Planning and Zoning Commission

Village of Homewood Planning and Zoning Commission Thursday, October 13, 2022 7:00 p.m. Village Hall Board Room 2020 Chestnut Road Homewood, IL 60430 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Sierzega called the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission to order at 7:01 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members attended: Alfonso, Bransky, Cap, Johnson, O’Brien, Castaneda, and Chairman Sierzega; Present from the Village were Economic and Community Development Director Angela Mesaros, Village Planner Valerie Berstene, and Building Department Secretary Darlene Leonard. There were four people in the audience. The public was able to listen and watch the meeting via zoom webinar. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chairman Sierzega asked if there were any corrections or changes to the minutes of September 8, 2022. Member Cap stated on page 2 it appears that a few sentences of his comments were omitted from the minutes regarding the consideration of the special use permit for the tattoo parlor in Cherry Creek center and should be added before his comments. They are, a zoning ordinance represents the values of the community and what we hold precious. Zoning is based upon the idea of separating incompatible uses. For example, uses that potentially release dangerous or noxious emissions or noise, such as a factory, out to be separated from single family homes. Or a bar ought to be separated from homes, churches, and schools. In this case, the protected use, the church, has no objection to this prospective use; so why should we object? Member O’Brien stated on page 3 in the second and fourth paragraph it should be “borne”. Also, on page 4 in the fifth paragraph “including” should be “included” and the last sentence should state “it can be taken out”. Member Castaneda stated on page 3 in the first paragraph “dry tattooing” should be “microblading” and in the third paragraph “microblading” should be “dry tattooing”. A motion was made by Member O’Brien to approve the minutes of September 8, 2022, as amended; seconded by Member Cap. AYES: Members Alfonso, Bransky, Cap, Castaneda, Johnson, O’Brien, and Chairman Sierzega NAYS: None ABSTENTIONS: NONE ABSENT: None Case No. 22-33: Special Use Permit for a Salon/Spa 18664 Dixie Highway: 1 Chairman Sierzega introduced the case and swore in the petitioner’s representative, Debbie Tarasiewicz. Ms. Tarasiewicz, a resident of 6119 103rd in Chicago Ridge, stated the petitioner Niya Thompson is out of town and unable to attend via zoom. Chairman Sierzega asked Ms. Tarasiewicz if she would be working with Ms. Thompson. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated Ms. Thompson has an extensive background in healthcare and salons and is in a position to help people. This salon is different, because it provides treatment plans for people with medical conditions. They set up treatment plans for each person in a private setting that is specialized for each individual. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated the tools with either be disposable or sterilized in an autoclave process. Member Alfonso stated she can see how it would be a useful service and asked if insurance would be accepted. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated insurance is not accepted, but the cost is affordable and for the elderly, services would be offered at their house. Member Alfonso asked how many employees there would be and what the hours of operation are. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated the maximum number of employees would be 4 and the hours would be Monday –Friday 8 AM to 8 PM, Saturday 8 AM to 8 PM, and Sunday 8 AM to 6 PM. There would be time between each appointment to allow for cleanup and it would be by appointment only. Member Alfonso asked if there would be hand treatments. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated no, only feet. Member Alfonso asked if a referral would be needed. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated no. Member Bransky asked why the applicant was not present. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated she is at a business conference in Utah and asked her to attend in her stead. Member Bransky asked if 100% of the clientele would get pedicures. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated yes. Member Cap asked if the petitioner had a business elsewhere. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated business is currently mobile and Ms. Thompson is looking for a physical location. Member Cap asked if this business has a lot of competition. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated no. Many places, and doctors refer their patients to a salon. Member Cap stated the location is a former sewing shop and there are no steps, and asked if there will be access through the back door as the parking in front is on the street only. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated she believes so. Member Cap asked if all the employees would park in the rear. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated yes. Member Cap asked how long each session would last. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated it would depend on the treatment, but no more than one hour. Member Cap asked how many clients would be in at a time because of the limited availability of parking spaces in front along the street. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated there would be 6-8 appointments per day and not all employees would be in every day. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated the parking was considered when the space was chosen. 2 Member Cap stated some of the locations in the building are vacant, so parking is okay now, but most parking is located in the front and that could be in competition with other users of the strip mall if there is no access to the parking in the rear. Member O’Brien stated there are three stations proposed and none of them will be in use concurrently. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated each station is for a different, specific service. Member Bransky stated there would be one person in the salon at a time. Chairman Sierzega stated there are three chairs, but they would not be filled at the same time. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated that is correct. Member O’Brien asked how the business would be categorized as the materials identify it as a salon or spa, but it is really medically oriented. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated it is a wellness spa because licensing is required and it is more like healthcare than a nail salon and the employees would be wearing scrubs. Member O’Brien asked if they would be doing regular pedicures also. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated no, the solutions and sprays that they will use are different from a regular pedicure. Member O’Brien stated a 40-hour internship with a physician is needed and is certified, and asked who certifies them and which state. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated she is not sure. Ms. Thompson is enrolled in a nail academy that has its headquarters in Florida. Member O’Brien asked staff if they were aware before the meeting that a substitute would be attending. Village Planner Berstene stated yes. Member O’Brien stated, regarding the parking, the drawing on page 12 is incomplete as it only lists 5 of the 7 businesses. It should be updated, but this should not make a difference because there is a large lot in the rear. Village Planner Berstene stated it is included, but it is not the same parcel. Staff Liaison Mesaros stated it is a shared lot. Member Johnson stated that the application is straightforward and there is no parking problem. It is B-3 in the updated zoning. Member Johnson stated he has no issue with it and it is a needed business. As long as it has the licensing required by the State or the County he has no issue. Member Castaneda asked if Ms. Thompson has her certification or if she is still obtaining it. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated she is still in the internship, but is almost complete. The internship is the last step in the program. Member Castaneda asked the price range of the treatments. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated it would depend on the severity and the treatments, but it starts at $40 and goes up. Chairman Sierzega stated they cannot open until she finishes. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated that is correct, but she is almost done. Chairman Sierzega asked where she is located since she is working with a physician. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated she did not know. There is a doctor in Georgia the school works with if one cannot be found locally, but Ms. Thompson is working with a doctor in their office in Illinois. 3 Chairman Sierzega stated the doctor does not come to the spa. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated no. Chairman Sierzega asked if Ms. Thompson needs a regular nail tech license also. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated Ms. Thompson has had one for years. Member Bransky stated, to staff, on page 12 the parking requirements; 3 chairs is the metric, but it is just stations, and asked why it is not calculated as one per customer at a time. Village Planner Berstene stated because the code is written as 3 spaces per chair, not per client. Chairman Sierzega asked if it is going to be one person at a time. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated yes. Chairman Sierzega asked if they would have to go to each chair. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated no, it would depend on what treatments they needed. Member Bransky stated to staff, that the total provided has an extra T in it. Member O’Brien asked if it is provided in a doctor’s office would it be covered by insurance. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated service is not provided in a doctor’s office. Member O’Brien asked not even as adjunct or during an internship in the doctor’s office. Ms. Tarasiewicz stated no and insurance does not cover it as they consider it cosmetic. Member O’Brien stated the Village should receive the certificate when it’s obtained. Village Planner Berstene stated yes, we can do that. Chairman Sierzega stated they can make the opening contingent on getting the certification. Member Bransky stated the Findings of Fact for the motion does not address the difference between salon/spa and medical purposes. Staff Liaison Mesaros stated yes, it should be in there. Village Planner Berstene stated it could be subjected to coming back in again for review. Staff Liaison Mesaros stated it could be in the statement, but special use is for the use/type. But, if the applicant wants to open a different one, they would have to come in for a new one. Member Johnson stated it is a special kid of spa and it should be prohibited if it is non-medical. Staff Liaison Mesaros stated it would be tough to do that because it is all within the same category of special use. Member O’Brien stated he is against it being a permitted use under the new code/ordinances. Village Planner Berstene stated we can always refer to the meeting minutes in the ordinance if there are questions in the future. Member Johnson stated that we should not add any limiting language. Member Bransky stated he thought it should be added because it was not in there. 4 A motion was made by Member Alfonso to approve Case Number 22-33 to grant a Special Use Permit for a Salon/Spa Establishment in the B-2 Community Business District for NuSole Wellness Spa LLC at 18664 Dixie Highway subject to the business owner receiving certification and incorporating the Findings of Fact into the record and adding #5 The proposed use is a medical spa; seconded by Member O’Brien. AYES: Members Alfonso, Bransky, Cap, Castaneda, Johnson, O’Brien, and Chairman Sierzega. NAYS: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: None OLD BUSINESS: Zoning Ordinance Update Discussion Chairman Sierzega set a deadline of 9 pm to finish. A discussion ensued about the proposed revisions to the zoning ordinance related to design standards. ADJOURNMENT: Chairman Sierzega asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting. Member O’Brien moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:01 p.m., seconded by Member Cap. AYES: Members Alfonso, Bransky, Cap, Johnson, O’Brien, Castaneda, and Chairman Sierzega. NAYS: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: None Respectfully submitted, Angela M. Mesaros Staff Liaison 5