DESIGN AND PROJECT REVIEW COMMITTEE (DAPR) Wednesday, October 25, :30 P.M. Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Room 2404

Transcription

1 DESIGN AND PROJECT REVIEW COMMITTEE (DAPR) Wednesday, October 25, :30 P.M. Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Room 2404 AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER/DECLARATION OF QUORUM, JOHANNA LEONARD, CHAIR II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 18, 2017 DAPR Committee meetings III. OLD BUSINESS Davis Street Planned Development Dave Cocagne, developer, submits for a planned development to construct a 33-story, 318 dwelling unit mixed use building with 176 parking spaces and approximately 7,400 square feet of ground floor commercial space in the D3 Downtown Core Development District. The applicant seeks site development allowances for: number of dwelling units (318), building height (313 feet), floor area ratio (12.25), number of parking spaces (176), number of loading docks (3), curb cut for drivethrough between building and street right-of-way, and a ziggurat setback that is less than 40 feet at a height of 42 feet along Davis St. and along the north property line. IV. NEW BUSINESS Elmwood Avenue Preliminary and Final Review Jeffrey Kaye, applicant, submits for construction of a two-story addition and second story addition to include an attached garage and new dwelling unit on the second story in the D1 Downtown Fringe District. Major variation granted in 2015 for a 0' rear yard setback where 10' is required Lincoln Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Gerald Brennan, property owner, submits for major zoning relief for a 10' front yard setback where 27' is required, a 26.4' rear yard setback where 30' is required, and 47% impervious surface coverage where 45% is permitted to locate a previously constructed "solar house" in the R1 Single Family Residential District. IV. ADJOURNMENT The next DAPR meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, November 2, 2017 at 2:30 pm in Room 2404 of the Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center. Order & Agenda Items are subject to change. Information about the Design and Project Review (DAPR) Committee is available at: can be directed to Meagan Jones at The City is committed to ensuring accessibility for all citizens; If an accommodation is needed to participate in this meeting, please contact this Department 48 hours in advance so that arrangements can be made for the accommodation if possible. La ciudad de Evanston está obligada a hacer accesibles todas las reuniones públicas a las personas minusválidas o las quines no hablan inglés. Si usted necesita ayuda, favor de ponerse en contacto con la Oficina de Administración del Centro a 847/ (voz) o 847/ (TDD).

2 Design and Project Review (DAPR) 601Davis St. Planned Development

3 Zoning Map Davis St. October 5, 2017 drawgraphics_poly User drawn polygons User drawn points Zoning Boundaries & Labels Tax Parcels 1:2, mi km City of Evanston IL, Imagery courtesy Cook County GIS Copyright 2016 City of Evanston This map is not a plat of survey. This map is provided "as is" without warranties of any kind. See for more information.

4 Aerial Map Davis St. October 6, 2017 drawgraphics_poly User drawn polygons User drawn points Tax Parcels 1:2, mi km City of Evanston IL, Imagery courtesy Cook County GIS Copyright 2016 City of Evanston This map is not a plat of survey. This map is provided "as is" without warranties of any kind. See for more information.

5

6 Design and Project Review (DAPR) Elmwood Ave. Preliminary/Final Review

7 Zoning Map Elmwood Ave. October 19, 2017 drawgraphics_poly User drawn polygons User drawn points Zoning Boundaries & Labels Tax Parcels 1:2, mi km Copyright 2016 City of Evanston This map is not a plat of survey. This map is provided "as is" without warranties of any kind. See for more information.

8 Aerial Map Elmwood Ave. October 19, 2017 drawgraphics_poly User drawn polygons User drawn points Tax Parcels 1:1, mi km City of Evanston IL, Imagery courtesy Cook County GIS Copyright 2016 City of Evanston This map is not a plat of survey. This map is provided "as is" without warranties of any kind. See for more information.

9

10

11 EXISTING AC METRA NORTH RAIL LINE 30'-7 3/4" 22'-8 1/2" 116' 10" BACK SETBACK NEW FENCE EXISTING ELECTRIC CONNECTION / METERS SIDE SETBACK 6" EXISTING BUILDING 6'-0" 6'-1 1/2" REMOVE EXISTING SIDEWALK 2nd FLOOR ADDITION 1ST FLOOR ADDITION 10'-10" EXISTING BUILDING TO NORTH OF SITE 2 STORY ADDITION N 1461 NEW COVERED ENTRY 6'-0" EXISTING PARKING LOT TO SOUTH OF SITE 50'-1" 74' 6" DECK EXISTING DRAINAGE COLLECTION REPLACE COURTYARD WITH PAVERS NEW ENTRY WALK CONNECT TO COVERED ENTRY HEIGHT '-10" EXISTING DRIVE TO NORTH OF SITE DISABLED PARKING 110' 0" EXISTING WOOD FENCE TO BE REPLACED EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE TO BE REPLACED 21'-7" 8'-0" GARBAGE / RECYCLING AREA 18'-4" EXISTING DRAINAGE COLLECTION 34'-7" EXISTING PARKING LOT 111' 4" EXISTING DRAINAGE / SEWER COLLECTION EXISTING BUSHES EXIST. TREE TO REMAIN EXISTING CONC. DRIVE EXIST. TREE TO REMAIN EXISTING CONC. DRIVE ELMWOOD AVE. SITE PLAN SCALE: 1" = 10'

12 Cedar Fence (Stained Dark Grey) New Brick (Stained Dark Grey to Match) Flat Aluminum Garage Door (Light Grey) Hardie Panel Siding (Light Grey) COR-TEN Steel (Natural Rust) Doors Concrete Cap (Light Grey) Brick Tiles (Rust) Hardie Clad Columns (Light Grey) (Stained Dark Grey to Match) Hardie Trim (Dark Grey) Existing Brick (Stained Dark Grey to Match) Aluminum Frame Windows (Dark Grey/Black Frame) Hardie Panel Cladding/Trim (Light Grey)

13 Hardie Panel Siding (Light Grey) 1 New 4 5 Brick 9 (Stained Dark Grey to Match) Existing Brick (Stained Dark Grey to Match) Cedar Fence (Stained Dark Grey)

14 (Light Grey) Hardie Panel Siding Steel Door (Light Grey) New Brick (Stained Dark Grey to Match) Existing Brick (Stained Dark Grey to Match)

15 Cedar Fence (Stained Dark Grey) (Natural Rust) COR-TEN Steel 1 4 (Dark Grey) 5 9 Hardie Panel Cladding and Aluminum Trim Hardie Panel Cladding/Trim (Light Grey) Existing Brick (Stained Dark Grey to Match)

16

17 MEMORANDUM To: From: Subject: Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals Mark Muenzer, Director of Community Development Damir Latinovic, Planning and Zoning Administrator Melissa Klotz, Zoning Planner Elmwood Avenue - ZBA 15ZMJV-0101 ZBA Determining Body Date: November 24, 2015 Notice - Published in the November 12, 2015 Evanston Review Jeffrey Kaye, property owner, applies for major zoning relief to construct a two-story addition and second story addition in the D1 Downtown Fringe District. The applicant proposes to construct a two-story addition for a new dwelling unit with a requested 0 rear yard setback where 10 is required (Zoning Code Section E). The Zoning Board of Appeals is the determining body for this case. Recommendation City staff and the DAPR Committee recommend approval of major zoning relief to construct a two-story addition with a 0 rear yard setback where 10 is required in the D1 Downtown Fringe District. The application complies with all other zoning requirements and meets all standards for major variations for this district. Site Background Elmwood Avenue is located on the east side of Elmwood Avenue, midblock between Lake Street and Grove Street in the D1 Downtown Fringe District and is surrounded by the following: North: D1 East: D1 South: D1 West: D1 Downtown Fringe District Downtown Fringe District Downtown Fringe District Downtown Fringe District The property features a one-story office building that abuts the CTA and Metra tracks to the east. Proposal Elmwood Avenue currently features a one-story, 3,775 square foot office building at the rear of the property, with open parking towards the front. The applicant proposes to construct a second story addition over the northern third of the existing building, a two-story addition on the north side of the existing building and a one-story

18 addition within the central part of the U-shape building. The additions provide a two-car garage on the ground-floor and one dwelling unit with a rooftop deck on the second floor. The applicant requests a 0 rear yard setback for the second floor addition where 10 is required. The existing building is located adjacent to the rear lot line with no setback. The new two-story addition to the north is proposed with a 5.75 rear yard setback. Since the existing building is located towards the rear of the property, all parking and loading occurs at the front of the property. The addition cannot be constructed in this front area without eliminating parking, loading areas or refuse pickup, and there is no space to maneuver behind the building to create additional parking, loading, and refuse pickup as the building is located adjacent to the rear property line. The new dwelling unit requires two additional parking spaces on the property, which are accommodated in the proposed garage below the dwelling unit. The existing office space requires a total of two parking spaces, but the applicant believes having a total of nine parking spaces on-site (two of which are for the new dwelling unit) are necessary for the building.

19 The applicant intends to extensively remodel the interior and exterior of the existing building, and will use matching building materials for the additions. The requested variation meets the standards for major variations in this district. City staff is not aware of any objections to the proposal from neighboring property owners. Ordinances Identified for Requested Relief : D1 Downtown Fringe District E: The yard requirements for the D1 District are as follows: Rear yard 10 Design and Project Review Committee (DAPR) Discussion and Recommendation DAPR members found the proposed addition would not negatively impact adjacent properties. Recommendation: Unanimous approval with the condition that updated elevations are submitted with labels for the proposed building materials. Variation Standards For the ZBA to approve a variation, the ZBA must find that the proposed variation: a) Will not have a substantial adverse impact on the use, enjoyment or property values of adjoining properties; b) Is in keeping with the intent of the zoning ordinance; c) Has a hardship or practical difficulty that is peculiar to the property; d) Property owner would suffer a particular hardship or practical difficulty as distinguished from a mere inconvenience e) Is not based exclusively upon a desire to extract additional income from the property or public benefit to the whole will be derived; f) Does not have a hardship or practical difficulty that was created by any person having an interest in the property; and g) Is limited to the minimum change necessary to alleviate the particular hardship or practical difficulty. Attachments Variation Application October 26, 2015 Standards Form Zoning Analysis Plat of Survey Site Plans Elevations Image of Property Aerial View of Property Zoning Map of Property DAPR Draft Meeting Minutes November 18, 2015

20 MEETING MINUTES ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Tuesday, December 1, :00 PM Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Council Chambers APPROVED Members Present: Matt Rodgers, Myrna Arevalo, Mary Beth Berns, Mary McAuley, Scott Gingold, Violetta Cullen Members Absent: Staff Present: Melissa Klotz Chair: Matt Rodgers Declaration of Quorum With a quorum present, Chair Rodgers called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. Approval of Minutes The minutes from the November 17, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting were motioned for approval by Mr. Gingold and seconded by Ms. McAuley. The motion was approved 6-0. New Business 1303 Rosalie Street ZBA 15ZMJV-0099 Nate Rosalie, contractor, applies for major zoning relief to construct an enclosed porch in the R1 Single Family Residential District. The applicant proposes a 5 rear yard setback where 30 is required (Zoning Code Section A-4). The Zoning Board of Appeals is the determining body for this case. Ms. Klotz passed out an prior to the beginning of the meeting whereas the applicant explained the property owner could not be present at the meeting and requested the case be continued to the December 15, 2015 ZBA hearing. Mr. Gingold motioned to continue the case without discussion to December 15, Ms. McAuley seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved Elmwood Avenue ZBA 15ZMJV-0101 Jeffrey Kaye, property owner, applies for major zoning relief to construct a two-story addition and second story addition in the D1 Downtown Fringe District. The applicant proposes to construct a two-story addition for a new dwelling unit with a requested 0 rear yard setback where 10 is required (Zoning Code Section E). The Zoning Board of Appeals is the determining body for this case. Ms. Klotz read the case into the record. Jeffrey Kaye, property owner, explained the proposal: Existing building backs up to the property line with train track embankment beyond Addition will be slightly forward with a 5.75 rear yard setback proposed Addition on second floor over existing building continues 0 setback Will stain existing bricks to match new bricks, and will use stucco on second floor Currently has 3 commercial spaces (2 are rented to a catering company and one is currently vacant) Addition will add one 2,000 sq ft, 2 bed/2 bath dwelling unit with a 2-car attached garage Page 1 of 3 Zoning Board of Appeals

21 Building footprint is increasing, but is not encroaching further towards the rear property line than the existing building (at 0 ) Ms. Berns inquired if the dwelling unit addition could be further forward to have a compliant rear yard setback of 10. The garage is larger than what the City requires, so that could be made smaller to accommodate the setback. The applicant responded that could be done, but that also shrinks the second floor of livable space, and it then creates a wasted area in the rear that will attract rodents. Ms. McAuley agreed with the applicant and stated in this instance there is no need to maintain 10 of unusable area. The ZBA entered into deliberations. Mr. Gingold stated that given the existing building footprint, the requested variance makes sense and has been well-designed to match the existing building. Ms. McAuley added that adding a dwelling unit is a great transition for the Downtown Fringe District that buffers the downtown from residential areas. Ms. Berns stated she appreciated the intent of the proposal, but the size of the proposed garage and dwelling unit in the location proposed is not the minimum change necessary. There is no compelling argument why the 10 rear setback cannot be achieved in a compliant way. Chair Rodgers noted the unique location of the property and existing building with the train embankment behind, as well as the City parking lot next door, are hardships that make the requested variance reasonable. Also, there is no known opposition to the proposal. The Standards were addressed: 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Yes (No Ms. Berns: there is no hardship) 4. Yes (No Ms. Berns: there is no hardship) 5. Yes 6. Yes 7. Yes (No Ms. Berns: there is no hardship) Mr. Gingold and Ms. McAuley noted the hardship is the adjacent berm and train tracks, which makes open space in the rear yard unusable. Also, pushing the addition forward to comply with the rear setback would make it difficult to maneuver in the driveway area around the trash enclosure to get into the garage. Mr. Gingold motioned for approval of the proposal with the condition that the project be in substantial compliance with the documents and testimony on record. The motion was seconded by Ms. Aerevalo, and approved 5-1 with Ms. Berns opposed. 860 Hinman Avenue ZBA 15ZMJV-0100 Kathleen Barry, attorney, applies for major zoning relief to convert 44 rooming house units to multiple-family residential units, for a total of 102 multiple-family residential units with 9 existing parking spaces in the C1a Commercial Mixed-Use District. The applicant proposes to convert 44 rooming house units to multiple-family residential dwelling units where 58 multiple-family residential dwelling units currently exist for a total of 102 dwelling units where a maximum 40 dwelling units are permitted (Zoning Code Section ), and to increase the parking by zero spaces where an increase of 55 parking spaces is required and 9 parking spaces currently exist (Zoning Code Section C). The Zoning Board of Appeals makes a recommendation to City Council, the determining body for this case. Page 2 of 3 Zoning Board of Appeals

22 Ms. Klotz read the case into the record and noted a new site plan was passed out prior to the meeting that depicts the 9 existing parking spaces on-site (2 of which currently have dumpsters located on them due to the construction of 835 Chicago Avenue). Kearby Kaiser, representative for applicant, explained the proposal: Only change proposed is to add kitchens to the units that currently do not have kitchens, which are considered rooming house units. Change triggers variance requests for total number of dwelling units (since rooming house units are converted to apartments they are then considered dwelling units) and number of parking spaces due to the increase in official dwelling units. Building is currently 100% occupied, but people want kitchens and get confused in rental process why there aren t kitchens. Units without kitchens often use hot plates, which are fire hazards. Full kitchens are safer. Likely won t increase rent. There are no official affordable units. Most units are square feet. Building had electrical upgrade recently. All kitchen equipment will be electric. Anticipate kitchen installation in summer Most residents of the building do not have vehicles. The on-site parking spaces have not been fully rented out in years. Mr. Gingold asked for clarification that there is no increase to the square footage in the building, the total number of units will not change, the total number of occupants will not change, and the number of parking spaces on-site will not change. The applicant confirmed Mr. Gingold s statements as correct. Mr. Gingold asked staff to clarify what the intent of the regulation for the number of dwelling units allowed on the property is for and if staff supports the proposal. Ms. Klotz explained it is intended to control the density and bulk of structures. Since this case is not proposing to increase the number of occupants within the building nor is it putting an addition on the building, it is supported by City staff. The ZBA entered into deliberations. Chair Rodgers noted he had no issue with the parking variance since the building is fully rented but on-site parking is not. The Standards were addressed: 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Yes 4. Yes 5. Yes 6. Yes 7. Yes Mr. Gingold motioned for approval of the proposal with the condition that the project be in substantial compliance with the documents and testimony on record. The motion was seconded by Ms. Cullen, and unanimously recommended for approval. The meeting was adjourned at 7:50pm. Page 3 of 3 Zoning Board of Appeals

23

24

25

26

27

28

29 Design and Project Review (DAPR) 1402 Lincoln St. Recommendation to ZBA

30 1402 Lincoln St. October 20, 2017 User drawn points Zoning Boundaries & Labels 1:1, mi km City of Evanston IL, Imagery courtesy Cook County GIS Copyright 2016 City of Evanston This map is not a plat of survey. This map is provided "as is" without warranties of any kind. See for more information.

31 1402 Lincoln St. October 20, 2017 User drawn points Tax Parcels 1:1, mi km City of Evanston IL, Imagery courtesy Cook County GIS Copyright 2016 City of Evanston This map is not a plat of survey. This map is provided "as is" without warranties of any kind. See for more information.

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54