Community Development Department

Transcription

1 Community Development Department SUBJECT: Reconsideration of a recommendation for Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Official Map Amendment, Rezoning, and Conditional Use for Canaan Church at 1255 Milwaukee Avenue MEETING DATE: November 13, 2018 TO: FROM: Village of Glenview Plan Commission Village President and Board of Trustees CASE # : P LOCATION: PROJECT NAME: 1255 Milwaukee Avenue Canaan Presbyterian Church ACTION REQUESTED: The Board of Trustees has remanded this case to the Plan Commission for additional review of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment requested by the applicant. The Comprehensive Plan considered midterm redevelopment opportunities (10-20 years) and short-term opportunities (a case-by-case review of proposals consistent with the mid-term recommendations). The Village Board is requesting the Plan Commission s review of long-term (20-40 years) planning options and the potential impacts of the proposed land use upon the redevelopment of this portion of the Milwaukee Avenue Corridor. BACKGROUND: The Plan Commission recommended approval of the application on August 28, 2018 after holding a public hearing, deliberating the merits of the case, and providing proposed conditions of operation. Following the positive recommendation from the Plan Commission, the Board of Trustees evaluated the recommendation on October 16, During their review, the Board of Trustees identified a need to further evaluate the Comprehensive Plan s long-term redevelopment scenarios and how the applicant s requested Comprehensive Plan amendment may affect the feasibility of those scenarios. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The subject property is currently improved with an office building. The building was primarily used for medical office land uses until it was vacated several years ago. The property is subject to the recommendations of the 2017 Comprehensive Plan (Subarea 7) and the Milwaukee Avenue Corridor Plan. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the Village should consider redevelopment scenarios that rezone the 1

2 parcels within the subarea to retail uses or redevelopments under the current industrial zoning. The Comprehensive Plan does not provide specific guidance on religious uses in this area, although residential zoning within the area adjacent to The Grove (immediately east of Subarea 7) was a redevelopment scenario that could be considered. Redevelopment Objectives, Goals and Development Parameters: Objectives: The objectives of the Redevelopment Chapter in the Comprehensive Plan are as follows: ❶ Prevent blight and encourage developments which preserve the character of the existing residential stock and the value of the properties within and adjacent to an area. ❷ Replace incompatible land uses and encourage the redevelopment or reuse of underutilized, vacant properties or buildings which detract from the economic vitality and aesthetic appearance of the Village. Goals and Development Parameters: The intent of the goals and development parameters listed in the Redevelopment Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan is to provide guidance to staff and the Board of Trustees to facilitate the review, analysis, and approval of appropriate redevelopment proposals in the identified subareas. The guidance included within the plan attempts to answer the question of What does the Village want to see on this site? and prescriptively identifies the opportunities and issues that would need to be addressed in conjunction with any redevelopment request. Beyond the Comprehensive Plan, development proposals are required to comply with existing codes, ordinances, and guidelines of the Village, which provide detailed direction with respect to densities, site coverage, setbacks, building height, landscaping, parking, and other aspects of development. Proposed redevelopment projects may be subject to additional conditions resulting from the regulatory review process conducted by the Plan Commission with the benefit of public input, and the consideration of development approvals by the Village Board of Trustees. Subarea 7 Comprehensive Plan Process: During the review of this subarea, the Comprehensive Plan Committee requested a special study of the area given the adjacency to the Environmentally Significant Area, configuration of land ownership, and the existing tenets of the Milwaukee Avenue Corridor Plan. Staff worked with Teska Associates, Inc. to conduct a detailed analysis of potential short and long-term scenarios of the subarea. Two (2) neighborhood meetings, one each before and after the release of the plan, were conducted with the property owners in and adjacent to the subarea. In August 2016, the Plan Commission reviewed the attached Special Study Area. The Plan Commission considered permitting rezoning to allow retail uses given the limited opportunities to consolidate all the various properties that would be needed to realize a larger scale redevelopment. The Commission also considered the possibility for residential uses adjacent to The Grove as part of the long-term vision to potentially allow a future multi-parcel redevelopment. The Commission s comments were incorporated into the Subarea 7 Goal (see below) and the recommendations from the Special Study Area (also below) are summarized for reference. 2

3 Subarea 7 Goal - The Village should consider redevelopment scenarios under the existing industrial zoning regulations or consider rezoning of parcels in Subarea 7 to retail use, such as a boutique hotel or day care center, or residential uses adjacent to The Grove (along eastern edge of subarea). Milwaukee Avenue Special Study Area Recommendations for Subarea 7 - The long-term scenario anticipated retail / commercial / restaurants fronting Milwaukee Avenue, with office uses behind. Such uses are reflective of others in the area and can be sited in a manner compatible with surrounding properties. The short-term scenario approach is representative of the optimal development outcome detailed in the long-term scenario, which would be evaluated via the rezoning or conditional use process. The Special Study Area is included as an attachment following the Plan Commission Discussion section. 3

4 PLAN COMMISSION DISCUSSION: At the meeting staff will present information to lead the Plan Commission through the discussion points (A-C) outlined below. Following the Commission s discussion and evaluation of the long-term planning implications, staff requests a recommendation on any proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and a recommendation on the requested reconsideration of the applicant s proposal. The Plan Commission should discuss the following: A. The Comprehensive Plan Committee and Plan Commission were challenged in crafting a recommendation for Subarea 7 based on the varied ownership issues, including the number of owners and their various positions related to a possible sale. Further consideration of the recommendations identified in the Milwaukee Avenue Special Study Area, as detailed in the August 19, 2016 memorandum from Teska Associates, Inc. should be evaluated. B. At the time of the Comprehensive Plan s approval, the largest land owners were consulted on the near-term feasibility of combining adjacent parcels to facilitate a large-scale redevelopment of the area. There was little interest in a large-scale redevelopment at the time, however long-term planning opportunities should be further reviewed to determine the impacts of residential zoning changes along Milwaukee Avenue and the effects these changes might have on this commercial corridor. The property owners of Subarea 7 were notified ahead of the Plan Commission s re-consideration of this proposal. C. Clustering of similar uses in close proximity, especially around a major destination, is a common zoning practice. The resulting uses are compatible, consistent and generate comparable traffic volumes. Further study of the impacts of a residential land use designation on the commercial corridor could be evaluated, particularly when considering a year time horizon for potential redevelopment. 4

5 Memorandum To: Jeff Brady, AICP Director of Planning, Village of Glenview From: Michael Blue, FAICP Principal, Teska Associates Jodi Mariano, PLA, ASLA Principal, Teska Associates Date: August 19, 2016 RE: Milwaukee Avenue Subarea #7 Special Study Area Background The Glenview Comprehensive Plan Committee recommended a Special Study Area for the Milwaukee Avenue Subarea #7 (located on the west side of Milwaukee Avenue roughly between Kennicott Lane and the north edge of the Castillian Court development) be conducted. The Committee discussed several potential redevelopment scenarios, which included: Retail adjacent to Milwaukee Avenue Single-family residential adjacent to the Grove or other residential uses Townhomes/Rowhomes adjacent to the Grove or other residential uses Due to the configuration of lots and multiple owners, the Committee recognized coordination of the multiple property owners was necessary to achieve a successful redevelopment of the Subarea. A primary concern of the Committee was to ensure a cohesive vision for the Subarea was crafted, compared to allowing one-off redevelopments reflecting the latest trends. A desire for the synergies a concentration of similar uses would create was identified. Neighborhood Meetings The Village hosted two meetings on March 24, 2016 at which neighbors of the Subarea and the property owners within the Subarea, meeting separately, reviewed the Comprehensive Plan Committee s recommendations. Both groups discussed the constraints and opportunities associated with the Subarea and expressed their vision for the area. The neighbors relayed concerns with the potential for busy restaurants and preferred established retail businesses and single-family residential uses. The property owners noted the difficulty in finding smaller office tenants to take over vacant space and several of the owners stated their long-term plans were to stay as they currently exist. Following the feedback from the neighborhood meeting, staff reached out to those property owners who indicated they would be interested in considering a near-term redevelopment of their land. Representatives of the property owners participated in a June 24, 2016 meeting at which multiple potential scenarios for redevelopment of the various sites were discussed. While Guaranteed Trust at 5

6 1275 Milwaukee Avenue and LifeStorage at 1205 Milwaukee Avenue stated they had no interest in redevelopment, there were four parcels within the Subarea (see right) who identified their interest as follows: A Milwaukee Avenue: Former medical office building currently for-sale or forrent. B Milwaukee Avenue: Two connected office buildings, offering office space for rent open to discussing potential redevelopment ideas. C Milwaukee Avenue: Existing singlefamily residence site for sale with interest from a prospective retail purchaser. D Milwaukee Avenue: Vacant lot owned by LifeStorage located south of selfstorage use site for sale with interest from non-office uses. Subarea Redevelopment Study C A B Consistent with the initial interest in potential D redevelopment and as part of the evaluation of the Subarea, the assessment includes four parcels (A, B, C and D). The study addresses site planning feasibility, but does not include financial analysis to determine the underlying economics of the plan or alternatives noted. The site design is intended to convey a sound approach to development in the area and raise options for the owners to consider in evaluating financial opportunities. The attached redevelopment study sketch presents a long-term scenario for the Subarea reflective of issues and opportunities drawn from discussions with property owners and neighbors, as well as land use and development policy direction from the Village s comprehensive planning process. On August 10, 2016, staff met again with the four property owners (and/or owner s representatives) to review a draft of the long-term scenario for the Subarea. Based on the feedback, the owner of parcel B is no longer interested in potential redevelopment of their site, as many of their vacant tenant spaces are being rented. As such, both a short-term alternative and the redevelopment study sketch demonstrating a long-term vision for the Subarea are included. A recommendation on how the shortterm alternative might be implemented, given the recent property ownership feedback, with a focus on the long-term vision is detailed in this memorandum. 6 Page 2

7 Long-term Development Scenario Considerations A long-term commercial redevelopment scenario for the subject sites (A, B, C, and D within the Subarea) is broken down into north and south parcels (see right). The scenario anticipates retail / commercial / restaurants fronting Milwaukee Avenue on the north parcel, with office uses behind. The south redevelopment site is anticipated as office. Such uses are reflective of others in the area and can be sited in a manner compatible with surrounding properties. The Subarea s location near a wide range of residential, businesses and recreational uses presents notable influences: 1. Abt Electronics is a significant and unique draw to this area. 2. Growth in Korean community-influenced retail nearby presents a unique potential market group for the study area. 3. Retail development may be appropriate in some circumstances (as noted below). 4. To the extent that a new hotel is possible in the Subarea, either of the north or south sites could be considered for such a use (as an alternative to the offices indicated). 5. The medical office uses that were prevalent in the area, are seeking new spaces given the latest medical office trends (consolidating space in newer buildings; moving to retail shopping center locations). 6. The potential for residential development in the study area is considered unlikely given the size and shape of developable property, and what would be the proximity of new residential uses to commercial development and the Milwaukee Avenue Corridor. North Parcel - The study for the north development site shows two commercial buildings of approximately 14,000 square feet each fronting Milwaukee. The layout reflects the commercial outbuilding located across Milwaukee Avenue and is considered most appropriate for both siting and urban design reasons. Development of individual lots fronting Milwaukee, following the underlying lotting of approximately one acre sites, has been seen in the region to result in standalone, individually tenanted small commercial or quick serve restaurant uses. Combining the sites to create multiple tenant commercial buildings allows for more square footage to be developed, facilitates flexibility and commonality in potential tenants, allows occupancy by larger businesses, and is better suited to address the opportunities noted above. 7 Page 3

8 From an urban design perspective, the consolidated development facilitates a high quality of design. As the long-term development scenario shows, the space between the commercial buildings fronting Milwaukee provides visual relief over a single building and is reflected in the office buildings behind them. This gap creates a plaza space to accommodate outdoor activities, passive open space, and / or outdoor dining. Further, it allows the area to be presented as a single development with a consistent appearance, with the open space providing the visual relief. The slip road is shown along Milwaukee Avenue, and the rear of the site is designed to accommodate stormwater detention. The office buildings are anticipated as one or two story buildings that would likely attract single users adequate parking can be provided for these uses. Buildings constructed on speculation of securing tenants are no longer common as they once were, but smaller office buildings for medical or financial users are seen along the corridor. The development scenario requires consolidation of sites controlled by three separate property owners 1255, 1245/47, and 1223 Milwaukee Avenue. The office building at 1255 is vacant and currently on the market for sale. The office buildings at 1245/47 are partially occupied (the site has two separate buildings connected by an enclosed passageway, with one of the buildings located generally in front, or west of the other). The 1223 property currently is an occupied single family home that is on the market to be sold. North Parcel - Preliminary Site Data: o Site Area 6.9 ac o Retail buildings: approximately 28,000 square feet o Parking: 114 cars o Office cluster: approximately 58,000 square feet. o Parking: 228 cars South Parcel The south development site is presented in the scenario as an office use. It had been anticipated as a part of the LifeStorage operation, but ownership chose to spin off the property. As a standalone site without a relationship to LifeStorage the property can accommodate limited square footage of development. Retail use of this site is not optimal in that the subject property is in close proximity to a residential area to the east and is preferred to present a lower intensity of development. South Parcel - Preliminary Site Data: o Site Area 1.4 ac o Office: approximately 22,500 square feet o Parking: 67 cars 8 Page 4

9 Alternative Long-term Scenarios Based on current occupancy and development interest of the parcel s ownership, consolidating all the properties may not be feasible in the near term. However, alternatives to the development scenario that reflect the unique opportunities of the corridor can be considered: A partial redevelopment of the 1245/1247 could remove only the front (west) office building, with that portion of the site being consolidated with 1255 and 1223 for a development consistent with that shown in the redevelopment concept. The western portion of the 1245/1247 building could be repurposed to exhibit a retail design focusing on addressing Milwaukee Avenue and populated with retail uses fronting along the street. A similar option could be accomplished without the 1255 property if that building were to remain as office / medical use, but would result in less commercial square footage. The 1223 property could be developed as an additional office use affiliated with 1245/1247, with a new office building constructed on the site and the parking lot integrated to the existing office parking lot. Recommendation Given the complexities of the potential long-term development scenarios and alternatives, the current conditions of the four subject properties, and taking into consideration numerous conversations with the current owners of the properties, challenges remain in meeting the objectives listed in the long-term scenario for this Subarea. In particular, owners of the 1223 Milwaukee site and the south portion of the LifeStorage property have indicated to the Village strong interest in developing soon. Both property owners have provided to the Village correspondences that indicate inquiries to purchase the properties are for uses other than office (examples include - retail, day care, residential, and senior housing uses). As such, an alternative approach may be considered by the Village for the two potential development sites (B & D) in accordance with the below outlined development parameters. Alternative Approach The short-term alternative approach is representative of the optimal development outcome detailed in the long-term scenario. Retail uses are not permitted under the current I-1 Limited Commercial District zoning designation and hotel uses would be zoned a Planned Development. Should the Village wish to consider redevelopment proposals on parcels B & D, the following factors should be applied as part of any development review: Redevelopment should reflect the intent and recommendations of the Milwaukee Avenue Corridor Plan. To that end, development plans for parcels B and D should be consistent with one another to reflect a synergy between any proposed uses and site planning characteristics. It is recommended that the current property owners jointly consider how to create compatible design character and land use for the subject properties. 9 Page 5

10 Rezone the properties for which a request is received from the I-1 Limited Commercial District to I-2 Light Industrial District, which allows additional industrial businesses and certain retail businesses as a conditional uses. Special consideration would have to be given to the site design of any parcel proposed to be rezoned in the Subarea, as numerous permitted uses under the I-2 District could be considered objectionable from the perspective of the overall vision for the area, especially if located adjacent to existing residential uses. Proposed redevelopments could be evaluated via the rezoning or conditional use processes and design considerations that include additional criteria based on the direction of the comprehensive plan, including the following redevelopment parameters: o Building designs should be of a character that can potentially be convertible to office use in the future. o Architectural appearance of the buildings should be compatible with nearby commercial developments (such as the Abt Design Center across Milwaukee Avenue). o Access to the future slip road should be maintained for all sites and include easements with ingress and egress onto adjacent properties. o Development should mitigate any adverse impacts on adjacent properties through use of intensive landscaping. o Due to congestion on Milwaukee Avenue and multiple curb cuts along this corridor, any proposed use should limit the amount of curb cuts and create access points to adjacent properties that connect a slip road to a proposed stop light. o Any proposed auto-oriented use should be sited to only include right in/out access to Milwaukee Avenue, and include access to a controlled intersection in order to minimize impacts on Milwaukee Avenue traffic flow. To maintain the office character of the corridor, drive-thrus should be located at the rear of buildings or, if on the side, well screened. Rezone the properties for which a request is received from the I-1 Limited Commercial District to Planned Development, which allows hotel uses. A new zoning category could be established to allow flex space use (nontraditional industrial uses like auto repair and sales, personal services, entertainment, and sports/fitness training) in order to support small-scale, low impact, incubator flex-type industrial spaces for small and emerging businesses. 10 Page 6

11 VILLAGE OF GLENVIEW MILWAUKEE AVENUE SUBAREA REDEVELOPMENT STUDY THE GROVE SITE DATA: NORTH PARCEL 6.9 Acres RETAIL 28,000 Square Feet 114 Cars OFFICE (1 and 3 Story) THE GROVE EXISTING OFFICE 58,000 Square Feet 228 Cars Office WYNDHAM GLENVIEW SUITES PARKING Office 1 story 8,000 3 story 42,000 Retail SITE DATA: SOUTH PARCEL 1.4 Acres 14,000 Office 1 story 8,000 OFFICE (3 Story) Retail 14,000 22,500 Square Feet 67 Cars ABT EXISTING COMMERCIAL EXISTING OFFICE Study Area Boundary Parcel Boundary Potential Future Traffic Signal Office 3 story 22,500 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL om o m Feet 400

12 PREVIOUS PLAN COMMISSION DISCUSSION: At the August 28, 2018 Plan Commission meeting, staff presented an overview of the project which included the following: Applicant proposes to operate a church of approximately 100 congregants; Request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Official Map Amendment, Rezoning to residential zoning, and Conditional Use to allow operation of a church; No exterior site plan changes are proposed at this time; Sufficient parking exists for approximately 230 congregants Following staff s summary, the Plan Commission began discussing the proposal and focused on the following issues: Size of Congregation: The Plan Commission reviewed the potential impacts of larger events that may be held on the subject property outside of typical hours of operation. The Plan Commission felt that special events which exceed 100 occupants would require a special event permit that may necessitate additional traffic control and review by the Village. Comprehensive Plan: Staff clarified that the 2017 Village of Glenview Comprehensive Plan provides specific guidance regarding the proposed rezoning of the land within the subarea from industrial land use to retail uses, and residential land uses only adjacent to The Grove. Rezoning to residential along Milwaukee Avenue as requested by the applicant to allow the operation of a religious institution was not considered in the Comprehensive Plan. Milwaukee Avenue Corridor: The Plan Commission discussed the future requirement for Milwaukee Avenue Corridor cross-access easements. These easements would not be required in association with the current proposal since no exterior changes are proposed, but any future changes to the site plan would trigger this requirement. One member of the public spoke during the public hearing to provide comments in favor of the request. The Plan Commission moved to recommend approval of the proposal with additional language which clarifies the terms for future request for special event permits. PREVIOUS PLAN COMMISSION ACTION: On August 28, 2018, Commissioner Witt moved, seconded by Commissioner Korman, to recommend approval, by a 6-0 vote, of Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Official Map Amendment Rezoning and Conditional Use, for the subject property commonly known as 1255 Milwaukee Avenue from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family District to allow the subject property to be utilized as a building primarily devoted to religious worship in accordance with the following conditions: A. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to reflect the rezoning of the subject property from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family District. B. Official Map Amendment to reflect the rezoning of the subject property from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family District. C. Rezoning of the subject property from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family District. 12

13 D. Conditional Use in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 98, Article II, Section (a)(1) and Article II, Section (d)(2) of the Code to allow the operation a building primarily devoted to religious worship upon the subject property, a conditional use in the R1 Residential Zoning District, shall be permitted subject to the following conditions: 1. The use shall be permitted to operate from 7:00 am to 8:00 pm daily, with exceptions for the following: 2. There shall be a maximum occupancy of 234 people during normal services, however any special events exceeding 100 persons and/or with the potential for impact on the community or traffic safety shall be required to obtain a special event permit from the Village of Glenview. In addition, petitioner understands that in the event that they need to obtain a special event permit from the Village, that there might be additional traffic control personnel required by the Village. 3. The petitioner shall be in receipt of a building permit within 1 year following the adoption of said ordinance, or the conditional use will lapse. 4. If the conditional use is abandoned or discontinued for more than three (3) months, without substantial attempt to resume such use, the conditional use shall be rescinded. E. All materials presented to the Commission on August 28, 2018 and associated revisions required by the Plan Commission. Commissioner Korman seconded the motion. YEAS: Commissioners Burton, Duff, Fallon, Igleski, Korman, and Witt (6) NAYS: None (0) ABSTAIN: None (0) ATTACHMENTS: 1. Sample Motion 2. Previous Plan Commission Staff Report and Exhibits 3. Excerpt from Minutes of the August 28, 2018 Plan Commission Meeting 4. Excerpt from the Minutes of the October 16, 2018 Board of Trustees Meeting 13

14 Sample Motion Based upon the petitioner s application materials, testimony, and discussion relating to the petition which together demonstrate compliance with judicial standards for rezoning and the Conditional Use Standards of Chapter 98, Article II. Administration and III of the Municipal Code, I move in the case of P , Canaan Presbyterian Church, the Plan Commission recommend the Village Board of Trustees approve an Ordinance granting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Official Map Amendment Rezoning and Conditional Use of the subject property commonly known as 1255 Milwaukee Avenue from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family District to allow the subject property to be utilized as a building primarily devoted to religious worship in accordance with the following conditions: A. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to reflect the rezoning of the subject property from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family District. B. Official Map Amendment to reflect the rezoning of the subject property from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family District. C. Rezoning of the subject property from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family District. D. Conditional Use in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 98, Article II, Section (a)(1) and Article II, Section (d)(2) of the Code to allow the operation a building primarily devoted to religious worship upon the subject property, a conditional use in the R- 1 Residential Zoning District, shall be permitted subject to the following conditions: 1. The use shall be permitted to operate from 7:00 am to 8:00 pm daily, with exceptions for the following: Day Event Time Attendance Tuesday and Friday Evenings Prayer Meetings 6:00 p.m. 6:30 p.m. 10 People Thursday Evenings Bible Study 7:30 p.m. 10:00 p.m. 5 people Monday through Friday Music Lessons 3:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m. 10 people Friday Evenings Prayer Service 8:00 p.m. 10:00 p.m. 20 people Sunday Morning Mass 8:30 a.m. 9:30 a.m. 20 people Sunday Morning Mass 11:00 a.m. 12:00 p.m. 70 people As needed Weddings / Special Events people 2. There shall be a maximum occupancy of 234 people during normal services. Any special events exceeding 100 persons and/or with the potential for impact on the community or traffic safety shall be required to obtain a special event permit from the Village of Glenview. In addition, the petitioner understands that in the event that they need to obtain a special event permit from the Village, that there might be additional traffic control personnel required by the Village. 14

15 3. The petitioner shall be in receipt of a building permit within 1 year following the adoption of said ordinance, or the conditional use will lapse. 4. If the conditional use is abandoned or discontinued for more than three (3) months, without substantial attempt to resume such use, the conditional use shall be rescinded. E. All materials presented to the Commission on November 13, 2018 and associated revisions required by the Plan Commission. 15

16 Report Disclaimer: Village 16staff makes no representations regarding support, endorsement, or the likelihood of approval or disapproval by any Glenview regulatory commission or the Village Board of Trustees. Village 5. of Glenview Plan Commission Staff Report August 28, 2018 TO: Chairman and Plan Commissioners CASE #: P FROM: Community Development Department CASE MANAGER: Tony Repp, Planner SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Official Map Amendment, Rezoning, and Conditional Use ACTION REQUESTED: Staff requests consideration of a Plan Commission recommendation to the Village Board of Trustees APPLICANT: Canaan Presbyterian Church 8930 Waukegan Road Morton Grove, IL LOCATION: PROJECT NAME: 1255 Milwaukee Avenue Canaan Presbyterian Church OWNER: 1255 Glenview LLC 500 Park Blvd., Suite 1010 Itasca, IL CONTACT: Lawrence M. Freedman 77 W. Washington Street, Ste Chicago, IL PROPOSAL: The applicant, Canaan Presbyterian Church, represented by Lawrence M. Freedman, requests approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Official Map Amendment, and Rezoning of the subject property from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family Residential District and a subsequent Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 98, Article II, Section 98-50(a)(1) and Article III, Section of the Glenview Municipal Code to allow the existing building upon the property to be used as a building primarily devoted to religious worship, a conditional use in the R-1 Residential Zoning District.

17 Site Assessment VILLAGE OF GLENVIEW ZONING: PIN(s): Current North East South West I-1 Limited Commercial District I-1 Limited Commercial District P-1 Public Lands District I-1 Limited Commercial District B-2 General Business District AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY: 17

18 PICTOMETRIC PHOTOGRAPHY: South Elevation(s) East Elevation(s) 18

19 Project Summary BACKGROUND: The subject property is currently improved with an office building. The building was primarily used for medical office land uses until it was vacated in recent years. The property is subject to the recommendations of the 2017 Comprehensive Plan and the Milwaukee Avenue Corridor Plan. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests a recommendation to the Board of Trustees for approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Official Map Amendment, Rezoning, and Conditional Use to allow a religious institution to occupy the existing building. Interior renovations would be completed to allow for a gathering space of approximately 100 people. Weekly activities would be consistent with the following summary: Day Event Time Attendance Tuesday and Friday Prayer Meetings 6:00 p.m. 6:30 p.m. 10 People Evenings Thursday Evenings Bible Study 7:30 p.m. 10:00 p.m. 5 people Monday through Friday Music Lessons 3:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m. 10 people Friday Evenings Prayer Service 8:00 p.m. 10:00 p.m. 20 people Sunday Morning Mass 8:30 a.m. 9:30 a.m. 20 people Sunday Morning Mass 11:00 a.m. 12:00 p.m. 70 people As needed Weddings / Special Events people The applicant is not proposing any other alterations to the property at this time. There will be no kitchen or banquet facilities on-site. It is likely the applicant will request signage at a point in the future which will require additional review and approval from the Appearance Commission. The applicant may pursue a childcare/daycare facility on-site in the future. This would require the applicant to return to the Plan Commission and Board of Trustees for review of alterations to the Conditional Use and any associated site plan modifications. POTENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS: The subject property lies adjacent to existing commercial properties. No correspondence has been received regarding this petition to date. No impacts are expected from the added traffic. During special events or large events, the applicant may be required to provide traffic control services through the Glenview Police Department. This determination is made by Village Officials during review of a special event permit. 19

20 Plan Commission Review COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: The 2017 Village of Glenview Comprehensive Plan does not provide specific guidance regarding the proposed rezoning of the property from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family District as requested by the applicant to allow the operation of a religious institution. An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan would be required to allow the proposed conditions. 20

21 OFFICIAL MAP AMENDMENT: The Village s Official map prescribes appropriate land uses for property within the Village and property within 1.5 miles of the Village s corporate limits. Also, the Village s Official Map is incorporated by reference within the Village s Comprehensive Plan to provide guidance regarding rezoning petitions. Since the 2017 Village of Glenview Comprehensive Plan does not provide specific guidance regarding the proposed rezoning of the property from P-1 Public Lands District to I-2 Light Industrial District as requested by the applicant, an amendment to the Official Map would be required to allow the proposed conditions. REZONING STANDARDS: The Plan Commission should consider the following judicial standards and requisites for rezoning: 1. The existing uses and zoning of nearby property. 2. The extent to which property values may be diminished by the particular zoning restrictions. 3. The extent to which the destruction of property values upon the plaintiff promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the public. 4. The relative gain to the public as compared to the hardship imposed upon the individual property owner. 5. The suitability of the subject property for the zoned purposes. 6. The length of time the property has been vacant as zoned considered in the context of land development in the area in the vicinity of the subject property. 7. The community need for the proposed use. 8. The care with which the community has undertaken to plan its land use development. 21

22 CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS: Per Sec of the Municipal Code, the Plan Commission shall evaluate any petition for Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the following standards before offering a recommendation to the Village Board of Trustees: 1. The proposed conditional use at the particular location is necessary or desirable for the public convenience; and it will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of property already permitted in the immediate vicinity; nor will it diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood; nor will it affect a significant change in the character of the neighborhood. 2. The location and size of the conditional use, the nature and intensity of the operation involved in or conducted in connection with it, the size of the site in relation to it, and the location of the site with respect to streets giving access to it, shall be such that it will be in harmony with present development and the appropriate and orderly future development of the district in which it is located, as well as other butting districts. 3. The location, nature, and height of buildings, walls, and fences, and the nature and extent of the landscaping on the site shall be such that the use will not unreasonably hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent and nearby land and buildings. 4. Parking areas shall be of adequate size for the particular use, properly located, and suitably screened from adjoining residential uses, and the entrance and exit drives shall be laid out so as to prevent traffic hazards and nuisances, and minimize traffic congestion in the area. 5. A use which is permitted in another district by conditional use shall comply with all applicable bulk regulations of the district in which the use is located. Please refer to the applicant s Conditional Use application within the attached application materials for details regarding the applicant s responses and justifications for the proposed use in regard to the Conditional Use Standards. 22

23 Existing Proposed Allowed/Permitted Compliance No Zoning R-1 R-1 Rezoning I-1 Required Lot Size 43,560 sq. ft. 43,560 sq. ft. 111,911 sq. ft. Yes Building Height feet feet feet Yes Minimum Front Yard Setback (West) feet feet feet Yes Minimum Side Yard Setback (North) Minimum Side Yard Setback (South) Minimum Rear Yard Setback (East) Maximum Building Size Impervious Lot Coverage 7.69 feet 7.69 feet feet No Existing Nonconforming feet feet feet Yes feet feet feet Yes 13,934 square feet 53,752 square feet 13,934 square feet 21,424 square feet Yes 53,752 sq. ft. 20,143 sq. ft. Controlled by Site Plan Review PARKING REQUIREMENTS: The Zoning Ordinance stipulates formulas to be applied to various possible land uses in order to establish the minimum number of required parking stalls. These parking formulas have been examined by staff to establish the most restrictive requirements, which can be summarized as follows: Parking Requirements Assembly Worship Space Specialty School / Lessons Formula Quantity Total Required 1 Parking stall per 3 fixed seats 1 per student / instructor 100 Seats 15 Students / 3 instructors Total Proposed Compliance 33 stalls 78 stalls Yes 18 stalls 78 Stalls Yes 33(Sundays) 18 (Weekday) 78 stalls Yes 23

24 Technical Review TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS: A parking / traffic study was prepared for the proposed project which evaluated the use and scope of proposed traffic. A review of projected impacts and site analysis was conducted by James J. Benes and Associates. The Village s third-party consultant concurred with the results of the applicant s study which showed the proposed parking and traffic was suitable for the location. Given the relatively small size of the congregation, vehicles exiting onto Milwaukee Avenue are not expected to cause any addition congestion. On Sundays, the busiest time for the facility, the traffic on Milwaukee Avenue is off-peak and traffic circulation is not expected to be an issue. COMPLIANCE WITH VILLAGE PLANS: Village Plan Compliance Yes / No / N/A Comments Comprehensive Plan Yes The proposal would require an amendment to the Plan Official Map Yes The proposal would require an amendment to the Map to reflect the change in zoning. Waukegan Road Corridor Plan N/A - Milwaukee Avenue Corridor Plan N/A At any point in the future where Final Site Plan Review is requested, the granting of Milwaukee Avenue Corridor Cross-Access easements and slip road configuration may be required. Downtown Revitalization Plan N/A - Natural Resources Plan N/A - Bicycle & Sidewalk Master Plan Yes The property is currently served by existing sidewalk. The GNASH Design Guidelines N/A - PROJECT TIMELINE & OUTREACH: Submittal/Meeting/Action Date A. Application Submitted 07/26/2018 B. Public notice published in the Glenview Announcements 08/09/2018 C. Public notice sign posted upon the subject property 08/09/2018 D. Public notices mailed to surrounding property owners 08/09/2018 E. Plan Commission Meeting 08/28/2018 F. Board of Trustees Meeting (Remanded to PC) 10/16/2018 G. Plan Commission Meeting 11/13/2018 H. Appearance Commission Meeting 11/14/2018 I. Board of Trustees Meeting (2 nd Consideration) TBD J. Permit Issuance TBD K. Inspections TBD L. Certificate of Occupancy N/A 24

25 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) (Zoning Board of Appeals) L. Certificate of Appropriateness (Appearance Commission) M. Final Engineering Approval & Outside Agency Permits N. Building Permits O. Building & Engineering Inspections P. Recorded Documents (Development Agreements, Easements, Covenants, etc.) Q. Business License R. Certificate of Occupancy 25

26 VILLAGE OF GLENVIEW PUBLIC NOTICE P Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Glenview Plan Commission to consider a petition requesting approval of a Conditional Use of the Glenview Municipal Code. The meeting will be held on Tuesday, August 28, 2018 at 7:00 P.M., in the Village Hall, 2500 East Lake Avenue, Glenview, Illinois in accordance with Chapter 65, Section 5/ of the Illinois Compiled Statutes. The property involved is commonly known as 1255 Milwaukee Avenue and is legally described as: LOT 1 IN THE BLOOD CENTER OF NORTHERN ILLINOIS, INC. RESUBDIVISION, BEING A PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29 AND THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 42 NORTH, RANGE 12, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS. The applicant, Canaan Presbyterian Church, represented by Lawrence M. Freedman, requests approval of a Rezoning of the subject property from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family Residential District and a subsequent Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 98, Article II, Section 98-50(a)(1) and Article III, Section of the Glenview Municipal Code to allow the existing building upon the property to be used as a building primarily devoted to religious worship, a conditional use in the R-1 Residential Zoning District. All persons interested should attend and will be given an opportunity to be heard. For additional information regarding this case, please contact Tony Repp, Planner, at (847) Glenview Plan Commission Steven K. Bucklin, Chairman ATTEST: Jeff Rogers Planning Manager Publication Date: August 9,

27 EXCERPT FROM MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 28, 2018 PLAN COMMISSION MEETING P Milwaukee Avenue Canaan Presbyterian Church (Public Hearing) Proposal: Rezoning, Official Map Amendment and Conditional Use Action Requested: Recommendation to Board of Trustees Chairman Bucklin introduced the case: The applicant, Canaan Presbyterian Church, requests approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Official Map Amendment, and Rezoning of the subject property from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family Residential District and a subsequent Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 98, Article II, Section 98-50(a)(1) and Article III, Section of the Glenview Municipal Code to allow the existing building upon the property to be used as a building primarily devoted to religious worship, a conditional use in the R-1 Residential Zoning District. Case Summary Mr. Rogers provided a case summary: The subject property is on the northeast side of Milwaukee Avenue, north of Glenview Road, east of the I-294 overpass, and south of Kennicott Lane. The property is improved with an existing office building, vacant for a number of years. Other improvements include a parking lot extending to the rear of the property, wetlands adjacent to The Grove, and parking in front of the building. The property is several feet higher than adjacent properties to the south. The Comprehensive Plan Committee, the Plan Commission, and Village Board reviewed opportunities for rezoning and cross access in this area. The property would likely be the north terminus of cross access, unless there is redevelopment of it. The applicant proposes: remodeling the interior of an existing commercial office building; accommodating a new house of worship with up to 100 congregants, but allowing about 240 occupants (to be clarified at the end of the presentation); no exterior changes; signage to be reviewed by the Appearance Commission at a later date; conditional use as a house of worship (requiring rezoning from I-1 industrial to R-1 residential). Rezoning from I-1 industrial to R-1 residential is a procedural requirement within the 2017 Comprehensive Plan that allows for conditional use, in this case, a house of worship on the property. There are other houses of worship in Glenview on property rezoned from I-1 to R-1. The property is compliant with R-1 zoning regulations. Impervious lot coverage, however, is controlled by the Plan Commission through site plan review. Greater coverage is allowed a house of worship than a residence. There are 78 parking stalls allowing for a building occupancy of 234 occupants, or seats. The number of parking stalls controls the building occupancy, which could peak during Sunday religious services, but not during the week. Mr. Rogers clarified that Section D of the Sample Motion would allow for 234 occupants. It is only special events, identified in D 2, which would require a permit for more than 100 persons. Chairman Bucklin asked Mr. Rogers to clarify the anticipated traffic impact. 27

28 Mr. Rogers said the peak traffic of the proposed use has shifted to off-peak hours on the weekend, far less than a business use. Though the property is across from Abt Electronics, which has its peak traffic on the weekends, the alignment of the Abt north curb cut (right in / right out) is sufficiently distant to minimize problems. Commissioner Burton asked why with the 78 stalls the occupancy would be limited to 100 people. Mr. Rogers said they look at the land uses on the property that will generate the largest parking demand. The applicant does not anticipate an immediate need for 234 occupants, but they would have the opportunity to expand to that level. If they host special events for 234 people, a special event permit is required. He further clarified with Commissioner Burton that a normal event of 234 people would not require a permit, but a special event in excess of 100 occupants would. The permit allows the Village to anticipate traffic impacts, often during concurrent uses on the site or peak traffic volume. The permit may require a police officer to direct traffic or a traffic release plan. Discussion Chairman Bucklin asked for comments on the rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Commissioner Witt asked if a permit for a special event for more than 100 people would include additional traffic control. Mr. Rogers said the scope of the permitting review could include signage, pedestrians, traffic, and food service. Commissioner Korman wanted to ensure that handicapped parking was included in the review. Mr. Rogers said the accessible parking was on the west end, but perhaps could be at the east end if it proved more practical. Commissioner Korman asked if the ADA signage would be updated, and Mr. Rogers said that new signage would be required. Chairman Bucklin welcomed the petitioner to explain the plans for the site. Mr. Lawrence Freedman, attorney for the petitioner, said they would be happy to work with staff to accommodate the handicapped spaces, but they do not anticipate any changes. Mr. Freedman, in response to Commissioner Witt s question about maximum capacity, said they recognize that the capacity is governed by the number of parking spaces. They are agreeable to a cap of 100 people without a special event permit because they do not anticipate that many special events. If the use changes, they will work with staff, but in the meantime, the restriction is acceptable, even if they could meet code with a higher number. Commissioner Korman said he hoped the church flourishes and has more than 100 people. Commissioner Igleski asked if the seating is intended to be fixed or moveable. 28

29 Mr. Freedman said it was moveable, which Commissioner Igleski said might change the parking calculation. Mr. Freedman added that the number of 100 people was an expectation of the current attendance of a regular service, knowing they could accommodate more people based on the parking. Commissioner Igleski said that the code assessed fixed seating differently than moveable seating as it affects parking or toilets. He asked if assembly use could potentially raise code issues, such as a fire lane around the building, which could not be done here and may be an existing nonconforming condition. Though he raised these potential issues, he noted that it was great to see a building reused. Commissioner Burton asked Mr. Rogers whether cross access under the Comprehensive Plan would be accomplished eventually. Mr. Rogers said the Comprehensive Plan required cross access easements of adjacent properties in redevelopment. If external modifications were to be made, the subject property would have to have a grade change and curb cut change to accommodate an adjacent embankment and retaining wall. The curb cut into the subject property would likely be closed to allow for the use of the adjacent curb cut by all users on the east side of the block. There would also be a cross access from the subject property to the adjacent property to the north, which is currently blocked by a pond. Commissioner Burton asked if they could require cross access later if they do not require it now. Mr. Rogers said the Village would require cross access easements anytime there would be land development (requests for modifications). Chairman Bucklin asked Mr. Freedman if they had any plans to arrange parking to the south in the event of large gatherings. Mr. Freedman said that they did not have such a plan and did not envision the need for it. If necessary, they would have to find someone on their side of the street for additional parking. Commissioner Duff concurred with Commissioner Burton s question on the slip road (cross access). He said when he recently exited the property to go south on Milwaukee Avenue (left), he nearly hit another car because the driver did not see him. Whatever the Commission can do in process and without undue burden for the applicant is critical in controlling access to Milwaukee Road. Mr. Freedman agreed that concerns over cross access made sense, but there were so many variables in this case, notably property use and the difference in grade. Many questions would need to be addressed if they were to consider cross access at this time. Mr. Rogers said even though the Village can require cross access when site improvements are proposed, they can encourage independent solutions among adjacent property owners as the need arises. Public Hearing Chairman Bucklin opened the public hearing. 29

30 Mr. Joseph Nam of 4156 Central Road, Glenview, came forward, but decided that since questions and answers had been adequately addressed, he would waive his opportunity to speak to the Commissioners. Chairman Bucklin closed the public hearing. Discussion Commissioner Korman thanked the petitioner and team for coming and showing their support for the building. He noted that the Commission does not often get a crowd like this for any one project and thanked them for making this happen in our community. Commissioner Witt asked for clarification on maximum occupancy to include in the Motion. Mr. Rogers said Section D 2, any events should be limited to any special events. There should also be clarification in Section D that up to 234 occupants would be permitted during normal services. This is a zoning requirement that supersedes other requirements. They would not be allowed to have more than 234 people on the property because of the zoning requirement. Motion Commissioner Witt made a motion of approval as amended: Based upon the petitioner s application materials, testimony, and discussion relating to the petition which together demonstrate compliance with judicial standards for rezoning and the Conditional Use Standards of Chapter 98, Article II. Administration and III of the Municipal Code, I move in the case of P , Canaan Presbyterian Church, the Plan Commission recommend the Village Board of Trustees approve an Ordinance granting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Official Map Amendment Rezoning and Conditional Use of the subject property commonly known as 1255 Milwaukee Avenue from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family District to allow the subject property to be utilized as a building primarily devoted to religious worship in accordance with the following conditions: F. Rezoning of the subject property from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family District. G. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to reflect the rezoning of the subject property from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family District. H. Official Map Amendment to reflect the rezoning of the subject property from I-1 Limited Commercial District to R-1 Single-Family District. I. Conditional Use in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 98, Article II, Section (a)(1) and Article II, Section (d)(2) of the Code to allow the operation a building primarily devoted to religious worship upon the subject property, a conditional use in the R1 Residential Zoning District, shall be permitted subject to the following conditions: 5. The use shall be permitted to operate from 7:00 am to 8:00 pm daily, with exceptions for the following: 30

31 6. Any events exceeding 100 persons and/or with the potential for impact on the community or traffic safety shall be required to obtain a special event permit from the Village of Glenview. There shall be a maximum occupancy of 234 people during normal services. And, in addition, petitioner understands that in the event that they need to obtain a special event permit from the Village, that there might be additional traffic control personnel required by the Village in addition. 7. The petitioner shall be in receipt of a building permit within 1 year following the adoption of said ordinance, or the conditional use will lapse. 8. If the conditional use is abandoned or discontinued for more than three (3) months, without substantial attempt to resume such use, the conditional use shall be rescinded. J. All materials presented to the Commission on August 28, 2018 and associated revisions required by the Plan Commission. Commissioner Korman seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: ABSTAIN: Commissioners Burton, Duff, Fallon, Igleski, Korman, and Witt None None Chairman Bucklin thanked the petitioner for utilizing the facility in a different manner, welcomed them to the Village of Glenview, and wished them luck with the Board of Trustees. 31

32 EXCERPT FROM MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 16, 2018 BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING a. First Consideration of an Ordinance for Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Official Map Amendment, Rezoning, and Conditional Use for Canaan Church at 1255 Milwaukee Ave. Remanded to Plan Commission Director Brady said Canaan Church is proposed south of Kennicott Lane on the east side of Milwaukee Avenue across the street from Abt Electronics. On August 28th the Plan Commission recommended approval on a 6-0 vote. The subject area is designated in the 2017 Comprehensive Plan as Subarea 7, the Milwaukee Avenue offices. The area is zoned I-1 which is Glenview s most restricted limited commercial district. The homestead of the original owner for all the properties within the subarea is still zoned R-1. During the Comprehensive Plan process, it was determined that rezoning of property within the subarea could be considered if it were retail or commercial uses along Milwaukee Avenue and residential uses adjacent to The Grove. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to rezone the property from I-1 to an R-1 residential district along Milwaukee Avenue to allow a conditional use approval that permits the remodeling of the existing office building to allow the operation of a building primarily devoted to religious worship. The applicant s proposal is to modify the interior of the former office building with no site plan modifications requested at this time. Canaan Church has about 100 members. The Plan Commission discussed building occupancy, the ultimate capacity of the congregation during a service and the amount of available parking. The proposed conditional use includes a condition that caps the assembly of people at 234 in the building based on the existing parking stalls permitted for the former office development. The ordinance clarifies parking and special event conditions, including exceptions for late night prayer services, Bible study meetings as well as special events that have more than 100 people in attendance. Director Brady reviewed the 2017 Comprehensive Plan redevelopment considerations, which is to prevent blight and encourage developments that preserve character and replace incompatible land uses, and encourage redevelopment or reuse of underutilized vacant properties or buildings. The Comprehensive Plan notes that the Village could consider redevelopment scenarios for subarea 7 under the existing industrial zoning regulations for I-1 or I-2, rezoning to B-2 to allow retail, and residential land uses adjacent to The Grove. He gave examples of what would be permitted. Director Brady addressed general questions. Trustee Karton began a discussion about the recommendations to redevelop subarea 7 on a case-by-case basis. She noted that tonight s meeting material didn t advocate for consideration of potential short term redevelopment projects one parcel at a time. If a parcel is redeveloped as a residential use, the long term vision was to locate it close to The Grove. Mr. Brady agreed with the long term vision but added that the overall vision for the area was complex. When the special subarea was discussed, the owner of the subject property, the owner of the office buildings adjacent to the subject property and the owner of the farmhouse were interested in redeveloping their respective sites in the near term. By the end of the process, the owner of the office buildings that are adjacent to the subject property were not interested in a large scale redevelopment. During the comprehensive planning process, the property defaulted to a short term plan to be handled on a case-by-case, that is, a rezoning request or conditional use request would be considered against the long term recommendations. 32

33 Trustee Karton was in favor of remanding this case back to the Plan Commission to get a deeper evaluation of the Comprehensive Plan s special study area, since the applicant is requesting to amend the Comprehensive Plan and the requested residential zoning along Milwaukee Avenue doesn t comply with the vision of the 2017 Comprehensive Plan. Trustee Britton said a long term evaluation of the parcel would be beneficial, but remanding the case back to the Plan Commission may result in the parcel sitting fallow again for years. Trustee Hinkamp noted a lack of discussion in the Plan Commission minutes about the Comprehensive Plan, other than that the plan would need to be amended. He wants to better understand the pros and cons of diverting from the Comprehensive Plan before considering approval. Trustee Jenny wanted to know if the proposed project is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan. Trustee Khoja saw a benefit in getting more information from the Plan Commission. Trustee Karton made a motion to remand this case back to the Plan Commission seconded by Trustee Jenny. Attorney Lawrence Friedman came forward to represent the petitioner. Remanding this case back to the Plan Commission would be difficult for the petitioner due to contractual obligations to purchase the property and plans to move forward. The subject property can t be redeveloped as part of a larger development which is a challenge. He felt the proposed use would accommodate the long term plan and short term plan for the site. Ultimately the church could grow too large for the size of the site and would perhaps need to move to a larger property in the future. The Plan Commission has limitations and the parcel has parking limitations. If in the future the church moved to a larger site, the vision for commercial development on Milwaukee Avenue could occur. If the property is abandoned and the R-1 zoning remains in place, the property might never be redeveloped as a single family residential property. This parcel and the land around it would likely not become residential. Trustee Karton restated her motion to remand 11a back to the Plan Commission in order to conduct a deeper review based on the study area identified by the 2017 Comprehensive Plan to see if the project fits it or doesn t fit it. The Board would then consider the results when voting on this case. Trustee Jenny seconded the motion. Director Brady said staff will work with the applicant and the Plan Commission to schedule a hearing either on October 23rd or November 13th. The matter would then return to the Village Board for review on December 4. On roll call: AYES: Trustees Hinkamp, Jenny, Karton, Khoja NAYS: Trustees White, Britton ABSENT: None Motion carried 33

34 34

35 35

36 36

37 37

38 38

39 39

40 40

41 PROJECT NARRATIVE Applicant is a church servicing the Korean-American community. It has been in existence for over ten years and has been operating for the last three years in a facility in Buffalo Grove. Its membership is comprised of approximately 100 adults. Operations of the proposed facility are contemplated to be as follows: Weekdays: Tuesday and Friday evenings prayer meetings from 6:00pm to 6:30pm attended by approximately 10 people. Thursday evenings bible study class at 7:30pm, attended by approximately 5 people Monday thru Friday After school music lessons will be available for a small number of members. Friday evenings Prayer service at 8:00pm attended by approximately 20 people. Sundays: Two services are contemplated, one from 8:30am to 9:30am, attended by approximately 20 adults, and one from 11:00am to 12:00pm, attended by approximately 70 adults. There will be occasional weddings or other events on a non-regular basis. No kitchen is planned for the facility. In the near future, it is contemplated to have preschool and daycare facilities to service between 20 to 30 children, which facilities will be available to members and non-members alike and the cost of which will be partially underwritten by the Applicant. 41

42 42

43 9575 West Higgins Road, Suite 400 Rosemont, Illinois p: f: MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Richard Kim CK & Associates, LLC Brendan S. May Consultant Luay R. Aboona, PE, PTOE Principal DATE: August 20, 2018 SUBJECT: Summary Traffic Evaluation Proposed Canaan Presbyterian Church of Chicago Plainfield, Illinois This memorandum summarizes the methodologies, results, and findings of a traffic impact study conducted by Kenig, Lindgren, O Hara, Aboona, Inc. (KLOA, Inc.) for the proposed Canaan Presbyterian Church to be located in Glenview, Illinois. The site, which is currently occupied by a vacant medical office building, is located at 1255 Milwaukee Avenue (IL Route 21). As proposed, the existing building will be converted to a church to accommodate its 100 adult members. Additionally, the building will be used on weekdays for a daycare facility for up to 30 children. The purpose of this study was to examine background traffic conditions, assess the impact that the proposed development will have on traffic conditions in the area, and determine if any roadway or access improvements are necessary to accommodate traffic generated by the proposed development. Existing Conditions The site, as previously indicated, is located at 1255 Milwaukee Avenue, approximately 700 feet south of Kennicott Lane and is currently occupied by a vacant medical office building. The surrounding land uses are Guarantee Trust Life Insurance and Delta Hotels by Marriot Chicago North Shore Suites to the north, US Law Group, Lucy s Garage and Life Storage to the south and Abt Electronics to the west. Figure 1 shows the location of the site in relation to the area roadway system. Figure 2 shows an aerial view of the site area. KLOA, Inc. Transportation and 43Parking Planning Consultants

44 SITE Site Location Figure 1 44

45 Aerial View of Site Location Figure 2 45