Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/26/2007 P&Z minutes 07-07 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-07-07 Hearing Date: April 26, 2007 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 601 E. Kensington Road PETITIONER: NEPCO, Inc / Nicholas Papanicholas PUBLICATION DATE: March 7, 2007 PIN NUMBERS: 03-35-200-019-0000 REQUEST: Conditional Use - Mixed Use Planned Unit Development MEMBERS PRESENT: Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Marlys Haaland Ronald Roberts Richard Rogers ST AFF MEMBER PRESENT: Judith Connolly, Senior Planner Ellen Divita, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES: Nick Papanicholas, Joseph Rubel, LeAnn Chuboff, Nancy Beckmann, Donna Johnson Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Richard Rogers moved to approve the minutes of the March 22, 2007 and April 12, 2007 meetings and Joseph Donnelly seconded the motion. The minutes were approved 6-0 with Mary McCabe abstaining. Chairperson Juracek introduced Case PZ-07-07, a request for a Conditional Use at 601 East Kensington Road, at 7:37 p.m. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, stated that the Subject Property is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Kensington and Wheeling Roads, and includes a vacant office/laboratory building with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned 11 Limited Industrial and is adjacent to the 11 District to the south and east and is across the street from the Rl Single Family District to the north and west. Ms. Connolly said the Petitioner proposes to demolish the existing building and construct six buildings on one lot of record. Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval is required to construct multiple buildings on one lot of record as the Village Code allows one principal building per lot of record. Ms. Connolly stated that the proposed site plan indicates two driveways would be added to the site, creating four access points to and from the proposed development. There will be a total of six buildings constructed on the Subject Property and the site plan notes that specific users have been secured for four of the buildings. The identified occupants are contractors and their proposed buildings include office space, warehouse areas, as well as outdoor storage areas. She said the plan calls for the outdoor storage areas to be secured and screened with an 8- foot wood fence as required by the Village's Zoning Ordinance. The remaining two buildings include 10,450 square feet of multi-retail building and a 30 to 40 seat freestanding restaurant with a drive-thru. The dumpsters for the restaurant and retail buildings will be located in the rear of the buildings. All dumpsters will be screened with a 6-foot wood fence. The site plan indicates that some of the parking stalls measure less the minimum 16- foot depth, which is the minimum allowed depth when there is a 2-foot overhang. However, the drive aisles can be reduced to 24-feet so the stall length would comply with the Village's regulations. Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting April 26, 2007 PZ-07 -07 Page 2 Ms. Connolly said Section 14.2224 of the Village Code lists parking regulations, which are based on the proposed use. For industrial properties, the Village Code requires office space to be calculated separately (at 4 per 1,000 square feet) from warehouse (at 1 per 1,500 square feet) when the two uses are located in the same building. She showed a table summarizing the required and proposed parking conditions; the proposed parking is based on the amount of parking available in closest proximity to each building. However, Staff understands that all the parking spaces are available to all the tenants, with the exception of the roofing contractor's facility since that parking is secured behind an 8-foot wood fence. In order to ensure code compliance, a cross parking agreement and easement noted on the plat would need to be adopted so parking remains available for all users in the development. Ms. Connolly stated that the Petitioner prepared elevations for each of the proposed buildings. The one-story contractors' buildings are consistent with typical industrial buildings and will be stained precast concrete panels and include accent reveals. The two-story contractor's building is similar, but has more windows. The Petitioner must provide color renderings detailing these buildings. Ms. Connolly said the elevations for the restaurant and retail building indicate both buildings will be all brick, and include soldier course that frames the windows and defines the signable area. The west and north elevations lack architectural design and roofline interest. These elevations must be modified to provide distinguishable retail space at this location. Ms. Connolly stated that the Petitioner submitted a landscape plan that indicates a significant amount of landscaping would be installed at the Subject Property. However, the proposed perimeter landscaping lacks year- round materials. Staff recommends revising the landscape plan to include at least 50% year-round materials along the perimeter of the Subject Property. Ms. Connolly said the Petitioner submitted a traffic study, which the Village's Traffic Engineer reviewed. The Traffic Engineer found the following issues need to be addressed: . Modifying the plan so the western drive on Kensington Road is right-in and right-out only; . Modifying the plan so the southern drive on Wheeling Road is right-in/right-out and left-in only; . Revising the traffic study, which includes the traffic assignment maps and the intersection capacity analyses, so the study reflects the revised access design; . Revise the Traffic Study to include a restaurant as Building B if it is being considered that a restaurant may go there; and . Show the required 8 stacking spaces for the proposed drive-thru. Ms. Connolly stated that Engineering also found Exhibit 5, Project Traffic Characteristics, needs to address and or answer the following: . The number of trips during the morning peak hour for the retail building appears to be low and does not match the number of new trips; . The number of new trips during the morning peak hour for the restaurant appears to be low; and . The number of trips during the evening peak hour for the restaurant appears to be low. According to ITE Land Use Code 934, Staff has estimated 210 trips for the evening peak hour. Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting April 26, 2007 PZ-07 -07 Page 3 Ms. Connolly said the Petitioner's site plan indicates a freestanding sign will be installed at the northwest corner of the Subject Property. Details on the proposed ground sign and all wall signage must be submitted prior to V illage Board review ofthis request. Ms. Connolly stated that the proposed development is zoned 11 Limited Industrial. She showed a table summarizing the proposed and required bulk regulations. The table shows that the proposed development will comply with the Village's zoning bulk regulations. Ms. Connolly said the standards for Conditional Uses are listed in the Zoning Ordinance and include seven specific findings that must be made in order to approve a Conditional Use. She summarized the standards as: . The Conditional Use will not have a detrimental impact on the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare; . The Conditional Use will not be injurious to the use, enjoyment, or value of other properties in the vicinity or impede the orderly development of those properties; . There is adequate provision for utilities, drainage, and design of access and egress to minimize congestion on Village streets; and . The request is in compliance of the Conditional Use with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and other Village Ordinances. Ms. Connolly stated that in general, Staff does not object to the proposed mixed use industrial PUD. The proposed uses are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the site would comply with the Zoning Ordinance regulations subject to modifications to the Landscape Plan. She said the proposed restaurant and multi-tenant retail building may have difficulty attracting drive-by traffic, consequently destination orientated businesses may be more successful at this location. However, there are traffic-related concerns that the Petitioner would need to resolve in order for the proposal to comply with the standards for a Conditional Use as listed in the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Connolly said Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission approve the following motion: "To approve a Conditional Use permit for a mixed used Planned Unit Development at 601 E. Kensington Road, Case Number PZ-07-07 subject to the following: Prior to Village Board review, the Petitioner shall: 1. Revise the site plan to: a. reflect right-in and right-out only access for the western drive on Kensington Road; full access for the eastern drive on Kensington Road would be acceptable; b. reflect right-in/right-out and left-in only at the southern driveway along Wheeling Road; and c. demonstrate the site can accommodate 8 stacking spaces as required by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Revise the Traffic Study: a. so the assignment maps and the intersection capacity analyses reflect the revised access design of the two driveways along Wheeling Road; b. to reflect a restaurant for Building B, if it will be a restaurant; c. to document the number of trips during the morning peak hour for the retail building meet industry standards; Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting April 26, 2007 PZ-07-07 Page 4 d. to clarify how the number of new trips during the morning peak hour for the restaurant was determined; and e. to confirm the number of trips during the evening peak hour for the restaurant comply with industry standards. 3. Revise the Landscape Plan to include at least 50% year-round plant materials along the perimeter of the Subject Property. 4. Revise the west and north elevations of the restaurant and retail buildings to include architectural and roofline interest, and distinguishing it as retail space. 5. Prepare color renderings of the buildings. 6. Prepare a sign package that provides details for the ground sign and all wall signs. 7. The Petitioner shall prepare plans in general conformance with the site plan prepared by NEPCO, dated April 2, 2007. 8. Prior to submitting for a Building Permit, the Petitioner shall prepare plans that provide additional hydrants as required by Village Code. 9. Provide the Fire Department access to the secured outdoor storage areas through the Knox rapid key entry system, which includes electric key switches ands/or padlocks. 10. The site shall be developed in accordance with all Village Codes and regulations." Ms. Connolly stated that the Village Board's decision is final for this case. Richard Rogers said it appears as if the secured parking for the roofing contractor occupies most of the parking area and he is concerned about adequate parking for the remaining businesses. Ms. Connolly clarified that the overall parking does meet the Village Code requirements. Mr. Rogers stated that his concern is if the other uses need additional parking, the secured parking is not available for general use. Chairperson Juracek asked if the right-in-right-out at Kensington is already indicated on the plan. Ms. Connolly stated for the western-most entrance, there will be no left turns allowed. There was general discussion regarding the traffic flow in the area. There were no additional questions for Staff. Chairperson Juracek swore in Nick Papanicholas 700 French Way, Mount Prospect, Illinois and Joseph Rubel, 1001 Feehanville Drive, Mount Prospect, Illinois, representing Nepco. Mr. Papanicholas gave a brief history of NEPCO. He stated that Albany Molecular vacated the subject property and Nepco was able to work with the potential tenants on developing the project. Chairperson Juracek asked if the retail building is geared toward service oriented businesses. Mr. Papanicholas stated they envision businesses such as a florist, insurance, chiropractic, embroidery or other service-type offices in this location. As far as the restaurant, he would like to see something along the lines of a Panera or Einstein Bagels. He does not want to see a "fast food" restaurant come in, but perhaps a "quick food" restaurant. Richard Rogers stated that the site plan does not appear to provide for adequate turning-radius at the corner near the restaurant. He asked how the stacking would work for the drive-thru. Mr. Rubel stated that the generation of the 8 cars along the building would cause 2 cars to wait in the drive-aisle. He stated they are not positive there will be a drive-thru since a tenant has not been secured. Chairperson Juracek stated that a drive-thru would be a Conditional Use and it would not be ideal to approve that at this time since a tenant has not been secured. Mr. Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting April 26, 2007 PZ-07 -07 Page 5 Papanicholas said that once a tenant is secured, and if a drive-thru is desired, they would come back with the tenant for a separate Conditional Use. Mr. Donnelly stated that the lane configuration on Kensington is not accurately depicted on the drawings. There was general discussion regarding lane configuration and speed limits in that area of the business park. Mr. Rubel stated they will update the drawings to reflect the proper lane configuration. Chairperson Juracek said that Staff had concerns that the numbers reflected in the traffic study were low. She asked the Petitioner to address that concern. Mr. Rubel stated that he is not a traffic engineer and would have to defer to their traffic engineer. He stated that the traffic study was compiled by a third party and the study will address Staff concerns prior to going before the Village Board. Mr. Donnelly said it may be better to provide a left-turn lane for left-turns from Kensington into the site. There was additional discussion regarding the traffic in and out of the site. Mr. Papanicholas stated that the vehicles that will be stored on-site will be light to medium duty trucks. He discussed the general uses of the contractor parking. Chairperson Juracek asked if the roofing contractor would generate an asphalt smell. Mr. Papanicholas stated that the roofer is primary a residential roofer and would not be melting down asphalt on the site. Leo Floros asked if the contractor tenants are secured. Mr. Papanicholas stated that, provided the development passes the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Village Board, these contractors will be moving into the development. There was general discussion regarding the operations of the potential tenants. Mr. Rogers stated he would like an additional condition of restricting outdoor storage to the motion. There was additional discussion regarding the potential restaurant tenants. Ronald Roberts stated that there are no retail services available to the Business Center employees. He said this may be one step in the right direction to promoting the Kensington Business Park. Mr. Rubel also stated there is significant foot-traffic in that area of the Business Center. There was general discussion regarding the sidewalks in the area. Chairperson Juracek swore in Nancy Beckmann, 603 Ironwood, Mount Prospect, Illinois. Ms. Beckmann stated her backyard backs up to Kensington Road. She is concerned about the smells that may be generated from a restaurant. She asked if there would be any recourse for her, should a restaurant that generates smells move into that development. Ms. Connolly stated the Zoning Ordinance regulates toxic matters, but it would be difficult to enforce non-noxious odors. Chairperson Juracek stated it would have to be addressed as a "good neighbor" policy. There was general discussion regarding location of the restaurant within the development. Chairperson Juracek swore in LeAnn Chuboff, 707 Eastman Drive, Mount Prospect, Illinois. Ms. Chuboff asked the Commission to consider that this development is close to three residential areas. Her main concern aside from lighting, safety, debris, and odor, is traffic. She is concerned with the noise and safety of increased traffic volume and the size of the vehicles. She stated she is worried about the unknown; that the residents need to expect the worst and hope for the best. She said she is here to raise potential concerns and remind the Commission that this development will have residential neighbors. Chairperson Juracek asked if Ms. Chuboff had concerns about the mixed retail portion of the development. Ms. Chuboff said she is ok with the mixed-use development, but is unsure of what type of concerns to anticipate. Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting April 26, 2007 PZ-07 -07 Page 6 Mr. Rogers asked how far Ms. Chuboff's home is from Wheeling Road. Ms. Chub off said they are approximately 75-feet from Wheeling Road. Ms. Chuboff said she is concerned with the proposed hours of operation until 10 p.m. She said she feels the proposed hours are excessive for the target market of the Business Center employees. She suggested the hours of operation be reconsidered. She would like to see a compromise to make the development work for the retailers, the Business Center employees, and the neighbors. Chairperson Juracek stated that Mr. Papanicholas has come up with a "gentle" use for this property, but feels that there are many issues to be ironed out before the project proceed. Ms. Chuboff summarized her concerns and reiterated that the traffic study data was based on a vacant building and feels the count is too low and the type of vehicles. was not taken into consideration. Chairperson Juracek swore in Donna Johnson of 1009 N. Westgate, Mount Prospect, Illinois. Ms. Johnson stated that she has lived at this address since 1978, when the Kensington Business Center was a grassy field. She stated that she was part of the committee that signed the petition to make Kensington a Business Park, that it would be a business area with no foot traffic. She said she feels that this development would change the architecture and ambiance of the Center. She stated that she is concerned other vacant buildings will become mixed-use buildings as well. Ms. Johnson also stated she is concerned that the fencing for the contractor sites will not be sufficient to screen the materials and supplies stored on the development site. She gave examples of other contractor storage areas in the Village. She said she is concerned this is an industrial use and does not belong in a business center. She said she feels the Village does not need a strip mall in a residential area. She also stated there are enough restaurants in the area and the proposed restaurant use does not fit into the center. Ms. Johnson also stated she has concerns regarding landscaping and traffic. She said she is worried about the increased traffic and the heavy trucks damaging the roadway. She also said she is concerned with the speed limit in that section; even though the speed limit drops, vehicles tend to remain at the 45 miles per hour speed limit. This area is also on a bus route and she is concerned with school bus traffic. The Commission had no questions for Ms. Johnson. Chairperson Juracek invited the Petitioner to address the resident concerns. Mr. Papanicholas stated that the tenants will be part of an association and will be required to maintain their storage sites. The association would maintain the fencing, landscaping, and walkways. He stated that the Nepco properties have an excellent history of well-maintained facilities and they are proud of their reputation. There was general discussion regarding the type of tenant and the vehicles/storage that will be on site. Mr. Rubel stated that the setback on this development site is greater than what is required by Village Code, offering a good distance from the residential properties. He also stated that they will not be removing the sidewalks in the area, and would plant additional landscaping to soften the area. There was additional discussion regarding the sidewalks in the area. Mr. Papanicholas stated that the excavator company interested in becoming a tenant, would use using this location as his business office, and that there would be no large truck traffic and/or storage. Chairperson Juracek asked what the nature of J. Giannini is; Mr. Papanicholas said it is a utility contractor. The company does utility work and this site would primarily be his business office. Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting April 26, 2007 PZ-07 -07 Page 7 Mr. Donnelly asked why the contractors need secured parking if there is not going to be storage on the site. Mr. Papanicholas stated that the contractors prefer secured parking as additional safety for vehicle and equipment protection. Mr. Donnelly asked staff if locked storage is permitted in the Center. Ms. Connolly stated that the Zoning Ordinance allows outdoor storage in the 11 District to a certain extent when it is screened. Chairperson Juracek stated she feels the developer has done a nice job of laying out the site, however; she has concerns with a restaurant in that location. She said she would like to see a quieter tenant in that location. Leo Floros stated that it needs to be decided if this is a consistent use with what is in the rest of the Business Park. He said this site was not part of the original Kensington Business Park, but the use should still be consistent with its industrial neighbors. Mr. Papanicholas stated that the tenants that have been secured are reputable, long- standing businesses. There was general discussion regarding the equipment that will be stored at the site. Mr. Donnelly stated that many of the other sites that offer outdoor storage in the Village have landscaped berms to buffer it from other properties, and this site is different because the line of site is straight into the development. He stated his biggest concern is the traffic that will be generated from this development. He said he feels he does not have enough information to make a decision on this proposal. Chairperson Juracek asked if Nepco had considered other sites for this project. Mr. Papanicholas said they are always looking for properties, but they feel this location would be a nice addition to the area. Mr. Rogers asked if the building is being completely torn down, and if the proposal is denied, what they intend to do with the property. Mr. Papanicholas said the building is coming completely down and they will retain the property and submit another proposal should this one be denied. Ms. Beckmann asked if it was too late in the process to start a petition against the project. Chairperson Juracek stated it is not too late to proceed since the Case needs to go before the Village Board. Chairperson Juracek closed the public hearing at 8:56 p.m. Mr. Donnelly asked if the Petitioner should consider tabling the Case to a future meeting and address some of the concerns brought up tonight. Chairperson Juracek asked the Petitioner how he would like to proceed. Mr. Papanicholas stated that he would like to come back to a future Commission meeting. Mr. Donnelly made a motion to table Case PZ-07 -07 to the May 24, 2007 Planning and Zoning Commission. Richard Rogers seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Donnelly, Floros, Haaland, McCabe, Roberts, Rogers, Juracek NAYS: None Motion was approved 7-0. After hearing four additional cases and discussing the Zoning Ordinance update, Richard Rogers made a motion to adjourn at 10:48 p.m., seconded by Joseph Donnelly. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Stacey Dunn, Community Development Administrative Assistant C:\Documents and Seltings\kdewis\Local Settings\Temporary internet Files\OLK6B\PZ-07-07 601 E Kenslngton,doc