Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/26/2007 P&Z minutes 26-07 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-26-07 Hearing Date: July 26, 2007 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1550 W. Dempster PETITIONER: Kelley Alcock, Whiteway Signs (Agent for Property Owner) PUBLICATION DATE: July 11, 2007 PIN NUMBER: 08-14-300-016-0000, 08-15-401-037-0000 REQUEST: Sign Package - (4) Variations MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Chairperson Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Mary McCabe MEMBERS ABSENT: Marlys Haaland Ronald Roberts Keith Youngquist STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judith Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Ellen Divita, Deputy Director of Community Development Jason Zawila, Long Range Planner Joseph Levie, Planning Intern INTERESTED PARTIES: Kelly Alcock, Peter Lubin Chairman Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:35p.m. Leo Floros made a motion to approve the minutes of the June 28, 2007 meeting and Mary McCabe seconded the motion. The minutes were approved 3-0, with Joseph Donnelly abstaining. After hearing one previous case, Chairman Rogers introduced Case PZ-26-07, a request for a Sign Variation at 1550 W. Dempster Road at 8:03 p.m. Jason Zawila, Long Range Planner, stated that the Subject Property is located at the northwest comer of Dempster Street and Busse Road, and consists of a 240-unit multi-family development on two lots of record. The development includes a multiple building apartment complex zoned R4 multi-family development. The Subject Property is bordered by the Commonwealth Edison right-of-way to the north, the B3 community shopping and the B4 commercial corridor districts to the west, B3 community shopping district and unincorporated Cook County to the south, and the R4 multi-family residence district to the east. Mr. Zawila said the Petitioner is seeking approval to replace the existing apartment complex signage that was installed more than 20 years ago. There are currently six legal non-conforming freestanding signage installed on the Subject Property that would not be allowed under the current Sign Code. The Petitioner is proposing to remove all freestanding signage and replace them with a sign package: Sign A The Petitioner is seeking approval to replace the existing signage located at the comer of Dempster Street and Busse Road. The existing signage consists of two freestanding signs installed in a "V" configuration. The total sign face for both signs measures 64 square feet. Richard Rogers, Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting July 26, 2007 PZ-26-07 Page 2 The Petitioner proposes to install a freestanding sign with a masonry base in approximately the same location as the existing signage. The total proposed sign face measures 70.2 square feet and will be internally illuminated. The existing landscaping around the area of sign will remain, which meets the requirements of the Sign Code. Sign B The Petitioner is seeking approval to replace the existing freestanding sign located on Dempster Street, east of the western most parking lot entrance. The existing sign face measures 32 square feet for each side of the freestanding sign and encroaches into the required 5 foot setback. The Petitioner proposes to install a new freestanding sign with a masonry base in the same location. The total proposed sign face measures 70.2 square feet for each side of the freestanding sign and will be internally illuminated. The proposed landscaping around the area around the sign meets the requirements of the Sign Code. Sign C The Petitioner was approved to install a temporary leasing sign on Dempster Street. There is currently an oversized directional sign in the location for Sign C. This sign will need to be removed, when the temporary sign is installed. A variation was not required for this temporary leasing sign, because it meets the Sign Code regulations. Sign D The Petitioner is seeking approval to replace the existing signage located at the Busse Road entrance to the Subject Property. Each existing sign face measures 16.5 square feet. The Petitioner proposes to remove the existing freestanding sign to the right side of the driveway entrance. The existing sign on the left side of the driveway entrance will remain; however, a new directional sign will be installed on the sign face of the freestanding sign. The existing posts will be repainted with blue-gray enamel. The proposed sign area also measures 16.5 square feet. Mr. Zawila stated that in order to approve the Petitioner's request, the Planning and Zoning Commission has to find that the proposed sign package meets the criteria for a Variation because three sign faces each exceed the maximum permitted area of 30 square feet, and one of the three signs is setback zero feet from the property line, when five-feet is required. He said the required findings for sign variations are contained in Section 7.725 of the Village of Mount Prospect Sign Code. He said the section contains specific findings, summarized as: . The sign allowed under code regulations will not reasonably identify the business; . The hardship is created by unique circumstances and not serve as convenience to the petitioner, and is not created by the person presently having an interest in the sign or property; . The variation will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood; . The variation will not impair visibility to the adjacent property, increase the danger of traffic problems or endanger the public safety, or alter the essential character of the neighborhood; and be in harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. Mr. Zawila summarized the required findings for each sign. Sign A The Sign Code limits the size ofthe sign face for residential developments, located on a secondary arterial street, to 30 square feet. However, the Petitioner is seeking a Variation to permit a 70.2 square foot sign face. The height and setback of the sign complies with the Sign Code regulations. The proposed signage would exceed the sign face area of the current signage, which measures 64 square feet, by 6.2 square feet. Richard Rogers, Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting July 26, 2007 PZ-26-07 Page 3 The Sign Code does allow two freestanding signs to be located on the western lot of the Subject Property, since the lot has two frontages, Dempster Street and Busse Road. Since the Petitioner is proposing to install only one sign on the western lot of the Subject Property, when two freestanding signs would be allowed, they are eligible for a 50% bonus. Staff discussed with the Petitioner, this option to install a 45 square foot freestanding sign which would be 50% greater than the 30 square foot maximum area allowed in this location. The Petitioner chose to submit the proposed sign with 70.2 square foot sign face instead. The 45 square foot signage allowed at this location under the Sign Code regulations would reasonably identify the apartment complex. Also, it is not clear what the hardship is that would warrant the proposed larger sign face area. The Petitioner notes in the attached application that the sign conforms to their corporate image, which appears to be based on convenience as opposed to a hardship, as defined by the Village Code. Sign B The Sign Code limits the size of the sign face for residential developments located on a secondary arterial street to 30 square feet. However, the Petitioner is seeking a Variation to permit a 70.2 square feet sign face for each side of the freestanding sign. The Petitioner is also seeking a Variation from the required five-foot setback for a freestanding sign to have a zero-foot setback. Staff discussed with the Petitioner that they had the option to install a 30 square foot sign, setback five feet from the property line. The perimeter landscaping area for the parking lot measures fourteen-feet in width. This would still allow a sufficient amount of space for the installation of a freestanding standing with the required landscaped area around the base of the sign. The Petitioner will not need to lose any parking spaces, as noted in the attached application, because of the installation of a freestanding sign. The Petitioner chose the option to submit the proposed sign for this location instead. It is not clear what the hardship is that would warrant the proposed sign face area or zero-foot setback. The signage allowed at this location under the Sign Code regulations would reasonably identify the apartment complex. Additionally the proposed sign will be internally illuminated and another larger freestanding sign is allowed on the western lot of the Subject Property. Sign D The sign area for the proposed directional sign measures 16.5 square feet. The Sign Code limits the size of a directional sign to 10 square feet. However, the Petitioner is seeking a Variation to permit a 16.5 square foot directional sign. Staff discussed with the Petitioner that they had the option to mount a 10 square foot directional sign on the existing stone gates. Petitioner also has the option to install similar square foot directional signs at each entrance to the Subject Property, better informing the public to all entrances of the apartment complex. The Petitioner chose the option to submit the proposed signage for this location instead. It is not clear what the hardship is that would warrant the proposed sign face area. The Variation appears to be based on convenience as opposed to a hardship, as defined by the Village Code. The Petitioner is proposing to overlay the sign face on an existing freestanding sign that is not permanently affixed to the stone gate. The sign is attached to two wooden posts that could be removed if new directional signage were installed on the gate. Mr. Zawila stated that the Petitioner's requests would not adversely impact the neighborhood or the adjacent properties, and the signage will not detrimental to the public welfare or other properties in the neighborhood. However, the signage permitted by code would reasonably identify the Subject Property. Also, this request is different from a previous request approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission whereby the Mansions of Mount Shire wanted a 68 square foot sign face, with frontage on Golf Road, for only one freestanding sign on the property. Traffic on Golf Road travels at a higher rate of speed; therefore larger text and a larger sign face would Richard Rogers, Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting July 26, 2007 PZ-26-07 Page 4 read easier. The size of the proposed sign face for that request was smaller than the existing freestanding sign for that property. Mr. Zawila said in this case, the requests are based on convenience and the Petitioner has several code compliant sign options that would reasonably identify the apartment complex. The apartment complex is also located at an intersection with a four way stop light that would allow traffic to easily read the signage, unlike the Mansions of Mount Shire, where no traffic control device was located along the Golf Road frontage of the property. Mr. Zawila stated that based on this analysis, the proposed signage requests do not meet the standards for a Variation. No hardship has been presented that would warrant the proposed signage and the requests appear to be based on convenience. Staff presented several options to the Petitioner, which would meet the Sign Code regulations for their sign package for the Subject Property. The signage allowed under the Sign Code for this location would reasonably identify the apartment complex. He said Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission DENY the following motion: "To approve the Variations to allow: . a 70.2 square foot sign face for "Sign A" as shown on the Petitioner's exhibit; . a 70.2 square foot sign face for "Sign C" as shown on the Petitioner's exhibit; . a 16.5 square foot sign face for "Sign D" as shown on the Petitioner's exhibit; and . a 0' setback for "Sign C" as shown on the Petitioner's exhibit." He said the Planning & Zoning Commission's decision is final for this case. Chairman Richard Rogers asked when the original signs were placed. Mr. Zawila said there was a sign permit from 1986 for the sign at the comer of Dempster and Busse. Staff could not confirm installation of the others, but due to the similarity in design, it has been estimated that the stalls were all installed at the same time. Chairman Rogers asked what is allowed at the location of "sign A." Mr. Zawila stated that a 30 square foot sign is allowed, and the Petitioner would be eligible for a 50% bonus if there were no other signage on this frontage. Chairman Rogers asked if all of the signs would be allowed at 30 square feet. Mr. Zawila confirmed. Chairman Rogers said the Petitioner is asking for oversized signs, almost double the allowable size, at each location. There was general discussion regarding the lot lines and street frontages. Joseph Donnelly asked if major arterial street frontages are allowed larger signs. Mr. Zawila said signs on major arterial streets such as Golf Road and Route 83, are allowed at 35 square feet; neither of the street frontages are on major arterial streets for this property. Mr. Donnelly asked if there are time limits for the sign illumination. Mr. Zawila stated the sign must be turned off at II :00 p.m. Chairman Rogers swore in Kelly Alcock of Whiteway Signs at 451 Kingston Court, Mount Prospect, Illinois and Peter Lubin, attorney for Alpine Apartments. Ms. Alcock stated that the owner is working to improve the image of their properties located in the Village. She said the sign at Mansions of Mount Shire have significantly improved leasing at that location and that 83 square foot sign was approved by this Commission and included an electronic message board. She said this variation is for oversized signs and a zero-foot setback. She said this request will actually decrease the total sign-face square footage on the property from 200 square feet to 163 square feet. She stated the proposed signs will have better readability and a more modem look. They also intend to update the landscaping. She said that if the signs were reduced to staff's recommendation, the readability would be reduced. Ms. Alcock stated that the new signage ties directly to the new corporate image. This image has been incorporated into stationary, advertising, and staff uniforms. The owner would like to continue this corporate image into the proposed signage. Richard Rogers, Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting July 26, 2007 PZ-26-07 Page 5 There was general discussion regarding the letter height and readability of the proposed signage. Ms. Alcock gave a brief summary of the proposed signage package and each location for the Alpine Apartments. She stated that the new proposal is actually reducing the total sign-face square footage and she would like the Commission to approve their sign package. Mr. Lubin gave a brief summary of the reduction in square footage of the whole sign package. Chairman Rogers stated that the Village's Sign Code is not arbitrary; that research and surveys were conducted to provide a uniform appearance throughout the Village. He said that a program was initiated to have non-conforming signs removed or replaced and he is not sure how the existing signage was allowed to remain up. He stated that the proposed sign package is requesting quite a large variation from what is currently allowed by Code. Ms. Alcock showed the Commission exhibits comparing a code-compliant sign versus the proposed oversize signs. She said the readability would be considerably reduced and she would like to reach a compromise with the Village. The Petitioner and the Commission had general discussion on reducing the sign package and changing the sign locations. Chairman Rogers called for additional questions or comments from the audience. There were no additional questions. He said a compromise needs to be reached on this sign package. Ellen Divita, Deputy Director of Community Development suggested reviewing the exhibits of each sign. Leo Floros made a motion to amend the previous motion to approve the following Variations: . To allow a freestanding sign with a 70.2' square foot sign face, in the location and constructed as shown on the attached Exhibit A; and . To allow an additional directional sign face with a 10.0' square foot sign face in the location as shown on the attached Exhibit B. The Planning & Zoning Commission grants these Variations subject to: . The removal of all non-conforming signs from the Subject Property as shown on the attached Exhibit C. . The withdrawal of Permit #07-1346 for a temporary/for lease sign as shown on the attached Exhibit D. Mary McCabe seconded the motion. Chairman Rogers closed the public hearing and called for the vote. UPON ROLL CALL: A YES: Donnelly, Floros, McCabe, Rogers NAYS: None Motion was approved 4-0 After hearing four additional cases, Joseph Donnelly made a motion to adjourn at 9:53 p.m., seconded by Mary McCabe. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Stacey Dunn, Community Development Administrative Assistant C:\Documcnls and Settings\kdewis\Local Settings\Temporary Inlernet Files\OLK6B\PZ.2~7 Alpine Apts.doc