Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5. OLD BUSINESS 4/19/05 MEMORANDUM Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department Mount Prospect DATE: APRIL 1, 2005 TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: PZ-49-04 - PLAT OF RESUBDIVISION 7 N. MAIN STREET TERESA LICARI - APPLICANT The Planning & Zoning Commission transmits their recommendation to approve Case PZ-49-04, a request 0 consolidate two parcels and create a one-lot subdivision. The Planning & Zoning Commission heard the request at their March 24, 2005 meeting. The Subject Property is located on the east side of Main Street (Route 83), between Central Road and Henry Street. It consists of two vacant parcels located between two apartment buildings. The Subject Property is zoned B5 Central Commercial. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, reviewed the case. She said that the Village Attorney determined that the Subject Property was created without the benefit of a subdivision and Village review. In addition, he determined that the Village could not prevent the Applicant from seeking approval of the proposed Licari's Consolidation. However, future development of the site must comply with all Village Codes. She said that it is important to note that the item being reviewed is the plat and that the development of the site is a separate issue. Staff reviewed the proposed plat and found that it had been prepared in accordance with the Village Code. The Planning & Zoning Commission discussed the Petitioner's request and the possible consequences of consolidating the site to a one-lot subdivision. Several Commissioners stated their concerns about developing the site and how it would adversely impact the parking conditions for the existing apartment buildings. The Planning & Zoning Commission voted 4-1 to recommend that the Village Board approve the Licari's Consolidation with the acknowledgement by the Petitioner that approval of the plat does not constitute approval for future development. Please forward this memorandum and attachments to the Village Board for their review and consideration at their April 6, 2005 meeting. Staff will be present to answer any questions related to this matter. Ii' H,\!'I.AN\PI...";,,. & z.";,,. COMMIP&Z 2005\.,EJ .""",IPZ.<9."< ME! 17 N .";,, I.;",; pl"l doc MI:\'1JTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNI!'iG & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-49-04 Hearing Date: March 24, 2005 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 7 N. Main Street PETITIONER: Teresa Licari 4 Red Ridge Circle BaITington, IL 600 10-5326 LEGAL NOTICES MAILED: February 9, 2005 PIN#: 03-34-410-044-0000 REQUEST: Petitioner is seeking approval to consolidate (2) parcels and create a one- lot subdivision/one lot of record ME;\1BERS PRESENT: Acting Chair Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Marlys Haaland Ronald Roberts Matt Sledz MEMBERS ABSE~T: Chair Arlene Juracek Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Clare Sloan, Neighborhood Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: Teresa Licari Bryan Mraz Mark Watychowicz Acting Chair Joseph Donnelly called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. Leo Floros moved to approve the minutes of the February 24, 2005 meeting, but coITected to reflect Ronald Roberts voting against the sign Variation, and seconded by Ronald Roberts. The motion was approved 3-0, with 2 abstentions by Marlys Haaland, new member, and Matt Sledz. Under Old Business, Mr. Donnelly asked for a motion to continue PZ-50-04 to the April 28, 2005 meeting. Matt Sledz moved to continue the case; seconded by Ronald Roberts, and it was approved 5-0. Mr. Donnelley introduced Case No. PZ-49-04, a request to consolidate two parcels and create a one-lot subdivision into one lot of record. He said that this case would be Village Board Final. Judy Conr¡olly, Senior Planner, summarized the request. She said that discussion on the Petitioner's project was continued from the February Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. As you recall, the Petitioner is proposing to consolidate two parcels, which were acquired through a county tax sale, to create a one-lot subdivision. The parcels would be consolidated through the proposed Licari's Consolidation plat. The Village Attorney determined that the Subject Property was created without the benefit of a subdivision and Village review. In addition, he determined that the Village could not prevent the Petitioner from seeking approval of the proposed Licari's Consolidation. However, future development of the site must comply with all Village Codes. It is important to note that the item being revie",'ed is the plat that consolidates the parcels and creates a one-lot subdivision. The redevelopment of the site is a separate issue. If the proposed development does not comply with Village regulations or requires Conditional Use approval, the P& Z, and most likely Village Board, would review the request and make a decision in response to the development. Planning & Zoning Commission Joseph DonneIley, Acting Chuirperson PZ-49-04 Page 2 Ms. Connolly summarized the standards for approving a subdivision and said they relate to the physical development of a subdivision. The regulations provide requirements for the development of the block, and the development of the lot. Staff revie\.ved the proposed plat and found that it had been prepared in accordance with the ViJlage Code. In response to the discussion held at the February meeting, the Petitioner submitted a plat of survey. However, Staff prepared an aerial photograph exhibit titled "Existing Conditions" to depict CUITent conditions. In addition, the color-coded page from the SidweJl book identifies the adjacent properties and the Subject Property. This exhibit documents that the existing apartment buildings were bui1t over the property lines. The 'hooks' indicate common ownership, and a dashed line indicates a parcel line. The Village's Zoning Ordinance does not recognize a parcel line the same as a lot line and CUITent code regulations would require the Petitioner to consolidate the parcels before the development could be approved. Also, the Staff exhibit titled "Address Verification" documents that the address assigned to the Subject Property is '7 N. Main Street' although the Petitioner has refeITed to it as 7 A N. Main Street. Ms. Connolly summarized the request: the Petitioner is seeking approval of the Plat of Consolidation only, however, during the original review of the request, the P&Z Commission raised questions regarding the 30' easement that extends along the rear lot line of the subject property and the adjacent properties and how the easement would affect future development with respect to parking. Per the P&Z Commissioner's request, the Village Attorney prepared a memo clarifying that the parking easement would probably survive upon approval of the Plat. In addition, he found that the title document submitted by the attorney for the adjacent property demonstrated that there was limited right to park in the easement, but that it would survive the tax di vision and the plat approval as wen. The Village Attorney stated that whether the limitation on the parking rights are so restrictive as to prevent the development would depend on the nature of the development and the extent to which portions of the easement would be used for parking. He noted that is an issue to contend with when, if ever, a development plan was submitted. Therefore, Staff continues to recommend that the Planning & Zoning Commission approve the plat for 7 N. Main Street, Case No. PZ-49-04, because the plat meets Village Code requirements and future development of the site is a separate issue to be reviewed when plans are submitted for review. However, as stated in the ViIlage Attorney's memo, the plat should be approved with the statement that the approval is for consolidation purposes only and does not extend to any development approval of any kind and asks that the applicant acknowledge this for the record. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. Mr. Donnelley asked about CUITent and past zoning for the property. Ms. Connolly said it had been Residential and now was B5; Village records do not indicate that it was ever a Planned Unit Development. It was determined that CUITent code regulations would prohibit this same subdividing/development situation. Teresa Licari, 4 Red Ridge Circle Drive, BaITington, IL, and her attorney, Bryan Mraz, III Irving Park Road, Roselle, IL, were sworn in to testify. Mr. Mraz said he has recently become involved in this case, has read the Village Attorney's Jetter and concurs with his opinion. There is an easement agreement across the rear of all the properties for ingress and egress with a parking reservation that only runs to the subject property. 1'\1r. Mraz said that is the opinion of the Village Attorney and he concurs with that opinion. What may actually have happened in practice and over time will need to be worked out amongst the other owners. Mr. Mraz agreed that the hearing's purpose was to request a consolidation and the Petitioner should and would acknowledge that plat approval does not extend to development of any kind. Mr. Donnelley asked if she understood she could not block ingress/egress with parking; Ms. Licari said she did. Mark Watychowicz, 301 S. WaPella, an attorney for 5 N. Main Street, was sworn in. He said be wanted to remind the Commission that the Subdivision request is actually a request to build something at the 1 ocation in the future. The site was designed for three buildings and another building win cause chaos - to pitch a tent there will cause a major probJem. There are 36 existing units and 36 parking spaces and the present ordinance requires 2 Planning & Zoning Commission Joseph Donnelle: . Acting Chairperson PZ-49-04 Page 3 spaces per unit. He said building a building there would cause, an eyesore ~nd prevent redevelopment of the undesirable shopping center across the street from it. Anyone coming into town sees this eyesore. All the overflow parking will fall into the downtown area, which is already overcrowded. He also questioned whether the Petitioner had the proper standing to bring this request before the Board. Mr. Watychowicz said he had just received a parking ticket last week and didn't think the Petitioner had the right to come from out-of-town to cause these problems for him as a resident, taxpayer, father and downtown businessman. Mr. Watychowicz said his client's needs are not being served because the property is being used for his tenants as parking spaces. His client purchased his building in 1977 as is, with no additional parking. His client had no notice of any tax sales. He said the Petitioner had time to study the property and realize what the problems were before getting involved with it. Mr. Watychowicz said his client would be willing to purchase the property from the Petitioner but not at the inflated price she wanted for it. He said his client had maintained the parking portion of the property for all those years without remuneration. Matt Sledz said he appreciates the comments about future development but hearing the opinion of the Village Attorney, realizes that the Petitioner is entitled by right to consolidate the lots. Mr. Roberts agreed. Mr. Floros said he feels approval of the consolidation would be construed as endorsement of future development of the site; he sees no benefit to the Village. Mr. Roberts said one possible benefit is that the neighbor might purchase the land and that would be beneficial to the Village. He stated that the Petitioner has acknowledged she as no approval from the Village to develop the property, which she must disclose to any buyer by law. Matt Sledz made a motion to recommend approval of the Licari's Consolidation plat for the property at 7 North Main Street, Case No. PZ-49-04, with the statement that approval of the plat does not constitute approval for future development; Ronald Roberts seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: A YES: Donnelly, Haaland, Roberts, and Sledz NAYS: Floras Motion was approved 4-1. Ronald Roberts made motion to adjourn at 8:40 p.m., seconded by Leo Floros. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. MINUTES OF THE REGlJLAR MEETING OF THE PLANi\ING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-49-04 llearing Date: February 24, 2005 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 7 N. Main Street PETITIONER: Teresa Licari 4 Red Ridge Circle Barrington, IL 600 ¡ 0-5326 LEGAL NOTICES MAILED: February 9, 2005 PIN #: 03-34-410-044-0000 REQUEST: Petitioner is seeking approval to consolidate (2) parcels and create a one- lot subdivision/one lot of record MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Arlene Juracek Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Ronald Roberts Richard Rogers Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: Merrill Cotten Matt Sledz STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Ellen Divita, Deputy Director, Community Developmcnt INTERESTED PARTIES: Irene Chipinski Teresa Licari Mark Watychowicz Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. Richard Rogers moved to approve the minutes of the January 27, 2005 meeting and Joe Donnelly seconded the motion to approve. The motion was approved 6-0. Under Old Business, Ms. Juracek asked for a motion to continue PZ-50-04 to the March 24, 2005 meeting. Richard Rogers made such motion, seconded by Joe Donnelly, approved 6-0. Ms. Juracek introduced Case No. PZ-49-04, a request to consolidate two parcels and create a one-lot subdivision into one lot of record. She said that this case would be Village Board FinaL Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, summarized the request. The Subject Property is located on the east side of Main Street, Route 83, between Central Road and Henry Street. It consists of two vacant parcels located between two apartment buildings. The Subject Property is zoned BS Central Commercial and is bordered to the north, west, and south by the 85 district and by the RA Single Family Zoning District to the east. The Petitioner is proposing to consolidate two parcels, which were acquired through a County tax sale, to create a one-lot subdivision. The parcels would be consolidated through the proposed Licari's Consolidation plat. Plat approval incl udes Planning & Zoning Commission review and a recommendation to the Village Board. The Village Board's decision is final for the proposed plat. Village records indicate that the area north of Central road and south of the single-family residences was rezoned from Rl to R3 in ¡ 960. The site was then rezoned from R3 to R4 a year later and the original subdivision indicates that the development consisted of 5 lots of record. The three existing apartment buildings were Planning & Zoning Commission Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-49-04 Page 2 constructed in the early 19605. However, the building footprints did not match the lot lines. The ViJlage later rezoned the properties to 85 Central Commercia! in the early 1990s. Although the Petitioner did not submit a development plan, Staff had concerns regarding the proposed plat because of the potentia! impacts of developing the site. Currently, there is not enough parking for the tenants and developing an open area would intensify the situation. Each building has 12 units, creating a total of 36 units. and each building has 12 assigned parking spaces. However, it appears that some vehic]es parallel park along the east lot line. The Village Attorney researched the title information and found that the Subject Property, the two parcels the Petitioner is seeking 10 consolidate, was created through a tax division. A tax division is a petition processed through the Cook County Assessor's Office whereby a property owner parcels off a portion of their land for tax purposes. A separate tax bill and PIN# are created. In this case, the Village \\'as first made aware of this situation when the Petitioner contacted ViJlage Staff to determine whether the property could be developed. The Village Attorney determined that the Subject Property was created without the benefit of a subdivision and Village review. In addition, he determined that the Village couldn't prevent the Applicant from seeking approval of the proposed Licari's Consolidation. However, future development of the site must comply with all Village Codes. The. Petitioner could request relief, which would require going through the zoning process and obtaining Village Board approval. Currently, the Subject Property is undeveloped, but it includes an ingress/egress easement along the rear 30' of the property. The easement provides ingress/egress rights between the apartment properties over the eastern 30' of each property. The Petitioner has not submitted development plans for Staff review, but has indicated that the property would be sold to another party for redevelopment. The proposed development would have to incorporate the easement requirements and comply with all Village regulations. The Subject Property is zoned 85. The table in the Staff Report lists the bulk regulations for the 85 District. It is important to note that the item being reviewed is the plat that consolidates the parcels and creates a one-10t subdivision. The development of tbe site is a separate issue. If the proposed development does not comply with Village regulations or requires Conditional Use approval, the P& Z, and most likely Village Board, would review the request and make a decision in response to the development. The Subdivision Ordinance includes standards for approving a subdivision, which relate to the physical development of a subdivision. The regulations provide requirements for the development of the block, length, width, etc. and the development of the lot, size, depth, shape, etc. Staff reviewed the proposed plat and found that it had been prepared in accordance with the Village Code. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend the Village Board approve the plat for 7 N. Main Street, Case No. PZ-49-04. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. Ms. Juracek asked if there were 5' utility easements on the north and south ends of the plat; Ms. Connolly replied yes. Ms. Juracek asked if they could build up to the easements without providing setbacks. Ms. Connolly said yes, but they would need to provide parking. She explained that in the 8-5 district they would need Conditional Use approval for a residential only development and would have to provide parking to ensure proper development. Joe Donnelly asked if the existing parking spaces belong to the existing apartment buildings and was tòld they did. Richard Rogers asked what was a permissible use for 8-5. Ms. Connolly said retail on the first floor and apartments above; the existing buildings are non-conforming. Teresa Licari was sworn in and testified that she purchased the propelty at a Cook County Tax Sale and received a Tax Deed approximately one year ago, placed a for sale sign on the property, and then there were signs placed on the rear of the property that the parking area belongs to someone else. She said she is trying to create a one-lot subd i vision to make the property buildable. Mr. Donnelly asked what lots she wants to combine; she said she purchased a pin # that is listed as a lot for tax purposes but not for building purposes. Irene Chipinski, 5619 N. Campbell, Chicago, was sworn in and stated that her family owned the apartment building just north of the Licari property, 9-] 1 North Main. She reported that there is currently a parking shortage; they have 11 assigned parking spaces for 12 units, there is space for 4 non-assigned cars t:o park. There have been recent problems with a residential neighbor to the north and have had to restrict parkin g on the north side of the lot due to those complaints. She said she knows the other buildings have assigned park i ng spaces, but . . Planning & Zoning Commission Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-49-04 Page 3 also experience a parking shortage. There is a lot of traffic cutting through the lot trying to avoid the traffic lights. She had come to the meeting tonight and waited two hours to speak to the Commission to make them aware of the parking deficiency at this property. Discussion ensued between the Board members and ìv1s. Connolly regarding the lack of parking spaces and the future development of this site requiring more parking spaces in addition to displacing some of the existing spaces. Ms. Chipinski reminded the group that the additional garbage dumpsters would also take up additional parking spaces. Mark Watychowicz, 301 S. WaPella, an attorney for 5 N. Main Street, was sworn in. He said he wanted to stress that the reason for this request for Subdivision is actually a prelude for a request to build something at the location. And to bui!d anything, even to pitch a tent and add one more car to the area will cause a major problem. There are three buildings, aJl built by the same builder. To build another building between those wiJl cause an eyesore - across the street from another eyesore - an undesirable existing shopping center in need of redevelopment. Anyone entering or leaving the downtown area sees this eyesore. There are on ly half of the parking spaces now required by Code for the present development; to add another building will more than double . the problem. All the overflow parking will fall into the downtown area, which is already overcrowded. He also questioned whether the petitioner had the proper standing to bring this request before the Board. To that end, Mr. Watychowicz gave his interpretation of his review of the file of the transcripts of the tax sale: He said, "The petitioner visited the property and testified to the judge, under oath, that the property was not being used for any purpose. But it should be clear to all here tonight that the property is being used for parking spaces. I believe if the petitioner had properly advised the judge in the tax court that the property was being used for parking the judge would have required that notice be provided to all the people who would be affected by the tax sale, and that would have included my client, and as a result my client's interest in the property hasn't been properly adjudicated. So for that reason, I would petition that the Board either deny this request or, at the very least, continue the case to allow my firm more time to further analyze the tax case and file any appropriate pleading which would probably affect petitioner's ability to do anything with this land." Ms. Juracek said she is having a difficult time understanding how the tax sale occurred since it appears it was a portion of Mr. Watychowicz's client's property that was sold and how could that have happened without his knowledge. Mr. Watychowicz's said his client purchased property in 1977 from Mr. Carlson in this condition. He considered buying this property but an attorney told him this property was unbuildable so he did not purchase it. The Village attorney reviewed the case and apparently the property division was done as tax benefit by a previous purchaser. His client has taken care of that property for the past 30 years, cut the grass, paved the area, re-paved, sealed, re- sealed, all at his own expense. Ronald Roberts asked him if his client would have bought the property at the tax sale. Mr. Watychowicz said he would have, but didn't know about the sale. Mr. Roberts asked ifhis client would still be willing to buy the property. 1\1r. Watychowicz said absolutely, but not at the price being asked. Mr. Rogers asked Ms. Licari if she would accept a lesser price at this time, given the condition of the property. Ms. Licari returned to the podium and said she had sold the propel1y twice but neither deal materialized because of these problems. She went on to explain that her research had revealed that the Neri family had owned the Licari property, along with Mr. Watychowicz's client, Michael Neri's, property since around 1960. Somewhere in the 19605, Edwina Neri divided the property in order to save taxes. Charlie Young then bought the property at a tax sale but did nothing with it and it went back into a tax sale and was purchased by Ms. Licari. Edwina Neri subsequently sold the original parcel to Michael Neri. Ms. Licari explained that she noted in the tax sale that a 60x 142 vacant site zoned B-5 was available. She calculated].5 parking spaces for each 2-bedroom units and I parking space for each I-bedroom units would require] 7 spaces. The property has 337' along the property line and at 20' per car that would be enough space. Ms', Licari said she did not commit any fraud in the tax transaction, the owner of the South building had proper notice of the sale and whoever put up the parking sign put that up after she put up the for sale sign. She had taken pictures at the end of lot line and presented those at the tax sale. She said they would have 50' of bu ildable space Planning & Zoning Commission Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-49-04 Page 4 so there should be 55 parking spaces according to her calcu1ations, She also said one prospective buyer \vas considering underground parking. Ms. Juracek said the problem to consider today is docs the petitioner have a legal right to consoJidate. Ms, Connolly said the Village Attorney reviewed it and said the property o\vner has the right to consolidate even ¡[the county didn't notify the Village. Ownership has been traced back to 1990, but Staff could not confirm who transferred it for tax purposes and when. Ms. Licari said property can be traced online to 1985 and a title search can trace it back to the ISOOs. Ms. Chipinski asked whether it was possible the land was sold without the parking area. Ms. Juracek said more research needs to be done before they can make a recommendation to the Village Board that would be fair to all parties involved. She asked that the Village Attorney clarify the limitations of the recorded easement and clarify whether a formal parking agreement exists and how future parking requirements would be regulated. Joseph Donnelly made a motion to continue the request to consolidate two parcels and create a one-lot subdivision/one lot of record at 7 North Main Street, Case No. PZ-49-04. Richard Rogers seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Donnelly, Floras, Roberts, Rogers, Youngquist and Juracek NA YS: None Motion was approved 6-0. Case was continued to the March 24, 2005 P&Z Meeting. Joe Donnelly made a motion to adjourn at 1 I :28 p.m., seconded by Richard Rogers. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. .' 'j Lj_j / '// 'i&; /! /<!7P~~ ¡;Jy Con~oll.(; Akp, Senior Planner ,/ / ~ H:IPlANIPllnn;ng & ZonIng CO,~I~I\r&Z 200~\JII,"uleS\PZ.49.04 7 N ~lam SI lx,,¡ SubdIvISion doc Village of l\lount Prospect Community Development Department CASE Sl":\I:\IARY - PZ- 49-0~ LOCA TIOt'i: PETlTIO:"ER: OW~ER: PARCEL #: LOT SIZE: ZONI~G: LAND USE: RIQCEST: 7 ~. Main Street Teresa Licari Teresa Licari 03-34-4 I 0-044-0000 O. I 9 acres (8,520 square feet) B5 Centra! Commercia] Vacant Lot Resubdivision (Consolidate t\\lO parcels to create a one-Jot subdivision) LOCATION :\IAP 123 122 121 119 II!! 117 116 lIS 11.. 113 112 111 110 109 \08 107 106 105 10.. 10J 102 101 100 Thaver Street r") QC QJ ..... ::: 0 0:: 123 12' 120 119 118 117 116 115 II" 1l3 112 III 110 109 108 107 106 105 10.. 103 102 101 100 Henry Street 21 19 '.. 22 20 18 16 I.. 2J Z2 21 20 19 18 16 17 12 IS 8 11 9 6 7 5 .. 3 2 1 ..... ~ ~ '- ..... ~ c 17 - ~ ~ '- - ~ c - ;;; '- ~ ë '-' - I! .- - ... 10 ~ 6 .. 2 CJ Central Road 117 116 liS 114 113 112 III 110 109 108 107 106 !OS 10.. 103 102 101 100 n 16 21 14 17 12 15 13 1(1 11 8 7 6 5 3 N = 2 N I ..... ~ ~ '- ..... ~ E - ::-;¡ 117 115 113 III 109 107 105 10J 101 15 13 11 9 7 S ~ J MEMORANDUM Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Departolent TO: MOUNT PROSPECT PLAJ\'NING & ZONING COMMISSION ARLENEJURACEK,CHA~ERSON FROM: JUDY CONNOLLY, Arcp, SENIOR PLANNER DATE: MARCH 17,2005 HEARING DATE: MARCH 24, 2005 SUBJECT: PZ-49-04 - RESUBDIVISION (CREATE I-LOT SUBDIVISION) 7 N. MAIN STREET (TERESA LICARI - APPLICANT) BACKGROl.J1'l'D Discussion on the Petitioner's project was continued from the February Planning & Zoning Commi ssion meeting. Per the P&Z's request, the Petitioner submitted the attached plat of survey. Also, the attorney for the adjacent property owner has submitted title documents for the Subject Property for consideration. The ViJlage Attorney is reviewing the title documents and his memo will be distributed March 22, 2005 via e-mail or hand delivery. In addition, the ViJlage Attorney's memo will clarify whether the easement allows for parking rights for the adjacent property owners. In response to the discussion at the February P&Z meeting, Staff prepared an aerial photograph exhibit titled "Existing Conditions" to J!lustrate the CUITent conditions. The exhibit titled "Address Verification" documents that the address assigned to the Subject Propeliy is '7 N. Main Street' although the Petitioner has refelTed to it as 7A N. Main Street; the PIN# is the same. For your convenience, Staff has inc1uded a page from the Sidwell book that color-codes the adjacent properties and the Subject Property. This exhibit documents that the existing apartment buildings were built over the property lines. The 'hooks' indicate common ownership, and a dashed line indicates a parcel. As you can see, several Jots have been parceled off. Please note that the Village's Zoning Ordinance does not recognize a parcel line the same as a lot line; CUITent code regulations would require the Petitioner to consolidate the parcels before the development could be approved. In addition, the original Staff Report has been included a fter this cover memo. I)' H IPI.'NI'I.""¡,,. '" Z""¡,,, COMM,P&Z 2ows"rr M"".IPZ,<9,O< MEMO \I (7 N M.¡" ".."ohd""", pi", doc PLAT OF SURVEY ! ., I OF THE NORTH 34,20 FEET OF LOT 3 AND THE SOUTH )5,80 FEET OF LOT 4 IN BOLC(R'S RESUBDiV¡SION OF LOTS 193 TO 207 INCLUSIVE AND THE HAlF VACATED ALI.,Y F.AS1 ~"ù ADJOINING L'JTS 193 TO 207 INCLUSIVE ii' LAUGER"'LK ',",LA, BEiNG A SUBDIVISION :I.: 'He SOU1Hf.AST QUARTER OF SECTION 34, 1OWNSHIP 42 NOR"H, RANGE 1\ EAS1 JF THE H1IR::' PRI'JCIPAL M,:RIDiAN, IN COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS PIN: 03-'4-410-,0<4 N, UN' Of LOI . IN BOLaCR'S R"uBDI"510N ~ ~ 8 I I I 'OCND CuI CROSS IH; 1--E~ .<S1 ~ " ,.27 a -- -- ---. I, I £... g § It.:¡" u :. t.:¡ ~ ~ 71 'I ~ it "', U ~ i £... "' :;; t 'I' tI) 1> ~ ~Ii I ~ ¡i , ~:; l. - __1- I ,.."~ i I > I I fO,"O cU' <'ass :¡ i ~~~ ! I I I :z~ ~ I .; 0';; I ;: '--- - .':-..--~ I öl \ --;'-;RI~K.,-:-,IL:;'---~-;,' \"U' ~1" ~,' ~ '_-------r;.'7T6-~--1- ~ : r:>~ , '" iš ~ !:,~.,-, '.,' ,'.' 0 ". I . .' .", ", I \5 U \" ¡---' \...co","'!!: WAL< I , ,u c~ ~ ~ I i '.. § 5:1 !;: "'/ ~i I , , 42,43' (R) 142.49'{M) 589'27'56" (M) '0 ¡ L < ~I SCALE: '"=30' ~ 'DUNe "ON / ",O[ 5 "00' Of lO' . 'N ooca,"'s RESUBOI~510N ì--::-I g 0-- O~ 0-"'; "'W . --iõ ,!,¡" . p It) 8 ~cn It) :31 ,;! ~ ~ i5 ð ~ e ;~ ö ~ ~~~ - ~ ~~:' .., ~~~ ~ w5g - I ~uo ~ ô ~~f~ N ¡. 00' or LOI J IN B"'OCR'5 RESIJB~~SlON ~ -\::~'U~'~(1" WAL< ' 2. ..5 . (M) I ----"- 'Ou", "ON c~-" :ž~~~ ¡ l' I -, __L_-1- /1 \ 5 CO"~ or ,01 J '" 90LOE"S R"u.D'~S'ON I 11 I 11 \ ~I ) Jk I I / ---------- :\ ,$/ 5 UNC Of LOI . IN BOLOCR'S RESuOO""N N UN' 0' ,01 J IN BOLGËii'SRESuBO'~ ' + :OS1 ~l 51 ~ ~ ~f-- ~ \ ; I g 7 ~ 2 ~ -- 11,""""1/", ,-:"~~~L LAND IIIIII !"$~'.""""""~~~ if /!; ,:TERENCE R. CAHILl\"'-< ~ :: a:: 035.002859 : 0:: ~"':. :"'g ~ '., HOFFMAN ESTATES"" g '<;. .1';':-. ILLINOIS "Ò~ of 1"",;;1'¡äF'il.~\......\\,,-t ".""""""" '0, "'. ',,-. ,- 'I -, 5 UN' or ""'0,"" 101 207 ,N LAUD,R.'I< ~LL' ~T~!:!!.Q CENTRAL AVENUE 1"1 = MEASUR£O DIMENSIDN IR) RECORD DIMENSION rOI = QEED ("(R,'OfOR( DEOICA!!:O fOR 'UBUe 511!((TI PREPARED FOR: _.r:~':!.~.?-,~~_P!~.:'~~~~~_'::-.c:.._- THIS PROFESSIONAL SERI/ICE CONFORMS TO THE CURRENT ILLINOIS MINII; UI; STANDARDS FOR A BOUNDARY SURVEY, STATE OF ILLINOIS) COUNTY or COOK) " 1£RENCE R C,'HILL, AN ILLINOIS PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR, HlREBY CERTIFY THAT I hAVE SURVEYED THE PROPERTY AS HEREIN DESCRIBED, AND THAT THIS PLAT IS A CORRECI REPRESENTATION OF SAID suRVEY ALL DIMENSIONS ARE G'\ÆN IN FE!:T AND DECIMAl PARTS THEREOF ~ ß~ DA TE 3fd:!_C IÏ~rÑCE- ;¡-ëÃriïLL-- - Cë-Ëxp.~~IE'[rE:o~~~"" ILLINOIS P L S #)5- 28~9 PI.A T IS VOID If IMPRESSED SEAL DOES NO T APPEAR NOTE EASOKNTS ANC 8UIlDING LINES INDICATED ARE TAKEN rRO" ORIGINAL RéCORDED SUBDIVISION PLA T, rOR SUBSEQUENT EASEMENTS AND BUILDING LINES, ADL'ED, AL TERED, OR NOT DEPICTED UPON RECORDED SUBDIVISION PLAT, REFER TO 11 TLE POLICY, DEED OR INSTRUMENT CREATING SAME, CONllNENTAL ENGINEERS &: SURVEYORS. INC. Consuiting Civil 0 Sanitary 0 Structural Engine.," Land Surveyors &- Planners 2099 STONlr-iCTON AVE, HOfF~AN EsrATES, I~LlNO!S 6019:' (&47)885-3326 FAX:(&47)885-J.496 Existing Conditions f}agc 1 (i! ' .,---~_.,,_.._'-----" ,."--~-~' "",,--"""""-'--"""" ,-,.._-"-".-~...-....~".... ""..,... ....'m ..' "" ..-.-..",..,. ---- -,---------,----,..'--' --'--"------- -"""--'-'----"""'" ....--""""-'" .._-", ---..-" .....' , ,,--,-,----- ..'.. ," ", , ,", .' , , "'..."" ' _.,-,,-,--.....- ,n----'- f- r' c;.. --...{l)" \~ è~~YR~L RD :",-T ,f,vQ. ~ . '... " -~- t",~ í :) ;, '? ,,¡ :Î; ,1,:, "" .".' i¿~;'¡sfil'1q :;;c:r"lc¡iÍ,I()n,. ;' , ir,í i",j;,',' '-, ,~ :TllI -=::.... ---....-....---- :t .IP E CENTRAL RD__--___"",'--j.....----,.....--- -- ¡ "-, I Go PVlg,ot (0;;) Vil¡3g9 of. NIt P P:JSp9ct, I L rtOL"" """"~~5ft I) .;I I I""""'~ '. j ~".'" ,. .. ,..- I ,. - . "':'; ....... ,-,,/ [, -- -:1 c.:::=J , ,t ':~'~ .>-' ;-;: : ;. ..- , .. ". . . . ------ Ci~<..i i.,C',';" "'," ',.'. ',' ------- 'J"- ,'; "It"-,,,: C' ..,," - '" ""." ,0 , - "'" "¡""""-"" ,c-..,""'> ,,": ""'<' ",' ",' ,',r'" "','" ç;""'í",:I,' "" :"'",1,--"" ,,""- ,"'¡ ,'r""";'--""',, ,"-" "'" ,",','" ., ~-.,,:ç,J ;':,' ',' 'j , , -------'---- ----- -'----- ------ ,- ","-'--' -----" ------..-----",--,- -.. _..,-,-- -",.."._,---_..-.---,...,~~--------'--'--'~.._..--~"........~..._-,-"_...-' ",--,--'--""'_,_,',,--,"" ,..,...."_......,.""..,,.. ,.... ....,---, ,.." httr://gis/pvwcb2/print.do'?title-=Existing+Condi t ions& paper'let! cr &oricntat ion=portr ai t& -'" 3/ 16!2005 j'>.UUlt~::,:, VUII'\.:,tllUll ._"~_._" .~'..-'..~, ',. """'. ',. """".--.'-.-.-......" . '~"~---'-""'-".'--'-"-" "'-"--'.-.,......--""......-,.. "-'-"'-.""'._---"'~"""'--'---'","-.~-.."-,,,--- r-'-----"-'- ----:::'--'-...:.._~'-:,' '.-'-'-'--._----c. ".-..-------.---....---------. ---.----..,-..---..----,-.. I'age I CJ! I i I ì I i I I i I '-00...- W Cf:N1RAL RD +--.............------.-.--....---...........,.--...-.."- E CENTRAL RD I _Gopyrgþt (ç) Villag£l °t.f"1t, Pro~pi: d, IL r:-' '1 'l~..:. ' 195ft ---L._.~- , .','~",".,-%""-',-,,,,-,".~..'~""""'-' ------ "---"'-"'---1"'--- ! I I I I I I I I, Z ~ :Þ z CJ -I Þ;ddn~ss VedŸkaUcn '._._..,.,'_.~' i 7 fr. ¡ I 11 ,. ! ¡ " 11 11 ,. -: ., "', 7 7 3 :\ :~ ;, "'-'-'.' j r. , ,j 'r .., . ". " . t. ',"-c""';' "", '. , _.. ";0': .';' ',' ',.'" '"., .". , " , ",..',' ",'" ,. , " .. """""" r ~1 '-::::=.:1 ... "'.' '.. " ..'. -", . .,--_. "-'-"---'-- .. ",. .'. . ... . ., . .' "" .. "". , ,"', ". ,.C "0 ~~_. F'JlnlerJ 0316,':iOi;5D?2112P" !", ¡,d C'(1:", '.-""""'1""-- I I I " ' z m ~ m ;;0 (J 0 z ;~ en -t ¡ I ! 1 . '---""-"--"--,----'--""-"'-"""'" i \ r-:-- .l__L~__.. 1 D!SCLp,IMEf< i Cos GIS cere 's lore.",;<:O "<'IS ,,' w,lh()u! "¡¡'!I,pn'~' O' ar,\' "TCSOI1I?'<'m 0' "ccurac" ¡"w."""'" v ':C¡"~"cte'."$S Ti,e ~t;:~:;:~;,~'~:~¡~:~'~,':;,"~~.~~:~';::;~;r 1~:~'~~:~;~:::;;~;~~~~:I¡;~'~:e ""IS S('lec." 00 the rcq'lccter . ".-. . ...-.-.. http :// gis/pv\\'cb2/print.do?title= Address+ Veri fication&paper-clcttcr&oricntation=portrai 1.. - 3/16/2005 , -+ t I ~t /¡j6 - tJJO ~ CJ \ Û)-t /c5 - 03/: cc I - 036 ~ ltJ I L-H-4-=--¡~-j ~ 1 ¡ . - 049 ,~I.. ~~ / c.:? - "-tJ Sectioll of Sî(l\velllVlal) , '" '.1) HE¡VRY \rJ I J. 1-f:~-4J .J.\ ¡ - !::;f:-~'ì.! 4'.'f - ~~...l.'f' " . -~T..;! -;;. ~~ /8,,"? 'iff //2 - ðZ<"- :.: ,,\..; I ð ó - 0-5' I ' I ~ -~ - .Tlg~-=--~(1::_~.-t-i II,) - 0 Z 5 ~ ~ -oo~ I,. - I '~G'~ I", ~ i -ð47 ~ i /1" - C 2 6 ~ I /¿J.4} : ~ ~ .. . ~ j I t /9) - ,,~8 ~ } . r;9~- ,I .t.._~~9 - OZ7- . . I /41.1-3 I ~ ~.r ¡';'é' - cZ8 ' ~I~ 5 -¿),tf.3 K (A'~ - - :;i , '- ., /cJ7-ú2'7 ~ r 4 \= 4 -- ---- ." -ð44 :-.5--- ~~, -d4!: ~ I ---- ~ 2 ------ I t <::J I 't I . '" " r I ,. ~ /c:'/ - ¿?]5 Ii" IfJ. 1-3 / ~ ~,"';'.J /CZ-Cì50 ~ ~ '~ t--: " J -¿;4G 6457 1~2, -f ~~ ¡~ ~ C - - £. , \ J I Ij \~ T ¡ I \ I I \.,0-1:-:' ~: ..... .... r- " , ---- ~. ;-... i)- i I !. I 1. 6 ~ i -.... ¡ - Sidwell Map Information (~ /'i' £-7'-~ ¡ ¡ :,~ <:';"," /:::(;-'-:2'" 'I " ..... l' ' c v 0 " .j - () ..4 -:r. .! I " f\ì " ~¡I ' '- ~ ; .L, . ?k~ --+- -:: ..1-. ...--- ¡ ¡ / /: ' ..; [: ," ,'----!,rL"""~-;,~,:",;.~"" ,\-1 - C 2 '7 .~ , 4" ~' ' :, \ ~.;¿, ~ ." , --J- ~ II: 4 "'--...:. ': ~ " / ! , , - -4, ~ /06 - C!"O ~i ,....., !';~¡~r':;~~p+ it?5' :"1 r ~ <: ,. ,...;' ~ ---- """ ¡ ',(r - /: '::' / j\: ¡. ...~,:. ,,' --'/.'~,/- I, _L.oé."",- ~ ~"""~" u ¡ \3 I -'f ./ ~r' ,")> ¡ r7'""<,o. - - -=+- ~ ... -::--"~'---_.._._-, ¡.(' ¡ ~ , ~ ¡" ~; : 1-1 ; " ---- - I - !N '.', ......, ¡r¡ow--- , , L. , 0 4-9 I," L I '-<f ¡ Co ~' / C? .. ¡ ....... ~ ¡ -- --- -y"'" ¡ ~¡ / I} /t:JZ -O5ð t~b 'i H .,. . :~ ¡ -f';4/': ',; , i ,(,,- , iO ¡ ¡- :i, ,J¡-. , '- ~ i 64 5""!, : / c:'1 .. CJ5 i('J , ,/ /~.',>t3 : If' '¡" ¡ /' ~ , , /.,;' J-,1' ," ,--,', = . i --' W 4- >'.. -..=~rE.;} -r"O A " " " ") ::I,' ","" {:---f---<r., ' ' ~~a"='wq~,~~- '. "'.., "t j!j~~ 9'1 .: "---11 ;: ~ " j i-- t; N. Main Street ~ r- f 5 N. Main Street " "') ""',1 M. S 1 -.J N. aID treet >';¡;'" /gé -05""/ ...f,¡'\¡. ~~ -"---'- , , I \-1- --t- ',/>- -;", ; ¡ /ð" - :::";1,3 >'i!; 1'>-' . ~,- " ---r:"( /11.. 0 Z 5 ~¡ . /,?'ß -¿;<Jd. .<",; , -ip""""""""b , """", ~ 'J, ¡ /4:1" ; '(2 ,t ~t(",,>w>,I""',,;", - i " \ ¡",.-t.'ïl,\'", II:; --c¿6 ~, "'" - U' t ì ' /4;2,43 " ' -1i""'-=--~h .~ ~ ' ,,) 9/ - ::J 4-8' ~ -r ¡ J. . -~, -.- ,--,-~ i ..-, .. , -í' ¡ I , /92 l ¡ I /:':7' -- 027 :¡ -----L Village of lVIount Prospect Community Development Department CAS E S r:\I :\[ A R Y - P Z - 49 - 04 LOCATIO~: PETITIO:'íER: O\V~ER: PARCEL #: LOT SIZE: ZONIì'iG: LAND VSE: REQl"EST: 7 :\. i\bin Street Teresa Licari Teresa Licari 03-34-410-044-0000 0.19 acres (8,520 square feet) B5 Central Commercial Vacant Lot ResubdivisÎon (Consol1date two parcels to create a one-lot subdivision) 123 122 12l 119 In! 117 116 115 II~ 113 112 III 110 109 108 107 106 105 10~ 103 102 101 100 f"'. QC e.,¡ - :: c ~ - C.I C.I I.. - CI'. 21 19 17 !~ 2! = .- :: 20 18 16 I" 12 ~ CJ LOCA TIO:'í :\[AP Thayer Street 123 1'2 120 119 118 117 \(6 liS II" 1\3 1\2 III 110 109 108 107 106 105 10~ 103 102 101 100 Henry Street 10 6 23 !' 21 20 19 18 16 17 12 15 8 II 9 6 7 5 " 3 2 I - :oJ :oJ I.. - r:JJ ~ 2 = - - ;, I.. :,¡ = ,-, - Central Road IIi 116 115 II~ 113 112 1\1 110 109 108 107 106 10S 10~ 103 102 101 100 .n 16 21 I" 17 12 IS 13 111 II 8 7 6 5 3 ~ 2 .... I 117 115 113 III 109 107 10S 103 101 15 IJ II ..... 9 ~ ~ 7 I.. ..... rJ'1 S ë ~ - 3 ~ M E M 0 R A ~ D U :\'1 Village of Mount Prospect Community Development Department TO: \!OL:-iT PROSPECT PLA~~IÌ'iG & ZONING COM~lISSlON ARLENE JURACEK, CHAIRPERSON FRO~l: JTJDY CON"NOLL Y, AlCP, SENIOR PLAN},iER DATE: FEBRUARY 17,2005 HEARING DATE: FEBRUARY 24,2005 SUBJECT: PZ-49-0.+ - RESUBDIVISION (CREATE I-LOT SUBDrVISION) 7 N. MArN STREET (TERESA LICARl - APPLICANT) BACKGROUND A public hearing has been scheduled for the February 24, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting ;0 review the application by Teresa Licari (the "Petitioner") regarding the property located at 7 N. Main Street (the "Subject Property"). The Petitioner has submitted a plat of Resubdívision to consolidate two parcels to create l one-lot subdivision. The P&Z hearing was properly noticed in the February 9, 2005 edition of the Journal Topi.:s Newspaper. In addition, Staff has provided written notice to property owners within 250-feet and posted a Pubiic Hearing sign on the Subject Property. .'. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Subject Property is located on the east side of Main Street (Route 83), between Central Road and Her.;-:: Street. It consists of (\\0 vacant.pJrcels located betvveen MO apartment buildings. The Subject Proper!) is zond B5 Central Commercial and is bordered to the north, west, and south by the B5 district and by the RA Sinf:e Family Zoning District to the east. . SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The Petitioner is proposing to consolidate two parcels, which were acquired through a County tax sale, to create) one-lot subdivision. The parcels would be consolidated through the proposed Licari's Consolidation plat. P~l¡ approval includes Planning & Zoning Commission review and a recommendation to the Village Board. Tne Village Board's decision is final for the proposed plat. Background Village records indicate that the area north of Central road and south of the single-family residences was rezond from Rl to R3 in 1960. The site was then rezoned from lU to R~ a year'iater and the original subdivision indicates that the development consisted of 5 lots of record. The three existing apartment buildings wer~ constructed in the early 19605. However, the building footprints did not match the lot lines. The Village lat~r rezoned the properties to B5 Central Commercial in the early 1990s. Although the Petitioner did not submit a development plan, Staff had concerns regarding the proposed plJ.t because of the potential impacts of deve10ping the site. Currently. there is not enough parking for the tenants and PZ-49-04 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting February 1.4, 2005 Page 3 developing an open are:l would intensify the situation. bch building h:1s 12 units, creating a total of 36 units. and e:1ch building has 12 assigned parking spaces. However, it appe:1rs that some vehicles par:111el park along the e3st lot line. The Village Attorney researched the title information and found that the Subject Property, the t'\vo parcels the Petitioner is seeking to consolidate, \-vas created through a tax division. A tax di vision is a peti tion processed through the Cook County Assessor's Office whereby a property owner parcels off a portion of their land for :ax purposes. A separate tax bi1l and PIN# are created. In this case. the Village was first made aware of this situ:l::on 'when the Petitioner contacted Village Staff to deteITnine \vhether the property could be developed. The Village Attorney determined that the Subject Property \vas created without the benefit of a subdj vision Jnd Village review. In addition, he deteITnined that the Village couldn't prevent the Applicant from seeking appro\"al of the proposed Licari's Consolidation. Ho\vever, future development of the site must comply \vith all Village Codes. The Petitioner could request relief, which would require going through the zoning process and obtaining Village Board approval. GE~ER-\L ZONI~G COi\IPLIANCE Currently, the Subject Property is undeveloped. but it includes an ingress/egress easement along the rear 30' of the property. The easement provides ingress/egress rights between the apartment properties o\'er the eastern :0' of each property. The Petitioner has not submitted development plans for Staff review, but has indicated that :he property would be sold to another party for redevelopment. The proposed development would have to incorpor:lte the easement requirements and comply with all Village regulations. The Subject Property is zoned B5. The following table lists the bulk regulations for the B5 Pistrict: B5 Central Commercial District I ;,\Iinimum ReQuirements SETBACKS: I Front No more than 30' ! Interior No Requirement I Rear Distance equal to the height of the building I Bl1LD[~G HEIGHT 30' mid-point of roof I DENSITY 16 units/acre (3 units in thIs case) I I LOT COVER-\GE No Requirement i S{;BD[VISIO~ STAXD.-\RDS It is important to note that the item being reviewed is the plat that consolid:ltes the parcels and creates :l one.~ot subdivision. The development of the site is a separate issue. If the proposed development does not comply \\ith Village regulations or requires Conditional Use approval, the P& Z, and most likely Village Board~ would reviev,,' the request and make a decision in response to the development. Sec. 15.305 of the De\"elopment Code lists the standards for a subdivision. The standards relate to the physical development of a subdivision. It provides requirements for the dewlopment of the block (length, ","idth. etc.) :ll1d the development of the lot (size, depth, shape, etc.). Staff reviewed the proposed plat and found [bat it had be~n prepared in accordance with the Village Code. PZ-49-04 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting February 24, 2005 Page 4 RECOM:\IE~DA TIO=" The proposed Licari's Consolidation plat has been prepared in accordance with Village Codes. Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend the Village Board approve the plat for 7 N. Main Street, Case No. PZ-49-04. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. I concur: ICP, Director of Community Development , ,j< W PLA.'<' PI....".. loft.... COM~~Pil :OO! 5",0.Icm.PZ"'9.1).O ~IE"O '.' " ".... . ,..,"I,d,".. pl....doc .. .. . Mount t'rospect Public Works Department INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: SENIOR PLANNER JUDY CONNOLLY PROJECT ENGINEER CHUCK lINDELOF FEBRUARY 14, 2005 PZ-49-04; LICARI'S CONSOLIDATION (7 NORTH MAIN STREET) The Engineering Division has reviewed the Plat of Consolidation for the subject property, and finds it meets all requirements and is acceptable. The Engineering Staff has no objections and approves of the proposed consolidation. =1 I 50 50 ~Ô-2 ~ ,:, I:: '" I 100 ~ ~ t. N I " 21 21 22 71 19 '" 19 17 17 9-11 l' 15 PROJECT LOCATION 10 10 ... ..., ~ 0 ..., ~ ~ ~ 9 ... '" ~ ~ ~ , 6 <I 1-3 .~ ~W~ c:r~lbecker X;\Engineering\ProjectReviews\licarisCons\ApP-1.doc " ". VILL~L\GE OF l\lOUNT PROSPECT COMNfUNITY DEVELOP\ŒNT DEPARTME?\T - Planning Division 100 S. Emerson Street Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056 Phone 8...7-813-5323 FA..\': 8...7-818-5329 Plat of Resubdivision Application Z Case Number 0 PZ - - - ¡.. <-:" Subdivision ~ame .-\ddress :;f c:=:o 0 ~ t;;, "" Date of Submission zE -0 x'-" ~ Hearing Date Q Z - z 0 1= , < ~ 0 .. z - Q Z :J 0 iX í"j ~ U < :::: Telephone (day) S 'JÎ- 55/" !J 7 a Tele ho.ne (evening) - C Cl ('" \ S-ta ( 7{~.Qr+;es. C;fC(f State IL LLC Fax <{l(7-lllb' 3702- If 1-7c¡!~3 7'-/0 Zip Code "'VOiD ~ Buyer I Telephone (day) \ Telephone (e\"ening) Fax: Property Owner - ~ame Corpor.mon c~ - ) Street Address City I State I Zip Code Sur\'eyor/F. noìno>o>~ I Name. C::~_-/'.,-.;.4L E,., "."",....Ç'/J f5v,l""/"/cY'$ 4c. ~/".-/ C.c-Á.d, ¿.,f Address ""Zaìf'f -?"...6I'7.U?r~"'" Al..<!' ". - / /1 .. h/-~----- 6~~/,/(... 6a/,/j- I , I Pager"\-!obi!e Telephone (day) ~'I' 7/ (1..>--3 ?Z~ Fax Ø"~7 / ~8'ç -:1'7"'1" ~ , - ~ ----.., l SUBDIVISION ~AME LfC.4- £jt~ Co ¡..) ~ C'( ì ol}'TrvrJ REAL ESTATE INDEX NO,:..fJ... ~ --.3 if --S L~ -- ó --.II- ~ - - -- REAL ESTATE INDEX NO.: -- -- -- - - -- -- --- - LOCATION OR ADDRESS: 1 A/..). )11 a in .5-!y ~--¡-. LAND USE: EXISTING lloc tJ ,) f PROPOSED: ¿j -l~ cjc:T .AI'- ¡-~ ZONING: EXISTING ß 5 L3S- !" PROPOSED: TOT AL ACIliAC ~ úúY N dJI ~ --I c:::: / TOTAL # OF LOTS: en ~ ~"---V~, Number of dwelling units: ~ Single Family: l\IUltifamilY~ TWNHS- ~ If requesting an exception to Development Code requirements, list request and explain why it is nec~ssary: Please note that the application will not be reviewed until this petition has "~en fully completed and 'iiJI.required p!.ms ar.: other materials have been satisfactorily submitted to the P1anning Division. 1I1I.:o;ilplete submittals \vill nor be accepted. It is s::ongly suggested that the peritioner schedule::m appointment with the appropriate Vil!..~e staff to review the process :lOd so t~.:.t :11.1ter.~;s can be reviewed for accurac y and completeness at the time of subrn.ittal. ., In consideration of the infonnation contained in this petition as well :IS :Ill stlporting document:ltion, it is reques red :Ì:::lt apprv';al be given to this request. The applicant is the owner or authorized represent:lti\- of the owner of the property. The petitioner l..-:.d the owner of the property grant employees of the Village of Mount Prospect and . h~ir agents permission to enter on the iJropert): :uring reasonable hours for visual inspection of the subject property. I hereby affirm that all information provided herein :lnd in all materials submit: ..1 In association \\ith [his application :Jr~ :n:e ar.': ::;:i'::::th~~::e :J~ D", t¡'d I- (; Ý If applicant is not property owner: I h"eby d.,ignote th, 'ppli "0 '" " my 'h'e of "oki,,; ,he V,ri,Üonl'¡ ¿e"dbed iA ,hi, associated supporting ~. Property Owner' /~-L..... .- , Date' 9-cJ j. Lj ;:¡ppli.:ation nd the L¡ Mount Prospect Department of Community Development 100 South Emerson Street, Mount Prospect Illinois 2 Phone 347.813.5328 Fax. 347.813.5329 TDD 347/392-6064 7 -- :> - ~ :J - -I J 1) ;7 ..- :) :.) J) . - !I'<::=î æ::-= \0)-1 := u z ë5~:::~ tD ,< " .::: c.;:è Z V'~ -~~::> .. - é:,- õ=t'?~ -,<::1',"-, ...~,,- 0 -1, 0- ~~~~ ... c:J, 0 ~ ",æ ~ I ;;ï.=" N"" >3 ;:: .::: j :: 6~~:; V1 =< ,~ c"- l.;'-I - ='f: ~~Š;S6 c::>_'!;s ~;j-=9=' .,~~:(~ õ~3-~ -' 0 ~ 'S 'J t..-== 0_,.<:::::' ~ '" ::>'1' ':J w-'" u t:',::2:'s;::: co v mu 07>-'-'" Z õ- '2::-;: ~~i~~ 0 or .... CJ', C\ :r: ~ J - ..J -----2~ ~ ~ ~d r: " ¿;,; - . ,^ ~ ~ £~ ~ 0 ~" " u .. 2:7bL ~ :r;d ~ , 111\ ~ 0 ~;; ~~ \ (Vi) 3.lÇ,£O.OOS (~) 00'09 (Vi) c;S'6; I I .)'W C)..~" \. '2 ,""" '-'~oJcn. ¡ '" '"'"..,,""' 0< -<6. sia 1 ','~'.oc 'c ;"" J t -¡;CI.ao", (C) ,0", L ..1,"" '00 ")d '")~'SY) 5""",n "'8".1 . >5;112] ¡SSJtOM ,ot I â ----------~I------ ~ &\ ~ ~I ,I, . ~ ~ ¡.... æ i ~I~ f" I., a I ~ '~I ~¡g I: r ;;!:" ~ ~ ((95"9-' ~~ ;<;X' ,~z 0 ,Do J3~ f I ...1., I ;" ~ _GIS 0 I ~I; I : '"V"'AiããñsJìi ~ ¡ !,g ~ ¡ ~ 1 ~ ~ I :1 ~ ¡ ~ ;;; ~';I gig I~~ - g i5 ~ .. -.r ........ Õ. I '<'0'\" ~ I " I ~ - '~ " ð 2 ~ õ I ) ;1; r . - ~ :::;- I ~ ~ I ~ :!: 0 ¡~ I Z (~I ;t., I - 0 1 a .. .. '" 1 '" 0 z i'i: S' '-' ;., 5 ..,. ~ I N 0 ..,. ~ ¡ ~ I I I 1:1 :. ,,~ ~ ÜO ,00'09 (Vi),90'09 (Vi) M.9l.l0.00N (",.,'8 JO S".8 o)~nss,) (Ir'"" "'~n, >¡OJ O)¡.,'O)O """012-"') ~ JJ33tlLS NIViV 0; , 5~ ';.~~ u = "'¿; = ~u §ðð :;1 ~I '- .. :;; t çb~çí:~5 )< '."" la,,~ . " z 0 ;~ ~~ J / I / t 2 I - -- ý~ ,) 7\'--~ .""03cr,- '" 1\ \ " \ 'I ~ b"'; C, -:: I ì~ ; '..~, ~ ';'~ ~ š~ ...' " ; ,; . """ " . -: ~ ':" -'- I 0 't tlX ..J <: IX ~ 2: , .. W 'i ,,'0 ' ',C :> 4 "R ;:cr¡ ; .' ......, U ~ .~ ~ := rJJ ~ ......, :- ~ 0. 0 :- ~ , ',:-,' l , '" .-. ... :, ~ ~ ~ , ;.¡ I . ----'---- -"'- til- I 8IJ II .1~ ~ ' I I I z 3: 'Þ z (/I -I - --- - - t, ~,-,~'H' ~ ~ ~ ~ "-' - «:. - e-..' '. ,- ~,....,",...., ~.,,~,..,-,- ,~ '.. "". ,- ";',;'-:;;:::'."õ'.'" '""",'.."",-- ~-_..~, ~-"'-""'- .-.._,.... ="'H_"""- ,.-....-.. ,. _~d-- ,~.._._- ,. - --------- "~"">->'-'- """"" "",.. ". .------ - L_,_I -===- _..,...>_.~,- ~.. _.,..~ ""',.""""- ~ -.' ~ - '- c-....""""'" "'".... ....,- --- 1 ~ 11 11 , , 11 11 ).11 1.; ; J , , J ['age 1 O! 1 P~¡nt Çics~ ; '1 13 . . 1'; - . III ".. 8'0 . . , . . 1 0 . . G . 8 .. DISCLAIMER Tn" GIS '""'a 'S pro "Ced '35 ,5' ",,:r,oLJ: war-aOly Of ar... repeesenlal,Dr, 01 ;;(OCracy, lo"'e"n~ss cr tcn-orereress -he burCer lor ,~ele'T""""g occurac'" ';ompleleresS, ""'elor",' merchan,aD,"'y am) Io:ness 'Of Of tile appropn.:eness 'or .se resls solely on lI'Ie requesJer Peeled 0;2: \ 7 20CS 'J9 ,to ::0 A\I httn'! hr; ,!nvwf'h ì .Inri ntrlo"ti t 1~=+&,')aDer=lctter&oríentation=portrait& fix Legend=on 2/17/2005