Plat and Subdivision Committee

Village of Arlington Heights Plat and Subdivision Committee Community Room, 3rd Floor Arlington Heights Village Hall 33 S. Arlington Heights Road Arlington Heights, IL 60005 April 26, 2017 6:45 PM I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Industrial Development - 3/22/17 IV. REPORTS V. OLD BUSINESS VI. NEW BUSINESS A. CA Ventures - Sigwalt St. Apartments - T1592 Rezoning From R-3 to R-7, Preliminary PUD, Preliminary Plat of Resubdivison, Variations VII. OTHER BUSINESS VIII.ADJOURNMENT Persons with disabilities requiring auxiliary aids or services, such as an American Sign Language interpreter or written materials in accessible formats, should contact David Robb, Disability Services Coordinator, at 33 S. Arlington Heights Road, Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005, (847)368-5793 (Voice), (847)368-5980 (Fax) or drobb@vah.com.  Item: Industrial Development - 3/22/17 Department: Planning & Community Development ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Industrial Development - 3/22/17 Minutes  703-723 W ALGONQUIN INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT - TEMP FILE 1581 REPORT OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLAT & SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE OF THE VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS PLAN COMMISSION HELD AT VILLAGE HALL ON: March 22, 2017 Project Title: 703-723 W Algonquin Industrial Development Address: 703-723 W. Algonquin Rd. Petitioner: Mike Wauterlek Hamilton Partners Real Estate 300 Park Blvd. – Suite 201 Itasca, IL 60143 Requested Action: 1. Preliminary Planned Unit Development. 2. Plat of Subdivision to Consolidate the Lots. Variations Required:  None Identified at this Time. Attendees: Mike Wauterlek, Petitioner Bruce Green, Plan Commissioner Lynn Jensen, Plan Commissioner Jay Cherwin, Plan Commissioner Sam Hubbard, Development Planner Project Summary: The subject property is a composed of multiple lots of record comprising a total of 15.4 acres in area. The site is occupied by two light industrial/office building, one on the northern half of the site and one on the southern half of the site. There are two driveway entrances along Meijer Drive and one full access driveway along W. Algonquin Rd. The intersection of Meijer Drive and W. Algonquin Road is a full access lighted intersection. On the southern end, the subject property abuts the I-90 Toll Road. The applicant has proposed to purchase the site and redevelop the subject property in two phases. Phase I would involve the demolition of the north building and the redevelopment of an approximately 131,750 square foot distribution facility with 28 loading spaces and 187 parking spaces. Phase II would involve the demolition of the southern building and a 167,250 square foot addition to the Phase I building, for a total of 299,000 square feet for distribution/warehousing. The total amount of on-site parking provided would increase to 363 parking spaces. Meeting Discussion: Mr. Wauterlek introduced himself and provided a description of who Hamilton Partners is, and their interest in Arlington Heights. He mentioned the Hamilton Partners has not done a development yet in Arlington Heights. He explained that the subject property is two separate parcels of land and owned by separate individuals. One of the properties has multiple tenants, and the other property has a vacant building. Hamilton Partners was interested in developing a 300,000 square foot light distribution facility on the two properties. The development would occur in two phases, the first phase being a 131,000 square foot building on the property with the vacant building, then eventually expanding that building onto the second property in the future to achieve the full 300,000 square feet. Commissioner Green asked if the southern building would be torn down during phase I or phase II. J:\PLAT & SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE\2017\T1581 - 703-723 W Algonquin Industrial Redevelopment\Plat and Sub Minutes.docx  703-723 W ALGONQUIN INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT - TEMP FILE 1581 Mr. Wauterlek responded that the southern building would not be torn down until phase II was ready to proceed. Commissioner Jensen asked if the southern building would only come down when the first building was to be expanded? Mr. Wauterlek confirmed that the south building would not come down until they were ready to expand the first building. He explained that one of the tenants within the southern building had a lease that was set to expire at the end of the year. It was the developer’s intention to renew their lease so that it would be “co-terminus” with the lease for the State of Illinois facility and another tenant, so all lease obligations would expire around 2020. At that point, the developer would analyze if the time was right to move forward with phase II. He said if all parties within the southern building were willing to negotiate out of their lease, Hamilton Partners would consider doing the entire development up front, but if this is not possible, being able to start phase I immediately meant that they were in a good position regardless. Mr. Hubbard explained that the subject property was located within the M-2 Zoning Districts and that light distribution uses were permitted uses within the M-2 Zoning District. The Zoning Code requires that any development within the M- 2 District and was located on a property that was greater than 4 acres in size, must obtain PUD approval, and so the subject property, at over 15 acres, was required to develop as a PUD. The Comprehensive Plan classifies the subject property as appropriate for “Research, Development, Manufacturing, and Warehousing”, and so the proposed PUD was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Hubbard said that the fact the property was composed of at least two lots of record, when the building was extended over the lot lines, it would create a non-conforming situation. Therefore, consolidation of the lots would be required during the PUD process and phase I approval. Approval of both phase I and phase II could occur simultaneously. As part of the PUD process, a market analysis would be required, and the applicant had already done some time of market study to determine that there was a demand for light-distribution facilities of this size in this location. Mr. Hubbard mentioned that the subject property shared a private drive aisle with the property to the west, and staff did not know if a formal reciprocal easement agreement or cross access easement was established for this shared drive aisle. If not, then this must be recorded during the PUD process. It would be important for the applicant to take this into consideration during the design of the site, and information would be required on the functionality of this shared access this during the Plan Commission process Mr. Hubbard stated that there may be an opportunity for more greenspace in the rear of the development, and all MWRD stormwater and local stormwater requirements must be met. He encouraged additional landscaping at the rear of the site, not only to buffer the building from the tollway, but also to provide an attractive appearance from this heavily travelled corridor. Mr. Wauterlek said that they often put a lot of money into attractive design of the building exterior, but then also extensively landscape the site, which landscaping sometimes blocks the architecture of the building. Mr. Hubbard mentioned that landscaping also had air quality and environmental benefits. He explained that the code requires a traffic and parking study for the property, and the Village would want to make sure that the existing road network is capable of handling the increase in truck traffic that would be generated by this development. He mentioned that Algonquin Rd. was under IDOT jurisdiction, so the applicant could be required to obtain certain IDOT reviews and/or approvals. Relative to parking requirements, it would be based off the size of the individual build-outs, the number of employees, and the uses of each future tenant. The number of parking spaces proposed complies with code requirements, however, the actual size and use of each future tenant may mean that there are future parking restrictions or users/tenants. He summarized that staff was supportive of this concept on a preliminary basis. Commissioner Jensen asked if Weber Packing Solutions was the tenant to the west. J:\PLAT & SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE\2017\T1581 - 703-723 W Algonquin Industrial Redevelopment\Plat and Sub Minutes.docx  703-723 W ALGONQUIN INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT - TEMP FILE 1581 Mr. Hubbard confirmed that it was. Commissioner Jensen asked where truck traffic would go during phase I. Mr. Wauterlek replied that trucks would use Mejier Drive, and then access the shared drive aisle between Weber and the subject property. He stated that this is how access to the “phase I” property is currently configured. Commissioner Jensen asked what volume or measure of truck traffic would be increased by the proposed development. Mr. Wauterlek replied he did not have a formal traffic analysis, but that generally truck traffic would be increasing. If he were to move to the Plan Commission, he could hire somebody to study traffic. Commissioner Jensen said the traffic study should assess the ability of the shared drive, Meijer Drive, and the intersection of Algonquin Road and Meijer Drive, to determine their ability to accommodate the traffic that could be generated by this development. He asked if access to the site could come from Algonquin Road. Mr. Wauterlek replied that Algonquin Road abutted the development, and access was from Meijer Drive. Commissioner Jensen asked about landscape requirements. Mr. Hubbard replied that landscaping was required along the southern property line as all parking lots had to be screened from a public Right-of-Way, regardless of if that ROW was a local street, major arterial, or expressway. Commissioner Cherwin asked about the number of loading bays. Mr. Wauterlek replied that it would be built to suit, although they had estimated that there would be around 74 loading bays. Commissioner Cherwin asked about the features of the building. Mr. Wauterlek responded that access to both I-90 and I-53 would be attractive to any light distribution/logistics company. Given exposure off of I-90 and Algonquin Road, this site could also be viable for a distribution company or wholesaler with a showroom. Also, the property is in close proximity to O’Hare Airport, so logistics companies could also take advantage of that location. He said that ceiling heights would be 32’ tall, whereas the average building heights in the area were probably 18’ to 24’. The lighting and heat exchange units would be energy efficient. Parking for the building would be higher per floor area than nearby buildings. Finally, the turning radius for the trucks would be 131’, which could accommodate larger over-the-road hauling vehicles. Commissioner Cherwin he said that landscaping along the rear of the building would be nice, but that he was more concerned with landscaping in the front of the building to provide screening along Algonquin Road. Commissioner Jensen asked if the property had been purchased yet. Mr. Wauterlek responded that the property was not yet owned by them. Commissioner Green he said that he thought it was a good use for the property and he supported a two phased development. He said that he was not too concerned with landscaping on the rear of the property by the expressway as he believed that the expressway was elevated in this location and landscaping would not be effective due to the grade. Commissioner Jensen said he was a little concerned about the number of trucks and the conditions of the roads. J:\PLAT & SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE\2017\T1581 - 703-723 W Algonquin Industrial Redevelopment\Plat and Sub Minutes.docx  703-723 W ALGONQUIN INDUSTRIAL REDEVELOPMENT - TEMP FILE 1581 Mr. Hubbard stated that he believed Meijer Drive was a local street under Arlington Heights jurisdiction. Commissioner Jensen asked the other commissioners if they were concerned about conditions of the roads to support such heavy truck traffic. Commissioner Green responded that he believe they were built to accommodate heavy truck traffic. Commissioner Cherwin said he suspected that the road was already successfully handled truck traffic from Meijer. Commissioner Green encouraged the applicant to move forward. RECOMMENDATION The Plat & Subdivision Committee provided their feedback to the petitioner and advised petitioner to proceed forward as they saw fit. Bruce Green, Chair PLAT & SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE Sam Hubbard, Recorder J:\PLAT & SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE\2017\T1581 - 703-723 W Algonquin Industrial Redevelopment\Plat and Sub Minutes.docx Item: CA Ventures - Sigwalt St. Apartments - T1592 Department: Planning & Community Development Requested Action 1. A rezoning from R-3 One Family to R-7 Multiple Family. 2. A preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow the construction of a five story, 86 unit apartment development. 3. Plat of Resubdivision to consolidate six lots into one lot. Variations Required 1. Chapter 28, Section 5.1-7.4 Minimum Lot Size. 2. Chapter 28, Section 5.1-7.6 Required Minimum Yards (Interior Side/North). 3. Chapter 28, Section 5.1-7.6 Required Minimum Yards (Front / Highland). 4. Chapter 28, Section 5.1-7.6 Required Minimum Yards (Front / Chestnut). 5. Chapter 28, Section 5.1-7.7 Maximum Building Lot Coverage. 6. Chapter 28, Section 5.1-7.13 Maximum Floor Area Ratio. Recommendation The Staff Development Committee is generally supportive of the development but additional information shall be provided as part of the formal review including, but not limited to, the following: 1. Prior to a public hearing of the Plan Commission, a neighborhood meeting shall be held to obtain early input from nearby property owners. 2. Provide a written justification for each variation based on the following hardship criteria outlined in the Zoning Ordinance: • The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations in that zone. • The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances. • The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 3. Engineering plans, details and storm water detention calculations shall be required as part of the formal review process. 4. A market assessment shall be required to demonstrate a need for this type and size development at this location. 5. The developer shall pay a fee of $25,000 per required affordable unit (total $325,000) per the Village’s Affordable Multi-Family Housing Policy 6. Design Commission review shall be required prior to a formal hearing of the Plan Commission. 7. A detailed traffic and parking study from a Certified Traffic engineer that assesses access (location, design, and Level of Service), on-site circulation, trip generation and distribution, parking, and impacts to public streets shall be required. 8. The developer shall purchase parking permits as determined during the review process from the Village annually at the monthly rate for 24 hour residential permits. 9. The developer shall pay to the Village a one time fee per parking space in the Vail garage for any required spaces in an amount to be determined during the review process. 10. Existing overhead utilities running through the middle of the site shall be abandoned or relocated if in use, and if feasible buried. 11. School, Park, and Library contributions shall be required per Village Code prior to the issuance of a building permit. 12. These are just preliminary comments only and should not be relied upon as identification of the only major issues. The Staff Development Committee reserves the right to change its position on issues upon submittal of a formal application and detailed review. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Staff Report Board or Commission Report Architectural Rendering Exhibits Location Map Exhibits Context Site Plan Exhibits Site Plan Exhibits Landscape Plan Exhibits Elevations Exhibits Building Section Exhibits Floor Plans Exhibits  VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS Temp File Number: T1592 Project Title: CA VenturesSigwalt St Apartments Address: 300 Block W. Sigwalt St To: Plat and Subdivision Committee Prepared By: Bill Enright Meeting Date: April 26, 2017 Date prepared: April 20, 2017 Petitioner: Mark Hopkins HKM Architects Subject Address: 43 S. Vail Avenue Property Arlington Heights, Il 60005 Existing Zoning: R‐3 One Family Surrounding Uses Direction Existing Zoning Existing Use Comprehensive Plan North R‐3 Vacant Mixed Use South R‐3 and R‐4 Single Family Single Family Attached; High Density Multi Family East B‐5 AT&T Offices/Parking Mixed Use West R‐3 Single Family Single Family Attached Requested Action: 1. A rezoning from R‐3 One Family to R‐7 Multiple Family 2. A preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow the construction of a five story, 86 unit apartment development. 3. Plat of Resubdivision to consolidate six lots into one lot. Variations Required: 1. Chapter 28, Section 5.1‐7.4 Minimum Lot Size 2. Chapter 28, Section 5.1‐7.6 Required Minimum Yards (Interior Side/North) 3. Chapter 28, Section 5.1‐7.6 Required Minimum Yards (Front / Highland) 4. Chapter 28, Section 5.1‐7.6 Required Minimum Yards (Front / Chestnut) 5. Chapter 28, Section 5.1‐7.7 Maximum Building Lot Coverage 6. Chapter 28, Section 5.1‐7.13 Maximum Floor Area Ratio Page 1 of 7 Project Background: The subject property is located along Sigwalt Street between Highland Avenue and Chestnut Avenue, and is currently vacant. The developer proposes to rezone the property to R‐7 multiple family, Planned Unit Development, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan which designates the site as High Density Multi Family. One of the Board’s 2017 Strategic Priorities is to facilitate development of this block (block 425). Block 425 has sat vacant and underdeveloped for years as is an important part of the downtown. The proposal includes 86 rental apartments in a well designed, five floor building. 98 parking spaces will be included in the building with one level underground and additional parking on levels one and two. Additional parking can be provided in the Vail Avenue municipal garage per Chapter 28 Section 11.3‐2. Variations requested include density, floor area ratio, building lot coverage, as well as setbacks along the east, west and north property lines. The Sigwalt setback meets code. The height of the building is approximately 60 feet and will need to be verified by providing the average grade at the front of the building. The developer will be required to dedicate 8 feet of property along both Highland and Chestnut for public right of way, which increases the variations due to the loss of land privately held. The current site is 42,000 square feet reducing to 39,600 square feet after dedication. In response to the Village’s Affordable Housing Policy, the developer is proposing to contribute $25,000 per required affordable unit towards the Village’s affordable housing trust. This equates to $325,000 total. This will be a significant contribution to the trust fund, which was established to facilitate affordable housing in the Village. Early Review On April 17, 2017, the petitioner appeared before the Village Board for Early Review. Minutes from this meeting are not yet available. The discussion focused on parking and whether or not the Vail garage can accommodate up to an additional 31 spaces for this development in order to meet code. A recent study commissioned by the developer indicates a need of 1.1 to 1.25 spaces per unit given trends in the rental apartment market and given that this site is within walking distance of the train station in a transit oriented development downtown. The Board asked to see data on parking demand for other similar developments including downtown Arlington Heights. Zoning and Comprehensive Plan To proceed forward, the Plan Commission must review and the Village Board must approve the following zoning actions. First, rezoning from R‐3 One Family to R‐7 Multi Family. Second is approval of a Planned Unit Development and lastly a Plat of Subdivision to consolidate the six lots into one. The proposal is consistent with the Village’s Comprehensive Plan which designates this site as High Density Multi Family. In addition, the Village adopted a new Downtown Master Plan in 2007 which calls for the southern portion of block 425 to develop in the 4 to 6 floor range, therefore this proposal is consistent with the Master Plan. In addition, the remaining northern portion of the block is designated as Mixed Use, allowing for B‐5 Downtown zoning, and is large enough to allow for flexibility with the site plan and design, complimenting this development. Several variations from the zoning code have also been identified and will be discussed throughout this report. For each variation, the petitioner must provide a written justification for each variation based on the following hardship criteria: Page 2 of 7  The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if per mitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations in that zone.  The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances.  The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Site Plan Staff has performed a preliminary review of the conceptual site plan provided by the petitioner. The proposed development will require several variations described below. Density The developer is seeking a variation to density. The site can currently allow 59 units. After 8 feet is dedicated on both Highland and Chestnut for additional Village right of way, the allowed density decreases to 55 units based on the proposed bedroom mix of one and two bedroom units. The developer is seeking 86 units. The following variation is required: Variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1‐7.4 Minimum Lot Size, to permit 86 dwelling units on 39,600 square feet of land whereas 63,600 square feet is required. Data shall be provided to support the variation for density, including data on housing trends such as unit sizes and persons per unit. Setbacks The proposed development requires variations to the east and west yards and the interior side yard setback (north). The exterior side yard along Sigwalt Street meets code. Table A attached to this report lists the code standards. The existing property is 280 feet east to west, and 150 feet north to south. After the required land dedication for additional right of way, the site length decreases to 264 feet thus increasing the setback variations along Highland and Chestnut. As a result, the following setback variations have been identified:  Variations from Chapter 28, Section 5.1‐7.6 Required Minimum Yards: Interior Side Yard (north): 35 feet required, 18.4 feet proposed Front Yard (Highland): 45 feet required, 8.5 feet proposed Front Yard (Chestnut): 45 feet required, 13.7 feet proposed As with the other variations that have been identified in this report, the Petitioner will need to provide a written justification prior to Staff rendering a final recommendation. It should be noted that there are no plans to widen the physical streets along Highland or Chestnut, therefore the 8 feet of land dedicated will remain as green space. The proposed setback from the Chestnut Avenue east curb line to the building is 33.7 feet. The proposed setback from the Highland Avenue west curb line to the building is 22.5 feet. The proposed setbacks are consistent with other R‐7 developments. Staff has recommended to the developer that the Chestnut setback be increased to 17 feet and the north setback increased to 20 feet. Landscape & Tree Preservation The petitioner proposes a well designed landscape plan around all four sides of the property. There are no existing trees on site. Additional landscaping should be included on the north side of the building. Page 3 of 7 Storm Water Detention/ Utilities The developer is required to provide storm water detention. One concept for providing detention for a portion of storm water is by upsizing new storm water pipes that the Village is exploring to address storm water concerns in the neighborhood. If feasible the developer would pay for the cost to upsize these pipes. The timing of Village improvements is still being evaluated, which may be an issue with this concept. MWRD will require a certain level of storm water infiltration, which can likely be accommodated in the perimeter landscaped areas. In addition, there are existing utility poles running north to south in the middle of the development site which will need to be abandoned, or relocated if in use. Building Design Commission review and approval shall be required prior to a formal hearing of the Plan Commission. The developer is proposing a very nice contemporary design for the building which includes first floor dwelling units with patios facing the street. This will help to activate the street levels rather than a blank wall. The developer shall provide exact height measurements as defined in the zoning code in order to determine the height of the building. As depicted in the architectural elevations, the height is 58 feet to the roof deck line, which meets the R‐7 height limit of 60 feet. The building design varies the façade to create interest and the upper levels along Sigwalt Street are setback in a U‐ shaped court yard/deck on level two. This helps reduce massing for the longer portion of the building fronting Sigwalt Street. Two variations have been identified related to the building footprint and floor area as follows: Variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1‐7.7 Maximum Building Lot Coverage: 45% allowed, 67% proposed. Variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1‐7.13 Maximum Floor Area Ratio: 200% allowed, 244% proposed. Traffic and Parking Chapter 28, Section 6.12, Traffic Engineering Approval, requires that planned unit developments provide a traffic and parking study from a certified traffic engineer. The study needs to assess access (location, design, and Level of Service), on‐site circulation, trip generation and distribution, parking, and impacts to public streets. The developer is proposing 98 on site parking spaces for 1.14 per unit, all of which are within the building with one level of underground parking and parking on levels 1 and 2 for a portion of the floor plates. The entrance to the private parking garage is off Highland Avenue, therefore the Chestnut Avenue frontage will not include any vehicular access. Code requires 1.5 spaces per unit thus 129 spaces, therefore an additional 31 spaces may be required in the Vail garage. A recent study commissioned by the developer indicates that the true demand based on other similar transit oriented developments, is in the range of 1.1 to 1.25 spaces per unit. This equates to 95 to 108 parking spaces. Staff will obtain actual demand for downtown Arlington Heights rental developments to help analyze parking, in addition to reviewing the developers information. Also, One Arlington at Euclid and Rohlwing (former Sheraton Hotel), includes 214 rental units and the actual demand is 1.2 spaces per unit. Page 4 of 7 Recent parking counts in the Vail municipal garage indicate that if needed, 31 additional spaces can be accommodated for the proposed development. As the garage is adjacent to the development, code allows for parking in the garage, therefore no variation is required. The Village would enter into an agreement with the developer to require that 31 permits (or some other number once determined) are purchased from the Village annually. In addition, the Village required the developer of Metro Lofts to pay a one time up front fee to the Village for each parking space in the Vail garage that was required for that development. This fee partially compensated the Village for costs to expand the Vail Avenue garage. The value of each space at that time (based on cost to construct), was $3,500 per space. Staff will work with the developer on establishing a similar fee taking into consideration inflation and thus the value of each space. This development requires one 10’ x 35’ loading zone as the overall square footage of the development is greater than 10,000 square feet. Staff will work with the developer on this requirement. One viable option is to convert two of the existing five parking spaces on the west side of Highland Avenue to a loading zone similar to the loading zone in front of Dunton Tower. Two to three additional spaces will be lost for the development’s garage driveway onto Highland Ave. RECOMMENDATION The Staff Development Committee is generally supportive of the development but additional information shall be provided as part of the formal review including, but not limited to, the following: 1. Prior to a public hearing of the Plan Commission, a neighborhood meeting shall be held to obtain early input from nearby property owners. 2. Provide a written justification for each variation based on the following hardship criteria outlined in the Zoning Ordinance:  The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if per mitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations in that zone.  The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances.  The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 3. Engineering plans, details and storm water detention calculations shall be required as part of the formal review process. 4. A market assessment shall be required to demonstrate a need for this type and size development at this location. 5. The developer shall pay a fee of $25,000 per required affordable unit (total $325,000) per the Village’s Affordable Multi‐Family Housing Policy 6. Design Commission review shall be required prior to a formal hearing of the Plan Commission. 7. A detailed traffic and parking study from a Certified Traffic engineer that assesses access (location, design, and Level of Service), on‐site circulation, trip generation and distribution, parking, and impacts to public streets shall be required. 8. The developer shall purchase parking permits as determined during the review process from the Village annually at the monthly rate for 24 hour residential permits. 9. The developer shall pay to the Village a one time fee per parking space in the Vail garage for any required spaces in an amount to be determined during the review process. 10. Existing overhead utilities running through the middle of the site shall be abandoned or relocated if in use, and if feasible buried. 11. School, Park, and Library contributions shall be required per Village Code prior to the issuance of a building permit. Page 5 of 7 12. These are just preliminary comments only and should not be relied upon as identification of the only major issues. The Staff Development Committee reserves the right to change its position on issues upon submittal of a formal application and detailed review. ________________________________________ April 20, 2017 Bill Enright, Deputy Director of Planning and Community Development Cc: Randy Recklaus, Village Manager All Department Heads Temp File 1592 Page 6 of 7 Table A ‐ Zoning Analysis Setbacks Code Staff Staff CA Ventures Recommendation Recommendation Proposal after Dedication of 8 feet Sigwalt 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 19.9 feet North side 35 feet 20 feet 20 feet 18.4 to 19.9 feet Highland 45 feet 20 feet 12 feet 8.5 to 10.7 feet Chestnut 45 feet 20 feet 12 feet 13.7 to 15.6 feet Height 60 feet 60 feet na 59 feet to be verified by average grade at front Parking 1.5 per unit 1.5 per unit na 1.14 129 total 129 total 98 on site Building Lot 45% 67% na 64% Coverage pre dedication 67% after dedication Floor Area 200% 244% na 230% Ratio prededication 244% after dedication Page 7 of 7  Metropolis Place Metropolis Performing Condominiums Arts Centre & Ballroom Vail Avenue Parking Garage Dunton Tower Apartments Project Site AT & T Building 115 W. Sigwalt Condominiums 100 S. Vail Condominiums North 0 40' 80' 160' Sigwalt Apartments Location Map 43 South Vail Avenue Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017  North 0 40' 80' 160' Sigwalt Apartments Context Site Plan 43 South Vail Avenue Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017 Sigwalt Apartments Site Plan 43 South Vail Avenue Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017  CONDENSER UNITS WITH RTU WITH EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT SCREENS TO SCREENS TO MATCH MATCH BUILDING BUILDING MATERIAL MATERIAL METAL PANELS CAST STONE UTILITY SIZE FACE BRICK QUARRIED STONE UTILITY SIZE FACE BRICK South Elevation 0 10' 20' 40' 43 South Vail Avenue Sigwalt Apartments Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017  CONDENSER UNITS WITH RTU WITH EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT SCREENS TO SCREENS TO MATCH MATCH BUILDING BUILDING MATERIAL MATERIAL METAL PANELS CAST STONE UTILITY SIZE FACE BRICK UTILITY SIZE FACE BRICK North Elevation 0 10' 20' 40' 43 South Vail Avenue Sigwalt Apartments Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017  METAL PANELS CAST STONE UTILITY SIZE FACE BRICK UTILITY SIZE FACE BRICK East Elevation 0 10' 20' 40' 43 South Vail Avenue Sigwalt Apartments Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017  METAL PANELS CAST STONE UTILITY SIZE FACE BRICK UTILITY SIZE FACE BRICK West Elevation 0 10' 20' 40' 43 South Vail Avenue Sigwalt Apartments Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017  CONDENSER UNITS WITH RTU WITH EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT SCREENS TO SCREENS TO MATCH BUILDING MATCH BUILDING MATERIAL MATERIAL Building Section - North South 0 5' 10' 20' 43 South Vail Avenue Sigwalt Apartments Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017  Ramp Up Elev Elev Water/ HW bikes Maint bikes Elec Basement Plan 43 South Vail Avenue Sigwalt Apartments Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017  Ramp Up Ramp Down Unit Unit bikes Trash Room Unit elec Toilet elec Work Elev Elev parcel Ofc Coffee Unit Unit Unit Mail Unit Unit Unit Lobby Conf Lounge First Floor Plan 43 South Vail Avenue Sigwalt Apartments Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017  Ramp Down Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit elec elec Elev Elev Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Second Floor Plan 43 South Vail Avenue Sigwalt Apartments Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017  Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit elec elec Unit Community Room Fitness Room Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Elev Elev Unit Unit Roof Deck Unit Unit Third Floor Plan 43 South Vail Avenue Sigwalt Apartments Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017  Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit elec elec Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Elev Elev Unit Unit Unit Unit Fourth Floor Plan 43 South Vail Avenue Sigwalt Apartments Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017  Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit elec elec Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Elev Elev Unit Unit Unit Unit Fifth Floor Plan 43 South Vail Avenue Sigwalt Apartments Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005 Job No. 16031 © 2017 Arlington Heights, IL March 31, 2017