DES PLAINES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING JUNE 13, 2017 MINUTES

Transcription

1 Page 1 DES PLAINES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING JUNE 13, 2017 MINUTES The Des Plaines Planning and Zoning Board Meeting held its regularly-scheduled meeting on Tuesday, June 13, 2017, at 7 p.m. in Room 102 of the Des Plaines Civic Center. ZONING BOARD PRESENT: ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: Bader, Catalano, Hofherr, Saletnik, Schell, Szabo Green Johanna Bye, AICP, Senior Planner/Community & Economic Development Lauren Pruss, AICP, Coordinator/Community & Economic Development Gale Cerabona/Recording Secretary Chairman Szabo called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. and read this evening s case. Roll call was conducted. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr, seconded by Board Member Catalano, to approve the minutes of April 25, 2017 as submitted. AYES: NAYES: ABSTAIN: Hofherr, Catalano, Bader, Saletnik, Szabo None Schell ***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY*** PUBLIC COMMENT There were no comments. PUBLIC HEARING NEW BUSINESS 1. Address: 946 & 970 North Avenue Case MAP-SUB-PUD The petitioner is requesting an Amendment to the Official Des Plaines Zoning Map, as amended, under Section of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to reclassify the properties from the M-2 General Manufacturing District and the R-1 Single-Family Residential District to the R-3 Townhouse Residential District; and A Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the Blue Sky Residence residential PUD under Section of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, and a Tentative Plat of Subdivision, under Section of Subdivision Regulations of the City of Des Plaines Municipal Code, to allow for the construction of a 70-unit, three-story apartment building with 70 surface parking spaces, 66 in-building parking spaces, and 4 parking spaces in a detached garage

2 Page 2 structure, with a requested PUD exception from the R-3 Townhouse Residential Zoning District standards under Section (J) of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, for 2,203 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit, instead of not less than 2,800 square feet. PINs: ; ; ; ; ; PARCEL 1: LOTS 1, LOT 2 AND THE NORTH 35 FEET OF LOT 3 IN HANNS-WADE SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 7 AND 8, EXCEPT THAT PART OF THE WEST 5 FEET OF LOT 7 ALL THAT PART OF LOT 8 WHICH LIES SOUTH OF THE EAST AND WEST QUARTER OF SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 17, IN THE SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 AND 2, IN BLOCK 11 IN DES PLAINES MANOR TRACT NO. 2, A SUBDIVISION OF PART OF THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 12, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF SAID HANNS-WADE RESUBDIVISION REGISTERED IN THE OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF TITLES OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, ON NOVEMBER 25, 1975 AS DOCUMENT NUMBER PARCEL 2: THAT PART OF LOT 6 LYING WEST OF A LINE FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT, AS MEASURED ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT (EXCEPT THAT PART LYING EAST OF A LINE 36.0 FEET EAST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF LOT 6 AND SOUTH OF THE EAST AND WEST ¼ LINE OF SECTION 17) ALL IN THE SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 AND 2 IN BLOCK 11 IN DES PLAINES MANOR TRACT NO. 2, A SUBDIVISION OF PART OF THE WEST ½ OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 12, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. PARCEL 3: THAT PART OF LOT 6 LYING EAST OF A LINE 75 FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT AS MEASURED ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT, ALSO: LOT 6 (EXCEPT THE WEST 1.54 ACRES THEREOF AND EXCEPT THAT PART OF SAID LOT LYING EAST OF LINE DRAWN 75 FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT AS MEASURED ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT AND EXCEPT THAT PART OF LOT 6 LYING EAST OF THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1.54 ACRES OF SAID LOT AND LYING WEST OF A LINE WHICH IS 30 FEET EAST OF AND PARALLEL TO SAID EAST LINE OF WEST 1.54 ACRES OF SAID LOT, AS MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID EAST LINE OF WEST 1.54 ACRES AND LYING NORTH OF THE EAST AND WEST ¼ LINE OF SECTION 17), ALL IN THE SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 AND 2 IN BLOCK 11 IN DES PLAINES MANOR TRACT NUMBER 2, A SUBDIVISION OF PART OF THE WEST ½ OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 41 NORTH, RANGE 12 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. Petitioner: Daniel Pontarelli, 1204 E. Central Road, Arlington Heights, IL Owner: Robert & Patricia Lonze, 946 North Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016; Scotland E. Hodlmair & Noreen R. Hodlmair, 654 Arlington Avenue, Des Plaines, IL Chairman Szabo asked Staff to share the Staff Report which Senior Planner Bye did via a PowerPoint presentation: Issue: The petitioner is requesting an amendment to the Official Des Plaines Zoning Map, as amended, under Section of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to reclassify the properties from the M-2 General Manufacturing District and the R-1 Single-Family Residential District to the R-3 Townhouse Residential District; and A Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the Blue Sky Residence residential PUD under Section of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, and a Tentative Plat of Subdivision, under Section of Subdivision Regulations of the City of Des Plaines Municipal Code, to allow for the construction of a 70-unit, three-story apartment building with 70 surface parking spaces, 66 in-building parking spaces, and 4 parking spaces in a detached garage structure, with a requested PUD exception from

3 Page 3 the R-3 Townhouse Residential Zoning District standards under Section (J) of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, for 2,203 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit, instead of not less than 2,800 square feet. Analysis: Preliminary Planned Unit Development Report Owners: Robert & Patricia Lonze, 946 North Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016; Scotland E. Hodlmair & Noreen R. Hodlmair, 654 Arlington Avenue, Des Plaines, IL Petitioner: Daniel Pontarelli, 1204 E. Central Road, Arlington Heights, IL Case Number: MAP-SUB-PUD Real Estate Index Numbers: ; ; ; ; ; Ward: Existing Zoning Existing Land Use Surrounding Zoning Surrounding Land Use Street Classification Comprehensive Plan Project Description #3, Alderman Denise Rodd M-2, General Manufacturing District; R-1, Single-Family Residential District The parcels currently zoned R-1 are primarily vacant, with one existing single-family home to be torn down according to the plans submitted; the M-2 property is currently improved with an industrial building North: Railroad; M-2, General Manufacturing District South: R-1, Single-Family Residential District East: M-2, General Manufacturing District; R-1, Single-Family Residential District West: Railroad; M-2, General Manufacturing District; R-1, Single- Family Residential District North: Railroad; Industrial South: Single-family residential East: Industrial/Residential West: Industrial/Residential The Comprehensive Plan designates North Avenue as a local street Traditional Single Family is the recommended use of the property The proposed age-restricted (62 and older) residential development would incorporate 3.54 acres of land currently located in the M-2 General Manufacturing and R-1 Single-Family Residential Districts. Multiple-family residential is not permitted in either of these zoning districts; as a result, the petitioner is seeking to rezone the site to the R-

4 Page 4 Zoning Map Amendment Findings 3 Townhouse Residential District where this type of development is allowed. 70, 1-bedroom apartments are proposed for the site, all to be located in a single, 2 and 3-story masonry building. The petitioner is proposing 66 in-building parking spaces, 4 parking spaces to be located in a detached garage on the west side of the site, and 70 parking spaces at grade, for a total of 140 parking spaces (2 parking spaces per dwelling unit are required per the Zoning Ordinance). Vehicular access to the site would be provided by two curb cuts off of North Avenue. Please note that this application and request appeared before the Planning and Zoning Board on February 28, Since that meeting, the petitioner has incorporated an additional parcel of land (PIN ) into the plans that necessitated the need for a new public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Board. This new parcel of land has allowed for a revised site plan that addresses many of the comments and concerns from the original public hearing. The petitioner has revised the location of the building on the site, pushing it farther north and closer to the railroad tracks. 70 units are now proposed, instead to 75, which has allowed for a reduction in parking spaces from 150 to 140. The reduction in total number of units allows some parts of the building to only have two stories, instead of three. Additionally, all surface parking spaces are now behind the single-family residences, as opposed to directly adjacent to them. As required, the proposed amendment is reviewed below in terms of the standards contained in Section (E) of the Zoning Ordinance: A. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The 2007 City of Des Plaines Comprehensive Plan designates the area as Traditional Single Family. As defined by the Plan, Traditional Single Family is a residential area that includes single-family detached dwellings at densities greater than the large-lot single-family classification. The minimum required lot size for single-family homes, based on the Zoning Ordinance, is 6,875 square feet, which would allow for 22 single-family homes on the proposed site (though this does not account for required public right-of-way and open space). The proposal calls for 70 dwelling units at 2,203 square feet of lot area per unit. This is more in line with the Low-Density Multi-Family Residential classification that calls for 22 dwelling units per acre. B. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with the current conditions and the overall character of existing developments in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The parcels in question are bounded by train tracks to the north, train tracks and single-family homes to the west, single-family homes to the south, and an industrial property and single-family homes to the east. The proposed rezoning to the R-3 Townhouse Residential District would prohibit industrial and single-family residential uses and allow for either townhomes or multiple-family dwelling units, as is proposed. Though

5 Page 5 this type of residential use allows for higher densities than single-family homes, it does provide for a good transition between the single-family residences and train tracks. C. Whether the proposed amendment is appropriate considering the adequacy of public facilities and services available to the subject property. The public facilities and services provided by the City of Des Plaines are expected to be adequate within this area. If the zoning amendment is approved, no additional expansion of public facilities or services is anticipated. The proposed development is approximately 1 mile from the amenities offered in downtown Des Plaines, which may be walkable for some. Additionally, the petitioner has been made aware of the potential requirement to either dedicate parkland to the Des Plaines Park District or pay a fee-in-lieu based on the impact the development will have on local parks. It should also be noted that the petitioner s traffic impact study, completed by Gewalt Hamilton Associates, Inc. of Vernon Hills, IL, concluded that the traffic generated by the proposed development represents a negligible impact on adjacent roadways and intersections. The traffic study was prepared with the assumption that 75 units, as opposed to 70 units, would be proposed. D. Whether the proposed amendment will have an adverse effect on the value of properties throughout the jurisdiction. The reuse and improvement of the site is expected to increase property values of the surrounding community, especially when considering the potential for an industrial use given the current M-2 General Manufacturing District zoning. E. Whether the proposed amendment reflects responsible standards for development and growth. The proposed map amendment to reclassify the properties to the R-3 Townhouse Residential District complies with the Comprehensive Plan s call for residential in this area; however, the proposed multiplefamily apartment building is not in line with the Traditional Single Family classification identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Planned Unit Development Findings As required, the proposed development is reviewed below in terms of the findings contained in Section (E) of the Zoning Ordinance: A. The extent to which the Proposed Plan is or is not consistent with the stated purpose of the PUD regulations in Section (A): Comment: The proposed plan is consistent with the stated purpose of Section (A) of the Zoning Ordinance in that the multiple-family residential development would allow for a more efficient use of land resulting in more economic networks of utilities, streets and other facilities not possible under the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance. Additionally, the proposed PUD offers a creative approach to the use of land that results in better development and design and the construction of aesthetic amenities. B. The extent to which the proposed plan meets the prerequisites and standards of the planned unit development regulations: Comment: The proposed Planned Unit Development meets all PUD requirements contained in Section (B) of the Zoning Ordinance as it would be located in a zoning district that permits PUDs (R-3 Townhouse

6 Page 6 Residential District), meets the minimum size standard of two acres (combined lot is 3.54 acres), and the land is under unified control of Blue Sky Residence LLC as the contract purchaser. C. The extent to which the proposed plan departs from the applicable zoning and subdivision regulations otherwise applicable to the subject property, including, but not limited to the density, dimension, area, bulk, and use and the reasons why such departures are or are not deemed to be in the public interest: Comment: The proposed development meets or exceeds the following applicable zoning regulations for the R-3 Townhouse Residential District: Minimum size for PUD; Two acres are required; the total site is 3.54 acres; Maximum building coverage (Not applicable in the R-3 Townhouse Residential District); Parking requirements; 140 spaces (2/unit) are required; 140 are proposed; Setbacks; A front yard setback of 25 feet, side yard setbacks of 10 feet, and a rear yard setback of 30 feet are required; a front yard setback of at least 62 feet 10 inches, side yard setbacks of a minimum of 10 feet 10 inches, and a rear yard setback of 25 feet are proposed; Height; A maximum height of 45 feet is permitted; 36 feet is proposed; Compatibility with surrounding properties; There is no negative impact expected from the proposed multiple-family residential use; the properties to the south have residential uses, while the properties to the north, east and west currently have industrial uses. Traffic; Adequate provisions for safe ingress and egress and minimal traffic impact will be provided according to the traffic study; and General Design; The general design of the proposed apartment building is not expected to be detrimental to public health, safety or general welfare. A Planned Unit Development exception is requested for: (1) Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit; A minimum of 2,800 square feet per dwelling unit is required; 2,203 square feet per dwelling unit it proposed (an approximately 21% reduction in required lot area per dwelling unit). D. The extent to which the physical design of the proposed development does or does not make adequate provision for public services, provide adequate control of vehicular traffic, provide for, protect open space, and further the amenities of light and air, recreation and visual enjoyment: Comment: After reviewing the petitioner s preliminary building and site improvement plans, it appears that the proposed development is making adequate provision for the necessary infrastructure. Comments and conditions from the Public Works and Engineering Department further address this issue. In terms of recreational amenities proposed for the site, the petitioner has identified on the site plan a series of walking paths as well as game tables and a bocce court. Additionally, the developer has been made aware of the potential requirement for a parks dedication or impact fee for the development, which will likely take the form of a fee-in-lieu donation to the Des Plaines Park District. The petitioner may receive credit for the proposed recreational amenities, as approved by the City Council. The control of vehicular traffic is addressed in the petitioner s professional traffic impact study, which was performed by Gewalt Hamilton Associates, Inc. of Vernon Hills, IL. The study concluded that the traffic generated by the proposed development represents a negligible impact on adjacent roadways and

7 Page 7 intersections. The study also concluded that at morning and evening peak travel times, the traffic created by the proposed development would be equal to or less than the traffic created by a traditional non-age restricted development of 55 units (the number of units that would be permitted based on the requirement of 2,800 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit) or an industrial use (which would be permitted by-right under the current zoning designation). Please note that the traffic study was performed under the assumption that 75 units, instead of 70, were proposed. An addendum provided by Gewalt Hamilton Associates, Inc. confirms that the current proposal represents a slight reduction in anticipated traffic volumes over the previous plan. E. The extent to which the relationship and compatibility of the proposed development is beneficial or adverse to adjacent properties and neighborhood: Comment: The style, location and massing of the proposed apartment building is compatible with the surrounding uses. The original site plan proposed surface parking areas that surrounded the existing singlefamily homes along the north side of North Avenue; however, the revised site plan, as presented, now has all surface parking areas behind the single-family residences instead of adjacent to them. The petitioner was able to accommodate this new site plan by reducing the total number of units from 75 to 70 (and thereby reducing the total number of parking spaces required) and by providing more parking underneath the building. F. The extent to which the proposed plan is not desirable to physical development, tax base and economic well-being of the entire community: Comment: The proposed multiple-family residential use of the site would likely have a greater positive impact on property values and tax base over the existing industrial use. Once the apartment building is constructed and occupied, there will be greater demands on city services, city streets, and other public facilities; however, it is assumed that the City s current public services and public facilities will be able to handle the increased need for services at this location without being overburdened. G. The extent to which the proposed plan is in conformity with the recommendations of the 2007 Comprehensive Plan: Comment: The 2007 City of Des Plaines Comprehensive Plan recommends the site as Traditional Single Family. As defined by the Plan, Traditional Single Family is a residential area that includes single-family detached dwellings at densities greater than the large-lot single-family classification. The minimum required lot size for single-family homes, based on the Zoning Ordinance, is 6,875 square feet, which would allow for 22 single-family homes on the proposed site (though this does not account for required public right-of-way and open space). The proposal calls for 70 dwelling units at 2,203 square feet of lot area per unit. This is more in line with the Low-Density Multi-Family Residential classification that calls for 22 dwelling units per acre. Tentative Plat Report Name of Subdivision: Address: Request: Total Acreage of Resubdivision: Blue Sky Residence 946 North Avenue Approval of a Tentative Plat of Subdivision 3.54 acres

8 Page 8 Lot Descriptions and Construction Plans: The petitioner s Preliminary Plat shows the existing three parcels being combined into one lot. It shows easements for public utilities and stormwater management. No changes to the proposed boundaries of any parcels are proposed at this time. Tentative Plat Comments: 1. If approved, the Final Plat must show the Name of the Owner(s) and notarized signatures; 2. The Final Plat must show the proper easement provisions and signature lines and have them signed by all the public service utilities; 3. On the Final Plat, the petitioner shall sign the owner certificate(s) and have them notarized; 4. The Final Plat must show Municipal Boundaries; 5. The Final Plat must show building lines and easements including dimensions; 6. The Final Plat must show a statement of land dedication for public use; 7. The Final Plat must show a complete legal description; 8. The Final Plat must include Certificates from the Finance Director, Director of Public Works and Engineering, and Director of Community and Economic Development; 9. The Final Plat must show all subdivision regulation variances. 10. The Final Plat must meet the minimum standards for Plat of Subdivision in the State of Illinois. Final Comments Summary and Staff Recommendations: Staff supports the proposed rezoning from M-2 General Manufacturing and R-1 Single-Family Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential, as well as the proposed age-restricted, multiple-family apartment building. Though the Comprehensive Plan calls for this area to be single-family residential, this type of development is not likely given the proximity to multiple railroad tracks and other industrial facilities. However, a multiple-family use can serve as a good buffer between the existing single-family homes and the railroad tracks, especially given the fact that the site could be used industrially by-right under the current zoning. Staff believes that the age-restricted, multiple-family use is the best use of the site in terms of impact on the surrounding community. The traffic impact study provided by the petitioner provides further evidence of this. Originally, staff did not support the proposed site plan and location of surface parking. The parking layout appeared to be inefficient and surrounded existing single-family residences. Staff had recommended reducing the number of units, so that less parking would be required, and/or providing more parking underneath the building. Staff is pleased with the petitioner s revised site and building plans that address the above concerns as well as those brought up by the Commissioners and public at the February 28, 2017 Planning and Zoning Board meeting. The new building is less dense, is pushed back farther on the site from the single-family residences, and is two stories in some areas (as opposed to three). Additionally, the new site plan eliminates the parking areas that surrounded the single-family residences and allows for a much more efficient flow through the site. I recommend approval of the Zoning Map Amendment, Preliminary Planned Unit Development and Tentative Plat of Subdivision, subject to the conditions as listed below. Conditions: 1. The petitioner must prepare a Final Planned Unit Development Plat that meets all the requirements of Appendix A-4 (Minimum Submittal requirements for PUDs) of the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance and a Final Plat of Subdivision that meets all the requirements of the

9 Page 9 Subdivision Regulations and the comments in this report and submit it to the Community and Economic Development Department. 2. The petitioner comply with potential provisions for a parks dedication or impact fee, to be determined by the City Council. 3. The petitioner shall provide written proof of Final Engineering approval from the City of Des Plaines Public Works and Engineering Department. Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: The Planning and Zoning Board may vote to grant or deny approval of the Tentative Plat. If approved, the petitioner s next step is to submit final engineering plans to the Public Works and Engineering Department and return to the Planning and Zoning Board with an updated plat for Final Plat consideration. The Planning and Zoning Board may vote to recommend approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval. The City Council has final authority over the Map Amendment and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD). Chairman Szabo swore in Petitioner Daniel Pontarelli, 1204 E. Central Road, Arlington Heights, IL & team: Daniel J. Dowd, Dowd, Dowd & Mertes, Ltd., 701 Lee Street, Suite 790, Des Plaines, IL, Ronald Sorce, Sorce Architecture, 3030 Salt Creek Lane, Arlington Heights, IL, Kevin Serafin, CemCon LTD, 2280 White Oak Circle S 100, Aurora, IL, Lynn M. Means, P.E., PTOE, Senior Transportation Engineer, Gewalt Hamilton Associates, Inc., 625 Forest Edge Drive, Vernon Hills, IL, & Pamela Self, Landscape Architect RLA. Mr. Dowd noted changes: Small piece of property that was added creates a better opportunity for this project Properties were identified where views will not be blocked Building was moved back Parking has been moved to rear of resident lot lines Unique living spaces in the interior Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has any questions. Mr. Pontarelli highlighted an aerial neighborhood plan. Chairman Szabo swore in the following audience members who came forward: John Thompson 892 Hollywood Avenue (resident for 12 years) Mr. Thompson stated there are streets (1 st through 4 th ) that will be used for this project. Currently only 1 car can fit down each street at a time. Due to the narrow street, there have been near collisions. Signage, stop signs must be added. Believes this project is an awful idea. Edgar Murillo 917 North Avenue (just purchased his home) Mr. Murillo stated if he would have known this project was forthcoming, he would not have purchased his home; it was a quiet neighborhood; doesn t fit into the area; more parks or singlefamily homes are needed. Believes this project should be posed as a vote to the community. Children s safety takes precedence. Chairman Szabo advised the Planning & Zoning Board (PZB) will vote, and City Council will have the final say.

10 Page 10 Lynn Wojcik 907 North Avenue Ms. Wojcik asked which people in favor live in Des Plaines. Chairman Szabo stated he would revisit this later in the evening. Mohammed Tabani 952 North Avenue Mr. Tabani thanked the Board & Petitioner. He stated he obtained his presentation from the City (and distributed same): o Multi-family is not in line with single-family classification o 55 units is the legal maximum o Traffic study was conducted (by Petitioner) on a Tuesday between 2d and 3d Avenues. Actual traffic will be 5 times this (Exhibit 13 was referenced). Small children will not see vehicles. Study does not include emergency vehicles. o Roads have not been repaired; would like other access for entry o Not against the project, however believe Petitioner should only be allowed to build 2 floors with 55 units o Changing this to R-3 takes away green space Janie Feldkamp 938 North Avenue Ms. Feldkamp quoted previous minutes (2/28/17) and asked why we are here as Staff already recommended 55 units. Coordinator Pruss stated the PZB recommended to reduce or remove the parking from the front of the property in accordance with Staff s recommendation. Board Member Saletnik stated the current allowable number is 55 units; the PZB has the ability to grant or deny what Petitioner proposes. Christine Cirone 977 North Avenue Ms. Cirone stated the community is on North Avenue and is present tonight. These neighbors seem to have no voice. Staff is making decisions on the quality of life for those who are vehemently against the project. She takes offense to these recommendations. James Roherty 994 North Avenue Mr. Roherty asked why the driveway can t be moved to the middle. How far is the setback from the driveway? Mr. Murillo returned to the podium and asked if this project has been considered for another area in Des Plaines (and encourage TIFs, incentives for the Petitioner); would like the Petitioner to propose other locations. Mr. Thompson returned to the podium and asked for the show of hands of those Des Plaines residents who are objecting. Chairman Szabo stated he may defer to Staff. He advised these numbers really don t mean anything. Board Member Schell advised a public hearing is for anyone to come forward.

11 Page 11 More audience members were sworn in by Chairman Szabo and came forward: Erin Johnson 994 Hollywood (grew up in this area) Ms. Johnson stated flooding is already present; not interested in an increase of that. Mr. Tabani returned to the podium and stated his sump pump is continually running. Mr. Dowd thanked everyone. He reminded this is a difficult case; the area has not been and will not be developed as a single-family residence. The existing structure and area is dilapidated. He noted it is better to be developed rather than have it remain as is. Mr. Dowd reminded the parking is relocated, units have been reduced. Ms. Means addressed increase in traffic, signage, safety, street width. She advised the traffic would entail 14 cars per hour entering and 18 cars exiting. Age-restricted residents would not always be using streets during rush hour. On a daily basis, 244 trips would take place (3-4 cars at peak per hour). If an industrial project was slated, there may be more traffic. Board Member Saletnik asked how many vehicles pass on a regular street? Ms. Means advised there are cars per hour on adjacent residential streets (less than 1 car per minute). Board Member Catalano noted he is a Civil Engineer and stated capacities of roads are meant to handle this traffic. An A rating is not exceeding this traffic. Audience members returned to the podium: Ms. Feldman stated she agrees the current structure is an ugly building. Now there is no traffic; of course there will be an increase. Mr. Thompson asked if emergency-service vehicles and visitors (multiple-car trips) are being considered. Chairman Szabo stated, by reputation, these traffic engineers are professionals. Ms. Means replied that, per industry standards, deliveries, emergency-response vehicles, visitors, residents are included in the data collected. Other senior housing numbers are even lower. Board Member Hofherr stated, regarding water/flooding, residents should contact City Staff to make them aware as well as inquire about suggestions to repair the street (due to potholes). Board Member Catalano stated, regarding flooding, there is no current drainage system. If this gets developed, flooding will improve, as there will be a detention pond, drainage, storm water management, etc. This is a mandate for a developer on this site. Audience member Ms. Cirone stated she is hearing there will be no improvements unless this project is developed. She would like to see the City help the neighbors. Board Member Schell stated the PZB doesn t assist with flooded basements. Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has further questions. Mr. Sorce advised the driveway is 10 ft. off the neighbor s property.

12 Page 12 Board Member Saletnik stated when there are difficult unused industrial areas, it is tough to find the right development. The railroad has been existing. A building as a buffer is positive as the Petitioner listened and responded accordingly. A motion was made by Board Member Saletnik, seconded by Board Member Hofherr, to recommend approval to City Council with Conditions as proposed by Staff (all inclusive). AYES: NAYES: Saletnik, Hofherr, Bader, Catalano, Szabo Schell ***MOTION CARRIED 5-1*** Chairman Szabo advised a recommendation for approval would be submitted to City Council. ADJOURNMENT On a voice vote, Chairman Szabo adjourned the meeting at 8:27 p.m. Sincerely, Gale Cerabona, Recording Secretary cc: City Officials, Aldermen, Zoning Board of Appeals, Petitioners