PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION

PARK RIDGE, ILLINOIS

IN RE:

 

PRELIMINARY PLANNED MIXED USE        )

DEVELOPMENT                                  )

PRELIMINARY PLAT OF                        )      Nos. PUD-04-01

SUBDIVISION FOR TARGET AREA 2          )      S-04-01

IN THE UPTOWN CENTRAL BUSINESS       )

DISTRICT                                         )

    )

 

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS at the hearing of

the above-entitled cause before Philip H. Mitchell,

Chairman, at 505 Butler Place, Park Ridge, Illinois,

on the 25th day of October, 2004, at the hour of

7:30 p.m.

APPEARANCES:

MR. PHILIP H. MITCHELL, CHAIRMAN

MS. CARRIE DAVIS

MR. KIRKE R. MACHON

MS. AURORA ABELLA-AUSTRIACO

MR. DONALD CRAMPTON

MS. DAWN DISHER

MR. R. DERIFIELD

MR. R. JOHNSON

MS. KRISTY L. FAFINSKI

REPORTED BY: LIDIA T. STEFANI, C.S.R.

 

2

CHAIRMAN MITCHELL: Good evening. I think we will start the first order of business.

Let the record reflect the presence of

Mr. Johnson, Mr. Machon and counsel liaison members, Alderman Crampton and Alderman Disher.

For the purpose of tonight's meeting, both alderman, liaison members, Alderman Crampton and Alderman Disher, will make up the core tonight. And there will be voting members for this proceeding pursuant to the rules of the Planning and Zoning Commission.

The second of order of business is the approval of the minutes of the meeting of

September 27th, all members having been served with a copy of the minutes.

Is there a motion?

MR. MACHON: So moved.

CHAIRMAN MITCHELL: Second?

MR. JOHNSON: I will second.

CHAIRMAN MITCHELL: Any discussion concerning the minutes? If not, all in favor please say aye. The minutes are approved.

MR. DERIFIELD: Since the last meeting, I wanted

 

3

to announce that Commissioner Bill Aumiller has resigned, so we are officially down to two members.

CHAIRMAN MITCHELL: You are here often as it is, but I'm sure it will continue.

The third order of business is the development cases, Case No. PUD-04-01, preliminary planned mixed use development and Case No. S-04-01, preliminary plat of subdivision for Target Area 2 in the uptown central business district.

This is a public hearing, and as a public hearing, we have a court reporter with us.

Let the record also reflect Ms. Abella-Austriaco.

(Discussion off the record.)

CHAIRMAN MITCHELL: Since this is a public hearing, everything that is said during the course of the public hearing has to be taken down by our court reporter. What that means for us is so that we, the members of the commission, can hear everything that is said, I will request that only one person speak at anytime during the course of the public hearing. As I said, that's so we can hear what is being said, and the court reporter can take down everything that is said. If more than one person is speaking, we can't

4

hear what's being said by anyone, and she can't down what she needs to take down and make a transcript and a record.

The process that we follow in our public hearing is that we first will ask the staff to do the commission of report on the subject of the application. Afterwards we will then ask the applicant to come forward and to present to the commission any evidence or presentations that they may wish to make in support of their application.

After that, anyone who wishes to address the commission or ask a question of the applicant will have an opportunity to do that. Anyone who does speak, however, and who do address the commission will have to do so under oath. What that means is a couple minutes after the staff report, I will ask anyone who wishes to address the commission, anyone who wishes to ask a question of the applicant, to ask you to stand, and you will be sworn in at that time.

So while we're going through the staff report, I want you to think long and hard and carefully about whether you think you might want to address the commission on this matter because at the time that I ask you to stand up, that will be your

5

time to do it. It doesn't mean you have to. You may change your mind. You may hear that your point or that your comment or your question was asked or made by somebody else before you. If that's the case, there is no need to come forward if you don't wish to.

So as I say, if you're sworn in, it doesn't mean you have to come forward, but if you think you may, that would be the time to stand up and do that.

So, with that said -- alderman?

ALDERMAN CRAMPTON: In light of the entry of Commissioner Austriaco, I wish further clarification of our statuses.

CHAIRMAN MITCHELL: I think, Alderman Crampton, you are the primary liaison, and Alderman Disher is the alternate, so I believe by rule, Alderman Crampton, you continue.

Having said that, any other questions by the members of the commission? If not, we will ask for the staff report at this point on this application and on these cases.

MS. DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will make this brief.

PRC Partners is the applicant for this case

6

and plans to construct a development containing commercial and residential uses in parts of Target Area 2 in the uptown central business district in the area generally bounded by Northwest Highway, Touhy Avenue and Morris Street.

To do this, two reviews by the commission are required, and one is a preliminary planned mixed use development, which is the subject of the public hearing this evening, and then the second is the preliminary plat of subdivision, which is also part of the review but not part of the public hearing.

The property is now -- used to be          had the Bredermann Auto Dealership as one of the occupants. That has been demolished and the area is now vacant. And then there is the Happy House Restaurant on the side of retail. And there is also the city reservoir and pump station along the city parking lot. Those reservoirs will be removed and located to Hinkley Park in the future.

The area surrounding the subject property, Napleton Cadillac and also a retirement home, which are not part of the project this evening, and also the Park Ridge Public Library and a number of office and service retail uses. Hinkley Park is also

7

located west of the property.

Notification of requirements for this case have been satisfied. Legal notice will be published in the paper. Two signs are posted on the property and neighboring property owners were notified by the applicant.

With regard to the preliminary plan development, just in summary here, the development would contain a mix of retail, restaurants, rowhouses, townhouses and multi-family residential on approximately 5.7 acres in Target Area 2 and uptown. Again, this area is not all of Target Area 2. It comprises some of the parcels that have been reviewed by the city in the past.

The project will contain three phases. One would be more of a townhouse, rowhouse type of product. There will be seven rowhouses and sixteen townhouses. Each would have a two-car attached garage. And there will be a single access road to this site off Meacham Avenue.

The second phase would be comprised of one primary building, and it would have about 29,000 square feet of retail on the first floor and 53 units of multi-family residential above. There will be a

8

surface parking lot and also an underground parking lot.

The third phase would have five buildings, and it would be about 66,000 square feet of retail, commercial space on the first floors with four stories and about 112 units of multi-family above. Again, there would be a surface parking lot along with two levels of underground parking. There will also be two pedestrian plazas on site in that particular phase.

There is a traffic analysis provided, and this traffic analysis has provided a number of recommendations and conclusions for modifying traffic patterns to facilitate movements in and around the site. There's also been a discussion on parking and how many spaces would be provided and how many would be demanded based on the uses.

There's a separate report assessment for sanitary sewer, stormwater detention and storm sewer for the project.

In addition, there are a number of street improvements that would entail street pavers, street trees, different planters and parkway planting and then also plantings in the plaza area and throughout

 

9

the site. So basically every street would be affected by this project and would be improved in some capacity along with the other right-of-way improvements.

And then finally the applicant addressed the findings and conclusions, which are required for plan developments, and it appears they have satisfied all eight of these findings, which is subject to discussion by the commission.

The staff conducted a preliminary review to determine how the project would -- how it would be applicable to the project, and the plan, which is a long-term vision for the city, it contains now a portion now contains an amendment to the plan, which is known as the uptown plan, approved in 2002, and is described as the vision for the uptown area as a whole, including Target Area 2.

The plan describes the Target Area 2 as top priority for mixed use development and also outlines design guidelines and appropriate uses and design considerations for Target Area 2, such as building heights and setbacks, layout consideration and traffic issues to be addressed.

There were also some broader issues that

10

staff addressed in the zoning ordinance along with a number of technical requirements, and there are quite a few pages listed on those items that the commission would want to consider, including some exceptions that the applicant would need in order to proceed with this project.

And finally, there was a preliminary plat of subdivision proposed as part of this project. And the lots that are proposed on the plat are also known as a plat of consolidation because they were consolidating a number of lots. They would divide the project, again, by phases into a number of different lots on each phase. And so staff reviewed those items and basically found that it was generally what is required with regard to the plat

requirements. And so if you have further comments about that, that would be something to discuss this evening.

And then also I have -- I just want to mention that I dropped or put on your chairs this evening a number of exhibits that would be part of the public hearing for the preliminary planned mixed use development by subdivision, and there are 23 different exhibits. If you want me to read through

11

them I will, but I will simply add these should be entered into the record, all exhibits listed on here, Nos. 1 through 23.

And with that, any questions?

CHAIRMAN MITCHELL: Are there any questions? Yes, Mr. Machon.

MR. MACHON: Please bear with me because it was a long staff report, so I have a few questions.

Starting on Page 2, Carrie, it says that the City Council approved an amendment to the Zoning Map in August of 2004 to rezone all of Target Area 2 to the B-5 Central Business District Planned Development District, including Napleton Cadillac and Summit Square.

I just want to confirm -- I know that believe what we did that night, but it was going to be investigated further as to whether or not the Napleton and Summit Square properties should be included in that. Is that what ultimately happened, they stayed in our -

MS. DAVIS: They did. Yes, that is a good question. There was a lot of discussion. And I apologize if we failed to bring that to your attention.

12

But the Napleton Cadillac and Summit Square Retirement Home is included in the rezoning, but they're not part of the project this evening. They were rezoned to be filed.

MR. MACHON: Okay. On Page 5 you talk about technical zoning ordinance requirements. A2. You talk about the minimum lot size for a planned development is two acres, meaning each block should consist of two acres. You talk about three distinct blocks. Are we talking about blocks or lots?

MS. DAVIS: The way the zoning ordinance describes it is by zoning lot size, but in conjunction -- it's described by zoning lot, and each one of those lots is supposed to be two acres

minimum. And really if you go back to the zoning lot definition, which is number 1 above, it talks about how a zoning lot may consist of one parcel or several continuous parcels.

In accordance with the zoning ordinance, the contiguous parts cannot be divided by streets, but this project is. I know it's a little confusing here but the parcels -- the lots are supposed to be contiguous, and in this case they are not because they are divided by streets.

13

MR. MACHON: The word "lot," instead of the word "block," that was my question. Where the word "block" appears doesn't have any special meaning in Paragraph 2.

MS. DAVIS: That was simply my way to clarify --clarify that what the zoning ordinance says, which in essence is each block should contain two, and they don't.

CHAIRMAN MITCHELL: Are you breaking up the three phases of the three blocks? Is that what -‑

MS. DAVIS: That's basically what I'm getting at here, yes.

MR. MACHON: The definition of block, Phase I block and -‑

MS. DAVIS: Phase II would be a block and Phase III would be a block.

MR. MACHON: Page 6 at the bottom, your Paragraph 9 where you are describing the zoning ordinance partner requirements. And about the third sentence it says, "One space for each gross square foot of retail area."

I'm assuming that's not -- that's too many spots. I was wondering what I'm supposed to write in there.

14

MS. DAVIS: Okay. Page 9 what -

MR. MACHON: Page 6, your Paragraph 9.

MS. DAVIS: One space for each gross square foot. I see. Yes. I meant to say for 300. It should be one space for each 300 gross square feet of retail.

MR. MACHON: Okay.

MS. DAVIS: Sorry about that.

And then restaurants are calculated differently, just so you are clear. They are 200 --one space per 200 square feet.

MR. MACHON: Okay. That's all I have.

CHAIRMAN MITCHELL: Any further questions by members of the -- okay.

If not, this is the opportunity I was talking about earlier. Anyone who would like to address the commission or ask a question now, please stand up on this matter.

Raise your right hands.

(Witnesses sworn.)

CHAIRMAN MITCHELL: When you step up to the podium and speak to the commission, please state your name and your address and/or affiliation.

At this point we ask the applicants present

15

to please come forward.

MR. KLAWITER: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, and the Planning & Zoning Commission, my name is

Rich Klawiter, K-l-a-w-i-t-e-r, from the law firm of Piper Rudnick, 203 North LaSalle Street Chicago. I represent PRC Partners.

We have a number of witnesses this evening who would like to offer testimony. We will do it through a power-point presentation, which we hope will answer a lot of the concerns that were raised in the very comprehensive staff report Ms. Davis prepared.

Obviously we will be glad to entertain questions at any time during the proceedings, either from the Planning & Zoning Commission or members of the public.

What I would like to do is turn it over to Mike George, who is a principal with Mid-America and one of the members of the development team. And he, in turn, will turn it over to our witnesses who are

representatives from our architectural team, our engineering, who are traffic engineers, and others. They will identify themselves by name and by affiliation. And obviously we will be happy to

16