Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/28/2007 P&Z minutes 16-07 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-16-07 Hearing Date: June 28, 2007 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 401 E. Kensington PETITIONER: Terra Development Services PUBLICATION DATE: May 9,2007 PIN NUMBER: 03-34-201-008-0000 REQUEST: 1) Rezone from RX Single Family to R2 Attached Single Family 2) Conditional Use for a Planned Unit Development MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Chairperson Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Marlys Haaland Mary McCabe Ronald Roberts MEMBERS ABSENT: Joseph Donnelly Keith Youngquist STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judith Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Ellen Divita, Deputy Director of Community Development Jason Zawila, Long Range Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: Fred Biermann, Luella Biermann, Viola Ribando, Steve Polit, James Vivirito, Jeff Lee, Pamela Self, Tom Buckley, Dave Block, Bill Schneider, Chris Kim, H. Robert Reszke Chairman Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:37 p.m. Marlys Haaland moved to approve the minutes of the May 24, 2007 meeting and Ronald Roberts seconded the motion. The minutes were approved 5-0. After hearing seven previous Cases, Chairman Rogers introduced Case PZ-I6-07, a request for Rezoning from RX to R2 Attached Single Family and a Conditional Use for a Planned Unit Development at 401 East Kensington Road, at 9:28 p.m. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, stated that the Subject Property is located on the south side of Kensington Road, between Rand Road and Wilshire Drive, and currently contains a vacant single family residence with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned RX Single Family and is bordered by the B3 Community Shopping District to the west and north, and by the RI Single Family District to the south and east. Ms. Connolly said the Petitioner's proposal includes the demolition of the existing building and the redevelopment of the site as an II-unit townhome development. The Subject Property is currently zoned RX Single Family, and the Petitioner is requesting approval to rezone the Subject Property to R2 Attached Single Family. The R2 district allows a maximum density of 10 dwelling units per acre for multi-family developments. The Petitioner's proposal includes a density of 5.5 units per acre, which falls below the maximum density permitted within the R2 District. Richard Rogers, Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 28, 2007 PZ-I6-07 Page 2 Ms. Connolly stated that in addition to the requested rezoning, the Petitioner is also requesting approval of a Conditional Use permit for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the townhome development. This request is due to the Village Code's requirement that two or more multi-family residential buildings may be located on the same zoning lot only as part of an approved PUD. She said the PUD process also allows for unified zoning control over the entire development, which would require formal Village approval if any modifications to the development are proposed in the future. Ms. Connolly showed a site plan illustrating the proposed layout for the II-unit townhome development. The development would consist of two clusters of townhomes: one cluster would have 6 units and the second cluster would have 5 units. Each of the townhome units would have a separate entrance, a front-loading two-car garage, and a two-car driveway. The units would be setback approximately 77-feet from the Kensington Road lot line. She said a 24-foot wide drive aisle would run parallel to Kensington Road, in front of the units, and there would be two driveways/access points from Kensington Road; a right-in, right-out for the eastern drive and full access for the western drive. Ms. Connolly stated that the lot west of the Subject Property is zoned B3 Community Shopping and is intended to retain its B3 zoning designation. The Village Board granted a Conditional Use permit to operate a Community Center for the lot west of the Subject Property. However, the facility was not built and the Conditional Use permit has since expired. She said the proposed townhome site plan indicates that the western access point for the townhomes would extend to the adjacent lot of record, and the driveway would be located on the adjacent lot. Therefore, a cross access agreement is required to ensure perpetual access for the proposed townhome development. Also, Staff recommends that the road and driveway on the adjacent lot to the west be configured and installed to accommodate vehicles from the anticipated drive aisle from the south. Ms. Connolly showed a table listing the Bulk Regulations for the R2 District and the table showed that the units comply with the R2 Bulk Regulations, but the guest parking spaces encroach into the required front yard. The Petitioner's site plan indicates that the project would have approximately 49.5% lot coverage, which is below the 50% limitation. The project is subject to all development requirements as detailed in Section 15.402 of the Village Code, which includes, but is not limited to providing storm water detention and street lights, if applicable. She then showed elevations indicating the architectural composition of the townhomes. The units are 2-stories tall, measure approximately 25-feet wide, and have 2-car front loading garages. The building materiaIs for the exterior elevations consist of stone, brick and stucco for the second story. The units include an unfinished basement and a IO-foot x IO-foot deck located along the rear elevation of the building. Ms. Connolly said the Petitioner's proposal indicates that each unit would include 3 bedrooms on the second floor plus a den on the first floor. The Village Code requires 2 ~ parking spaces per dwelling unit. The Petitioner's proposal contains a 2-car garage plus two driveway parking spaces per unit. In addition, the Petitioner's plans indicate II guest parking spaces are available on-site. Ms. Connolly said the Petitioner's landscape plan indicates that a variety of shrubs, shade and evergreen trees will be planted along the perimeter of the Subject Property and the foundation of the buildings. The landscape plan indicates that deciduous shrubs and a IO-foot wide band of evergreen shrubs will be planted along the Kensington Road frontage to screen the guest parking. Since the garages also face Kensington Road, efforts must be made to screen the garages and enhance the view from the road; she said Staff recommends the landscape plan be modified accordingly. Also, any shrubs planted along the public sidewalk should be no taller than 36-inches, including berm height, to avoid creating sight obstructions for vehicles exiting onto Kensington Road. She said the plan indicates that a fence would be installed along the south and east lot line, but not along the west lot line. However, the fence material and height are not noted. The maximum fence height allowed between residential properties is 5-feet and the proposed fence would need to comply with the 5-foot height limitation. Staff suggests Richard Rogers, Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 28, 2007 PZ-I6-07 Page 3 extending the fence along the west lot line, up to the front setback of the unit to screen the development from the adjacent driveway. Ms. Connolly stated that the Petitioner has submitted preliminary storm water detention plans and is working with the Village Engineer to arrive at a design that will comply with Village Code regulations. A final design is typically submitted as part of the Building Permit process, and this issue shall be addressed prior to permit submittal. It should be stressed that the proposed development will be subject to all development requirements, as detailed in Section 15.402 of the Village Code. Ms. Connolly said the property is located along an arterial street and it is adjacent to single family residences and commercial properties. The recently updated Comprehensive Land Use Map designates the Subject Property as Single Family Residential Development and allows for the R2 Zoning District. Ms. Connolly said, as previously noted, the proposal does not comply with the R2 Bulk Regulations because the guest parking encroaches into the front setback. She showed a table providing zoning district information for the property's proposed zoning classification and summarized the proposed setbacks. Ms. Connolly stated that the standards for Map Amendments are listed in Section I4.203.D.8.a of the Village Zoning Ordinance. When a Map Amendment is proposed, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall make findings based upon the evidence presented to it in each specific case with respect to, but not limited to, the following matters: . The compatibility with existing uses and zoning classifications of property within the general area of the property in question; . The compatibility of the surrounding property with the permitted uses listed in the proposed zoning classification; . The suitability of the property in question to the uses permitted under the existing and proposed zoning classifications; and . Consistency with the trend of development in the general area of the property in question, and the objectives of the current Comprehensive Plan for the Village. Ms. Connolly said the Subject Property is adjacent to existing single family residential and commercial properties, and is across the street from the Randhurst Shopping Center. The proposed townhomes would be consistent with recent in-fill developments approved in the Village and it would be an appropriate transitional use for the Subject Property. The proposal meets the standards for a Map Amendment because it is compatible with existing properties within the general area of the Subject Property. Ms. Connolly stated that the standards for approving a Planned Unit Development are listed in Section 14.504 of the Village Zoning Ordinance. The section contains specific findings that must be made in order to approve a Planned Unit Development. These standards relate to: . The proposed development complies with the regulations of the district or districts in which it is to be located; . The principal use in the proposed planned unit development is consistent with the recommendations of the comprehensive plan of the village for the area containing the subject site; . That the proposed planned unit development is in the public interest and is consistent with the purposes of this zoning ordinance. . That the streets have been designed to avoid inconvenient or unsafe access to the planned unit development and for the surrounding neighborhood; and that the development does not create an Richard Rogers, Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 28, 2007 PZ-I6-07 Page 4 excessive burden on public parks, recreation areas, schools, and other public facilities which serve or are proposed to serve the planned unit development. Ms. Connolly said the proposal is consistent with the recently updated Village's Comprehensive Land Use Map. Also, the townhomes are in keeping with other previously approved townhome projects in the Village. Although the proposal does not comply with the R2 Zoning District regulations because the guest parking encroaches into the required front setback, the project location is in close proximity to commercial properties and the parking setback would have minimal impact on the adjacent properties when screened appropriately. However, it is unclear how the project creates a public benefit as noted in Section 14.501 of the Village Code. Ms. Connolly stated that the proposed Map Amendment and Conditional Use requests meet the standards for each request as listed in the Zoning Ordinance. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission approve the following motion: "To approve: 1) a Map Amendment to rezone the property from RX Single Family to R2 Attached Single Family; 2) a Conditional Use permit for an II-unit townhome Planned Unit Development subject to the following: A. Prior to Village Board review, the Petitioner shall identify the public benefit as noted in Section 14.501; B. Prior to Village Board review, the Petitioner shall prepare elevations that specifies the building materials and documents the townhomes comply with the Village's 28-foot height limitation; C. Approving a Variation to permit a 10- foot front setback for the guest parking spaces; D. Development of the site and floor plans in general conformance with the plans prepared by Terra Architects revision date June 1,2007 but revised to include a 20-foot wide fire lane/no parking in the drive aisle requirement; E. Development of the elevations in general conformance with the exhibits prepared by Terra Architects revision date June 1, 2007; F. Development of the site in general conformance with the landscape plan prepared by Pamela Self, revision date May 30, 2007, but revised to include materials that screen the garages and enhance the view from the road; G. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the Petitioner shall submit a plat of dedication that dedicates an additionalI7-foot of right of way (ROW) to provide a fulllOO-foot ROW for Kensington Road; H. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the Petitioner shall submit a lighting plan that complies with the Village's lighting regulations for the lighting within the development and includes low level lighting and 4' fixtures for the areas adjacent to the guest parking; I. Prior to obtaining the first Certificate of Occupancy, the Petitioner must submit homeowner's association documents for Staff review and approval; J. Prior to obtaining the first Certificate of Occupancy, the Petitioner must submit a cross access agreement and plat of easement to ensure perpetual access to/from the western driveway; K. The Petitioner shall construct all 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; and L. Prior to Village Board review, the Property Owner shall pay all outstanding property maintenance fines and provide proof that the site will be maintained on a consistent basis." Richard Rogers, Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 28, 2007 PZ-I6-07 Page 5 Ms. Connolly said the Village Board's decision is final for this case, 401 E. Kensington Road, Case Number PZ- 16-07. Chairman Rogers stated that the parking is in the front yard and asked if the road is in the front yard as well. Ms. Connolly stated that a drive aisle is a permitted encroachment. Chairman Rogers also stated that if the guest spaces were done with parallel parking, they could be located 20-feet off the front lot line versus IO-feet. There was general discussion regarding the different parking configuration. Chairman Rogers swore in Bill Schneider of Terra Architects at 14044 Petronella Lane, Libertyville, Illinois. Mr. Schneider thanked Staff for their comprehensive report. He summarized the project and stated that this is an 11- unit project, reduced from the original request for a IS-unit project. He stated that the required standards in the Village Code for each request have been met. He stated that he did not interpret the public benefit requirement, as listed in Section 14.501 to be a developer donation. He said he feels Terra Development meets this requirement by providing sidewalks and landscape improvements to a dilapidated property. He also stated they are required to make a Village Donation under Code Section 15.807 of$1350 per unit for a total of $29,700. Chairman Rogers swore in David Block of Terra Architects at 14044 Petronella Lane, Libertyville, Illinois. He stated the project consists of 11 units in two clusters. He said the easement to the west will remain as-is and they will be obtaining perpetual easement to the Subject Property. He stated the project is under the maximum lot coverage requirement. He agreed to extend the fence along west property line, that preliminary engineering has been completed, and they agree to the requirements in the staff report. He said they prepared a landscape plan and that it was developed per the required screening requirements listed in the Village Code. Chairman Rogers swore in Pamela Self, Landscape Architect of 1 Ann Court, Hawthorne Woods, Illinois. Ms. Self gave a brief summary of the proposed landscape plan, stating that it will soften the appearance of the development. Chairman Rogers asked where the planting bed will be located. Ms. Self said the continuous planting bed is 10 to I2-feet wide and contains several large trees within this same planting line. Chairman Rogers stated that it is unfortunate the garages face Kensington Road and he would like to see additional screening to soften the vast elevation. Ms. Self showed elevations with the mature landscaping in place, providing screening from the road. There was general discussion regarding the types of landscaping material that could be used. Ms. Self showed additional elevations of the foundation and perimeter landscaping. She stated that the plan exceeds the Village's requirements for landscaping and believes it has succeeded in softening the architecture of the development. Mr. Block provided an overview of the architecture and building materials for the project. He stated the building height is in compliance with Village Code. He showed exhibits depicting the floor plans of the available units. He stated there are 5 parking spaces per unit: two in the garage, two in the parking pad, and one guest space per unit. Ronald Roberts asked if there were elevation views of what the residential neighbors to the south wouId see. Mr. Block showed an elevation without the fence in place. He stated he could develop a rendering and get it to the Commissioners. He also stated they are adding more landscaping that what is required by Village Code. Ms. Self stated the proposed trees and shrubbery will provide 100% screening at maturity. Chairman Rogers asked how long the owner has owned the property. Mr. Block stated that it has been less than one year. Chairman Rogers stated that there were several mature trees on this lot that were taken down and he appreciates the fact that they are adding several trees back to the property. He said he would like to see more landscaping added to the Kensington Road frontage to screen the vast expanse of garage doors. Richard Rogers, Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 28, 2007 PZ-I6-07 Page 6 Chairman Rogers swore in Fred Biermann of 410 Garwood, Mount Prospect, Illinois. Mr. Biermann stated that his wife's family had owned the Subject Property since 1866. He gave a brief history of the Subject Property and stated that the sale of the Subject Property to Dr. Hsu ended a long family history with this land. Mr. Biermann stated that the application listed Dr. Robert Hsu as the owner of the Subject Property, but wanted to point out that at the closing of the property, the owner was listed as the Taiwanese-American Cultural Center. Mr. Biermann stated that he had no concerns with the proposed development until he reviewed the landscaping plans. He said he is not happy with the location ofthe detention area. He would prefer to see that located more to the west closer to the commercial properties, rather than directly behind their house. He asked if the detention area will be an open pond or if it will be underground, and asked if it would drain to Kensington Road. Chairman Rogers swore in Steve Polit of 601 North Wilshire Drive, Mount Prospect, Illinois. He thanked the Commission for their time and listening to the residents. Mr. Polit stated that this project requires a lot of "Tender Loving Care" because this project has not had much "TLC" when the 80+ mature trees on the property were taken down without regard for the future land use. He stated that he does not believe the traffic study is accurate; it still states there are 15 townhomes, that the residential numbers are artificially low, and the west side access point does not address the future use of that property. He said there is no information regarding the traffic on the eastern side of the property. He stated that he feels the project does not provide for public safety in regard to traffic issues. Mr. Polit said that over 65 mature trees were taken off the site and the owner needs to take steps to return the site to the previous condition. He said he feels the Petitioner, not the Village, should have to provide the parkway trees, as retribution for the dozens of mature trees he had removed from the property. Mr. Polit stated that he has concerns with water drainage from the site. He said the residents do not know if the water that currently runs into the 2 acre site will continue to do so. He did commend the architects on the project designs and appreciates that the elevations that face the single family residences are beautiful. Chairman Rogers swore in Paul Stonis of 606 North Windsor Drive, Mount Prospect, Illinois. Mr. Stonis asked if the small western portion of the site is rezoned, but not developed at this time, what will be the future of that property. He asked what the possibility of something less desirable than the Cultural Center going in would be. He stated that the Petitioner took down several mature trees on his property at the time he cleared the site, with the promise that landscaping improvements were made when the site was developed. He wants to know what would be allowed on that site in the future. Chairman Rogers said there is nothing currently planned, but the redevelopment would need to come before the Commission for approval if the proposal was not a permitted use. Chairman Rogers asked the Petitioner to address concerns raised tonight. In regards to water detention, Mr. Block stated that the on-site detention will be more than adequate for the largest rains and they have very capable detention facilities planned for this property. In addressing the traffic concerns, Mr. Block stated that KLOA conducted the traffic study and they are more than capable in providing traffic information. He said the proposed easement will be designed to be extended to the southern properties in the future; however he cannot speak to the future use of this parcel. Chairman Rogers asked if Dr. Hsu is the owner of the property. Mr. Block stated that he cannot speak for Dr. Hsu, but indicated that Dr. Hsu works with many LLCs. Ms. Connolly stated that the Village transfer stamp record does show Dr. Robert Hsu as the owner of 40 1 East Kensington. Chairman Rogers asked if there is an Ordinance in place regarding the removal of the trees from the Property. Ms. Connolly replied the Subject Property is zoned as residential and tree removal is allowed without a permit. Chairman Rogers asked if Dr. Hsu, as owner, was responsible for the authorization of the tree removal. Mr. Schneider stated to the best of his knowledge, Dr. Hsu did authorize the tree removal. Chairman Rogers stated he would like to add an additional landscape requirement to this site to account for the mature trees that were removed. He said he would like to require larger trees for replacement; a 4" diameter tree versus the 2.5" diameter requirement. Ms. Self said she would need concession for oak trees as they are not available in sizes Richard Rogers, Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 28, 2007 PZ-I6-07 Page 7 over 3". Mr. Rogers said for oak trees, he could accept the 2.5" requirement, but for all other trees would like to require the 4" diameter tree. He would also like to require landscaping 50% over the Code requirement. Mr. Schneider stated that the Petitioner will be paying for the parkway trees, but the Village takes care of the installation of those trees. Mr. Polit stated he understands that the water that generates on the Petitioner's property must be dealt with by the Petitioner; however he is concerned with the water that flows through the project, particularly during construction. Chairman Rogers called for additional questions or comments. Hearing none, the Public Hearing was closed at 10:32 p.m. Mary McCabe made a motion to approve a request for Rezoning from RX to R2 Attached Single Family and a Conditional Use for a Planned Unit Development at 401 East Kensington Road, Case Number PZ-I6-07, with the additional conditions presented this evening. Leo Floros seconded the motion. Mr. Floros stated that he does not support this proposal until Dr. Hsu speaks to the Case. He said there are several unanswered questions that Dr. Hsu needs to address. Mr. Roberts stated that he does not like seeing the zoning changing from single family to a higher density district. Ellen Divita, Deputy Director of Community Development, stated that there is currently a $1,000 fee levied on the property for grass mowing and the project cannot go before the Village Board until the fees are paid. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: None NAYS: Floros, Haaland, McCabe, Roberts, Rogers Motion was disapproved 5-0. After hearing two additional cases, Ronald Roberts made a motion to adjourn at 11 :04 p.m., seconded by Mary McCabe. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Stacey Dunn, Community Development Administrative Assistant C:\DocumenIS and Settings\kdewis\Local Settings\Temporary Intemet Files\OLK6B\PZ-16-07 401 E Kensington.doc