Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/26/2008 P&Z minutes 15-08 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-15-08 Hearing Date: June 26, 2008 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 999 N. Elmhurst Road PETITIONER: CLP/SPF Randhurst LLC, c/o Casto Lifestyle Properties PUBLICATION DATE: June 11, 2008 PIN NUMBER: 03-27 -401-266-0000 REQUESTS: 1) Conditional Use for a Commercial Planned Unit Development 2) Building Height and Setback Variations 3) Special Use for Signs Associated with a Large Scale Development 4) Variation for Temporary Leasing Signs 5) Variation to Increase Maximum Fence Height 6) Variation to Site Lighting and Illumination Standards 7) Waiver of Street Lighting Requirements MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Chair Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Marlys Haaland Ronald Roberts MEMBER ABSENT: Keith Youngquist ST AFF MEMBERS PRESENT: William Cooney, AICP, Director of Community Development Brian Simmons, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development Patrick Ainsworth, Planning Intern INTERESTED PARTIES: Aarti Kotak, Brett Hutchens, Arnold Gitten, David Galler, Jim Conroy, Lou Aboona, Dominic Fong, Marlene Friedrichs, Wes Pinchot, Richard Sassan, Linda Davis, Thomas Budzik, Mike Stratis, Ted Johnson, Tim Reber, Brian Swin, Kim Adams Chairman Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Leo Floros made a motion to approve the minutes of the April 24, 2008 meeting and Ronald Roberts seconded the motion. The minutes were approved 4-0 with Joseph Donnelly abstaining. After hearing three previous cases, Chairman Rogers introduced Case PZ-15-08, requests for: a Conditional Use for a Commercial Planned Unit Development, building height and setback Variations, and Special Use for signs associated with a large scale development at 999 N. Elmhurst Road, at 8:10 p.m. Brian Simmons, Deputy Director of Community Development, gave a brief overview of different types of retail centers. He also summarized the history of Randhurst and stated the existing conditions that include several large big box stores. He indicated that several of the larger anchor stores will remain with the proposed project. Mr. Simmons said the status of the mall has decreased due to competition in the retail market. There has been a shift in both retail design and strategies. Mr. Simmons said the area demographics are still strong enough to support a mall. Mr. Simmons concluded by stating Casto Lifestyle Properties and JP Morgan would be presenting and encouraged the public to voice their opinions. Chairman Richard Rogers swore in Aarti Kotak, 203 N. LaSalle Street, Chicago, IL. Ms. Kotak introduced the development team for the proposed project. She said the subject property is approximately a 100 acre site and stated the property location. The applicant (Petitioner) is the owner of the property. The subject property is Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 26, 2008 PZ-15-08 Page 2 currently zoned B-3 community shopping district with an amended Planned Unit Development (PUD). Ms. Kotak said the application proposed approximately 155,000 square feet of newly constructed retail with a total square footage of approximately 980,000 square feet at the site. Ms. Kotak stated the Petitioner is seeking the following approvals: 1) Conditional Use for a PUD with use exceptions and approval of a final plan for the PUD. 2) Residential uses allowed on the Chase bank building parcel and the existing AMC Theater parcel on the Northwest corner of the property. 3) Variations for the following: maximum building height of 60 feet. A reduction in the front yard setback from 30 feet to 20 feet. Reduction in the existing side yard setback from 30 feet to 15 feet for the existing Jewel building. 4) A waiver to permit the location of street lights at locations other than at the frontage as well as other relief to the illumination provisions for the lighting plans that have been submitted. 5) Special Use permit for signs associated with a large scale development and such other relief as may be necessary to accomplish or submit development plans. Chairman Rogers swore in all personnel at one-time testifying on behalf of the Petitioner. Brett Hutchens, President of Casto Lifestyle Properties, 401 N. Cattlemen Road, Sarasota, FL, discussed the needs for the re-development of Randhurst Mall. He also discussed the background of Casto Lifestyle Properties and his company's commitment to Mount Prospect by offering new restaurants, stores, offices, and a hotel. Mr. Hutchens stated the proposed development would provide convenience to shoppers and spur economic development with increased jobs and business opportunities. Mr. Hutchens made several comparisons of Randhurst Village (proposed project) and a mall that Casto re- developed several years ago in Winter Park, FL. Mr. Hutchens discussed Randhurst Village would contain mixed uses of retail, hospitality, offices and residential components in the future. He said he has been asked several times how he knows that this proposed development would work. Mr. Hutchens said his company looked at the market and the opportunity in mall re-development is only there if the real estate is good and the market is still strong. He provided and showed a comparative demographic analysis between Mount Prospect and Winter Park. Mr. Hutchens discussed the vision for Randhurst Village. Arnold Gitten, 116 Alhambra Circle, Coral Gables, FL, discussed the site. He mentioned that they are not changing traffic entrances into the site. There would be walking paths designed so people have a trail to walk through the entire shopping center. There would also be sidewalks added on site so residents from the surrounding neighborhoods could walk in safely along with crosswalks across Elmhurst and Euclid. Mr. Gitten said there would be a parking garage directly south ofthe theaters. David Galler, 116 Alhambra Circle, Coral Gables, FL, discussed the architectural elements and elevations. He discussed the signs that would be placed throughout the property. He said that there would be wider sidewalks down the Main Street area. Mr. Galler showed pictures that included site amenities and discussed the furniture and planters. Chairman Rogers asked if the elevations presented represented what would be built. He also wanted to clarify that the only difference would be signage or the color for a particular client. Mr. Galler said the only thing that might change would be if a retailer came in with a larger space. They might have to modify the elevation slightly to have the retailers' door centered where they might be showing a different color on the elevation. Mr. Galler said they submitted a design guideline booklet with the case for design criteria for retailers. He stated retailers need to conform to sign regulations, use of materials, and the way store fronts are designed. The buildings would be made with mostly brick and glass with stone at the base. Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 26, 2008 PZ-15-08 Page 3 Mr. Gitten discussed the brick work and representation in greater detail by showing the colors and a material sample board to the Planning and Zoning Commission members. Jim Conroy, Director of Development for Casto Lifestyle Properties Chicago, 999 N. Elmhurst Road, Mount Prospect, IL, stated that he has an office on site and will make himself available to the public. Mr. Conroy presented a three dimensional fly through of the proposed development. Mr. Conroy discussed the residential component for the proposed site. The original plans called for residential to be located above the retail along Main Street. He said that this was just not feasible due to construction costs. Mr. Conroy stated that residential is a needed component for the mixed use lifestyle. He said they looked at the Northwest corner of the site and they would be able to provide retail on the first floor with residential above. Mr. Conroy stated that they could segregate commercial and residential parking for this area. The preliminary plan included 200 apartment units and 12,000 to 20,000 square feet of retail. Mr. Conroy mentioned that Staff put together verbiage so the two Northwest corner parcels could possibly have residential zoning. He said they accepted Staffs five conditions for this proposed area. Ms. Kotak discussed the Conditional Use and Special Uses for signs. She said that the Conditional Uses have been addressed in the Petitioner's application. She requested that this application be included into the record for the proceeding. She stated additional uses do no represent more than 40 percent of the total floor area. The signs they construct would serve as a public convenience and they would not be detrimental to the safety, visibility, or general welfare. Ms. Kotak said the signs would be in harmony in scale with the architecture of the building and surrounding neighborhood. The location and size of the signs would not impede the adjacent properties. They would enhance the proposed development. Ms. Kotak stated the Special Use application conforms to the applicable regulations of the sign ordinance. She said the applicant, as far as the Special Use that they requested for the signs is a unique development being proposed along 5,000 linear feet of street frontage. Mr. Donnelly questioned the traffic flow through the property. He stated that the ring road disappears on the West side of the property. Mr. Conroy said that the ring road is difficult to manipulate with the development evolving over time. He stated that he would like to funnel traffic through the Main Street area. Mr. Conroy mentioned that they did retain the ring road coming off of Elmhurst and an area off of Kensington. He said there will be a substantial traffic flow for the theater. Mr. Donnelly said that ring roads typically do not have stop signs. He said people tend to cut through parking lots. He asked the Petitioners to address this. Mr. Conroy said there are currently huge gaps to the East ring road. Access points would be framed out by the building immediately East of Costco. He stated actual aisles would be better defined with the proposal. Mr. Conroy said he is willing to work with Staff in regards to the stop signs Mr. Donnelly addressed in front of the Home Depot store. Ronald Roberts said the whole idea is to get people out of their cars and create a pedestrian friendly environment. He thought it is great that the development is getting rid of most ofthe ring roads. Mr. Donnelly asked about outdoor sales. Mr. Conroy said part of the proposal and site plan included an area that they are requesting as seasonal outdoor display for Home Depot. This would include typical garden displays. Mr. Conroy stated that there would be outdoor dining areas along Main Street as well. Chairman Rogers said the issue is that Home Depot has to taken over part of the parking lot which has made it dangerous for pedestrian traffic and he wanted to know if something could be done about closing off a part of this area. Discussion continued regarding the seasonal area. William Cooney, Director of Community Development, said all outdoor sales areas have to come to the Village for review and comments. Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 26, 2008 PZ-15-08 Page 4 Mr. Donnelly recommended that the seasonal area be moved to the East side of the Home Depot store. He believed Home Depot needed a road like Jewel to move traffic through. Mr. Donnelly asked about the intersection of Rand, Kensington, and Elmhurst Roads, he wanted to know if the road could be expanded to get more cars into the development. Mr. Hutchens wanted to address the seasonal area; he said seven tenants have outdoor lease rights to outdoor sales. He stated that they would work with tenants regarding traffic flows. Lou Aboona, 9575 W. Higgins Road, Rosemont, IL, completed a comprehensive traffic study on the site. He said he has been working with Staff to upgrade the signal at Kensington. The signal currently operates independently from the signal at the triangle (Rand, Kensington, Elmhurst). He stated that he is also working with the Illinois Department of Transportation (lOOT). The east bound traffic would have a protected left turn and they are not planning additional lanes at this time. Chairman Rogers believed one more lane would greatly help as Leo Floros concurred. Mr. Donnelly stated circles into the proposed development would not be a good move. Mr. Gitten said that they have added circles into their projects all over the United States. There are only two circles in the proposed development. He stated that these are not major intersections and they would mainly act as one-way circles. Mr. Gitten said they have not had accidents at their previous projects concerning the circles and does not foresee this being a problem. Chairman Rogers stated circles would help, they would even slow traffic. Mr. Galler said he has worked with Staff regarding the circle on the Chase bank site. There are four ways around the circle and agreed that the circles are just trying to calm the traffic as people head towards the theater. Chairman Rogers asked how the outdoor cafes and work areas would work with our region's climate. Mr. Hutchens said one of the most successful lifestyle mixed-use centers is in Columbus, OH. He stated that you would not eat outside in the wintertime, but it is very important to activate the street when the temperatures are warmer. Chairman Rogers asked how the Petitioner would handle snow removal. Mr. Conroy said they currently contract this out. They have a full-time operations manager who has reviewed the plans. Snow can be pushed out of the Main Street area and be moved to the outer areas of the parking lots. He stated that they will not have snow melting machines. They are comfortable that they can control the snow. Mr. Donnelly asked if there are any commitments for a hotel operator. Mr. Gitten said there is a hotel committed to the project. They would just have to finalize plans just like they do with other tenants. Mr. Donnelly asked if any restaurants were committed. Mr. Gitten said until the final lease is signed, they cannot release any names. Mr. Donnelly and Mr. Floros both had questions regarding the storage facility that has been referenced on the site plan. Mr. Conroy said the storage facility would be a three story fully self-contained building with heat and air conditioning. He stated there has been interest from three to four storage facility companies. Mr. Floros asked how a storage facility would meld with the proposed lifestyle center. Mr. Conroy said they want to bring in the residential component with the proposed project. People in the area might be interested in downsizing and have storage needs. Mr. Conroy stated the community itself has storage needs. He said area of the proposed storage facility was currently located on the least utilized portion of the site. A storage facility is a light and quiet user. Trucks would gain access to the building on the West side so they would be further away from the residential area along the Eastern property line. Mr. Conroy said this provided a nice buffer to the residents of the East and it would blend in with the rest of the architecture for the proposed development. Mr. Donnelly asked how the lights on top of the parking garage would be screened for the residents directly to the East. Mr. Gitten said lights would not be tall on the top of the parking garage. They would have the ability to Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 26, 2008 PZ-15-08 Page 5 control lights and place them along the property line without any spillover. Mr. Conroy added that they will have cut off lenses to eliminate the glare. Mr. Gitten said the whole property line along the East would be fully landscaped. Mr. Conroy said there would be a six foot fence and additional landscaping across the street along the perimeter edge of the parking garage. There was discussion regarding the hotel. Mr. Gitten said it was a need especially for the Kensington Business Center. Mr. Donnelly confirmed that Casto and Chase owned the entire property. He wanted to know if the residential component was added, if it would be apartments and not condos because of shared ownership. It was confirmed that the residential area would be apartments. There was a discussion regarding lease agreements with the major anchors. Everything has been worked out for the proposed development. Chairman Rogers stated that the Petitioners have shown storm detention, lighting, and landscaping on the plans. He asked the Petitioner if they were in agreement with Staffs recommendations on the various items in this entire development plus the process of obtaining building permits. Mr. Conroy stated that they are providing seven to eight acres of storm detention and they are looking at an underground location. This location could be under the future parking garage or under one of the existing buildings in the basement. Mr. Conroy said they have been in contact with the Village Engineer and have toured other similar facilities in regards to the proposed underground detention. Mr. Conroy stated a complete photometric plan was submitted with the application. There may be some modifications to the original plans based on security concerns. Mr. Conroy said they are in agreement that they could comply with the Ordinances set forth by the Village of Mount Prospect. Chairman Rogers received a memo from Staff with some additional items. Mr. Conroy said they are in agreement of keeping the fence along the Eastern property line at six feet. Mr. Conroy stated that they still request a waiver for the street lighting. There was general discussion regarding the lighting along Kensington, Euclid, and Elmhurst Roads. Chairman Rogers said this is something that can be worked out with Staff and it is something to incorporate with the plans in order to get the approval. Chairman Rogers stated that residential on the Northwest corner is a good idea. He said as long as they meet the 30 units per acre, he thought the residential request should be included with the development. Chairman Rogers stated that the signs are too large, but he is willing to increase them from what is normally allowed. There was general discussion regarding signage. Mr. Roberts felt that more signage was necessary due to the segregated parking lots in the proposed plan. There was discussion on the sizes of the signs. The signs at the entrances would be 15 feet, Village Code allows 12 feet. Mr. Cooney provided Staffs input on the signage. He said Staff has been restrictive on signage throughout the Village. They have discussed the Randhurst signs at great length. Mr. Cooney stated the text on the signage basically conforms to code. Staff believed that the location is appropriate for these signs due to the importance of this shopping center. Mr. Donnelly asked about the sight lines with the monument signs. Mr. Gitten said signs are pushed back and would not interfere with sight lines. There was further discussion on the number of tenant names that could appear on the sign. The general consensus between the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Petitioner was seven names. Mr. Floros asked why Randhurst has been a failure with other indoors malls being successful. Mr. Hutchens said when interstates where added, they had the ability to provide regional access. Indoor malls along interstates have Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 26, 2008 PZ-15-08 Page 6 been very successful. Mr. Hutchens stated anchor stores drive traffic into the core of the malls so smaller stores could feed off of the traffic created. The rent for department stores tends to be very low while it is very high for smaller stores. Mr. Hutchens said the cost for maintaining the common areas of the mall is increasing due to heating and air conditioning. Smaller tenants have to support the costs of the common area. There was general discussion regarding the re-development of the mall. Chairman Rogers swore in Dominik Fong, 1172 Boxwood Drive, Mount Prospect, 11. Mr. Fong was concerned with the fence and landscaping along the eastern property line blocking his view and access of the mall. Chairman Rogers said people who live in residential areas next to malls or other properties generally like to be screened. Mr. Fong stated that he would like to have the construction completed as quickly as possible. Mr. Fong was also concerned with the construction hours. Mr. Cooney stated that construction hours were 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. per Village Ordinance. Chairman Rogers swore in Marlene Friedrichs, 320 W. Central Road, Mount Prospect, 11. Ms. Friedrichs read in the newspaper that the proposal did not include any residential. She said the presentation now included 200 apartments rather than the 150 that were originally proposed. Ms. Friedrichs stated that the rest of the project is wonderful, but objected to any more apartments in Mount Prospect. Chairman Rogers swore in Wes Pinchot, 747 Whitegate, Mount Prospect, 11. Mr. Pinchot said he is impressed with the presentation and concept. He asked if the Main Street parking would be adequate for shopping. Mr. Gitten said there would be breezeways along Main Street to lead to adjacent parking areas. Mr. Pinchot asked if parking was adequate for all uses on the property. Mr. Gitten confirmed that parking was adequate and valet parking was included throughout the center. Mr. Donnelly asked where the office population would park. Mr. Hutchens said the office space users would park in the garage. The parking garage would be a shared use with the theater. There was general discussion on locations of the offices and distance from the parking areas. The office space users would be required to park in the garage. Mr. Hutchens said the mixed use concept is to go to the site, park, and create pedestrian traffic. Mr. Pinchot said he was concerned with the signage on Euclid Road for the residents to the North of the proposed site. Mr. Gitten said the sign would not bleed into the residential area. Mr. Pinchot appreciated the proposal and thought it would be a compliment for Mount Prospect. Mr. Donnelly asked about the existing signs for Jewel, Steak and Shake, and Borders. Mr. Conroy said the existing signs would remain, there were no plans to take these down. Chairman Rogers asked if the flags at the entry ways would be taken down, Mr. Conroy said they would. Mr. Hutchens stated there is currently an AMC sign near the Borders building. He said that Casto objected to the look of this sign and AMC allowed them to construct a different sign and move it to a different position. Mr. Donnelly requested a drawing of where all the signs would be located. Mr. Hutchens said they do not have this, but it is something that they could provide in the future. Chairman Rogers swore in Richard Sassan, 1004 N. Elmhurst Road, Mount Prospect, 11. Mr. Sassan said the plans were fabulous and he asked where signage would be along Elmhurst Road. Mr. Conroy said a freestanding pylon sign would be at the signalized intersection off of Elmhurst Road and a second pylon sign at the intersection by the Chase Bank building. Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 26, 2008 PZ-15-08 Page 7 Mr. Sassan wanted to know additional information regarding the buildings along the West property line adjacent to Elmhurst Road. Mr. Simmons said the buildings as proposed are to be setback 20 feet from the property line. The buildings would be screened in by landscaping. Mr. Sassan asked the Petitioner how his other projects have affected property values of the nearby residential neighborhoods. Mr. Hutchens said the property values have consistently gone up, more so with commercial. He believed that if nothing was done with Randhurst, the residential property values would fall. Mr. Hutchens believed that the proposed project would stabilize or increase residential property values because there would be more services nearby. Mr. Sassan said the proposed project is good for Mount Prospect. Chairman Rogers called for additional questions or comments; hearing none, the public comment portion of the hearing was closed. Chairman Rogers said he will entertain a motion, but would like it to include all of Staffs recommendations from both the Staff report dated June 18, 2008 and the Staff supplemental memo dated June 26, 2008. Chairman Rogers asked Mr. Donnelly if he had anything additional to add to the motion. Mr. Donnelly thought that the Petitioner would come back with a revised plan for the Planning and Zoning Commission to review with where the real signs would be located and fixing the road situation before they vote. Chairman Rogers said he would like to see the project proceed, otherwise there would be another month before it comes back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Chairman Rogers suggested that Staff review the signs and make sure that they are within reason. Mr. Cooney said the only signs that are in addition to the proposed plan would be the existing signs on site with the exception of the AMC sign which would be moved within a few feet from where it is currently located. Mr. Cooney confirmed this with the Petitioner. Mr. Donnelly said if the residential was not advertised, is the Planning and Zoning Commission prepared to vote on this. Mr. Cooney stated that Staff is fine with the way the Planned Unit Development was advertised in the newspaper. Mr. Donnelly said he is concerned that they have done this with other developments in the past. Chairman Rogers said he understands Mr. Donnelly's concern, but he believes Staff knows what the Planning and Zoning Commission wants to see regarding this development. Chairman Rogers said he would like to include the residential sketch in the motion and possible reduction of pylon signs at the main entry, but keeping at least seven tenant names on the sign itself. Mr. Donnelly asked if they are approving all the plans on the site plan the way that they are drawn. Mr. Cooney stated that they would be voting on the way the site plans are presented. Mr. Donnelly asked about phasing. There was general discussion on phasing for previous projects and Randhurst. Mr. Conroy said upon approval, he expected the outlots along Elmhurst Road, the Main Street retail and offices, the theater, and parking garage all to be completed by the Spring 2010. The storage facility adjacent to Costco would be delayed for strategic reasons because this is the area where construction materials and equipment would be stored. Once Main Street opens, the storage facility would be completed. Mr. Conroy stated they will have to wait on residential component until at least 2010 to develop the area by Chase Bank and the existing theaters. General discussion continued regarding construction dates and what was being voted on regarding residential. Chairman Rogers confirmed that the vote would give the Petitioner the right to look at residential for the Northwest corner of the property. Chairman Rogers said the Petitioner would be back in front of the Planning and Zoning Commission when the residential would be ready for review. There was general discussion on how the Planning and Zoning Commission would vote on Case Number PZ-15- 08. Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 26, 2008 PZ-15-08 Page 8 Mr. Donnelly asked for clarification regarding the maximum building height. Mr. Simmons said the maximum height Variation that the Petitioner requested was for 60 feet across the entire property. Mr. Simmons stated the hotel would be the tallest structure. With any future buildings, the height would be limited including the plans for residential. The 60 foot height is a blanket proposal, the storage facility and parking garage would not be this high. There was further discussion regarding the Variation for maximum height. Mr. Roberts said this is a packaged development. He stated that Commission has to be careful with all of the qualifications that are being piled on. Mr. Roberts does not believe adding all of these qualifications are a good idea, there are a lot of moving pieces. Mr. Roberts said that the Commission needs to trust Staff. Chairman Rogers agreed with Mr. Roberts, but he did not want a 60 foot building next to Boxwood. There was general discussion regarding the Variation for setbacks and the height of the proposed storage facility and parking garage. Mr. Conroy estimated that the storage facility would be around 40 feet in height. The theaters are going to exceed the 30 foot allowed height. Mr. Conroy said the Village of Mount Prospect only allows 30 feet in height unless a Variation is granted. He felt that a 60 foot Variation would provide flexibility and would allow the architectural accent of some towers along the development. Chairman Rogers asked if the Petitioner understood the concerns regarding residential and took them into consideration. Chairman Rogers also asked that if 60 feet were allowed on the entire site, the Petitioner would not build a 60 foot storage facility. Mr. Conroy understood the residential concerns and would not build a 60 foot storage facility. Mr. Donnelly said by giving a 60 foot Variation, it would stay with the property forever. Mr. Cooney suggested that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the site plan and elevations as submitted. Mr. Cooney understood that there is no elevation provided for the proposed storage facility, but it shall not exceed 60 feet. Chairman Rogers said the only way to resolve this is to let Staff use their best judgment knowing that the Planning and Zoning Commission does not want a 60 foot structure next to residential and let the architect design something appropriate that the Staff could approve or disapprove. Mr. Donnelly asked if the next owner of the property could raise the height of buildings without going before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Chairman Rogers said if a future owner decides to place a new building on the property, it would have to come back via the Planning and Zoning process. Mr. Donnelly asked what if the Petitioner decided to raise a tower in five years. Mr. Cooney stated prior to the Village Board meeting, Staff would ensure in the Ordinance that raising the height could not happen. Staff would also obtain schematic elevations. There was no further discussion. A motion was made and seconded to recommend approval of a Commercial Planned Unit Development, building height and setback Variations, Special Use for signs associated with a large scale development, Variation to allow brighter and taller parking lot lighting than permitted by code, and Variation to install two temporary leasing signs, for the property located at 999 N. Elmhurst Road, Randhurst Village Shopping Center, Case No. PZ-15-08, as detailed below: To Approve: 1) A Conditional Use permit for the Randhurst Village Commercial Planned Unit Development consisting of approximately 979,500 square feet of retail subject to compliance with the following conditions: Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 26, 2008 PZ-15-08 Page 9 A. All previous conditional uses for a planned unit development or associated amendments and variations on the subject property are hereby nullified by reference. B. Variation approval to allow: a. A maximum building height of 60 feet. b. A reduction in the required front yard building setback from 30 feet to 20 feet. c. A reduction in the required exterior side yard setback from 30 feet to 15 feet for the existing Jewel retail building. C. Future development of the outlots, or building fayade of individual tenant spaces within the shopping center shall not require an amendment to the approved PUD but review shall be performed at an administrative level; if such future development or fayade plans are in general conformance with the design guidelines submitted by the petitioner and with the character of the previously approved development, then Village staff shall approve the same. In the event that Village staff determines a public hearing is necessary to review a proposed amendment, then a formal application shall be submitted to request an amendment to the approved PUD. D. In addition to land uses permitted within the B-3 Community Shopping Zoning District, the following use exceptions shall also be permitted within the proposed Planned Unit Development: a. Health services, clubs or gymnasiums b. Hotels and motels c. Medical and Dental Laboratories d. Parking lots and structures e. Outdoor display and sales of products the sale of which is a permitted use, subject to compliance with Village regulations pertaining to outdoor sales f. Game rooms g. Residential land uses subject to the following conditions: I. Residential uses shall be restricted to the northwest corner of the property generally bounded by Euclid Road, Elmhurst Road, the northern access road entering from Elmhurst Road, and the central access road entering from Euclid Avenue. II. Residential uses shall be limited to a maximum density of 30 units per acre for the portion of the development constructed for residential use. 111. The maximum height for future residential uses shall conform to the maximum building height for the PUD. IV. Future development of residential shall be in general conformance with the design guidelines submitted by the petitioner for the PUD. v. Development approval of future residential uses shall be in compliance with the terms and conditions of the development agreement executed between the Village of Mount Prospect and the petitioner, including buy not limited to, public hearings and required public notification. Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 26, 2008 PZ-15-08 Page 1 0 E. In addition to the above use exceptions, the following uses shall be permitted as part of the proposed Planned Unit Development in the locations currently indicated on the site plans. Similar facilities proposed in the future will require an amendment to the PUD. a. Drive through facilities for two existing banking facilities and the proposed third outlot bank building. b. Drive through facility for the Jewel-Osco pharmacy. c. Self-Storage Facility for the building sited along the east property line adjacent to the existing Costco retail building and proposed parking structure. F. Prior to the issuance of a development permit, the Petitioner shall provide final civil engineering drawings for review and approval by the Village. The engineering drawings shall include all site work including utilities, storm water detention, and associated improvements. G. Development of the site in general conformance with the site and landscape plans prepared by Woolpert Inc., dated June 17, 2008 and received by the Community Development Department on June 17,2008. H. Development of the elevations in general conformance with the building elevations prepared by Beame Architectural Partnership, dated June 17,2008, and received by the Community Development Department on June 17,2008 with the following conditions: a. The architecture for the hotel shall be refined to provide more definition at the top of the structure and to take advantage of views upon entering the site. Current design lacks interest at the top of this building. b. The design of individual store fronts will be reviewed at the time a building permit is issued for each tenant space and shall be in general conformance with the design criteria packet prepared by Beame Architectural Partnership. I. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the petitioner shall submit revised photometric plans which incorporate the final site plan layout. Where feasible, light pole standards shall be placed in curbed islands. To provide uniformity across the property, light poles shall match the style, height, and illumination levels of those previously approved and installed in the Costco parking lot. J. The Petitioner shall construct all building and individual units according to all Village Codes and regulations, including, but not limited to: the installation of automatic fire sprinklers, fire hydrants and roads must be located and constructed according to Development and Fire Code standards. Where applicable, the buildings will also require the installation of a stand pipe system. K. A building permit, in accordance with the current regulations and requirements of the Village of Mount Prospect, must be issued within one (1) year from the date of adoption of the enabling ordinance by the Village Board which authorized the development proposal. The development approvals granted herein, without need for further action by any Village board, commission or official, shall become null and void if no building permit is issued within the one (1) year requirement and improvements completed within a period of eighteen (18) months. 2) A Special Use to allow Signs Associated with a Large Scale Development. Said ground signs shall be designed in general conformance with the sign drawings prepared by Casto Lifestyle Properties, dated May 15, 2008 and received by the Community Development Department on June 17, 2008. Future wall signs for individual tenant spaces shall conform to the Village's sign regulations. 3) A Variation to install two temporary leasing signs 180 square feet in size and 12 feet in height. Said temporary leasing signs shall be located at the southwest corner and northwest corner of the subject property and shall be removed following the completion of the project. Richard Rogers, Chair Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 26, 2008 PZ-15-08 Page 11 To Deny: 1) A Variation to increase the maximum fence height permitted along the east property line from six feet in height to eight feet in height. 2) A request to waive the Village's street lighting requirement along the rights-of-way of Elmhurst Road, Kensington Road, and Euclid A venue adjacent to the subject property. UPON ROLL CALL: A YES: Floros, Haaland, Roberts, Rogers NAYS: Donnelly Motion was approved 4-1. Joseph Donnelly made a motion to adjourn at 11: 12 p.m., seconded by Ronald Roberts. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Ryan Kast, Community Development Administrative Assistant H:\PLAN\Planning & Zonmg COMM\P&Z 2008\Minutes\PZ-) S-OM 999 N Elmhurst Rd (Randhurst Village)