HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPPROVED PZB Minutes 3.8.22Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
DES PLAINES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING
March 8, 2022
MINUTES
The Des Plaines Planning and Zoning Board held its regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday, March 8,
2022, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 101 of the Des Plaines Civic Center.
Chairman Szabo called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and read this evening's cases. Roll call was
established.
PRESENT: Szabo, Veremis, Saletnik, Hofherr, Weaver, Fowler
ABSENT: Catalano
ALSO PRESENT: Jonathan Stytz, Planner Community & Economic Development
John Carlisle, Director of Community & Economic Development
Ryan Johnson, Assistant Director of Community & Economic Development
Vanessa Wells/Recording Secretary
A quorum was present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion was made by Board Member Weaver, seconded by Board Member Hofherr to approve the
minutes of February 23, 2022, as presented.
AYES: Szabo, Veremis, Saletnik, Hofherr, Weaver, Fowler
NAYES: None
ABSTAIN: None
***MOTION CARRIED ***
PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
NEW BUSINESS
1. Addresses: 600 E. Algonquin Road Case Number: 22-008-CU-V
The petitioner is requesting the following items: (i) A conditional use to allow an office use in the C -1
Neighborhood Shopping District; (ii) A variation for number of off-street parking spaces; and (iii) any other
variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary.
PINs: 09-19-214-031-0000
Petitioner: Donna Adam, Clean Up – Give Back, 612 S. Fifth Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016
Owner: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL 60016
Chairman Szabo swore in Donna Adam, with Clean Up – Give Back at 612 S Fifth Ave. in Des Plaines, Illinois.
This is a small non-profit organization that intends to relocate its headquarters to 600 E. Algonquin Rd.
They organize, coordinate, and facilitate cleanup projects throughout the area. They offer a flexible
service program that allows individuals to earn service hours by participating in the cleanup events, which
are not held on site but rather alongside roads, or at parks or other properties needing clean up.
Member Fowler asked how many employees will be at this location.
Ms. Adams stated they have mostly volunteers but we do have two paid interns currently. This number
may increase to six to eight employees maximum.
Member Hofherr asked how many people attend board meetings.
Ms. Adams responded that eleven board members attend but they usually have their meetings at the Elk’s
Club.
Member Fowler asked where the volunteers meet at 600 E. Algonquin Road or on site of the project.
Ms. Adams responded we meet on site at the cleanup location. However, if it is a large group we will have
some volunteers or the organizers pick up the supplies at our office before heading to the designated
location.
Member Hofherr asked what other municipalities or towns does Clean Up – Give Back work with.
Ms. Adams stated we will travel one hour away outside of Des Plaines, so we can get close to the
Wisconsin or Indiana boarders.
Member Veremis asked if the clean-up campaigns typically occur on weekends.
Ms. Adams responded that clean-ups typically occur on weekends March through January but during the
summer months clean-up events can happen daily.
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
Chairman Szabo asked if people picking up supplies are completing a public service requirement.
Ms. Adams responded that they have a flexible service program available where people who need to fulfill
a public service requirement can complete it through these clean-up events.
Member Weaver asked if there is a vehicle that will transport volunteers and or staff to the cleanup sites
and where it is parked.
Ms. Adams responded there is a van that will be kept on site that we use to go to the sites but it is not for
the volunteers only for staff and or the interns to use. Volunteers are required to have their own way to
and from the cleanup site.
Member Fowler asked for clarification from staff regarding available parking on site, specifically if there
are nine current spaces that are being reduced down to six or if there are six existing spaces on site.
Jonathan Stytz, Planner for CED, responded that the parking requirement is for nine parking spaces with
a minimum of one handicap accessible spaces. However, the existing site has six parking spaces with two
handicap accessible parking spaces and the petitioner is not proposed any proposed changes to the
parking area.
Planner Stytz gave his staff report.
Issue: The petitioner is requesting a conditional use for an office use in the C-1 Neighborhood Shopping
District and a major variation for off-street parking at 600 E. Algonquin Road.
Address: 600 E. Algonquin Road
Owner: City of Des Plaines, 1420 Miner Street, Des Plaines, IL, 60016
Petitioner: Clean Up – Give Back, (Representative: Donna Adam, 612 S. Fifth Avenue,
Des Plaines, IL 60016
Case Number: 22-008-CU-V
PIN: 09-19-214-031-0000
Ward: #3, Alderman Sean Oskerka
Existing Zoning: Vacant building
Surrounding Zoning: North: R-1, Single Family Residential District
South: R-1, Single Family Residential / C-3, General Commercial Districts
East: R-1, Single Family Residential District
West: C-3, General Commercial District
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
Surrounding Land Use: North: Single family residences
South: Restaurant (Commercial) / Church (Residential)
East: Single family residences
West: Auto Service Repair Shop (Commercial)
Street Classification: Algonquin Road is classified as a major collector and Wolf Road is classify as a minor
arterial.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan illustrates the site as institutional.
Zoning/Property History: Based on City records, the property was annexed into Des Plaines in 1927. The
existing structure has been used as an office in the past but has been vacant since December of 2020. It
was most recently the Self Help Closet and Food Pantry of Des Plaines.
Project Description: The petitioner, Clean Up – Give Back, with written consent of property owner
City of Des Plaines, is requesting a conditional use to allow an office use in a C-1 Neighborhood Shopping
District and a major variation to reduce the required number of off-street parking spaces from nine to six
at 600 E. Algonquin Road. The subject property is a corner lot in the C-1 Neighborhood Shopping District
directly northeast of the Algonquin Road and Wolf Road intersection. An alley runs along its east (rear)
property line. The property consists of one parcel totaling 8,362 square feet (0.19 acres) and currently
consists of a 2,419-square-foot, one-story commercial building, paved parking area off the alley with six
total parking spaces, and existing green space as shown on the Plat of Survey (Attachment 3). The existing
one-story commercial building is set back approximately 30 feet off the west property line (front) along
Wolf Road, 26 feet from the east property line along the alley (rear), 5 feet off the north property line
(side), and 29 feet off the south property line (side) along Algonquin Road.
The petitioner is a small non-profit organization that intends to relocate its headquarters to the
subject property. They organize, coordinate, and facilitate cleanup projects throughout the area. They
offer a flexible service program that allows individuals to earn service hours by participating in the cleanup
events, which are not held on site but rather alongside roads or at parks or other properties and
locations needing clean up. The proposal does not include any exterior changes to the building. They will
remodel and partition the interior to provide the following: (i) an office desk and workspace area; (ii) a
reception area; (iii) a volunteer and workshop area for programs; (iv) an area for cleanup kits to be
prepared; (v) space for donated items and occasional meetings; and (vi) a storage area for supplies as
shown in the Floor Plans (Attachment 4). The petitioner projects four employees and anticipates that over
the course of an entire day, no more than 25 to 30 individuals will visit the building, usually for a short
period to pick up supplies for a service project. The proposed hours of operation are 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
Monday through Saturday and closed on Sundays. While the organization’s board meetings normally take
place off-site, they would occasionally like to use one of the rooms in the building for this purpose,
although this would not be a day-to-day or regular function of the headquarters. See the Project Narrative
and Petitioner’s Responses to Standards (Attachment 1) for more information.
An office use requires a conditional use permit in the C-1 district pursuant to Section 12-7-3(K) of the
Zoning Ordinance. The petitioner is also requesting a variation for off-street parking. Pursuant to Section
12-9-6 of the Zoning Ordinance, one parking space is required for every 250 square feet of gross floor
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
area. Floor area, as defined in Section 12-13-3, includes all space devoted to the proposed office use and
any portion of the total proposed storage area greater than 10 percent of the entire combined floor area
of the building. Based on the Floor Plans (Attachment 5), the proposed office space and portions of
intended storage over 10 percent of the entire combined floor area equates to a total of nine required
parking spaces. However, there are only six parking spaces, including two handicap accessible spaces.
Section 12-9-2 provides that when a new use is proposed, it should meet the minimum parking
requirement for the new use. When the new use cannot meet the minimum, as in this case, variation is
required.
Conditional Use Finding: Conditional Use requests are subject to the standards set forth in Section 12-3-
4(E) of the Zoning Ordinance. The PZB may use the staff comments below or the attached petitioner
responses as its findings, or the Board may adopt its own:
1. The proposed Conditional Use is in fact a Conditional Use established within the specific Zoning
district involved:
Comment: The proposed principal use is classified as an office. An office use is a conditional use as
specified in Section 12-7-3 of the Zoning Ordinance. Accessory uses are permitted in the C-1 District.
2. The proposed Conditional Use is in accordance with the objectives of the City’s Comprehensive
Plan:
Comment: The subject property is a vacant building. The proposed office non-profit organization
repurposes the subject property to provide opportunities for residents to serve and benefit the city as a
whole.
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 proposed office use for the non-profit organization would utilize the existing building and
site, which is harmonious with the surrounding commercial development to the west and south of the
property. It also serves as a gradual transition from commercial to residential development in the north
and east sides of the subject property.
4. The proposed Conditional Use is not hazardous or disturbing to existing neighboring uses:
Comment: The proposed office use would not be hazardous or disturbing to the existing neighboring uses.
Instead, the proposal will improve an underperforming property with a new use that is self-contained
inside a building and will not detract or disturb surrounding uses in the area.
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 subject property is a corner lot with direct access to essential public facilities and services.
Staff has no concerns that the proposed use will be adequately served with essential public facilities and
services.
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
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 proposed use would neither create a burden on public facilities, nor would it be a
detriment to the economic well-being of the community. The proposed use could help improve the
economic well-being of the community by beautifying visible areas.
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: All proposed activities for the proposed office use would take place inside, reducing any noise,
smoke fumes, light, glare, odors, or other concerns. The actual clean-up projects do not occur at the
building. The existing development and site improvements currently do not project adverse effects on the
surrounding properties.
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 proposed use will not create an interference with traffic on surrounding public
thoroughfares as access is from an existing public alley. The proposal will not alter the existing access
point or add any curb-cuts to the existing 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 subject property is already developed so the new use would not result in the loss or
damage of natural, scenic, or historic features. Instead, the petitioner is repurposing the existing
development to house a new non-profit organization in an effort to benefit the city.
10. The proposed Conditional Use complies with all additional regulations in the Zoning Ordinance
specific to the Conditional Use requested:
Comment: The proposed office use will comply with all applicable requirements as stated in the Zoning
Ordinance.
Variation Findings: Variation requests are subject to the standards set forth in Section 12-3-6(H) of the
Zoning Ordinance. The PZB may use the staff comments below or the attached petitioner responses as its
findings, or the Board may adopt its own:
1. Hardship: No variation shall be granted pursuant to this subsection H unless the applicant shall
establish that carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this title would create a particular
hardship or a practical difficulty:
Comment: The layout of the existing development does not provide the property owner ample space to
add parking to meet the minimum requirement. The enforcement of the off-street parking requirement
would likely require altering the existing layout and access of the existing parking area as well as decrease
the amount of permeable open space currently on site.
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
2. Unique Physical Condition: The subject lot is exceptional as compared to other lots subject to
the same provision by reason of a unique physical condition, including presence of an existing
use, structure, or sign, whether conforming or nonconforming; irregular or substandard shape
or size; exceptional topographical features; or other extraordinary physical conditions peculiar
to and inherent in the subject lot that amount to more than a mere inconvenience to the owner
and that relate to or arise out of the lot rather than the personal situation of the current owner
of the lot:
Comment: Staff’s review concludes that there are some unique physical conditions on the subject
property than differs from many other properties in this area. First, the size of the lot is relatively small
for a commercial corner at an intersection of two arterial roads. This limits the amount of room for a
building, parking areas, and access. Additionally, the existing building comprises a large amount of the lot,
preventing the addition of new parking spaces in the back and severely limiting the addition of a drive
aisle/parking spaces on other building frontages. Last, the property is on a corner next to a busy
intersection, which limits the opportunity for the sensible placement of new curb cuts and access to, for
example, a separate and new parking area.
3. Not Self-Created: The aforesaid unique physical condition is not the result of any action or
inaction of the owner or its predecessors in title and existed at the time of the enactment of the
provisions from which a variance is sought or was created by natural forces or was the result of
governmental action, other than the adoption of this title:
Comment: The subject property and adjoining residential properties were annexed into the City in
1927.The building and property were, at the time of construction, designed for lower driving and parking
demand and use. Because of the unique physical conditions (i.e. small lot at the corner of a busy
intersection), it became unreasonable to add parking after the surrounding area was built out.
4. Denied Substantial Rights: The carrying out of the strict letter of the provision from which a
variance is sought would deprive the owner of the subject lot of substantial rights commonly
enjoyed by owners of other lots subject to the same provision:
Comment: Carrying out the strict letter of this code to require the minimum nine parking spaces would
limit the property owner from fully utilizing the existing structure and property as a whole, and thus would
deprive the substantial rights enjoyed by other commercial properties.
5. Not Merely Special Privilege: The alleged hardship or difficulty is neither merely the inability of
the owner or occupant to enjoy some special privilege or additional right not available to
owners or occupants of other lots subject to the same provision, nor merely the inability of the
owner to make more money from the use of the subject lot:
Comment: Granting of this variation for off-street parking spaces would not provide any special privilege
but rather a solution to some of the existing unique physical conditions of the site and practical difficulties
associated with the development of the subject property. Additionally, the granting of this variation does
not allow the petitioner to make additional money, as that is not the petitioner’s mission.
6. Title And Plan Purposes: The variation would not result in a use or development of the subject
lot that would be not in harmony with the general and specific purposes for which this title and
the provision from which a variation is sought were enacted or the general purpose and intent
of the comprehensive plan:
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
Comment: Staff’s review concludes that the proposed variation would help meet objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan, especially those pertaining to services for residents and contributing to an
aesthetically beautiful community.
7. No Other Remedy: There is no means other than the requested variation by which the alleged
hardship or difficulty can be avoided or remedied to a degree sufficient to permit a reasonable
use of the subject lot.
Comment: There are no reasonable ways to avoid the requested variation given the characteristics of the
existing development and the property as a whole. Any potential options, including a demolition of a
portion of the existing building or addition of drive aisles and parking areas in other areas of the site,
would be too cost prohibitive for any use and could drive potential users away.
8. Minimum Required: The requested variation is the minimum measure of relief necessary to
alleviate the alleged hardship or difficulty presented by the strict application of this title.
Comment: Approval of this variation request is the minimum measure of relief to address the petitioner’s
concerns and the existing conditions on site. The variation would allow the property owner to fully utilize
the existing building with a new use. Please see the Petitioner’s responses to Standards for Variations.
PZB Procedure and Recommended Conditions: Under Section 12-3-4(D)(3) (Procedure for Review and
Decision of Conditional Uses) and Section 12-3-6(G)(2) (Procedure for Review and Decision for Major
Variations) of the Zoning Ordinance, the PZB has the authority to recommend that the City Council
approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny the above-mentioned conditional use and major variation
requests for 600 E. Algonquin Road. The City Council has final authority on the proposal.
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 Uses) and
Section 12- 3-6(H) (Standards for Variations) of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff does not recommend any
conditions with this request.
A motion was made by Board Member Fowler, seconded by Board Member Hofherr, to approve a
conditional use for an office use in the C-1 Neighborhood Shopping District and a major variation for
off-street parking at 600 E. Algonquin Road.
AYES: Szabo, Veremis, Saletnik, Hofherr, Weaver, Fowler
NAYES: None
ABSTAIN: None
***MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY **
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
2. Addresses: 1050 E. Oakton Street Case Number: 22-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC
(Also 1000-1110 Executive Way and 1555 Times Drive)
The petitioner is requesting the following items: (i) A Final Plat of Planned Unit Development under
Section 12-3-5 of the Zoning Ordinance to construct a 125-unit townhome development, with exceptions
related to fence height and minimum lot area per unit, for which the petitioner received Preliminary Plat
approval of the City Council on October 4, 2021; (ii) A Final Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2-7 of the
Subdivision Regulations; and (iii) any other variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary.
PINs: 09-20-316-020-0000; -021; -023; -024; -025; -026; 09-20-321-005-0000;
09-20-322-001-0000
Petitioner: Marc McLaughlin, M/I Homes of Chicago, LLC, 400 E. Diehl Road, Suite 230, Naperville, IL
60563
Owner: 1090-1100 Executive Way, LLC and 1555 Times Drive, LLC, 2211 Old Willow Road,
Northfield, IL 60093; AND Oakton Mannheim, LLC, 2734 W. Superior Street, Chicago, IL
60654
Chairman Szabo swore in the following individuals: (i) Julie Workman with Levenfeld Pearlstein, 2 N LaSalle
St. Chicago, Illinois; (ii) Tom Petermann with Cage Engineering, 3110 Woodcreek Drive, Downers Grove,
IL 60515, (iii) Marc McLaughlin with MI Homes of Chicago, LLC, 400 E. Diehl Road, Naperville, IL 60563;
and (iv) Rich Olsen, Gary R. Weber Associates, INC, 402 W. Liberty Drive, Wheaton, IL 60187.
Ms. Workman stated on October 4, 2021 the City Council granted preliminary PUD approval of petitioner
M/I Homes’ proposal for 125 townhouses, known collectively as Halston Market. Ms. Workman explained
that today they are requesting a conditional use for a final plat of PUD as well as a final plat of subdivision.
Each building would be three stories with each unit having a ground floor, two-car, rear-loaded garage
that faces inward toward the development, not toward public streets. Walkways would connect unit front
doors to public and private sidewalks. Units include balconies and small landscaped front yards.
Ms. Workman added that their team has worked with city staff diligently and we are also including four
primary changes that include full reconstruction of Executive Way that will include adding curbs,
sidewalks, and storm water drainage. Times Drive we will add 28ft of curbs and sidewalks. This project is
envisioned to have passive open space and also feature two park areas that will have a steel shelter gazebo
with seating.
Chairman Szabo asked if they met with the engineering department at the City of Des Plaines and if they
are okay with their proposed stormwater drainage.
Mr. Petermann responded that they have met with the engineering department three times and that the
engineering plans have been passed to MWRD.
Member Fowler asked about the detention facility and what is included with it.
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
Director Carlisle mentioned that it is a dry basin with native plantings and referenced a page in the PZB
packet pertaining to the detention facility.
Member Fowler wanted confirmation that the detention facility would not be a pond.
Richard Olsen with Gary R. Weber Associates, INC stated that the detention area is a stormwater basin
that is meant to be dry for most of the year with native plantings on a slight slope. He explained that they
have proposed various prairie plants in the dentition facility that take varying water conditions, meaning
that the top portion of the detention area has plantings that take drier conditions and plantings that take
wetter conditions in the lower portion of the detention area. He added that all plantings proposed are
native, sustainable, and do not require a lot of maintenance.
Member Fowler asked if there would be in fencing around the detention area for children’s safety.
Mr. Olsen responded that there is not a fence proposed around the detention facility but there is a safety
shelf area inside the detention area that prevents someone who steps into the upper portion of the
detention basin to touch water at the bottom of the detention basin, acting as a safety shelf. He added
that these types of vegetated basins are very common and very safe.
Member Fowler stated she envisions children in the park area and is concerned about their safety. She
asked is there a reason why there is no fence proposed for this basin.
Mr. Olsen responded that it is not required in the code and fences are generally not installed around these
types of basins as they are very visible, so you can see its bottom, and there are no safety concerns.
Member Veremis asked if there will be any fencing by the proposed gazebo as shown in the photo
provided by the petitioners in their presentation.
Ms. Workman responded that this is a stock photo and that no fencing will be installed with the gazebo.
Member Veremis wanted confirmation that there will be no stoplights installed for the entrances coming
out onto Oakton Street.
Ms. Workman stated that since there are other stoplights in close proximity to the subject property,
adding additional stop lights would not be warranted.
Member Fowler was concerned about traffic movements and mentioned that this was a big concern to
residents before.
Ms. Workman stated that their traffic consultant is here who completed a traffic study over the Oakton
Street right-of-way and with other signalized intersections nearby at Lee Street and Webster Lane and
could provide additional information.
Member Fowler stated that would not be necessary.
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
Member Weaver asked what the progress was with MWRD and if there are any issues.
Tom Petermann, with Cage Engineering, 3110 Woodcreek Dr. Downers Grove Illinois stated they are
working on comments and expect to have a permit in the next one to two months.
Member Weaver asked if there are any anticipated substantial changes to the design of the development.
Mr. Petermann responded that there may be some slight changes to the detention basin but nothing to
the lots, stormwater, sanitary, or water main.
Member Weaver asked once the townhomes are sold, will the common elements belong to the HOA.
Julie Workman stated that is correct. Everything out side of the building footprint becomes the common
element and will be handled by the HOA.
Chairman Szabo asked CED Director John Carlisle to enter the staff report.
Director Carlisle noted in the version of plans recommended for approval by the PZB in June 2021, the
northernmost row of buildings were set back 21 feet from the north lot line where a minimum of 25 feet
is required. This plan necessitated a rear-yard exception. However, after listening to input at the public
hearing and subsequent meetings with neighbors and at the City Council, the petitioner revised the
drawings to shift these buildings to the south such that a rear-yard exception is no longer necessary.
Director Carlisle explained that the petitioner proposes that most of the north-south portion of Executive
Way where it connects to Oakton and borders the post office, would remain a public street. However, at
a point just south of the existing curve, the developer would construct a new east-west private drive and
demolish the existing east-west segment of Executive Way. Similarly, a portion of Times Drive would also
be vacated and become private; however, the remainder of Times, which provides access to businesses
on the east side of the street, would remain public.
Director Carlisle added that the Subdivision Regulations 13-2, requires parkland dedication (public) and/or
fee-in lieu. The rationale is the development adds residents and therefore increases demand for public
parks. The proposed project does not contain a land dedication for a public park, which instead leads to a
fee-in-lieu obligation. However, Section 13-4-2.A allows for on-site private open space to reduce the fee-
in-lieu, in the form of a credit.
Issue: The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use for a Final Plat of PUD under Section 12-3-5 of the
Zoning Ordinance, as well as a Final Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2-7 of the Subdivision
Regulations.
After the PZB’s review and recommendation regarding these requests, the petitioner will also seek the
following approvals from the City Council: (i) Vacation of Public Streets (Plat of Vacation) under Section 8-
1-9 of the City Code; (ii) Fee in Lieu of Dedication of Park Lands under Chapter 13-4 of the Subdivision
Regulations; and (iii) a redevelopment agreement.
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
Owner: 1090-1100 Executive Way, LLC; 1555 Times Drive, LLC; Oakton Mannheim, LLC
Petitioner: M/I Homes of Chicago, LLC
Case Number: 22-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC
PIN: 09-20-316-020-0000; -021-0000; -023-0000; -024-0000; -025-0000; -026- 0000;
09-20-321-005-0000; 09-20-322-001-0000
Ward: #5, Carla Brookman
Existing Zoning: R-3, Townhouse Residential District (via Ordinance Z-40-21)
Surrounding Zoning: North: R-1, Single Family Residential
South: C-3, General Commercial and C-4, Regional Shopping MEMORA NDUM
East: C-3, General Commercial, and C-4 Regional Shopping
West: C-3, General Commercial
Surrounding Land Use: North: Single family detached homes
South: Restaurants and retail goods
East: Services (Vision Care), restaurants, retail goods (Jewel-Osco grocer)
West: Post office
Street Classification: Oakton Street is classified as an arterial roadway. Times Drive and Executive
Way are local roadways.
Final PUD
Project Summary: On October 4, 2021 (Ordinance Z-40-21), the City Council granted preliminary PUD
approval of petitioner M/I Homes’ proposal for 125 townhouses, known collectively as Halston Market.
The approval was based on a proposed unit mix of seven two-bedrooms and 118 three-bedrooms, all
Of which would be horizontally connected to other units (i.e. townhouse style) across 23 separate
buildings. Each building would be three stories with each unit having a ground- floor, two-car, rear-loaded
garage that faces inward toward the development, not toward public streets. Walkways would connect
unit front doors to public and private sidewalks. Units include balconies and small landscaped front yards.
However, the amount of private open space per unit is minimal, as the concept is built around shared
open space.
Centrally located in Halston Market is a landscaped common plaza of approximately 14,000 square
feet with benches, plantings, walkways, and open green space. There is also an approximately 10,000 -
square-foot common area oriented north-south between the buildings in the southwest portion of
the development. In the southeast portion, a storm water detention area (“dry” basin, not a pond) of
approximately 69,050-square feet (1.6 acres) is shown, with adjacent surface visitor parking spaces.
Thirty-seven visitor spaces are interspersed through the development for a total of 59, which in addition
to the 250 indoor spaces for each of the 125 units would amount to a full total of 309 spaces, exceeding
the minimum requirement of 282 (Section 12-9-7).
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
Concurrence with Preliminary Plat
The petitioner’s final proposal reflects the site design of the preliminary plans, including the exception
requests acknowledged in Ordinance Z-40-21, which granted preliminary approval. These exceptions are
pursuant to Section 12-3-5 and would grant relief from the bulk regulations of the R-3 district, as well as
the fence regulations:
• Minimum lot area: Seventy-nine units are proposed with a lot area of 923 square feet, and 46
units are proposed at 1,038 square feet. The proposed lot area for each unit includes only the
livable space inside the building and a small landscaped front yard. All other area in the
development (e.g. open space, private drives, storm water basin) is allocated not to dwelling units
but instead to the development overall. The minimum lot area per dwelling unit requirement
pursuant to Section 12-7-2.J is 2,800 square feet.
• Maximum fence height: Pursuant to Section 12-8-2.A., the maximum height of a residential fence
is 6 feet. As labeled on the Final PUD Plat, the petitioner proposes 8 feet for the full length of the
rear/north lot line. The change from six to eight feet was suggested first by the PZB and
subsequently required by the City Council. An eight-foot fence is allowable along the eastern
border to screen the residential use (the townhouses) from the back of the Oak Leaf Commons
shopping center.
In the version of plans recommended for approval by the PZB in June 2021, the northernmost row of
buildings were set back 21 feet from the north lot line where a minimum of 25 feet is required. This plan
necessitated a rear-yard exception. However, after listening to input at the public hearing and subsequent
meetings with neighbors and at the City Council, the petitioner revised the drawings to shift these
buildings to the south such that a rear-yard exception is no longer necessary.
Building Design and Elevations
The Building Design Review requirement under Section 12-3-11 would apply. The petitioner’s final
submittal is unchanged from the preliminary. They are proposing that for the elevations that face public
streets, the primary material is face brick on all three stories with projections of complementary vinyl.
Elevations that would not face public streets contain face brick only on the ground floor, and where garage
doors are shown, the brick is interrupted.
Landscaping, Screening, and Lighting
The petitioner submitted a Final Landscape Plan that appears to conform to the requirements of Chapter
12-10. For example, building foundation landscaping is installed at the bases of the buildings, shade trees
are interspersed throughout common areas and open space, and at lot lines where required particularly
at the north lot line where the development abuts a single-family neighborhood – plantings are shown
such that when they are mature, they should, in concert with the proposed fencing, provide ample
screening. The petitioner has also submitted a photometric plan, which is attached, that shows how light
will be contained within the borders of the development.
Streets and Access
The petitioner proposes that most of the north-south portion of Executive Way where it connects to
Oakton and borders the post office – would remain a public street. However, at a point just south of the
existing curve, the developer would construct a new east-west private drive and demolish the existing
east west segment of Executive Way. This requires a vacation of approximately 29,000 square feet.
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
Similarly, a portion of Times Drive (approximately 10,600 square feet) would also be vacated and become
private; however, the remainder of Times, which provides access to businesses on the east side of the
street, would remain public. More details of the private street plan are discussed on Page 6 of this report.
The final submittal includes a fire truck turning radius diagram, attached to this report, to ensure access
to the various buildings and units. The Fire Prevention Bureau recommends approval, provided all private
drives are a minimum of 20 feet wide.
The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) has jurisdiction over the Oakton Street right-of-way, and
given existing signalized intersections at Lee Street and Webster Lane (1,600 feet apart), an additional
signalized intersection in front of the development will not be warranted. Consequently, without a traffic
signal in front of the development, pedestrian activity will be restricted to the sidewalk on the north side
of Oakton before reaching a marked crossing, approximately 700-800 feet in each direction (three-to-five-
minute walk for an able-bodied person). However, the development includes a pedestrian opening to
accommodate walking to shopping – particularly useful for groceries at Jewel-Osco – at the east lot line,
near the detention pond. That opening may also be useful for those walking to or from the Oakton-Lee
Street intersection and the public transportation that is existing or planned in that area (e.g. Pace PULSE
Dempster Line station, future Metra stop at Oakton and the North Central Service/Canadian National Rail
Line).
Construction Schedule and Phasing Plan
The petitioner has submitted a construction schedule as required by Section 12- 3-5.H., as well as a
Phasing Plan. These are combined into one document and attached to this report. In summary, the
developer intends to separate vertical construction of the buildings into two phases: Phase I and Phase II.
Phase I covers the southern half of the development, where 10 buildings (56 units) are planned. Phase I
includes mass earthwork for the entire site, including digging the detention basin and implementing the
grading components of the storm water drainage plan. The Phase II area covers the northern 13 buildings,
or 69 units. The Phasing Plan illustrates the timing of various improvements, such as the installation of
underground utilities such as water mains and storm sewers, as well as the construction or reconstruction
of private drives and public streets. Phase I has a projected end date of October 2022, with Phase II in
October 2023. However, the petitioner notes: “Building starts will commence subject to sales absorption
and seasonal construction limitations.” Per the Zoning Ordinance, the petitioner has an 18-month period
of flexibility on the dates in the construction schedule before the City Council may re-evaluate the final
PUD approval.
Final Plat of Subdivision
Request Summary: The PZB approved a Tentative Plat of Subdivision in 2021 to re-subdivide the 11.2-
acre subject property from the existing eight lots to 131: 125 for each individual townhouse units
plus six lots for land under common/homeowners’ association ownership. The area of each townhouse
lot will vary from 923 square feet (interior units) to 1,038 square feet (end units), necessitating a PUD
exception for minimum lot area (2,800 square feet in the R-3 district).
The Final Plat aligns with the Tentative Plat to show the following existing easements and building lines:
(i) a 13-foot Public Utility Easement and 20-foot building line on both sides of Executive Way throughout
the development; (ii) a 13-foot Public Utility Easement and 20-foot building line on both sides of Times
Drive throughout the development; (iii) a 20-foot building line along Oakton Street on the south side of
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
the lot; (iv) a ten-foot electric and telephone easement and 24-foot ingress, egress, and driveway
easement behind the commercial development on the south side of the lot; (v) a 23-foot public utility
easement along the existing drive aisle east of the proposed detention area; (vi) a 15-foot public utility
easement along the east property line of the development; and (vii) a five-foot public utility easement
located along the north property line of the development. The proposed Final Plat illustrates vacations of
portions of Executive Way and Times Drive with their respective easements.
Public Improvements and Final Engineering
Under Section 13-3-1 of the Subdivision Regulations, the developer is required to improve adjacent rights-
of-way. The City will require Executive Way, on the western boundary of the development and next to the
Post Office, to be reconstructed. The City will also require Times Drive to be reconstructed to the same
standards, and the developer will be bound to certain construction/reconstruction of adjacent
underground infrastructure such as water mains and sewers.
The developer has provided the City Engineer with an estimated cost of public improvements, which will
be agreed to and finalized at the time of approval by the City Council and reinforced by the redevelopment
agreement. A performance security in the form of a letter of credit, with the City named as the beneficiary,
that amounts to 125 percent of the total estimated cost plus a 10 percent maintenance warranty will be
required to secure the improvements.
City Engineers note that inside of the development barrier curb should be installed around corners to
prevent landscaping from being damaged. Further, while various plans in the submittal (e.g. Final
Landscape Plan) show overhead lighting over the private drives, details on the structures of the fixtures
should be added to the engineering plans. The attached Public Works and Engineering memo lists the
department’s comments, which are expected to be resolved upon final construction design approval of
both the City and external agencies such as IDOT.
Private Open Space and Recreation; Parkland Dedication or Fee-in-Lieu The petitioner is proposing two
open space areas to serve residents: an approximately 14,000-square-foot central plaza area in the Phase
II area, just south of Building 22, and a 10,000-square-foot north-south oriented green space in the Phase
I area with a mix of trees and grassy space between Buildings 8 and 9 (west) and Buildings 4 and 5 (east).
The plaza area is proposed to have a steel shelter gazebo with seating. The north-south linear area is
shown with two backless benches. In general, the project is envisioned to have passive open space instead
of actively programmed recreation such as playgrounds, ball fields and courts, or fitness equipment.
For residential developments at the proposed scale, Chapter 13-4 of the Subdivision Regulations requires
parkland dedication (public) and/or fee-in lieu. The rationale is the development adds residents and
therefore increases demand for public parks. The proposed project does not contain a land dedication for
a public park, which instead leads to a fee-in-lieu obligation. Per the calculation prescribed by Section 13-
4-4, there are 296 projected residents, which leads to a parkland obligation of 1.63 acres, equivalent to a
fee-in-lieu of approximately $326,000. However, Section 13-4-2.A allows for on-site private open space to
reduce the fee-in-lieu, in the form of a credit, at the discretion of the City Council if the proposed open
space is determined to meet the expectations of that Section. These open space details are provided for
the PZB’s information, but any decision on whether to grant a credit rests with City Council.
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
Vacation of Public Streets (Plat of Vacation), Private Streets
Request Summary: As described in the Project Summary on Pages 2-3, the petitioner will seek vacations
of public streets. Based on an appraisal conducted by JMS Appraisal Group, the value of the approximately
40,000-square-foot total vacation area is $32,000. The southernmost approximately 185 linear feet of
Times Drive, which provides accesses to businesses Dunkin’ Donuts and Vision Works, is not proposed to
be vacated, but this segment of street will nonetheless be reconstructed, and the redevelopment
agreement will require the future homeowners’ association to be responsible for yearly maintenance
activities such as snow removal and leaf collection. Although only the City Council can approve the
vacation, the details are included for the PZB’s information.
The City maintains an Address Assignment Policy, to which new proposed private drives must conform
per 13-2-5 of the Subdivision Regulations. The petitioner proposes within the development 11 private
drive names to which addresses would be assigned. The most current list, which is not reflected in the
current submittal is Bogart Street, Blaine Street, Cooper Street, Denny Way, Dock Street (new), Wren Road
(new), Girard Avenue, Phinney Lane, Renton Avenue, Slade Way, and Tolt Avenue. Staff has reviewed the
proposed names against a master existing street name list and does not have concerns about redundancy
or confusion. A condition is recommended that the petitioner update plans and drawings with the
updated street name list.
Although the project does not yet have a street numbering designation, at the time of official address
assignment (during construction, pre-occupancy) unit address numbers will be given in accordance with
the Des Plaines city grid number system. For reference, the Oakton-Lee intersection is 1200 East and 1600
South. Per the addressing policy, each unit will have its own address number. Finally, the Address
Assignment policy requires compliance with the 2015 International Fire Code and International
Residential Code, which dictates minimum sizes, location, and legibility of address numbers.
Alignment with the 2019 Comprehensive Plan
Although the PZB previously reviewed at the preliminary stage, the Board may find the following analysis
useful in determining the extent to which the proposed project aligns with the Comprehensive Plan.
• Under Overarching Principles:
o The principle to “Provide a Range of Housing Options” mentions “high-quality
townhomes” in general and recommends, “For the Oakton Street Corridor, it is
recommended that the City update … zoning … to permit townhomes, row homes, and
mixed-used development.”
• Under Land Use & Development:
o The Future Land Use Plan illustrates the property as commercial. While the proposal
does not align, it may be seen as a reasonable concept to support nearby commercial
uses and the theme that the Oakton-Lee intersection should be anchored by
commercial.
• Under Housing:
o There is a recommendation to “Ensure the City has several housing options to fit diverse
needs.” Townhouses appeal to a wide range of potential households and provide a
middle ground between the heavy supply (proportionally) of single-family detached
homes and apartments/condominiums.
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
PUD Findings of Fact
The proposed development is reviewed below in terms of the Findings of Fact contained in Section 12-3-
5 of the Zoning Ordinance. In addition to staff comments, the Board should review petitioner’s responses
(attached).
1. The extent to which the Proposed Plan is or is not consistent with the stated purpose of the
PUD regulations in Section 12-3.5-1 and is a stated Conditional Use in the subject zoning district:
Comment: A PUD is a listed conditional use in the R-3 zoning district. The proposed project meets the
stated purposes of the PUD. Additionally, the redevelopment of the subject parcels will enhance the
general area by activating a long-vacant site while being cognizant of nearby land uses.
2. The extent to which the proposed plan meets the prerequisites and standards of the planned
unit development regulations:
Comment: The proposed development will be in keeping with the City’s prerequisites and standards
regarding planned unit development regulations.
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:
Comment: The proposed project is in line with the intent of a PUD, as there are exceptions being
requested to accommodate the specific design of this mixed-use development, which allocates much of
its land to common areas to appeal to households to whom it is marketed. The exception for fence height
is to provide greater screening to the adjacent single-family residential block on Wicke Avenue.
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, protect
open space, and further the amenities of light and air, recreation and visual enjoyment:
Comment: All provisions for public services, adequate traffic control, and the protection of open space
would be accommodated in the proposed development, provided that comments regarding exit turn
lanes from Executive Way and Times Drive to Oakton Street are addressed.
5. The extent to which the relationship and compatibility of the proposed development is
beneficial or adverse to adjacent properties and neighborhood:
Comment: The proposed development serves as a transition between single-family development to the
north and corridor commercial development to the south and east. Additionally, considerations will be
made to mitigate impact on the nearby residential uses from light and noise pollution.
6. The extent to which the proposed plan is not desirable to physical development, tax base, and
economic well-being of the entire community:
Comment: The proposed project will contribute to an improved physical appearance by removing a large,
vacant, visually unappealing property. Such a significant improvement will contribute positively to the
tax base – of the City overall and the Oakton-Lee TIF District – and economic well-being of the
community.
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
7. The extent to which the proposed plan is in conformity with the recommendations of
the 2019 Comprehensive Plan:
Comment: The proposed development meets general goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, in
particular housing goals.
Recommendation and Conditions: Pursuant to Section 12-3-5.E of the Zoning Ordinance and 13-2-7 of
the Subdivision Regulations, the PZB should vote on a recommendation to City Council to approve,
approve with modification, or deny the requests for a Conditional Use for a Final Plat of PUD and Final
Plat of Subdivision. If the PZB chooses to recommend approval/approval with modifications, staff
recommends the PZB recommendation be subject to the following:
• A Plat of Vacation must be approved and recorded concurrently with any approved Final Plat
of PUD and Subdivision.
• A redevelopment agreement between the Petitioner and the City must be approved by the City
Council concurrently with the requested approvals of the Final Plat of PUD and Final Plat of
Subdivision. The redevelopment agreement will reinforce all terms including but not limited to
construction phasing; required public improvements; street naming, addressing, and signs; and
long-term maintenance and operations of the future development, in particular refuse service,
leaf collection, and snow and ice maintenance for the adjacent portion of Times Drive that will
remain public.
• All governing documents for the proposed development including covenants, conditions, and
restrictions, or operating reciprocal easement agreements must be submitted to and approved
by the City’s General Counsel prior to the recording of the Final Plat of PUD or Final Plat of
Subdivision.
• The final engineering plans to be approved by the City should attempt to incorporate
comments in the attached Public Works and Engineering memo, pending external agency
approval where noted.
• The estimated costs for required public improvements must be finalized and approved by the
City Engineer, and included with the materials to be reviewed by the City Council.
Chairman Szabo asked if anyone from the audience had questions or concerns. No one from the public
responded.
Chairman Szabo asked if the petitioners were aware of all conditions proposed by staff.
Ms. Workman responded that they would like them read.
Chairman Szabo read the conditions and asked the petitioners if they had issues with any of the
conditions.
Ms. Workman responded that they did not.
Case 22-008-CU-V 600 E. Algonquin Road Conditional Use / Variation
Case 2-002-FPUD-FPLAT-VAC 1050 E Oakton St Final Plat of Planned Unit Dev. /
Final Plat of Subdivision / Variations
A motion was made by Board Member Weaver, seconded by Board Member Saletnik to approve
requesting the following items: (i) A Final Plat of Planned Unit Development under Section 12-3-5 of the
Zoning Ordinance to construct a 125-unit townhome development, with exceptions related to fence
height and minimum lot area per unit, for which the petitioner received Preliminary Plat approval of
the City Council on October 4, 2021; (ii) A Final Plat of Subdivision under Section 13-2-7 of the
Subdivision Regulations; and (iii) any other variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary.
AYES: Szabo, Veremis, Saletnik, Hofherr, Weaver, Fowler
NAYES: None
ABSTAIN: None
***MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY ***
Member Saletnik thanked city staff for doing a great job on this project and the process.
ADJOURNMENT
The next scheduled Planning & Zoning Board meeting is Tuesday, March 22, 2022.
Chairman Szabo adjourned the meeting by voice vote at 7:52 p.m.
Sincerely,
Vanessa Wells, Recording Secretary
cc: City Officials, Aldermen, Zoning Board of Appeals, Petitioners