the northeast corner of Willow Road and Pfingsten Road comprised of approximately 65,152 square feet. A new prospective tenant, Starbucks, is proposing to occupy a proposed drive-thru restaurant upon the subject property at the south end of the primary parking field. The proposed use, additional floor area, restaurant seating, and associated modifications to the site conditions and parking configuration would reduce the number of parking stalls onsite while simultaneously increasing the square footage of the improvements upon the property. Variations would be needed to accommodate the proposed building and parking lot alterations, including variations for fewer than the minimum quantity of parking stalls, fewer than the minimum quantity of parking lot landscape rows, landscaped islands with less than the minimum width, and the area of proposed wall signs associate with the new drive-thru. The applicant previously received a parking variance in 2013 for 373 parking spaces in association with building alterations for existing anchor tenant, Walgreens. The building alterations included a reduction in the shopping center square footage from 67,030 square feet to 65,152 square feet to allow for the installation of a new drive-thru lane east of the Walgreens tenant space. The applicant received a parking variance in 2016 for 394 parking spaces to allow for additional students and instructors within the specialty schools to permit Corepower Yoga to locate within the shopping center. At this time, the applicant is requesting several zoning variations to include the following: A variation to permit the construction of a free-standing Starbucks. The construction of the building would require alterations to the existing parking field and increase the r A variation to permit fewer than the required number of landscaped rows. Code would require a landscape row every fourth row of parking. Currently, the parking field does not include any landscape rows and the applicant is not proposing any landscape rows with the proposed modifications to the parking field as part of the Starbucks proposal. A zoning variation for parking lot landscape islands less than the required 9.0-foot by 19.0-foot dimension. Currently, the landscape islands are less than 9.0-foot by 19.0 foot and the proposal would be consistent with the existing landscape island dimension. Wall sign area greater than 10% of the wall area on the west and east elevations of the proposed Starbucks retail building. The proposed signage is 76.0 square feet where 67.7 square feet would be permitted. The proposed signage is 11.2% of the façade. PLAN COMMISSION CONSIDERATION: The Plan Commission reviewed the proposed site plan and conditional use application at the April 24, 2018 meeting. The Plan Commission provided the following comments for review: Recommended that Northpond Partners be cognizant of future tenants to ensure a greater parking demand is not created. The addition of landscape within the revised parking lot islands is a great improvement over the current parking lot islands. Concern over the 38% proposed variance request with the caution that business and customer trends can change over time requiring an increased parking demand from future tenants. Concern over the queuing when looking at other Starbucks in the area. The proposed Starbucks is rather close to Glenbrook High Schools and may draw a greater demand in the morning. If the 5

6 queue extended beyond the drive-thru queue the line would extend into the parking lot and not onto Willow Road. The Commission questioned if the area between Walgreens and Bank of America had been explored as this area of the parking lot generally seemed to be empty. The applicant stated they had explored that location but it created problems with the bank s drive-thru. The Commission questioned if overflow parking could be leased. The applicant stated the rear parking spaces would be utilized by employees of the businesses but Staff noted those spaces could be essential for the variance request. The tenants within the shopping center do not have seasonal usage patterns. A revised site plan was submitted on May 9, 2018 which featured relocation of a row of parking adjacent to the northern inline retail. This relocation of parking allowed for a smoother transition of the drive aisle south of these parking stalls. The proposal would return to the Plan Commission on May 22,

7 ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS: The following sections outline current ordinance requirements as these would be applied to the existing and proposed conditions. Minimum number of required parking stalls in the B-2 General Business District: Section (b) of the Municipal Code specifies the number of parking stalls required for various types of land uses. This ordinance specifies that sufficient parking shall be provided onsite for all tenants, customers, employees, etc. but in no case shall parking provided be less than the following ratios: Parking Requirements Retail / Offices / Banks Restaurants Fitness Center Specialty Schools Formula 1 parking space per every 300 square feet 1 parking space per every 3 seats 7 parking spaces per every 1000 square feet 1 parking space per student plus 1 parking space per instructor Quantity Total Required Total Proposed 38,710 sq. ft (shared) (shared) 8,040 sq. ft (shared) 114 students & instructors (shared) Totals: 416* 258 (-158) * These calculations include existing and proposed outdoor dining seats, with the exception of La Taquiza, who has yet to submit an application for outdoor dining. Any outdoor dining for that use would require seats to be eliminated within the store or elsewhere in the shopping center. 7

8 PROPOSED TENANCY & ASSOCIATED PARKING REQUIREMENTS: Address Current Tenant Required (416 spaces) Existing Proposed Compliance 2760 Willow Road 2823 Pfingsten Road 2823A Pfingsten Road 2825B Pfingsten Road 2827 Pfingsten Road 2839 Pfingsten Road 2861 Pfingsten Road 2871 Pfingsten Road 2821 Pfingsten Road 2845 Pfingsten Road 2843 Pfingsten Road 2831 Pfingsten Road 2825A Pfingsten Road 2833 Pfingsten Road 2859 Pfingsten Road 2841 Pfingsten Road 2853 Pfingsten Road 2857 Pfingsten Road 2863 Pfingsten Road 2847 Pfingsten Road Starbucks 60 seats MB Financial 2,700 sq. ft. Glenbrook Dentist 1,600 sq. ft. Lemon Nail Salon 1,600 sq. ft. 18/8 Fine Men s Salon 1,600 sq. ft. Glenbrook Cleaners 1,600 sq. ft. Merry Richards Jewelers 1,700 sq. ft. Walgreens 15,167 sq. ft. Bank of America 5,400 sq. ft. Vacant 3,446 sq. ft. Vacant 1,997 sq. ft. Vacant 2,487 sq. ft. Kumon Math & Reading 16 students/instructors CorePower Yoga 72 students/instructors Top Driver 26 students/instructors La Taquiza 35 seats JD Q & Brew 110 seats Szechwan North 120 seats Jimmy Johns 18 seats EcoGym Office 1,000 sq. ft. Gym 7,700 sq. ft. 20 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 9 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 5 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 5 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 5 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 5 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 6 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 51 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 18 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 11 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 7 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 8 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 16 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 72 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 26 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 12 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 37 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 40 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 6 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) 3 stalls 54 stalls 288 (shared) 258 (shared) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) No (variation required) 8

9 Current Tenant Mix: The shopping center currently includes nineteen (19) tenant spaces including the Bank of America which occupies a separate parcel. The two sites are separately owned but have an existing parking sharing agreement. Three (3) tenant spaces, including 7,930 square feet of space, are currently vacant. Starbucks would include 60 seats. No additional changes are proposed for any existing tenant spaces. Due to the parking requirements applied to the existing restaurant and specialty school uses, occupancy of the remaining three (3) vacant tenant spaces onsite is currently restricted since any new tenant would increase the required number of parking stalls beyond the 258 available after the construction of the Starbucks retail space. The existing vacant tenant spaces would be required to be occupied by standard retail or office uses unless an additional parking variation was approved. Proposed Tenant Mix: The applicant requests approval of a zoning variation in accordance with the proposed tenant mix including the new Starbucks building. If the requested zoning variation is approved, the center would be permitted up to 38,937 square feet of floor area devoted to retail, office, and bank uses. Up to 6,350 square feet of floor area would be devoted to specialty school uses with a maximum of 114 students & instructors. Restaurants would be permitted a maximum seating capacity of up to 343 seats. Lastly, up to 8,040 square feet would be devoted to a fitness center use. 9

10 Width of Landscaped Islands: Per Sec (e)(10), a minimum island width of 9.0 feet is required. The eleven (11) new landscape islands shown outlined in green on the site plan below have widths of less than 9.0 feet. A variation is required to allow these proposed island widths within the red dashed line outlining the portion of the site plan featuring changes. Quantity of Landscaped Rows: Per Sec (e)(10), landscaped rows are required at minimum intervals of every four (4) parking rows. Two (2) parking lot landscape rows shown in the required locations highlighted in orange would be required in the parking lot area to be modified as part of the proposal. Signage Area Greater than 10% of Façade: Per Sec (2) side wall signs are permitted to be up to 10% of the façade area. The proposed wall signage on the east and west façade are identical with an area of 76.0 square feet. While the Wall Sign Design Guidelines would recommend 5% of the façade Code would permit an area of 67.7 square feet. The currently proposed signage features 76.0 square feet or 11.2% of the façade area. 10

11 Other Performance Standards & Bulk Regulations: The proposed construction of the proposed Starbucks, and future occupancies of currently vacant units would be in full compliance with all other performance standards, design, and bulk requirements of the zoning ordinance, other than the parking variation currently requested. The applicants have an existing parking sharing agreement with the owners of the bank outlot to provide for the mutual use of all the existing parking onsite. The parking calculations in the chart above include stalls that are available from the easement with the bank property. 11

12 Zoning Board of Appeals Review ZONING BOARD JURISDICTION & PURPOSE: The Zoning Board is vested with the authority to hear, and make a final determination regarding applications for residential variances subject to the standards set forth in Section of the Municipal Code. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall identify findings of fact based upon the standards prescribed whether the application of regulations of the zoning ordinance will create a practical difficulty or hardship for the owner, lessee, or occupant of land, buildings, or structures. KEY VARIATION STANDARD COMMENTS: Staff comments after evaluating the wide range of issues considered by the Zoning Board of Appeals, including but not limited to the following: Whether there exists a legal hardship of the property as distinguished from an inconvenience Whether the alleged hardship may be self-imposed Whether a.) the property; and/or b.) the application of the ordinance to the situation is unique Compatibility of the resulting conditions with other properties of the same zoning designation Demonstration of how other available options are not viable, regardless of economic impact Mitigation of impact(s) upon properties in the vicinity Staff Comments: The applicant should discuss the rationale by which the Village should support a reduction in parking stall quantity while building square footage, seating, and required parking will increase in association with the construction of the proposed Starbucks and related site plan alterations. No changes are proposed to the existing restaurant uses, specialty schools, retail, services, and the fitness center. The Zoning Board of Appeals should discuss the proposal to ensure that the proposed Starbucks will not peak at the same time as other existing uses on site. If necessary to reach consensus regarding the variation request, the Zoning Board of Appeals can request the Plan Commission impose limitations on the hours of operation and/or land use associated with the conditional use for the drive thru restaurant. As proposed, the applicant has proposed an increase in the number of restaurant seats from 308 to 343 seats. The Zoning Board of Appeals should consider whether the parameters of the proposed tenant makeup of the shopping center are appropriate or whether any specific values (square footages, seating, students/instructors) should be modified. Since the approval of the last parking variation for the center, CorePower has occupied one of the inline tenant space. The property owner has stated that the tenant has not caused a parking shortage onsite. The Zoning Board of Appeals should consider the future occupancy of the remaining three (3) vacant tenant spaces comprising twenty (20%) percent of the shopping center s current total floor area which would be likely to 12

13 create an additional parking demand which might negatively impact the operations onsite. The parking lot islands are consistent with existing parking lot islands found in the parking lot south of the Walgreens tenant space. No changes are proposed to the parking lot islands in the parking field south of Walgreens. The applicant is proposing to shift the parking lot islands north of the proposed Starbucks to include additional parking spaces in this portion of the parking lot. The proposed signage is 11.2% of the façade and includes Starbucks Coffee lettering and a box sign for the drive thru which has visibility in both directions on Willow Road. If a shopping center with the proposed total area and composite land uses were proposed today, landscaped islands, landscaped rows, and other design improvements would be required which would require reduction in the leasable area of the center and/or the elimination of seating on the premises to comply with Village ordinance requirements. A variation for the deficient number of parking lot trees will also likely be required and shall be based upon a final design. This request may have to return to the Zoning Board of Appeals separately. POTENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS: The requested variation would result in a cumulative reduction in the number of parking stalls provided on the site with a corresponding increase in the square footage of shopping center. Adjacent property owners have relayed concerns to Village staff with numerous items relating to the maintenance and upkeep of the property. These issues include: A. Trash enclosures include missing or broken pieces with loose debri around the enclosure. B. Garbage totes located outside of trash enclosures. C. Trash enclosure doors shall be kept closed at all times. D. Garbage tote lids shall be kept closed at all times. E. Storage of carts for deliveries or linens are not permitted on the building exterior. F. Existing telephone utility box shall be secured. G. Northpond Partners should consider opportunities now or in the future to utilize the maximum fence height (8.0 feet) to screen the use from adjacent properties. H. A plan for trash clean-up in the northern buffer yard should be created for how the area will be actively maintained in the future. I. The landscape cleanup schedule should be confirmed. J. The approved landscape plan should be reviewed and confirm existing plantings comply with required landscape plantings. Numerous trees appear to have been removed from the buffer area. K. Delivery vehicles parked for deliveries for Walgreens shall not obstruct drive aisles or be left idling for periods longer than needed to complete the delivery. The applicant will be preparing an executive summary outlining steps in accordance with a compliance plan to remedy these issues as well as an outline of proposed ongoing management practices to ensure that issues do not recur. 13

14 Technical Review PROJECT TIMELINE & OUTREACH: 2018 A. 04/01/18 Zoning Variation Application Submitted B. 04/12/18 Public notice published in the Glenview Announcements C. 04/12/18 Public notice sign posted upon the subject property D. 04/24/18 Plan Commission Public Hearing E. 04/26/18 Public notices mailed to surrounding property owners F. 04/30/18 Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing (continued without discussion) G. 04/30/18 Revised public notices mailed to surrounding property owners H. 05/14/18 Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing I. 05/22/18 Plan Commission Public Hearing J. TBD Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing K. TBD Board of Trustees First Consideration L. TBD Board of Trustees Final Consideration M. TBD Permit Issuance N. TBD Inspections O. TBD Certificate of Occupancy P. TBD Expiration of Zoning Variation A BCDE FG I Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec LEGAL NOTICE & PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: A notice of a Public Hearing to be held was published in the Glenview Announcements, a newspaper with a general circulation within the Village of Glenview, not more than thirty (30) days, nor less than fifteen (15) days prior to the date set for said hearing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 65, Section 5/ of the Illinois Compiled Statutes. 14

15 REQUIRED APPROVAL(s): The following chart details the necessary required approvals: Required Regulatory Review A. Annexation B. Annexation with Annexation Agreement C. Comprehensive Plan Amendment D. Official Map Amendment E. Rezoning F. Planned Development G. Conditional Use H. Final Site Plan Review I. Second Curb Cut J. Subdivision (Preliminary, Final, and Waivers) K. Variation(s) L. Certificate of Appropriateness M. Final Engineering Approval & Outside Agency Permits N. Building Permit(s) O. Building & Engineering Inspections P. Recorded Documents (Development Agreements, Easements, Covenants, etc.) Q. Business License(s) R. Certificate of Occupancy 15

16 VARIATION STANDARDS: 1.) The Zoning Board of Appeals shall not vary the regulations of Chapter 98 of the Municipal Code unless it shall make a finding of fact based upon the evidence as presented to it in each specific case that the: a. Particular physical surroundings shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved would result in a practical difficulty or hardship upon or for the owner, lessee or occupant, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulation were carried out. b. Conditions upon which the petition for a variation is based are unique and would not be generally applicable to other property within the same zoning classification. c. Alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. d. Granting of the variation will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. e. Proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, substantially increase congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. f. Variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 2.) If all of the standards set forth in subsection (1) of this section cannot be met, yet an identifiable overriding public benefit can be realized by the granting of the requested variation, the zoning board of appeals shall forward a written recommendation, including a specific finding of fact of overriding public benefit, to the board of trustees for final disposition. 3.) The Zoning Board of Appeals may impose such conditions and restrictions upon the premises benefited by a variation as may be necessary to comply with the standards set forth in this subsection (1) to reduce or minimize the injurious effect of such variation upon other property in the neighborhood, and to better carry out the general intent of Chapter 98 of the Municipal Code. Attachments & Exhibits 1. Sample Motion 2. Public Notice 3. Excerpt from Plan Commission Minutes of 04/24/2018 Meeting 4. Petitioner s Application & Exhibits 16

17 Sample Motion Based upon findings evidenced through testimony, discussion, and the petitioner s application materials which demonstrate compliance with Chapter 98, Article II, Section 98-47(c) of the Municipal Code; I move the Zoning Board of Appeals recommend approval to the Village Board of Trustees of a Variation in the case of Z , Pfingtsen Road & 2760 Willow Road, for the applicant, Northpond Partners, represented by Marshall Proehl, from the provisions Sections (b), (10) and (2) of the Glenview Zoning Ordinance to allow: A. Current and proposed land uses in various combinations within a shopping center with a total of 258 parking stalls instead of a minimum of up to 416 parking stalls; B. Zero (0) landscape rows instead of a minimum of two (2) landscape rows; C. Landscape islands with a width of 5.7 feet instead of a minimum width of 9.0 feet; D. Wall sign area greater than 10% of the façade on both the west and east elevations each as required by said ordinance, provided that the future tenant mix be in substantial accordance with the plans and drawings (either as submitted or as amended ) and consistent with the testimony and discussion provided during consideration of the petition. I move the Zoning Board of Appeals continue case Z , Pfingsten Road & 2760 Willow Road, for the applicant Northpond Partners, represented by Marshall Proehl, to the June 5, 2018 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting with instructions to the applicant to address the following comments: 17

18 PROPOSED VARIATION PUBLIC NOTICE Z Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals to consider a petition requesting Variations of the Glenview Zoning Ordinance. The meeting will be held on Monday, April 30, 2018 at 7:00 P.M., in the Village Hall, 2500 East Lake Avenue, Glenview, IL in accordance with Chapter 65, Section 5/ of the Illinois Compiled Statutes. The property involved is commonly known as Pfingsten Road & 2760 Willow Road and is legally described as: LOT 1 IN GLENBROOK MARKET PLACE SUBDIVISION, BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF PART OF TRACTS 1 AND 2 OF ABEL S DIVISION IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 42 NORTH, RANGE 12, EASST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN; EASEMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF PARCEL 1 AS CREATED BY GRANT OF EASEMENT DATED AUGUST 27, 1991 AS DOCUMENT MADE BY AND BETWEEN THE TRUSTEES OF ST. PETER UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST AND AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF CHICAGO, AS TRUSTEE UNDER TRUST AGREEMENT DATED JUNE 3, 1991 AND KNOWN AS TRUST NUMBER FOR THE ERECTION, INSTALLATION, CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, REPLACEMENT AND RENEWAL OF A SLOPED EARTHWORK BUFFER, OVER THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED REAL ESTATE: THE EAST FEET OF THE WEST FEET OF TRACTS 1 AND 2 IN ABEL S DIVISION OF THE SOUTHERLY 20 ACRES OF THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER LYING NORTH OF THE CENTER LINE OF WILLOW ROAD AS DEDICATED OF RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF DEEDS OF COOK OCUNTY, ILLINOIS AS DOCUMENT , BOOK 306, PAGES 47, 48, AND 49 AND NORTH OF SAID CENTERLINE AS EXTENDED TO THE CENTERLINE OF PFINGSTEN ROAD IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 42 NORTH, RANGE 12, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN; NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF PARCEL 1 AS CREATED BY GRANT OF EASEMENT DATED AUGUST 27, 1991 AND RECORDED AUGUST 29, 1991 AS DOCUMENT MADE BY AND BETWEEN THE TRUSTEES OF ST. PETER UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST AND AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF CHICAGO, AS TRUSTEE UNDER TRUST AGREEMENT DATED JUNE 3, 1991 AND KNOWN AS TRUST NUMBER FOR AN EASEMENT TO MAINTAIN, REPAIR, REPLACE, CONSTRUCT, LAY, INSTALL, OPERATE, USE, RENEW OR REMOVE UNDERGROUND PIPES, LINES, MAINS, OR CONDUITS FOR WATER MAINS, TOGETHER WITH A RIGHT OF ENTRY UPON OVER AND INGRESS INTO AND EGRESS FROM THE SURFACE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND: THE NORTH FEET OF THE SOUTH FEET OF TRACT 2, EXCEPT THE WEST FEET THEREOF; ALSO THE NORTH 10 FEET OF THE SOUTH FEET OF THE WEST FEET OF TRACT 3 ALL IN ABEL S DIVISION OF THE SOUTHERLY 20 ACRES OF THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER LYING NORTH OF THE CENTERLINE OF WILLOW ROAD AS DEDICATED OF RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF DEEDS OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, AS DOCUMENT , BOOK 306, PAGES 47, 48 AND 49 AND NORTH OF SAID CENTERLINE OF PFINGSTEN ROAD IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 42 NORTH, RANGE 12, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS.; AND EASEMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF PARCEL 1 AS RESERVED IN THE DECLARATION OF COVENANTS AND RECIPROCAL EASEMENTS RECORDED AUGUST 23, 1991 AS DOCUMENT AND AMENDMENT RECORDED AS DOCUMENT , FOR VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER AND UPON COMMON AREAS LOCATED ON LOT 2 OF AFORESAID SUBDIVISION; ALL IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. 18

19 The petitioner, Northpond Partners, represented by Marshall Proehl, requests Variations from the provisions of Section (b), (10), (2) of the Glenview Zoning Ordinance to allow current and proposed land uses in various combinations within a shopping center with a total of 257 parking stalls instead of a minimum of up to 416 parking stalls, fewer than the minimum number of required landscape rows and islands and at intervals greater than the minimum required, parking lot landscape islands less than the required dimension of 9.00 feet by feet, and wall sign area greater than 8% of the façade area on two (2) building elevations, each as required by said ordinance. All persons interested should attend and will be given an opportunity to be heard. For additional information regarding this case, please contact Michelle House, Planner, at (847) Attest: Tony Repp Planner Publication Date: April 12, 2018 Zoning Board of Appeals Ronald A. Greco, Chairman 19

20 EXCERPT FROM MINUTES OF APRIL 24, 2018 PLAN COMMISSION MEETING P Pfingsten Road & 2760 Willow Road Starbucks and Glenbrook Marketplace (Public Hearing) Proposal: Conditional Use and Final Site Plan Review Action Requested: Discuss and Continue to May 8, 2018 Chairman Bucklin introduced Commissioner Korman, who had a statement prior to the case. Recusal Commissioner Korman notified the Board yesterday that his firm has been involved with Starbucks in building out the location in this case. He shared this information with Chairman Bucklin, Mr. Rogers, and Commissioners that he would be stepping out from this case and the remainder of it to make sure they maintain the appearance of propriety through this process. Herein, he recused himself. Chairman Bucklin acknowledged Commissioner Korman s recusal and proceeded to the case. He noted that the purpose of this evening s discussion was to provide guidance at this early proposal stage, as the petitioner would be required to seek Zoning Board of Appeals approval. The applicant, Starbucks & Glenbrook Marketplace, represented by Marshall Proehl from Northpond Partners, requests approval of a conditional use and final site plan review in order to construct a standalone drive-thru Starbucks and alterations to the existing parking lot for the Glenbrook Marketplace at Pfingsten Road and 2760 Willow Road. Chairman Bucklin then turned the case over to Mr. Rogers for a summary: Case Summary Mr. Rogers said the applicants, Starbucks and the management company for Glenbrook Marketplace, are requesting approvals for a new drive-thru restaurant at the south end of the property between Bank of America and the shopping center, north of a stormwater detention pond. The applicant plans to modify the parking lot and make other improvements to accommodate the new building. The subject property received a zoning variation to allow for a reduction in the number of required parking stalls. The applicant wants to amend this request for this project, which will require input from the Zoning Board of Appeals. To ensure that both the Zoning Board and the Plan Commission have the benefit of these comments for their reviews, Staff is seeking preliminary comments from the Plan Commission. Mr. Rogers said the proposed restaurant would: comprise 2,400 square feet, with a drive-thru accessed through interior Glenbrook Marketplace drive aisles; operate between 5 a.m. and 9 p.m., 7 days a week; include site changes: o additional parking lot islands at ends of parking rows; o new pole-mounted light fixtures; o modifications to detention areas; need variances for: o 159 (38.2%) fewer parking spaces than required per code; o fewer than minimum number of required landscape rows at intervals greater than the minimum required; o parking lot islands less than required 9-foot by 19-foot dimension; need consideration for: 20

21 o o o o approval of a restaurant with a morning peak; possible limitations on business hours; maintenance of a rubbish-free site; designation of parking spaces to be blocked by cars entering the drive-thru as employee only spaces. The north end of the property abuts residential property in Northbrook. To the east is a religious institution. The southwest corner is owned separately and occupied by the Bank of America. Parking is shared among the uses on the property. There is additional employee parking behind the shopping center along the north and east lot lines. Parking lot alterations would allow an entry to a drive-thru lane, to a menu board, and ultimately to the drive-thru window. Cars would then circulate back to the main drive aisle, allowing left-hand northbound turns to get back to Pfingsten Road or southbound, right out only turns, to get back to westbound Willow Road. Visitors would enter the site through the existing Willow Road or Pfingsten Road shopping center entrances. The applicant has provided the required landscape islands to separate parking from the trash enclosure and drive-thru, though some of the islands in the parking lot are less than the required 9-foot width and would require a variance. The total seating includes an outdoor dining area. Parking is required for all of the seats. Totals in the Staff Report reflect that. The applicant is requesting a parking variation of 38% reduction of the required parking stalls. Mr. Rogers noted this sounds like a large reduction, but property management can ensure that peak uses among the tenants (for example, a breakfast restaurant and a dinner restaurant) do not overlap over the course of the day. The applicant has included an escape lane from the drive-thru lane so vehicles can leave the queue before the menu board. The escape lane aligns with a Bank of America drive aisle. The trash enclosure at the northwest corner of the building would be accessible to refuse vehicles circulating through the parking lot. Proposed crosshatched striping is indicated in lanes at the north end of the parking lot to prevent vehicles in the queue from blocking parked cars. Mr. Rogers added that Staff has identified concerns if the queue extends into the parking lot at peak times. Elevations will be reviewed by the Appearance Commission. Landscaping, to be reviewed by both the Plan Commission and the Appearance Commission, includes new plantings in the adjacent islands and modifications around the detention area. Mr. Rogers said the Wilmette Starbucks has prompted concerns over queues onto main streets. Although Staff does not feel that the proposed site would encounter this problem, they are concerned that queues within the parking lot could block parked cars. The applicant has information to demonstrate why they feel there is sufficient stacking space from the menu board and the drive-thru window. Mr. Rogers said Staff would like the Plan Commission to ask questions this evening that would allow them to determine the merits of the case prior to final approval or denial. He added that the Zoning Board 21

22 of Appeals would review the case subsequent to the Plan Commission s review to determine how the property will be managed to allow for all of the parking lot uses. Staff can answer questions pertaining to the application of various code requirements to this case. Chairman Bucklin welcomed the applicant to provide a presentation. Mr. Marshall Proehl of Northpond Partners, representing the applicant, came forward and thanked Jeff Rogers, Michelle House, and Tony Repp for their assistance. He said his business had acquired the shopping center property about a year ago. As new owners, he felt they could breathe life into a site suffering stagnation to create a neighborhood destination for immediate and nearby communities. He noted the challenges to retail shopping centers: tenant retail space requirements are shrinking and creating an uptick in tenant vacancies. However, they believe that Glenbrook Marketplace is well positioned for increased occupancy and consumer demand. To achieve that potential, he believes a more aggressive leasing strategy going after a different caliber of tenants and making physical improvements to the center are imperative. He said that they view the project as a catalyst to revitalize Glenbrook Marketplace and keep it relevant. Mr. Proehl said they focused on creating a cohesive shopping experience that allowed customers safe ease of access between businesses and across the parking lot, as well as ingress and egress from Willow Road and Pfingsten Road. Mr. Proehl also said they worked with Starbucks to address stacking. Starbucks asked for a six-car space from the menu board to the pickup window. He and his team then worked with Village Staff to accommodate an additional three- to five-car space ahead of the menu board. They feel that a nine to eleven car stack should suffice. Mr. Proehl said they have a variance of 107 cars at Glenbrook Marketplace, which was approved a couple of years ago, however the parking requirement for the three specialty schools (Kumon Math & Reading, CorePower Yoga, Top Driver) is slightly over 25% of the parking. Because they are only open certain hours and not every day, Mr. Proehl and his team feel that the parking requirement does not reflect actual use. Based on the timing of tenants parking lot use, Starbucks early hours would complement their use. The only real crossover hours would be with Eco Gym and CorePower Yoga, when most other tenants are not even open. He described this as a symbiotic use, given current conditions at the shopping center. When they asked the two main restaurants, Szechwan North and JD s Q & Brew, they learned that pickup or delivery represented about 50 % to 75%, which indicates an underutilization of the parking lot, as Mr. Proehl interprets. To demonstrate this, they commissioned a parking study that showed a 50% maximum occupancy throughout the week and including weekends. This is why they feel the increase in use of parking in conjunction with the varied uses is not going to cause a problem. Mr. Proehl showed elevations of the proposed Starbucks, which were designed to fit into a cohesive shopping center. Landscaping will include existing mature trees along Willow Road as well as new landscape islands in the parking lot to the north of the Starbucks. He feels this will not only benefit Starbucks, but also enhance the consumer experience at the shopping center. Mr. Proehl concluded that he and his team believe in the potential of Glenbrook Marketplace, but that it will require a catalytic kick-starter like Starbucks to improve the neighborhood. He turned to the Commissioners for questions and comments. Chairman Bucklin asked Mr. Proehl if any of the current tenants had concerns over the effect of Starbucks on their businesses and parking. 22

23 Mr. Proehl said the tenants did not express concerns over a lack or overload of parking. To the contrary, they were excited at the prospect of a Starbucks in an out-lot building. Chairman Bucklin asked Mr. Rogers if there were public complaints pertaining to the Walgreen s drivethru or traffic in and out of the shopping center. Mr. Rogers said that Staff had received several anecdotal complaints as they do with many shopping centers throughout Glenview. These include vehicles making illegal turns across traffic or longer weekend traffic queues at the Willow/Pfingsten light. He said he would welcome public comment and concerns so they would have time to investigate them before the next meeting. Commissioner Witt noted that Mr. Proehl spoke of a plan to make the site a neighborhood shopping center. She asked if this included façade changes and different physical changes down the road. Mr. Proehl said physical improvements could be part of the changes beyond the Starbucks and parking lot improvements. They are in the process of replacing the roof and plan to make various aesthetic improvements that may include new monument signs. These improvements would aim to spark tenant demand to fill some of the vacancies. Commissioner Witt asked if they currently had specific plans other than building a Starbucks. Mr. Proehl said the Starbucks would provide them the necessary momentum to make additional improvements, but even without Starbucks, they plan to make landscaping improvements. Commissioner Witt asked if landscaping plans for parking lot islands extended beyond the Starbucks outlot to the larger parking lot. Mr. Proehl said they planned to add islands in the parking lot all the way up to Jimmy John s, Merry Richards, and Szechwan North and enlarge the existing impervious islands to include landscaping with trees. Commissioner Witt asked if the islands would be big enough to allow for trees. Mr. Proehl said, based on the opinion of the landscape architect they were working with, the parking lot islands could accommodate trees. Commissioner Witt confirmed with Mr. Proehl that they planned to redo the entire parking lot and agreed that this was a great improvement. Commissioner Witt asked about refuse pick up and deliveries. Mr. Proehl said they had a plan to coordinate refuse pick up and delivery times so that they do not create a nuisance for customers. Commissioner Witt referred to the traffic report from James J. Benes, Village of Glenview consultants, which indicated that the current parking situation seemed under control, but indicated a concern over the number of cars the applicant would actually be able to queue. She asked whether nine versus eleven cars in the queue would make a difference. Mr. Proehl said the discrepancy was due to different measurements. He and his team were using 19 feet, as opposed to the 22 or 23 feet Benes was using. Originally, Starbucks said they needed space for six cars 23

24 in the queue. He and his team increased it to eight, and, after working with Village Staff, they further increased it to nine or eleven, all beyond operational requirements. Commissioner Witt asked how long it took to serve a customer from order to pickup. Mr. Proehl said that he did not know how long it took, but based upon Starbucks operational requirement of a six-car queue, he felt that the planned nine or eleven spaces would be more than sufficient. Commissioner Witt asked if they would be willing to secure tenants who would not increase the traffic since, according to the Village, they are already under-parked. She asked Mr. Proehl to be aware of tenants who would bring in significant traffic. Mr. Proehl noted that they live and die by the success of these tenants. If the parking creates a burden on existing tenants or inhibits leasing to new tenants, it kills the owners of the shopping center as well as the shopping center itself. He emphasized that they are cognizant of the parking impacts on the health of the shopping center. Chairman Bucklin clarified that Benes was the Village traffic consultant. He asked Mr. Proehl if his traffic consultant communicated with Benes. Mr. Proehl said he believed the studies were conducted independently. Commissioner Bucklin asked what the current percentage of occupancy was. Mr. Proehl said the current percentage of occupancy at any time of day was 50%. Commissioner Bucklin asked what the current tenant occupancy was. Mr. Proehl said it was currently about 88%, with a 12% vacancy. Chairman Bucklin noted that he had not observed many cars in the lot, but had asked for the occupancy statistics to gain a sense of the potential impact of the Starbucks addition. Commissioner Igleski said actual parking lot use was important to him He noted there were a number of parking lots in the Village that seemed oversized. Willow Creek, for example, is a sea of asphalt, which could support additional outbuildings. His concern in the case of Glenbrook Marketplace is that the 38% variance in parking sets a dangerous precedent. Even though he has also observed the underused parking lot, he is hesitant to endorse a request to take out space for parking already well below the code requirement. The queuing, he felt, was adequate and speculated that customers would opt to park and go into the restaurant if the queue was as long as eleven cars. Mr. Proehl said if they were to gain approval for the Starbucks in the out-lot, they would require employees to park in the northeast parking lot behind the shopping center. They have also measured the potential increase in customer traffic among other tenants, as affected by Starbucks, and have found that the numbers do not exceed the proposed parking lot capacity. Commissioner Igleski cautioned that businesses of tenants and customer trends could change significantly enough to increase parking needs. He questioned the ability to manage significant changes in use over time. Mr. Proehl emphasized that they would consider the symbiotic uses among tenants. He said that it was important as owners to select the right tenants and reiterated that if the tenants suffer, they as owners suffer, too. 24

25 Commissioner Fallon said he was concerned about the queuing. He speculated that the long queue at the Wilmette Starbucks had something to do with Loyola, but said the proximity to the Glenbrook high schools could similarly cause long queues. He asked who would turn into the parking lot queue first if two people got there at the same time, one from Willow Road, and one from Pfingsten Road. He also asked if there was room to relocate the dumpster from the northwest corner of the building to around the corner along the drive-thru lane. Mr. Proehl said they had considered moving the dumpster along the drive-thru lane, but it would present a safety hazard for employees crossing the lane to dump garbage and would require the garbage truck to circulate through the Bank of America property. He agreed with Commissioner Fallon that there may be a better place for the dumpster than the front yard, but they had not determined that location. He then deferred to Mr. Peter Lemmon, their traffic consultant with Kimley-Horn, to address queuing issues. Mr. Lemmon said that stacking would function much like traffic at an intersection, whoever arrived first would go first. He said the striped area at the north end of the Starbucks parking lot would help prevent cars in the queue from blocking parked cars. Based on their traffic studies, Starbucks peak hours would be earlier than the hours of the other tenants. The Starbucks parking lot, within the larger parking lot could contain a long queue if necessary. Chairman Bucklin referred to concerns over the Dunkin Donuts queue extending into Willow Road. He noted the peak hours of 6 a.m. to 9 a.m., but said there were no huge backups onto Willow Road at that time or throughout the day. He emphasized that it was important that they understood the type of tenants in their shopping center. Commissioner Igleski said if at peak hours the Starbucks had 13 or 14 cars in the queue, the problem would be in the parking lot. He suggested they could queue in the Starbucks parking lot, but speculated that this problem would occur within a relatively short 15-minute window. Chairman Bucklin said the applicant s biggest challenge was in obtaining parking variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Zoning Board s approval or denial would determine the direction the Plan Commission would take. If the variances were denied, it would be necessary for the applicant to come up with another plan. Commissioner Igleski noted that the area between the bank and Walgreen s was typically vacant and asked if this location had been considered for Starbucks. Mr. Proehl said they had looked at the feasibility of different locations. The location between the bank and Walgreen s created potential problems with the bank s drive-thru, as well as with open access through drive aisles in the parking lot. Commissioner Igleski brought up this alternative because of the void in that area of the parking lot. Mr. Proehl said because of the requested variances, they would need to return to the Plan Commission if a new tenant challenged the parking lot conditions. He characterized a symbiotic relationship between his team and the Commission. Commissioner Burton said the parking remained his biggest concern and confirmed that the parking spaces had gone down from 288 to 257. Despite the loss of 31 spaces, he noted that the studies indicated there should be sufficient space if the tenants remained the same. He asked Mr. Rogers if new tenants would have to come before the Village for approval if they affected the parking. 25

26 Mr. Rogers said the Zoning Board of Appeals recommended a zoning variation with conditions that would allow for replacement of uses (current zoning). If there were substantial changes in the use, including changes in peak hours, it would be necessary to come back to the Village for approval. Commissioner Burton asked Mr. Rogers if there was an option to lease additional parking space across the street and if this would solve the problem of employee parking. Mr. Rogers said overflow parking is often considered as a solution, but was not currently an option in this case. Commissioner Burton said that the additional parking spaces in the back of the shopping center could be critical in alleviating some of the parking concerns. Mr. Proehl said the spaces in the back could be striped and designated for employees. Bank of America has also said they would be willing to share some of their unused parking spaces. Commissioner Burton confirmed with Mr. Proehl that the tenants did not have seasonal usage patterns. Chairman Bucklin asked for comments on the Starbucks building, even though the Appearance Commission would evaluate it in detail. Commissioner Igleski asked how this Starbucks ranked among others in size. Mr. Proehl said it was a prototypical size. Chairman Bucklin said that the building looks plain, like a box with two chimneys on it. The south and west elevations looked stark. He referred to the improved design of the bagel shop across Willow Road, all sides of which look like the front of the building. He suggested that they add character to the building. Mr. John Bradshaw, the architect with Camburas & Theodore, came forward. He said the criticism was valid for the south (Willow Road) elevation, but said the building was small and adding features, such as false windows, could make it look vacant, rather than enhance the appearance. Commissioner Igleski noted that the elevation renderings did not show the texture of the brick, which could heighten the aesthetic. However, he did not want to overstep the Appearance Commission s role. He did agree that there could be some enhancement to the south elevation. Mr. Bradshaw suggested a pilaster, but referred to it as a concession of the moment, not a thoughtful consideration. Commissioner Duff confirmed that there are trees along the south elevation, which could mitigate the stark appearance. Commissioner Duff asked how many employees would be working at one time at Starbucks and where they would park. Mr. Proehl said the employees would park in a space immediately to the north of the building by the crosshatched striping, or the northeast back lot. Commissioner Duff also said he was concerned about potential parking lot traffic conflicts with people coming into Starbucks from the north and the east. 26

27 Chairman Bucklin asked about lighting and security for the proposed employee parking behind the shopping center. Mr. Proehl said they have wall-mounted lighting in the back. If they designate employee parking in the back, they also plan to install peepholes on all the rear exit doors as a safety consideration. Chairman Bucklin thanked the applicant for his presentation. Public Hearing Chairman Bucklin opened the public hearing. Mr. Daniel Gottstein of 2725 Prince Street, Northbrook, spoke of his concerns as a neighbor backing up to Walgreen s. He is concerned about the heavy morning traffic from the Walgreen s drive-thru and the left-turn lane going east on Willow Road. The left-turn queue frequently backs up to the shopping center entrance. These conditions already make it difficult to exit left out of Glenbrook Marketplace onto Pfingsten Road. Mr. Gottstein noted frequent problems with garbage behind the stores that back up to his property and his neighbors. He said the space between the retail property fence and the private fences of Prince Street residents had become a garbage repository. The recycling container is not well maintained, often surrounded by litter. He said if the new owner diminishes the number of spots and more cars park in the back, there would be lights and noise from the cars. Although he patronizes the stores in the shopping center, he would like the owner to consider the impact on the Northbrook residents. Chairman Bucklin said that adequate maintenance of the shopping center, beyond the Starbucks plans, was critical and asked Mr. Proehl to comment on it. Mr. Proehl said Mr. Gottstein s concerns were valid. He would prevail upon property management and tenants to address the problems of garbage and noise and return to the Commission with an effective maintenance plan. Chairman Bucklin encouraged Mr. Gottstein to return to the next Plan Commission meeting to address these concerns and ensure that they are dealt with. Mr. Gottstein maintained his concerns over the reduction in the number of spots, particularly in snow, when parking spaces are obscured or eliminated by pile-up. Chairman Bucklin thanked him for his comments and again encouraged him to return to the Commission. Mr. Marc Gordon of 2715 Prince Street, Northbrook, said that he did not receive the April 5 th notification of the hearing until the 20 th, which gave him little time to review information. He said he had lived next door to the shopping center for twelve years and had fought with three owners. The problem came from employees who would congregate behind the buildings next to his property, make noise, and leave beer bottles. He shared pictures of the rubbish that had accumulated between the retail and private fences in a kind of demilitarized zone. Chairman Bucklin said the pictures would be entered into the record. He confirmed the location of the area between the fences on the north border with the Prince Street residents. Commissioner Fallon confirmed with Mr. Gordon that the demilitarized zone was the property of the shopping center owners. 27

28 Mr. Gordon said although the Village of Glenview employees periodically spoke to tenants regarding rubbish and noise whenever residents complained, the maintenance remained inconsistent. Rubbish in the demilitarized zone continued to accumulate. Mr. Gordon also said he was concerned about the parking. He questioned the adequacy of a 38.2% gap down to 257 spaces. He said that Northbrook, from what he gathered from a zoning official, does not consider parking variances with a gap greater than 25%. He said the Starbucks would be the third drivethru, after Walgreen s and the bank. Three drive-thru businesses would generate significant traffic flow within the parking lot, which he observed, contrary to recent studies, was frequently over 50% occupied with Szechuan, bank, Walgreen s, and gym patrons. Mr. Gordon noted that the parking stall widths would be reduced, a problem for SUVs. He asked how they could require employee parking in the back, especially in the winter. He said it was a long walk. He pointed out inconsistencies in the Staff Report that indicated the employee parking was both required and encouraged. Since the conditions between the shopping center and residents to the north did not work now, the addition of employees in the back would only add to the problems. He also noted dumpster lids did not close and allowed animals to get in. He asked the Commission to address these problems before any approvals of the project are issued. Chairman Bucklin said he expected to see a plan of action from Mr. Proehl. He said the 33 spots in the back were not marked and would need from Mr. Proehl a plan. He said the Plan Commission would require the plan of action to address the current problems as well as the Starbucks proposal. Commissioner Burton asked Mr. Gordon if he knew how wide the gap was between the fences. Mr. Gordon said the gap between the fences was about 12 feet and had utilities under it. Commissioner Burton confirmed with Mr. Gordon that it would not be desirable for the fences to abut. Chairman Bucklin asked Mr. Gordon if he wanted the space between the fences. Mr. Gordon said that when he moved into his house on Prince Street the space between the fences was landscaped, watered with grass. Although he noted how well maintained the area was at the time, he did not know how badly it would deteriorate. Chairman Bucklin thanked Mr. Gordon for his comments, which would be noted in the record. Ms. Annmarie Gesualdo of 2600 Quail Lane, Northbrook, said her concerns pertained to traffic and pedestrians. Although she favors a Starbucks presence, she is concerned about the traffic on Willow Road and the amount of traffic that the Starbucks will draw. She referred to the Walgreen s Pfingsten Road access as a nightmare. The two Walgreen s exits, the drive-thru and the parking lot, are a traffic problem. There are already many accidents at the Willow and Pfingsten intersection, as well as at the church to the east along Willow Road. She also noted her late mail receipt of the hearing notification, which did not allow her time to review the information. As a 30-year neighbor, she recalled Wirkus Nursery prior to Glenbrook Marketplace, the latter of which she compared to Plaza del Prado as a source of issues. She remains concerned with safety, pedestrians, and traffic management. She questioned whether she should go to another commission. Chairman Bucklin said that the good news for Ms. Gesualdo and her neighbors is that the Plan Commission would hear the case again on May 8 th unless there is a continuance. He said he did not know why she received the letter so late on Friday, since they generally go out in a timely matter. He advised her to check the website for updates. 28

29 In response to Ms. Gesualdo s concerns over the delayed receipt of the letter, Mr. Rogers said he would like to meet with her after the meeting to gather contact information and make sure that she got everything directly. He also wanted to look at the postmark of the notification. Chairman Bucklin said that the Village took such comments very seriously and reiterated that Mr. Rogers would meet with her after the meeting. Chairman Bucklin referred to residents concerns at a Milwaukee Avenue location just north of Lake Avenue. He said that residents added striping and a sign saying not to stop on the stripes at the entrance to their subdivision to prevent traffic from blocking it. He said it was largely successful and posited that it could work at Glenbrook Marketplace. Mr. Rogers said they would have to review this with the applicant s traffic consultant and the body that has jurisdiction over the road in question between now and the next meeting. Mr. Chang Suh of 2755 Prince Street, Northbrook, spoke of his concerns when Walgreen s drive-thru was added. Chairman Bucklin clarified that the current owner did not own the property when the Walgreen s drivethru was added. Mr. Suh said he complained to Walgreen s that headlights shone into his property and that he could see employees smoking in back from his property. Commissioner Igleski asked Mr. Suh if he wanted a taller fence behind Walgreen s. Chairman Bucklin said that Mr. Proehl would need to present a plan of action for clean up and to make sure the fence is in good shape. He cautioned that the Commission could not change the Walgreen s drive-thru, but they could help to make sure that the fences are in good shape. Mr. Rogers said he would speak with Mr. Suh after the meeting. Mr. Suh complained of smells from the dumpsters. Chairman Bucklin encouraged Mr. Suh to return to the May 8 th meeting, but said that Mr. Rogers was willing to meet with him to discuss his concerns in more detail. Mr. Rogers assured Mr. Suh that he would gather contact information and would like to meet with him and the other residents. Chairman Bucklin thanked Mr. Suh for his comments and said that Mr. Rogers would detail his discussion with Mr. Suh and share it at the May 8 th meeting. No one came up to speak, so Chairman Bucklin closed the public hearing. Discussion Chairman Bucklin asked Mr. Proehl to comment. Mr. Proehl said he wanted to acknowledge the residents along the north border of the shopping center. He said their concerns are entirely warranted. There is no excuse for poor property management. He said they would address the demilitarized zone and come up with a plan of action to be a good neighbor. 29

30 Chairman Bucklin said his consideration was reassuring. He said he liked the plan, but wanted to make sure it was successful and worked for the community. He wants to be partner in the success. Commissioner Igleski said he was concerned that the parking lot island at the row furthest to the north would go away since it provided a buffer. Mr. Proehl said they would address all of the issues raised by the Commissioners and public prior to the next meeting. Commissioner Fallon motioned to continue the case to May 8 th ; Commissioner Igleski seconded the motion. ABSTAIN: YEAS: NAYS: Commissioners Burton, Duff, Fallon, Igleski, and Witt None 30

31

32

33 Zoning Variation Standards 1. Briefly explain the extents of the improvement(s) currently proposed and itemize each zoning variation that is requested. The proposed improvements include development of an approximately 2,400 square-foot coffee shop with drive-through window on an outlot parcel located near the southeast corner of the site. Associated improvements include modifications to the eastern portion of the existing off-street parking lot in order to enhance onsite circulation and landscape the interior parking lot islands. The Applicant requests a variance from Section and a modification to Ordinance No previously entered to regulate parking at Glenbrook Marketplace. Glenbrook Marketplace currently provides 288 parking spaces. With the proposed improvements, a total of 257 spaces are proposed. Based on a review of existing weekday and Saturday parking conditions, the peak occupancy was approximately 46 percent of the overall parking supply. Therefore, the total proposed parking supply is expected to accommodate existing tenants, as well as the parking required for the proposed coffee shop and vacant tenant spaces. A copy of the Parking Summary for Glenbrook Marketplace, prepared by Kimley-Horn (dated March 21, 2018), is enclosed with the Final Site Plan Review Application. In addition to the parking variance request, the Applicant requests a variance from the Village's Wall Sign Design Guidelines to increase the logo sign from 24" high to the proposed 48" in height; and a variance from Section (e)10 to allow the parking lot islands to remain less than the Code-required 9 feet by 19 feet, consistent with existing conditions, after they are converted to landscaped islands. The proposed improvements and associated variance requests are intended to revitalize Glenbrook Marketplace center physically and functionally to create a premier neighborhood retail destination. In the continually evolving retail market, shopping centers must focus on thoughtful design and intentional programming in order to remain relevant and successful. The Applicant finds the proposed improvements will enhance Glenbrook Marketplace and meet the demands of today s consumers. 2. Explain how the enforcement of the applicable zoning requirement(s) for which relief is currently requested to the proposed conditions would create a hardship or practical difficulty. Examples of hardships or practical difficulties include the following: the subject property s physical surroundings including but not limited to proximity of proposed improvements to adjacent properties and improvements, compatibility of adjacent land uses, attempts to preserve existing mature/quality trees, etc.; an irregular lot shape, multiple lot frontages, topography, drainage patterns, etc.; potential impacts upon adjacent properties would be greater if development was pursued in accordance with the ordinance than the alternative requested; the history or chronology of the existing improvements upon the subject property; and/or other similar conditions which demonstrate a hardship or practical difficulty. PLEASE NOTE: The alleged hardship or practical difficulty should not originate from a personal need of the present user(s) or occupant(s) of the property, but should instead arise from the condition(s) of the property or improvements, or from the application of the ordinance requirements to the situation.

34 Parking Variance The parking requirements outlined in the Glenview Zoning Ordinance do not consider the shared parking benefits associated with a mix of land uses with varying peak parking demands. Further, the Zoning Ordinance does not consider the actual parking demand of the existing tenancy, but rather applies a universal standard based on the land use category. As demonstrated in the Parking Summary for Glenbrook Marketplace, prepared by Kimley-Horn (dated March 21, 2018), peak parking demand for the existing tenancy is 133 spaces or 46 percent of the existing supply. The peak parking demand clearly demonstrates a disconnect between actual parking conditions and the Code-required parking of 394 spaces for the existing tenancy. To the extent possible, the Applicant is working to enhance the existing parking supply and comply with Ordinance No However, in light of the continually evolving retail market, demand for traditional retail tenant spaces is limited. Accordingly, Glenbrook Marketplace continues to experience demand for specialty schools, services such as dry cleaners and dentistry offices, and small restaurant uses that predominantly provide carry-out/delivery food services. The proposed outlot development reflects market demand for a coffee shop with drive-through window located on a prominent corner with convenient access to Willow Road and Pfingsten Road. Based on a review of current tenant operations, the mix of uses and respective peak hours of operation support the existing shared parking provided for Glenbrook Marketplace. For example, classes at the specialty schools are staggered and largely occur during periods when retail and service tenants such as MB Financial, Merry Richards Jewelers, and Glenbrook Family Dental are closed. Furthermore, two of the existing restaurant tenants estimate a significant percentage of sales is carry-out/delivery. JD Brew Pub estimates approximately 50 percent of all sales is carryout/delivery and Szechwan North estimates approximately 75 percent of all sales. The proposed coffee shop with drive-through window is expected to generate demand throughout typical hours of operation, from 5:00AM to 9:00PM. The peak period of demand during the morning commute period would occur when many of the retail tenants are closed. Strict enforcement of the parking requirements would result in a hardship as it would significantly impair the Applicant s ability to complete the improvements necessary to provide a relevant and attractive neighborhood retail center. This would not only negatively impact the Applicant, but also the existing tenants who support the proposed improvements as they are expected to draw new internally captured customers and future tenancy interest in Glenbrook Marketplace. Furthermore, strict enforcement of the parking requirements would necessitate termination of existing leases as the shopping center does not currently comply with the Code requirements. Moving forward the Applicant will continue to work to enhance efficient use of the existing parking supply and only explore future tenants with peak parking demand which is compatible with the Glenbrook Marketplace parking characteristics. The Applicant is also committed to working with existing tenants to direct employees to park in the rear of the center in effort to increase availability of the spaces in front of the buildings. Wall Sign Design Guidelines Variance In addition to the parking variance request, the Applicant requests a variance from the Village's Wall Sign Design Guidelines to increase the logo sign from 24" high to the proposed 48" in height. The Guidelines-prescribed 2-0 high logo sign would be disproportionately small when compared to the overall sign face presented in the elevations. The proposed 4-0 high logo sign still allows for plenty of negative space around it and retains a very balanced design on the building.

35 Parking Lot Landscaping Design Guidelines Variance The proposed interior parking lot landscaping requires a variance from Section (e)10 to allow the parking lot islands to remain less than the Code-required 9 feet by 19 feet, consistent with existing conditions, after they are converted to landscaped islands. The Code requirements do not address the proposed retrofit of existing conditions. Strict enforcement of the parking island dimensions would result in a reduction to the overall parking supply and would impair the Applicant s ability to improve the overall aesthetics of the parking lot. The parking stall dimensions are an existing condition; the proposed improvements would convert the existing concrete medians to landscaped islands. This improvement will enhance the aesthetics of Glenbrook Marketplace and is intended to provide the Code-required interior parking lot landscaping with limited negative impact to the overall parking supply and internal circulation. 3. Explain how the existing conditions and factors creating the need for relief from the zoning ordinance are unique. The evidence provided should identify how the factors identified are unusual due to unique site conditions or circumstances, and demonstrate how these site conditions or circumstances would not be generally applicable to other lots subject to the same zoning regulations. Parking Variance The unique conditions of the subject property relate to the tenancy mix and the shared parking characteristics observed onsite. It is unlikely that similar neighborhood shopping centers in the B- 2 District have both the varied tenant mix and the empirical parking demand documented in the Parking Summary for Glenbrook Marketplace, prepared by Kimley-Horn (dated March 21, 2018). In this case, the requested zoning variance reflects the unique nature of the mix of uses, respective peak hours of operation, and successful shared parking conditions. Wall Sign Design Guidelines Variance The variance from the Village's Wall Sign Design Guidelines to increase the logo sign from a height of 24" to the proposed 48" is a reflection of the scale and design of the proposed building. Strict enforcement of the prescribed 2-0 high logo sign would be disproportionately small when compared to the overall sign face presented in the elevations. The proposed elevations are unique to the subject development and are not generally applicable to all developments in the B-2 District. Parking Lot Landscaping Design Guidelines Variance A variance to the interior parking lot landscaping is requested in order to address the unique existing conditions onsite. With the proposed improvements, the Applicant seeks to maintain the existing parking lot island dimensions in order to maximize the parking supply and provide efficient onsite circulation. Strict enforcement of the 9 x 19 parking lot island dimension would result in further reduction to the overall parking supply, thereby limiting the Applicant s ability to move forward with the planned parking lot improvements, including the proposed landscaping. 4. Identify the characteristics of your plan which demonstrate how the granting of your requested variation(s) would not create impacts upon adjacent property owners or other properties in the vicinity. Your response should address any potential impacts on each of the following criteria: the supply of light and air to neighboring properties; traffic and congestion on nearby public streets; public safety, such as increased risk of fire or other potential hazards; neighboring property values; and the future development and enjoyment of neighboring properties.

36 If warranted in response to any potential impacts, describe any design solutions that will be implemented or other efforts you plan to undertake to mitigate or eliminate potential negative impacts stemming from the granting of your requested variation(s). The requested variances will not negatively impact the supply of adequate light or air the adjacent properties. The proposed development is not expected to materially impact existing or future traffic conditions as documented in the Traffic Impact Study prepared by Kimley-Horn (dated December 2017), a copy of which is included with this Final Site Plan Review Application. The proposed outlot development is expected to provide a desirable use with convenient access from Willow Road and Pfingsten Road. The planned improvements would enhance Glenbrook Marketplace, thereby creating a more vibrant neighborhood shopping center which is expected to benefit both existing tenants and the community. 5. Describe available alternatives you considered to the variation(s) you have requested, and explain why each alternative is not considered viable. Your response must identify why the plan selected is the only viable option. The proposed outlot development is the only viable option to provide the scale of activation needed to transform Glenbrook Marketplace into a vibrant neighborhood shopping center, thereby enhancing activity for existing tenants and creating a destination for the community. The Applicant has considered other alternatives and site plan layouts however the proposed plan provides the most efficient circulation and highest parking count. The Applicant is limited to leasing the in-line commercial tenant spaces to more traditional (read non-destination coffee) retail users which is also limited by market demand. With today s changing retail market, shopping centers and communities must explore opportunities and consider flexibility in order to respond to market conditions and identify compatible and commercial uses that carry high consumer demand such as the proposed coffee shop. The proposed coffee shop requires an outlot with a drive-through window. The proposed development provides the visibility and access necessary to support the proposed use. Strict enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance limits the Applicant s ability to add relevant tenants, resulting in existing vacancies and the potential for future vacancies. Vacant tenant spaces negatively impact the Applicant and existing tenants who would otherwise benefit from the opportunity to internally capture new customers visiting other uses in Glenbrook Marketplace. 6. Economic impacts can be considered by the Zoning Board of Appeals, however economic impacts alone do not provide sufficient grounds for approval or denial of any variation request. Explain what, if any, economic impact you would incur if the requested variation(s) were to be denied. Strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would impose undue restriction to Glenview Marketplace. As evident in the Parking Summary for Glenview Marketplace, prepared by Kimley- Horn (dated March 21, 2018), the existing parking supply is underutilized. In this case, the Village's parking requirements would significantly impair the Applicant's ability to lease existing and future vacant tenant spaces and provide an appropriate tenant mix which reflects market/community demand, resulting in a negative economic impact to existing tenants, the community, and the Applicant. The overall impact of denying the variances requested to support the proposed outlot development is significant. It eliminates the potential for the Applicant to attract a new active user to Glenbrook Marketplace. This decision threatens the sustainability of the existing tenants who would otherwise benefit from a vibrant shopping center but also the potential for internal capture of customers.

37 Current tenants regularly ask about prospects for the existing vacancies, hoping for additional activity within the center. The proposed coffee shop is an active use which is expected to benefit all tenants within Glenbrook Marketplace. Approval of the proposed development and the associated variances is expected to positively impact the leasing viability of Glenbrook Marketplace, thereby keeping it vibrant, relevant, updated, and well-maintained.

38 Proposed Starbucks at Glenview Marketplace Parking, Circulation and Stacking Narrative As part of our proposal for the Starbucks outlot development, we have keyed in on the potential issues pointed out to us by Village Staff that relate to the functional impact on the overall Glenbrook Marketplace resulting from the addition of said outlot. The following provides a qualitative breakdown of how the addition of Starbucks functions with both existing and future retail uses. In addition, the programmatic design and development plan allows for the positive addition of the outlot while mitigating concerns surrounding parking, circulation and stacking. Parking We are asking for a reduction to the overall parking supply but believe this does not create a burden as our parking study (submitted with our application) proves that actual peak occupancy of 133 spaces or less than a 50% utilization. Furthermore, Starbucks draws primarily morning customer traffic while the majority of the center does not draw customer traffic until midday. For example, Starbucks peak hours of operation are estimated to be from 6:00 am to 10:00 am. During this time, the only Tenants that are open for business at Glenbrook Marketplace are as follows: Walgreens opens at 7:00 am but does not start to experience significant customer traffic until 10:00 am Merry Richards opens at 10:00 am but has no real peak hours Eco Gym is open 24 hours a day but only experiences significant customer traffic from 8:00-9:00 am La Taquiza opens at 10:00 am but does not start to experience significant customer traffic until 11:00 am Glenbrook cleaners opens at 7:00 am but is a drop/off and pick up use Core Power Yoga is open at 6:00 am but but does not start to experience significant customer traffic until the evenings 18/8 opens at 10:00am but has no real peak hours Lemon Nails opens at 9:00 am but has no real peak hours Glenbrook dentist is open 5 days a week at 9:00 am, is closed Sunday and closes at 1:00 pm Saturday and has no real peak hours MB Financial opens at 8:30 am but has no real peak hours Bank of America opens at 9:00 am but has no real peak hours With this in mind and knowing that most of these businesses do not share their peak hours with Starbucks, under a highly unlikely and worst case scenario, even if all of these businesses were operating at maximum capacity and the entire parking load they require per code is utilized, these Tenants would only require 236 parking spots. If Starbucks during this same window also requires their maximum parking per code at 20 additional spots, this still yields only 256 spots out of the 257 we propose to have. Utilizing the data exhibited in the parking study which showed the peak occupancy of 133 parking stalls and adding Starbucks maximum occupancy of an additional 20 stalls, we reach a peak occupancy of 177 stalls out of our proposed 257. In conclusion, the parking supply will more than accommodate all existing tenants, while still providing ample parking for Starbucks and significant coverage for the vacant tenant spaces.

39 It should also be noted that during the non-peak hours for Starbucks (which begins at midday and continues until the close of business) the current parking requirement for JD s Q and Brew and Szechwan North does not accurately reflect their actual business needs. As outlined in our parking study, JD s has indicated that 50% of their total gross sales comes from delivery or carry out orders while Szechwan North has indicated for them this number is 75%. The requirement per code for these two businesses is a combined 77 spaces. If we reduce the number of seats by 50% and 75% respectively to reflect those seats actually being used in the restaurants, the result is a need for only a combined 29 parking spots (total reduction in need of 48 spots). Circulation and Stacking We are aware that the Village has investigated the Starbucks at 3520 Lake Ave in Wilmette and the problems that drive-through creates. We would like to highlight that at the Lake location, if the drivethrough exceeds its maximum capacity, the cars back up through the drive aisles and onto a major thoroughfare. This queuing blocks cars from exiting parking stalls, forces heavy vehicular movements across the pedestrian access points and is further congested by one way directional traffic flows. These issues compound on one another and exacerbate an ordinarily normal circumstance. At Glenbrook Marketplace, due to the way we have designed the site and drive-through, and the sheer size of the existing parking lot, none of the issues that occur at the Lake Avenue location will occur at Glenbrook Marketplace. Vehicular and pedestrian traffic is provided optionality for making movements to navigate in and out of the center and to parking stalls through multiple points of ingress and egress, multiple drive aisles and multiple parking aisles. At no point will this optionality be reduced by the addition of Starbucks and its drive-through traffic, thus leaving the circulation undisturbed. The drive-through lane specifically effectively eliminates vehicular conflicts within the parking lot. A single ingress is provided with onsite wayfinding signage to direct vehicles to the drive-through lane. The egress provides separation from Willow Road and is designed to facilitate outbound left- and right-turn movements. Additionally, the drive-through lane provides dedicated stacking for 11 vehicles (5 stacking spaces between the ingress and the order board; 6 stacking spaces between the order board and the pick-up window) which is nearly double that of the 6 vehicles Starbucks operationally requires. If the drive-through was to experience the unlikely event that more than 11 vehicles stack, it is important to note that the spillover would move into a two-way parking aisle leaving movements through this aisle slowed but far from obstructed. Furthermore this is where our optionality with multiple points of access for the rest of the center would render this a non-issue. Conclusion We believe the scenarios listed above depict the actual conditions that would occur with the addition of the Starbucks outlot. These potential issues have been deliberated and discussed extensively for almost an entire year by the development team, Village staff and the proposed tenant. The solutions and planning represent a development plan that will function today and in the long term. We are prepared to discuss and demonstrate these solutions at deeper length during the public process.

40 Proposed Starbucks at Glenview Marketplace Executive Summary Purpose NP Glenbrook, LLC, as applicant and petitioner, proposes to develop one (1) new commercial outlot at the existing Glenview Marketplace, located on the northeast quadrant of Willow Road and Pfingsten Road with a common street address of Pfingsten Road (PIN ). The outlot would be located along the Willow Road frontage, near the southeast corner of the site. The placement of the building is strategic in that it continues the natural flow of the shopping center spaces (ending at MB Financial), which creates a better programmed and more intuitive shopping experience. Entitlement Request The petitioner requests approval of a conditional use to allow a dine-in and carry-out food and beverage establishment with a drive-through window offering service to patrons in vehicles, a B-3 General Service District Use in a B-2 General Business District. In addition, a commercial zoning variation of the Glenview Zoning Ordinance is requested for the following: Vision 1. A variation to allow current and proposed land uses in various combinations within the Glenbrook Shopping Center to operate with a total of 257 parking stalls which per our parking study and findings is more than adequate to functionally support the center. 2. A variation from the Village s Wall Sign Design Guidelines. The suggested maximum for a logo sign (in our case, the siren ) is 24 high while the logo sign that we propose is 48 high. We found that the Guideline prescribed 2-0 high logo sign was disproportionately small when compared to the overall sign face presented in our elevations and that the 4-0 high logo sign was a much better fit for both elevations. The larger logo sign still allows for plenty of negative space around it and retains a very balanced design on the building. 3. A variation to allow the parking islands, after they are converted to landscaped islands and modified, to remain the same size that they are today rather than the required 9 feet by 19 feet sizing required per code. This will preserve parking spaces as well as maintain uniformity with the parking islands that are not being modified at the center. In April of 2017, NP Glenbrook, LLC purchased Glenbrook Marketplace with the intent of revitalizing the neighborhood center physically and functionally to create a premier neighborhood retail destination for the residents, workers and visitors of the surrounding communities. The retail environment nationwide is changing; retailers are downsizing, reducing their number of brick and motor locations and in some instances exiting markets altogether. We believe the end result of this shift in the retail world will hurt many shopping centers but also allow the best designed and programmed sites to flourish and experience increased customer traffic and tenant interest. Glenbrook Marketplace, with the right vision and execution going forward can become one of these flourishing centers and curating a tenant roster and shopping experience that meets the demands of today s consumer is our paramount endeavor. In conjunction with this request to develop a free-standing Starbucks at Glenbrook Marketplace, we are also planning to undertake several capital improvement projects in order to better the conditions and aesthetics of the center while employing an aggressive leasing strategy for the vacant spaces and existing tenant renewals.

41 Lastly, this proposed outlot will get Starbucks their prototypical free standing drive-through and cements their long-term commitment to this intersection. Holistically, due to their popularity and business model, Starbucks specifically will anchor consumer demand and change the trajectory and viability of this asset as a shopping destination. They are a linchpin component in helping us accomplish our overall vision for the near-term future of Glenbrook Marketplace and will continue to be beneficial to the community for years to come. Existing Conditions The subject property is currently zoned B-2 General Business District. Glenbrook Marketplace consists of approximately 45,900 square feet of in-line commercial space, including retail, restaurant, and service uses. Three existing vacant tenant spaces are also included in the total in-line square footage. In addition, an approximately 15,167 square-foot standalone pharmacy with drive-through window (Walgreens) is located near the northwest corner of the site and an approximately 5,400 square-foot bank with drive-through (Bank of America) is located at the southwest corner of the site (not owned by NP Glenbrook, LLC). An existing tenant roster is provided as Attachment 1. Shared parking and cross-access is currently in place across Glenbrook Marketplace. A total of 288 parking spaces are currently provided and collectively serve as shared parking supply for all uses within Glenbrook Marketplace. Access is provided via two driveways to Pfingsten Road and a single driveway to Willow Road. As part of the redevelopment, site access, cross-access, and shared parking would be maintained with Bank of America (who is aware of and on board with the outlot development) for the overall Glenbrook Marketplace. Proposed Development The proposed outlot development would be an approximately 2,400 square-foot Starbucks. It would feature indoor and outdoor dining areas as well as a drive-through window. Typical hours of operation are from 5:00AM-9:00PM; drive-through window service would be provided throughout the normal business hours. The proposed site design provides visibility from Willow Road, minimizes impacts to onsite parking, maximizes vehicle stacking for the drive-through window, and supports onsite vehicular and pedestrian circulation. Key characteristics of the site development plan are summarized below: Detention will be provided immediately south of the proposed Starbucks outlot via modifications to the existing pond. Detention/water quality will be provided in accordance with the Village of Glenview and Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) requirements. A conceptual engineering plan has been included with the Final Site Plan Review Application. Vehicular access to the site is provided via the existing driveways to Willow Road and Pfingsten Road. The existing onsite circulation is maintained. Onsite wayfinding signage would be provided for the drive-through window access. The drive-through window exit provides separation from the Willow Road site access driveway and is designed to facilitate outbound left- and right-turn movements. The drive-through window is designed to provide dedicated stacking for eleven (11) vehicles. This is nearly double that of the six (6) vehicle stacking spaces typically required by Starbucks. The breakdown is five (5) vehicles from the ingress to the order point and six (6) from the order point to the window. Pedestrian connectivity will be provided between the public sidewalk and the proposed Starbucks development; sidewalk is proposed along the north, east, and west sides of the building. Pedestrian crossing enhancements, including pavement markings and signage, are provided at the drive-through window exit in order to support pedestrian access to the site. The trash enclosure has been located so as to minimize visibility from Willow Road, limit pedestrian travel distance from the Starbucks building, and accommodate truck access. The trash enclosure will

42 be fully screened on all four sides with a roof over top and designed with the same materials as the building. Trash removal service will be provided by a third party; the applicant will coordinate trash pick-up service during off-peak hours in order to minimize conflicts with employee and customer traffic. Four-sided architecture and quality building materials are depicted on the building elevations included with the Final Site Plan Review Application. To accommodate the outlot development, we worked extensively with both our engineer and Starbucks to lay out the development in such a way that only 10% of the parking spaces would need to be removed from the overall Glenbrook Marketplace parking supply. As part of the outlot development, parking would be provided along the north side of the building in order to facilitate convenient customer access. In addition, the area in front of the existing in-line commercial space would be restriped. With the proposed modifications, an overall total parking supply of 257 would be provided, resulting in a net reduction of 31 parking spaces for Glenbrook Marketplace. In order to verify that this minor reduction was functionally feasible, we commissioned parking and traffic studies for the center which returned favorable results as summarized below: Based on a review of existing weekday and Saturday parking conditions, the mix of uses and respective peak hours of operation not only supports the existing shared parking provided for Glenbrook Marketplace, the peak occupancy is approximately only 46 percent of the overall parking supply. Therefore, the total proposed parking supply of 257 spaces is expected to accommodate existing parking conditions, as well as the parking required for the proposed coffee shop and tenanting the vacant spaces. Regardless, modifications to the parking variance previously granted for Glenbrook Marketplace would be required to reflect the proposed land use composition and parking supply. A summary of the proposed land use and parking composition is provided in the parking study included with the Final Site Plan Review Application. Lastly, we plan to require all tenant employees to use the parking in the rear of the center to free up as many spaces as possible in the main field. Additionally, to enhance the safety of the employees, we will retrofit each rear door with a 180-degree peephole so they have full visibility of the conditions that exist when exiting the premises to their vehicles. Northpond Partners Overview Northpond partners is a Chicagoland based retail real estate investor and operator. The Principals have a collective 30 years of experience and have led the operation and/or development of over 40 retail properties encompassing almost $375MM in value.

43 MEMORANDUM To: From: Samuel Ankin, NP Glenbrook, LLC Rory Fancler, AICP, PTP Kimley-Horn Tim Sjogren, P.E., PTOE Kimley-Horn Date: March 30, 2018 RE: Parking Summary for Glenbrook Marketplace Glenview, Illinois Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Kimley-Horn) was retained by NP Glenbrook, LLC to perform a parking analysis for Glenbrook Marketplace, located on the northeast quadrant of Willow Road and Pfingsten Road in Glenview, Illinois. The parking analysis was completed in order to evaluate existing parking occupancy and assess future parking conditions with the addition of the proposed outlot development. Executive Summary Glenbrook Marketplace currently provides a total of 288 parking spaces, a 106-space variance from Code-required parking, approved through Ordinance No Although the site currently provides 106 spaces below the Code requirement, empirical data reveals less than 50 percent of the reduced parking supply is occupied during the peak period. This occupancy is attributable to the mix of uses, respective peak hours, and the operational characteristics of some tenants. Specifically, two of the existing restaurant tenants experience limited use of the dining areas and a significant percentage of sales are carry-out or delivery. For these uses, the Code-required parking is based on seating capacity, which overestimates parking needed to support operations. With the proposed outlot development and full occupancy of the in-line commercial space, Glenbrook Marketplace is expected to provide adequate parking to accommodate the overall development. The proposed outlot development is complementary to the existing tenant mix. A number of the existing tenants are closed during the peak morning and evening commute periods (e.g., MB Financial, Merry Richards Jewelers). While modifications to the parking variance previously granted for Glenbrook Marketplace would be required to reflect the proposed land use composition and parking supply, the analysis that follows suggests that approximately 80 parking spaces would be available to accommodate the proposed outlot development during periods of peak demand. Therefore, the proposed 257-space parking supply is expected to accommodate the proposed outlot development and full occupancy of Glenbrook Marketplace. kimley-horn.com 1001 Warrenville Road, Suite 350, Lisle, IL

44 PFINGSTEN ROAD N GLENBROOK MARKETPLACE PROPOSED OUTLOT WILLOW ROAD EXHIBIT 1 LOCATION MAP

45 Page 3 Existing and Proposed Site Development Glenbrook Marketplace consists of approximately 45,900 square feet of in-line commercial space, including retail, restaurant, and service uses. Three existing vacant tenant spaces are also included in the total in-line square footage. In addition, an approximately 15,200 square-foot standalone pharmacy with drive-through window is located near the northwest corner of the site and an approximately 5,400 square-foot bank with drive-through is located at the southwest corner of the site. Shared parking and cross-access is currently in place across Glenbrook Marketplace. A total of 288 parking spaces are currently provided and collectively serve as shared parking supply for all uses within Glenbrook Marketplace. NP Glenbrook, LLC proposes to develop an outlot parcel which would provide an approximately 2,400 square-foot coffee shop with drive-through window. As part of the outlot development, parking would be provided along the north side of the building in order to facilitate convenient customer access. In addition, the area in front of the existing in-line commercial space would be restriped and landscaped islands would be installed at the ends of each parking row. In addition, one new parking stall would be striped near the northeast corner of the site. With the proposed modifications, an overall total parking supply of 257 spaces would be provided, resulting in a net reduction of 31 parking spaces for Glenbrook Marketplace. An aerial view of the study location is presented in Exhibit 1. Pursuant to Village of Glenview Ordinance No. 6017, Glenbrook Marketplace was granted zoning variations to allow the tenant and parking composition summarized in Table 1. Table 1. Village of Glenview Ordinance No Land Use Quantity Parking Ratio Total Required Retail/Services/Offices/Banks Up to 38,937 sq. ft. 1 space / 300 sq. ft. 130 Restaurants Up to 283 seats 1 space / 3 seats 94 Fitness Center Up to 8,040 sq. ft. 7 spaces / 1,000 sq. ft. 57 Specialty Schools Up to 114 students & 1 space / student instructors 1 space / instructor 114 Total Required Parking 395 spaces Total Approved Parking Existing 288 spaces -107 spaces Since approval of Ordinance No. 6017, Glenbrook Marketplace has experienced changes to the tenant composition. Table 2 provides a summary of the parking required for the existing tenant mix per Section (b) of the Glenview Municipal Code. For purposes of this analysis, the existing vacant tenant spaces were assumed as retail, office, or service uses. As shown, a total of 392 spaces are required by Code for the existing Glenbrook Marketplace tenant roster. The proposed outlot development would increase the Code-required parking for the overall Glenbrook Marketplace by 20 spaces (total of 412 spaces). As previously noted, with the proposed outlot development and associated parking lot modifications, the overall Glenbrook Marketplace would provide a total of 257 spaces, which is less than required by Code. Accordingly, modifications to the parking variance granted through Ordinance No would be required. kimley-horn.com 1001 Warrenville Road, Suite 350, Lisle, IL

46 Table 2. Updated Parking Requirements Suite Tenant Square Footage Restaurant Seating Max. Class Code Required Parking Size + Instructors Ratio Stalls Subtotal Restaurants 11,415 sq. ft (46 5 ) Fitness Center 10 EcoGy m 7,700 sq. ft. 7 / 1,000 sq. ft. 54 Fitness Center 1,000 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 3 Office Subtotal Fitness Center 8,700 sq. ft. 57 Required Spaces 392 Ex isting Total 65,975 sq. ft. Parking Supply 288 (Variance Allow ed under Ordinance 6017) -104 Outlot Proposed Coffee Shop 2,400 sq. ft / 3 seats 20 Restaurant Required Parking 412 Proposed Total 68,375 sq. ft. Parking Supply 257 Land Use Retail / Commercial 19 MB Financial 2,700 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 9 Serv ice 18 Glenbrook Dentist 1,600 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 5 Office 16 Lemon Nail Salon 1,600 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 5 Serv ice 15 18/8 Fine Men s Salon 1,600 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 5 Serv ice 13 Glenbrook Cleaners 1,600 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 5 Serv ice 6 Merry Richards Jew eler 1,700 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 6 Retail 1 Walgreens 15,167 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 51 Retail Outlot Bank of America 5,400 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 18 Serv ice Page 4 10A Vacant 3,446 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 11 Retail/Serv ice/office 2 11 Vacant 1,997 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 7 Retail/Serv ice/office 2 14A Vacant 2,487 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 8 Retail/Serv ice/office 2 Subtotal Retail / Commercial 38,710 sq. ft. 130 Specialty Schools 17 Kumon Math & Reading 1,600 sq. ft / student 1 / instructor 16 Specialty School 14 CorePow er Yoga 1 3,928 sq. ft / student 1 / instructor 68 Specialty School 7 Top Driv er 1,050 sq. ft / student 1 / instructor 26 Specialty School Subtotal Specialty Schools 7,150 sq. ft Restaurants 12 La Taquiza 1,889 sq. ft / 3 seats 12 Restaurant 9 JD Brew Pub 4,000 sq. ft. 110 (55 5 ) 1 / 3 seats 37 (18 5 ) Restaurant 8 Szechw an North 3,826 sq. ft. 120 (30 5 ) 1 / 3 seats 40 (10 5 ) Restaurant 5 Jimmy Johns 1,700 sq. ft / 3 seats 6 Restaurant -155 Notes: 1 Consistent with Ordinance No. 6017, CorePow er Yoga is considered a Specialty School. 2 Parking ratio for retail/serv ices/offices/banks assumed for v acant tenant spaces. 3 Reflects max imum occupancy. 4 Includes three (3) Top Driv er student training v ehicles. 5 Conserv ative estimate of actual parking required for this tenant. According to JD Brew Pub, approx imately 50 percent of all sales is carry -out / deliv ery; use of 50% of seating area w ould result in adjusted parking of 18 spaces. According to Szechw an North, approximately 75 percent of all sales is carry -out / deliv ery; use of 25% of seating area would result in adjusted parking of 10 spaces. kimley-horn.com 1001 Warrenville Road, Suite 350, Lisle, IL

47 Page 5 Adjusted Parking Requirements Per Actual Use Pursuant to the Glenview Municipal Code, parking requirements are based on the following: Retail/Commercial Uses: Gross floor area (excluding floor space devoted to mechanical or electrical equipment, or storage purposes) Specialty Schools: Maximum students + instructors Restaurants: Seating capacity The Code requires parking for each individual use and does not facilitate shared parking for complementary peak hours. Furthermore, the Code does not consider unique operational characteristics. As noted in Table 2, two of the existing restaurant tenants experience limited use of the dining areas and a significant percentage of sales are carry-out or delivery. As such, the use of maximum seating capacity to estimate Code-required parking is considered conservative. In addition, one of the specialty schools does not hold classes with the maximum occupancy, but rather has established class size limits which are less than the posted occupancy. In order to account for these unique operational characteristics, a summary of the adjusted parking requirements is shown in Table 3. As shown, when the known unique operational characteristics are considered the total adjusted parking requirement is 321 spaces. With the addition of the proposed outlot development, the total adjusted parking requirement is 341 spaces. While modifications to the parking variance previously granted for Glenbrook Marketplace would be required under this scenario, the adjusted parking requirements presented in Table 3 reflect the conservative nature of the Code requirements. It should be noted that the adjusted parking requirements do not account for the respective peak hours for each use and the ability to use shared parking to accommodate parking demand for Glenbrook Marketplace. kimley-horn.com 1001 Warrenville Road, Suite 350, Lisle, IL

48 Table 3. Adjusted Parking Requirements Suite Tenant Square Footage Restaurant Seating Max. Class Code Required Parking Size + Instructors Ratio Stalls Subtotal Restaurants 11,415 sq. ft Fitness Center 10 EcoGy m 7,700 sq. ft. 7 / 1,000 sq. ft. 54 Fitness Center 1,000 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 3 Office Subtotal Fitness Center 8,700 sq. ft. 57 Required Spaces 321 Ex isting Total 65,975 sq. ft. Parking Supply 288 (Variance Allow ed under Ordinance 6017) -33 Land Use Retail / Commercial 19 MB Financial 2,700 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 9 Serv ice 18 Glenbrook Dentist 1,600 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 5 Office 16 Lemon Nail Salon 1,600 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 5 Serv ice 15 18/8 Fine Men s Salon 1,600 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 5 Serv ice 13 Glenbrook Cleaners 1,600 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 5 Serv ice 6 Merry Richards Jew eler 1,700 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 6 Retail 1 Walgreens 15,167 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 51 Retail Outlot Bank of America 5,400 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 18 Serv ice Outlot Proposed Coffee Shop 2,400 sq. ft / 3 seats 20 Restaurant Page 6 10A Vacant 3,446 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 11 Retail/Serv ice/office 2 11 Vacant 1,997 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 7 Retail/Serv ice/office 2 14A Vacant 2,487 sq. ft. 1 / 300 sq. ft. 8 Retail/Serv ice/office 2 Subtotal Retail / Commercial 38,710 sq. ft. 130 Specialty Schools 17 Kumon Math & Reading 1,600 sq. ft / student 1 / instructor 16 Specialty School 14 CorePow er Yoga 1 3,928 sq. ft Top Driv er 1,050 sq. ft / student 1 / instructor 1 / student 1 / instructor 46 Specialty School 26 Specialty School Subtotal Specialty Schools 7,150 sq. ft Restaurants 12 La Taquiza 1,889 sq. ft / 3 seats 12 Restaurant Notes: 9 JD Brew Pub 4,000 sq. ft / 3 seats 18 5 Restaurant 8 Szechw an North 3,826 sq. ft / 3 seats 10 5 Restaurant 5 Jimmy Johns 1,700 sq. ft / 3 seats 6 Restaurant Proposed Total 68,375 sq. ft. Required Parking 341 Parking Supply Additional Variance Requested 31 1 Consistent with Ordinance No. 6017, CorePow er Yoga is considered a Specialty School. 2 Parking ratio for retail/serv ices/offices/banks assumed for v acant tenant spaces. 3 Based on actual use of CorePow er Yoga, there are tw o studios w hich hold 24 and 20 students, respectively. One instructor is prov ided for each studio, resulting in a max imum class size (students + instructors) of Includes three (3) Top Driv er student training v ehicles. 5 Conserv ative estimate of actual parking required for this tenant. According to JD Brew Pub, approximately 50 percent of all sales is carry -out / deliv ery; use of 50% of seating area w ould result in adjusted parking of 18 spaces. According to Szechw an North, approx imately 75 percent of all sales is carry -out / deliv ery; use of 25% of seating area would result in adjusted parking of 10 spaces. kimley-horn.com 1001 Warrenville Road, Suite 350, Lisle, IL

49 Existing Parking Occupancy Page 7 In order to measure parking occupancy for the existing uses at Glenbrook Marketplace, Kimley-Horn conducted hourly parking counts during a typical weekday and Saturday as follows: Thursday, October 5, 2017, from 7:00AM-7:00PM Saturday, October 28, 2017, from 7:00AM-7:00PM During the study periods identified above, the existing parking supply was verified and the number of parked vehicles were documented. Other observations regarding curbside and delivery truck loading activity were noted. Table 4 summarizes the observed parking occupancy for Glenbrook Marketplace. During the weekday, the peak occurred at 12:00PM with approximately 133 occupied spaces (46 percent). On Saturday, the peak also occurred at 12:00PM with approximately 87 occupied spaces (30 percent). Table 4. Observed Parking Occupancy Time of Day Thursday, October 5, 2017 Saturday, October 28, 2017 Occupied Spaces Percent Occupied Occupied Spaces Percent Occupied 7:00AM 26 9% 20 7% 8:00AM 28 10% 22 8% 9:00AM 52 18% 44 15% 10:00AM 65 23% 67 23% 11:00AM 84 29% 84 29% 12:00PM % 87 30% 1:00PM % 86 30% 2:00PM 98 34% 64 22% 3:00PM 84 29% 64 22% 4:00PM 80 28% 65 23% 5:00PM 91 32% 66 23% 6:00PM 84 29% 61 21% 7:00PM 70 24% 59 20% Average 77 27% 61 21% The observed parking occupancy reflects the mix of uses and respective peak hours. For example, classes at the specialty schools are staggered and largely occur during periods when retail and service tenants such as MB Financial, Merry Richards Jewelers, and Glenbrook Family Dental are closed. The proposed coffee shop with drive-through window is expected to generate parking demand throughout typical hours of operation, from 5:00AM to 9:00PM. Peak periods of demand during the morning commute period would occur when many of the retail tenants (e.g., MB Financial, Merry Richards Jewelers) are closed. Proposed Parking Supply Evaluation To assess the parking supply proposed with the outlot development, the anticipated future parking conditions were considered. To estimate future parking conditions, full occupancy of the existing Glenbrook Marketplace and development of the proposed outlot were assumed. Based on the empirical data presented in Table 4, existing parking occupancy is less than the parking required by kimley-horn.com 1001 Warrenville Road, Suite 350, Lisle, IL

50 Page 8 Code. However, in order to present a conservative estimate of potential future parking conditions, Code-required parking was assumed for the vacant tenant spaces and proposed outlot development. Based on a review of the Glenview Municipal Code, 24 spaces are required for the existing vacant tenant spaces assuming future retail/service/office/bank uses. This assumption is consistent with the land use assumptions previously considered for Ordinance No In addition, 20 spaces are required by Code for the proposed outlot development. Based on the parking occupancy data presented in Table 3, under peak weekday conditions a total of 133 spaces were occupied. With the addition of the Code-required parking for the existing vacant tenant spaces (24 spaces) and proposed coffee shop (20 spaces), a future parking need of approximately 177 spaces is estimated. Therefore, the proposed 257-space parking supply is expected to accommodate the proposed outlot development and full occupancy of Glenbrook Marketplace. Conclusions Glenbrook Marketplace currently provides 288 parking spaces. A total of 257 parking spaces is proposed for the overall site with the proposed outlot development. Based on a review of existing weekday and Saturday parking conditions, the peak occupancy was approximately 46 percent of the overall Glenbrook Marketplace parking supply. Therefore, the total proposed parking supply of 257 spaces is expected to accommodate existing parking conditions, as well as the parking required for the proposed coffee shop and vacant tenant spaces. Regardless, modifications to the parking variance previously granted for Glenbrook Marketplace would be required to reflect the proposed land use composition and parking supply. A summary of the proposed land use and parking composition is provided in Table 5 below. Table 5. Summary of Proposed Zoning Variance Modifications Land Use Quantity Parking Ratio Total Required Parking Retail/Services/Offices/Banks Up to 41,110 sq. ft. 1 1 / 300 sq. ft. 130 spaces Restaurants Up to 343 seats 1 / 3 seats 115 spaces Fitness Center Up to 8,700 sq. ft. 7 / 1,000 sq. ft. 57 spaces Specialty Schools Up to 110 students & 1 / student instructors 1 / instructor 110 spaces Required Parking 412 spaces Total 68,375 square feet Proposed Parking 257 spaces -155 Notes: 1 Includes the ex isting pharmacy at the northw est corner of the site, the bank at the southw est corner of the site, and 7,930 square feet attributable to the three ex isting v acant tenant spaces (i.e., Suite 10A, Suite 11, Suite 14A). 2 Includes the proposed 60-seat coffee shop w ith driv e-through w indow. In order to enhance efficient use of the proposed parking supply, coordination with existing and future tenants is recommended in order to utilize the existing parking spaces in the rear of the building for employee parking. The spaces in the rear of the building were observed to be underutilized and designated employee parking provides an opportunity to maximize use of these spaces, thereby increasing the availability of parking spaces in the front of the building for customers and visitors. kimley-horn.com 1001 Warrenville Road, Suite 350, Lisle, IL

51

52 NORTH LEGEND PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB EXISTING CURB PAVING AND CURB LEGEND NO PARKING OR WAITING NO PARKING OR WAITING NORTHPOND PARTNERS PFINGSTEN ROAD NO PARKING OR WAITING EXISTING BUILDING FFE: ± OVERALL CONCEPT SITE PLAN EXISTING BUILDING FFE: ± PROPOSED BUILDING 2,400 SF FFE: D O NOT ENTER STARBUCKS PFINGSTEN RD & WILLOW RD GLENVIEW, IL WILLOW ROAD C1.0A

53 X NORTH NO PARKING OR WAITING NO PARKING OR WAITING U W W Q G NO PARKING OR WAITING S S U V LEGEND SITE LEGEND PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED CONCRETE CURB EXISTING CURB PROPOSED PARKING COUNT H U PROPOSED CURB & GUTTER. PROPOSED SIDEWALK PROPOSED HEAVY DUTY CONCRETE F F F ADA CURB CUT / ACCESSIBLE RAMP ACCESSIBLE PARKING LANDSCAPING BOLLARD F CLEARANCE BAR WITH BOLLARD PRE MENU BOARD WITH BOLLARD ORDER POINT CANOPY WITH DIGITAL ORDER 6 CAR STACK 5 PANEL MENU BOARD WHEEL STOPS M E E V EXISTING BUILDING FFE: ± TRASH ENCLOSURE BIKE RACKS THANK YOU / EXIT ONLY SIGN PATIO WITH RAILING (350 SF) DTE ENTRANCE ARROW DTE EXIT ARROW WAYFINDING DOUBLE ARROWS STRIPING NORTHPOND PARTNERS A DIRECTIONAL SIGN G A G I F F L L GD GN L FP L STOP SIGN "DO NOT BLOCK DRIVE AISLE" SIGN EMPLOYEE ONLY PARKING SIGN PAVING AND CURB LEGEND CONCEPT SITE PLAN J K B PROPOSED BUILDING 2,400 SF FFE: G G F O D DO NOT ENTER T D STARBUCKS PFINGSTEN RD & WILLOW RD GLENVIEW, IL A C O B C1.1A

54 G N PLANT SCHEDULE TREES CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT CAL SIZE AW 1 ACER TRUNCATUM `WARREN RED` PACIFIC SUNSET MAPLE B & B 3" CAL MIN SINGLE STEM CO 4 CELTIS OCCIDENTALIS COMMON HACKBERRY B & B 3" CAL MIN SINGLE STEM GD 6 GYMNOCLADUS DIOICA `ESPRESSO` KENTUCKY COFFEETREE B & B 3" CAL MIN SINGLE STEM GS 2 GLEDITSIA TRIACANTHOS INERMIS `SHADEMASTER` TM SHADEMASTER LOCUST B & B 3" CAL MIN SINGLE STEM QB 4 QUERCUS BICOLOR SWAMP WHITE OAK B & B 3" CAL MIN SINGLE STEM UP 5 ULMUS AMERICANA `PRINCETON` AMERICAN ELM B & B 3" CAL MIN SINGLE STEM DECIDUOUS SHRUBS CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT SPACING SIZE 2 GD 90 SH 62 SH 44 AS 2 GD 63 SH 2 GD 63 SH DL 13 DIERVILLA LONICERA DWARF BUSH HONEYSUCKLE - SEE PLAN 24" HT MIN FG 18 FOTHERGILLA GARDENII DWARF FOTHERGILLA - SEE PLAN 18" HT MIN IL 18 ITEA VIRGINICA `LITTLE HENRY` TM VIRGINIA SWEETSPIRE - SEE PLAN 18" HT MIN IR 15 ILEX VERTICILLATA `RED SPRITE` RED SPRITE WINTERBERRY - SEE PLAN 18" HT MIN 11 IL 1 UP 4 JF IV 2 ILEX VERTICILLATA `JIM DANDY` JIM DANDY WINTERBERRY - SEE PLAN 18" HT MIN RG 35 RHUS AROMATICA `GRO-LOW` GRO-LOW FRAGRANT SUMAC - SEE PLAN 18" HT MIN 29 AS RG2 9 RIBES ALPINUM `GREEN MOUND` GREEN MOUND ALPINE CURRANT - SEE PLAN 18" HT MIN 19 AS 9 DL 18 EK 10 EK 16 SH 4 DL EVERGREEN SHRUBS CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT SPACING SIZE JF 20 JUNIPERUS CHINENSIS `SEA GREEN` SEA GREEN JUNIPER - SEE PLAN 24" HT MIN TR 11 TAXUS X MEDIA `RUNYAN` YEW - SEE PLAN 24" HT MIN 1 UP 10 JF 18 SH 22 SH 9 RG2 7 IL T 1 JF 3 JF 48 SH 44 PS 10 EK 10 FG PROPOSED BUILDING 2,400 SF FFE: JF 19 EK 8 FG 1 JF 24 SH 17 EK 1 AW DO NOT ENTER PERENNIALS AND GRASSES CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT SPACING AS 92 ALLIUM X `SUMMER BEAUTY` SUMMER BEAUTY ALLIUM 1 GAL 18" o.c. EK 74 ECHINACEA PURPUREA `KIM`S KNEE HIGH` TM PURPLE CONEFLOWER 1 GAL 18" o.c. PS 44 PANICUM VIRGATUM `SHENANDOAH` SWITCH GRASS 1 GAL 24" o.c. SH 532 SPOROBOLUS HETEROLEPIS PRAIRIE DROPSEED 1 GAL 18" o.c. SOD NORTHPOND PARTNERS LANDSCAPE ENLARGEMENT PLAN 1 IV 1 IV 15 IR 11 TR STARBUCKS PFINGSTEN RD & WILLOW RD GLENVIEW, IL EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN NORTH L1.1

55 NORTH PLANT SCHEDULE TREES CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT CAL SIZE AW 1 ACER TRUNCATUM `WARREN RED` PACIFIC SUNSET MAPLE B & B 3" CAL MIN SINGLE STEM CO 4 CELTIS OCCIDENTALIS COMMON HACKBERRY B & B 3" CAL MIN SINGLE STEM 7 RG 2 UP 1 UP 16 RG GD 6 GYMNOCLADUS DIOICA `ESPRESSO` KENTUCKY COFFEETREE B & B 3" CAL MIN SINGLE STEM GS 2 GLEDITSIA TRIACANTHOS INERMIS `SHADEMASTER` TM SHADEMASTER LOCUST B & B 3" CAL MIN SINGLE STEM QB 4 QUERCUS BICOLOR SWAMP WHITE OAK B & B 3" CAL MIN SINGLE STEM UP 5 ULMUS AMERICANA `PRINCETON` AMERICAN ELM B & B 3" CAL MIN SINGLE STEM 63 SH 2 CO 63 SH 2 CO DECIDUOUS SHRUBS CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT SPACING SIZE DL 13 DIERVILLA LONICERA DWARF BUSH HONEYSUCKLE - SEE PLAN 24" HT MIN FG 18 FOTHERGILLA GARDENII DWARF FOTHERGILLA - SEE PLAN 18" HT MIN IL 18 ITEA VIRGINICA `LITTLE HENRY` TM VIRGINIA SWEETSPIRE - SEE PLAN 18" HT MIN IR 15 ILEX VERTICILLATA `RED SPRITE` RED SPRITE WINTERBERRY - SEE PLAN 18" HT MIN IV 2 ILEX VERTICILLATA `JIM DANDY` JIM DANDY WINTERBERRY - SEE PLAN 18" HT MIN 6 6 RG RG RG 35 RHUS AROMATICA `GRO-LOW` GRO-LOW FRAGRANT SUMAC - SEE PLAN 18" HT MIN 1 GS NO PARKING OR WAITING NO PARKING OR WAITING SEE LANDSCAPE ENLARGEMENT PLAN, SHEET L1.1 1 GS RG2 9 RIBES ALPINUM `GREEN MOUND` GREEN MOUND ALPINE CURRANT - SEE PLAN 18" HT MIN EVERGREEN SHRUBS CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT SPACING SIZE JF 20 JUNIPERUS CHINENSIS `SEA GREEN` SEA GREEN JUNIPER - SEE PLAN 24" HT MIN TR 11 TAXUS X MEDIA `RUNYAN` YEW - SEE PLAN 24" HT MIN PERENNIALS AND GRASSES CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME CONT SPACING AS 92 ALLIUM X `SUMMER BEAUTY` SUMMER BEAUTY ALLIUM 1 GAL 18" o.c. NORTHPOND PARTNERS EXISTING BUILDING FFE: ± T PROPOSED BUILDING 2,400 SF FFE: D O NOT ENTER EXISTING BUILDING FFE: ± EK 74 ECHINACEA PURPUREA `KIM`S KNEE HIGH` TM PURPLE CONEFLOWER 1 GAL 18" o.c. PS 44 PANICUM VIRGATUM `SHENANDOAH` SWITCH GRASS 1 GAL 24" o.c. SH 532 SPOROBOLUS HETEROLEPIS PRAIRIE DROPSEED 1 GAL 18" o.c. SOD STARBUCKS OVERALL LANDSCAPE PLAN PFINGSTEN RD & WILLOW RD GLENVIEW, IL EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN, TYP. 2 QB WILLOW ROAD 2 QB L1.0

56

57