Planning and Zoning Board

Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL The Niles Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals was called to order at 7:02 P.M. All rose for the Pledge of Allegiance. Present: 6 Chairman Thomas Kanelos, Commissioners Ted Karabatsos, Susan DeBartolo, Angelo Troiani, Robert Schulter, Morgan Dubiel Excused: 1 Barbara Nakanishi Also present was Director of Community Development Charles Ostman, Senior Planner Bruce Sylvester and Village Attorney Joseph Annunzio. APPROV AL OF MINUTES Chairman Kanelos asked if there were any additions, clarifications or corrections to the minutes of August 3, 2015. There were none. Commissioner DeBartolo moved to approve the minutes of August 3, 2015. Seconded by Commissioner Schulter, on roll call the vote was: AYES: 6 DeBartolo, Troiani, Schulter, Dubiel, Karabatsos, Kanelos NAYS: 0 EXCUSED: 1 Nakanishi There being six (6) affirmative votes the motion carried. Chairman Kanelos mentioned that the Public Hearing for the New Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance which had been scheduled for September 28, 2015 is now postponed until further notice. NEW BUSINESS 15-ZP-28 Reques ting approval of a Special Use p ermit as provided in Village Ordinances Appendix B Section VIII(B)(3)(x) to allow a pool hall at 7946 Waukegan Avenue. 15-ZP-29 Requesting approval of a Variation from the requirements of Village Ordinance Appendix B Section IV(H)(2) to allow a new detached garage to be constructed at 8129 North Odell Avenue that would be within 5.02 feet of the existing principal structure on the Page 1 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ lot where the zoning ordinance requires a minimum separation of 10 feet. 15-ZP-30 Requesting approval of a Special Use permit as provided in Village Ordinances Appendix B Sections VIII(B)(3)(u) and VIII(B)(3)(a) to allow Big Blue Swim School to open and operate a swim school at 7428 Waukegan Avenue. 15-ZP-31 Reques ting approval of a Special Use p ermit as provided in Village Ordinances Appendix B Section VIII(B)(3)(d) to allow Detail-All, LLC to open and o perate an automobile cleaning and detailing business at 8851 Milwaukee Avenue. 15-ZP-32 Reques ting approval of a Special Use p ermit as provided in Village Ordinances Appendix B Section VIII(B)(3)(y) to allow Penske Trucks to be stored and rented from the parking lot of the Home Depot store located at 8650 Dempster Street. 15-ZP-33 Reques ting approval of a Special Use p ermit as provided in Village Ordinances Appendix B Section VIII(C)(3)(bb) to allow additional cell phone antenna and equipment to be located on the roof of the residential tower located at 9201 Maryland Street. 15-ZP-34 Reques ting approval of a Special Use p ermit to allow a color electronic message board display, exceed the maximum height from 20 ’ to 24’6” and to exceed the maximum allowable sign area from 666 square feet to 967.78 square feet at Jerry ’s Fruit Market at 7901 N. Milwaukee Avenue. Chairman Kanelos called for the first item on the agenda tonight. 15-ZP-28 Request ing approval for a Special Use p ermit as provided in Village Ordinances Appendix B Section VIII(B)(3 )(x) to allow a pool hall at 7946 Waukegan Avenue. Bruce Sylvester, Senior Planner, presented this case. The first item on the agenda is a request for a Special Use permit for a Pool Hall at 7946 Waukegan Road located in the strip center right across from where we are located here at the Village of Niles. Mr. Cho is a business owner who has owned pool halls before and is here tonight and is proposing to have six tables and a rest area in the rear of the building space. The area is primarily Page 2 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ commercial but is also a civic area and some residential in the vicinity. Staff has reviewed, discussed it and distributed all information to other department heads. Bruce showed and described the location of the building on the large screen. The Chief of Police, Dennis McEnerney, had two questions: The name of the business that Mr. Cho previously owned and operated in another community and the Chief of Police did do some research and found that there were no complaints or problems with that business. Liquor Licenses were another question – could it be issued to this type of business? Community Development staff spoke with Assistant Liquor Commissioner, Patrick Burn, and learned that there is no liquor license available for a billiard hall and so the business will not be able to serve alcohol for this type of business. Based on this information, Chief McEnerney said he does not have any concerns about the proposed business. Finding of Fact for the Special Use Permit is as follows:  Is the special use necessary for the public convenience at the proposed location? The proposed pool hall business will provide recreational services for the public and will therefore provide a public convenience.  Is the special use designed, located and proposed to be operated so that the public health, safety and welfare will be protected? Waukegan Road is an appropriate location for a pool hall business such as the one proposed.  Will the special use cause substantial injury to the value of other property in the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located? No. The proposed use will not have a negative impact on other property. A legal notice was provided to the newspaper as well as notices to all owners of property within 250 feet. Bruce Sylvester was then done with his presentation. Questions from Staff: Commissioner Schulter mentioned that if there are two persons per table the capacity of the pool hall would be twelve people requiring three parking spaces. Bruce agreed that it would require more than three parking spaces and after some discussion he then realized he made a mistake and forgot to put the zero next to the three and the total parking stalls was thirty not three. Our Village ordinance does not have a parking requirement for pool halls but because of the hours and on street availability there is a total of forty five stalls. Staffs opinion is that there is sufficient parking. The aerial of parking spots also comes up with forty five parking spots. Page 3 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Dubiel asked how many active pool halls are there in Niles right now? Bruce replied there are no pool halls in Niles right now. The documents were changed to two persons per table through the business and staff believe there are adequate parking for proposed pool hall. Commissioner Dubiel also asked if you go by numbers do they need a variance and Bruce said no. Bruce mentioned that he checked the hours for the other businesses in the strip mall where the pool hall is and he found that they all have daytime hours except for Jimmy Johns who is open till 9:00pm so there are no conflicts with the other businesses. After Chairman Kanelos swore in the owners, Mr. & Mrs. In Cho, he asked if there were any additional information about the pool hall they could share with us and Mrs. Cho said there are never any problems with the business, adults are in and out. The customers pay by the hour and the most they stay is one or two hours and there is never any trouble. Commissioner Schulter mentioned that the hours for the pool hall are as follows: 1:00pm to 12:00am Monday thru Friday 1:00pm to 2:00am Saturday 3:00pm to 10:00pm Sunday Commissioner asked the owners if their clients cannot smoke inside will they be going out to the back of the building to smoke and will there be any noise to the people living behind? The owners mentioned that at their previous business they smoked in the front of the store and they want to carry this on at this business. There was a concern about leaving the pool hall at 2:00am and if there would be too much noise. They said they will put a sign up inside saying that after 10:00pm to please use the front door when leaving. Commissioner DeBartolo asked about the rest area in the back of the pool hall and how many can sit at one time. The owners mentioned that they will have one table with four chairs and that should be sufficient. The question of what was served was also brought up and the owners said pop, pre-packaged ice cream and popsicles. Also, no children are allowed in the facility but children under 18 can be present if with an adult/parent. Chairman Kanelos asked everyone attending the meeting if there were any questions from the public or for the Staff and no one responded. Chairman said he will entertain a motion and then asked if there was a notification letter sent out to the surrounding area and Bruce mentioned that letters had gone out. Page 4 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner DeBartolo made a motion to approve a request for a Special Use Permit to allow a ‘Pool Hall’ at 7946 Waukegan Road as provided in Appendix B, Section VIII, (B)(3)(x). Seconded by Commissioner Schulter, on roll call the vote was: AYES: 6 Dubiel, Karabatsos, DeBartolo, Troiani, Schulter, Kanelos NAYS: 0 There being six (6) affirmative votes the motion carried. Chairman Kanelos stated this Board is a recommending Board to the Board of Trustees who can either confirm or negate this decision. It will be necessary for the petitioner to contact Mr. Ostman and ask to be placed on the Board of Trustees agenda. Chairman Kanelos called for the next item on the agenda. 15-ZP-29 Requesting approval of a 4 foot-11 and ¾ inch variation from zoning ordinance Appendix B Section IV(H)(2) to allow a detached garage that is 5 feet-1/4 inch away from the house where Village ordinances require 10 feet between a detached gar age and the principal structure at 8129 North Odell Avenue. Bruce Sylvester presented this case. The second item on the agenda tonight is a request for a variation from the requirements for the separation between accessary buildings and in this case a proposed detached garage and the principal structure on the property in this case is the home at 8129 North Odell Avenue. Included in the packet and a picture that Bruce put on the screen shows an existing small shed that the owner want to tear down and put a detached garage. The proposed detached garage would be only 5.02 feet away from the existing single-family house at this address. Village ordinances require 10-feet of separation between a detached garage and the primary structure. A variation of 4-feet 11 and ¾ inches from the required 10-foot set-back is required. Attached to this report is a survey and plans provided by the applicant. The applicant has provided his explanation for how he believes this application meets the requirements necessary to obtain a variation. The Village ordinance requires ten feet of separation and they are looking for a variation of 5 feet. In terms of review, other departments had no comments except the Engineering Department who reminded us that drainage will have to be reviewed so there are no drainage issues for the adjacent property owners. Page 5 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ In Compliance with the Village’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan, by granting the requested variation, an existing home can be improved on this site. Staff believes that two of the ‘Residential Areas’ recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan are accomplished, including: providing a diverse range of housing stock and promoting residential department and redevelopment. Requirements for Variations and Findings of Fact Appendix B, Section XI(E) provides the procedures for considering requested Variations from the Village’s zoning ordinance. Subsection 2 provides standards that must be satisfied in order to grant a variation. Below are those requirements, with staff comments. The Board of Appeals may vary the provisions of this ordinance as authorized in this section, but only when it shall have made findings based upon the evidence presented to it in the following specific cases: That the property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations governing the district in which it is located; Staff Comment: The property does not currently have a garage. Allowing a garage will enable the property owner to obtain a reasonable return. That the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances; Staff Comment: The existing house was constructed so that it is 30 feet away from the rear property line. To build a standard garage that is 20-feet deep and meet the 5-foot rear set-back requirement, the garage needs to be approximately 5-feet away from the house. That the variation, if granted will not alter the essential character of the locality; Staff Comment: This block of Odell includes an alley and many homes in the area have detached garages that are accessed from this alley. If granted, the requested variation and the proposed garage would not alter the essential character of the surrounding area. A legal notice was provided in the newspaper and notices to all owners of property within 250 feet. For this variation, the Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals is a recommending body and the Village Board must make a final decision. The Village Board is tentatively scheduled to consider this request at its September 22, 2015 meeting as all of the cases mentioned at this meeting. Bruce concluded his report. Questions from the Staff: Chairman Kanelos asked if all the garages in that area are five feet off the property line? He was wondering if there could be another solution to give them a variance to go closer to the property line? Bruce Sylvester said it was a good question for the applicant. Page 6 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Chairman Kanelos continued and said all the surrounding properties look like the garages are less than five feet off the property line. He was just wondering which would be less problematic. Bruce Sylvester mentioned there is a five foot variance from the required ten foot set-back which is required. The owner was told there was a five foot variance and Bruce was not sure if he would prefer to be further from the house or closer to the alley. No other options were discussed with the applicant. When Staff reviewed this we said the requirement is five feet and we held him to that. Chairman Kanelos asked Chuck Ostman what the reasoning behind the ten foot minimum separation behind the main structure and the detached garage? Chuck answered as I understand it was a requirement from the Fire Department which is a life safety issue. Chairman Kanelos said with that in mind would it make more sense to give the petitioner a variation to allow him to go closer to the property line and maintain the 10 foot set-back? Chuck Ostman mentioned this language has been in the zoning code as far back to at least 1965 or before that. We have had many talks with the Fire Department and they did not think it was a big concern in reducing the distance between the house and the accessory structure. Chairman Kanelos asked if there was any advantage from one variation to the other? Chuck Ostman answered by saying in his opinion he thinks Public Works would prefer when they plow the alleys to have the garage set back from the alley. Bruce Sylvester shows the site plan on the large screen and zooms into the proposed site plan showing 5.02 feet between the rear of the house and the proposed garage and 5 feet from the corner of the garage to the alleyway line. This might be helpful if moving the garage. If the addition was not there, there would be no problems at all. Commissioner Schulter mentioned that on the left side of the property there is an asphalt driveway. He wondered if the owner would want to have access from the front of the house and also the alley, having two doors on the garage. Bruce Sylvester said according to what the owner said, the garage will be accessed from the alley only and not from the front of the house. Commissioner Dubiel mentioned that because there is plenty of room on the side of the house why not have an attached garage put in. It would be good for resale Page 7 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ purposes and also nice not to have to walk in the snow or rain from the back of the property. Chuck Ostman mentioned it is a different zoning and coding issue and is more costly. Chairman Kanelos swears in the petitioner who is an urban planner, works with the garage company and is not the owner. He answers some of the concerns of building the garage. He mentioned that he did not look any further than the five feet off the alley because of practical matters of driving in and out of the garage. It will be a simple 20’x20’ garage being put up. He also addresses the issue of having an attached garage and because it is on a floating slab, a foundation and roof would have to be lined up with the house and it would become very costly. Commissioner Karabatsos asked what will happen with the asphalt driveway? Bruce Sylvester mentions there is a small asphalt parking pad/existing driveway which goes into the property line. Chuck Ostman said the existing driveway is legal and non- conforming to today’s codes and the green space is fine. Chairman Kanelos swears in Linda Forty Coleman, the homeowner at 8129 North Odell Avenue. She mentions that they will never be extending the driveway from the front of the house because there is a severe drop because they are on a hill. It is a good idea but would be too expensive. A retaining wall would have to be put up and there is a short driveway, grass and sidewalk and then there is a 3 ½ foot drop because of a pool that was dug out many years ago. Chuck Ostman mentioned that the asphalt driveway can be left in. Chairman Kanelos asked Chuck if he was confident the owners can leave the driveway in? He replied yes. Commissioner DeBartolo said to my understanding this piece of asphalt is going to stay there and the reply from Chuck Ostman was yes. Commissioner Troiani asked if the owners would consider removing the asphalt driveway and Chairman Kanelos said they do not want to take it out. Commissioner Kanelos entertained a motion to approve a request for a Variation from the requirements of Village Ordinance Appendix B Section IV(H)(2) to allow a new detached garage to be constructed at 8129 North Odell Avenue. Page 8 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Seconded by Commissioner Schulter, on roll call the vote was: AYES: 5 Dubiel, Karabatsos, DeBartolo, Schulter, Kanelos NAYS: 1 Troiani There being five(5) affirmative votes the motion carried. Chairman Kanelos called for the next item on the agenda. 15-ZP-30 Requesting approval of a Special Use Permit as provided in Village Ordinances Appendix B Sections VIII(B)(3)(u) and VIII(B)(3)(a) to allow Big Blue Swim School to open and operate a swim school at 7428 Waukegan Avenue. Bruce Sylvester presented this request. As was just explained, another request on our agenda tonight is to allow another business in the community and this is a swim school business. This is located in the former Aldi building at 7428 Waukegan Road near Waukegan and Milwaukee. This site is zoned ‘B-2’ and in this area any type of school is special use in this zoning district. The applicant is here and he can go into the specifics of the proposal to reconstruct the building but basically the proposed business will construct two shallow swimming pools, to conduct swim lessons, changing rooms, a view room and their corporate offices within the approximately 11,000 square foot space. Big Blue Swim School is proposing to improve the outside of the building with canopies, awnings and signage. Additional landscaping is also proposed for the site. Next the Community Development thoughts pertained to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan is as follows: By granting the requested Special Use Permit, this vacant space will be occupied by a new business rather than remaining vacant. Staff believes that several of the ‘Commercial Areas’ recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan are accomplished by preventing vacancies along Milwaukee Avenue and Waukegan Road, including:  Promoting commercial corridor beautification and combating blight and  Maintaining a range of retail and service commercial activities throughout the Village along key corridors. Additionally, several of the ‘Economic Development’ recommendations are accomplished, such as: Page 9 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Maintaining and strengthening the Village’s tax base through the attraction and retention of businesses; and seeking an appropriate mix of commercial and retail uses throughout the Village. We looked at the comments from other Village Departments like Fire and Fire Inspections, Police Department and Engineering and none of them had any concerns. There are 103 parking spaces available at this site. Big Blue Swim School programs run between 8:00am and 8:00pm. Class sizes would be no larger than 50 students at a time with no more than 22 employees on-site at a time. The Village’s parking requirements do not provide the required amount of parking for a ‘swim school’. After the Community Development Department did an analysis they felt that there is plenty of parking for this proposed business. One issue is noise and Bruce scrolled down on the screen to an aerial photo and there is a condominium building located at 7450 Waukegan Road which is very close to the swim school. One question was what kind of air-handling equipment will they have and where will it be located. The applicant plans to put this equipment on the roof-top, where the existing air-handling equipment is located. The applicant, however, has expressed a willingness to locate this new equipment on the ground, to the west of the building, if necessary to address noise concerns. If the equipment is placed on the ground a wall would have to be constructed around it and this wall might be too close to the property line. A variation would probably have to be issued tonight if the equipment is needed to be placed on the ground. If it could not be done tonight we would have to talk with the applicant and find out what their deadline is. We would hate to have to delay this for another month. Requirements for a Special Use Permit and Findings of Fact Section XI(H)(4) of the Niles zoning code provides 3 specific standards that must be satisfied in order for the Village to approve a special use permit. Staff opinion for weather or not this request complies with these 3 standards is provided below, and the Plan Commission is encouraged to consider these standards as it discusses this request:  Is the special use necessary for the public convenience at the proposed location? The proposed swim school business will provide needed services for the public and will therefore provide a public convenience.  Is the special use designed, located and proposed to be operated so that the public health, safety and welfare will be protected? The property at 7428 Waukegan is an appropriate location for a swim school business such as the one proposed, especially since such a Page 10 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ business may draw shoppers to other businesses within the area. Staff believes that the public health, safety and welfare will be protected.  Will the special use cause substantial injury to the value of other property in the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located? No, but air handling and any potential impacts to the condominium to the north should be discussed. We did do all the required legal notifications in both the newspaper and mailed out letters to owners in the vicinity. Bruce Sylvester’s presentation ends. Chairman Kanelos asks if there are any questions from the staff and because there were none he continues by asking if the petitioner is available. Chairman Kanelos swears in the petitioner who is John Lonergan at 7428 Waukegan Road and is the CEO and part owner of the business. Mr. Lonergan said this is a great use for this building and obviously an assemblage was attempted but it did fail. Brunswick decided they would not sell it under any circumstance and the contractor involved decided to let us inhabit the building. For us it is a great site, it has access on both sides of the building, our use is very family oriented and easy for parents to drop off and pick up. It is important for us to improve the facade of the building, which makes a lot of sense for a family oriented business. As far as making it look appealing and inviting, I think we are on the same page to improve the building. We have been around since 2009 and in our current form in2012 in Wilmette. There has been an immediate increase in business and a lot of traffic. They come in every half hour, which means there are not too many people in the building at once. We like a calm easy environment. Chairman Kanelos asked how did you determine the demand is here at this location? Mr. Lonergan replied that we already have people from Niles, Park Ridge and Northern Chicago driving for 45 minutes to an hour to our Wilmette location. There are 300 to 400 students transferring over to this location. The demand is huge for swim lessons because other facilities, like the WMCA, do not have space or pool times and they cannot keep up with serving the community. Swimming is growing by 7 to 8% a year and baseball and other sports are declining. It is a wonderful sport they can do all their life. We are helping kids stay in the sport longer and giving them good instruction for the future. Page 11 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Chairman Kanelos asked how many families are from the Niles vicinity? Mr. Lonergan mentioned there are 75 families from Niles and from Park Ridge, Northern Chicago and including Niles there are 250 families. Chairman Kanelos asked if there are any other questions. Commissioner Troiani asked if they have staff that is qualified to give medical assistance to you if you need it? Mr. Lonergan replied yes, we have trained lifeguards on every single shift. Everyone is trained with CPR/AED and we are the only swim school in this area that has one to two lifeguards on duty every swim lesson. Commissioner Dubiel wanted to know about the air-handling system and if the owner could give us some background on that? Mr. Lonergan replied that the difference between the original air-handling system and the new one is they want to put in humidification and a larger size. He said he could understand if you want it located on the side of the building but the noise levels are not going to be any higher. They have never had any complaints at all and the only difference is that it is bigger. Commissioner Dubiel also asked if they have to put the air-handling unit on the ground would it be ok and what would the turn-around be if they have to have a variation? Mr. Lonergan said they could put it on the ground but Bruce Sylvester mentioned that the variance would not be able to go thru until November, 2015 because the October meeting is already full and the final decision by the Village Board would not be until the end of that month. Bruce also mentioned that if it did not go on the roof the unit would be on the west side of the building. The building is where Kiddy Kingdom is located and the trucks back into Aldi. The question is the distance between the building and the rear property line. Chuck Ostman said a fence might be sufficient but needs to be looked at. A foundation for a wall also needs to be determined. Commissioner Karabatsos asked how many air-handling units are you taking off the roof? Mr. Lonergan replied that they were not sure what needs to be taken off the roof but there are five or six units there right now. They only need one for the pool and one for the dry side of the building and rooftop units will be screened. Page 12 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Chairman Kanelos brought up the Robust Retail Center in the building and wanted the owner to explain what will be in that store. Mr. Lonergan mentioned that in the store there are puzzles, toys that are education oriented plus swimming gear. Chairman Kanelos asked if there were any more questions and mentioned again about the noise level. Mr. Lonergan said the units do not run as much at night especially after 7:00pm. Chairman Kanelos asked if anyone from the public would like to ask a question? He then swears in Mr. David Freeze, a resident at 7450 North Waukegan Road and one of 36 owners and one of the five board members. Pertaining to the air-handling units, I think there is some middle ground. It would be great to have them on the ground but if that is not possible maybe they can shield them more adequately. I also think our phone trunk lines go thru your building but we can talk later about that and one other thing is if you can leave your alarm company phone number on your door that would be great. The alarm has gone off many times and the Police have been great about it but having the number would help alleviate any future problems and Mr. Lonergan agreed to do that. Mr. Freeze also mentioned about where they store the chlorine in the building and is it under lock and key. Mr. Lonergan said it is under lock and key and it is a liquid chlorine and if it is spilled on the ground nothing would happen and it is safe. Mr. Freeze said Aldi had a garbage pick at 6:00am every day and it made so much noise, could that time be changed? Mr. Lonergan said they only have a once a week pick up and it should be all right as they do not have much garbage. Chairman Kanelos swears in James Heinlein and he said he is the secretary of the board for the Abbey Manor Condominium Association which is the property next door north of Aldi’s. I was a water safety instructor and a lifeguard instructor for the Red Cross in Glenview for 45 years and I cannot think of anything better for that property than what is being proposed. I look forward to greeting them in the area. Page 13 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Mr. Lonergan said drowning is one of the number one preventable deaths amongst toddlers, so the more swimming and swimming lessons the children have can only be good for the community. Chairman Kanelos mentioned is there anyone else from the public that would like to speak? Commissioner Kanelos entertained a motion from Mr. Dubiel to approve a request for a Special Use permit per Village Ordinance Appendix B Sections VIII(B)(3)(U) and VIII(C)(3)(a) to allow a swim school at 7428 Waukegan Road with 2 conditions of approval: 1) that applicant provide additional landscaping to the extent possible; and 2) that air handling equipment on the roof must be screened with architectural screening. Seconded by Commissioner Schulter, on roll call the vote was: AYES: 6 Dubiel, Karabatsos, DeBartolo, Schulter, Troiani, Kanelos NAYS: 0 There being six (6) affirmative votes the motion carried. 15-ZP-3 1 Requesting approval of a Special Use Permit as provided in Zoning Ordinance Appendix B, Section VIII (B)(3) ( d) for a proposed automobile detailing business at 8851 Milwaukee Avenue . NOTE: The audio-recorder did not record this section of the meeting. The notes for Case 15-ZP-31 are from staff-recollection. Bruce Sylvester presented this request. This site is zoned ‘B-1’ and in this area auto detailing is special use in this zoning district. The applicant is here and he can go into the specifics of his proposed business. The proposal is to repair the existing vacant building and provide auto detailing and cleaning services. Staff have spoken with the applicant about improving the appearance of the building and staff recommends that—if this item is approved—that the Village impose 3 ‘conditions of approval’: 1. That the appearance of the building must be improved with new paint, fascia, and brick treatments; 2. That the overhead/service-bay doors must be painted and must have damaged panels replaced during the first year of operation and must be replaced with all-glass doors no later than October 1, 2016; and 3. That the existing fence in the rear yard must be replaced with a new cedar fence. Next the Community Development thoughts pertained to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan is as follows: Page 14 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ By granting the requested Special Use Permit, this vacant space will be occupied by a new business rather than remaining vacant. Staff believes that several of the ‘Commercial Areas’ recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan are accomplished by preventing vacancies along Milwaukee Avenue and Waukegan Road, including:  Promoting commercial corridor beautification and combating blight and  Maintaining a range of retail and service commercial activities throughout the Village along key corridors. Additionally, several of the ‘Economic Development’ recommendations are accomplished, such as: Maintaining and strengthening the Village’s tax base through the attraction and retention of businesses; and seeking an appropriate mix of commercial and retail uses throughout the Village. We looked at the comments from other Village Departments like Fire and Fire Inspections, Police Department and Engineering and none of them had any concerns. Requirements for a Special Use Permit and Findings of Fact Section XI(H)(4) of the Niles zoning code provides 3 specific standards that must be satisfied in order for the Village to approve a special use permit. Staff opinion for weather or not this request complies with these 3 standards is provided below, and the Plan Commission is encouraged to consider these standards as it discusses this request:  Is the special use necessary for the public convenience at the proposed location? The proposed business will provide needed services for the public and will therefore provide a public convenience.  Is the special use designed, located and proposed to be operated so that the public health, safety and welfare will be protected? Milwaukee Avenue is an appropriate location for a business such as the one proposed.  Will the special use cause substantial injury to the value of other property in the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located? No. We did do all the required legal notifications in both the newspaper and mailed out letters to owners in the vicinity. Bruce Sylvester’s presentation ends. Page 15 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Plan Commission discussed several items related to this request, including the staff recommendation that a new cedar fence be installed. The applicant made it clear that he wished to add this fence and was planning to install this fence. Commissioner Kanelos entertained a motion from Commissioner DeBartolo to approve a requested special use permit per zoning ordinance Appendix B Section VIII(B)(3)(d) to allow an auto-detailing business at 8851 Milwaukee Avenue with the following 3 conditions of approval: 1. That the appearance of the building must be improved with new paint, fascia, and brick treatments; 2. That the overhead/service-bay doors must be painted and must have damaged panels replaced during the first year of operation and must be replaced with all-glass doors no later than October 1, 2016; and 3. That the existing fence in the rear yard must be replaced with a new cedar fence. Seconded by Commissioner Karabatsos, on roll call the vote was: AYES: 6 Dubiel, Karabatsos, DeBartolo, Schulter, Troiani, Kanelos NAYS: 0 There being six (6) affirmative votes the motion was carried. Chairman Kanelos called for the next item on the agenda. 15-ZP-32 Requesting approval of a Special Use Permit as provided in Zoning Ordinance Appendix B, Section VIII (B)(3) (Y) for a request from Home Depot to display and rent Penske trucks from the parking lot at 8650 Dempster street. Mr. Chairman and members of the commission, this is another request for a special use permit that is not necessarily for a new business but it would be a modification to the Home Depot at 8650 Dempster Street. Specifically the request would be to allow Home Depot to partner with Penske trucks and allow Penske trucks to be stored and rented from the parking lot of the Home Depot at Greenwood and Dempster Streets. This would be considered outdoor storage and that requires a special use permit per section VIII(B)(3)(y). Staff, prior to making a recommendation, just wanted to be sure that you discussed with the applicant two concerns that staff has about this proposal. One concern being parking and whether or not there is sufficient parking and if the proposed use of a portion of the parking lot for truck storage would be a good idea given the parking situation. The second issue is of appearance and as was briefly touched on in the previous discussion issues of signage and trucks with signs on the side. Page 16 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Let me just go down real quickly to parking. The Home Depot store has 114,000 sq. ft. and that according to our parking ordinance means that they need to provide 456 parking stalls and that is based on one stall for every 250 sq. ft. of gross store area. The site includes 455 parking stalls so they basically have exactly what they need but are shy by one. About approximately 30 stalls are utilized for the display of large items such as sheds and seasonal items such as flowers during the spring resulting in about 425 parking stalls being available for use. Secondly, the proposed truck storage would utilize up to 24 additional stalls resulting in only about 400 stalls being available for parking for the Home Depot store itself. We, however, wanted you to be aware of that and wanted you to possibly discuss issues related to parking, parking availability and demand with the applicant. We did not go into great depth in the staff report about this but Staff did have questions about the appearance and whether the community wants to have Penske trucks stored on a permanent or semi-permanent basis out on the front parking lot at Home Depot along Dempster Street or whether or not it would be appropriate to require some type of screening just to minimize the visual impact if it were allowed. Those are the two issues we wanted to raise for your consideration. In terms of comments from other departments, there were none. If this were approved, it would accomplish some of the goals from the comprehensive plan. Again, the same ones we’ve already gone over tonight, providing a mix of services, and seeking a variety of uses throughout the village in particular. We did want to raise the question with the applicants, would there be any revenue implications if this were approved. The applicant said they would come prepared with some information on some potential revenues that might come to the Village from taxes on rental or leasing of the vehicles. Let me go through the requirements that would need to be satisfied if the requested special use permit is to be approved: 1) Whether or not the special use would be necessary for public convenience at proposed location. If approved, use of Home Depot parking lot for the display and rental of Penske trucks could provide public convenience. 2) Is the special use design located and proposed to be operated so that public health safety and welfare be protected? We think it could be but you may want to talk specifically to the applicant about the public welfare in terms of appearance and community aesthetics. And lastly, will the Special Use Permit cause substantial injury to the value of other property in the neighborhood, we believe it will not. Again, you may want to talk specifically on parking and impacts on other properties especially commercial properties to the west such as Jewel if we believe there is not sufficient parking. We did provide all the notification requirements. This would go to the Village board after your consideration tonight. I am not going to go through this, the Page 17 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ applicant can if you wish. There is information in your packet specifically about the proposed use and partnership with Home Depot and Penske trucks. Do they have a Special Use Permit for outdoor storage of machinery and equipment that they have (bobcat, augers, etc.) Chuck Ostman said no. Also, are we certain that all the garden equipment only takes up 30 spots? Bruce Sylvester mentioned that it was my calculation based off this aerial which was just one moment in time. Maybe the next week they doubled the size of the garden area or sheds they had on display but I just went off this photo and came up with a number at that time on how many stalls are used for sheds and garden center use. Commissioner Troiani mentioned, remember the problem we had with Peapod parking trucks there and we asked them to put licenses on the trucks? Will we do that with these trucks parking for resale? Chuck said you mean for vehicle stickers? Commissioner Troiani said yes. Chuck said that I’m not familiar with the rules. The Peapod trucks were for the industrial area and registered in Niles. I’m not sure if the Penske trucks are registered in Niles, you would have to ask the applicant. Commissioner mentioned that is very important because you will be have that vehicle parked in Niles. Commissioner DeBartolo asked will the Home Depot trucks be leaving the premises? When I was there today they took up four or five spots, pretty big spots. Will they no longer lease the Home Depot trucks? Chuck Ostman said that is another question for the applicant, but I believe the Home Depot trucks do stay there because they are pickup trucks and load trucks, Penske are box trucks. Commissioner DeBartolo said I did we take that into account for the parking lot? They are right in the middle of the parking lot Bruce Sylvester said that is a good call. I did not factor that in and it would mean an additional reduction in the amount of parking available if six or eight stalls are used for Home Depot truck storage. Commissioner Dubiel had a general question on consistency. We have a sign code in which we were pretty adamant particularly from the department on not Page 18 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ having advertising trucks be parked on the front end of our properties and parking lots. We just had a petitioner come in and we were strict on him in terms of appearance of the building and how nice it’s supposed to look. We are having him replace a whole fence and yet Home Depot is allowed whatever it wants all along Dempster Street with no regulation and that is fine but we should not be harder and stricter on small businesses than we are on larger businesses. Chairman Kanelos said that begs the question, are these trucks going to be in violation of the sign code? Chuck Ostman said there is nothing specific. Is the language and sign code if the appearance or intent of parking the vehicle out near the roadway with signage is to attract attention of the business? Chairman Kanelos said so a truck that says 1800 Penske on it is not an advertisement? Chuck said I’m not saying it is not. That is what the language says. Unknown: I think that we need to look at that section of the sign code because it’s too restrictive. I think there are several things and we should look at that again because it is between three or four years. Unknown: is that one of the reasons that the Village may budget in to fence the property in by Milwaukee and Dempster Street? Chuck Ostman said no, that fence was there all along. Chairman Kanelos asked if there were any other questions for Bruce or for our staff in general? Commissioner Karabatsos asked, can you put restrictions on them not being able to park on that frontage? Bruce Sylvester said to answer that question, our two newest members were not here but the rest of you were here and it was exactly a year ago. It was September of 2014, when the Home Depot here at Civic Center Plaza made the same request because there site is configured differently. We said yes we will approve it but the trucks need to be stored behind the building. I did discuss that with the applicant for this proposal that is in front of us tonight. They just simply do not have that option because of the way the building sits is on the lot and there is no space behind it where they could store trucks in back. To answer your question, they would need to be out front. Commissioner Karabatsos said but if not behind the building, not to go within the first island. Even the storage sheds are not out front they are against the building. Page 19 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Bruce Sylvester mentioned, I think that is a great idea and that is something you want to consider telling the applicant. This could be approved but the trucks would have to be in this area and then specify that area. Commissioner Karabatsos said, does this Home Depot have more parking than the Home Depot on Waukegan Avenue? I am curious being that they rent heavier equipment there and if they were to bring it there it would free up their parking spots? Bruce said, I think they operate the store independently. The applicant may be able to answer that. One thing I do remember is that the proposal for this Home Depot is that there was a large area that was not striped for parking, it was a paved area and that was where they proposed putting the Penske trucks here and because it did not really use up parking stalls it was efficiently using a paved area. We did make them show us that those trucks wouldn’t interfere with delivery truck maneuvering and after they did that a year ago, we approved it at this store. I guess my point is, it did not impact parking here, this one would impact parking. Commissioner Schulter asked have they started to park at the Civic Center Plaza? I did not see them yet. Bruce said I followed up with them recently and they are saying they are caught up in corporate bureaucracy. They have not started yet but they intend to. Commissioner Schulter asked if this was a Special Use Permit. Bruce Sylvester said it was. Commissioner Schulter asked has it been more than a year. Does it expire? Bruce said it does and the question is, and we are going to talk about this internally, if they have submitted paperwork and show us that they are working towards that and they are moving forward, then we tend to allow that to continue. So the question we will have to ask is, have they done that? Commissioner Schulter mentioned maybe we will need to, like we are proposing new wording for a special use is held up by lawsuit, we might want to have something special so that you can have an automatic extension under certain conditions. I am sure you are probably already thinking along those lines. Chairman Kanelos asked if there were any other questions. Is the petitioner present? Are you an attorney ma’am? Margaret Blum said I am not. Page 20 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Chairman Kanelos: Can you please raise your right hand? Do you solemnly swear the testimony you’re about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Margaret Blum: I do. Chairman Kanelos: please state your name and address in the microphone for the record. Margaret Blum said I am Margaret Blum and I am a Site Development Coordinator with Greenberg Farrow located at 21 South Evergreen Avenue in Arlington Heights, Illinois 60005. Also, with us this evening is Mr. Brian Kelly, who is the store manager for this particular Home Depot facility. Chairman Kanelos said to Mr. Kelly, if you anticipate giving any information please come up and be sworn in. Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear the testimony you’re about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Brian Kelly said I do. Chairman Kanelos said, please state your name and address into the microphone . Brian Kelly said, Brian Kelly 1849 Eberhard Lane, Plainfield IL. Chairman Kanelos said, do you have anything more to add? Margaret Blum said, I do have a brief bit of background regarding the operational aspects of the program that I would like to share and it might alleviate some questions. The Penske program is based on customer orders through the internet or main person at the store. Penske delivers the vehicles to the designated parking area for pickup by the customer. Paperwork and key pickup and drop-off are handled inside the store and renters are allowed to drop off trucks during non- business hours. One point I do want to emphasize is that trucks are not stored on-site except when there is a pending executed rental. This is so different than some of the situations you were discussing with respect to the budget operation. The submitted site plan depicts the proposed location of the Penske truck rental area and parking for the trucks will be restricted to that area. There is a request for 28 parking stalls to be used for this program and that would allow for about 6- 8 Penske vehicles at any given time. The particular location and way that the stalls are selected on the site plan will allow drivers to pick up and drop off the trucks in a forward motion rather than needing to back up and cause any other circulation issues. No semi-trucks or tractor trailer type vehicles are included in the program. The trucks being rented have box enclosures varying in size from 12 feet to 26 feet. I do believe in your packets was a brief explanation about the Penske truck size, Page 21 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ programs, etc. No fueling servicing or maintenance of the trucks would take place on-site and all of these types of activities will take place off-site at Penske locations. Regarding staff concerns with respect to adequate parking included in the packet provided was a study completed in, I believe it was 2011, if I remember offhand by KLOA, which was taking into account supply and demand for several Home Depot parking stores and I think their analysis in the end found that the number of stalls that typically Home Depot stores were typically over parked and that was quite common. I think the average number of stalls that they have proven out in their finding was about 308 required. Chairman Kanelos asked, when you say over parked you mean had more than enough parking? Margaret Blum said that is correct and I can let Brian Kelly, the store manager, speak to this but it is his feeling being there day in and day out that the remaining parking spaces will easily accommodate typical customer demand even during seasonal sales periods. In terms of aesthetic feeling or aesthetics in general along Dempster Street, obviously that is a very busy commercial corridor, high intensity retail commercial uses along both sides of the street, associated parking along the front of store fronts along both sides of the street. This particular section of Dempster, there is vehicle parking allowed and I am going to approximate so please do not hold me to it but it looks like about 10 feet from the back of curb on both sides of Dempster where there is a multitude of vehicle types, sizes, shapes, colors, etc. Directly across the street as you know, there is a dealership. The dealership displays larger vehicles; vans, passenger trucks in close proximity to the street as well and then again I would emphasize as mentioned the trucks are not stored on site except when there is a pending executed sale. I am happy to entertain any questions. Commissioner Karabatsos mentioned North Avenue, which is probably the busiest Home Depot around. How many Penske trucks do they rent? Margaret Blum said, I don’t know. I think someone referenced earlier, they are each independently addressed facilities. Commissioner Karabatsos said okay but like you said if an order is put in, a truck will come, then it will get picked up and get out of there anyway. Margaret Blum said correct. Bruce Sylvester said, I can give you an idea on that, they do probably double the volume we do or more actually they are the busiest store in Chicagoland market. So they are one to one and a half times more our volumes. Page 22 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Karabatsos said this store here? Bruce Sylvester said, no, the North Avenue store. Brian Kelly said both towns cannot take two stores and that is awesome that we are able to be here and I have been here for about two and a half years, just to throw in a little bit about me. I have been with the company about 20 years this past month. I believe as many of you may know, I am very highly involved with the Police, Fire and the Chamber of Commerce. Anyway that I can help out in the city I try to. Various organizations that come to us for donations we always try to help them. We believe in being a part of the community, finding a way to give back, not just taking, like a lot of big organizations do. I have always believed in that whole- heartedly. That is everything we do at our location and if there are any questions you have, we are always willing to answer. Chairman Kanelos said, so, right now, nobody can walk in and rent, there will be no truck for them. You have to go online and make your reservation. How far out do you have to make your reservation? Brian Kelly said, I believe they have to give them a couple days’ notice. Chairman Kanelos said, and then that truck comes on the day it is scheduled to be picked up. It is there for about a couple of hours? Brian Kelly mentioned, yes, generally speaking, because the person wants to get going in the morning. The beginning of the month and the end of the month is usually the busiest time. The other times we anticipate is why it is a win for the store and the community as people sometimes are buying bigger things and little pickups as you said cannot accommodate because there are weight limits on those and how much you can fit on them whereas they could buy a whole house package and they can fit it in one of the Penske’s. Margaret Blum: If I could add to that, to get back to a previous question, I did send a quick flyer put together, regarding the question about the potential tax benefits, etc. In response to that question, there are two types of taxes applied to Penske vehicle rentals: an environmental fee and a licensing fee. The licensing recovery fee and environmental fee go to Penske to partially cover registration and licensing cost and help dispose of hazardous materials in an environmentally friendly manner. Additionally, in Niles itself, there is a 9.25% sales tax on supplies which Home Depot does promote heavily along with the vehicle rentals, boxes, furniture, housing, garden supplies, and other move in repair items and then I did include a sample off the web page of how Penske and Home Depot promote these at other locations. Page 23 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Schulter said so basically the vehicles could be registered, and licensed, in other states? Margaret Blum said correct. Bruce Sylvester said could you remind me, my first question was, how many spots do the Home Depot trucks take and then how many are you requesting for Penske? Margaret Blum asked Mr. Sylvester, do we have a site plan because it does show where the Home Depot, I think the load and go versus the… Margaret Blum mentioned we have four trucks so it is going to take up four spots. The trucks are like a pick-up truck and I have one van and three flat beds. Chairman Kanelos asked Commissioner Troiani, while we’re waiting for this, do you have any questions? Commissioner Troiani asked what kind of signage will you need? Margaret Blum said no additional signage. Commissioner Troiani asked it looks like you have signage on here. It is on the truck parked right at Home Depot. Chairman Kanelos mentioned she said no additional signage, just what is on the trucks. Commissioner Troiani said the Penske trucks will then be parked parallel to Dempster Street? Bruce Sylvester said it is right here on the screen showing the shaded areas on the left. Commissioner Troiani asked that would be along Greenwood? Bruce Sylvester said that is along Dempster Street. Commissioner Troiani said along Dempster? Bruce Sylvester said yes, the shaded area to the left not the right. Commissioner Troiani said12 spaces then. 12 parking spaces? Margaret Blum said it is a total of 28, no 24 I’m sorry. Commissioner Troiani said yes but they are bigger trucks. Page 24 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Margaret Blum said some of them take up more room and that is why there are only six to eight trucks. Commissioner Dubiel asked, do you have your study with you? Margaret Blum said yes I do. Commissioner Dubiel said if you turn to page 5, they are not in order in our packet, but this should be the very beginning of your analysis, you give them a letter from Greenberg Farrow, it shows an average of 308, so even if we go with the lower end of 400 stalls and say okay, you are going to lose another 30, you are at 370, so you are easily 20% over, what do you think your peak is going to be. Is that what your testimony is? Margaret Blum said, yes sir. Commissioner Dubiel asked is that correct Mr. Kelly? Brian Kelly said, yes and at this time of the year our seasonal display is down from what it is. The only peak times we have, as you can imagine, is when the weather is picking up in the Spring. We are actually going down in season at this point and so far as a demand for parking spaces, it is less compared to the Spring. Commissioner Dubiel asked in the springtime when you have the garden displays, I have spent a lot of time in those garden displays, how many spots are you taking up approximately? Brian Kelly said I would have to get you a number but because we sell a lot more, we expand that area, compared to what it is now. It does not go all the way out, but because of the volume that we do to keep up with the customer demand, it is expanded out. Commissioner Dubiel said and there is another question that came up earlier: The heavy equipment that you rent, that is stored outside, how many spots do those take? Maybe that is something you do not know at the top of your head? Brian Kelly said we know that at peak they can easily be 20 or 30 spots if we need them. Commissioner Dubiel said, that is not the answer to my question though. Brian Kelly said I would guess 6. Commissioner Dubiel said, do you have an idea? Page 25 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brian Kelly said probably 8 or 10, somewhere around there. Commissioner Dubiel said okay. Chuck tells us that you are supposed to have a Special Use Permit for storing those things outside as well, correct? Chuck Ostman said I am not familiar with what is being stored out there. I would have to go out there. Commissioner Dubiel said I would have thought that corporate would have done that because those are not ours, those are for the company that we rent, they bring the bigger ones there. Those are not the ones that the Home Depot actually owns, that are in the building. So that is a third party. Chairman Kanelos said Commissioner DeBartolo. Commissioner DeBartolo said, let us say all the sheds come down, and everything else comes down and you are going to put these Penske trucks in there, I know typically we do not always have big winters but when we do, that parking lot tends to have mountains of snow, particularly, where you are going to park these trucks, there are mounds of snow when you go into that parking lot, into Jewel and Portillo’s. Are you taking into consideration, this time you have the garden and I’m assuming all the sheds will come down. Brian Kelly said the sheds will be there all year long. Commissioner DeBartolo asked the sheds then are permanent? Brian Kelly mentioned the sheds are up against the building. Commissioner DeBartolo said no the sheds are all at the street. Brian Kelly said every store is a little different and based on size, this store is a lot bigger than ours. Commissioner DeBartolo said how many spaces do you think those sheds are taking because it is more than what was showing on the screen. Brian Kelly said the sheds go across the front on Dempster Street. Commissioner DeBartolo said with the machines and the sheds you have that whole front blocked. Brian Kelly said there is probably 24 spaces. Commissioner DeBartolo said okay the whole front of your store on the Dempster side is filled with your machinery and your sheds. Page 26 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Brian Kelly said it is from the end there, where you come in from off of Dempster, right there (pointing to screen) to about there. I know, because I park up against Dempster where there are 20 to 24 spots. Commissioner DeBartolo asked and the machinery? Brian Kelly said the machinery is not there. Commissioner DeBartolo said so that is what I am thinking is that I’ve got more room over there. Brian Kelly said and with the snow, we can work with the vendor, it depends on what happens. We usually try to keep that out of the way up towards the side, by the Greenwood side towards the front, and then over here towards the front. But we can work with them as far as whatever we would need to do. Chairman Kanelos asked any other questions? Commissioner DeBartolo said I just would like a clarification. We have testimony here from our packet on Page 2, that there is approximately 456 stalls, you have 455 so they’re essentially the same. 30 are utilized for the display of large items. When you describe those large items, you are familiar with this packet that we’re looking at? It says sheds and seasonal items such as flowers but we’ve already now just had testimony that conflicts with that. It sounds more like there is something between 40 and 50 stalls, is that correct? So either way you are still at this 400 threshold where you are saying you will only need 308, is that right? Brian Kelly replied yes. Commissioner DeBartolo said okay thank you. Chairman Kanelos asked are there any other questions? Any questions from the public? Okay that being said I will entertain a motion. Commissioner Dubiel said regarding case 15-ZP-32 recommend that the request for a special use permit to allow truck rentals at Home Depot located at 8650 Dempster Street is providing Appendix B Section VIII(B) (3)(Y) be approved. Commissioner Kanelos entertained a motion from Commissioner Dubiel to approve a requested Special Use permit per zoning ordinance Appendix B Section VIII(B)(3)(y) to allow Home Depot to display and rent Penske Trucks from their parking lot at 8650 Dempster Street. Seconded by Commissioner Schulter, on roll call the vote was: AYES: 6 Dubiel, Karabatsos, DeBartolo, Schulter, Troiani, Kanelos Page 27 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ NAYS: 0 There being six (6) affirmative votes the motion was carried. Chairman Kanelos called for the next item on the agenda. 15-ZP-33 Request for a Special Use p ermit as provided in Village Ordinances Appendix B Section VIII(C)(3)(BB) to allow additional cell phone antenna and equipment to be located on the roof of the residential tower located at 9201 Maryland Street. Bruce Sylvester said Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, this item is a request for an amendment to a special use permit. The Village is previously allowed cell phone antenna equipment on the roof of the residential building at 9201 Maryland Street. This request would be to add additional antenna requiring an amendment to the previously approved special use permit. This site has commercial zoning, it is B2 zoning, which is why we would allow cell phone antenna. If this parcel had residential zoning, the Village ordinances would not allow cell phone antenna, which is why the antenna that are there now were allowed previously. Real quickly, it is a pretty straight forward application. I am going to scroll down, to show you the building in question. I am sure we have all seen it. It is the large residential tower at 9201 Maryland just south of the Bradford Exchange site and I think pictures are worth a thousand words included in your packet. This is what it looks like currently and this is what it would look like if the additional antenna were approved as requested. It is my opinion that it will not be noticeable at all to the general public. The difference is really negligible between what is there now and small antenna that is proposed to be added. Having said that, let me just quickly state the requirements. Let me go down to the conditions that are required for special use permits. I apologize, I sound like a broken record but we do need to go through these for each case. First: Is the Special Use necessary for the public convenience at the proposed location? The proposed new antenna will enhance cell phone service in the Niles community and therefore necessary for the public convenience at the proposed location. Specifically, these antennas need to be on taller structures. Tall buildings are preferable, otherwise the cell phone companies need to resort to towers and it is generally the preference in Niles and most communities to have these on buildings rather than free-standing towers. Number two: Is the special use design located and proposed to be operated so that the public health safety and welfare will be protected? Yes. And lastly, will the Special Use cause any substantial injury to the value of other property in the neighborhood? We believe it will not. I want to point this out quickly because the last time we had a cell phone antenna issue this did come into play. We are only allowed a limited amount of time to review these proposals and that is per federal regulations. Based on when we Page 28 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ received this application, when our technical consultant, Stu Chapman, completed his review, basically this is the one night where we can discuss this request. The Village does need to make a decision about this request for the new antenna before the end of the month so I just wanted people to be aware if there was any temptation to table or delay a decision, I would not advise that. Again, here is a picture of the building. For your reference and included in your packet is the original ordinance in 2002 that allowed cell phone antenna for this building in the first place. Also included in your packet as requested previously is the copy of the report from Stu Chapman, dated July 31, 2015 and then lastly is the technical information provided by the applicant about the antenna themselves. We did provide all of the required notification for this special use as we do for all Special Use requests. I will conclude my report there. I am available for questions and I believe the applicant is here as well to provide additional information. Chairman Kanelos said any questions for our staff? Commissioner Troiani said I just have a little concern here… Stu Chapman gets us in July, we get one go at it in September, if it were to be tabled, it is automatically passed anyways? Bruce Sylvester said I believe that is what the FCC rules say. Commissioner Troiani said right. So is there any chance to compress this? Why do they come to us? It seems to be a waste. Half the things, we cannot even consider. The Federal Government decided that it is safe for everybody and we cannot even talk about it, but you are right, it is fine. We have to decide, it does not matter whether we say yes or no today, it is going to pass. Bruce Sylvester said let me remind you, previously we tried to expedite the process and have you review things before Stu finished his report and you tabled it because you wanted Stu’s report before you considered it. Commissioner Troiani said I am ready to make a motion Mr. Chairman. Chairman Kanelos said any questions? Is the petitioner present? Cindy Dini said Cindy Dini from CCSI, on behalf of Sprint. Chairman Kanelos entertained a motion from Commissioner Troiani to approve a request for an amendment to a Special Use permit per Village Ordinance Appendix B Section VIII(C)(3)(bb) to allow additional cell phone antenna and equipment on the roof of the building at 9201 Maryland Street. Seconded by Commissioner DeBartolo, on roll call the vote was: AYES: 5 Dubiel, DeBartolo, Schulter, Troiani, Kanelos Page 29 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ NAYS: 0 ABSTAIN: 1 Karabatsos. There being five (5) affirmative votes the motion carried. 15-ZP-34 Requesting approval of a Special Use Permit to allow a color electronic message board display exceeding the maximum height from 20 ’ to 24’6” and to exceed the maximum allowable sign area from 666 Sq. Ft. to 967.78 Sq. Ft. at Jerry ’s Fruit Market at 7901 N Milwaukee Avenue. Chuck Ostman said this is zoning number 15-ZP-34 which is requesting three items for Special Use to exceed the maximum height from 20’ for the ground sign to 24’6”, exceed the maximum allowable sign area from 666 sq. ft. that is permitted by right to 967.78 sq. ft. and the third item is the electronic message board. I do have available the worksheet in regards to sign area. The total sign area that they are requesting is 967.78 the maximum allowed is 666. I would like to point out, when Jerry’s Fruit Market put the addition on the building it was staff that encouraged Jerry’s to put the fruit cornucopia on. There are two of them at the northwest corner of the building which equal 230 sq. ft. If the 230 sq. ft. was taken away from the 967 total that they are requesting, it would be 71.78 sq. ft. over the 666 sq. ft. That address is the one item. I would also like to point out that for the two signs, why they are changing some of the signage on the west side of Milwaukee Avenue and the South Side needs repair. The company that had maintained these signs is no longer in business. They went bankrupt plus they have been having other problems with birds making nests within those signs and now they are requesting to put up box signs. They are requesting to reduce those box signs from what is currently 380 sq. ft. down to either 320 sq. ft. or 200 sq. ft. on the South side. So they are making a considerable reduction in regards to that signage. That addresses the sign area that they are asking for. Just recently we had what was approved at Fresh Farms up at Golf Road is the color of the electronic message board. They are asking for the same thing here. The third thing is the height. They would like to increase the height, reconfigure that ground sign that they have out there and increase the height up and above the 20 feet allowed. I will be more than happy to answer any questions. Commissioner Dubiel said just recently you have said you changed your mind because the quality has improved. Is that correct still? Chuck Ostman said that is correct. Commissioner Dubiel asked and this is of that quality that you are talking about? Page 30 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Chuck Ostman said it is the same quality as Fresh Farms. Commissioner Dubiel said okay that is fine. My second question is: is there a net reduction in the signs? You have talked about them reducing some of the signage, some is staying the same. Will the net on this property stay the same or be reduced by the numbers you have calculated? Chuck Ostman said those numbers I do not have available. You are asking what the total signage area is now? Commissioner Dubiel said I am asking what is the total signage area now versus what it will be? Chuck Ostman said I know that it is going to be reduced of what they have now and possibly, I think the owner is here, and the sign person is here also, they can possibly answer those questions. Commissioner Dubiel said this is my last question Chuck. Is the cornucopia you mentioned going to be put on? Remember that the staff recommended that and as an encouragement to them, inducement perhaps for style and add that 230 sq. ft., this is just a general concern, but for you being here, if you retired or something like that, how will we memorialize things like that so we can account for… Chuck Ostman: Memorialize it as a new sign code that we adopted, it is something that I remember, just unfortunately under the new sign code, any signage that attracts attention, whether it has the name on there or not, would count towards the sign area. Commissioner Dubiel said I understand. So, you gave us that information for our consideration, correct? Chuck Ostman said yes. Commissioner Dubiel said what I am saying, is if you were not here for any reason, you know retirement or whatever, ten years from now, we lose that historical knowledge. We would not be able to account for that, correct? Chuck Ostman said that is correct. Chairman Kanelos asked is there any other questions for our staff? I think this along with Tony’s is another example to look at the sign code again. I just do not want to get in a position where it looks like every time one of the big shakers and movers in Niles, wants to put up a new sign, we make changes and accommodations. I want to make sure we are doing that for the little guy too because honestly, we do not really need the signs this big but it is good for Page 31 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ business. Jerry’s is a wonderful part of this community and I think we made things a little too strict and we have to go back and look at that. Any other questions before we invite the petitioners up? Chuck Ostman said it says on the agenda for the October building and zoning committee to review the sign code. Chairman Kanelos said ultimately it will but we will discuss it there first, right? Chuck Ostman said this board really does not have the authority to approve the text changes. It will go directly to the trustees. Chairman Kanelos said that being said, thank you Chuck. Is the petitioner present? Are you an attorney, sir? (He swears him in) Dan Olsen said Dan Olsen, 1527 Yunus Avenue, Joliet, Illinois. I am a sign contractor for the petitioner and he is here tonight as well. The overall area of signage, the existing signage, if I break it down, the wall signage existing is 760 sq. ft. and the proposed signage that we have here, the numbers sound like they are a lot but we are reducing the signage by over 30% for what it is today, so the existing is 760 sq. ft. That is the two wall signs that are existing and the two replacements would be a total of 520 sq. ft. We originally had those working with staff, they were going to be equal in size and there was a number that we were looking at through the reduction and we reduced the sidewall sign and added that to the front but in effect it is 30% reduction on the wall signs. The pile on sign is about a 50% reduction, the existing sign, and when I say in actual square footage, if you take each area of it, it totals 308 sq. ft. actual and the design that you have for our proposed pile on sign, actual square foot is 149 so we have reduced that over 50%. The reason I bring up actual, if you look at the photograph of the sign and you measured from the top to grade and then the overall width, you come up with a number and you could do the same with the proposed sign. What I do is I take, when you look at the existing sign photograph, the Jerry’s sign area is 14’ by 11’ I believe. The LED is 4’ by 14’ and what we refer to as the billboard. That changeable area was 13’ by 7’ and the total square footage of the sign, in actual square footage, if you take them incrementally, is 308 sq. ft. and the new sign design is 149 sq. ft. total. Chairman Kanelos asked when you say pile on sign, you mean this? Dan Olsen said correct. Chairman Kanelos asked so that is just one side right? Dan Olsen said right. Commissioner Troiani asked how about traffic designation signs? Page 32 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Dan Olsen mentioned I believe there are some directional sings there. It is a very busy business. When I go there, I park way out over by McDonald’s. I do not want to take up one customer’s spot. As a sign contractor, when it comes to way finding, it is really difficult and traffic engineering is difficult. People ignore directional signs half the time. I do not know what the code really allows. Commissioner Troiani said there is no left turn lane there and someone made it and hit me. Chuck, I am against that left turn lane onto Milwaukee Avenue. Chuck Ostman said that is not what we are talking about tonight. Commissioner Troiani said it is signage. Isn’t it signage? Chairman Kanelos said we are talking about the different thing right now. Commissioner Troiani said I finally get a chance to talk to someone at Jerry’s about signage and you are ignoring me. You want me to shut up. Chairman Kanelos said “I am not ignoring you, I am just saying that the directional signage and how people go in and out of the parking lot is not the issue. As much as I agree with you, you said sometimes you feel like you are taking your own life in my hands when you go in there. The point is, we are not talking about that tonight. That is all. If you want to talk about the other signage and the increases, etc. that is fine. Any other questions? I will entertain a motion.” Commissioner Dubiel said regarding 15-ZP-34 consideration of a Special Use permit to approve a colored electronics message board display, to exceed the maximum height, then go from 20’ to 24’ 6” and to exceed the maximum allowable sign here from 666 sq. ft. to 967.78 sq. ft. at Jerry’s Fruit Market at 7901 N. Milwaukee Avenue be approved. Seconded by Commissioner DeBartolo on roll call the vote was: AYES: 5 Dubiel, Karabatsos, DeBartolo, Schulter, Kanelos NAYS: 1 Troiani There being five (5) affirmative votes the motion carried. Chairman Kanelos said thank you very much. Good luck with your endeavor. There being no other items on the agenda, I will be tabling the memos regarding remaining zoning and subdivision ordinance language because it is 10:10 p.m. So we will table that to the next meeting without causing any harm. Seconded by Commissioner DeBartolo on roll call the vote was: AYES: 6 Dubiel, Karabatsos, DeBartolo, Schulter, Troiani, Kanelos Page 33 of 34 Plan Commission and Approved Meeting Minutes September 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________________________________________________________ NAYS: 0 There being six (6) affirmative votes the motion carried. Chairman Kanelos entertained a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Dubiel moved to adjourn . Seconded by Commissioner Schulter , on roll call the vote was: AYES:6 Dubiel, Karabatsos, DeBartolo, Troiani, Schulter, Kanelos NAYS: 0 There being six (6) affirmative votes the motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 10:10 pm. Carol Navilio & Alaa Saleh, Temporary Recording Secretaries Page 34 of 34