Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/27/2011 P&Z Minutes 27-11MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ -27 -11 PROPERTY ADDRESS: PETITIONER: PUBLICATION DATE: PIN NUMBERS: REQUEST: MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: INTERESTED PARTIES: Hearing Date: October 27, 2011 1601 S. Busse Road (Southeast Corner of Busse & Dempster) Daveri Development Group October 12, 2011 08 -23- 100 - 015- 0000,08 -23- 100 - 014 -0000 Conditional Uses (Final Planned Unit Development & Dwelling Units above First Floor) and Variation (Building Height) Richard Rogers, Chair William Beattie Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Keith Youngquist Jacqueline Hinaber, Alternate Theo Foggy Ronald Roberts Consuelo Andrade, Development Review Planner Brian Simmons, Deputy Director of Community Development Jessica Berzac, Susan Reynolds Chairman Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:31 p.m. Mr. Donnelly made a motion, seconded by Mr. Beattie to approve the minutes of the September 22, 2011 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting; the minutes Nvere approved 4 -0 Nvith Mr. Floros and Mr. Youngquist abstaining. After hearing one (1) previous case, Chairman Rogers introduced Case PZ- 27 -11, 1601 S. Busse Road at 7:50 p.m. Ms. Andrade said the Petitioner for PZ -27 -11 received approval for a Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) in April 2011 and Nvas seeking Final PUD approval including a Conditional Use to allow dwelling units above the first floor and a Variation to increase the building height for the property located at 1601 S. Busse Rd. Ms. Andrade stated the final Planned Unit Development Nvould consist of an existing restaurant Nvith a drive - through and a new mixed use building that Nvould provide affordable supportive housing units to individuals Nvith disabilities. Thirty -nine (39) one (1) bedroom or studio apartments Nvould be located on the second, third, and fourth floors. The ground floor Nvould include a commercial /retail space and ancillary uses that Nvould support the residential dwelling units. Ms. Andrade said the Subject Property is located at the southeast corner of Busse Road and Dempster Street, and consists of two (2) tax parcels. The parcel on the east end of the property is occupied by a Culver's Restaurant Nvith drive - through. The parcel on the Nvest end is vacant. The Subject Property is zoned B -3 Community Shopping and is bordered by the B -3 District to the east, south, and Nvest, and by the R -4 Multi - Family Residential District to the north. Richard Rogers, Chair PZ -27 -11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting October 27, 2011 Page 1 of 5 Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner's site plan indicated the new mixed -use building Nvould be located on the Nvest end of the property. The building Nvould measure approximately 169 feet Nvide by sixty -five (65) feet deep. Overall, 165 parking spaces Nvould be provided, including thirty -six (36) land banked spaces. The proposed development Nvould utilize the existing curb cuts on Busse Road and Dempster Street, in addition to maintaining access to the adjacent Plaza United commercial development Ms. Andrade said the new building Nvould be primarily constructed out of brick, including hardi siding for the bays, and precast concrete. The design incorporates glass storefronts on the ground level and Nvindows on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th floors. The ground floor also includes avmings on the north and Nvest building elevations. As proposed the building elevations Nvould require revisions to address previous Staff comments. Ms. Andrade referenced the folloNving table: Ms. Andrade stated the table compared the Petitioner's final Planned Unit Development Nvith the Village Code requirements. The existing building currently complied Nvith the minimum setback requirements and the proposed mixed -use building Nvould also comply Nvith the required setbacks. The new building Nvould be setback approximately eighty -seven (87) feet from the front property line, eighty -eight (88) feet from the exterior side property line, forty -six (46) feet from the interior side property line, and forty -eight (48) feet from the rear property line. The overall development on the Subject Property would have sixty -eight (68) percent lot coverage, Nvhich falls below the B -3 District's maximum seventy -five (75) percent lot coverage permitted. The building height Nvould exceed the maximum permitted by Code and Nvould require a Variation. As proposed, the building height Nvould be forty -three (43) feet as measured to the top of the building. The maximum building height permitted by Code in the B3 district is thirty -five (35) feet. Ms. Andrade said the Zoning Code requires parking based on land use. Ms. Andrade referenced the folloNving table: Code Requirements Existing Bdlg. (Culver's) Proposed Mixed -Use Buildin Building Setbacks: Requirement Number of Required Parking Spaces Front (Dempster) Min. 30' 98' 87' Exterior (Busse) Min. 30' n/a 88' Side Min. 10' 37' and 56' 46' Rear Min. 20' 48' 48' Building Height Max. 35' 24' 43' Lot Coverage Max. 75% 68% Ms. Andrade stated the table compared the Petitioner's final Planned Unit Development Nvith the Village Code requirements. The existing building currently complied Nvith the minimum setback requirements and the proposed mixed -use building Nvould also comply Nvith the required setbacks. The new building Nvould be setback approximately eighty -seven (87) feet from the front property line, eighty -eight (88) feet from the exterior side property line, forty -six (46) feet from the interior side property line, and forty -eight (48) feet from the rear property line. The overall development on the Subject Property would have sixty -eight (68) percent lot coverage, Nvhich falls below the B -3 District's maximum seventy -five (75) percent lot coverage permitted. The building height Nvould exceed the maximum permitted by Code and Nvould require a Variation. As proposed, the building height Nvould be forty -three (43) feet as measured to the top of the building. The maximum building height permitted by Code in the B3 district is thirty -five (35) feet. Ms. Andrade said the Zoning Code requires parking based on land use. Ms. Andrade referenced the folloNving table: Ms. Andrade stated the total number of required parking spaces is 164. Culvers restaurant currently provides sixty -seven (67) parking spaces. The proposed mixed use building Nvill provide sixt -,T -two (62) parking spaces and land bank thirty -six (36) parking spaces, Nvhich Nvould bring up the overall number of parking spaces provided to Richard Rogers, Chair PZ -27 -11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting October 27, 2011 Page 2 of 5 Building Area ( sq.ft.) or Number Parkin Requirement Number of Required Parking Spaces Existing Restaurant 4,754 sq.ft. 12 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. 57 Proposed Mixed -Use Building: • DNvelling Units 39 DU 2 spaces per unit 78 • Medical Clinic 3,561 sq.ft. 5 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. 18 • Office /Retail 2,625 sq.ft. 4 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. 11 Overall Parking Required = 164 Overall Parking Provided (including land banked spaces) = 165 Ms. Andrade stated the total number of required parking spaces is 164. Culvers restaurant currently provides sixty -seven (67) parking spaces. The proposed mixed use building Nvill provide sixt -,T -two (62) parking spaces and land bank thirty -six (36) parking spaces, Nvhich Nvould bring up the overall number of parking spaces provided to Richard Rogers, Chair PZ -27 -11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting October 27, 2011 Page 2 of 5 165. This Nvould exceed the minimum required by one (1) parking space. The preliminary PUD proposal Nvas granted a parking Variation; hoNvever, the parking Variation Nvas no longer necessary based on the revised floor plan submitted as part of the Final PUD request. Ms. Andrade said the Petitioner's landscape plan provided a conceptual design Nvith regards to the number, type, and location of plantings. The landscape plan Nvould be required to be revised to meet Code. Ms. Andrade stated the proposed photometric plan illustrated nine (9) new parking lot light poles as part of the development and provided illumination levels, Nvhich exceeded the maximum levels permitted by Code. The Petitioner Nvould be required to revise the photometric plan to comply Nvith Code and provide fixture cut sheets for all exterior lighting. Ms. Andrade said the standards for Conditional Uses are listed in Section 14.203.1 of the Village Zoning Ordinance and include seven specific findings that must be made in order to approve a Conditional Use. The summary of these findings include: • The Conditional Use Nvill not have a detrimental impact on the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general Nvelfare; • The Conditional Use Nvill not be injurious to the use, enjoyment, or value of other properties in the vicinity or impede the orderly development of those properties; • Adequate provision of utilities, drainage, and design of access and egress to minimize congestion on Village streets; and • Compliance of the Conditional Use Nvith the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and other Village Ordinances. Ms. Andrade stated Staff found that the Petitioner's request for a Final PUD Nvould not have a negative impact on the public or surrounding properties. The existing restaurant Nvith a drive - through and proposed mixed use building Nvould integrate Nvell Nvith the surrounding properties. The proposed development Nvould not have an impact on circulation as it proposed to utilize existing ingress and egress from Dempster and Busse. The proposal is consistent Nvith the Village's Comprehensive Land Use Map and is compatible Nvith the underlying zoning for the property. Ms. Andrade said based on the findings, Staff recommended that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval for the motions listed in the Staff report. Mr. DonnelIv asked Staff if there Nvere any requirements that the Subject Property Nvould have to stay Nvith the proposed use. Ms. Andrade stated that there Nvas no requirement stating the Subject Property Nvould have to be supportive housing. Chairman Rogers said the biggest issue Nvould be the parking requirements if the use Nvas changed. Mr. Simmons said if the Subject Property changed to a different residential use, the number of parking spaces including the land banked spaces Nvould meet Code. Chairman Rogers confirmed that the subject case Nvas back before the Planning and Zoning Commission for final PUD approval. The previous zoning case, PZ -19 -10 Nvas for the preliminary approval approved by the Village Board in April 2011. Chairman Rogers swore in Jessica Berzac, Vice President of Daveri Development Group, 900 W. Jackson, Chicago, Illinois. Ms. Berzac discussed the financing for the project and stated they are ready to close on the Subject Property in the first quarter of 2012 and hopefully start construction in March 2012. Ms. Berzac discussed the overall project which brings permanent supportive housing to the Village. Daveri is linking affordable housing units Nvith on -site case management and social services. Ms. Berzac said that Daveri has teamed up Nvith the Kenneth Young Center who Nvill be an oN -,ner and service provider of the proposed Richard Rogers, Chair PZ -27 -11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting October 27, 2011 Page 3 of 5 facility. Representatives from the Kenneth Young Center Nvould be on site to support the residents of the proposed building. Ms. Berzac stated the Subject Property Nvould consist of thirty -nine (39) units. The building is mixed -use as the first floor Nvould consist of a commercial space and ancillary spaces supporting the residential units. Chairman Rogers asked the Petitioner if she saw the twelve (12) items that need to be taken care of for Staff. Ms. Berzac said she has seen the items and has spoken Nvith Staff. The Petitioner agreed that the items Nvould be addressed accordinOv. Mr. Beattie asked the Petitioner to address the commercial space on the first floor. Ms. Berzac stated that the specific health center that they targeted is on hold due to no new contracts being released. She said confidence has been secured Nvith the investors for them to proceed Nvith the proposed development without the commercial tenant in place. Mr. Beattie asked if there Nvould be any problems if the Petitioner Nvould not get the commercial tenant they are looking for. Ms. Berzac stated that they have not begun a standard marketing process for alternative tenants because they Nvould prefer someone who Nvould serve the residents of the building and surrounding community. Mr. Floros asked the Petitioner Nvhat she Nvould specifically like to see on the first floor. Ms. Berzac said the goal and original commitment Nvas from Heartland Health Outreach to provide a federally qualified health center. The center Nvould provide medical services to the entire area. The commercial tenant Nvould only occupy 3,500 square feet of the first floor. The rest of the first floor is purely residential uses: the property management offices, the case management and therapy offices, community rooms, laundry, library, and learning centers. The residential uses Nvould be strictIv for the residents of the proposed building. Chairman Rogers asked how much of the Subject Property is federally funded. Ms. Berzac stated there are layers of financing sources. The primary source is the low income tax credit. This is a competitive tax credit that is purchased by private investors. Ms. Berzac believed the investor Nvould be United Health Care. There are also several grants and low interest loans from the State and Federal Governments. Chairman Rogers asked if any of the residents are federalIv subsidized. Ms. Berzac anticipated that all residents Nvould be federalIv subsidized. Residents Nvould only parr thirty (30) percent of their income Nvhich is typically their social security toNvards their rent. Cook County has committed to picking up the balance of the rent so Daveri could operate at the levels that are necessary. Chairman Rogers confirmed that the proposed development Nvould be similar to Section Eight (8) housing. Mr. Beattie asked if support Staff Nvould be living on site. Chairman Rogers swore in Susan Reynolds of Kenneth Young Center, 8047 Floral Avenue, Skokie, Illinois. Ms. Reynolds stated that the Kenneth Young Center has been the community mental health center for the Elk Grove and Schaumburg ToN -,reship areas for the last forty (40) Nears. The residents are going to receive services that allow them to remain independent. They Nvill also receive services in their home. Ms. Remolds said that Staff may be on site during the evenings and Nveekends to help residents Nvith various tasks. No staff Nvould be living on site; hoNvever, there are procedures in place for twenty -four (24) hour crisis intervention if necessary. Mr. DonnelIv asked Nvhat type of disabilities residents Nvould commonly have at the proposed facility. Ms. Remolds said that they Nvould primarily be looking at people Nvith mental illness. She stated that they are ahvays looking for residents who are living Nvith aging parents or who may currently be in transitional living. Mr. Floros asked if the residents Nvould primarily be from Mount Prospect. Ms. Reynolds said there are no requirements in regards to geographic area. The facility Nvould have to have an open Nvaiting list and prospective residents would have to meet federal eligibility requirements in terms of income and have a disability. Mr. Floros confirmed that the Petitioner Nvould have no issues filling all thirty -nine (39) units. Ms. Berzac stated that they had a third party market study completed that this type of housing is needed for hundreds who are in the area. Richard Rogers, Chair PZ -27 -11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting October 27, 2011 Page 4 of 5 Mr. DonnelIv asked if Daveri had similar facilities in the area. Ms. Berzac stated that they have a large pipeline of facilities currentIv in operation around the state in Peoria and Chicago. She said they have many proposals in surrounding communities, but the Mount Prospect location Nvould be their first facility in the area. Mr. Donnelly asked how parking Nvas at the facility. Ms. Berzac stated that they are offering a lot more parking than they normallv do. The Petitioner had a parking study completed. She said typical units normally require two (2) parking spaces per unit; the demand for the proposed housing use is 0.15 spaces per unit. Ms. Berzac stated most of the residents can drive; in most cases, they cannot afford a car payment and insurance. Mr. DonnelIv confirmed that the housing is permanent for the proposed building and not transitional. Ms. Berzac stated that there is no timeline on residents of their units. She said some residents move for a less restrictive environment or a bigger space. Mr. Beattie confirmed that most of the units Nvould be single occupancy. Ms. Hinaber asked about security in the building. Ms. Berzac said the building Nvould be very secure Nvith a twenty -four (24) hour camera system. The building Nvill not be staffed N, -enty -four (24) hours. Ms. Berzac stated that there are extensive emergency response networks in place from the ov'nership and property management side as Nvell as the social service areas. She said that Daveri has Nvorked Nvith the Village's Police and Fire Departments on making sure that there are integrated systems so the proper part- is called in case of emergency. Chairman Rogers asked if there have been security issues Nvith the Petitioner's other facilities. Ms. Berzac stated that there have been no issues. She said the proposed development actually Nvould reduce security issues and calls to emergency services because the residents are provided Nvith stability. Chairman Rogers asked if there Nvas anyone else in the audience to address this case. Hearing none, he closed the public portion of the case at 8:16 p.m. and brought the discussion back to the board. Mr. Floros made a motion, seconded by Ms. Hinaber to approve a Conditional Use of a Final Planned Unit Development consisting of an existing restaurant Nvith drive - through and a four (4) story mixed -use building; a Conditional Use for dwelling units above the first floor; and a Variation to increase the maximum permitted building height from thirty -five (35) feet to forty -three (43) feet, subject to compliance Nvith the conditions of approval listed in the Staff Report. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Beattie, Donnelly, Floros, Hinaber, Youngquist Rogers NAYS: None The motion was approved 6 -0. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. Mr. DonnelIv made a motion, seconded by Mr. Beattie to adjourn at 8:17 p.m. The motion Nvas approved by a voice vote and the meeting Nvas adjourned. Rvan Kast, Community Development Administrative Assistant Richard Rogers, Chair PZ -27 -11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting October 27, 2011 Page 5 of 5