HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025.03.25 PZB Meeting Minutes - ApprovedCase No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
1
DES PLAINES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING
MARCH 25, 2025
MINUTES
REVISED 4/7/2025
The Des Plaines Planning and Zoning Board held its regularly scheduled meeting on
Tuesday, March 25, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 102 of the Des Plaines Civic Center.
ARTUR ZADROZNY SWEARING IN
Chairman Szabo called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. and a roll call was established.
PRESENT: Bronakowski, Fowler, Zadrozny, Veremis, Weaver, Szabo
ABSENT: Catalano
ALSO PRESENT: Samantha Redman, Senior Planner
Jonathan Stytz, Senior Planner
Jeff Rogers, Director of Community & Economic Development
A quorum was present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion was made by Board Member Bronakowski, seconded by Board Member
Fowler to approve the meeting minutes of February 25, 2025.
AYES: Bronakowski, Fowler, Zadrozny, Veremis, Weaver, Szabo
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: None
PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEM
There was no public comment.
GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS – ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS
Chairman Szabo stated the list of administrative decisions provided on the agenda.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
2
Pending Applications:
1. Address: 2250 Mannheim Road Case Number: 25-005-TPLAT
The petitioner is requesting a Tentative Plat of Subdivision to split an existing lot into two
lots of record, and any other variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary.
Withdrawn by Applicant.
PIN: 09-29-403-005-0000
Petitioner: BP Pulse (Representative: Jason Skock, 5199 Locust Post Lane, Columbus,
OH 43230)
Owner: Hertz (Representative: Joshua Blum, 8501 Williams Road, Estero, FL
33928)
Chairman Szabo stated that 2285 Mannheim has asked for two continuances and now has
withdrawn the petition. Chairman Szabo asked for any public comment. None was given.
2. Address: 20 W. Golf Road Case Number: 25-010-CU
The petitioner is requesting a conditional use to allow a drive-through facility adjacent to
residences in the C-3 General Commercial district at 20 W. Golf Road, and any other
variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary.
PINs: 08-13-202-006-0000 and 08-13-202-030-0000
Petitioner: Kisan Patel, 4337 Emerson Avenue, Schiller Park, IL 60176
Owner: John Nasiopoulso, 20 W. Golf Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016
Chairman Szabo swore in Kisan Patel (4337 Emerson Avenue, Schiller Park, Illinois), Mario
Valentini (5105 Tollview Dr., Rolling Meadows, Illinois), and Jacob Mathiasen (5105 Tollview
Dr., Rolling Meadows, Illinois).
Mr. Mathiasen provides overview of the existing property. They are interested in dividing the
existing building into two spaces, and the west side will be for Scooter’s Coffee and the east side
of a future office/retail space. The plan has taken into consideration sound and light disturbance
from this use and limiting any traffic impacts.
Mr. Mathiasen provides an overview of the site context and the zoning including commercial on
the east and south and residential on the north and west. The site includes more landscaping than
the existing site. Access and drive thru locations will be in the same locati on as the existing.
Parking islands will be added to increase landscaping in the area.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
3
Mr. Mathiasen describes various elements of the site plan. A noise meter will be added to the
speaker to control for the noise and landscaping will be included to buffer any sound on the
property line. Information on the traffic study and parking information was discussed, seeking to
balance the drive thru and the office/retail needs of both tenants on the property. Two drive thru
lanes are intended to expedite services and reduce any traffic impacts.
Mr. Mathiasen describes the landscape plan, including arborvitaes along the proposed new fence
on the property. This landscaping will buffer sound and light that may affect the residences
surrounding this development.
Mr. Mathiasen describes the proposed floor plan and states it will meet ADA requirements. Mr.
Mathiasen describes the building elevations and will not change the building. The existing building
is brick and CMU and will be painted to match the Scooter’s and office/retail color schemes. Some
of the existing canopies will also be removed and a smooth EIFS coating will be added 10 feet
above the finished floor. The paint scheme will continue around the building and the existing
awnings will be swapped out with new awnings matching the color scheme. Metal siding will be
added to the drive-thru side. Mr. Mathiasen provides a list of building materials on the building.
The only materials not previously existing is the metal siding being added.
Mr. Mathiasen states the focus is on compatibility in the neighborhood, ensuring it meets code
requirements for sound, window glazing, and ADA compliance with sidewalks.
Member Weaver asked if there was consideration regarding closing acknowledged that the plans
would close one of the access points to improve circulation. What about converting the remaining
access point to three lanes, one going in and two going out for left and right turns?
Mr. Mathiasen states that they discussed this with the traffic consultant and stated it was a
possibility. However, they state that adding the potential third lane will improve traffic flow on the
site.
Mr. Valentini stated they would need to discuss closing this access point with IDOT. Member
Weaver stated he has concerns with traffic with the existing site design.
Mr. Valenti responds that some of the parking stalls would be blocked with the suggested option.
This option would also require additional discussion with IDOT. He states that he is unsure if they
meet parking requirements.
Member Fowler states that she is familiar with this site and it is a difficult left turn. She went often
when it was Johnny’s and it is difficult to make that left turn and strongly encourages them to
consider that option.
Senior Planner Stytz provides his staff report.
Issue: The petitioner requests a conditional use for a drive-through facility in the C-3 General
Commercial district adjacent to residential uses.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
4
Petitioner: Kisan Patel, 4337 Emerson Avenue, Schiller Park, IL 60176
Owner: John Nasiopoulos, 20 W. Golf Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016
Case Number: #25-010-CU
PINs: 08-13-202-006-0000; 08-13-202-030-0000
Ward Number: #4, Alderman Dick Sayad
Existing Zoning: C-3, General Commercial
Existing Land Uses: Restaurant with drive-through facility (commercial)
Surrounding Zoning: North: R-1, Single Family Residential District
South: C-3, General Commercial District
East: C-3, General Commercial District
West: R1, Single Family Residential District (Village of Mount
Prospect)
Surrounding Land Uses: North: Single Family Residences (residential)
South: Pharmacy (commercial)
East: Convenience Mart Fueling Station (commercial)
West: Single Family Residences (residential)
Street Classification: Golf Road is classified as a principal arterial road under Illinois
Department of Transportation (IDOT) jurisdiction.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as commercial.
Property/Zoning History: The subject property at 20 W. Golf Road was annexed into the City
in 1927 as undeveloped farmland. It was originally developed into a
retail store but was later converted into a Class A restaurant use. In
2000, a former restaurant use, Jay’s Beef, requested a conditional
use to convert the Class A restaurant into a Class B restaurant, which
was approved by City Council on April 3, 2000 by Ordinance Z-3-
00, but did not include an allowance for a drive-through facility. In
2002, a separate conditional use was requested by Jay’s Beef to
allow a drive-through facility on a property abutting residential,
which was approved by City Council on March 18, 202 by
Ordinance Z-4-02 with certain conditions and restrictions. In 2009,
the current Class B restaurant use, Johnny’s Place, began operation
and has been operating on the subject property since then.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
5
CONDITIONAL USE
Request Description: Overview
The subject property consists of two separate parcels under common
ownership, which are both zoned C-3 and addressed 20 W. Golf
Road. The 8,592-square-foot subject property is developed with a
single-tenant commercial building, paved off-street parking areas
accessed by two curb cuts off Golf Road, a pole sign, and single-
lane accessory drive-through facility as illustrated on the attached
Plat of Survey.
Pursuant to Section 12-7-3.K, a drive-through facility—as defined
below—is only allowed as an accessory use to a principal use (e.g.,
a restaurant) and cannot be established and operated as the principal
use of the property.
DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITY: An accessory facility, structure or
portion thereof that is designed, intended or used for transacting
business with customers located in motor vehicles. "Drive-through
facility" shall not include an automobile filling station or any use
that is otherwise listed specifically in a zoning district as a permitted
or a conditional use.
The proposal includes the renovation of the existing single-tenant
restaurant building into a two-unit commercial building: the west
side to be occupied by a quick service coffee shop, Scooter’s Coffee,
with a drive-through facility and the east side to be occupied by a
future commercial tenant as described in the attached Project
Narrative. Pursuant to Section 12-13-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, a
coffee shop is identified as a specialty food store—as defined
below—which is a permitted use in the C-3 district:
SPECIALTY FOOD STORE: A building or portion thereof where
the direct retail sale of prepared food items, either for immediate
consumption on premises or to carry out, are available. "Specialty
food" items include ice cream and frozen yogurt stores, bakery and
bagel shops, coffee and tea shops, confectionery and candy shops,
and other stores selling similar items. "Specialty food store" shall
not include any use that is otherwise listed specifically in a zoning
district as a permitted or conditional use.
Contrarily, the existing drive-through facility on the subject property
required a conditional use—which was obtained in 2002 as
illustrated in the attached Ordinance Z-4-02—in order to be installed
and utilized on the subject property which is adjacent to residential
uses to the north and west.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
6
Proposed Changes to Drive-Through Operation Hours
As noted in the attached Project Narrative, Scooter’s Coffee would
be open from 5 am to 9 pm Sunday through Monday and intends to
utilize the drive-through facility during this time. However,
Ordinance Z-4-02 limits the hours of operation for the drive-through
facility from 10 am to 10 pm Monday through Sunday and requires
an amendment to the conditional use in order to extend the drive-
through facility operation hours beyond these previously approved
times. As a result, the petitioner must obtain a conditional use to
allow the drive-through facility as proposed.
Floor Plan and Elevations
The attached Architectural Plans include a floor plan of the 2,435-
square-foot commercial building, showing the split of the building
between the proposed Scooter’s Coffee and the future commercial
tenant. Scooter’s Coffee intends to occupy 1,182 square feet or 48.5
percent of the building, a majority of the floor plan designated for
kitchen and drive-through serving areas. However, an approximate
120-square-foot area off the vestibule is designated for a point-of-
sale and small seating area. The proposed improvements to the east
tenant space are not shown as no user has yet been identified.
However, when a future tenant is identified, a separate building
permit will be required to specify the improvements to this space.
Related to the building elevations, the proposal includes aesthetic
updates through painting and the installation of (i) awnings, (ii)
accent finishing systems (EIFS) on the upper level of the building’s
elevations, and (iii) glazing on the south building elevation as noted
on the Proposed Exterior Material Elevations sheet in the attached
Architectural Plans. The proposed changes to the front, street-facing
building elevation require the proposal to comply with the Building
Design Standards in Section 12-3-11 of the Zoning Ordinance,
which is summarized in the table below for the subject property.
Item Standard Proposed
Transparency
(street-facing
elevations)
Minimum 75 percent transparency for restaurants,
retail stores, and service uses from 2 ft to 9 ft above
sidewalk
77 percent
Blank Wall
Limitations
No rectangular area greater than 30 percent of a
story's facade may be windowless;
No part of a story's facade may be windowless for a
horizontal distance greater than 15 feet.
26 percent of façade
windowless
4’-1½” horizontal
distance windowless
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
7
Access and Circulation
There are currently two curb cuts from Golf Road for the subject
property, the westernmost curb cut with full-access and the
easternmost curb cut as a limited right-in-right-out access given the
raised median on Golf Road and left turn lane for northbound Mount
Prospect Road. Given concerns associated with the easternmost curb
cut’s proximity to the neighboring convenience mart fueling station
entrance and limited access onto and from Golf Road, staff
suggested and the petitioner agreed to remove the easternmost curb
cut and replace it with a turf, parking, and landscaped area. The
remaining westernmost curb cut will be 26 feet wide, which
complies with the minimum 22-foot-wide requirement in Section
12-9-6 of the Zoning Ordinance for two-way travel aisles.
Related to site circulation, adjustments have been made to the
parking area drive aisles, drive-through facility lane, and drive aisles
to ensure compliance with Section 12-9-6. The front parking area
drive aisles exceed 22 feet wide providing motorists sufficient space
to park and leave the subject property without traveling around the
building. The drive-through facility lane is 12 feet wide to provide
sufficient space for drive-through queuing and circulation for
Scooter’s Coffee. In addition, a separate one-way travel lane around
the building is provided to allow garbage trucks access to the
existing dumpster enclosure at the northeast corner of the property
as well as an escape lane for motorists in the drive-through facility
lane. While there are some conceivable chokepoints in front of the
building at both the entrance and exit of the drive-through facility
due to site constraints, the proposal has maximized the space
available to allow for adequate clearances.
Drive-Through Queuing Spaces
Section 12-9-4 of the Zoning Ordinance governs the number of
queuing spaces required for the existing drive-through facility to
ensure there is ample space for the queuing of motorists utilizing the
drive-through facility, especially during peak business hours. Every
drive-through facility must provide a minimum of six stacking
1 Finishing systems (EIFS) may be used as a permitted ground story material as an accent material. Such material
shall only be used when installed at least eight feet (8') above the finished first floor.
Exterior
Building
Materials
Permitted ground story materials are face brick,
stucco, metal, and concrete masonry units1
Concrete masonry units,
metal, accent EIFS
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
8
spaces plus one stacking space per waiting area provided which do
not interfere with the ingress and egress of the off-street parking
provided on site. The Proposed Architectural Site Plan and Details
sheet in the attached Architectural Plans illustrates that 11 stacking
spaces are provided from the entrance to the drive-through lane to
the pick-up window without any direct interfere with the off-street
parking spaces noted below. In addition, the attached Preliminary
Traffic Statement identifies that the drive-through configuration is
sufficient for the anticipated queuing volumes.
Off-Street Parking
Sections 12-9-7 and 12-9-8 of the Zoning Ordinance govern the
number of off-street standard and accessible parking spaces required
based on the property uses. While the east tenant space use has not
been defined, a parking calculation for the proposed specialty food
store—requiring a minimum of one off-street parking space for
every 200 feet of gross floor area—was conducted. Given the small
customer area in the front of the proposed specialty food store, only
two off-street parking spaces, including one accessible space, would
be required. However, the Proposed Architectural Site Plan and
Details sheet in the attached Architectural Plans illustrates a total of
16 off-street parking spaces, including one accessible space, in
compliance with this regulation.
Landscaping and Screening
The subject property is currently void of landscaping improvements.
However, the proposal includes the installation of the following
landscape improvements throughout the subject property to make it
more compliant with the regulations in Chapter 10 “Landscaping
and Screening” of the Zoning Ordinance:
• Addition of perimeter parking lot landscaping areas for the
entire front off-street parking lot;
• Addition of interior parking lot landscaping areas up in front
of the building and at the end of all off-street parking rows;
• Landscape buffer areas along the full west and north
property lines with fencing and arborvitae plantings to
provide ample screening between the subject property and
the adjacent residences; and
• Replacement of gravel groundcover with wood mulch and
natural turf.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
9
Standards for Conditional Use: Conditional Use requests are subject to the standards set forth in
Section 12-3- 4(E) of the Zoning Ordinance. Rationale for how the proposed amendments would
satisfy the standards is provided below and in the attached Petitioner Responses to Standards. For
its rationale, the Board may use the responses provided as written, modify them, or adopt its own.
1. The proposed Conditional Use is in fact a Conditional Use established within the specific
Zoning district involved:
Comment: A drive-through facility operated on a property adjacent to residential requires a
conditional use as specified in Section 12-7-3.K of the Zoning Ordinance for properties in the
C-3 District.
2. The proposed Conditional Use is in accordance with the objectives of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan:
Comment: The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as commercial and strives to
promote new commercial businesses in Des Plaines. This property is positioned along the Golf
Road corridor and surrounded by a mixture of residential and commercial development. The
proposal for the new commercial building with two tenant spaces at the subject property—
even with the drive-through facility—generally falls within the principles and goals of the
Comprehensive Plan.
3. The proposed Conditional Use is designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be
harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the
general vicinity:
Comment: The existing drive-through facility is positioned and designed in a similar fashion
to other drive-through facilities in the C-3 district and is generally harmonious with the existing
commercial development in the immediate vicinity including the existing drive-through
facility currently utilized by the pharmacy across the street from the subject property. While
the proposal intends to slightly widen the drive-through lane to 12 feet in order to provide
sufficient space for queuing vehicles, the overall design and location of the drive-through
facility itself will not change.
4. The proposed Conditional Use is not hazardous or disturbing to existing neighboring
uses:
Comment: The existing drive-through facility has been in operation on the subject property
since 2002 and during its current hours of operation from 10 am to 10 pm has generally not
had more hazardous or disturbing effects on neighboring uses than a typical drive-through
facility. However, the proposed change in hours of operation of this drive-through facility to
permit its operation as early as 5 am may subject residents located directly north and west of
the subject property to the general adverse effects attributed to drive-through facilities at early
hours in the day, seven days a week.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
10
5. The proposed Conditional Use is to be served adequately by essential public facilities
and services, such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures,
refuse disposal, water and sewer, and schools; or, agencies responsible for establishing
the Conditional Use shall provide adequately any such services:
Comment: The existing drive-through facility on this site is adequately served by essential
public facilities and services. While the proposal removes one of the existing curb cuts from
Golf Road, staff do not have concerns that this will impact the essential public facilities and
services that are currently serving the subject property.
6. The proposed Conditional Use does not create excessive additional requirements at
public expense for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the
economic well-being of the entire community:
Comment: The existing drive-through facility has not created a burden on public facilities and
has not been detrimental to the economic well-being of the community. There is no indication
that the expansion of the drive-through facility hours of operation will have negative economic
impact on the community as a whole or create the need for additional City services provided
that appropriate screening improvements are installed and the drive-through facility is operated
according to all requirements in the C-3 district and the environmental performance standards
in Section 12-12 of the Zoning Ordinance.
7. The proposed Conditional Use does not involve uses, activities, processes, materials,
equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property,
or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke fumes,
glare or odors:
Comment: The operation of a drive-through facility by nature is attributed to activities that
generate traffic, noise, smoke fumes, glare, and odors from vehicles occupying this space for
pick-up of items from the establishment. Related to traffic, the proposal removes the east curb
cut nearest the drive-through facility to reduce the number of vehicular interactions on and off
the site while also increasing the stacking capacity of the drive-through facility, both of which
help address concerns related to traffic backups and circulation issues on site. Related to light
and glare, the proposal includes the installation of a new eight-foot-tall fence along the rear
(north) property line and installation of 57 arborvitae plantings along the rear (north) and side
(west) property lines to further screen the residences from the drive-through facility, which in
part help address the light and glare concerns associated with drive-through facilities.
Furthermore, the attached Project Narrative identifies that the total time a motorist spends in
the drive-through lane from entry to exit is around 60-90 seconds, mentioning that this helps
reduce the noise concerns for residents. That said, the noise generated from the drive-through
speaker, light generated from site lighting, and odor generated from vehicles queuing in the
drive-through lane are still viable concerns with this request given the proposed extension of
hours of operation for the drive-through facility. As such, staff have added conditions related
to the drive-through facility hours of operation, speaker system volume, and lighting plan to
reduce adverse impacts on the neighboring residential properties.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
11
8. The proposed Conditional Use provides vehicular access to the property designed so that
it does not create an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares:
Comment: The proposal removes the existing east curb cut on the subject property to reduce
interferences with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares and circulation on the subject
property. However, with the drive-through facility, painted arrows will be necessary to clearly
define the direction of travel throughout the subject property to ensure that sufficient access
and circulation are maintained for all uses. That said, staff have added a condition requiring
the installation of painted arrows on all drive aisles throughout the subject property.
9. The proposed Conditional Use does not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of
natural, scenic, or historic features of major importance:
Comment: The proposal would not cause the destruction, loss, or damage of any natural, scenic,
or historic features of major importance. The building and site were already developed for
similar uses, including the accessory drive-through facility.
10. The proposed Conditional Use complies with all additional regulations in the Zoning
Ordinance specific to the Conditional Use requested:
Comment: This proposal with the aforementioned adjustments will meet all other requirements
of the Zoning Ordinance for the C-3 General Commercial District.
PZB Procedure and Recommended Conditions: Under Section 12-3-4.D (Procedure for Review
and Decision for Conditional Uses) of the Zoning Ordinance, the PZB has the authority to
recommend that the City Council approve or deny the aforementioned request. Consideration of
the request should be based on a review of the information presented by the applicant and the
findings made above, as specified in Section 12-3-4.E (Standards for Conditional Use) of the
Zoning Ordinance. If the PZB recommends and City Council ultimately approves the request, staff
recommends the following conditions.
Conditions of Approval:
1. The petitioner agrees to maintain the same or fewer hours of operation for the drive-through
facility lane as the coffee shop, not to exceed 5 am to 9 pm, seven days a week. The
petitioner agrees to seek an amended conditional use if the hours of operation for the drive-
through facility are proposed to be extended beyond these limits.
2. The petitioner must restripe the parking areas of the subject properties in conformance with
the Proposed Architectural Site Plan and Details sheet and add painted directional arrows
throughout the subject property. Ample off-street parking spaces for both uses shall be
provided on site at all times.
3. At time of building permit, the petitioner must provide a photometric plan identifying the
location of all existing and proposed exterior lighting fixtures and foot-candle
measurements for the entire site in conformance with Section 12-12-10 of the Zoning
Ordinance. Foot-candle measurements shall also be provided for a minimum of two rows
outside the property boundaries.
4. A sound meter must be installed near the drive-through facility speaker and utilized at all
times to ensure the speaker is not audible outside the boundaries of the subject property.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
12
Member Weaver asked if the City’s traffic engineer assessed the topic he raised regarding closing
the curb cut. Senior Planner Stytz stated that was a recommendation by staff. There was not
discussion of the three lanes, but that any changes to existing curb cuts will need to be approved
by IDOT.
Member Veremis asked if there is seating inside the facility. Mr. Mathiasen states yes, there are
seats provided.
Member Veremis asked about what type of business they foresee for the east tenant. Mr. Patel
states they are unsure about the space, but that it could be an office space. They are planning to
acquire the property but are not the owner yet.
Member Bronakowski asked about the ideal tenant. The concern he has for this property is the
small size in a high traffic area. If you accidentally pull into the lot, with this site plan, it could be
challenging to pull out of the lot. His concern is what the likelihood of an accident would be in
this high traffic area. Mr. Patel stated they are considering an insurance agency who reached out,
Geico or State Farm. It will not be a food service at this time.
Member Bronakowski asked about indoor seating. Mr. Patel says only two seats. The focus is on
the drive-through concept.
Chairman Szabo stated the board members made an excellent point. Szabo states another restaurant
would be challenging in the east tenant space because of conflicting hours. In other areas of the
city, multiple restaurants in these areas could be a disaster. Mr. Valentini stated filling the east
tenant space has been a discussion and limiting that use to something low impact. It is good for
the future owner to know so they are careful to market that space.
Member Fowler asks if they are a to-go restaurant, not a typical coffee spot where people sit on
their laptops and if we add a condition to require the addition of the third lane. She agrees with
Member Bronakowski. Mr. Valentini stated that could be a condition to discuss with staff and there
needs to be discussion with IDOT regardless, because one apron is being closed, and the proposal
will be under the scrutiny of IDOT. It is something that could be discussed with staff and IDOT. It
is easier to put it as a condition, throw it to IDOT as a scenario, and see what they say about what
they can/cannot do.
Member Weaver has great faith that IDOT will look at that request carefully and command the
third lane. I think their concern will be for the traffic and potential for accidents.
Member Weaver had another question on the drawings for the east tenant a front, side, and back
entrance. The coffee operation is from 5am to 9pm. Where would supplies be received? Where
would garbage and waste exit the building? The drive-thru is covering several sides [of the
building] for many hours of the day and night.
Mr. Valentini states they cannot speak for the potential tenant on the east. They did not alter the
existing exits on the current building. The landlord would need to ask them to coordinate on off-
peak hours in order to have deliveries made. If this is an office use, this becomes a point of least
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
13
contention. They don’t have a lot of deliveries; they will have quick drop offs. We do not think
those are long duration items. Trash pickup is something that needs to be discussed with the waste
management company to prevent pickup at 6 am during the busy time for the coffee shop. One of
the entrances could potentially be closed off in the future. The adjacent tenant would have the rear
exit, but that will be the main delivery door for the coffee shop now.
Member Weaver asked when deliveries come to the coffee shop. Mr. Patel states it is overnight,
and they will have a key to the building to open the doors.
Member Weaver asked about refuse collection for both tenants. Mr. Patel states that they will share
the same dumpster and same trash pick-up.
Member Bronakowski asked about congestion in this location. There is concern about one
entrance/exit. Has there been discussion with the gas station next door to add a connection between
the property?
Mr. Valentini stated that no, there has not been a conversation about that with the gas station.
Potentially that is an option but would rely on a separate party for that agreement. However, they
could potentially cause a problem with a person at the gas station using that exit as an outlet onto
Golf Rd to avoid traffic on Mt. Prospect Rd. He understands concern with congestion. KLOA
provided a traffic impact analysis stated support in their report for this facility. If they had
objections, it would have been in the KLOA traffic statement. KLOA is being relied on for the
traffic analysis because they are the experts and do many reports in the Chicago area.
Member Bronakowski states he will trust the experts.
Member Zadrozny asked about what products they will be selling. Mr. Patel mentioned they will
sell primarily coffee and some donuts.
Member Zadrozny asked City staff if there have been any complaints regarding this drive thru in
the past. There could potentially be several cars queuing early in the morning on this site. Mr. Patel
states that it is generally 60-150 seconds to process orders. The restaurant is relatively fast
compared to competitors.
Chairman Szabo opened public comment. No members of the public came forward. Chairman
Szabo closed the public hearing and entertained a motion regarding the case.
A motion was made by Member Weaver and seconded by Member Veremis to recommend
approval of the conditional use to the City Council, with four conditions drafted by staff.
AYES: Bronakowski, Catalano, Fowler, Zadrozny, Veremis, Weaver,
Szabo
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: None
***MOTION CARRIED***
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
14
3. Address: 200 Howard Avenue Case Number: 25-012-TA -CU
The petitioner requests: (i) text amendments to the Zoning Ordinance related to assembly
uses in manufacturing zoning districts; (ii) a Conditional Use for a proposed assembly use
at the subject property; and (iii) any other variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be
necessary.
PINs: 09-30-101-031-0000 and 09-30-101-032-0000
Petitioner: Insight Church, Inc., P.O. Box 188, Tinley Park, IL 60477
Owner: HOH Owner LLC, 837 W. Junior Terrace, Chicago, IL 60613
Chairman Szabo swore in Braeden Lord (Taft Stettinius & Hollister, LLP, 111 E. Wacker Drive,
Suite 2600, Chicago, IL 60601), Robb Thompson (Insight Church, 4400 Greenwood St, Skokie,
IL 60076), Linda Thompson (Insight Church, 4400 Greenwood St, Skokie, IL 60076) Thomas
Gath (481 W. Savoy Round Lake, IL), James Ward (18500 92nd Ave., Tinley Park, IL 60487), and
Shannon Westberg (20 Chestnut Ave., Clarendon Hills, IL).
Mr. Lord summarized the applicant’s request.
Senior Planner Redman confirmed that copies of the applicant’s addendum of materials was
provided to the PZB members.
Mr. Ward greeted the PZB and summarized the details of Insight Church. Insight Church is a multi-
location church founded in 2011 with existing locations in Skokie and Tinley Park. He summarized
the beliefs and teachings of the Church and relationships with their communities including
coordinating with the Skokie Police Department for involvement in crisis situations. The
leadership of the church look forward to coordinating with Des Plaines community leaders to
improve the quality of life for the City of Des Plaines.
Member Fowler inquired about the reasoning for selection of this particular location in the City.
Mr. Ward identified the accessibility of the site from the highway provides opportunities to serve
populations from a wide area.
Member Veremis inquired whether the Skokie location would be vacated. Mr. Ward noted that
space in Skokie is currently leased from a Park District. The new operations in Des Plaines would
initially supplement the existing operations in Skokie while also providing permanent office
space.
Member Veremis inquired about the comparative sizes of the Skokie operation and the proposed
Des Plaines operation. Mr. Ward answered that the Des Plaines location is slightly larger and more
functional than the one in Skokie.
Mr. Lord summarized the details of the proposed amendments to the City Code which would add
a conditional use land use in the M-2 District for a manufacturing-zoned assembly use. As
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
15
proposed, buffer setbacks are required. The amendments would be intended to minimize negative
impacts upon adjacent properties.
Mr. Lord summarized the intent of the proposed buffer setbacks from various uses and major
roadways, the downtown, and the Rivers Casino. The buffers would assist with limiting utilization
of industrial property for large quantities of assembly uses and would not conflict with existing
allowances in the Code establishing requirements which allow assembly uses near the downtown
and in other areas of the community.
The proposed use would occupy Suite 202 in the existing multi-tenant building. The use would not
be expected to have negative impacts on the operations of other businesses in the center. The space
was developed in 1986 and has been vacant for approximately six months after occupancy by a
prior office use. The proposed use would be especially well suited for the proposed tenant space
which is highly visible from the public right-of-way on a site with ample off-street parking spaces.
Visitors to the site would contribute to the economic vitality of the City as many visitors would be
expected to visit other businesses in the community before or after their visit to the site. A summary
of the proposed schedule of weekly and monthly operations and anticipated traffic volumes was
presented.
Mr. Lord presented a summary of the existing tenant mix throughout the center including existing
hours of operations. The proposed use would not create significant conflicts with the existing uses
and would typically be comprised of up to two employees occupying the offices on the property
when church services were not in progress.
Mr. Lord summarized the standards for text amendments and the applicant’s evidence and
testimony indicating their compliance with the applicable standards.
The proposed tenant would contribute to common maintenance expenses, would contribute to the
economic vitality of the development via payment of rent, and would increase the appearance of
the multi-tenant center by adding an occupancy to a key tenant space in the development which is
currently vacant.
The proposed use would help strengthen connections between congregants and local employers.
Many buildings throughout the City’s industrial areas are approaching the end of their useful life
and are experiencing pressures for new investment and/or consideration of alternative occupancies.
The proposed text amendment would require assembly use occupancies to locate within 150 feet
of public rights-of-way to ensure visibility of such uses.
The proposed use would serve a diverse population and would serve as a conduit for reaching
diverse populations within the community.
The proposed text amendment would provide property owners with an additional tool to find
tenants for vacant space throughout the M Districts. Presently, there is an especially depressed
demand for office space due to changes in employee behavior and expectations since the COVID
pandemic. The lack of opportunity to consider assembly uses creates challenges for the se property
owners to secure tenants in some properties, including legacy developments such as the multi-
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
16
tenant building on the subject property. All proposed assembly uses could be considered on a case-
by-case basis in accordance with the conditional use standards.
Mr. Lord presented specific information regarding the proposed use in accordance with the
conditional use standards. The existing development is comprised of eight freestanding buildings
with various office and logistics/warehouse uses and 339 shared off-street parking spaces. The
proposed space is comprised of more than 7,000 square feet. Several site photos were presented as
well as the proposed floor plan. The proposed use would be expected to be comprised of
congregation space, restrooms, classrooms for Sunday school, and offices. Access to the site is
available from a curb cut near the tenant space to be occupied. Two staff members would be present
during operations outside of proposed assembly services. A weekly sermon service would be
scheduled in addition to a monthly prayer service.
Mr. Lord noted that the proposed use would comply with the City’s conditional use standards and
would be operated in accordance with these requirements. The use would operate on days and at
times which would not conflict with other uses in the vicinity. A preliminary review by City staff
of utility service to the property was found to be sufficient for the proposed use.
Member Weaver asked whether SCIS would continue to occupy their existing tenant
space. Thomas Gath, broker representing the property owner, confirmed that SCIS maintains a
one-year lease and they expect their continued occupancy into the future.
Member Weaver inquired whether the adjacent tenant space is occupied, 204B. Mr. Gath noted
that the space is currently vacant and is comprised of 1,578 square feet. This space is separated
from Suite 202 by a demising wall.
Member Veremis inquired about the percentage of development that is vacant. Mr. Gath confirmed
the current vacancy is approximately 20 percent.
Member Veremis inquired about anticipation of future growth. Mr. Ward confirmed that they do
not have specific expectations but hope to grow in the future.
Member Bronakowski asked for confirmation of any other locations that were considered. Mr.
Ward noted that they are working with a broker but prefer this space due to its proximity to
highway access. Uses such as this have become more popular due to improvements in technology.
Member Zadrozny asked for confirmation of the maximum occupancy of the proposed space. Mr.
Lord confirmed that the maximum occupancy would be 140 occupants, however the expected
regular occupancy would be approximately 60 occupants.
Member Veremis inquired about the draft text amendment about accommodating the proposed land
use. Senior Planner Redman stated that churches are classified within the assembly use definition.
Chairman Szabo requested a summary of the proposal from staff.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
17
Senior Planner Redman summarized the details of the City Code and the applicant’s request. She
noted the need to consider potential text amendments in the context of the entire City and all
districts where a text amendment may change applicable requirements.
A text amendment regarding assembly uses in institutional districts was considered in 2024 and
was subsequently adopted. The applicant’s specific request includes various qualifying details
including requiring proposed uses to be noncommercial assembly uses as well as various buffer
distances.
The applicant proposes several conditions to limit the quantity of potential assembly uses in
manufacturing districts. The proposed buffers would create an area generally inclusive of the
Howard Avenue corridor and other properties near I-90 in the vicinity of the subject property. A
map of the potential areas where an assembly use would be permissible in M Districts was
presented.
Ms. Redman summarized the importance of the manufacturing district properties to employment
and economic production of the City and referenced the detailed analysis provided within the staff
report.
Issue: Consider Zoning Ordinance amendments to: (i) define “Manufacturing Zoned Assembly
Uses” in Section 12-13-3; (ii) amend the use matrix in Section 12-7-5.A.6 to allow “Manufacturing
Zoned Assembly Use”; and consider a Conditional Use for a Manufacturing Zoned Assembly Use
at 200 Howard Ave., Suite 202.
Petitioner: Insight Church, Inc., P.O. Box 188, Tinley Park, IL 60477
Owner: HOH Owner LLC, 837 W. Junior Terrace, Chicago, IL 60613
Case Number: 25-012-TA -CU
PINs: 09-30-101-031-0000; 09-30-101-032-0000
Ward: #5, Alderman Carla Brookman
Existing Zoning: M-2, General Manufacturing District
Existing Land Use: Multi-tenant manufacturing building
Surrounding Zoning: North: M-2, General Manufacturing District
South: M-2, General Manufacturing District
East: M-2, General Manufacturing District
West: M-2, General Manufacturing District
Surrounding Land Use: North: Manufacturing building
South: Manufacturing building and railroad
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
18
East: Railroad
West: Manufacturing building
Street Classification: Howard Avenue is classified as a local road and is under the
jurisdiction of the City of Des Plaines.
Comprehensive Plan: “Industrial” is the use illustrated in the Comprehensive Plan.
Project Overview: The petitioner, Insight Church, LLC, is the prospective lessee of
Suite 202 of 200 Howard Ave. This tenant space is within a multi-
tenant building which has historically included primarily office
spaces and small warehouses. Insight Church is interested in
operating a religious assembly use facility within Suite 202 of this
building. No proposed expansions or exterior alterations are
proposed for the building. All proposed uses will be located inside
the building. Refer to the “Floor Plan” attachment.
Zoning Permitted or Conditional Use Count of Parcels
R-1 Conditional use, if on sites of 1 acre or more with
frontage on a collector or arterial street
87 parcels
R-2 Conditional use, if on sites of 1 acre or more with
frontage on a collector or arterial street
0 parcels
R-3 Conditional use 1,494 parcels
R-4 Conditional use 779 parcels
C-3 Conditional use 800 parcels
C-5 Conditional use 120 parcels
I-1 Permitted by right if along an arterial roadway;
Conditional use if not located along an arterial
roadway
67 parcels
C-1, C-2, C-4, C-6, C-7,
M-1, M-2, M-3
Not permissible N/A
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
19
Overview of Requests To allow this use in this location, the applicant requests the
following:
1. Text amendment to the zoning ordinance defining
Manufacturing Zoned Assembly Uses;
2. Text amendment to the zoning ordinance allowing
Manufacturing Zoned Assembly Uses within the M-2 district;
and
3. Conditional use for a Manufacturing Zoned Assembly Use, if
required by proposed text amendment allowing this use in the
M-2 district.
Text Amendment Request Currently, City Code identifies assembly uses within the
Institutional zoning district as well as several residential and
commercial districts, either permitted by right or as a conditional
use.
Refer to Existing Assembly Use map for locations where an
assembly use may currently locate. The table below summarizes
requirements for assembly uses within each zoning district:
Proposed Text Amendments
Definition
In 2018, the Zoning Ordinance was amended to establish regulations
surrounding assembly uses within residentially and commercially
zoned properties. In 2024, an additional definition for institutionally
zoned assembly uses was added to the zoning ordinance. Included
below are the three current definitions.
• COMMERCIALLY ZONED ASSEMBLY USES: A use that is
primarily for the purpose of the assembly of people, which can
contain a combination of uses that take place in both principal
and accessory structures. Such uses include: commercial theater,
banquet halls, nightclubs, church, synagogue, temple, meeting
house, mosque, or other place of worship.
• RESIDENTIALLY ZONED ASSEMBLY USES: A use that is
primarily for the purpose of the assembly of people for a non-
commercial purpose, which can contain a combination of uses
that take place in both principal and accessory structures. Such
uses include: community center, membership organizations,
church, synagogue, temple, meeting house, mosque, or other
place of worship.
• INSTITUTIONALLY ZONED ASSEMBLY USES: A use that
is primarily for the purpose of the assembly of people, which can
contain a combination of uses that take place in both principal
and accessory structures. Such uses include: commercial
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
20
theaters, banquet halls, event spaces, churches, synagogues,
temples, meeting houses, mosque, or other place of worship.
Institutional Zoned Assembly Uses do not include nightclubs.
Such uses must adhere to the off street parking requirements
under "assembly uses".
The petitioner proposes a similar definition to the above, but
clarifies the use should have a “non-commercial” purpose. The
applicant’s draft definition is as follows:
MANUFACTURING ZONED ASSEMBLY USE: A use that is
primarily for the purpose of the assembly of people for a non-
commercial purpose, which can contain a combination of uses
that take place in both principal and accessory structures. A
Manufacturing Zoned Assembly Use may include: community
center, membership organizations, church, synagogue, temple,
meeting house, mosque, or other place of worship. Such uses
shall adhere to the off-street parking requirements under
"assembly uses".
Within the Response to Standards for Amendment attachment, the
petitioner discusses the rationale for their definition specifying the
assembly being for a “non-commercial purpose”. The Board may
request additional details or evidence regarding the applicant’s claim
of non-commercial assembly uses benefitting adjacent employers.
Use Matrix
The purpose stated for manufacturing districts within the Zoning
Ordinance is “to protect the stability of manufacturing activities in
the City and to encourage the development of new manufacturing
activities by providing adequate and appropriate space within the
City.” Any erosion of this purpose with the introduction of non-
compatible or less economically productive uses should be
considered carefully. The M-2 zoning district has a wider range of
uses permitted by right or with a conditional use than the other
manufacturing districts and is generally intended for higher intensity
uses such as warehouses, heavy manufacturing, and distribution
facilities.
The applicant proposes the following text amendments to the use
matrix:
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
21
Section 12-7-6: Manufacturing Districts Regulations
M-1 M-2 M-3
***
Manufacturing Zoned Assembly
Uses
C8,9
***
8. Any manufacturing zoned assembly use must have an
entrance that faces or is located within 150 feet of a public
right-of-way.
9. No manufacturing zoned assembly use shall be located
within 1,320 feet of an R-1, R-2, R-3, or R-4 District; 1,760
feet of the Touhy Avenue public right-of-way; or 5,280 feet
of the C-5 or C-6 District.
Refer to Text Amendment Buffer Map to understand the locations
where these uses may be located with a conditional use. Rationale for
the buffers and the distance are provided within the Petitioner’s
Response to Standards for Amendment
Examples from Other Communities
Within their narrative, the petitioner has provided a summary of
zoning ordinances from six surrounding municipalities, showing
that various assembly uses are permitted in industrial or
manufacturing districts with a special or conditional use. While this
comparison highlights how other communities accommodate such
uses, these municipalities lack the proximity to O’Hare Airport and
Interstate 90 making Des Plaines’ manufacturing-zoned properties
particularly valuable for import/export operations and for improving
employee commutes, expanding the potential workforce, and
making these businesses more attractive to prospective employees.
Conditional Use Proposed Uses of Building and Hours of Operation
Refer to the Petitioner’s Narrative for an overview of the proposed
activities at the site. Insight Church intends to primarily use the
property for religious services with accessory classroom and
rehearsal spaces for related activities.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
22
Off-Street Parking
Pursuant to Section 12-9-7, commercially zoned assembly uses for
worship facilities without affixed seating are required to provide one
off-street parking space for every 60 square feet of gross activity
area. The office spaces currently used in the building require 1 space
for every 250 square feet of gross floor area.
The definition of “floor area” in Section 12-13-3 allows certain
spaces such as restrooms, mechanical rooms, hallways, and a
percentage of storage areas to be excluded. The table below reflects
the floor area of the tenant space per this definition.
Use Floor Area or Seats/Employees1 Required parking2
Assembly use 3,851 sq ft 65 spaces
Office 1,072 sq ft 5 spaces
Total Required Spaces 70 spaces
Total Existing Spaces 339 spaces
(shared)
1 Excludes floor area for mechanical rooms, restrooms, and storage areas
2 Spaces rounded up to next whole number
Parking will not be separately dedicated for this use versus other
tenant spaces. A total of 331 standard spaces and 8 accessible spaces
are provided for shared use by all tenants of this facility. Staff
completed an analysis of all existing uses on the property and
determined, with this proposed assembly use, the total minimum
required parking for all uses on the property is 295 spaces, therefore
sufficient required parking is provided on the property per Section
12-9-7. Further, per City Code required parking spaces for each use
are assumed to be available 24/7, and therefore additional capacity
for parking during peak periods could be accommodated since every
business will likely not be open simultaneously.
Traffic
Although a traffic impact study is typically associated with a
conditional use permit for assembly uses, a waiver was requested by
the applicant and granted by the Zoning Administrator based on the
limited traffic generated by this use compared to the overall volume
of traffic traveling in and around this site, and staff’s familiarity with
the building, tenant mix, and site operations stemming from recent
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
23
code enforcement actions. Refer to the Traffic Waiver Request
attachment. If needed, the Board may request additional information
regarding parking, traffic management, projected trip generation,
etc.
In 2024, a Zoning Certificate was approved for the overall property
to allow businesses within several tenant spaces to park larger trucks
and vehicles on the property in designated locations. Refer to the
2024 Zoning Certificate Parking Plan attachment. A site plan,
approved by the Community and Economic Development
Department and the Fire Prevention Division, includes a compliant
fire lane surrounding the building. This plan regulates the parking
and vehicle storage operations throughout the property. If the PZB
identifies a reasonable nexus between the proposed use and the site
plan, they may recommend amendments to the currently approved
plan.
Noise and Other Nuisance
The property and all associated uses will be required to meet all
environmental performance standards surrounding noise, odor,
light, or other potentially disruptive elements pursuant to Title 12,
Chapter 12 of the City Code. A condition of approval states a special
event license is required for any special events located outside of the
building. This condition of approval is suggested to provide
certainty of safe circulation patterns around the building due to the
frequent large truck traffic on the property related to businesses
within other tenant spaces.
Standards for Text Amendments:
The following is a discussion of standards for zoning amendments from Section 12-3-7.E. of City
Code. Rationale for how the proposed amendments would satisfy the standards is provided. The
PZB may use the statements below as its rationale or adopt its own.
1. Whether the proposed amendments are consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies
of the comprehensive plan, as adopted and amended from time to time by the City Council;
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Amendment provides a summary of their
justification for this amendment.
Staff Comments: Review of the comprehensive plan by staff did not provide any additional
evidence or policy to support this type of use within manufacturing districts. Rather, the
comprehensive plan encourages the growth of industry by maintaining manufacturing areas
zoning districts and re-development of properties as necessary to evolve to new industrial needs.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
24
2. Whether the proposed amendments are compatible with current conditions and the overall
character of existing development;
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Amendment provides their response to this standard.
Staff Comments: Staff encourages the Board to consider the overall intensity of uses possible
within the M-2 zoning district. The M-2 Zoning District Use Matrix attachment provides an
overview of the types of uses permitted in this zoning district. In addition, the M-2 district is the
only zoning which permits heavy manufacturing, which is generally considered the highest
intensity use within the city in terms of potential impact. Refer to the definition below from
Section 12-13-3:
MANUFACTURING, HEAVY: The assembly, fabrication or processing of goods and
materials using processes that ordinarily have greater than minimal impacts on the
environment, or that ordinarily have significant impacts on the use and enjoyment of
adjacent property in terms of noise, smoke, fumes, visual impact, odors, glare, or health
and safety hazards, or that otherwise do not constitute "light manufacturing". Heavy
manufacturing generally includes processing and fabrication of large or bulky products
made from extracted or raw materials or products involving flammable or explosive
materials and processes that require extensive floor areas or land area for the
fabrication and/or incidental storage of the products. "Heavy manufacturing" shall not
include any use that is otherwise listed specifically in a zoning district as a permitted
or conditional use.
The Board may find it suitable to ask for additional information from the petitioner regarding
why assembly uses would be compatible in a zoning district with the potential for the above
activities permitted by right. In addition, by its nature, the traffic generated by uses within
manufacturing districts is a greater volume and the vehicles a larger size than other zoning
districts. The proposed amendment requiring assembly uses to be in close proximity to a street,
in order to limit conflict points on large industrial properties, may provide some compatibility
assurances.
3. Whether the proposed amendments are appropriate considering the adequacy of public
facilities and services available;
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Amendment provides their response to this standard.
Staff Comments: This amendment proposes manufacturing zoned assembly uses as a conditional
use, which would allow for determining adequacy of public facilities and services on a case-by-
case basis, including assessing whether the existing transportation network and proximity to
emergency services would be adequate for this type of use.
4. Whether the proposed amendments will have an adverse effect on the value of properties
throughout the jurisdiction; and
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
25
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Amendment provides their response to this standard.
Staff Comments: To evaluate potential adverse effect on property values in both the M-2 District
and throughout the City, Staff completed an analysis of major employers within the city and the
zoning classifications of their properties to better understand the overall inventory of
manufacturing properties and their impact on the local economy. Below is a table summarizing
the total jobs of major employers, classified as employers with 25 or more employees, and the
associated zoning district for these businesses.
Major employers within the M-2 zoning district have the highest number of jobs, largest local
sales volume, and the properties have the highest estimated property taxes compared to other
zoning districts.
Zoning Total
Employees1 Total Sales1 Estimated Property
Taxes2
Estimated City Share
of Property Taxes3
C-2 447 $147,307,000 $3,747,751.50 $386,018.40
C-3 3,293 $448,297,000 $7,652,366.25 $788,193.72
C-4 309 $47,728,000 $1,432,080.50 $147,504.29
C-5 1,073 $132,305,000 $325,438.06 $33,520.12
C-6 1,500 $194,317,000 $9,293,831.10 $957,264.60
I-1 1,625 $68,125,000 $199,440.34 $20,542.36
M-1 47 $203,685,000 $60,133.86 $6,193.79
M-2 7,001 $5,521,113,000 $19,908,165.32 $2,050,541.03
M-3 1,201 $385,373,000 $2,838,664.27 $292,382.42
R-1 1,216 $24,979,000 $40,866.23 $4,209.22
1 Data obtained through Data Axle Reference Solutions, retrieved March 2025
2 Total assessed value data obtained through Cook County Assessor, retrieved February 2025 and
adjusted with Cook County Equalized Assessed Value formula. Estimated tax bill does not take into
account any applicable tax exemptions that may reduce the total amount.
3 Based on current 10.3% property tax collected by Des Plaines
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
26
The petitioner’s proposed text amendment significantly limits where manufacturing zoned
assembly uses may be considered as a conditional use, reducing—but not eliminating—the risk
of eroding valuable M-2 zoned properties. Assembly uses typically do not generate local sales
revenue and, if occupied by a tax-exempt entity, could remove the property from the tax base
entirely. Given these potential impacts, the Board is encouraged to request additional evidence
from the petitioner demonstrating that the benefits of the amendment outweigh its risks.
Assembly uses are allowed as a permitted or conditional use on over 3,600 other properties
within the city.
5. Whether the proposed amendments reflect responsible standards for development and
growth.
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Amendment provides their response to this standard.
Staff Comments: As outlined in the standards above, this type of use differs from what is
typically permitted in manufacturing districts and raises compatibility concerns. To uphold
responsible development standards, the proposed amendment designates assembly uses as
conditional, allowing case-by-case evaluation and City Council approval, with conditions to
address potential issues. However, as noted in Standard 4, converting manufacturing parcels to
less economically productive uses may hinder industrial growth, conflicting with responsible
growth principles.
Standards for Conditional Use
The following is a discussion of standards for zoning amendments from Section 12-3-4(E) of the
Zoning Ordinance. Rationale for how the proposed amendments may or may not satisfy the
standards is provided below and in the petitioner’s response to standards. The PZB may use this
rationale toward its recommendation, or the Board may make up its own.
1. The proposed Conditional Use is in fact a Conditional Use established within the specific
Zoning district involved:
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Conditional Use provides their response to this
standard.
Staff Comments: With the approval of the proposed text amendment, this would be a conditional
use in this zoning district.
2. The proposed Conditional Use is in accordance with the objectives of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan:
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Conditional Use provides their response to this
standard.
Staff Comments: As discussed in the amendment standards above, staff did not identify
anything explicit within the comprehensive plan which supports non-industrial uses within
manufacturing districts.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
27
3. The proposed Conditional Use is designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be
harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the
general vicinity:
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Conditional Use provides their response to this
standard.
Staff Comments: Staff has suggested a condition of approval to mitigate concerns with this use
to ensure compatibility on the property for any outdoor events.
4. The proposed Conditional Use is not hazardous or disturbing to existing neighboring
uses:
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Conditional Use provides their response to this
standard.
Staff Comments: Staff did not identify any specific concerns regarding this use in this location
impacting neighbors.
5. The proposed Conditional Use is to be served adequately by essential public facilities and
services, such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse
disposal, water and sewer, and schools; or, agencies responsible for establishing the
Conditional Use shall provide adequately any such services:
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Conditional Use provides their response to this
standard.
Staff Comments: Staff believes the proposed use will be adequately served with essential public
facilities and services in the future.
6. The proposed Conditional Use does not create excessive additional requirements at public
expense for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic well-
being of the entire community:
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Conditional Use provides their response to this
standard.
Staff Comments: The proposed use is not anticipated to create a burden on public facilities.
However, this use in this location may encourage a higher amount of automobile traffic
compared to an assembly use in a residential neighborhood, as it is not easily walkable from a
residential area and may have fewer attendees using alternative means of transportation to
arrive at services.
7. The proposed Conditional Use does not involve uses, activities, processes, materials,
equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property,
or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke fumes,
glare or odors:
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Conditional Use provides their response to this
standard.
Staff Comments: All activities are proposed to occur inside the building. Any uses must be in
compliance with the Environmental Performance Standards in Title 12, Chapter 12 of the City
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
28
Code. Noise level for any activities on the site will be regulated by Section 6-2-7 of the Police
Regulations in the City’s municipal code. Refer to the Traffic section of this report for
additional discussion regarding traffic.
8. The proposed Conditional Use provides vehicular access to the property designed so that
it does not create an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares:
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Conditional Use provides their response to this
standard.
Staff Comments: Vehicular access will continue to be provided from the existing full-access
curb cut to Howard Avenue. Traffic within the property will continue to be guided by the site
plan approved in 2024. Howard Avenue is designed with a cross -section designed to
accommodate typical industrial vehicle trip volumes.
9. The proposed Conditional Use does not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of
natural, scenic, or historic features of major importance:
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Conditional Use provides their response to this
standard.
Staff Comments: The subject property is within an existing building and thus would not result
in the loss or damage of natural, scenic, or historic features. No new development is proposed
for this site.
10. The proposed Conditional Use complies with all additional regulations in the Zoning
Ordinance specific to the Conditional Use requested:
The Petitioner’s Response to Standards for Conditional Use provides their response to this
standard.
Staff Comments: If the text amendment is approved, no zoning relief is necessary for this
conditional use and it is compliant with other zoning ordinance requirements.
Senior Planner Redman noted that a traffic impact analysis was not required for the proposed
application. Extensive information was available for the property based upon prior research and code
enforcement relating to the property.
Member Weaver asked for clarification of the meaning and definition within the Code for uses which
comprise a “noncommercial” purpose. Senior Planner Redman confirmed that the Code may not
specifically state the definition of this term. Mr. Lord noted that the proposed text amendment definition
for the proposed assembly use was based upon the current definition for “residentially zoned assembly
uses” which similarly references assembly uses serving a “non-commercial” purpose.
Chairman Szabo repeated the petitioner’s statement that the proposed negative tax implications of the
use might be offset by the sales tax revenue by visitors to the property to businesses elsewhere within
the City.
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
29
A motion was made by Member Weaver and seconded by Member Zadrozny to recommend approval of
the text amendment as presented.
Member Veremis inquired whether an alternate definition or regulation of assembly uses was
contemplated by staff, potentially including a limitation on size of a property or proposed use. Ms.
Redman stated this option was not presented by the petitioner, but it is a common regulation for other
uses in the zoning ordinance.
Member Weaver stated that his understanding is that the amendment, as presented, would still require
each assembly use to be reviewed as a conditional use by the Board, so it can be decided on a case by
case basis. Ms. Redman confirmed this statement was correct.
Member Bronakowski referenced attachment 3 of the staff report packet. Note 9 notes a minimum buffer
from residential uses. He inquired whether such a restriction would limit opportunities for rezoning of
property in the future. Ms. Redman stated staff would not anticipate any issues with re-zoning in the
future caused by this amendment.
Chairman Szabo asked whether anyone from the public wished to speak regarding either request. No
one from the public came forward.
Member Veremis noted that this location may not provide opportunities between the highway and the
premises to support visitors patronizing other businesses within the City.
Member Bronakowski noted that there are many vacant properties elsewhere in the City with zoning
that would allow for consideration of the proposed use without the need for a text amendment. Mr. Ward
noted that over a period of ten years they have been coo rdinating with property owners for potential
occupancies in other locations but have not found alignment until the current opportunity.
Member Fowler noted that the proposed text amendment would introduce buffers which would limit
potential locations for all assembly uses throughout the City’s manufacturing
Member Fowler noted that she believed that a conditional use requirement will provide the City with an
opportunity to potentially limit and control a large influx of assembly uses into manufacturing districts.
Shannon Westberg, the property owner’s representative, summarized the challenges with leasing this
space. The existing space is suited for an office tenant and generally lacks some of the industrial features
of properties near the rear of the building.
A motion was made by Member Weaver and seconded by Member Zadrozny to recommend
approval of the text amendment to the City Council, as drafted by staff.
AYES: Fowler, Zadrozny, Veremis, Weaver, Szabo
NAYS: Bronakowski
ABSTAIN: None
***MOTION CARRIED***
Case No. 25-005-TPLAT TENTATIVE PLAT 2250 MANNHEIM ROAD
Case No. 25-010-CU CONDITIONAL USE 20 W. GOLF RD.
Case No. 25-012-TA -CU TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE 200 E HOWARD AVE.
30
A motion was made by Member Weaver and seconded by Member Zadrozny to recommend
approval of the conditional use to the City Council, with condition drafted by staff.
AYES: Fowler, Zadrozny, Weaver, Szabo
NAYS: Bronakowski, Veremis
ABSTAIN: None
***MOTION CARRIED***
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Szabo adjourned the meeting by affirmative voice vote at 9:05 p.m.
Sincerely,
Jeff Rogers/Recording Secretary
cc: City Officials, Aldermen, Planning & Zoning Board, Petitioners