Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/23/2003 P&Z minutes 39-03MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-39-03 Hearing Date: October 23, 2003 PETITIONER: Pochter Group Ltd 1601-1639 S. Busse Rd. PUBLICATION DATE: September 10, 2003 PIN #: 08-23-100-013 REQUEST: Conditional Use for a PUD MEMBERS PRESENT: Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Merrill Cotten Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Richard Rogers MEMBERS ABSENT: Matthew Sledz Keith Youngquist STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Jacobs, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: Stephen Comoran Barbara Dickson Chuck Martin Keith Pochter Todd Shaffer Peter Uliasz Dan Wander Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. Merrill Cotten made a motion to approve the minutes of the September 25 meeting, seconded by Richard Rogers. The September meeting minutes were approved 4-0, with one abstention by Leo Floros. At 7:37 pm, Ms. Juracek introduced Case No PZ-39-03, a request for a Conditional Use for a PUD. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, presented the case and said the Petitioner's proposal calls for the development as a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The review procedure for a PUD requires Preliminary Plan review and recommendation by the P&Z Commission and final action by the Village Board. Following completion of the Preliminary Plan process, the Petitioner will be required to obtain Final Plan approval. It's important that the Commission keeps this in mind and that tonight's review is on a conceptual design. All details must be resolved prior to review of the Final Plan. Final Plan approval entails review and recommendation by the P&Z Commission and final action by the Village Board. The Petitioner is proposing a multi-use development consisting of: a 4,500 square-foot bank with five drive-thru lanes; a two-story, 16,000 square-foot office building; and a 4,754 square-foot restaurant with a drive-thru. In addition to these buildings, the development would include parking, landscaping and stormwater detention improvements. The proposed development is consistent with the Village's Land Use Plan, which designates the Subject Property as "Community - Commercial". Ms. Connolly said the proposed development consists of three buildings located on a single lot of record. Since the Zoning Ordinance requires each primary structure to be located on its own lot of record, the Petitioner is seeking approval for a PUD to allow multiple structures on a single lot. The proposed PUD would result in a more cohesive development of the irregular shaped property because it minimizes potential traffic impacts and allows for better interior circulation between the three uses. Planning & Zoning Commission PZ-39-03 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2 Ms. Connolly noted that the site plan indicates that each of the proposed buildings would meet the Zoning Ordinance's minimum setback requirements. The B-3 District allows a maximum building height of 30 feet. In reviewing the Petitioner's proposal, Staff found that the 28-foot building height of the proposed restaurant meets code, but the proposed 2-story office building measures 34-feet in height. This exceeds the District's height limitations and requires Variation approval. While the majority of the office building complies with the height limitations, the building includes some design/entry features that extend to a height of 34-feet. Also, specific building elevations have not been provided for the bank building. Without this information, Staff cannot confirm whether the building would meet the District's height requirements. Since relief has not been requested, the bank building would be required to comply with the District's maximum height limitation. Most of the proposed site plan complies with the Village's parking setback requirements, but there are two areas that require approval of a Variation: The first area is the 19 angled parking spaces along the east lot line of the site require a minimum setback of 10 feet, the Petitioner proposes a 5-½ foot setback. Ms. Connolly noted that the proposed site plan includes parking spaces along the south and west sides of the office building. These spaces would be accessed directly from the existing service drive that runs along the rear of the Plaza United center. The Plat of Survey indicates that an existing easement along the south lot line of the Subject Property allows access to/from the Plaza United Shopping Center, so vehicles are permitted to use this easement to access the Petitioner's lot of record. The proposed parking spaces along the south and west sides of the office building have no setback since they would be accessed directly from the adjacent service drive. The Petitioner is seeking relief from the Village's 10-foot parking setback requirement, however, Staff is concerned that this proposed configuration may conflict with delivery trucks or service vehicles using the existing service drive to gain access to the tenant spaces within the Plaza United center. A potential solution may be to limit the parking spaces in this area to employee parking only, which would restrict the amount of vehicle turnover. Another alternative would be to eliminate these parking spaces altogether, which would eliminate potential traffic conflicts and provide additional landscaping/screening opportunities for the office building Based on the calculations provided by the Petitioner, the overall development would have a total lot coverage calculation of 74.18%, which falls just below the District's maximum allowable lot coverage of 75%. The Preliminary Landscape Plan provides a conceptual design with regards to the size, general type, and location of proposed plantings for the Subject Property. The information provided indicates that the amount of the interior parking lot landscaping meets code. However, the Petitioner must submit a more detailed landscape plan that includes specifics regarding the size and species for all landscaping as part of the Final Plan submittal. It is important that the landscaping plan maintain a consistent theme throughout the entire development and include hardy, salt-resistant ground cover and plants, that it provide more year-round screening, and that the foundation landscaping for the office building consist of materials that are an appropriate height and species. As a PUD, it is anticipated that the proposed development will contain cross access and shared parking agreements between all three of the uses. Although the project would be a unified development, the Petitioner has provided a Site Plan that delineates the 'parking fields' for each of the proposed uses. The Petitioner's proposal exceeds the an~ount of required parking based on the combination of proposed uses. The Staff Report includes a detailed analysis of code requirements vs. the Petitioner's proposal. Due to these circumstances Staff recommends the Petitioner revise the Site Plan by eliminating the 12 parking spaces along the south and west sides of the office building as well as additional spaces along the Dempster Street frontage. The removal of additional parking spaces will allow for some additional green space both along the perimeter and within the interior of the proposed development, while the overall number of available parking spaces would still exceed the amount of required parking. The proposed PUD calls for a combined tenant sign at the comer of Busse & Dempster and a freestanding sign in front of the Culver's restaurant. The size and location of the Culver's freestanding sign on the Dempster Street frontage complies with the Sign Code regulations. However, the proposed 28 square-foot menu board sign (consisting of three panel boards) exceeds the 16 square foot limitation. Recently, the P&Z approved an oversized menu board for a new restaurant that featured three distinct restaurants/tenants. In comparison, Culver's would be the only tenant/user. Also, the Petitioner is requesting a 16 square foot 'pre-order menu' board sign in addition to the oversized menu board. While the request may be consistent with the drive-thru restaurant industry's expectations, the requests do not comply with Village regulations. Reducing the size of the menu board to no more than 20 square feet would be consistent with Planning & Zoning Commission PZ-39-03 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 3 previous relief granted by the P&Z and still allow the Petitioner flexibility to promote menu items. The Petitioner proposes a freestanding sign that would be shared by the bank, the Culver's restaurant, and up to four tenants of the office building. The proposed sign's size, location and materials comply with the Village's Sign Code regulations. Ms. Connolly pointed out that the Petitioner's submittal only included elevations for the office building and Culver's restaurant. The office building elevations indicate that the building facade will be a tan colored brick and include stone accents. The design incorporates large, expansive windows and curvilinear entrance features to provide architectural relief for the flat roof. The elevations for the Culver's restaurant indicate the building will have a blue metal roof and the facade will be constructed primarily of white brick Or Split faced CMU with some blue soldier course accents. To ensure that the proposed development will have a consistent design theme, more detailed information and material samples must be provided for each of the proposed buildings. The proposed office building exceeds the 30-foot height limitation for the B-3 District. The design of the building is primarily a flat-roofed structure with several curvilinear entrance features that are intended to soften the look of the building. Although the proposed design features may improve the appearance of the building, there is no apparent hardship that requires the building to exceed the 30-foot limitation: However, as part of the PUD approval process, the Village Board may approve deviations from the bulk regulations when they find that the proposed exception would not adversely impact the value or use of any other property. The Petitioner's proposal would utilize the existing curb cuts on Busse and Dempster, in addition to maintaining access to the adjacent Plaza United commercial development. Staff's preliminary analysis indicates that the eastern most driveway must be modified to create a dedicated left-turn lane onto Dempster Street. The dedicated left-turn lane will allow traffic to exit the site safely and minimize congestion within the development. Also, directional arrows must be painted onto the pavement surface (per the Village's Traffic Engineer's direction) to ensure safe interior circulation throughout the site. The Petitioner's Site Plan indicates that the bank's drive-thru lanes would be located along the building's west elevation. Staff reviewed access to the site and found that by eliminating one drive,thru lane that the bank could be reconfigured by shifting the drive-thru lanes to the SOuth or east side of the building. This modification to the site plan would make the highly visible west elevation of the bank building more aesthetically Pleasing while also creating a safer interior circulation pattern. Also, the petitioner must address how traffic flow will function along the south portion of the site. Twelve parking spaces are proposed with access off of a service alley that contains dumpsters, delivery areas and an enclosed children's play area. The site plan must be redesigned to reflect the outdoor play area and any other permanent structures in the service area that would impede traffic flow. In conjunction with development projects the Village's Development Code requires right-of-way improvements such as the installation of parkway trees and public sidewalks. The Subject Property currently contains public sidewalk along a portion of the site's perimeter (along Busse Road frontage) and some parkway trees near the intersection of Busse & Dempster. Prior to review of the Final Plan the Petitioner must revise the plans to include the required right- of-way improvements. In order to approve the proposed PUD request, it must meet the Conditional Use Standards listed in the Zoning Ordinance. The standards relate to the Conditional Use not having a detrimental impact on the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare; the Conditional Use not being injurious to the use, enjoyment, or value of other properties in the vicinity or impede the orderly development of those properties; that the design allows for providing utilities, adequate drainage, with minimal congestion on Village streets; and compliance of the Conditional Use with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and other Village Ordinances. The Petitioner's request to construct a bank with a drive-thru, a restaurant with a drive-thru, and an office building requires Conditional Use approval for a Planned Unit Development (PUD), The information submitted for review indicates that the proposed uses would work well together at this location. However, additional information is required, as well as modifications to the plans, in order for the Petitioner to demonstrate that the proposed PUD Planning & Zoning Commission PZ-39-03 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 4 complies with the Village Code. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval of the Petitioner's request for Preliminary Plan approval for the proposed uses as indicated on the site plan prepared by OKW Architects dated October 10, 2003, relief from the Sign Code to allow an additional freestanding sign/pre-order menu board as shown on Exhibit A, relief as needed from the parking setback requirements, relief from the B~3 District's height limitations to allow a 34-foot office building, subject to the following modifications: 1. Revise the Site Plan to provide a dedicated left mm lane for the eastern most driveway and address any other modifications required by Staff following a complete analysis of the Site Plan and Traffic Study; 2. Demonstrate that the 12 parking stalls along the south and west sides of the office building will function safely or revise the plan to eliminate them. 3. Revise the Site Plan so the bank's drive-thru lanes are relocated to the south or east elevation of the building; 4. Revise the landscape plan to include: 1) at least 75% year-round foundation landscaping for all of the buildings; 2) detail sheets for the various landscape features; and 3) viable, Iow-maintenance ground cover within the parking lot landscape islands; 5. Provide detailed information (including building material samples, colors, etc.) for the proposed office, bank and restaurant buildings prior to proceeding with the Final Plan approval process; 6. Revise the signage as follows: 1) modify the Culver's menu board so it has no more than two panels and measures no more than 20 square feet; and 2) reduce the height of the directional signs to no more than three- feet from grade or relocate the signs out of the sight triangle area; and 3) provide detailed information for the proposed wall signs for all the buildings to document compliance with Sign Code regulations; 7. Develop the site in accordance with all applicable Village Codes and requirements, including, but not limited to, detention requirements, Fire Prevention Code regulations, lighting regulations, Sign Code regulations except as noted in the Staff Report; and building regulations; and 8. Obtain permits from MWRD, IDOT, and any other applicable agency as may be required to develop the site as proposed. The Village Board's decision is final for this case. Keith Pochter, Pochter Group LTD, Northbrook, IL and Dan Wander, Terraco, Inc., 8707 Skokie Blvd., Skokie, IL, were sworn in and testified Pochter had been in the development business over 40 years and Terraco for over 20 years. They mentioned several large developments in the area they are currently working on. All anticipated witnesses were sworn in at this time. Peter Uliasz, Architect, came forward and highlighted some areas of the proposed project. He said landscaping had been seasonally planned. He pointed out the building architecture had been planned to avoid a '~top-heavy" appearance. He provided examples of proposed building materials: limestone for the base; masonry brick, pre-finished aluminum coping; orange-red and brown-red brick; dark bronze architectural metals and pictures of wall sconces. He said tenants would not be allowed to have their own sign. One sign will be used in the lobby. Board members had questions about the building height and whether the HVAC was included in the height. Those questions were left to be answered at a later date. Todd Schaffer, Haeger Engineering, Rolling Meadows, IL, came forward and testified that 30% more above and below ground storm water detention would be provided than was previously provided in the area of the proposed project. To accommodate the buildings. This is in accordance with Mount Prospect Ordinance and MWRD Regulations. Chuck Martin, Culvers, 599 Hawthorne Blvd., Glen Ellyn, IL, came forward and testified he is a future Culvers franchisee and is excited about opening in the Mount Prospect location and anticipates a high rate of success. He said this restaurant will be a little larger than the standard Culvers. He held up a board showing the samples of the building materials to be used on the building. Mr. Martin showed pictures of the Culvers Menu Board and reiterated their need for their need at least a 28 sq.ft, menu board. lanning & Zoning Commission PZ-39-03 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 5 Steve Corcoran, Principal and Traffic Engineer with Metra Transportation, who prepared the traffic study for the proposed project, testified this is a 3-frontage site with 4 existing access points. He explained how they determined trip generation and capacity analysis. He explained why the 5' setback requested by the Board would not be feasible. Board members had concerns about Day Care Center children playing in a playground adjacent to a driveway to the center. Keith Pochter said he will talk to the Day Care Center owners about moving their playground. Chair Juracek closed the hearing at 9:11 p.m. Board members said they felt that, after some suggested changes are made, this would be a very attractive addition to an area that is presently an eyesore in Mount Prospect. Richard Rogers voted to recommend approval of a request for a Conditional Use for a PUD for 1601-1639 S. Busse Rd., PZ-39-03, with the eight conditions imposed by staff (except #6); the Bank drive-up to be moved off of Dempster or Busse; playlot to be worked out with the other owner and the building having a Dempster address. Joseph Donnelly seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Donnelly, Floros, Rogers and Juracek NAYS: None Motion was approved 5-0. Chuck Martin of Culvers asked to address the group again before voting on the menu board occurred. He asked the group to consider allowing no pre-signage and allowing a total 32 sq. ft of signage and no visual clutter from the street. Joseph Donnelly voted to recommend approval of one 32 sq. ft. sign as presented, with the condition that it is screened with year round landscaping from the driveways and the roads and is only visible from the drive-up area for 1601-1639 S. Busse Rd., PZ-39-03. Richard Rogers seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotten, Donnelly, Floros, Rogers and Juracek NAYS: None Motion was approved 5-0. At 10:30 p.m, Richard Rogers made motion to adjourn, seconded by Leo Floros. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Michael Jacobs, AICP Deputy Director Community Development Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner H:~PLAN~lanning&Zoning COMM~&Z2003LMinutes~PZ-39-03 1601-39SBusseRd 10-23 mtg.doc