VILLAGE OF LAKE BLUFF JOINT PLAN COMMISSION & ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING

VILLAGE OF LAKE BLUFF JOINT PLAN COMMISSION & ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING 1. Call to Order and Roll Call Wednesday, August 16, 2017 Village Hall Board Room 40 East Center Avenue 7:00 P.M. A G E N D A 2. Non-Agenda Items and Visitors (Public Comment Time) The Joint Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals Chair and Board Members allocate fifteen (15) minutes during this item for those individuals who would like the opportunity to address the Board on any matter not listed on the agenda. Each person addressing the Joint Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals is asked to limit their comments to a maximum of three (3) minutes. 3. Consideration of the July 19, 2017 PCZBA Meeting Minutes 4. Pre-Application Workshop With Mr. Edward Deegan regarding 419 E. Prospect Avenue (No Final Action by PCZBA in July) 5. Pre-Application Workshop With Mr. Brad Andersen regarding 511 E. Prospect Avenue (No Final Action by PCZBA in July) 6. Conceptual Workshop Regarding Recreational, Institutional, and Open Space (RIO) Zoning (No Final Action by PCZBA in July) 7. Staff Report 8. Commissioner s Report 9. Adjournment The Village of Lake Bluff is subject to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Individuals with who require accommodations in order to allow them to observe and/or participate in this meeting, may contact Glen Cole, Assistant to the Village Administrator, at (847) 283-6889 or TDD number (847) 234-2153 in advance to allow the Village of Lake Bluff to make reasonable accommodations.

VILLAGE OF LAKE BLUFF JOINT PLAN COMMISSION & ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS REGULAR MEETING JULY 19, 2017 DRAFT MINUTES 1. Call to Order & Roll Call Chair Kraus called to order the regular meeting of the Joint Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals (PCZBA) of the Village of Lake Bluff on Wednesday, May 17, 2017, at 7:00 p.m. in the Village Hall Board Room (40 E. Center Avenue). The following members were present: Members: Absent: Sam Badger Leslie Bishop Mary Collins David Burns Elliot Miller Gary Peters Steven Kraus, Chair Also Present: Benjamin Schuster, Village Attorney Drew Irvin, Village Administrator Glen Cole, Assistant to the Village Administrator Member Bishop volunteered to serve as Chair Pro Tem and a motion was duly made and seconded. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. 2. Approval of the June 21, 2017 PCZBA Regular Meeting Minutes Member Peters moved to approve the June 21, 2017 PCZBA Regular Meeting Minutes as presented. Member Miller seconded the motion. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. 3. Approval of the May 20, 2017 PCZBA Special Meeting Minutes Member Collins moved to approve the May 20, 2017 PCZBA Special Meeting Minutes as amended. Member Miller seconded the motion. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. 4. Approval of the June 27, 2017 PCZBA Special Meeting Minutes Member Miller moved to approve the June 27, 2017 PCZBA Special Meeting Minutes as presented. Member Peters seconded the motion. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. 5. A Public Hearing for Text Amendments to the Zoning Regulations Regarding Short Term Rentals and the Definition of Hotel Chair Pro Tem Bishop said the PCZBA will not be discussing or considering any final action for this agenda item at tonight s meeting. Member Collins made a motion to continue the public hearing to the August 16, 2017 PCZBA Regular Meeting. Member Burns seconded the motion. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote.

Joint Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2017 Following a comment from Member Collins, Mr. Cole said the short term procedural regulations are still under the PCZBA s purview. It was the consensus of the PCZBA to seek further direction from the Village Board and their reviewing the previous meeting material and awaiting the June 21 st PCZBA minutes. 6. Non-Agenda Items and Visitors (Public Comment Time) Chair Pro Tem Bishop stated the PCZBA allocates 15 minutes during this item for those individuals who would like the opportunity to address the PCZBA on any matter not listed on the agenda. Each person addressing the PCZBA is asked to limit their comments to a maximum of three minutes. There were no requests. Chair Pro Tem Bishop administered the oath to those in attendance. 7. A Public Hearing for the Union Church Property (525 and 531 E. Prospect Avenue) Chair Pro Tem Bishop introduced the agenda item and requested an update from Staff. Mr. Cole said that the Union Church currently operates as a legal non-conforming use in a residential area. The request is to create a separate lot of the Union Church for a new church manse, which will be constructed after existing manse is demolished. This would require approval of a subdivision and granting of variations that address those non-conformities such as floor area ratio and impervious surface that increase in magnitude by the subdivision. The subdivision would allow the future manse to be built to conform to the residential bulk restriction without any variation. Also, this request triggers a requirement that Union Church conform to current zoning regulations. Granting the special use permit in addition to the other zoning relief will bring Union Church into full conformance with the Zoning Regulations. Mr. Cole said the one substantial change on the Church lot is the addition of a new courtyard (1,500 sq. ft.) of impervious surface being put where the existing home is located and will increase the impervious surface variation. As there are existing draining issues associated with the lot, Staff recommend Union Church provide on-site stormwater detention basin to offset the increased runoff created by the new courtyard. A discussion ensued regarding draining system. Member Collins said this is now a possibility that Union Church can sell the new residential property and asked would it make sense to keep the two lots stormwater infrastructure separate. Mr. Cole said that could be a condition for approval. The plat of subdivision has the manse lot granting a stormwater easement to the church lot, and to some extent the maintenance responsibility needed to keep the detention on-site will be covered in that grant. Member Collins said she does not understand what the stormwater picture is like all around the property and asked if there are some issues. She asked why would there be an easement, would the stormwater be dumped on the property to the east, or where does the easement take the stormwater. Mr. Cole said this is a private easement the will tie lots one and two together into the public stormwater system through a common conveyance. Mr. Jerry McDermott and Ms. Anne Sorensen, representatives from Union Church, said parcel three, lot one, underground drainage pipes run directly out to the storm sewer along the eastern 2

Joint Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2017 border of the property as well as north from Prospect Avenue and south toward the parking lot. The plan is to tie lots one and two into this existing system. Mr. Cole said the broad theme from Staff is that we are not sure what the drainage situation on this site will look like in its final version, part of the amount of relief necessary is going to depend on the size of the new manse and it makes sense that the design process continue on without having to worry about this process. Following a request from Chair Pro Tem Bishop, Mr. McDermott said the current lot has Union Church, a Manse in the middle and a vacant lot to the east. The plan is to build a conforming new Manse on a 12,000 sq. ft. vacant lot and demolish the existing Manse and detached two car garage and construct a courtyard in its place. The proposed plan will make the lot more presentable and allow them to use more of the property. Ms. Sorensen said the vacant lot is referred to as the courtyard and is currently being used as a gathering place and it would be nice to actually use the lot. Mr. McDermott said they have received bids on the courtyard and the plan is to have a welcoming appearance from the streetscape. There will be a nice walkway from Prospect Avenue, from the Union Church entrance and parking lot, aligned with trees and vegetation, going into the courtyard to create a welcoming area. Member Collins asked what type of events will be held in the courtyard. Mr. McDermott said regular Sunday worship services and occasional wedding events. Member Collins asked if they have considered the seat arrangement and number of people the area could accommodate. Ms. Sorensen said there have been events with tents set up held on the current vacant lot and her belief it will accommodate approximately 100 people. Mr. McDermott said there have been approximately 50 people at the summer services on the Village Green and this is the intended use for the courtyard. There is potential for benches to be placed in the courtyard but the current plan is not to have permanent seating. Member Miller discussed the patio and the stormwater situation among the lots. Mr. Cole said that what is presented is the same as concrete and Staff would require a soil study to be performed before considering pervious pavers but the study is unlikely to show the infiltration rates that would make pervious pavers a meaningful strategy for this area. In response to a question from Member Peters, Mr. McDermott said there have not been any concerns from the neighbors regarding potential flooding issues. The plans were shared with the neighbor and non-members and Union Church received a lot of positive responses. Member Collins expressed a personal comment regarding the existing vegetation and if they would consider going more native. Ms. Sorensen said native plants are being considered. Member Miller said that the PCZBA gets caught up in the stormwater subject when discussing rehabs and drainage and changing pervious surface into impervious surface. He asked if the Village Board has given the PCZBA permission to mandate compensation for the creation of impervious surface. Mr. Cole discussed the regulations applicable to new single-family residences. A discussion followed. 3

Joint Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2017 Village Attorney Ben Schuster said some of these issues are not covered in the Building Code but the Village does have the authority to adopt additional standards if so desired. Should the PCZBA desire it can discussion with Staff the best policy practices moving forward. In response to a comment from Member Collins, Mr. Cole said on the plat of subdivision, that is being used to calculate the variation, there was a little bit of square foot change in the total lot size between surveys, which is normal. He reviewed the existing conditions, floor area ratio and estimated impervious surface and proposed conditions floor area ratio and impervious surface as a result of the change in bulk caused by the subdivision and variation sought. In response to a comment from Member Burns, Mr. Cole said the bulk regulations are designed to restrict a single family home. It would be difficult for a larger structure, such as a church, to conform to the bulk regulations. Member Bishop asked if it would be more cost effective to put the drainage system in when the Manse is built and asked if Staff would be able to make that assessment. Mr. Cole said that part of the approval for new single family residential homes is submittal of a drainage plan. Following its discussion regarding the variations, drainage system, Manse and courtyard plans, Chair Pro Tem Bishop said tonight s vote would be to consider: the amount of variation for the impervious surface, special use permit govern the use of the church and subdivision. Member Collins made a motion to recommend Village Board grant the relief variations subject to the following conditions: the existing manse be demolished no later than nine months after a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the new manse; and, subject to adjustment by the Village Engineer, the Church provide up to 2,000 gallons of stormwater detention on-site. Member Burns seconded the motion. The motion passed on the following roll call vote: Ayes: (6) Badger, Burns, Collins, Miller, Peters and Chair Pro Tem Bishop Nays: (0) Absent: (1) Chair Kraus Member Burns asked if this would be an institutional zoned SUP. Mr. Cole said it was be SUP in a residential zoned area for Church use. Member Miller made a motion to recommend Village Board grant a Special Use Permit to Union Church. Member Peters seconded the motion. The motion passed on the following roll call vote: Ayes: (6) Burns, Collins, Miller, Badgers, Peters and Chair Pro Tem Bishop Nays: (0) Absent: (1) Chair Kraus Member Miller said if Union Church decides to move could the two lot subdivision be converted into two homes. Village Attorney Schuster said the existing Church building could be demolished and converted into a residential unit. Should the plan be to convert the property into multiple lots they would have to come back for subdivision consideration. 4

Joint Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2017 Member Burns made a motion to recommend Village Board approve the Union Church subdivision as submitted. Member Collins second the motion. The motion passed on the following roll call vote: Ayes: (6) Miller, Badger, Peters, Collins, Burns and Chair Pro Tem Bishop Nays: (0) Absent: (1) Chair Kraus 8. Pre-Application Workshop With Ms. Marina Puryear Regarding 718 Sheridan Road Chair Pro Tem Bishop said that Ms. Marina Puryear has requested an informational workshop to seek the PCZBA s informal input regarding changes to her home. Ms. Puryear said she purchased 718 Sheridan Road as an opportunity to downsize and the plan is for the home to become her personal residence. Currently the entrance to the property is on Sheridan Road and there is no curb there, so you have to drive around to Woodland to get into the driveway. She have noticed in having workmen come to the house is they pull approximately 15 ft. onto Woodland and park their vehicles and then walk to the Sheridan Road entrance. This makes it difficult for people coming from Sheridan Road onto Woodland or vice versa. Ms. Puryear said this is a corner lot which is subject to various setback requirements. She noted in the packet a drawing with a red dotted line below bedroom #3 and #4 that is the actual building setback lines, so the house is already non-conforming. She would like to formalize the addition of an entrance on the northeast corner of the house that will cut into the setback as outline in red. Ms. Puryear showed the commissioner a photograph of the northeast corner of the home. Member Burns said the construction of the existing home seems backwards and the fact the bulk is lower than the amount allowed, he think it would improve the look and feel of the neighboring properties. The bedroom are already far past the allowed setbacks and he is in favor of proceeds with the concept. Member Collins said adding a porch on the northeast side would be fine. She said as you go east the houses are set further back and asked if she could suggest the architect not make the porch deeper than it needs to be, maybe more transitional but not out to the northern most wall. She asked that other options be reviewed. Ms. Puryear said she appreciate the suggestion but this is a pretty fine little space and she needs a place to receive people. Member Badger asked Ms. Puryear to explain what she wants to do with the house. Ms. Puryear said she wants to have an entrance closer to the driveway, which is the northeast corner and put a screened porch on the south side of the property. Chair Pro Tem Bishop said this is an opinion, not an approval of the exact plans and she hope the constructive feedback will assist with getting final that can be approved right away. 9. Comprehensive Plan Discussion Transportation Section Vision, Goals, etc. Chair Pro Tem Bishop described the information that was provided from previous discussions regarding the transportation section of the comprehensive plan. She said tonight we want to review all the information before moving forward with other sections of the plan. A discussion followed. 5

Joint Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Minutes July 19, 2017 Member Burns said he a problem with policies for consideration because he sees them more as initiatives that should be prioritized. Chair Pro Tem Bishop asked if there was discussion regarding study of a nontraditional methods of transportation (Uber, Lyft and self-driving cars) and asked if something could be include in the draft. Member Collins said maybe it would be a good policy to have frequent transportation review. Member Burns said he would make it a recommendation throughout all the elements as a technology review (Airbnb, Uber, etc). Member Peters said there was discussion regarding the possibility of a pedestrian underpass/bridge for Bath and Tennis Court and Blodgett and the other issue he thought was emergency safety access across the tracks should flooding occur. A discussion followed. Member Miller expressed his preference to receive revised collated material regarding the matter. A discussion regarding the housing section and requirements for consideration followed such as low income housing, fair housing, affordable housing, and senior housing. Chair Pro Tem Bishop asked the commissioners to provide Staff with information that should be considered. Mr. Cole reported that the Comprehensive Workshop Meeting was scheduled for August 15 th and Regular Meeting is scheduled for August 16 th. 10. Staff Report There was no report. 11. Commissioner s Report There was no report. 12. Adjournment As there was no further business to come before the PCZBA, Member Collins moved to adjourn the meeting. Member Burns seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Glen Cole Assistant to the Village Administrator 6

VILLAGE OF LAKE BLUFF Memorandum TO: FROM: Chair Kraus and Members of the Joint Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals Glen Cole, Assistant to the Village Administrator DATE: August 11, 2017 SUBJECT: Agenda Item #4 A Pre-Application Workshop With Mr. Edward Deegan regarding 419 E. Prospect Avenue The owner of the property located at 419 E. Prospect Avenue seeks to add additional space for his family. He is considering, among other options, the construction of a second house that would require subdivision relief from the PCZBA to complete. The project team seeks the PCZBA s input informally as to his concept. Mr. Edward Deegan, architect, will be present in person to discuss the proposal and the necessity for a variation. Attachments Letter and attachments from Mr. Edward Deegan Page 1 / 4

EDWARD DEEGAN ARCHITECTS Joint Planning Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals for the Village of Lake Bluff Re: PCZBA Workshop to Discuss Potential Development of 419 E. Prospect Avenue August 7, 2017 Glen Cole, Assistant to the Village Administrator of Lake Bluff, and the PCZBA Committee, Bob Helle, the owner of 419 E. Prospect Ave., is considering further development of this property for his family. The property currently has a Victorian home located at the southwestern edge of the lot. The property owner is requesting an opportunity for a PCZBA workshop to discuss the details regarding this potential project. More specifically, the following items would be addressed: 1. The property owner is requesting consideration for a subdivision of 419 East Prospect Avenue from a 125 frontage along Prospect to 2 lots: a 50 frontage lot (Western lot) and a 75 frontage lot (Eastern lot). 2. The 50 lot (Western lot) would maintain and restore the existing late 1800 s Victorian Residence with HPC direction and involvement. The current structure is approximately just under 3,000 sq. ft. and is non-conforming. After restoration, this Eastern lot would maintain the maximum FAR of 2,000 sq. ft. as per the zoning ordinance. No other Variance is requested. The existing trees would also be maintained on the Northern end of this lot. Additionally, the modifications proposed would be in keeping with the existing streetscape of Prospect Ave. 3. The requested zoning variance would be tied to the preservation and renovation of the existing historic home. 4. On the 75 lot (Eastern lot) the property owner would like to construct a new home, adhering to a maximum of 3,000 sq. ft. The new construction home would conform to all zoning regulations and no additional Variance will be requested. 5. Per our sketch, we are showing curb cuts on Moffet Road and no curb cuts on Prospect Avenue to help preserve the current streetscape and character that exists on Prospect Avenue today. In summary, both the new and existing homes are being built for my client and his family. They will not be sold as speculative projects. We can t stress enough that while we are asking for a variance for the subdivision, this would be tied to the preservation and renovation of the existing Victorian home. We feel that this approach to this lot will be more in keeping with the existing streetscape and Historic character of Lake Bluff. The alternative approach would be to tear down the existing Historic home and build a new, larger single family 5,000 sq.ft. residence. Please advise regarding our next steps to schedule the PCZBA workshop. Very truly yours, Edward J Deegan AIA NCARB EDWARD DEEGAN ARCHITECTS 503 PARK DRIVE, KENILWORTH, IL 60043 PHONE: 847.906.4110

100.00' SIDE YARD SETBACK 12.50' Ex. Residence 2-Story Frame N PROSPECT AVE. 125.00' FRONT YARD SETBACK 20.00' Exist. Garage 125.00' REAR YARD SETBACK 15.00' Existing Site Plan SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" CORNER SIDE YARD SETBACK 20.00' 100.00' MOFFETT ROAD A 0.1 Project NO. 17.23 EDWARD DEEGAN ARCHITECTS 503 Park Drive, Suite #4 Kenilworth, IL 60043 (847)-906-4110 www.edwarddeeganarchitects.com PROPOSED RESIDENCE 419 E. PROSPECT AVE. LAKE BLUFF, IL 60044

N RAVINE AVE. GURNEY AVE. RAVINE AVE. E. PROSPECT AVE. MOFFETT RD. MOFFETT RD. E. PROSPECT AVE. Existing Context Map SCALE: NTS A 0.2 Project NO. 17.23 EDWARD DEEGAN ARCHITECTS 503 Park Drive, Suite #4 Kenilworth, IL 60043 (847)-906-4110 www.edwarddeeganarchitects.com PROPOSED RESIDENCE 419 E. PROSPECT AVE. LAKE BLUFF, IL 60044

PROSPECT AVE. 50.00' 75.00' MAX TOTAL: 2,000 S.F. MAX FOOTPRINT: 1,500 S.F. MAX TOTAL: 3,000 S.F. MAX FOOTPRINT: 2,250 S.F. FRONT YARD SETBACK 20.00' REAR YARD SETBACK 15.00' 50.00' 75.00' 100.00' CORNER SIDE YARD SETBACK 20.00' 100.00' 2-Story New Construction Ex. Residence 2-Story Frame N Scheme 'A' SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK 5.00' MOFFETT ROAD A 0.3 Project NO. 17.23 EDWARD DEEGAN ARCHITECTS 503 Park Drive, Suite #4 Kenilworth, IL 60043 (847)-906-4110 www.edwarddeeganarchitects.com PROPOSED RESIDENCE 419 E. PROSPECT AVE. LAKE BLUFF, IL 60044

N RAVINE AVE. GURNEY AVE. RAVINE AVE. E. PROSPECT AVE. MOFFETT RD. MOFFETT RD. E. PROSPECT AVE. Scheme 'A' Context Map SCALE: NTS A 0.4 Project NO. 17.23 EDWARD DEEGAN ARCHITECTS 503 Park Drive, Suite #4 Kenilworth, IL 60043 (847)-906-4110 www.edwarddeeganarchitects.com PROPOSED RESIDENCE 419 E. PROSPECT AVE. LAKE BLUFF, IL 60044

100.00' SIDE YARD SETBACK 12.50' FRONT YARD SETBACK 20.00' N PROSPECT AVE. 125.00' 1.5-Story New Construction REAR YARD SETBACK 15.00' 125.00' Scheme 'B' SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" 100.00' CORNER SIDE YARD SETBACK 20.00' MOFFETT ROAD A 0.5 Project NO. 17.23 EDWARD DEEGAN ARCHITECTS 503 Park Drive, Suite #4 Kenilworth, IL 60043 (847)-906-4110 www.edwarddeeganarchitects.com PROPOSED RESIDENCE 419 E. PROSPECT AVE. LAKE BLUFF, IL 60044

N RAVINE AVE. GURNEY AVE. RAVINE AVE. E. PROSPECT AVE. MOFFETT RD. MOFFETT RD. E. PROSPECT AVE. Scheme 'B' Context Map SCALE: NTS A 0.6 Project NO. 17.23 EDWARD DEEGAN ARCHITECTS 503 Park Drive, Suite #4 Kenilworth, IL 60043 (847)-906-4110 www.edwarddeeganarchitects.com PROPOSED RESIDENCE 419 E. PROSPECT AVE. LAKE BLUFF, IL 60044

VILLAGE OF LAKE BLUFF Memorandum TO: FROM: Chair Kraus and Members of the Joint Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals Glen Cole, Assistant to the Village Administrator DATE: August 11, 2017 SUBJECT: Agenda Item #5 A Pre-Application Workshop With Mr. Brad Andersen regarding 511 E. Prospect Avenue The owner of the property located at 511 E. Prospect Avenue, desires to build a small addition to his home that would, among other things, provide further privacy for his master bedroom from the public right of way and from the Union Church lot. He seeks the PCZBA s input informally as to his concept. Mr. Brad Andersen, the owner, will be present in person to discuss the proposal and the necessity for a variation. Attachments Letter and attachments from Mr. Brad Andersen Page 1 / 4

Glen Cole From: Sent: To: Subject: Drew Irvin Friday, August 11, 2017 11:43 AM Glen Cole FW: PCZBA Preliminary Presentation Narrative for workshop item From: Brad W. Andersen [mailto:bandersen@gglrealty.com] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 11:42 AM To: Drew Irvin Subject: PCZBA Preliminary Presentation Drew, Thank you for suggesting I make a preliminary presentation to the PCZBA before fully developing plans for an addition to my home at 511 E. Prospect Avenue. I think it will be very helpful to hear feedback from the board members. What I am proposing is a very small addition to the S/E corner of the first floor of my home. The result will likely create a need for a couple small variances. Probably, a side yard variance of 1.5-2 feet and a variance from the floor area regulations of less than 4% over what is currently constructed. I originally re-built home in 1993, prior to some of the current regulations. I am proposing this for several reasons. First, my side yard abuts a public right of way with traffic that has been increasing in recent years and will likely increase more in the future as a result of the recently approved Union Church subdivision and courtyard. The right of way is also used as a parking lot for the church and unfortunately, my master bedroom, closet, bathroom and dressing area all have exposure on this elevation. Additionally, the church building sits almost on the lot line across the right of way and the church office and living room look out to the west and toward my home. Because the first level of the church is well above grade, there is a site line directly into my home, even with the 6 foot stockade fence I installed many years ago. With the construction of a new closet I will be able to re-align my windows to create more privacy and create some additional space for storage. Thanks very much. Brad W. Andersen Managing Broker/Owner Griffith, Grant & Lackie Realtors GGL Relocation Services 8 E. Scranton Avenue Lake Bluff, IL 60044 280 E. Deer Path Road Lake Forest, IL 60045 847-650-3456 www.gglrealty.com 1

Our office assists with primary and second home purchases, vacation properties and relocations. Please contact me if we may be of assistance. 2

VILLAGE OF LAKE BLUFF Memorandum TO: FROM: Chair Kraus and Members of the Joint Plan Commission & Zoning Board of Appeals Glen Cole, Assistant to the Village Administrator DATE: June 14, 2017 SUBJECT: Agenda Item #6 Conceptual Workshop Regarding Recreational, Institutional, and Open Space (RIO) Zoning As discussed at the PCZBA s June meeting, Staff has prepared a conceptual description and maps for a new zoning district suited for institutional uses within the Village. The attached document discusses the purpose, uses, regulations, special considerations, and appropriate properties to include in such a district. The attached maps visually show the areas that would be appropriate to include in the proposed district. If the PCZBA concludes its workshop favorably, the next steps will involve consultation with affected property owners. Consideration of adoption would likely come at or after the PCZBA s October meeting to allow time for statutory legal notice and newspaper publication. Attachments RIO District concept Maps Page 1 / 4

Recreational, Institutional, and Open Space (RIO) District August Conceptual Draft Purpose: The purpose of the Recreational, Institutional, and Open Space (RIO) District would be to provide regulations tailored to fit the unique use and form considerations of public amenities as well as eleemosynary and governmental functions. Uses of land that would be suitable for the RIO district are commonly adjacent to or are wholly surrounded by residential uses, and often have highly specific needs as to location, intensity of use, and massing due to their intrinsic character. The RIO district would promote the efficient use of land with a flexible set of regulations that meet these highly specific needs in a manner that minimizes the burden for the property owner, while maximizing the predictability of land use and public benefits as a result of the development and use of property. Currently, owners of this type of land may be required to seek numerous variations in order to utilize the property in the existing zoning. This creates legal challenges for the owner s desired uses, as well as extra procedural burdens and costs to seek variations and/or other types of zoning relief. Sites that would be appropriate for inclusion in the district are those where the current and future principal land use, as contemplated in the comprehensive plan, is the provision of public amenities, charitable functions, and governmental functions. Adjustments to Use Table: P = Permitted Use S = Special Use RIO CBD Churches and houses of worship P S S Buildings for public utilities P S S Public recreational and leisure facilities (Including, without limitation: beaches, parks, playgrounds, golf courses, community and recreation centers) All Other P - - Schools P S S Libraries P - - Municipal buildings or areas P - - Museums and art galleries P P - Other miscellaneous uses (e.g. cell site antennae, alt. energy systems) as appropriate Bulk and Use Regulations: Many buildings proposed for RIO zoning would be out of conformance with traditional or even minimal bulk regulations; for example, some buildings are built with a <5ft or even a 0ft setback on multiple lot lines. No property that is rezoned will be required to make alterations to their property, as discussed later. Nevertheless, some minimum standard of bulk restriction should be imposed. Staff recommends that RIO buildings be subject to the setback, height limit, and lot coverage requirements identical to those applicable to the R-4 district to reflect their predominant location in residential areas: Front Yard: 20 Rear Yard: 15%, not less than 10, not more than 25 Side Yards: 10%, not less than 5 In lieu of the R-4 district requirements, Staff recommends that RIO buildings be subject to the following regulations adapted from similar uses in other zoning districts: Height limit: 30 feet in height or two stories for buildings. (Planned Mixed Use Development) Lot coverage: 50% (L-1 Light Industrial) Parking standards: As set forth for the CBD, including 5 setback, except no standard for the number of stalls to be provided. Number of stall requirements would be set in a development site plan only for sites where one is required. Performance standards: As set forth for L-1 Light Industrial and other Industrial districts. (sound, gas, glare, etc.) Staff recommend that the RIO district not be subject to limitations upon: Daylight plane, impervious surface, front yard impervious surface: Designed to regulate residential uses and are not applied in non-residential districts. Minimum lot width: Inappropriate for small and irregularly shaped RIO spaces. Minimum lot area: Inappropriate for small RIO spaces, e.g. pocket parks, green space. Page 1 of 3

Recreational, Institutional, and Open Space (RIO) District August Conceptual Draft Development site plan review: Development site plan review (name used to distinguish vs. ABR site plan review) by PCZBA is optional on any site and is required for new development or significantly changed development involving: o Any lot where its area in excess of 10,000 square feet; or o Any lot where the aggregate lot coverage would exceed 3,000 square feet; or o Any lot not complying with the RIO bulk and use regulations. Requirements of the site plan submittal will be similar to other planned development tools of the Village. This review focuses on form and not on use given the limited set of uses permitted within RIO. The scope of review is limited but covers the essentials similar to existing planned development tools massing, parking, access, circulation, etc. Development site plan approval may modify or waive any provision of the RIO regulations or the subdivision or zoning code ( deviation ). The standard for granting a deviation does not require proving a hardship or a unique condition, only general conformance with the code and the comprehensive plan. Fee for these reviews to be set by the Village Board likely $0. Part of balancing efforts in crafting RIO regulations must be consideration of costs imposed upon residents whether they initially accrue to the Village (through staff workload) or users by fees (many of whom are supported by taxpayers, charitable gifts, or residents of the Village as utility customers). Significant changes: No current owner would be required to make alterations to their site or to come in for a site review to keep their property asis. An owner would only need to go through the site plan review process if they made significant changes to their property, which would trigger a requirement to submit an initial or updated development site plan and go through review by the PCZBA. The definition of significant changes focuses on massing of buildings and changes to the form of the site. It is not the higher substantial or strict compliance standard applied to site layouts in special use permits. Significant changes would be, relative to an approved development plan or existing site conditions: The addition, relocation, or removal of any principal structure; Increase in the total floor area of buildings more than 10%; Increase in lot coverage of more than 5%; Increase in the height of any principal building of more than 10%; Decreases of any existing setback of more than 5%; Decreases of areas devoted to open space of more than 5% or substantial relocation thereof; Decreases of the number of provided parking stalls by more than 5%; Changes that will impose substantially greater loads on public facilities and infrastructure (e.g. streets, stormwater). Role of the Architectural Board of Review: Note that RIO sites would also be subject to ABR site review, the same as commercial / industrial properties. This is done for some, but not all, of these sites today through a patchwork of Special Use Permits. This will be a new requirement for churches. Changes that do not meet the criteria for a significant change reviewed by the PCZBA will still often be reviewed by the ABR s less intense process. Page 2 of 3

Recreational, Institutional, and Open Space (RIO) District August Conceptual Draft Rezoning: Recommended for inclusion in RIO: Public Recreation o Sanctuary Park o Sunrise Park o Artesian Park o Mawman Park o Blair Park, Golf Course, and Adjacent Lots LBOLA Sites and Open Space o Skokie Wetlands Preserve, and Adjacent Lots o Goetz Wetland Preserve o Public Lots / Green Space on Sheridan Road Municipal Buildings o Public Works Building o Village Hall Churches o Grace United Methodist o Union Church Schools o Lake Bluff Elementary o Lake Bluff Middle o Forest Bluff School Public Utilities o ComEd o CLCJAWA Recommended for exclusion from RIO: Long / Random Public Rights of Way (e.g. Bike Trail): These would add complexity to the zoning map and to the rezoning process without delivering real value; most of these parcels are undevelopable for various reasons. PRD and HOA open spaces, conservation easements: Same as above. Church Manses: Only the Union Church manse is located adjacent to the main structure. UMC has a tax-exempt home elsewhere in Lake Bluff; the Community Church s parsonage status is unknown. Leaving the UC manse in the residential district allows it to remain subject to the ordinary residential bulk requirements. Parcels in the Central Business District: Tenancies may shift over time; additionally, it is more appropriate to keep these parcels in the regulatory scheme provided for CBD parcels. Walnut House (owned by VLB): Adjacent to the CBD. Used for storage by the Village pending a future user. Process and Next Steps: Next few weeks: Consultation with affected property owners. When ready (September? October?), two parallel processes to establish RIO: o Text amendment to establish the zoning district, and; o Map amendment(s) to rezone property into the district. Notice will include newspaper publication as well as notice to all property owners within, and 250ft surrounding, each changed zoning area Page 3 of 3

Village of Lake Bluff Recreational, Institutional, and Open Space (RIO) Zoning Conceptual Workshop 8-10-17 Draft Sanctuary Park Zoning Districts Proposed for RIO ComEd Golf Course Elem. Sch. Green Space CBD CLCJAWA AP-1 L-1 L-2 O&R C-E E-1 E-2 R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 ComEd Public Works Skokie Preserve (LBOLA) CLCJAWA Blair Park ComEd Forest Bluff School Mawman Park Green Space Goetz Wetlands Village Hall & PSB Artesian Park Middle School Green Space Grace UMC Ravine Park Union Church Moffett Woods (LBOLA) Sunrise Park (and Utilities) R-5 R-6 RR S 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, Miles METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, MapmyIndia, OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community

Village of Lake Bluff Recreational, Institutional, and Open Space (RIO) Zoning Conceptual Workshop 8-10-17 Draft Library Village Hall & PSB Zoning Districts Proposed for RIO CBD Artesian Park E-1 E-2 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 RR 0 0.125 0.25 0