Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/22/2015 P&Z Minutes 36-14 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-36-14 Hearing Date: January 22, 2015 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1700 W. Central Road PETITIONER :Village of Mount Prospect PUBLICATION DATE: January 7, 2015 PIN NUMBER: 03-33-300-078-0000 REQUESTS: 1) Variation to allow an accessory structure (Salt Storage Dome) measuring sixty-two and one half feet (62.5’) height 2)Variation to allow more than two (2) accessory structures MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Youngquist Jeanne Kueter Norbert Mizwicki Agostino Filippone MEMBERS ABSENT:,, Joseph DonnellySharon Otteman,Thomas FitzgeraldWilliam Beattie STAFF MEMBERSPRESENT: Brian Simmons, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development Consuelo Andrade, SeniorPlanner INTERESTED PARTIES :Jason Leib, Deputy Public Works Director Vice-Chairman Youngquist called the meeting to order at 7:35p.m. Commissioner Kuetermade a motion to approve the minutes of the November 13, 2014meeting; Commissioner Mizwickiseconded the motion. The minutes were approved 4-0.After hearing one case, Vice-Chairman Youngquist introduced Case PZ-36-14, 1700 W.Central Road. Ms. Andrade statedthe Petitioner for case number PZ-36-14isthe Village of Mount Prospect’s Public Works Department who is seeking Variations to allow a salt storage dome accessory structure with a finished height not to exceed sixty-two and one half feet (62.5’) and allow more than two (2) accessory structuresona zoning lot. Ms. Andrade explained the Subject Property is located on the north side of Central Road at the intersection of Busse and contains a one-story office/maintenance building and related improvements, including a storage yard . located at the northeast corner of the propertyMs. Andrade stated the Subject Property is zoned I1 Limited Industrial and is bordered by the I1 Limited Industrial and the CR Conservation Recreation in the Village of Mount Prospect and by Arlington Heights to the south. Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner would like to construct a 6,600 ton salt storage dome in the storage yard. The storage dome would be placed in an area that is currently gravel. The Petitioner intends to remove the gravel and pavethe area with eitherwith asphalt or concrete. The site plan indicates the salt storage dome would comply with the required setbacks. Ms. Andrade explained the salt storage dome would be setback over six hundred feet (600’) from the west property line, over fifty feet (50’)from north property line, and fifteen feet (15’) from the east and south property lines. Joseph Donnelly, ChairPZ-36-14 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting January 22, 2015Page 1of 4 Ms. Andrade indicated the height of the salt storage dome would exceed the Zoning Code requirements. The elevation plan indicates the salt storage dome would measure up to sixty-two and one half feet (62.5’) in height when the Zoning Code limits the height of an accessory structure (that is not a detached garage) to a maximum of ten feet (10’). Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner is requesting Variation approval to allow asixty-two and one half feet (62.6’) height for the salt storage dome. Ms. Andrade stated the construction of the salt storage dome would increase the overall number of accessory structures on the Subject Property to five (5). The Subject Property currently includes four (4) accessory structures, including vehicle and material storage buildings. Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner was seeking Variation approval to allow more than two (2) accessory structures since the Village Code limits the number of accessory structures to two (2) per zoning lot. Ms. Andrade summarized the standards for a Variation are listed in Section 14.203.C.9 of the Village Zoning Ordinance as follows: A hardship due to the physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of a specific property not generally applicable to other properties in the same zoning district and not created by any person presently having an interest in the property; Lack of desire to increase financial gain; and Protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character. Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner indicated there were a number of variables that could compromise the availability of salt rock during the winter months, which may leave the Village unable to effectively salt the public sidewalks, parking lots, and roadways. The Public Works facility only has storage capacity for 1,200 tons of rock salt at any given time and a typical winter snow requires approximately 4,400 tons of rock salt. Ms. Andrade stated the proposed salt storage dome would allow for 6,600 tons of salt storage to minimize any risk when salt shortages occur and help to the Village effectively provide safe roadways for pedestrians and vehicles during the winter months. Ms. Andrade explained that even though the proposed salt storage dome would have a maximum height of sixty- two and one half feet (62.5’),the majority of the structure would measure less than forty feet (40’) in height, which is the maximum height permitted for a principal building in the I1 District. Only 22% of the structure would measure higher than forty feet (40’) in height. Ms. Andrade further statedthe radius of the salt storage dome would decrease to less than five feet (5’) at the top, minimizing the impact of the structure on light and air flow. Ms. Andrade stated that Staff reviewed the Petitioner’s Variation requests and is supportive. The Variations to the height and number of accessory structures are specific to the type of use of the Subject Property and would not be generally applicable to other uses/property within the zoning district. Further, a specific hardship would result if the strict letter of the regulations of the Village Code were to be applied. Ms. Andrade stated that the Public Works storage yard is the only available place to store the proposed salt storage dome. The storage yard measures approximately 27,183 square feet in area. To store 6,600 tons of salt in the yard and meet Code would require 18,108.11 square feet of area with salt piled eight feet (8’) high and would not comply with the Environmental Protection laws, which require salt storage piles to be covered. Ms. Andrade stated Staff foundthat the standards for Variations have been met, as set forth in the Petitioner’s responses to the standards. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission make a motion to adopt staff’s findings as the findings of the Planning and Zoning Commission and recommend approval of the following motions: A.Variation to allow a sixty-two and one half feet (62.5’) height for an accessory structure (Salt Storage Dome); and Joseph Donnelly, ChairPZ-36-14 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting January 22, 2015Page 2of 4 B.Variation to allow more than two (2) accessory structures, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. The Village Board’s decision is final for the motions above. Commissioner Mizwicki asked for clarification regarding the number of accessory structures. Ms. Andrade responded the property presently consistsof multiple accessory structures, including vehicle and material storage buildingsin the rear.Ms. Andrade clarified the existing structures were constructed before the Village Code’s regulation limiting the number to two. Vice-ChairmanYoungquist swore in Jason Leib, Deputy Public Works Director, 1700 W. Central Road. Mr. Leib presented a short PowerPoint. Mr. Leib reiterated the zoning requests asking for Variations to allow a 6,600 ton salt storage dome measuring up to sixty-two and one half feet (62.5’) in height and to allow more than two (2) accessory structures. Mr. Leib explained how critical salt is in the winter season. Mr. Leib discussed the lane miles Public Works is responsible for salting and the 54,000 residents it serves. Mr. Leib explained that Public Works can only store 1,200 tons of salt currently which is not enough when the average spread is 4,400 tons. Mr. Leib explained the number of variables that could compromise the ability to get salt. The availability of salt drops when there is high demand leaving the Village unable to provide the necessary salt.Long delivery times areanother variable that could compromise the salting operations. Leib explained the benefits of having more storage capacity, such as the price of salt.Having more storage would allow the Village to buy more when the price is low and store it. Vice-ChairmanYoungquist asked if they can buy in the summer time. Mr. Leib responded that they donot currentlybut the salt storage dome would allow them to buy off season. Vice-ChairmanYoungquist asked how salt gets into the dome. Mr. Leib responded that a conveyor is used. Commissioner Filippone asked how much lower the delivery time would be with a6,600 ton salt storage. Mr. Leib responded they would not order salt during the winter season. They would order salt after the winter months and store it so the delivery time wouldnotbe as critical. The estimated cost to build the salt storage dome and savings that would result from having the dome was generally discussed. Mr.Mizwickiasked about future accessory structures. Mr. Leib responded Public Works does not have any plans for future accessory structures. Mr. Leib stated that the salt storage dome would be filled up completely. Mr. Mizwicki asked if other Villages have salt storage domes. Mr. Leib responded yes, includingArlington Heights and Des Plaines. Vice-ChairmanYoungquist asked if there was anyone presentto speak on the case. Hearing none. . Hearing none, he brought the discussion back to the Commission. Upon no further discussion, Commissioner Kueter made a motion to approve a Variation to allow a sixty-two and one half feet (62.5’) height for an accessory structure (Salt Storage Dome) and a Variation to allow more than two (2) accessory structures, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Mr.Mizwickiseconded the motion. Joseph Donnelly, ChairPZ-36-14 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting January 22, 2015Page 3of 4 UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Youngquist,Kueter,Mizwicki,Filippone NAYS: None Motion was approved 4-0. Commissioner Filipponemade a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mizwickito adjourn at 8:50p.m. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. ________________________________________ Consuelo Andrade Senior Planner Joseph Donnelly, ChairPZ-36-14 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting January 22, 2015Page 4of 4