Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/26/2004 P&Z minutes 04-04 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-O4-04 Hearing Date: February 26, 2004 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1590 S. Elmhurst Rd. PETITIONER: Parkway Bank PUBLICATION DATE: February 11,2004 PIN#: 08-14-403-024 REQUEST: Conditional Use to construct a drive-thru bank and a Variation for the number of proposed stacking spaces for the drive-thru lanes MEMBERS PRESENT: Arlene Juracek, Chair Joseph Donnelly Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: Merrill Cotten Leo Floras Matthew Sledz STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: Patrick Brankin Jack DiC1ementi James Gibbons Jiun-Guang Lin Kenneth Rathje Ralph Smith Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. Richard Rogers made a motion to approve the minutes of the January 22 and February 12, 2004 meetings with one minor correction. Keith Youngquist seconded the motion. The minutes were approved 4-0. At 7:43, Ms. Juracek introduced Case No. PZ-04-04, a request for Conditional Use approval to construct a drive-thru bank and a Variation for the number of proposed stacking spaces for the drive-thru lanes. She noted that the request would be Village Board final. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, presented the case. The Petitioner proposes to use the existing structure, but modify its interior and exterior to accommodate a bank with two drive-thru lanes. Also, the entire site will be improved as part of the bank project. The Petitioner proposes to improve the building's exterior façade by removing the existing materials and installing a new brick and stone façade. The roofline will remain the s arne, but decorative designs will be incorporated throughout the signable area of the building. Ms. Connolly said that the Subject Property is a separate lot of record from the adjacent retail center. The two sites operate independently of each other and do not have any means for vehicles to travel from one site to the other. The Petitioner proposes to close two existing curb cuts. The Petitioner is aware that an l11inois Department of Transportation (IDOT) permit is required to make these modifications. She said that the Petitioner started the IDOT permit process and received IDOT's requirements since the Staff Report was sent out. IDOT requires a Planning & Zoning Commission Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-04-04 Page 2 right-in, right-out only for the Elmhurst Road driveway. The driveway closings and restricted turning- movements will improve traffic flow to/from the site and within the bank's parking lot. The Petitioner has agreed to modify the site plan to address IDOT's requirements. The Petitioner's site plan indicates six stacking spaces will be provided for both drive-thru lanes, which is less than the minimum number required per zoning regulations. Ms. Connolly said that although ten vehicles are shown on the site plan, the vehicles using the actual drive-thru are not included in the stacking count and the last two vehicles are excluded as well. According to the Village's Traffic Engineer, the last two cars are technically in a driveway as opposed to a stacking area. However, the site includes 50% more than the number of required parking spaces. The Petitioner has provided information on the banking operation to explain why two drive-thru lanes will meet the site's proposed operational needs when most other banks have three or more drive-thru lanes. In addition, the Petitioner has provided information that identifies which banking transactions can be handled from the drive-thru lanes and documents stacking information obtained from other Parkway Bank sites. Ms. Connolly said that the Petitioner is required to submit a lighting plan for parking lot lighting as part of the Building Permit process. She said that the Petitioner has not requested relief from the lighting regulations and will be required to comply with the Village's regulations. The Petitioner's landscape plan details the proposed plant materials and sizes. I n response to Staff s initial comments, the Petitioner revised the plan to include additional year-round plant materials along the perimeter of the Subject Property. The Village's Traffic Engineer reviewed the proposed project and found that a bank with two drive-thru lanes would not generate more traffic or vehicle trips than the former gas station. The Traffic Engineer agreed with the Petitioner's decision to close two of the four existing driveways because the design would allow for safer access to/from the site and concurs that the right-in/right-out for the Elmhurst Road driveway would be a safer design than the full access proposed by the Petitioner. The existing building meets the current setback regulations and the proposed landscape areas exceed the minimum ten-foot setback required by the Zoning Ordinance. However, the Petitioner proposes a total of six stacking spaces and needs relief from zoning regulations for this number of stacking spaces. In order to approve the proposed amount of stacking spaces, the request has to meet the standards for a variation listed in the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Connolly summarized the standards and said that the Village has approved other d rive-thru projects that included 1 ess than t he required number 0 f stacking spaces when the Petitioner demonstrated that the proposed site plan could accommodate the traffic volume. In this case, the Petitioner submitted operational information that demonstrates how a total of six stacking spaces would meet the needs of the proposed bank facility. In addition, the location of the building and access to the Subject Property limit the Petitioner's ability to physically provide the other four stacking spaces required by the Zoning Ordinance. The site includes eighteen parking spaces, which is nine more than the code requires. The additional parking spaces may be used to offset the stacking deficiencies if necessary. Therefore, the proposed number of stacking spaces would not adversely impact other properties, the neighborhood character, or the public welfare. The size of the Subject Property and the location of the building make it somewhat challenging to develop a drive-thru bank that would meet all zoning regulations. In order to approve the Petitioner's request for the drive-thru lanes, the request has to meet the standards for a Conditional Use listed in the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Connolly summarized the standards. She said that the proposed bank has been designed to meet current building material regulations and the overall site development will meet all Building, Fire, and Development Code requirements. Access to the site, the drive-thru lanes, and new parking spaces have been designed according to Village regulations. Planning & Zoning Commission Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-04-04 Page 3 Therefore, the Petitioner's request to construct a drive-thru bank meets the standards for a Conditional Use. The bank will not have a detrimental impact on the adjacent retail center and the manner in which the parking lot will be reconfigured will not impair the use or value of the adjacent properties. The use, a bank, complies with the Comprehensive Plan and will be constructed according to Village Codes. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval of the Petitioner's requests for the Conditional Use and Variation to operate a bank with two drive-thru lanes and six stacking spaces subject to the following conditions: . 1. Develop the building in accordance with the elevations prepared by Elias G. Pappageorge Architects Staff Date Stamped February 19,2004. 2. Develop the site in accordance with the plans prepared by The Balsamo/Olson Engineering Company, but revised to reflect IDOT' S requirements for access to/from the site. 3. Develop the site in accordance with the landscape plan prepared by Jack Gabriel Di Clementi, Inc., revision date February 10, 2004 with minor modifications to accommodate a monument sign at the southeast corner of the Subject Property. 4. Submit a photometric (lighting) plan that indicates the site will comply with Village Code requirements. 5. The development shall meet aU Development, Fire, Building, and other Village Codes and regulations, which include but is not limited to installing automatic sprinklers and fire alarm, and signage that meet the Village Sign Code regulations. 6. Approval of appropriate permits by LD.O.T. and M.W.R.D., CCHD. The Village Board's decision is final for this case The Commissioners ascertained that the Harris Bank Case had requested and been granted four drive-thru lanes and twenty stacking spaces. Ms. Juracek swore in all speakers at once and Patrick Brankin, attorney with Schain, Burney, Ross & Citron, 222 N. LaSalle St., Suite #1910, Chicago, was sworn in and spoke. He made one correction, saying IDOT had informed him that the Elmhurst Rd. would be a right-turn-in only. Therefore, the only exit will be onto Dempster. He presented additional photos of the site. Ralph Smith, Project Manager & Consultant for Parkway Bank för 34 yrs. came forward and testified that gas tanks had been completely removed from the property. He described the services that would be provided by the bank. He said most transactions were commercial and conducted inside the bank. He identified photos of their Park Ridge facility that were then presented to the P&Z. He explained that stacking of cars had dropped off significantly in recent years because of direct deposit and online banking. Jiun-Guang Lin, 1627 Allison Court, Arlington Heights, addressed the P&Z. Mr. Brankin showed him a document and asked if it was his curriculum vitae and Mr. Lin agreed it was. Mr. Brankin asked that Mr. Lin's curriculum vitae be made a part of the record for this case. Mr. Lin said he is the Engineer for this plan and went to the easel to explain the engineering plans extensively. Mr. Brankin asked if Mr. Lin had worked with the V illage Engineer on designing those plans and M r. Lin said he had. Mr. Brankin asked if t he utilities provided were adequate for the site and Mr. Lin said they were. Mr. Brankin asked Mr. Lin if, in his opinion, granting this Variation or Conditional Use would have a detrimental impact on the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare or be injurious to the use, enjoyment, or value of other properties in the vicinity or impede the orderly development of those properties. Mr. Lin said no. Luay Aboona, Traffic Engineer, KOLA, addressed theP&Z next. Mr. Brankin showed him a document and asked if i twas h is curriculum v itae and M r. A boona t hat agreed it was. M r. B rankin asked that M r. L in's curriculum vitae be made a part of the record for this case. Mr. Abo()na pointed out that this project would be an Planning & Zoning Commission Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-04-04 Page 4 improvement over the former use since there would be less curb cuts and less traffic movement. He described anticipated traffic patterns for the site as compared to the previous use as a gas station, which would generate four to five times as many trip generations. Mr. Brankin distributed a memo prepared by Mr. Aboona that summarized his testimony. Mr. Brankin asked Mr. Aboona if, in his opinion, granting this Variation or Conditional Use would have a detrimental impact on the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare or be injurious to the use, enjoyment, or value of other properties in the vicinity or impede the orderly development of those properties. Mr. Aboona said it would not. Mr. Youngquist asked Mr. Aboona if he had considered a left turn-in from Dempster. He said he had not, and that the modification would be a consideration for the land planner. He said that he thought it would be a good idea to investigate further. Ms. Juracek asked Mr. Youngquist to elaborate on that idea, which he did. Mr. Brankin said he discussed the request during Mr. Youngquist's explanation with Mr. Smith, who agreed to look into the design. It was noted that the Cook County Highway Department would have to approve the design. Jack DiC1ementi, the Project Landscape Architect, 2509 Lake Avenue, came forward and reviewed the proposed landscape plan. He said the plant choices were fully seasonal and included shade trees, ornamental trees and shrubs, planting areas, perennial ground cover, turf foreground, green parkway and an irrigated site. The plan calls for numerous boxwoods, and 11 red maples and honey locusts to complement the brick palette. Mr. Brankin asked Mr. DiC1ementi if he had worked closely with staff on the landscape plan; he responded yes. Mr. Brankin asked Mr. DiClementi if he thought the landscape plan would enhance the general site area rather than detract from the area; he responded yes. James Gibbons, Gibbons & Gibbons Real Estate & Appraisal Co., 401 LaSalle St., Suite 1502, Chicago, came forward and testified. Mr. Brankin showed him a document and asked if it was his curriculum vitae and Mr. Gibbons agreed it was. Mr. Brankin asked that Mr. Gibbon's curriculum vitae be made a part of the record for this case. Mr. Brankin asked Mr. Gibbons what process did he use for his analysis of the site and its impacts on the surrounding properties. Mr. Gibbons said he reviewed the plans and visited the site and the surrounding areas, did an analysis of the Oakton/Northwest Highway site and the Multiple Listing Sales pattern of sales and explained how they related to the current proposal. He said he took photos of the subject property and the surrounding properties; he distributed copies of the photos to the P&Z. Mr. Brankin said he wanted the photos to be made part of the record. Mr. Gibbons described the subject property as being on the northwest corner of Dempster and Elmhurst Road, by the Kohl's, Hobby Lobby, and Enterprise; on the southwest corner, across the street from a Citgo Gas Station/Car Wash/Strip Shopping Center and across from a JeweI/Osco. On the Northeast corner there is a Cleaners and a Jiffy Lube sharing one driveway. He said that this is a commercial area and that the project would not have an adverse impact on the adjacent properties. The site was a former gas station and was an eyesore; the new proposal can only enhance the area. Mr.Brankin asked Mr. Gibbons, from an appraisal standpoint, was it his opinion granting this Variation and Conditional Use would have a positive effect on the area. Mr. Gibbons said it would. Mr. Rogers asked if he appraised the finished product; Mr. Gibbons said he had not. Kenneth Rathje, Rathje Planning Services, 412 Chicago Avenue, Downers Grove, came forward. Mr. Brankin showed him a document and asked if it was his curriculum vitae and Mr. Gibbons agreed it was. Mr. Brankln asked that Mr. Gibbon's curriculum vitae be made a part of the record for this case. Mr. Brankin asked Mr. Rathje to describe his actions in preparation for this proposal. Mr. Rathje said he took an aerial photo of the property, which he described in detail. Mr. Brankin asked Mr. Rathje if he had, in his further analysis, applied all the conditions for a Conditional Use and Variation. M r. Rathje said he has gone through the Code and identified item by item how each item was satisfied. He then described each item required for Variation and how it met Code. Mr. Brankin proceeded to question Mr. Rathje regarding each item required for a Conditional Use, but Ms. Juracek told him that was not necessary, that the P&Z had questions for the architect. Mr. Brankin acquiesced and requested that the longer version of the testimony be made part of the record. Elias Papageorge, Architect, 188 N. Wells St., Chicago, addressed the Commission. He said that anything Planning & Zoning Commission Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-04-04 Page 5 would be an improvement over the present site and described the proposed building. He said the project would comply with all Village codes and regulations. Richard Rogers asked if all existing masonry would be removed and whether it be all face brick. Mr. Papageorge said yes, that it would essentially be a brand new building. Ms. Juracek complimented Mr. Brankin on conducting a very thorough case for his client. She asked if any audience members had any comments and, being none, closed the hearing at 8:55. The Commission discussed the case in detail. Ms. Juracek said the Commission seemed to be in agreement on the case with the addition of two lanes out and one lane in on Dempster Street and a refuse enclosure built of the same brick as the building, not of concrete block. Joe Donnelly made a motion to recommend that the Village Board approve the Conditional Use to construct a drive-thru bank subject to the conditions listed in the Staff memo and: 1. Construct the refuse enclose with the same brick material proposed for the exterior of the building. 2. Subject to CCHD approval, modify the Dempster Street driveway to create a dedicated left-turn lane exiting the site, a right-turn lane exiting the site, and a full access lane entering into the site. Richard Rogers seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Donnelly, Rogers, Youngquist and Juracek NAYS: Motion was approved 4-0. Richard Rogers made a motion to recommend that the Village Board approve the Variation for the number of proposed stacking spaces for the drive-thru lanes. Joe Donnelly seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Donnelly, Rogers, Youngquist and Juracek NAYS: Motion was approved 4-0. At 9:30 p.m., Joseph Donnelly made motion to adjourn, seconded by Richard Rogers. approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. The motion was Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner H:IPLANIPJanning & Zoning COMMIP&Z 2004IMinutesIPZ-04-04 1590 S Elmhurst Rd Parkway Bank.doc