Village of Glenview Plan Commission STAFF REPORT February 14, 2017 TO: Chairman and Plan Commissioners CASE #: P2016-024 FROM: Community Development Department CASE MANAGER: Michelle House, Planner SUBJECT: Official Map Amendment, Rezoning, and Final Site Plan Review ACTION REQUESTED: Staff requests consideration of a Plan Commission recommendation to the Board of Trustees. APPLICANT: Joseph McElwee CSH of Glenview LLC 1275 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 2 nd Floor Washington, DC 20004 Tel: (202) 469-8400 OWNER: Jeff Engle Engle Properties LLC 8735 West Higgins Road, Suite 300 Chicago, IL 60631 Tel: (847) 375-4704 LOCATION: PROJECT NAME: 4700 West Lake Avenue Capitol Senior Housing of Glenview CONTACT: Larry Freedman Ash, Anos, Freedman, and Logan 77 West Washington Street, Suite 1211 Chicago, IL 60602 PROPOSAL: The applicant, Capitol Seniors Housing, represented by Larry Freedman of Ash, Anos, Freedman and Logan proposes construction of a senior care community comprised of 83 units for assisted living and memory care. A Rezoning from B-2 Light Industrial zoning to R-18 Multi-Family Planned Development, Official Map Amendment, and Final Site Plan Review approvals will be required. Report Disclaimer: Village staff makes no representations regarding support, endorsement, or the likelihood of approval or disapproval by any Glenview regulatory commission or the Village Board of Trustees.
Site Assessment VILLAGE OF GLENVIEW ZONING: PIN(s): 04-30-400-010-0000 Current B-2 Glenview General Business District North R-4 Glenview Residential District & B-1 Limited Business District East B-2 Glenview General Business District South R-4 Glenview Residential District West R-4 Glenview Residential District AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY: 2
PICTOMETRIC PHOTOGRAPHY: South Elevation East Elevation 3
Project Summary PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The property is currently improved with an office building which has been vacant for the past three years. The existing building, previously housed the Association Management Center (AMC) office building and the owner of that business is selling the property due to the difficulty in finding an office or retail tenant to occupy the site. The applicant, Capitol Senior Housing, proposes the demolition of an existing building and subsequent construction of an assisted living and memory care community comprised of 83 units. Rezoning to R-18 Planned Development district, Official Map amendment, and Final Site Plan Review approvals will be required. The proposed improvements would include a new 2-story building comprised of approximately 73,000 square feet to house clients and staff. A parking lot and accessory utility structures are also proposed. The applicant is requesting R-18 Planned Development zoning for the proposed assisted living and memory care facility, a land use permitted as a nursing home or assisted living facility in the R-18 district. The applicant requests the following variations to be approved as part of the Planned Development: A perimeter buffer yard of 36.00 feet instead of a minimum perimeter buffer yard of 50.0 feet from the property line to nearest adjacent parking stalls; and A density of 20.76 dwelling units per acre instead of a maximum density of 18-units per acre. As the senior population has grown in Glenview, a number of senior centers have begun to use Glenview Fire and EMS services as a lift service for residents who have experienced non-life-threatening falls. To counteract this strain on Fire services, the Village is exploring the possibility of passing a Village-wide ordinance to enact certain fees to deter abuse of this service and regain some of the lost funds that have accumulated over the past several years. In the interim, the applicant is proposing to enter into an agreement with the Village of Glenview that stipulates a fee will be charged if a non-emergency ambulance call is made or abuse of Fire Department services occurs. This agreement and any future ordinance regarding this issue are intended to require facility staff to assist facility residents with nonemergency care and thereby reduce strain on Village services. The applicant has internal policies which prevent employees from calling emergency services during non-emergency situations and is not expected to use emergency services for lifts of future residents. This site was included as a study area in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update. The plan is currently under review by the Village Board of Trustees and is expected to be adopted on the Village Board s February 21 st meeting agenda. The Village Board has reviewed the proposals for the study areas which included possible rezoning of this property to allow for a senior housing type use and had no comments on the proposal. Any final vote by the Board of Trustees on this proposed project would need to occur after the Board has adopted the Comprehensive Plan which recommends this type of use in this location. 4
POTENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACTS: The subject property is adjacent to a number of residential developments. The applicant was not able to host a public meeting prior to the Plan Commission meeting. Staff received one phone call from a resident in the neighborhood south of the proposed development who upon hearing a summary of the scope of the development had no direct concerns. The applicant is proposing to install a fence on the north and west property lines. The building would be located closer to the eastern property line adjacent to the existing Wendy s restaurant and the proposed above ground detention area would be located on the west side of the site to create a larger buffer for the adjacent residential homes. The parking spaces are oriented to direct the headlights of parked cars toward the building rather than to the north and west where they may disrupt adjacent homeowners. 5
Plan Commission Review FINAL SITE PLAN COMMENTS: The purpose of the Site Plan Review process is to consider the physical conditions of a proposed site plan in a manner which includes basic zoning, subdivision, design, and building regulations. The review process is intended to promote more orderly and harmonious development and to ensure that all codes and ordinances have been met, helping to provide a logical and coordinated review of proposed developments. The following is a summary of issues to consider when evaluating compliance with the Site Plan Review Ordinance Criteria: CIRCULATION The applicant has provided a two-way drive aisle around the building adjacent to parking spaces and a one-way drive aisle east of the parking stalls northwest of the building along the northern lot line to accommodate additional screening for neighboring properties. The Fire Department has reviewed this configuration and has accepted the proposed circulation pattern. The existing eastern entry drive from West Lake Avenue will be eliminated. One full-access drive is provided toward the western side of the site, furthest away from the Milwaukee Avenue intersection. The applicant should confirm the width of the loading berth is sufficient for vehicles using this area. The applicant has provided compliant auto-turn exhibits for the proposed vehicular circulation of cargo vehicles and emergency vehicles. BUILDING AND STRUCTURE LOCATION The building has been located toward the eastern side of the site to allow for a greater buffer between the adjacent residential structures and the proposed building. The applicant has provided additional green spaces around the building for the residents enjoyment. The applicant is requesting a second fence to be located within the extents of the site perimeter fencing. The interior fence is intended to enclose the green space for the memory care residents, preventing residents from leaving the site. The applicant proposes a maximum finished floor elevation of 47.0-feet in height for the main entrance peak detail. The remainder of the roof is 36.6-feet in height with the corner elevations reaching 37.66-feet in height. The applicant should confirm the height is no greater than 50.0-feet from the average existing grade. In association with the Planned Development, a variation is required to allow a buffer yard of 36.0 feet, less than the required 50.0 feet as measured to the required parking stalls. In no instance is the building closer than 52.0 feet from any lot line. 6
BUILDING SCALE The applicant has provided color elevations, renderings, and detailed elevations. In association with the Planned Development, a variation is required to allow a building with a density of 20.76 units per acre. The applicant has provided cross-sections from the lot lines to show the roof-mounted mechanical units will be screened from adjacent residential. The proposed building design shall be subject to review and approval by the Appearance Commission. PARKING LOTS The applicant has worked with staff to efficiently organize the parking lot layout, provide the necessary landscaping, and maintain proper circulation patterns. The applicant should confirm where designated visitor and employee parking will be located. The proposed lighting plan features compliant 100% cut-off fixtures, but will require revisions prior to final review to ensure compliance with maximum, average, and uniformity ratio requirements. The applicant will present a revised photometric plan and lighting fixtures for review by the Appearance Commission prior to seeking a Certificate of Appropriateness for the final lighting design. LANDSCAPING The applicant has proposed the planting of a number of trees in the rear of the property to add to the buffer between the single-family homes to the north and west and the subject property. The applicant should clarify the condition of the trees along the western property lines which are being proposed to remain. The landscape plan, plant list, and proposed fence details shall be subject to the review and approval of the Appearance Commission. SIGNAGE In association with the Planned Development, a variation is required to allow a sign comprised of 12.4 square feet for identification of the facility. 7
Technical Review COMPLIANCE WITH VILLAGE PLANS: Village Plan Compliance Yes / No / N/A Comments Comprehensive Plan Pending The Comprehensive Plan is expected to be adopted by the Board of Trustees on February 21, 2017 in which this site is a study area. Official Map No The existing property zoning is not consistent the property zoning prescribed by the Official Map. An amendment to the Official Map and Rezoning are required. Waukegan Road Corridor Plan N/A - Milwaukee Avenue Corridor Plan N/A - Downtown Revitalization Plan N/A - Natural Resources Plan N/A - Bike & Sidewalk Master Plan Yes Sidewalk is existing in this area. The GNAS Design Guidelines N/A - LAND USE STATISTICS: Multi-Family: Allowed/Permitted Proposed Compliance Zoning R-18 PD (Rezoning Required) R-18 PD Rezoning Lot Size 87,120 sq. ft. 174,216.0 sq. ft. Yes Building Height 50.0 feet 46.0 feet Yes Minimum Front Yard Setback Average of existing 75.0 feet Yes Minimum Side Yard Setback 12.0 feet 60.0 feet Yes Minimum Side Yard Setback 12.0 feet 135.0 feet Yes Minimum Rear Yard Setback 25.0 feet 75.6 feet Yes Lot Coverage (Building Only) Case by case basis 54.3% Yes 8
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 Nursing Home Formula 1 parking space for every 3 units, and 3 parking spaces for every 5 employees anticipated for the largest shift Quantity 83 units, 55 employees Total Required 39 Total Proposed 45 + 1 van space Compliance Yes PROJECT TIMELINE: A. 09/12/16 Preliminary Site Plan Review B. 12/19/16 Application Submitted C. 01/26/17 Public notice published in the Glenview Announcements D. 01/26/17 Public notices mailed to surrounding property owners E. 01/26/17 Public notice sign posted upon the subject property F. 02/14/17 Plan Commission Meeting G. 02/15/17 Appearance Commission Meeting H. TBD First Consideration by Board of Trustees I. TBD Second Consideration by Board of Trustees 2016 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2017 CDE FG H I Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec A B ENGINEERING COMMENTS: No preliminary engineering issues exist that would prevent this project from proceeding to final engineering review and approval. There are several minor engineering concerns outlined in the attached memorandum dated 02/10/2017 from Steve Amann, Consulting Engineer. FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: A fiscal study was prepared by Strategy Planning Associates. A review of the fiscal study was conducted by the Village s consultant, S.B. Friedman & Company and those results are attached for reference. Based on the information provided, S. B. Friedman projects that the proposed project will have a neutral 9
to potentially negative fiscal impact depending on the average cost per capita. The project will not impact the school or park districts, since it is a senior care facility. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS: A traffic study was prepared for the proposed project which evaluated the use and scope. A review of projected impacts and site analysis was conducted by James J. Benes and Associates. This memo showed the proposed use would have minimal impact on traffic during peak travel times and identified several minor modifications which would improve the site configuration. The auto-turn diagrams for all vehicles accessing the site were deemed adequate. OFFICIAL MAP AMENDMENT: In conjunction with the proposed rezoning of the property, the applicant is requesting an amendment to the Official Map to incorporate the revised zoning designation. The blank areas on the Official Map reference the Village s current zoning as designed on the Glenview Zoning Map, therefore any zoning or roadway change to the property also requires an amendment to the Official Map. REZONING STANDARDS: The Plan Commission should consider the applicant s responses to 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. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING: The purpose of the Planned Development (PD) District is to facilitate a more creative and efficient use of land than would otherwise be possible under traditional zoning regulations (Sec. 98-491, Municipal Code). PD s typically revolve around a mix of product types (horizontal or vertical) that when applied against their respective traditional zoning districts would create multiple variances. Other factors necessitating a PD include a unique product type, unusual parcel configuration, or environmental features of a site. While some would suggest PD zoning is a method to gain multiple variances for higher density developments, the Village has the additional authority to tailor a PD by imposing conditions to offset any development impacts. Traditional zoning establishes bulk and scale requirements in order to separate structures/uses and limit nuisances. Created in 1966, the PD district works differently by establishing a perimeter yard based on 10
the height of structures to create a buffer area between adjacent properties. Inside of the perimeter yard there are no bulk and scale zoning requirements to follow, which allows flexible and variance-free developments controlled by site plan review criteria rather than by lot sizes and building setbacks (bulk and scale requirements). Sometimes variances from the perimeter yard or other PD standards may be requested to account for unique building types or designs. To gauge compatibility, site plans within a PD are evaluated against other similarly scaled projects. Through the greater flexibility of a PD, creative developments can be permitted through site plan specific approvals that ensure site planning best practices are achieved. 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) (In accordance with the Planned Development) 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 Attachments & Exhibits 1. Sample Motion 2. Engineering Memorandum from Steve Amann, Consulting Engineer, dated 02/10/2017 3. DRAFT Emergency Services Agreement between Capitol Senior Housing and Village of Glenview 4. Petitioner s Application Materials & Exhibits 11
Sample Motion Based upon the petitioner s application materials, testimony, and discussion relating to the petition which together demonstrate compliance with Chapter 98, Article II of the Municipal Code, I move in the case of P2016-024, Capitol Senior Housing of Glenview at 4700 West Lake Avenue, that the Plan Commission recommend the Village Board of Trustees grant Rezoning, Official Map Amendment, and Final Site Plan Review approval in accordance with the following: 1. Rezoning of the Subject Property from B-2 General Business District to R-18 PD Planned Development Multi-Family Residential district. 2. Official Map Amendment of the Subject Property to reflect the zoning as described in Section 1. 3. Final Site Plan Review approval is granted for the subject property, in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 54, Article IV of the Village Municipal Code and in compliance with the following: A. The document titled Site Plan prepared by Groundwork, Ltd. dated 12/16/2016; B. The engineering plans prepared by Groundworks, Ltd. dated 12/16/2016 with final approval through the building permit process; and C. All materials presented to the Plan Commission on February 14, 2017; and associated revisions required by the Plan Commission. 4. A R-18 Planned Development with associated Variations from the Zoning Ordinance in accordance with the Proposed Site Plan, prepared by Groundwork, Ltd. dated 12/16/2016 is approved and shall include the following: A. A perimeter yard of 36.0 feet instead of a minimum of 50.0 feet as required. B. A density of 20.76 dwelling units per acre instead of a maximum density of 18.00 dwelling units per acre as required. C. A ground sign for identification of the facility comprised of 12.4 square feet per face instead of a ground sign comprised of a maximum of 5.0 square feet per face as required. 5. Final Appearance Commission approval is required for the proposed building architecture, signage, landscaping, and lighting. 12
VILLAGE OF GLENVIEW PUBLIC NOTICE P2016-024 Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Village of Glenview Plan Commission. The meeting will be held on Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 7:00 P.M., at the Village Hall, 2500 East Lake Avenue, Glenview, Illinois to consider an Official Map Amendment and Rezoning, Final Site Plan Review, and such other relief as may be necessary or desirable in connection with such matters for certain property hereinafter described. The property involved is commonly known as 4700 West Lake Avenue and is legally described as: LOT 1 IN J.G.J.N. RESUBDIVISION, BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF THE EAST 533.57 FEET OF THE WEST 613.28 FEET OF THAT PART OF LOTS 1 AND 2 OF THE SUPERIOR COURT PARTITION IN SECTIONS 29 AND 30, TOWNSHIP 42 NORTH, RANGE 12 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, LYING NORTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF LAKE AVENUE PER DOCUMENT 11527433 AND LYING EAST OF THE SOUTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE EAST LINE OF CAROL LANE AS DEDICATED IN PLEASANT TREE GARDEN ESTATES, A SUBDIVISION IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (1/4) OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 42 NORTH, RANGE 12, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, RECORDED AS DOCUMENT 17595871, WHICH PLAT OF J.G.J.N. RESUBDIVISION WAS RECORDED REBRUARY 27, 1984 AS DOCUMENT 26987283. The applicant, CSH Glenview LLC, requests approval of a Rezoning of the subject property from B-2 General Business District to R-18 Residential Planned Development District to permit a senior care facility with up to 83-units and other associated site improvements on the subject property. Final Site Plan Review is also requested. All persons interested should attend and will be given an opportunity to be heard. information, please contact Michelle House at (847) 904-4307. For further ATTEST: Jeff Rogers Planning Manager Publication Date: January 26, 2017 Glenview Plan Commission Steven K. Bucklin, Chairman 13