Planning & Development Committee Meeting 7:15 p.m. James C. Lytle Council Chambers - Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center APPROVED MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Wynne, A. Rainey, T. Suffredin, J. Fiske, E. Revelle, R. Rue Simmons, D. Wilson STAFF PRESENT: J. Leonard, M. Masoncup, S. Mangum OTHERS PRESENT: PRESIDING OFFICIAL: Ald. Wynne I. CALL TO ORDER/DECLARATION OF QUORUM: ALDERMAN WYNNE, CHAIR A quorum being present, Ald. Wynne called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 2018 Ald. Fiske moved to approve the minutes of the January 8, 2018 meeting, seconded by Ald. Wilson. The committee voted unanimously 7-0, to approve the January 8, 2018 minutes. III. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION (P1) Vacation Rental License for 710 Madison Street City staff recommends City Council approval of a Vacation Rental License for the property located at 710 Madison Street. The Vacation Rental meets all of the Standards and Procedures for license approval. For Action Ald. Fleming requested to hold to the item until February 26, 2018 to work with the property owner and staff. Ald. Wilson moved to hold the item until the February 26, 2018 Planning and Development Committee meeting, seconded by Ald. Rue Simmons. The Committee voted unanimously, 7-0 to hold the item. (P2) Ordinance 7-O-18, Granting a Special Use for a Type 2 Restaurant, Colectivo Coffee, at 716 Church Street The Zoning Board of Appeals and City staff recommend adoption of Ordinance 7-O-18 granting special use approval for a Type 2 Restaurant, Colectivo Coffee, at 716 Church Street in the D3 Downtown Core
Planning & Development Committee Meeting Page 2 of 10 Development District. The applicant has complied with all zoning requirements and meets all of the standards for a special use for this district. Alderman Fiske recommends suspension of the rules for Introduction and Action at the January 22, 2018 City Council meeting. For Introduction and Action Ald. Wilson moved to suspend the rules and recommend introduction and action of Ordinance 7-O-18, seconded by Ald. Revelle. The Committee voted unanimously, 7-0, to Introduce and Approve Ordinance 7-O-18. (P3) Ordinance 13-O-18, Granting a Special Use for the Expansion of a Religious Institution and Major Zoning Relief for a Third Story Addition at 2014 Orrington Avenue The Zoning Board of Appeals and City staff recommend adoption of Ordinance 13-O-18 granting special use approval for the expansion of a Religious Institution, Lubavitch Chabad of Evanston, and major zoning relief for a third story addition, in the R1 Single Family Residential District. The applicant has complied with all zoning requirements and meets all of the standards for special use and major variations for this district. For Introduction David Shoenfeld, 2039 Orrington, speaking for 10 neighbors, stated concerns of institutional intrusion and irrevocably converting to a nonresidential use. Mr. Shoenfeld suggested conditions agreed to by the applicant addressing concerns about termination of the use upon Chabad s departure. The ZBA changed these conditions and the neighbors ask to include the conditions in the ordinance. Ald. Fiske, referenced the neighbors and property owner s agreement, and suggested that the Committee amend the motion to include conditions regarding the use of premises and to limit the special use to Lubavich Chabad. Deputy City Attorney Masoncup, stated that per the zoning code a special use runs with the land, not with the owner except for unique circumstances. Further, RLUIPA protections require a compelling government interest to treat differently than other religious institutions. Ald. Fiske, stated that these issue were included in 1978 Ordinance and covenant and requested that these issues are explored in the next two weeks to discuss with neighbors and staff. Ald. Wilson, noted that it is important to protect the process and rights and is uncomfortable deviating from the ordinance as written. Ald. Revelle, noted that the record would reflect that Chabad is in agreement with proposed restriction.
Planning & Development Committee Meeting Page 3 of 10 Deputy City Attorney Masoncup stated that staff will explore further in next two weeks. Ald. Rue Simmons, inquired whether this could affect other houses of worship in community. Ald. Wynne, summarized the substitution of special use process. Ald. Rainey, further described regulations regarding abandonment of a special use. A motion by Ald. Fiske to amend the ordinance failed for lack of a second. Ald. Wilson moved to recommend introduction of Ordinance 13-O-18, seconded by Ald. Rue Simmons. The Committee voted 7-0 to Introduce Ordinance 13-O-18. (P4) Ordinance 14-O-18, Granting a Special Use for a Type 2 Restaurant, Rubie s, at 1723 Simpson Street The Zoning Board of Appeals and City staff recommend adoption of Ordinance 14-O-18 granting special use approval for a Type 2 Restaurant, Rubie s, at 1723 Simpson Street in the B1 Business District. This recommendation is conditional on the replacement of the building s glass block windows with unobstructed transparent glass and removal of iron bars on windows and doors. The applicant has complied with all zoning requirements and meets all of the standards for a special use in this district. For Introduction Ald. Wilson moved for introduction, seconded by Ald. Revelle. Jasmine, 5th Ward resident, spoke in support of the vision of the restaurant. Leticia Walker, supports economic development of Rubie s and feels it is a convenient location for restaurant. Michelle Askew, who grew up in 5th Ward, stated that Rubie s is welcoming for children s development and a healthier restaurant option and is in support of help with windows. Antonia Simpson, supports Rubie s as a mother and educator to provide meals for children. It would give back to community and provide a place for teenagers. Eddie Hatfield, who grew up in the 5th Ward, spoke in support of Rubie s. Erica Hatfield, spoke in support and inquired whether funding would be available for Rubie s.
Planning & Development Committee Meeting Page 4 of 10 Ald. Rainey, stated it is a perfect location for restaurant. Attended ZBA and heard conditions of approval regarding windows/bars needed before special use approved. Ald. Rainey suggested holding until facade improvement grant application received and Economic Development Committee meets. Robert Crayton, applicant for Rubie s, wants windows/bars removed. Bids have been received today. Doesn t believe need grant application to move forward. Planning and Zoning Administrator Mangum, stated that DAPR and the ZBA both reviewed and agreed that glass block windows need to be removed and replaced. The ZBA also had condition that grant application should be submitted prior to approvals. Staff believes that improvements for physical improvements need to be made before issuance of business license. Ald. Rue Simmons clearly communicated as has staff that windows/bars need to be removed. The vision of use of space by the applicant has been fluid. The first phase is limited to 10 people including 4-5 staff, the second phase now described as including programming with District 65. Would like to see more details of 2nd phase to determine whether the building may support those uses including an additional bathroom for more than 10 occupants. Mr. Crayton stated that the first phase would be limit to 10 and the second phase would occur once capital has been built. Ald. Rue Simmons requested additional details for the second phase including hours of operation, number of people, if building will work for use. Windows and bars on doors are ward-wide issue, not specific to this building. Mr. Crayton stated that looking to open first phase because now 6-months into lease and losing money. It took longer for bids because no Evanston company doing work regarding block windows. Ald. Rue Simmons noted that work was started early without permit and staff was not allowed into building. Mr. Crayton stated that funding is not currently available for removal of bars and windows and wasn t part of previous meetings. Ald. Wynne, described Economic Development Committee process for funding facade improvement grants, restated ZBA recommendation, and explained that a special use permit is needed for a Type 2 Restaurant. Mr. Crayton agrees that glass block and bars should be removed and inquired about reason for two phases.
Planning & Development Committee Meeting Page 5 of 10 Director Leonard, stated that the first phase limited occupancy based on building code requirements for ADA restrooms. A special use is needed for operating the restaurant. Ald. Wilson, stated that requiring funding should not be a part of the special use approval and suggested removing the subsection. Mr. Crayton explained his understanding of the limitations of the number of occupants and need for a special use only for more than 10 persons. Ald. Wynne requested a meeting with City staff to explain more clearly and noted other businesses limited by ADA restroom requirements. Mr. Crayton stated that there was previously restaurant at location. Director Leonard stated that based on staff review it was not operating in previous two years as the reason for new special use. Ald. Rue Simmons noted that staff has been very clear. There was a restaurant previously but has not been operating and used for storage. Ald. Wynne noted abandonment and need to reapply for a special use. Ald. Wilson stated it is a great location for restaurant, but noted that in looking at the space the applicant should consider long-term plans before making restaurant investment. Ald. Wynne concurred about thinking long-term about usage of the space. Monique Parsons stated that she has been helping to navigate process. The ZBA recommendation was for good faith to pursue funding, not to deny business license prior to windows/bars being replaced. This morning, in response to questions about conditions, an email was sent about conditions and if added after meeting should have been communicated following meeting. Noted that storefront application has been submitted electronically with an automatic response generated and that some recommended contractors in Evanston do not perform work proposed. In response to Ald. Wynne s inquiry, Ms. Parsons stated she doesn t know when the owner submitted the application. Ald. Wilson motioned to remove condition E, subsection 3-E, as a condition of the Special Use, seconded by Ald. Rue Simmons. Ald. Rainey moved to hold in Committee until next meeting. The item was held in Committee until February 12, 2018.
Planning & Development Committee Meeting Page 6 of 10 Ald. Wynne stated that staff would meet with applicant to describe process and timeline for special use and grant. Condition regarding window transparency remains in ordinance. (P5) Ordinance 5-O-18, Granting Special Use Permit for a Planned Development Located at 601 Davis Street The Plan Commission and staff recommend denial of Ordinance 5-O-18 for approval of the Planned Development to construct a 33-story, 318-unit residential building with 7,481 square feet of ground floor commercial space (including a drive through for a financial institution, Chase Bank) and 176 onsite parking spaces. The applicant is requesting 8 site development allowances. The proposed development exceeds the maximum site development allowances for building height and FAR, therefore, a supermajority (two-thirds) vote by the City Council is required for approval. On January 8, 2018 Ordinance 5-O-18 was continued until January 22, 2018 for Introduction. For Introduction Dave Cocagne, applicant made a presentation describing the history/timeline of project, existing conditions, and the context of the area. Mr. Cocagne noted that the project was about 60 feet taller because the University Building is preserved and that the pedestrian experience would be improved due to reduction in curb cut width. The number of development allowances are in line with other projects. The public benefits were described, including preserving historic structure, removing incompatible land uses, providing affordable housing per Mayor Tisdahl, and increasing tax revenues. Tina Paden, spoke in opposition, stated that Evanston is losing charm and looking more like Chicago. Hank Goldman, spoke in opposition, the project is too big with too many variances, and doesn t fit the character. Jack Weiss, spoke in favor. The parcel has been vacant for over 30 years. He expressed concerns but noted development allowances are typical, and that this is one of densest blocks, an appropriate location. The number of dwelling units is similar to others in the dense walkable urban location. Junad Rizki, spoke in opposition, there is no plan for downtown, should be a computer generated model. There is no vision, better architecture is needed, and CIty should not be giving away parking. Mike Breclaw, 1519 Davis, spoke in favor of dense downtown projects that are sustainable, of appropriate density and scale, and provide additional revenue for the city.
Planning & Development Committee Meeting Page 7 of 10 Prudence Moylan, spoke in favor because the design is an asset to the City and because affordable housing would be within the building. St. Vincent DePaul s affordable housing work is complementary and not duplicating. Pam Matambanado, of St. Vincent DePaul Society, stated that they run case management, teaching residents how to sustain and to break cycle of poverty. Sue Loellbach, of Joining Forces, noted that inclusionary housing is needed as a tool because of undue exclusionary zoning history and requested to maximize the number of onsite units. Dan Barton, Spice and Tea Exchange owner, spoke in favor for other small business owners, stating that development is good for the City and small businesses. Neil Sheehan, spoke in favor, Evanston s downtown is distinguished from other communities. High quality new development would energize the block and renovate the University Building. Brad White, spoke in favor, as former Landmarks Illinois Chair the development would reuse the site, preserve the University Building, expand the property tax base, and provide affordable housing. Lin Ewing, spoke in opposition, because of concerns with height, amount of affordable units, density, and diversity. Also, appreciate setback, but not sure taxes will be lowered and not sure of vacancy rate. Chris Body, owner of business property in downtown, spoke in favor for reasons stated by others. Lane Howard, spoke in favor, because the development can help relieve tax pressure and help businesses. Elizabeth Collen, spoke in favor, due to more vibrancy and safety. Jeanine Martin, spoke in favor due to property tax support. Theresa Melroy, spoke in favor, stating it was the right place for development. Clare Kelly, spoke in opposition due to concern with lack of zoning, low public benefits. Spoke of need for lobbying ordinance. Kiera Kelly, spoke in opposition, it is an empty lot, but can do better. There are minimal pub benefits, it does not meet IHO. Noted Crain s listing of units underway and vacancy rate, stated that DAPR and Plan Commission
Planning & Development Committee Meeting Page 8 of 10 recommended against. Also, expressed a lack of confidence in process and the need for a development plan and a moratorium on development. Darlene Cannon read a statement in opposition from Dominic Hilare. Chris Kruger, cautioned about funding to religious institution, recruiting of D65 referendum supporters to speak, displacement because of new buildings, income disparity, and spoke for the need for the best deal for residents. Ted Smuckler, representing Open Communities, stated he was neutral regarding high-rises, but there is a need to strengthen IHO and provide more onsite units. Another speaker in opposition, there is too much density and not wanted by residents. Jackie Prince, concerned with increase in trucks and busses and pollution. Ald. Wilson moved to introduce, seconded by Ald. Revelle. Ald. Wilson, stated downtown is a fantastic place and vibrant. The City is mostly built-up and there is interest in developing downtown. The Downtown Plan became obsolete after it was developed. Although there are parameters for exceptions, is not comfortable supporting the project. The City has an extensive review process for development and decisions aren t rushed. Ald. Fiske, is proud of steps to make downtown more livable and active, believes there is a need for more office space. Appreciates the Hyatt Hotel, an as of right development. Should be looking at future of downtown development, because some proposed developments are not supportable. Although there will be additional development, charm is important in attracting development to Evanston. Is not in support of this proposed development and believes need discussion of future of downtown. Ald. Revelle, stated everyone spent a lot of time on process. There are many positives to redevelop site including economic vitality, reducing drive-through lanes, preserving University Building, supporting homeless families as an important need. However, height and density too far beyond what is appropriate: Height exceeded by almost 100 feet versus development allowance, density 318 dwelling units versus 93 permitted, additional vehicle hazards for pedestrians, and precedent for future development allowances. The fee-in-lieu for Affordable Housing Fund is more comprehensive than proposal from Vermillion. Ald. Wynne, is in agreement with Ald. Revelle and others about downtown improvement, but believes a plan is possible and needed for downtown. Not necessarily the number of variances but the extent: height, density, FAR, a drive-through that will be obsolete in area where it should be eliminated. It
Planning & Development Committee Meeting Page 9 of 10 would be foolish to use public parking intended to attract retail customers. Real estate taxes are not a public benefit and others proposed are not sufficient. The developer has not listened to DAPR and Plan Commission. Cannot support the project. Ald. Rue Simmons has heard opposition from 5th Ward as a result of Inclusionary Housing. There is a need more onsite units and a project that is closer to the IHO requirements. Ald. Rainey, agrees it is a good looking building and will add to the tax base. A unique approach is being proposed for affordable housing. The variances are extreme, but a project is needed at that location, and suggested tabling for 4 months to evaluate a lower building with different affordable housing. Ald. Rue Simmons would support tabling if possible. Mr. Cocagne stated that he would entertain tabling the item. Ald. Fiske is not in support of tabling and feels that the development should start over, including improving the building design. Ald. Wynne, was not in support of tabling, noting that the developer heard from DAPR and Plan Commission, but did not make changes and should not be rewarded for ignoring the process. Ald. Fiske requested to call the question. Ald. Wynne called the question. Ald. Wilson moved to recommend introduction of Ordinance 5-O-18, seconded by Ald. Revelle. The Committee voted 1-6 and the Ordinance 5-O-18 was not Introduced. IV. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION (PD1) 1740 Hinman Avenue Building Renovations Staff requests review of the applicable Zoning and Building Code standards for permit review and requests direction from the Planning and Development Committee, which could come in the form of a referral to the Plan Commission if a Zoning Text Amendment is recommended or a recommendation for no further action. For Discussion Ald. Fiske made a referral to the Plan Commission to address partial bedrooms using borrowed light with 5-foot tall walls. 1740 Hinman Ave is a building with 2-bedroom units that are becoming 4-bedroom units. The leases are either not being renewed or rents are increasing. The changes are not consistent with IHO and units are being changed to student housing. Cameel Halim, property owner stated that he was only notified of this item on Friday by the media and is spending millions to upgrade the building.
Planning & Development Committee Meeting Page 10 of 10 Ald. Wilson stated that any changes would not affect this building. Mr. Halim noted that these are large 1,700 square foot apartments. Ald. Fiske stated it would not affect current units that have building permits. Deputy City Attorney Masoncup stated that the Law Department would review the issue. Mr. Halim stated that tenants are already creating partitions which creates fire hazards. Ald. Wynne seconded the referral. (PD2) Public Benefits for Planned Developments Staff requests direction from the Planning and Development Committee, which could come in the form of a referral to the Plan Commission if a Text Amendment is recommended or a recommendation for no further action. For Discussion The item was held until February 26, 2018. (PD3) Impact Fees from Planned Developments Staff requests direction from the Planning and Development Committee, which could come in the form of a referral to the Plan Commission if a Text Amendment is recommended or a recommendation for no further action. For Discussion The item was held until February 26, 2018. V. COMMUNICATIONS There were no communications. VI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Scott Mangum Planning and Zoning Administrator