HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025.01.14 PZB Meeting Minutes_appdCase No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
1
DES PLAINES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING
JANUARY 14, 2025
MINUTES
The Des Plaines Planning and Zoning Board held its regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday,
January 14, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 102 of the Des Plaines Civic Center.
GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
Chairman Szabo gave a remembrance statement for recently passed PZB Member Paul Saletnik.
Director Jeff Rogers gave a statement of remembrance. Chairman Szabo requested a moment of
silence in honor of PZB Member Paul Saletnik’s memory.
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Szabo called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and roll call was established.
PRESENT: Bronakowski, Catalano, Fowler, Szabo, Veremis, Weaver
ABSENT: None
ALSO PRESENT: Jonathan Mendel, AICP, Assistant CED Director
Samantha Redman, AICP, Senior Planner
Jeff Rogers, AICP, CED Director
Jonathan Stytz, AICP, Senior Planner
A quorum was present.
APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 26, 2024 PZB MEETING MINUTES
A motion was made by Board Member Bronakowski, seconded by Member Veremis, to approve
the meeting minutes.
AYES: Bronakowski, Catalano, Fowler, Szabo, Veremis, Weaver
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: None
***MOTION CARRIED***
PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEM
There was no public comment.
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
2
PENDING APPLICATIONS
1. Address: 2134 Sprucewood Ave. Case Number: 24-058-TSUB-FPLAT
The applicant requests Tentative and Final Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2 of the
Subdivision Regulations to subdivide one existing lot into two lots of record.
PIN: 09-30-403-009-0000
Proceedings/Discussion:
Chair Szabo introduced the case on the agenda and swore in petitioners Irene and Zenon Heldak.
Irene Heldak presented the proposed subdivision of a residential lot into two lots of record.
Chair Szabo asked for Board comments and asked why the subdivision wasn’t two equal width
lots.
Irene Heldak explained they need one wider lot for a planned ranch house, necessitating the
wider lot.
Senior Planner Sam Redman presented the staff report and packet:
Applicant: Irene Heldak, 2294 Westview Dr, Des Plaines, IL 60018
Owner: Irene and Zenon Heldak, 2294 Westview Dr, Des Plaines, IL 60018
Case Number: 24-058-TSUB-FPLAT
PIN: 09-30-403-009-0000
Ward: #5, Carla Brookman
Existing Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residential
Existing Land Use: Single family residence
Surrounding Zoning: North: R-1 Single Family Residential District
South: R-1 Single Family Residential District
East: R-1 Single Family Residential District
West: R-1 Single Family Residential District
Surrounding Land Use: North: Single Family Dwellings (Residential)
South: Single Family Dwellings (Residential)
East: Single Family Dwellings (Residential)
West: Single Family Dwellings (Residential)
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
3
Street Classification: Sprucewood Avenue is classified as a local road.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan illustrates the site as single family residential.
Zoning/Property History: Based on City records, the subject property has been one parcel
throughout known history. A single-family detached home has been
located on the property since around the early 1960s. The property
owners have received a demolition permit for the current house
intending to subdivide the property into two lots and construct a new
single family, detached residence on each lot.
Tentative and Final Plat of Subdivision Report
The petitioner, Irene Heldak, requests a Tentative and Final Plat of Subdivision for the 19,983
square foot (0.45 acre) property located at 2134 Sprucewood Avenue. The petitioner’s Final Plat
shows the subdivision of the existing lot into two lots, one 75 feet wide and 11,529 square feet in
area and the other 55 feet wide and 8,454 square feet in area. All required yards and building lines
are noted on the plat of subdivision and meet R-1, Single Family Residential Zoning requirements.
The Preliminary Site Improvement Plan includes installation of necessary water, sanitary sewer,
and stormwater infrastructure for the new lots as well as erosion control during construction and
installation of a new concrete apron for access to the second lot and any associated replacement of
sidewalk, curb and gutter, and parkway restoration. The required improvements were approved by
the Director of Engineering (Refer to Final Engineering Plans). A financial security in the amount
of 125% of the approved engineer’s estimate of cost of the public improvements will be collected
in a form approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation of the final plat of subdivision. The
total amount of the estimated improvements and the required financial securities are noted in the
Engineering Letter and EOPC attachment. The petitioner provided correspondence from required
utilities demonstrating they would serve this property and future easements would be determined
when new structures are proposed to be constructed.
PZB Procedure:
Under Section 13-2-7 of the Subdivision Regulations, the PZB has the authority to recommend
approval, approval subject to conditions, or denial of the request: A Tentative and Final Plat of
Subdivision to split an existing lot into two lots of record at 2134 Sprucewood Avenue.
The decision should be based on review of the information presented by the applicant and meet
requirements of Section 13-2-7 as outlined in the Subdivision Regulations. Staff has no suggested
conditions.
Chairman Szabo asked for comments from the PZB and there were none.
Member Weaver motioned to approve as presented and Member Fowler seconded the motion.
AYES: Bronakowski, Catalano, Fowler, Szabo, Veremis, Weaver
NAYS: None
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
4
ABSTAIN: None
***MOTION CARRIED***
2. Address: 10 W. Algonquin Road Case Number: 24-063-PUD-V
The petitioner requests: (i.) a Conditional Use for a Preliminary & Final Planned Unit
Development; (ii.) Major Variations to allow a.) loading spaces that open onto or face a
public right-of-way, and b.) fencing with an open design instead of solid opaque fencing
abutting existing residential uses; and (iii.) any other exceptions, variations, waivers, and
zoning relief as may be necessary.
PINs: 08-24-201-052-0000 & 08-24-201-053-0000
Proceedings/Discussion:
Chairman Szabo introduced the case in the agenda and swore in the 8 applicants giving
testimony.
Tom Kikta (Legat) introduced meeting and speakers.
Nick Zasada of 8025 Lamon Ave, Skokie IL. He explained the nature of Vetter Inc and their
services. Outlined their history and current US location in Skokie. Vetter is a family owned,
German based contract manufacturer where injectable drugs are filled for clients. It is a
converter of drug substance into injectable units. There is a total of 6600 employees, most of
those are based in Germany. The facility in Skokie has about 100 employees. Vetter is a 100%
service provider meaning they do not have their own product and is a pure contract
manufacturer. Headquarters are in Ravensbruck, Germany and these services have been
performed for over 40 years and 15 years at the Skokie facility. Main line of business is aseptic
filling of injectable drugs. Product is then returned to the customer where they are responsible
for marketing sales distribution and getting the injectables to the patients. The facility is working
in a clinical trial phase. Vetter is hired for the more complex products that are targeting many
diseases that currently have no treatment for. Vetter delivers critical medications to patients that
are in need of treatment where Vetter is the key step in this process. Medication batch sizes are
small since this is a clinical trial phase. Ranges from 1 L to maximum of 200 L (=50 gallons)
Plan for Des Plaines facility is to have 140 employees. There is no 24 hr operation here since
there is only 1 batch daily. Filling operation takes place during the day. Earliest arrival to
facility is 6 am and latest they would leave is 8 pm. There are no products of Vetter, so there is
no research done here and no animal testing. The only visitors will be the clients that would
come to observe their product being manufactured.
Chairman Szabo asked for PZB questions.
Member Veremis asked if this facility is like the current Skokie facility
Nick Zasada stated they provide the same production
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
5
Member Weaver asked for the phasing out of Skokie to Des Plaines.
Nick Zasada stated that they will eventually phase out Skokie and move completely to Des
Plaines. The Skokie location is being leased and improvements that need to be made to maintain
property and not having full control of building is a challenge and concern.
Tom Kikta outlined the development plan and the planned operational and non-operational
portion of the site. Outlined the general location and the intent for the two site access driveways
to be split between Algonquin for staff and Mount Prospect Rd for truck and delivery access.
Outlined the proposed site plan details specifically regarding the site perimeter landscaping, open
fence requiring a variation and NW berm, wall and fence. Also describe the general site
circulation around and throughout the entire site. Described the variation for loading bays facing
Mount Prospect and how to mitigate the aesthetic impact. Lastly outlined the ground sign
number variation to permit four ground signs when only three are permitted.
Trudy Buehler (Civil Engineer) of 9575 W Higgins Rd. Suite 500 in Rosemont. Trudy outlined
the site civil engineering requirement in accordance with MWRD, City of Des Plaines and IDOT
regulations.
Rachel Foster (Legat Architect) of 549 Randolph Street in Chicago, outlined the tree survey and
site landscaping findings and outcome as well as preservation and protection for remaining trees.
Proposed landscaping will be appropriate to region and provide nice aesthetics for the
neighboring residential properties. Described the site lighting and compliance with City Code.
Then described the general architecture of the proposed building and the built-in sound
attenuation architecture. Outlined the building architecture’s aesthetics, materials and details.
Specifically stated the building will have bird safe window glass. Lastly outlined the
construction schedule and timeline.
Micheal Werthmann (KLOA) outlined the traffic study details, findings and recommendations.
Brendan Penny (Meltzer Purtill & Stelle LLC) of 125 S Wacker Dr. In Chicago, outlined the
requests being sought. CU-PUD request, fencing variation, ground sign number variation and
loading docks orientation variation. Conclude the applicant presentation
Chairman Szabo asked for PZB comments.
Member Catalano asked about parking needs related to employee numbers
Tom Kikta explained that 140 parking is requested
Member Fowler asked about hours of operation is confusing between various applicant
presenters
Nick Zasada answered current operations begin at 6 am, second shift that comes in at 11 am and
ends at 7:30 pm.
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
6
Member Fowler asked about next development phase when Skokie closed at maximum
development on Des Plaines site.
Nick Zasada explained the timing of Skokie phase out and Des Plaines expansion beyond the
current development proposal.
Member Weaver asked about the layout and configuration of proposed building and why it was
designed and existing buildings remaining. Interested in need/use of existing southern buildings.
Tom Kikta explained that the existing buildings will be demolished when next phase of site
development occurs.
Member Veremis asked about time for drug approval.
Nick Zasada explained that drug approval can be about 10-20 years and they have multiple
customers and described the product approval process in the applicant’s presentation.
Member Veremis asked whether the proposed 140 employees should be static at this location.
Member Bronakowski questioned why the proposed building was placed closer to the residential
neighborhood.
Tom Kikta stated the proposed building is sited this way to accommodate production needs and
site circulation
Chairman Szabo asked for more PZB comments and passed to Director Jeff Rogers.
Director Jeff Rogers outlined the staff report and packet as amended by the applicant prior to
meeting:
Petitioner: Legat Architects, 549 W. Randolph Street, Chicago, IL, as agent
for Vetter Commercial Manufacturing USA, LLC, 10 W.
Algonquin Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016
Owner: Vetter Commercial Manufacturing USA, LLC, 10 W. Algonquin
Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016
Case Number: 24-063-PUD-V
PINs: 08-24-201-052-0000 & 08-24-201-053-0000
Ward: #8, Alderman Mike Charewicz
Existing Zoning: M-3, Special Manufacturing District
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
7
Existing Land Use: Vacant office buildings, surface parking lots, and undeveloped land
Surrounding Zoning: North: R-1, Single Family Residential District
South: R-1, Single Family Residential District
East: M-3, Special Manufacturing District
West: R-1, Single Family Residential District
Surrounding Land Use: North: Single-family detached residences
South: Single-family detached residences
East: Commercial buildings
West: Single-family detached residences
Street Classification: Algonquin Road is classified as a Major Collector and is under the
jurisdiction of the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT);
and Mount Prospect Road is classified as a Major Collector and is
under the jurisdiction of Cook County.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan’s future land use designation for the
property is “Commercial.”
Property/Zoning History: Per the Cook County Tax map, the subject property is comprised of
unsubdivided parcels. The existing vacant office buildings, an
underground parking structure, surface parking lots, and an area of
undeveloped land were established over time beginning in the late
1960s through the mid-1970s in accordance with a Planned Unit
Development approved via Ordinance Z-9-69.
Prior to the current proposal, a prior application for a Planned Unit
Development for the subject property was approved via Ordinance
Z-19-16 in 2016. The current property owner acquired the subject
property in 2017. The term of the approvals associated with the 2016
PUD Ordinance were extended via Ordinance Z-17-17 in 2017 but
were not pursued further by the property owner and subsequently
expired in 2018.
Project Overview: The petitioner is Legat Architects as agent for Vetter Commercial
Manufacturing USA, LLC, the property owner. The proposed
improvements would be comprised of a new building generally at
the north end of the site to be comprised of approximately 158,000
square feet. The existing office buildings would remain vacant at
this time except for a temporary occupancy of the north office
building by the construction contractors as a site office for the
duration of the construction activities on site. Details of the project
are included below and in relevant attachments.
Site Development
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
8
The site is comprised of two parcels together totaling approximately
17.84 acres. A consolidation of the two parcels into one lot will be
required prior to approval of final engineering design and prior to
issuance of permits for the project. The proposed building would be
situated in an area of existing open space at the north end of the
property and would add approximately 158,000 square feet of new
floor area including new mechanical space, laboratory space, office
space, and logistics space.
Three existing buildings would remain. The floor area of the five-
story west building, Building A, is approximately 22,350 square
feet. The floor area of the two-story south building, Building B, is
approximately 22,350 square feet. The floor area of the one-story
east building, Building C, is approximately 46,620 square feet. The
applicant proposes minor remodeling improvements to
accommodate a temporary occupancy of a portion of Building A for
the purpose of offices for the onsite construction management
personnel.
Bulk Regulations
The table below illustrates staff’s interpretation of the required yards
(i.e., building setbacks) for this property and the proposed building
setbacks as noted in Section 12-7-4 and defined in Section 12-13-3.
Off-Street Parking
In accordance with the requirements of the Code, the following
quantities of off-street parking stalls are required:
Bulk Controls Required Proposed
Lot size 5 acres (min.) 18 acres
Building Height 50 ft. (max.) 46 ft.
Front yard building setback (south & east) 60 ft. (min.) 169 ft.
Side yard building setback (west) 60 ft. (min.) 92.9 ft.
Rear yard building setback (north) 60 ft. (min.) 80.3 ft.
Building Coverage 75% (max.) 27.6%
Parking Requirement Total
Office Uses 1 space per 250
square feet of
gross floor area
82,964 square feet =
332 stalls
Industrial and
Manufacturing Uses
1 space for every
1,500 square feet
of gross floor area
78,266 square feet =
53 stalls
Accessible Spaces Between 301-400
spaces provided
8 accessible stalls
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
9
Sec. 12-3-5.C.4. of the Code allows for consideration of reductions
in required parking associated with a PUD by up to 25% of the total
collective parking requirement. In conjunction with the PUD
request, the applicant requests an exception to reduce the minimum
parking requirement to one stall per employee plus one stall per
visitor.
The applicant proposes up to 72 employees plus up to 10 visitors
during their busiest shift with 48 employees arriving at a 3 p.m. shift
change for a total of 130 simultaneous individuals daily. The
proposed site plan design would provide 318 parking stalls
including both surface and underground parking, a reduction from
the minimum required quantity of parking stalls of 17.5%.
If the exception is approved, the applicant will need to maintain
compliance with this minimum parking ratio prior to occupying the
existing buildings upon the property any new uses. Although land-
banking of parking is not permissible in the M-3 District per Sec.
12-9-10 of the Code, there remain areas of open space across the
property which could be improved in the future to accommodate
additional off-street parking should additional parking be required
to allow a future use to occupy existing space on the subject
property.
A similar exception was included in the PUD Ordinance adopted in
2016 which has since expired.
Off-street Loading
In accordance with the requirements of the Code, the following
quantities of off-street loading stalls are required:
Site Access
The subject property is currently accessible via two full access curb
cuts including one unsignalized access to E. Algonquin Road at the
southwest corner of the property and one signalized access to S.
Total Accessible Proposed: 14 stalls
Total Required: 385 stalls
Total Proposed: 298 surface stalls +
20 underground stalls =
318 stalls
Loading Requirement Total
Building Size 200,001-300,000 sq. ft. 3 loading stalls
Total Proposed: 5 loading stalls
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
10
Mount Prospect Road. The proposed improvements would add one
additional full access curb cut to S. Mount Prospect Road for visitors
to the site at the northeast corner of the site.
Traffic
The applicant provided a traffic impact study prepared by Kenig,
Lindgren, O’Hara, Aboona, Inc, a copy of which is attached to this
report. The study includes results from a traffic survey of existing
conditions with the current building vacancies on the property and
among other buildings in the vicinity in addition to projections of
future traffic volumes assuming the proposed building
improvements and occupancy of other buildings in the area. The
proposed weekday morning peak hour of traffic is estimated to
generate 65 inbound & 5 outbound traffic movements
(approximately 1.2 vehicles per minute). The proposed weekday
afternoon peak hour of traffic is estimated to generate 45 inbound
and 65 outbound traffic movements (approximately 1.8 vehicles per
minute). Most of these traffic movements would utilize the existing
Algonquin Road access drive.
Proposed logistics deliveries, refuse management, and other truck
trips would primarily utilize the signalized access to S. Mount
Prospect Road.
Transparency & Building Materials
Section 12-3-11 requires the facades of the office components of the
new building to be comprised of a minimum of 20% window glass
on all floors. Ground floor elevations must be comprised of face
brick, stucco, metal, and/or concrete masonry units while upper
floors may additionally feature painted or stained wood and/or
exterior insulation and finishing systems (EIFS).
Required Proposed
Ground Floor
Office Space
Transparency
20% (min.) 97.5%
(behind curtainwall)
Upper Floor
Office Space
Transparency
20% (min.) 97.5%
(behind curtainwall)
Ground Floor
Building
Materials
Face brick, stucco,
metal, and/or concrete
masonry units
Metal panels &
louvers and concrete
masonry units
Upper Floor
Building
Materials
Face brick, stucco,
metal, and/or concrete
masonry units, painted
Metal panels &
louvers and concrete
masonry units
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
11
or stained wood and/or
exterior insulation and
finishing systems
(EIFS)
Site Lighting
The applicant has provided a site photometric plan and catalog cuts
of the proposed light fixtures. The proposed design features pole-
mounted light fixtures with LED light elements at a height of 20.0
feet designed to direct light inward toward the perimeter circulation
drive and building exterior. In the proposed locations, the light
fixtures would not cast light beyond the lot lines and would be
expected not to create glare visible from adjacent properties.
Tree Preservation, Removal, & Landscaping
The applicant proposes to retain the existing perimeter fencing
which features a transparent design rather than an opaque design.
The applicant has provided a tree survey identifying 96 existing
trees that would be retained and 50 existing trees and stumps that
would be removed. The proposed landscaping plan would introduce
261 new shrubs and 133 new trees including 39 new deciduous trees,
45 new evergreen trees, and 49 new “Techny” arborvitae.
Mechanical and Dumpster Screening
Section 12-10-11 of the Code requires screening of roof-top
mechanical units and utility areas. The proposed design utilizes
rooftop parapets to screen mechanical units from line-of-sight from
adjacent properties and is intended to provide additional sound
attenuation. Refuse management is proposed within two compactor
units proposed within the two northernmost loading berths.
Stormwater Management
In accordance with the requirements of Title 14 of the City Code and
the Cook County Watershed Management Ordinance, the applicant
is proposing the installation of two new underground vaults near the
south end of the property to provide additional stormwater detention
volume as required for the proposed scope of site modifications. If
the project is approved, additional analysis of the proposed design
would be completed during review of final engineering plans in
advance of the finalization of the Tentative & Final Plat of
Subdivision and prior to the approval of any final designs in advance
of the issuance of grading & site work permits or building permits.
Major Variations The applicant requests several major zoning variations. The
variation requests are summarized as follows:
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
12
Loading Berth Orientation
Per Code, loading berths are not permitted to be oriented toward the
public right-of-way. The applicant proposes to orient the loading
stalls for the proposed building at the southeast corner of the
building facing the existing signalized intersection at S. Mount
Prospect Road. The proposed location would be arguably less
impactful than alternate locations along the west or north side of the
building which abut existing residences. The applicant has not
identified a future use of the proposed open space south of the
proposed building, however relocation of loading berths to this side
of the building may inhibit future opportunities for a building
expansion in this direction.
Fence Opacity
Per Code, a solid privacy fence with a minimum height of 8.0 feet
is required between the subject property and adjacent residential
properties. In light of comments from adjacent property owners
provided during the consideration of the 2016 PUD request, the
applicant proposes to retain the existing 8-foot transparent mesh
perimeter fence. The applicant proposes landscaping in a pattern of
three rows with various spacings in the attempt to provide landscape
buffer between the proposed perimeter circulation drive and the
property line.
Fence Height
The applicant proposes a second area of fencing along the northwest
corner of the new building on top of a proposed retaining wall. This
fencing would feature a similar transparent mesh style as the
existing perimeter fence, but would be installed on top of a new
retaining wall. The height of the fence on top of the wall would stand
up to 10.0 feet in height from the lowest adjacent grade.
Site Plan Review The table below combines a zoning analysis of both the site plan and
the buildings. A Site Plan Review is required for all development
application requests to assess how the request meets the
characteristics identified in Section 12-3-2, which are listed below
along with staff’s assessment of each in relation to the current Site
Plan provided by the petitioner, located in the Site Plan attachment.
Site Plan Review
Item Analysis (based on Proposal)
The arrangement of
structures on the site
• The existing buildings would remain in
their current locations.
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
13
• The new building would occupy an
area of open space at the north end of
the site.
The arrangement of
open space and
landscape
improvements
• The proposed site plan would maintain
open space within setbacks along the
north and west lot lines, south of the
new building, and between the existing
office buildings in the south half of the
property.
• The applicant proposes a new
landscaped buffer yard comprised of
three rows of landscaping along the
north and west lot lines.
The adequacy of the
proposed circulation
system on the site
• The proposed site plan separates truck
movements to and from the site at the
signalized intersection from passenger
vehicles at both the primary employee
entrance at the southwest corner and
the visitor entrance at the northeast
corner of the property.
• The applicant has located certain
service access areas at the northwest
corner of the new building. The
applicant should describe the frequency
of truck movements to these areas of
the building and how noise impacts
upon adjacent properties will be
mitigated.
The location, design,
and screening of
proposed off-street
parking areas
• The applicant proposes three primary
off-street parking areas including the
primary employee parking field on the
interior of the property south of the
proposed building and west of the
existing building, a new visitor parking
area east of the new building, and an
existing underground parking
structure.
The adequacy of the
proposed landscaping
design on the site
• The applicant proposes the removal of
approximately 50 existing trees and
stumps across the site.
• The proposed landscaping plan
includes shrubs plus approximately 133
new trees intended to establish a
landscape buffer yard along the north
and west lot lines.
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
14
• Per Code, a solid privacy fence with a
height of 8.0 feet would be required
along the north and west lot lines. The
applicant instead requests approval of a
variation to allow the existing 8-foot
transparent mesh fence to remain.
The design, location,
and installation of
proposed site
illumination
• The proposed site illumination plan
would comply with Code requirements
for site lighting & mitigation of
potential glare onto adjacent properties.
The correlation of the
proposed site plan
with adopted land use
policies, goals, and
objectives of the
comprehensive plan
• The Comprehensive Plan recommends
promoting employment growth in
industrial areas.
• Site design abutting residential areas is
encouraged to incorporate treatments
along the property’s edge to screen the
property from view.
• Fencing serving as a physical barrier
should be attractive while facilitating
safe operations.
• Industrial property is encouraged to
include additional stormwater
management infrastructure. Two new
underground vaults are proposed at the
south end of the property.
ENTITLEMENT REQUESTS AND ANALYSIS
Overview of Requests The petitioner requests consideration of the following items to
facilitate the proposed development:
1. A Conditional Use for a Preliminary and Final Planned Unit
Development (PUD) in the M-3 Special Manufacturing District;
2. Major zoning variations for the following:
a. Five (5) loading spaces that open onto or face a public
right-of-way;
b. Fencing with an open design instead of solid opaque
fencing abutting existing residential uses;
3. A Minor zoning variation for fencing with a height of up to 10.0
feet instead of a maximum of 8.0 feet; and
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
15
Preliminary & Final PUD A planned development, as defined below, was requested to
accommodate the existing and proposed improvements across the
property, including previously approved relief from bulk regulations
of the Code applicable in the M-3 District for building height,
parking, and other site characteristics.
Per Code, the Planned Unit Development allows for the following:
A development occurring on a parcel under single ownership
or unified control which is developed as a unit and includes
two (2) or more principal buildings or uses and is processed
under the planned development procedure of this title”
(Section 12-13-3).
The purpose of a PUD is to promote a unified development by
providing flexibility in development standards to accommodate site
conditions and encourage innovative use of land. Certain
characteristics are required by Section 12-3-5.A. of the Zoning
Ordinance, which are listed below along with staff’s assessment of
each in relation to the attached Preliminary PUD Plat provided by
the petitioner.
Preliminary & Final PUD Plat Review
Item Analysis (based on Proposal)
A maximum choice in the
types of environment
available to the public by
allowing a development that
would not be possible under
the strict application of the
other sections of this title
The subject property was
developed in accordance with a
prior PUD which allowed for a
concentration of buildings on the
south half of the site at heights
which would not have been
permissible by right. Although the
new building would comply with
the bulk regulations of the M-3
District, a PUD is required to
include the new improvements on
the same property with the prior
improvements.
Permanent preservation of
common open space and
recreation areas and facilities
The proposed site design includes
several areas of open space around
the perimeter and among the
proposed buildings.
A pattern of development to
preserve natural vegetation,
topographic and geologic
features
The currently proposed site
improvements would involve
remediation of various issues with
site trees including removal &
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
16
replacement of dead trees, existing
tree stumps, and trees in poor
condition. The proposed tree
removal activities would be
accompanied by new tree plantings
at a ratio of 2.67 new trees per tree
removed.
A creative approach to the
use of land and related
physical facilities that results
in better development and
design and the construction
of aesthetic amenities
Although not currently proposed,
the site design establishes
opportunities for future office uses
and additional employment
opportunities in addition to those
associated with the manufacturing,
office, and logistics uses currently
proposed.
An efficient use of the land
resulting in more economic
networks of utilities, streets
and other facilities
The proposed plan supplements the
existing utility designs and would
not substantially increase traffic or
congestion in the area.
A land use which promotes
the public health, safety, and
general welfare
The applicant’s application
materials attest that cleaning agents
would exclude hazardous
chemicals like ethylene oxide and
instead would feature water and
hydrogen peroxide. No site design
elements would introduce factors
which would detract from the
public health, safety, or general
welfare.
Prerequisites: Location, Ownership, and Size
PUDs are authorized in all zoning districts in the City subject to the
regulations in Section 12-3-5 of the Zoning Ordinance and must be
under single ownership and/or unified control.
PUD Bulk Exceptions
The requested PUD would include both the existing and proposed
improvements, including previously approved relief from bulk
regulations of the M-3 District to accommodate the height and other
characteristics of the existing office buildings.
Plat of Subdivision The proposal includes a consolidation of two original unsubdivided
parcels into one new lot of record. The attached Tentative Plat of
Planned Unit Development shows the dimensions of the proposed
lot.
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
17
Subdivision Improvements
Public right-of-way was dedicated previously and various public
improvements are existing along both E. Algonquin Road and S.
Mount Prospect Road.
In addition, the memo states required public improvements for this
development will include new watermain through the site, new
underground stormwater detention vaults, in addition to work within
Cook County & IDOT rights-of-way. In addition, Section 13-3-2 of
the Subdivision Ordinance discusses required improvements for
subdivided properties and timelines for the improvements.
Improvements are approved by the City Council during the final plat
of subdivision process and financial guarantees for improvements
are included within the resolution at that stage in the process.
Note the petitioner’s request at this time is for a Tentative Plat only.
The steps for Final Plat are articulated in Sections 13-2-4 through
13-2-8. The Final Plat of Subdivision would occur at a later date and
would be required prior to the issuance of building permits for the
proposed development. All necessary dedications, fees, and
necessary improvements, if any, would be outlined in the final
subdivision resolution.
Proposed Schedule Entitlement Schedule
The proposed requests for Preliminary & Final Planned Unit
Development, Major Variations, and a Minor Variation are the first
of two phases of required entitlements.
The Tentative & Final Plat of Subdivision needed to consolidate the
existing parcels and memorialize new easements and a Conditional
Use for a Localized Alternative Sign Regulation (LASR) to allow a
custom signage plan for the property including more ground signs
than would be permissible by right and any other wayfinding and
wall signage would need to be finalized after the current requests are
reviewed by City Council and prior to the approval of final plans
and issuance of permits.
After a Tentative Plat of Subdivision is approved by the Planning
and Zoning Board, the next step is a Final Plat of Subdivision. A
Final Plat of Subdivision must be submitted within 12 months of the
approval of the Tentative Plat.
If the Preliminary & Final PUD is recommended by PZB and
approved by the City Council, the Final Plat of Subdivision will
need to be submitted for review & approval prior to recording
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
18
subsequent to the collection of required financial securities
associated with the engineering improvements.
Construction Schedule
With any subdivision, construction must commence on any required
public improvements within one year. A financial security is
collected by the City to guarantee improvements and released after
inspection of completed improvements. An additional warranty
security is collected by the City to ensure the public improvements
will not require repair after installation, any funds from which that
remain unused are returned after 18 months after completion of the
project.
The applicant has provided a Preliminary Construction Schedule
attachment which outlines their projected project schedule for
construction of site & building improvements. The proposed
construction would be initiated in 2025 and would continue for
approximately 24 months into late 2027.
PUBLIC INPUT AND COMMUNITY CONTEXT
Engagement Summary On June 25, 2024, the Planning and Zoning Board hosted a public
workshop for the developer, PZB, and the public. A City webpage
shared details about the proposed project and included a public input
form to continuously gather community comments.
Legal notice for this case was provided pursuant to the requirements
of Section 12-3-1.C. of the Code, including publication in a local
newspaper, posting of notice signs on the property, and a notice
mailed to residents within 500 feet of the property.
Summary of Comments Refer to Public Comment attachment for all public comments.
Discussion surrounding this property and the proposed development
had several general themes. The summary below includes themes
and commentary from public comments.
Use of Cleaning Agents
The use of ethylene oxide should be prohibited. The operator should
be transparent regarding the types of cleaning agents that will be
used and no harmful chemicals should be released into the ground
water or the air. The Petitioner’s Narrative provides details on
cleaning operations, describing the decontamination process with
hydrogen peroxide. In addition, the petitioner provided information
regarding hazardous waste in the Waste Profile attachment.
Traffic Impacts
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
19
There are concerns regarding an increase in traffic congestion
originating from the proposed development. Respondents noted a
preference for all traffic to enter the site at the traffic signal on S.
Mount Prospect Road rather than at multiple proposed site
entrances. There are concerns regarding impacts from the proximity
of the proposed circulation drive around the new building to the
existing residences. Refer to the petitioner’s Traffic Study
attachment.
Lighting
Increased light from the existing and proposed site improvements
was identified as a concern. Compliance with International Dark
Sky Association outdoor lighting principles was requested by one
respondent. Refer to the Photometric Plan attachment provided by
the petitioner. Note that during the building permit process, the
photometric plan will be further examined to determine compliance
with Section 12-12-10 of the Zoning Ordinance which limit light
spillage onto adjacent properties.
Landscaping
Removal of existing mature trees to accommodate the proposed
building is considered unfortunate. There are concerns that proposed
landscaping will not provide a sufficient buffer separation from
existing residences. Refer to the Landscape Plan and the Tree
Survey attachments for landscaping details from the petitioner.
PUD Findings of Fact:
The following is a discussion of standards for PUDs from Section 12-3-5 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Rationale for how well the proposal addresses the standards is provided below and in the attached
petitioner responses to standards. The Board may use the provided responses as written, as
modified, or adopt its own to represent its rationale.
1. The extent to which the Proposed Plan is or is not consistent with the stated purpose of the
PUD regulations in Section 12-3-5.A of this title:
The proposed PUD generally aligns with the stated purposes of PUDs as analyzed in the
Preliminary & Final PUD Plat Review table above with a proposed office & manufacturing
development, designated open spaces, and landscaping. Refer to Petitioner’s Response to
Standards for a full analysis of how the development meets each standard.
2. The extent to which the proposed plan meets the prerequisites and standards of the
planned unit development regulations:
The proposal meets the ownership/unified control and size requirements in the Zoning
Ordinance.
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
20
3. The extent to which the proposed plan departs from the applicable zoning and subdivision
regulations otherwise applicable to the subject property, including, but not limited to the
density, dimension, area, bulk, and use and the reasons why such departures are or are
not deemed to be in the public interest:
The new site and building improvements meet the bulk regulations outlined in Section 12-7-
4.F. of the Zoning Ordinance (See Site Plan Review section above), however the original
existing building improvements were developed in accordance with a prior PUD Ordinance (ca.
1969) and several major variations relating to design elements of the proposal are required.
4. The extent to which the physical design of the proposed development does or does not
make adequate provision for public services, provide adequate control of vehicular traffic,
provide for, protect open space, and further the amenities of light and air, recreation and
visual enjoyment:
The proposed design introduces one new curb cut to aid in separating passenger vehicles from
truck traffic and maintains areas of open space among the existing and proposed buildings. Any
impact to air or light quality from this development is not anticipated to be greater than any
similar development of this nature or permitted in this zoning district and will be controlled by
the environmental performance standards of Chapter 12 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Refer to the Traffic Study for details on anticipated traffic impact. The report states the
development will not generate a disproportionate impact to the street network. Refer to the
Petitioner’s Response to PUD Standards attachment for further discussion of traffic generated
and parking demands of the proposed uses.
5. The extent to which the relationship and compatibility of the proposed development is
beneficial or adverse to adjacent properties and neighborhood:
The subject property is positioned at the boundary of an existing area of M-3 District
office/industrial development and an existing R-1 Residential District. The mix of office and
manufacturing uses and proposed landscape buffer yards is intended to serve as a transition from
the predominantly industrial uses to the east and the residential uses to the west. The proposed
scope of operations associated with the new improvements would not of themselves introduce
substantial additional vehicular traffic or congestion in area streets.
6. The extent to which the proposed plan is or is not desirable to physical development, tax
base, and economic well-being of the entire community:
The proposed development would increase the value of the property and site improvements and
thereby increase the taxes generated by the property. Additionally, the proposed land use would
introduce new employment within the community.
7. The extent to which the proposed plan is in conformity with the recommendations of the
2019 Comprehensive Plan:
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
21
Site design elements of the proposed manufacturing and office improvements would comply
with the recommendations of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan particularly including Goals 3.10.
and 3.11.
PZB Procedure and Recommended Conditions:
Under Section 12-3-5.D.2.c (Procedure for Review and Decision for PUDs) of the Zoning
Ordinance, the PZB has the authority to recommend that the City Council approve, approve with
modifications, or deny the Preliminary & Final Planned Unit Development (PUD). The City
Council has final authority on this request.
The PZB should take the following motions. The zoning motions can be combined or taken
individually:
Zoning Recommendations to City Council
• A motion pursuant to Section 12-3-5.E of the Zoning Ordinance to recommend to City
Council to approve, approve with modifications, or deny the requests for a Conditional Use
for a Preliminary & Final PUD, Major Variations and a Minor Variation including the
following:
A. Five (5) loading spaces shall be allowed to face a public right-of-way;
B. Fencing near the northwest corner of the site abutting the circulation drive shall be
allowed a height of up to 10.0 feet instead of a maximum height of 8.0 feet; and
C. One (1) additional ground sign at the entrance to the site for a total of four (4) ground
signs in excess of a maximum of three (3) permissible ground signs.
If the PZB recommends approval, staff recommends the following conditions for the Preliminary
& Final PUD, Major Variations, and Minor Variation.
Condition(s) of Approval:
1. Ordinance Z-9-69 shall be repealed and the previously approved bulk regulations and
improvements authorized by Ordinance Z-9-69 shall be incorporated in the new PUD
Ordinance, if applicable.
2. At time of both Tentative & Final Plat of Subdivision, approval of utility easements by all
privately owned utility companies shall be indicated via written correspondence or lettered
on the final document.
3. Final signage shall be considered in accordance with a Conditional Use for a Localized
Alternative Sign Regulation (LASR) Ordinance after all site signage has been finalized, if
necessary.
4. The Petitioner must maintain the Property and operate the Proposed Use in compliance
with the Performance Standards in Chapter 12 of Title 12 of the City Code, including,
without limitation, light, odor, and noise. Upon the receipt of complaints regarding the
operation of the Proposed Use, the City will investigate and apply the appropriate
provisions, If City code enforcement staff observes or detects a violation of the
Performance Standards (“Original Violation”), it will notify the Petitioner in writing and
provide a 14-day period for compliance, which compliance must be verified at a follow-up
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
22
inspection. If upon follow-up inspection the Original Violation is still observed and
uncorrected, a citation will be issued to Petitioner, which may result in a fine in a final
amount to be determined by the City’s administrative hearing officer.
Chair Szabo asked for PZB comments for staff
Member Weaver clarified the actions currently before them as amended during the meeting and
outlined by the applicant. Specifically, regarding the ground signs.
Member Bronakowski asked about the distance between the proposed building and the nearest
residential building to the west. Rachel Foster stated that the distance is 80 feet.
Chair Szabo for public comment and polled the audience for opposed, for or simply have
comments.
John (Jack) Grooms (public) asked about the occupancy and hours of operation for the proposed
development. Stated his perceived understanding of the presentation from the applicant
regarding the use of the existing buildings and regarding the height of the proposed perimeter
fencing.
Steven Vincenzo- [didn’t give his name] (public) statement about the 1969 approval and stated
that the development history of the subject property and the proposed development. Stated that
the previous owner reason for the selling the property. Concerned about the design of the
perimeter fence.
Member Weaver asked Director Rogers to confirm that the subject property was annexed in
1958. Director Rogers confirmed.
Szabo swore in all remaining public commenters
Frieda Hyrc (public) stated she worked for the Salvation Army and the existing buildings are
nice in her opinion. Concerned about
Holly Boers (public) an employee of Vetter, but commenting as a community member. Likes
the company and states Vetter is a good community member. Szabo asked if she worked at the
Skokie faciality
Donna Diamond (public) asked about the stormwater management for the proposed development
and is there plans for stormwater management for the existing site improvements. Asked about
the perimeter fence at the end dead end residential street and concerns about fence damage from
snowplow piling. Concerned about the sound impacts and light spillage on the neighboring
residential properties.
Chair Szabo asked civil engineer to address Diamond stormwater management for existing and
proposed.
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
23
Trudy Buehler stated that the existing and proposed stormwater management will be managed by
the proposed site improvements.
Donna Diamond asked about the removal of the existing large grass area and its stormwater
management. Trudy Buehler stated it’s accounted for.
Donna Diamond asked whether the proposed building could be moved to the east and still
provide truck turning radius.
Nam Nguyen (public) asked about timing for perimeter fence installation.
Rich Malinowski (public) stated this proposal should be denied and not appropriate for this
location and other locations are more appropriate. Concerned about the construction timeline
and likely 25 months of construction activity next to a residential neighborhood.
Chair Szabo asked for more public comment. There were none. Asked applicant to address
public comments.
Tom Kikta answered the employee counts and number of shifts. Stated that the 140 employees
are the maximum number for this site at any given time. The fence variation request was an
outcome of the 2024 workshop. Existing buildings do have asbestos throughout the building and
primarily part of the structure fireproofing.
Member Fowler asked about other hazardous materials in existing buildings.
Member Catalano asked about underground fuel tank storage concerns at UOP to the east across
Mount Prospect and stated the environmental report stated that UOP underground petroleum
storage could have migrated west to the subject property.
Nick Zasada outlined the process and rigor for sanitation and clean room procedures. Any gases
within the clean room are kept within the room and air recirculated and gases contained.
Tom Kikta stated they would be willing to change to a solid site perimeter fence, but the
proposed 8 foot tall fence was chosen with location and environmental impacts.
Member Fowler stated that the fence was part of neighbors’ input in 2016 public hearing and
2024 workshop.
Various public comments from the audience regarding the proposed fence.
Tom Kikta stated the proposed site perimeter fence is consistent with the proposed fence in 2016,
but open to a code compliance perimeter fence. Addressed sounds creation and where. The
sound would be air handlers and cooling towers in the building roof and will be shielded and
muffled within the building and through the use of large building wall to direct sound vertically
above the building and not horizontally toward the residential neighborhood to the west and
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
24
north. Trucks coming to the site will primarily be smaller box trucks, but need to assume a site
turn design to accommodate a 65 foot delivery truck. Reinforced reason by Trudy Buehler.
Ryan Christiansen (applicant general contractor) stated the perimeter fence replacement will be
over a short period that while fence is removed and new installed in same day. Tom Kikta stated
it’s a horizontal mesh with 1 inch gaps between mesh.
Chair Szabo stated that changing solid fence up for review by PZB.
Member Weaver stated the variations presented and the open perimeter fence. Stated the fence
design question is still open for clarification and concerned about the seeming confusion.
Chair Szabo stated that there is this fence design confusion and asked Rachel Foster to state the
number of trees and landscaping proposed.
Donna Diamond stated that she is concerned about the durability of the fence at the dead end
residential street, the fence design and working with the neighbors.
Member Fowler stated that for the planned fence removal and construction the applicant must
bring a specific plan for communicating with the affected neighbors.
Tom Kikta concluded addressing the applicant responses.
Member Veremis asked if the 140 new jobs in Des Plaines all coming from Skokie facility and
educational requirements. Nick Zasada stated that there are about 100 jobs at Skokie and the
Des Plaines site will
Member Weaver stated he is impressed about the rigor and thought put into the proposal. Does
have concerns about the status of some proposed variations that need to be further reviewed.
Brendan Penny discussed the fence design and working with staff, neighbors and City Council
but at this time would like to keep fence variation request.
Director Rogers stated the fence could be a factor for PZB to continue to permit further review,
Member Weaver further delineates the fence variation request.
Chair Szabo reaffirmed possible processes
Director Rogers restated the possible PZB actions and recommendations to City Council.
Member Weaver asked staff: if PZB makes formal recommendation tonight when would the
application go to the City Council?
Director Rogers stated if recommendation made by PZB next City Council meeting would be
Feb. 3rd or Feb 18th.
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
25
Member Weaver detailed the timing that three weeks for today for City Council review would be
minimum needed.
Brendan Penny requests the fence design variation be retained by PZB recommendation to City
Council and permit applicant time to address fence design concerns and maintain a judicious
timeline.
Member Weaver reiterated a need for working with the neighbors to gain better acceptance of
the fence design through a fair and accessible process. Not ready to continue forward as is.
Chair Szabo was concerned about timing and process but wishes to continue forward with a
recommendation as proposed and continue the analysis at City Council.
Member Veremis agreed.
Chair Szabo desires moving the request forward tonight.
Member Fowler agreed to more forward with requested zoning actions.
Member Weaver motioned to recommend City Council approval with exceptions B, C, D, and E
(ground sign count variation) and condition 1 through 4 as drafted by Staff.
Member Catalano seconded.
Motion passed 5-0 with 1 abstention (Bronakowski)
3. Address: 1685 E. Oakton Street Case Number: 25-001-CU
The petitioner requests: (i) a Conditional Use for an Auto Service Repair use; (ii) a Conditional
Use for an auto body repair use, and (iii) any other variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may
be necessary.
PIN: 09-28-101-084-0000
Proceedings/Discussion:
Colleen Doherty, attorney for the applicant, 6767 N. Milwaukee Avenue, Suite 202, in Niles and
Vechean Shamoan, the applicant for the proposed business at 1685 E Oakton Avenue were sworn
by Chairman Szabo.
Chairman Szabo requested the applicant’s summary of their request.
Ms. Doherty noted the current property zoning of C-3 and the need for two conditional uses to
allow proposed auto service and auto body repair upon the property. She reviewed the proposed
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
26
uses of the various areas of the site plan and noted the plan to close an existing curb cut to the side
street and replacement of this area with new parkway landscaping. There are various automobile
and motorcycle repair and service uses within the vicinity of the property. The prior use was an
auto body and auto sales operation. The building includes three (3) bays, one each for auto service,
auto body repair, and paint spraying. The applicant would both own the property and operate the
business on the site. Damaged and inoperable vehicles would be stored in the encloses area south
of the building. The applicant is interested in improving the property and operating in compliance
with City requirements. A letter of support from a neighbor of his existing business outside of Des
Plaines was entered into the record.
Member Weaver asked about the site plan details and about the use of the enclosed area at the rear
of the building.
Mr. Shamoan stated the area would be used for the storage of damaged vehicles with room for
approximately 6-8 vehicles in rows and in tandem. The fence would accommodate movement of
vehicles.
Member Weaver asked about the use of the parking spaces along the east lot line.
Mr. Shamoan noted that these spaces would be used for the parking of customers’ vehicles during
their visit and while awaiting service.
Ms. Doherty added that the intention would be for vehicles with significant damage to be stored
behind the building within the fenced storage area. The proposed site plan would accommodate
more off -street parking stalls than the minimum quantity required per Code.
Mr. Shamoan stated that he does not expect to operate the site at full capacity with more vehicles
than parking stalls. The operations will likely involve himself and one mechanic.
Member Veremis asked if the existing building would be painted, the existing red fence will be
removed, and whether the sign would be replaced.
Mr. Shamoan confirmed he intended to improve the look of the property with new exterior paint,
a new sign, and new fencing in the rear.
Chair Szabo asked if there would be auto sales.
Mr. Shamoan stated he would not selling automobiles at this property. In addition to customers’
vehicles, the business would source vehicles from auctions for repair & restoration. After
restoration in accordance with State requirements, restored vehicles would be sent back to the
auction for sale.
Senior Planner Jonathan Stytz outlined staff report and packet:
Petitioner: Vechean Shamoan, 9219 N. Ashland Avenue, Niles, IL 60714
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
27
Owner: Chicago Title Land Trust #128422 (Representative: Trustee
Steven Malina, 4075 E. Estes Avenue, Lincolnwood, IL 60712)
Case Number: 25-001-CU
PIN: 09-28-101-084-0000
Ward: #2, Alderman Colt Moylan
Existing Zoning: C-3, General Commercial District
Existing Land Use: Vacant (former auto service repair and motor vehicle sales uses)
Surrounding Zoning: North: C-3, General Commercial District
South: R-2, Two Family Residential District
East: C-3 General Commercial District
West: C-3 General Commercial District
Surrounding Land Use: North: Tavern (Commercial); Trade Contractor
(Commercial)
South: Duplex (Residential)
East: Multi-tenant Shopping Center (Commercial)
West: Multi-tenant Shopping Center (Commercial)
Street Classification: Oakton Street is classified as a minor arterial road and Orchard
Street is classified as a local road, both under City of Des
Plaines jurisdiction.
Comprehensive Plan: Commercial is the designated use of the property.
Zoning/Property History: Property Background
Based on City records, the subject property was developed
around 1961 and originally utilized as a gas station. On
November 6, 2017, City Council approved conditional uses for
motor vehicle sales and auto service repair uses via Ordinance
Z-27-17 to allow the business Des Plaines Auto Sales & Repair
to operate on the subject property. This approval was
conditioned upon the following provisions:
• All drive aisles must remain clear of vehicles and other
obstructions;
• The parking lot must be striped in accordance with the
Site Plan; and
• No body work is conducted on the subject property.
Previous Code Enforcement Issues
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
28
The subject property has had a few code enforcement issues
related to the previous auto service repair and motor vehicle
sales uses including:
• Overparking the lot where vehicles were not parked in
striped spaces, drive aisles were blocked, and site
circulation was severely impacted;
• Parking vehicles related to the business operations on
the public street whether they were serviced or waiting
to be serviced;
• Landscape bed maintenance throughout the subject
property; and
• Rubbish and debris throughout the subject property.
The previous business owner was recently evicted from the
subject property due to the issues identified above and the
property has been cleaned up to some extent. However, the PZB
and City Council may wish to ascertain whether auto-oriented
uses are ideal for this property given the property size, location,
and issues with the previous user.
CONDITIONAL USES
Request Summary: Overview
The subject property consists of one 13,521-square-foot parcel
located in the C-3 General Commercial district at the southwest
corner of the Oakton Street/Orchard Street intersection. It currently
contains an off-street parking area, pole sign, and 2,045-square-foot,
one-story commercial building with three service bays, office area,
restroom, mechanical room, and stock room as illustrated on the
attached Site and Floor Plan. The rear of the subject property
includes a non-paved fenced area accessible from the south building
elevation and gate on the east side of the enclosure.
The petitioner proposes to operate both an auto service repair use
and auto body repair use simultaneously on the subject property.
Both uses, as defined below, require a separate conditional use
permit pursuant to Section 12-7-3.K of the Zoning Ordinance prior
to their operation on the subject property:
AUTO SERVICE REPAIR: A building, property, or activity the
principal use of which is the repair or replacement of parts, oils,
coolants, lubricants, tires, and other similar services. "Auto
service repair", shall include, but is not limited to, muffler shops,
oil change shops, car care centers, tire centers and other uses
similar in nature and impact.
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
29
AUTO BODY REPAIR: A building, property, or activity the
principal use of which is automotive body repair or auto
detailing other than those types of repairs permitted at
automobile filling stations and auto service repair
establishments.
As noted in the attached Project Narrative, the petitioner intends to
utilize one of the existing service bays for mechanical repairs (i.e.,
auto service repair) and the remaining two bays for auto body repair
(i.e., frame machine and spray booth). The existing rear enclosure
will be utilized for the storage of damaged vehicles waiting to be
serviced to ensure all vehicles are kept on the subject property before
and after servicing. The petitioner has noted that his business will
repair tires but will not sell or replace tires on vehicles. The proposed
business will operate Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
and will be closed on the weekends. The petitioner and one
employee will be onsite at all times with additional employees added
in the future as necessary.
Floor Plan and Elevations
The attached Site and Floor Plan details the dimensions and uses of
the individual rooms of the existing building. The interior rooms of
the building will generally remain the same with some adjustments
as necessary to meet the applicable building and fire codes. The
existing restroom and compressor room on the east building
elevation will be converted into a single, accessible restroom
accessed from inside the building. The western and center bays will
be utilized for auto body repair and the eastern bay will be solely for
auto service repair. The petitioner intends to retain the existing
exterior building improvements without any changes.
Off-Streeting Parking
Pursuant to Section 12-9-7, automotive repair shops, including auto
service repair and auto body repair uses, require a minimum of one
off-street parking space per service bay plus one space for every 200
square feet of accessory retail. There are three service bays which
will be utilized, and the petitioner does not intend to have accessory
retail on site at this time. As such, a total of six off-street parking
spaces including one accessible space are required. The attached
Site and Floor Plan illustrates that 12 off-street parking spaces—
including one accessible space—are proposed for the subject
property, which meets this standard. In addition, if accessory retail
were to be added in the proposed 268-square-foot office/reception
area in the future, the proposed number of off-street parking spaces
would accommodate the additional two spaces required. All off-
street parking spaces on site are oriented 90-degrees and designed
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
30
to comply with all standards in Sections 12-9-6 and 12-9-8 of the
Zoning Ordinance.
Access and Circulation
The subject property currently contains three separate access
points, one on each public right-of-way that the property fronts.
Both access points on Oakton Street and Orchard Street are
located in close proximity to the Oakton/Orchard street
intersection, creating potential unsafe vehicular/pedestrian
interactions. To address and improve this existing condition, the
petitioner has worked with staff and proposes blocking the
existing access point on Orchard Street with a landscape bed as
shown on the attached Landscape Plan.
The existing two-way travel access from Oakton Street will
remain. However, the existing two-way travel access from the
alley into the subject property will be converted into a one-way
travel as exit only. Both the Oakton Street access and alley access
drive aisles are proposed to comply with the minimum drive aisle
width for two-way and one-way travel respectively, as noted in
Section 12-9-6 of the Zoning Ordinance.
In addition, the existing tandem parking spaces along the north
property line will be removed and replaced with a single row of
parking spaces providing for ample access and circulation between
the access points, service bays, and parking spaces.
Landscaping and Screening
The subject property contains some landscape beds along the
north and east parking space rows. However, it does not fully
comply with the landscaping and screening standards in Chapter
10 of the Zoning Ordinance. The petitioner worked with staff to
expand existing landscape beds and add new landscaping areas
between the parking spaces and the property lines to comply with
the screening requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
In summary, the following landscaping and screening
improvements are proposed for the subject property:
• Expanding the existing north and east landscape areas to
five feet in width for the full extent of the parking row;
• Adding eight-foot-wide, minimum 100-square-foot
landscape beds at the end of each parking row;
• Adding a minimum three-foot-wide landscape bed around
the base of the existing pole sign, which is to remain; and
• Removing the existing barbed wire from the rear fenced
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
31
enclosure located behind the existing building.
Conditional Use Findings: 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. The Board may use the provided responses as written as its rationale, modify, or
adopt its own.
1. The proposed Conditional Use is in fact a Conditional Use established within the
specific Zoning district involved:
Comment: Both the auto service repair and auto body repair uses are 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
foster growth and retention of existing commercial businesses in Des Plaines. This property
is positioned along the Oakton Street corridor and is surrounded on all sides by commercial
development with the exception of the south side, which abuts two-family residential. The
approval of a new commercial uses at the subject property generally falls within the general
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 subject property has been utilized for auto service uses in past and was
most recently vacated by an auto service repair and motor vehicle sales business. This is
consistent with other auto-oriented commercial uses currently operating along the Oakton
Street corridor. However, the PZB and City Council may also consider future plans for the
Oakton Street corridor in its determination of the conditional use requests for additional
auto-oriented uses in this corridor.
4. The proposed Conditional Use is not hazardous or disturbing to existing neighboring
uses:
Comment: Given that the subject property was recently utilized for auto-oriented uses,
there is no indication that this proposal would be any more hazardous or disturbing to
neighboring uses than another auto-oriented use. Aside from tow-truck deliveries of
vehicles in need of service, all of the proposed auto service operations will be conducted
within the building reducing any hazardous or distributing effects on neighboring
properties. Much of the circulation and operational movements outside the building will
occur in front of the building at the entrance to the three service bays, an area shielded by
buildings on the west and south sides and separated by streets on the north and east sides.
While this proposal does include the use of a frame machine and spray booth, the petitioner
will need to comply with all applicable building and fire codes to ensure safety and
nuisance standards are met. The petitioner has also stated that they will not be selling or
replacing tires and will not have a space dedicated to or utilized for tire storage. However,
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
32
staff have received complaints from neighboring residents regarding the past conditions on
the subject property, so operational conditions have been suggested by staff to minimize
adverse effects that are often attributed to auto-oriented uses.
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 previous auto service repair and motor vehicle sales uses on this site were
adequately served by essential public facilities and services. While the proposal replaces
the previous motor vehicle sales use with an auto body repair use, 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: As noted in the Zoning/Property History section above, the previous auto
service repair and motor vehicle sales uses did create a burden on public facilities and the
conditions on site were arguably detrimental to the economic well-being of the community
requiring code enforcement action. While there is no indication that the new user and
proposed auto service repair and auto body repair uses will have the same effect on public
facilities and the community as a whole, PZB and City Council should consider whether
the uses are feasible for the subject property given its size and location in the Oakton
corridor.
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: Auto-oriented uses do by their nature involve activities, processes, materials,
equipment, and conditions of operation that can be considered detrimental to any persons,
property, or the general welfare by many different means. The two separate auto-oriented
uses—similar to the two auto-oriented uses before them—can be expected to result in
increased vehicular traffic to and from the site throughout the day, which can impact
surrounding thoroughfares. The tools and machinery utilized for operations of both uses
create noise, fumes, odors, or a combination thereof, which may impact neighboring
properties depending on business operations and proper disposal or venting of resulting
byproducts. In particular, the paint booth requires certain venting requirements and can,
based on its design and location, create negative effects to neighboring property owners
that were not present when the previous uses were in operation.
It is anticipated that all auto-oriented service will be conducted inside the building and tire
storage will not be present on the subject property. However, the proposed vehicle storage
at the rear of the property and the resulting byproducts from work done inside the building
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
33
could create negative effects on the neighboring properties, in which the PZB and City
Council should consider.
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 subject property contains three separate access points, one on each of the
public rights-of-way fronting the site. However, the existing site design presents some
access and circulation concerns, a condition that was exasperated by the operations of the
previous business owner and created fairly substantial interferences to traffic on
surrounding throughfares. That said, the proposal includes improvements to reduce the
number of access points and redesign the parking and drive aisle layout to provide more
adequate space for circulation and operation of the proposed auto-oriented uses. It also
utilizes the existing fenced enclosure at the rear of the property to store vehicles to be
repaired or those that have recently been repaired to free up parking space for customers
and employees in the parking areas. These improvements help correct the existing issues
on the site to minimize any foreseen interferences with traffic surrounding thoroughfares.
However, as staff have noted, the nature in which business operations are conducted on
site is imperative to ensure conditions on site are maintained in a compliant manner,
permitting adequate access, circulation, and parking on the site and reduce traffic
interferences.
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 as the building and site were already
developed for similar uses. Furthermore, the proposal does include additional landscaping
and screening improvements that will help soften the transition between the commercial
lot itself and the neighboring residential lots to the south.
10. The proposed Conditional Use complies with all additional regulations in the Zoning
Ordinance specific to the Conditional Use requested:
Comment: This proposal is anticipated will meet all other requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance for the C-3 General Commercial District.
PZB Procedure and Recommended Condition: Pursuant to Section 12-3-4 of the Zoning
Ordinance, the PZB may vote to recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial of
the conditional use requests. If the PZB chooses to recommend approval of the requests, staff
recommends the following conditions.
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1. The gravel area in the rear enclosure shall be paved with a dust-free hard surface in
conformance with all City of Des Plaines regulations prior to the use of this space.
2. No motor vehicle sales are permitted on the subject property at any time for any reason.
3. The parking area must be restriped in accordance with all City of Des Plaines
regulations. All drive aisles must be kept clear of any obstructions at all times.
Case No. 24-058 TSUB-FPLAT 2134 Sprucewood Avenue
Case No. 24-063 PUD-V 10 W. Algonquin Road
Case No. 25-001 CU 1685 E. Oakton Street
34
Member Weaver asked about the status of the Oakton Street Corridor planning process.
Director Rogers explained the corridor plan project was delayed from 2024 and is currently
planned to restart in 2025. The draft plan would likely be available for public comment &
subsequent consideration by the City Council in the fall of 2025.
Chair Szabo asked the applicant to clarify proposed changes to the current sign.
Mr. Shamoan stated the existing sign face would be replaced and the frame would be refinished.
The tentative name for the proposed business is “Carmix.”
Member Catalano motioned to recommend approval as presented in the sample motion.
Member Weaver seconded the motion.
AYES: Bronakowski, Catalano, Fowler, Szabo, Veremis, Weaver
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: None
***MOTION CARRIED***
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning & Zoning Board meeting on Tuesday, January 28, 2025 is planned and there are four
cases.
Chairman Szabo adjourned the meeting by voice vote at 9:42 p.m.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Mendel, AICP, Assistant Director of CED/Recording Secretary
cc: City Officials, Aldermen, Planning & Zoning Board, Petitioners