Download Report

NAPERVILLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
COUNCIL CHAMBERS – MUNICIPAL CENTER
FINAL AGENDA
10/08/2014 CALL TO ORDER:
A.
ROLL CALL
B.
APPROVE MINUTES
1.
Approve the September 24, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting minutes.
C.
OLD BUSINESS
D.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.
PZC Case # 14-1-111 North Aurora Road Speedway Monument Sign
Petitioner: Speedway LLC
Location: 631 N. Route 59
Request: Conduct the public hearing regarding the variance request to
install a monument sign closer than the required 10' from the front
property line for the Speedway gas station located at 631 N. Route 59.
Official Notice: Published in the Naperville Sun on Sunday,
September 21, 2014
2.
PZC Case # 14-1-118 Compass Church Cafe Conditional Use
Petitioner: The Compass Church, 1551 Hobson Road, Naperville, IL
60540
Location: 2244 W 95th Street
Request: Conduct the public hearing to consider a request for a
conditional use for general retail in OCI (Office, Commercial and
Institutional District) for property located at 2244 W 95th Street. PZC
14-1-118
Official Notice: Published in the Naperville Sun on Sunday,
September 21, 2014
AGENDA
NAPERVILLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
10/08/2014 - 7:00 p.m. - COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Page 2
3.
PZC Case # 14-1-113 Greenway Herbal Care
Petitioner: Nilesh Khot on behalf of Greenway Herbal Care LLC, 2354
Hassel Road, Suite B, Hoffman Estates, IL 60169
Location: 424 Fort Hill Drive, Unit 103
Request: Conduct the public hearing to consider a conditional use for a
medical cannabis dispensing facility in B3 (General Commercial
District) for Unit 103 of the property located at 424 Fort Hill Drive.
Official Notice: Published in the Naperville Sun on Sunday,
September 21, 2014.
E.
REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
F.
CORRESPONDENCE
1.
2015 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Calendar
Request: Approve the 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting
calendar. (Continued from 9/24/14)
G.
NEW BUSINESS
H.
ADJOURNMENT
Any individual with a disability requesting a reasonable accommodation in order to
participate in a public meeting should contact the Communications Department at
least 48 hours in advance of the scheduled meeting. The Communications
Department can be reached in person at 400 S. Eagle Street, Naperville, IL., via
telephone at 630-420-6707 or 630-305-5205 (TDD) or via e-mail at
[email protected]. Every effort will be made to allow for meeting participation.
NAPERVILLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
DRAFT MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 24, 2014
UNOFFICIAL PRIOR TO PZC APPROVAL
APPROVED BY THE PZC ON
Call to Order
7:00 p.m.
A. Roll Call
Present:
Absent:
Student Members:
Staff Present:
B. Minutes
Frost, Coyne, Hastings, Martinez, Meyer, Williams, Gustin
Dabareiner, Messer
Planning Team – Allison Laff, Derek Rockwell
Engineer – Andy Hynes, Anastasia Urban
Approve the minutes of September 10, 2014
Motion by: Coyne
Second by: Williams
Approved
(7 to 0)
C. Old Business
D. Public Hearings
D1.
PZC 14-1-100
812 W. Jefferson
The petitioner requests approval of a variance to Section 7-4-4:2.4 (Ninety
Percent Rule) of the Municipal Code for the property located at 812 W. Jefferson
Avenue.
Derek Rockwell, Planning Services Team, gave an overview of the request.
Planning and Zoning Commission inquired about:
• Coyne – Commended staff on the report – well done. Noted that he
believes that the intent of the rule is to avoid overdevelopment. If subject
lot is divided in half, it appears to be comparable to lots immediately
adjacent to it, so what is the concern? Rockwell indicated that while it
may be consistent with those directly adjacent, it does not comply with
the 90% rule, which takes a larger area into account. Coyne indicated
that he does not feel that the lot is out of character with the
neighborhood.
• Gustin – If you don’t adjust the existing large lot (or have it remain
vacant), it will be more out of character with the existing neighborhood.
Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission
September 24, 2014
Page 2 of 14
•
•
•
•
It is rare to have a 19,000 square foot single-family lot in this area.
Frost – Looking at the map, there are no other lots in the 19,000 square
foot range. Is it staff’s opinion that the lot, as is, fits in the character of
the neighborhood? The choice is between 1 large lot and 2 lots that are
within the small lot size range for the neighborhood. Rockwell clarified
that there are no code provisions that limit maximum lot size.
Hastings – Did the petitioner provide designs for the two proposed
home? Rockwell indicated that they have not provided home designs.
Hastings believes that the existing home on the lot today fits well with
the neighborhood and does not believe that the lot should be subdivided.
Meyers – isn’t it typical to have varying lot sizes in different zoning
districts? In Meyers’ neighborhood, her lot is larger than her neighbors
and well exceeds the minimum lot size of her zoning district. What
impact would the subdivision have on property values within the
neighborhood? Can houses be built on the proposed lots without
variances or is the proposed subdivision opening the door for future
zoning variance requests?
Frost noted that PZC should not be considering market impact.
Russ Whitaker, Attorney, Rosanova & Whitaker, 30 W. Jefferson Street, spoke
on behalf of the petitioner:
• There are varying lot sizes and lot widths within the subject
neighborhood.
• Home could be designed for these lots that comply with the underlying
zoning requirements, as these lots are 25% larger than a typical R1B lot.
The subject lots are larger than a typical downtown Naperville lot.
• Purpose of the 90% rule is to prevent incompatible subdivisions, prevent
overcrowding, and to preserve light and open space. Doesn’t believe that
the 500’ area being included is reflective of the neighborhood in which
the subject property is located; instead believes that the neighborhood is
comprised of the lots located along Jefferson Street.
• Showed a picture of the proposed homes that might be built on the
properties. Homes will range from 3,200 square feet to 3,800 square feet
in size. These homes are modest given the sizes of the lots.
• Believes that the proposed homes/lots meet the intended purpose of the
90% rule. The 90% rule for just the properties located along Jefferson
Street results in a minimum lot size of approximately 9,800 square feet.
The proposed lots are very close to this lot size.
• Inclusion of Centennial Woods lots, which are encumbered by
stormwater, skews 90% rule calculation.
• Believes proposed subdivision is consistent with the eclectic feel of the
neighborhood/Jefferson Street.
Planning and Zoning Commission inquired about:
• Meyer – Lot 19, 20, 21, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 as shown on Exhibit C are
wrong based on information provided on other exhibits. If you add in the
45,000 square foot lot across Jefferson and the subject property, the 90%
Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission
September 24, 2014
Page 3 of 14
•
•
rule calculation is closer to 12,000 square feet. Whitaker indicated that is
it reasonable to exclude the subject property as it is proposed to be
developed. Whitaker noted that he believes that the 45,000 square foot
lot is an outlier and should not be included even though it is in the
neighborhood of the subject property.
Meyer – is the hardship the application of the 90% rule? Whitaker
indicated that the hardship is that the lots falling within 500’ are not part
of the neighborhood of the subject property.
Coyne requested clarification regarding the size/location of the
Centennial Woods lots that include stormwater on them.
Public Testimony:
Peter Kuefler, Maple Park, Illinois:
• Owns 804 W. Jefferson which is 14,000 square feet in size.
• Believes that the proposed subdivision will impact the value of his
property.
• Concerned regarding water problems resulting from the two new houses.
• Believes the subject property should remain as a single-lot.
• Does not believe that a 19,000 square foot lot is out of character for the
neighborhood.
• Believes that two homes on that lot will look out of character for the
neighborhood.
Kathy Benson, 51 Forest Avenue:
• Concurs with some of the petitioner’s statements regarding the breadth of
homes in the area.
• Agrees that some of the lots located farther south don’t make sense given
the similarities in the neighborhood.
• Reminded PZC that the 90% rule was put in place in response to infill
development. Homes on these lots are being built out to the setbacks to
maximize the home value.
• Calculated lot size based on the six lots directly east and six lots directly
west of the subject property, as well as the 6 lots located north across
Jefferson. Looking at these 18 lots, she found an average of
approximately 11,000 square feet and the proposed lots are 15% less than
this average. This is a significant difference.
• Believes ordinance was put in place to protect existing residents.
• There is a lot of difference between the width of the lot and the length of
the lot. The proposed lots will be narrower than what is typical along
this block.
• Believes it is better to have 1 larger lot than 2 smaller than average lots.
It keeps distance between properties, keeps open space.
Martha Kuefler Hirsch, 1034 N. Mill Street:
Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission
September 24, 2014
Page 4 of 14
•
•
Owns 804 W. Jefferson Avenue.
Concerned about drainage issues on this property if the two homes are
constructed.
Walter Kiselyic, 113 S. Stauffer Drive:
• What is the proposed frontage of the property?
• Believes that the lot as is today is in character with the neighborhood.
The proposed lots are too small. The proposed lot widths are too narrow.
• Too much traffic on Jefferson; proposal will result in more cars and more
traffic.
• Proposed lots are out of character with the surrounding area.
Petitioner responded to testimony:
• There are only two 90’+ wide lots on Jefferson today, of which the
subject property is one.
• Jefferson is a collector road. Believes that the road is equipped to handle
more density.
• “In City” lots are never intended to be 19,000 square feet in size.
• The character of the neighborhood changes at Parkway, where the
neighborhood becomes “suburban sprawl”. This portion of Jefferson
clearly has a downtown feel.
• Petitioner will be required to have engineered drawings that adequately
account for drainage.
• Maximum house size intended is 3,800 square feet. Petitioner is
agreeable to a condition restricting the maximum house size.
• Property value will increase as a result of the proposed subdivision.
Planning and Zoning Commission inquired about:
• Frost – isn’t the 19,000 square foot lot, as it exists today, out of character
for the neighborhood?
• Gustin – requested that staff provide information about the engineering
requirements pertaining to drainage for new single-family construction.
• Hastings – as he visited the site, he could not envision how two homes
could fit on the subject property. Also concerned that all trees will need
to be removed to accommodate the proposed home construction.
Whitaker clarified that the proposed homes shown could be constructed
on the subject properties (following subdivision) with no variances.
• Hastings would be more comfortable seeing a proposed site plan for the
homes so that he could understand how it lays out on the lots. Whitaker
pointed to the subdivision exhibit which demonstrates the buildable area
on each lot. Whitaker noted that he would be willing to include a
condition that limits the size of the homes to 3,800 square feet and a
maximum 2,000 square foot footprint.
• Martinez – what is the average home size along Jefferson? Whitaker
indicated that he does not have that information available.
• Coyne - greater drainage problems might result if 1 large home was to be
Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission
September 24, 2014
Page 5 of 14
built on the existing lot vs. 2 new homes on 2 smaller lots. Hynes
indicated that it depends on the amount of impervious surface proposed.
Planning and Zoning Commission closed the public hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission Discussion:
• Coyne – believes that the proposed lot sizes in the existing neighborhood
are comparable to proposed lots. Believes the intent of the 90% rule is to
avoid awkwardly designed neighborhoods and believes that PZC is
within their right to approve the variance.
• Frost – understands position of neighbors, but supports requested
variance.
• Gustin – supports project. Hardship is that there are lots in the area that
are larger due to floodplain, drainage, etc., rather than being large in
order to build larger homes. Confident that staff will account for drainage
requirements. The 90% rule was intended for “McMansions” where
people were putting too much on the properties. There are variables to
consider when looking at the application of the 90% rule. Believes
proposed homes will fit within the character of the existing neighborhood
and will be a good fit. Supports 3,800 square foot limitation on home
size.
• Hastings – Might be inclined to support the case, but in absence of a
more definitive site plan, struggles with approving the case.
• Martinez – supports variance. Believes it is consistent with the lots to the
east of the subject property.
• Meyer – will not support case. Understands petitioner’s concerns
regarding the 90% rule, but it is a safeguard for the entire neighborhood
that was put in place after much thought. Would rather err on the side of
a larger lot than approve smaller lots. The 90% rule is a minimum lot
size – not a maximum. Varying lot sizes add to the character of the
neighborhood and should not be discouraged.
• Williams – inclined to deny the request. If variance is granted, the result
will be claustrophobic. Does not believe that the proposed lot size is the
trend or density of the neighborhood. The existing narrow lots likely
have old homes on them today. Believes that people will be interested in
lot whether it is 1 larger home or improved with 2 smaller homes. If the
variance is approved, the lots just won’t look right in the neighborhood
and the resulting impact would be on the existing neighborhood.
Planning and Zoning Commission moved to recommend approval of a variance
to Section 7-4-4:2.4 (Ninety Percent Rule) of the Municipal Code for the
property located at 812 W. Jefferson Avenue, subject to the restriction that each
house be no greater than 3,800 square feet in size.
Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission
September 24, 2014
Page 6 of 14
Motion by: Williams
Seconded by: Coyne
Approved
(4 to 3)
Ayes: Coyne, Frost, Gustin, Martinez
Nays: Hastings, Meyer, Williams
D2.
PZC 14-1-102
North Central
College Residence
Hall
The petitioner requests approval of a variance to Section 6-2-4:1 (Building
Height and Bulk) and Section 6-7G-10:6.1 (Height Limitations / Bulk
Regulations) of the Municipal Code in order to construct a residence hall which
exceeds the maximum height (50’) as established by the datum point, and the
maximum number of stories (4) on the subject property.
Derek Rockwell, Planning Services Team, gave an overview of the request.
Planning and Zoning Commission inquired about:
• Gustin – what is the height of the stadium?
• Williams – a story is typically 9-10’. How did they gain a story, but only
increase height by 1.5’? Rockwell clarified that the definition per the
code and how it determines what is a story differs from how the building
will be appear as constructed.
Paul Loscheider, North Central College, spoke on behalf of the petitioner:
• NCC is a place based institution. Resident students are an important
component of NCC.
• The proposed dorm will not result in new student residents, but will help
to retain students on campus (vs. move off campus).
• Existing dorms will be lost as facilities are re-used during campus
reconstruction projects (Science Center).
• Proposed dorm project fits within the Master Land Use Plan.
• A 5-story building works very well for their proposed facility.
• Height variance is triggered by the varying topography on the site and the
ordinance pertaining to the measurement of height (datum point).
• The proposed building is 400’ away from the nearest residence and
largely hidden by evergreen trees. The trees that exist on the site today
will remain following construction.
• The fifth floor, which accommodates their needs that much better, only
requires a 17 1/8” variance to the maximum height limitation.
Planning and Zoning Commission inquired about:
• Coyne – what percentage of students will drive and need parking? Any
concerns regarding increased number of students crossing at Chicago?
• Gustin – what is approximate height of existing trees?
• Gustin – concern with water runoff?
• Hastings – clarification regarding number of floors?
• Meyer – where is the building entry?
Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission
September 24, 2014
Page 7 of 14
Petitioner responded to Planning and Zoning Commission questions:
• Loscheider indicated that NCC has just completed a parking analysis and
will be meeting with staff to discuss. Current studies show that parking
needs have dropped from 50% of students with cars to 30%. Parking
needs have declined due to zip cars, red bike program, shuttle service,
etc.
• Loscheider indicated that they have conducted a traffic and pedestrian
study to account for impacts.
• Loscheider indicated that the existing trees range from 40’ – 60’ and are
evergreens.
• Loscheider indicated that NCC is part of the Steeple Run Watershed.
Pond has been enlarged over time to make it an amenity. With current
dorm proposal, CEMCON has identified ways that the existing pond can
be reshaped and expanded to accommodate stormwater requirements.
• Loscheider indicated that the rear of the building has 5 floors plus a
walk-out basement due to the topography of the land.
• Loscheider indicated that there will be a front door on the north side of
the building.
Public Testimony: None
Planning and Zoning Commission inquired about:
• Gustin noted that PZC received a letter from the public regarding the
proposed dorm and asked for comment. Loscheider indicated that the
proposed dorm has been consistently identified on the Master Land Use
Plan, which stresses that growth should occur within the campus
boundaries. To do this, you have to maximize the use of the land that
you do have to work with.
Planning and Zoning Commission closed the public hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission Discussion:
• Coyne – the request is modest, beautiful building, and keeps students on
campus.
• Frost – well hidden and supports for that reason.
• Gustin – supports. Believes hardship exists due to the topography.
• Hastings – completely reasonable request. Wonderful building.
• Martinez – concurs with Hastings.
• Meyer – supports.
• Williams – concurs with Commissioner Frost and finds that the
percentage variance is de minimis.
Planning and Zoning Commission moved to recommend approval of a variance
to Section 6-2-4:1 (Building Height and Bulk) and Section 6-7G-10:6.1 (Height
Limitations / Bulk Regulations) of the Municipal Code in order to construct a
residence hall which exceeds the maximum height (50’) as established by the
datum point, and the maximum number of stories (4) on the subject property.
Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission
September 24, 2014
Page 8 of 14
Motion by: Williams
Seconded by: Meyer
Approved
(7 to 0)
Ayes: Williams, Meyer, Martinez, Hastings, Frost, Coyne,
Gustin
Nays: None
D3.
PZC 14-1-108 &
PZC 14-1-109
Water Street
District –
North/South
The petitioner is seeking approval of a major change to the Water Street District
– North Phase/South Phase PUD in order to establish revised Final PUD and
Subdivision Plats with respect to lot lines, building square footages and uses,
building height and elevation changes, and Riverwalk improvements and to seek
approval of a variance to Section 6-7D-4 to allow for a general service use on
the first floor in the B4 district.
Allison Laff, Planning Services Team, gave an overview of the request.
Jeff Prosapio, 401 S. Main Street, spoke on behalf of the petitioner:
• Water Street District will be a high quality mixed use development and
received approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission and City
Council in 2012.
• The City developed the Water Street Vision Statement in 2007 and set
forth the vision for the area.
• Preliminary PUD approvals in 2008 included residential, commercial,
restaurant, office and open space uses.
• In 2012, the residential component was eliminated and a hotel use was
added. This proposal was approved in 2012 / 2013 by City Council.
• Water Street is bounded by the DuPage River, Webster Street, Aurora
Avenue and Main Street. The development excludes the southwest corner
of Main and Water Street as well as the Naperville Township building.
• The proposal consists of four buildings and a parking deck. The first
building is a hotel with retail and restaurant uses on the first floor with
rooms and suites above. The parking deck will accommodate 520
parking spaces.
• The theater building includes restaurant space and office uses.
• The second phase will include an office building at the corner of Aurora
and Webster.
• Hotel Indigo is a boutique hotel concept under the umbrella of IHG.
• The heights of the building remain consistent with prior approvals.
• Marquette is requesting 7 modifications to the approved PUD.
• The first modification is an increase in the size of the theater building
and a decrease in the plaza size. Feedback from the development
community is that the footprint is too narrow. Thus, a bump out is
proposed to increase the footprint and usability by potential tenants. It
represents a net increase of 1% in square footage.
• The plaza size is down approximately 4.5% as a result of the increased
floor square footage.
• The second change is the addition of a banquet space. A restaurant user
Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission
September 24, 2014
Page 9 of 14
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
has committed to the first floor space. The proposal is to keep the space
previously committed to private dining as a potential restaurant use with
a maximum capacity of 248 seats in the private dining space. A prereception space is to be utilized as overflow space. All reservations will
be organized and sent through IHG’s central reservation service in order
to provide a high level of consistency and service. Most weekend events
will be small weddings of approximately 150-200 guests.
Michael Recktorik, V3 Engineering, provided an outline of the changes
in traffic and parking for the project. Assumptions in the worst case
scenario included no banquet guests staying at the hotel, all guests
parking in the parking deck, and the maximum size of each event was
used. This scenario is comparable to the plans approved in 2013. The
increased vehicular wait time is approximately 2 seconds per intersection
involved in the development.
The parking requirement for the project is 379 spaces, which this
proposal is compliant with through utilization of the parking deck.
Jeff Prosapio explained that on any given day should parking demand
exceed supply, the IHG parking operator will coordinate contingency
plans through the multiple users of the development in order to
appropriately respond to these situations. There will also be full scale
valet services. These services will utilize contingency plans in order to
most efficiently utilize the parking deck as well as surrounding public
parking. These plans will be in place prior to the issuance of a tenant
build out permit for the banquet space. This will satisfy the worst case
parking scenarios.
The approved PUD allows for 21,500 square feet with outdoor dining
space of 1,500 square feet. The revised request presented tonight includes
26,900 square feet of restaurant space plus 1,300 square feet of outdoor
dining area. Hotel Indigo will also include a dinner and bar space. The
totality of the modifications results in a ratio of 43% retail use and 57%
restaurant.
Additional mechanical equipment will require additional screening,
though all of the architectural heights of the building (parapet, top of
roof, etc) will remain at the same height elevations as the 2013 approvals.
The next modification is the incorporation of an upscale children’s
boutique and event programming space consisting of 2,600 square feet,
1,000 of which will be dedicated for sale of upscale children’s clothing.
The programming space is to be utilized for classes, arts and crafts, etc. It
will not be a day care as most classes last approximately 1 or 2 hours.
Annual retail sales of approximately $300,000 are projected for this use.
A modification to the pedestrian bridge design eliminates the bump outs
as they were deemed unnecessary. The proposed walkway connection
will utilize materials approved in prior entitlements for the project.
The final modification is to extend the Riverwalk to connect with the
covered bridge to the west of the site. The upper level boardwalk will
connect to this bridge in order to divert pedestrian traffic away from the
Naperville Township building’s parking facilities. It will thus eliminate a
Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission
September 24, 2014
Page 10 of 14
pedestrian safety concern. The connection at this point to the bridge will
be widened and will serve as a beautification project.
Planning and Zoning Commission inquired about:
• Frost- will the public spaces remain? Urban clarified that 120 spaces in
the deck will be reserved for hotel and banquet guests with the remainder
being available for public parking. 400 spaces will be available for
general public use.
• Meyer – does the deck parking provide required parking spaces in
surplus? Urban – The total surplus to the downtown area would be 19
parking spaces while the parking deck would be available for the general
public. During buildout the surplus will be much greater than 19 as the
parking deck will be constructed early in the development.
• Gustin – this parking accounts for the parcels to the south? Urban – Yes.
• Frost – have we lost surplus parking from prior approvals? Urban – the
parking deck accommodates all of the required parking demand for the
development. In 2013 the parking surplus represented 76 parking spaces.
• Williams – is the proposed mechanical screening necessary because of a
height issue? The sizing of the equipment will be approximately 2-4 feet
higher, necessitating a higher screen wall.
• Williams – is 19 surplus parking spaces an estimate? Yes.
• Frost – can you explain the role Chef David Miller plays in this
proposal? The owner - operator and head chef of Chefs by Request. He
will be leasing the banquet space and it will be his kitchen for private
dining events. Hotel Indigo will not be operating the banquet space, but
that space will be branded to complement Hotel Indigo.
• Frost – in the worst case scenario, how will the contingency plan work
with respect to public parking availability? This parking deck should
attract drivers from the other parking decks in the downtown, and
conversely, in the event that that the parking deck is full, those drivers
can pursue other public parking locations, including other parking deck
facilities.
• Gustin – will the 120 parking spaces dedicated to the hotel accommodate
all hotel guests? A 72% occupancy rate model is utilized in this type of
hotel format, which aligns with the 2013 approvals for this project.
• Gustin – was there discussion of one way traffic flow? No, but there is
the ability to place a certified traffic control person to accommodate large
concentrations of vehicles entering and exiting the property for banquet
events. Frost added that TAB had come to the conclusion that a one way
configuration would be very confusing and was not found to be
preferable to a two way configuration.
• Frost – what are the concerns regarding overflow parking into the
Municipal Lot? Urban: the Municipal Lot is currently underutilized,
especially on weekends. Per code, valet operators are able to park in the
City’s parking decks, including the Municipal deck.
• Meyer – what is staff’s position on the requests? Laff indicated that staff
supports the individual requests as well as the overall request, as outlined
Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission
September 24, 2014
Page 11 of 14
•
•
•
•
•
•
in the staff report. The mechanical screening is necessary. While a
parapet wall is preferable, the proposed screen wall is an appropriate
solution as new construction, especially of this nature, must have
mechanical screening. The upscale children’s boutique and event
programming space makes sense at the specific location within the
development and will be not be permitted by right district wide.
Frost – what is staff’s position on the parking and traffic modifications?
Urban gave an overview of the proposed parking modifications and
clarified that staff supports these revisions. Hynes explained that a
comprehensive study of the area was completed in 2010 that considered a
wide variety of traffic mitigation measures. Some have been
implemented while others are contingent of the development of this
project. Staff feels that the intersection levels of service are acceptable
and traffic management will be effective.
Frost – can the parking capacity at the Municipal parking deck
accommodate the worst case parking scenario? Urban – there are
approximately 350 spaces at the Municipal parking lot, which can
accommodate most of the overflow parking demand in the worst case
scenario, depending on time of day, week and year.
Williams – how does the parking request correspond to tonight’s request?
Urban – this is a request for a Major Change to the PUD. The parking
calculations utilized for this development have been aggressive, above
and beyond the requirements of the Continuous Improvement Model.
Hotel occupancy rates and parking demand have been calculated at a
conservative rate, and aligns with calculations used for other hotels
recently approve and constructed in the City. This request is not
specifically seeking a parking variance.
Williams – could staff provide a summary of the building height request
history for this project? Laff provided this history with a comparison of
the height modification before the PZC tonight. Laff also clarified that in
this instance, mechanical screening and parapet walls were included in
the height calculations, due to the focus on height for this project in an
effort to provide clarity.
Coyne – was the shadow study updated? No.
Gustin- is the height measured to the parapet or the screening wall? In
2013 they were the same height. The screening wall proposed is the
structure height outlined in the staff report as part of this request.
Public Testimony:
Dick Galitz, 1017 Bailey Drive:
• The growing height of the development is concerning, particularly as it
relates to the impact of the shadows of the proposed buildings on the
north side of the Riverwalk. Would like to see this studied.
Bob Fischer, 91 Quail Hollow Court:
• Outlined concerns regarding the reduction in the size of the plaza, the
Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission
September 24, 2014
Page 12 of 14
addition of the banquet facility, the conversion of the boutique hotel into
a full service hotel, and whether there will be adequate parking available.
Perhaps the building should shrink if the size of the mechanical units
must be enlarged in order to not add bulk to the buildings. Has traffic
concerns regarding the departure of a large amount of vehicles from the
banquet facility in a short amount of time. Would like to ensure that the
pedestrian bridge will not be utilized for advertising.
Planning and Zoning Commission extended the meeting to 11:20 p.m.
Kathy Benson, 51 Forest:
• Concerned about the reduction of surplus parking from prior approvals
and how this will relate to the increased tax revenue onsite. Questioned
how the occupancy numbers for the hotel are calculated and their
corresponding effect on parking and traffic impact. Would like to see
these numbers broken down specifically for boutique hotels.
Planning and Zoning Commission extended the meeting to 11:30 p.m.
Chuck Wesnick, 519 S. Main Street
• Feels that the petitioner could have the mechanical screening vendor
custom fabricate this equipment in order to meet prior height approvals.
• Has concerns regarding parking demand proposed with the development.
Anissa Olley, 101 Springwood
• Would like the PZC to deny the request. Feels that an overview of the
history of this project would have been helpful. Would like to see the
project to be developed as was approved in 2013 and would prefer that
the requests tonight be denied.
Petitioner responded to testimony:
• Access for Traveling Tots will have a normal storefront and streetscape
and will appear similar to other retail stores within the downtown area.
• The boutique hotel does not have a greater occupancy rate than other
hotel formats, and the 72% hotel occupancy rate is accurate, if not high.
• The pedestrian bridge will not have signage and is agreeable to a
condition stating as such.
Planning and Zoning Commission extended the meeting to 11:45 p.m.
Planning and Zoning Commission inquired about:
• Martinez – is the valet parking for hotel guests only? No. The valet is
available for the entire district and for all uses within the district.
Planning and Zoning Commission closed the public hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission Discussion:
• Coyne – Fantastic development and perfect tenant mix. Would like to see
Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission
September 24, 2014
Page 13 of 14
more specific valet plans as this project goes forward to City Council.
The Municipal Lot for overflow parking is a dangerous proposition.
Would be comfortable with conditioning approval upon a more detailed
valet plan and the prohibition of commercial signage on the pedestrian
bridge.
Planning and Zoning Commission extended the meeting to 12:00 p.m.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Frost – the requests aren’t objectionable but it will have an impact on
parking. Supports the project.
Gustin – Biggest concern is parking. Agrees that a condition that a
proposal regarding detailed valet parking on the property should be
imposed as the project moves forward to City Council.
Hastings – No concerns whatsoever. Believes the changes will enhance
the south side of the Riverwalk significantly.
Martinez – A great project, will be supporting. Supports a prohibition on
signage on the pedestrian bridge.
Meyer – Will not be supporting the project due to the intensity and
density of the project. Not thrilled that the amenities have been
decreased. Parking and traffic concerns will result from the success of the
project.
Williams – Would like a condition of approval that no signage be
permitted on the pedestrian bridge. Enthusiastically in favor of the
project. Feels it will add to the City’s reputation as a world class city
which can compete with any market. Increased parking demand is a good
problem for the City to have.
Planning and Zoning Commission moved to recommend approval of a major
change to the Water Street District – North Phase/South Phase PUD in order to
establish revised Final PUD and Subdivision Plats with respect to lot lines,
building square footages and uses, building height and elevation changes, and
Riverwalk improvements and to seek approval of a variance to Section 6-7D-4 to
allow for a general service use on the first floor in the B4 district, subject to the
condition that a valet agreement be proposed as a component of City Council’s
review of this case, as well as a condition that no signage on the pedestrian
bridge be permitted.
Motion by: Williams
Seconded by: Coyne
Ayes: Williams, Martinez, Hastings, Frost, Coyne, Gustin
Nays: Meyer
E. Reports and
Recommendations
Approved
(6 to 1)
Naperville Planning and Zoning Commission
September 24, 2014
Page 14 of 14
F. Correspondence
Planning and Zoning Commission tabled consideration of the 2015 Planning and
Zoning Commission meeting calendar until the October 8, 2014 meeting.
G. New Business
H. Adjournment
11:47 p.m.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
AGENDA ITEM
PZC CASE:
14-1-111
SUBJECT:
North Aurora Road Speedway Monument Sign
Petitioner: Speedway LLC
LOCATION:
631 N. Route 59
oCorrespondence
oNew
New Business
AGENDA DATE:
oOld Business
8/2014
10/8/2014
⌧Public
Public Hearing
SYNOPSIS:
The petitioner requests approval of a variance from Section 5-4-5:2.6 (Commercial
Commercial Signs;
Monument Signs; Monument Sign Setback (Front Property Line)
Line))) of the Naperville Municipal
Code to allow construction of a 7.7’ tall monument sign at a distance of eight (8)
(8 feet from the
front property line for the property located at 631 N. Route 59.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ACTION PREVIOUSLY TAKEN:
TAKEN
Date
N/A
Item No.
Action
ACTION REQUESTED/RECOMMENDED
ED/RECOMMENDED THIS MEETING
MEETING:
Conduct the public hearing.
PREPARED BY:
Tim Felstrup
Felstrup, Assistant Planner
EXISTING ZONING, LAND USE, AND LOCATION
LOCATION:
The subject property consists of a .9 acre lot and is located at the northwest corner of Route 59
and North Aurora Road. The property is zoned B2 PUD ((Community
Community Shopping PUD) and is
improved with a gas station and parking lot. The adjacent properties to the south and east are
also zoned as B3 (General
General Commercial District
District).
PLANNING SERVICES TEAM REVIEW
REVIEW:
Section 5-4-5:2.5
5:2.5 (Commercial Signs; Monument Sign Setback; Front Property Line) requires
that any monument sign fronting a major arterial be no closer than ten (10) feet from the front
property line.
The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) currently has a widening project underway for
Route 59 from Ferry Road to Aurora Avenue
Avenue,, including that portion of Route 59 abutting the
subject property. As a result of the expansion, several businesses
nesses along the impacted section of
North Aurora Road Speedway Monument Sign – Staff PZC Memo – PZC 14-1-111
October 8, 2014
Page 2 of 3
Route 59 will be required to remove their existing monument signs from their current locations
as IDOT acquires additional right-of-way. The North Aurora Road Speedway is one of the
properties that will be required to remove their existing monument sign as it is currently located
on property that will become IDOT right-of-way.
On October 19, 2010, the Naperville City Council directed staff to suspend enforcement of
Section 5-4-13:3 (Nonconforming Signs, Relocation of Signs) for businesses along Route 59 that
would be impacted by the Route 59 widening project. Given the hardships created by the
additional right-of-way takings, Council directed staff to allow for the relocation of existing
nonconforming monument signs onto private property without a variance as long as the current
setback requirements could be met.
Speedway proposes to install a new monument sign near the corner of their property but will not
be able to meet the required 10’ setback from the front property line as required by code while
also maintaining unobstructed two way traffic circulation though the parking lot. As a result,
Speedway is seeking a variance to install a new monument sign at a distance of eight (8) feet
from the front property line. The proposed sign will be located in the same general area as their
original monument sign toward the southeast end of the parking lot; Engineering Staff has
reviewed the sign for impact on site circulation and visibility and supports the sign location, as
proposed.
Staff Summary
The purpose of the Street Graphics Ordinance is to create the framework for a comprehensive
balanced system of signage, to promote communication between people and their environment
and to avoid the usual clutter that is potentially harmful to traffic and pedestrian safety, property
values, business opportunities, and community appearance.
Staff finds that the proposed signage will not interfere with either pedestrian or vehicular traffic
and will provide needed identification for the business along the Route 59 roadway. The
proposed sign area, height, and landscaping are in compliance with the requirements of the Sign
Graphics Ordinance. In addition, staff believes that this request is in harmony with the intent of
City Council’s October 19, 2010 direction to provide additional flexibility to businesses
relocating their signage due to IDOT’s right-of-way taking along Route 59.
Staff has reviewed the requested variance and finds that the petitioner does meet the standards
for granting a variance. As a result, staff recommends approval of a variance from Section 5-45:2.5 (Commercial Signs; Monument Sign Setback; Front Property Line) of the Naperville
Municipal Code to allow for the installation of the proposed monument sign, which would allow
the sign to be setback eight (8) feet from the front property line instead of the required ten (10)
feet, for the property located at 631 N. Route 59.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Conduct the public hearing.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. North Aurora Road Speedway Monument Sign – Application – PZC 14-1-111
North Aurora Road Speedway Monument Sign – Staff PZC Memo – PZC 14-1-111
October 8, 2014
Page 3 of 3
2. North Aurora Road Speedway Monument Sign – Legal Description – PZC 14-1-111
3. North Aurora Road Speedway Monument Sign – Site Plan – PZC 14-1-111
4. North Aurora Road Speedway Monument Sign – Sign Rendering – PZC 14-1-111
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 2
Proposed Sign
Location and
Setback
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 4
NAPERVILLE PLAN
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
AGENDA ITEM
PZC CASE:
SUBJECT:
14-1-118
AGENDA DATE:
10/8/201
/2014
Compass Church Café Conditional Use
Petitioner: The Compass Church, 1551 Hobson Road,
Road Naperville, IL
60540
LOCATION:
2244 W 95th Street
oCorrespondence
oNew
New Business
oOld Business
⌧Public
Public Hearing
SYNOPSIS:
The petitioner requests approval of a conditional use for general retail in OCI (Office,
Commercial and Institutional District) for property located at 2244 W 95th Street.
Street
PLAN COMMISSION ACTION PREVIOUSLY TAKEN
TAKEN:
Date
N/A
Item No.
Action
ACTION REQUESTED/RECOMMENDED
ED/RECOMMENDED THIS MEETING
MEETING:
Conduct the public hearing.
PREPARED BY:
Kasey Evans
Evans, AICP, Community Planner
EXISTING ZONING, LAND USE, AND LOCATION:
The subject property consists of 6.
6.32 acres and is located on the south side of W 95th Street with
a common street address of 2244 W 95th Street. The property is zoned OCI (Office,
Office, Commercial
and Institutional District) and is improved with a 3 story commercial building.
PLANNING SERVICES TEAM REVIEW
REVIEW:
The petitioner, Compass Church
Church,, requests approval of a conditional use in OCI in order to
operate an approximately 250 square foot café (general retail) within the existing building. The
not-for-profit
profit café will be run by church employees and volunteers with any proceeds generated
being donated to fight human trafficking
trafficking.. The anticipated hours are Monday through Friday
6:30am-10am and 2:30pm-5:30pm,
5:30pm, and Sunday 6:30am
6:30am-5:30pm.
5:30pm. The café will serve
serv coffee and
pre-packaged
packaged foods primarily to church congregants and daycare center clients
clients.
The café space was previously used as part of a daycare center in the building. The parking
requirement for daycare centers is 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet. If the 250 square feet
remained part of the daycare it would require 1 parking space. The parking requirement for
Compass Church Café – PZC 14-1-118
October 8, 2014
Page 2 of 2
cafés is 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet; therefore the proposed café would require 1.125
(rounded to 1) parking space. Given the café’s small size and that the majority of the patrons
will be existing church congregants and daycare clients; staff does not anticipate the proposed
use causing any parking issues.
The existing facility and proposed café is consistent with the intent of the OCI district to provide
office, residential, and institutional uses with supportive commercial facilities, as a transition
between intensive business areas and residential neighborhoods.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Conduct the public hearing.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Compass Church Café – Application – PZC 14-1-118
2. Compass Church Café – Legal Description – PZC 14-1-118
3. Compass Church Café – First Floor Plan – PZC 14-1-118
4. Compass Church Café – Floor Plan – PZC 14-1-118
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LOT 1 IN THE RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 1 IN NAPERVILLE’S Y.M.C.A. SUBDIVISION,
BEING A SUBDIVISION IN SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 9, EAST OF
THE THIRD PRINCIPLE MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT R2005-162808 ON SEPTEMBER 20, 2005, IN WILL
COUNTY, ILLINOIS.
ADDRESS: 2244 W. 95th Street
PIN: 01-10-201-031-0000
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 4
NAPERVILLE PLAN
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
AGENDA ITEM
PZC CASE:
SUBJECT:
14-1-113
AGENDA DATE:
10/8/201
/2014
Greenway Herbal Care
Petitioner: Nilesh Khot on behalf of Greenway Herbal Care LLC,
LLC 2354
Hassel Road, Suite B, Hoffman Estates, IL 60169
LOCATION:
424 Fort Hill Drive
Drive, Unit 103
oCorrespondence
oNew
New Business
oOld Business
⌧Public
Public Hearing
SYNOPSIS:
The petitioner requests approval of a conditional use for a medical cannabis dispensing facility
in B3 (General Commercial District) for Unit 103 of the property located at 424 Fort Hill Drive.
PLAN COMMISSION ACTION PREVIOUSLY TAKEN
TAKEN:
Date
N/A
Item No.
Action
ACTION REQUESTED/RECOMMENDED
ED/RECOMMENDED THIS MEETING
MEETING:
Conduct the public hearing.
PREPARED BY:
Ying Liu, AICP, Community Planner
EXISTING ZONING, LAND USE, AND LOCATION
LOCATION:
The subject property,, known as the Fort Hill Business Center, consists of 6.26 acres and is
located on the east side of Fort Hill Drive with a common street address of 424 Fort Hill Drive.
The property is zoned B3 (General Commercial District) and is improved with a commercial
building consisting of 46 condominium units and 244 off-street parking spaces..
PLANNING SERVICES TEAM REVIEW
REVIEW:
Conditional Use
The petitioner, Greenway Herbal Care LLC
LLC,, requests approval of a conditional use in B3 in order
to occupy Unit 103 of the subject
ubject property with a medical cannabis dispensing
spensing facility.
facility The
petitioner is in the process of apply
applying for a state permit for the proposed business. It has
submitted a notarized affidavit (Attachment 3) affirming compliance of the proposed business
with Section 6-2-32:5
32:5 (Medical Cannabis Disp
Dispensing Organization) of the Naperville Municipal
Code as well as all requirements of the State Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Pilot
Program Act,, including the 1,000
1,000-foot distance requirement from a pre-existing
existing school or
daycare center and the 250-foot
foot requirement from a residentially
residentially-zoned
zoned property.
property
Greenway Herbal Care – PZC 14-1-113
October 8, 2014
Page 2 of 4
Section 6-2-32:3 (Medical Cannabis Facility Components) provides a list of components that
shall be evaluated in approving a conditional use for a medical cannabis facility. The petitioner
has submitted a response to each component included in Attachment 4. Staff’s responses are
included below:
1. Impact of the proposed facility on existing or planned uses located within the vicinity of the
subject property.
Response: Based on the petitioner’s business plan (Attachment 2), the proposed medical
cannabis dispensing facility would be most similar to a retail/medical office use in terms of
its land use impact. Most of the existing tenants on the subject property consist of offices
and storage spaces for contractors in the construction trades. While the proposed use is more
customer-oriented than the semi-industrial character of the subject property, staff does not
find that the proposed use will be incompatible with the existing tenants.
2. Proposed structure in which the facility will be located, including co-tenancy (if in a multitenant building), total square footage, security installations/security plan, and building code
compliance.
Response: The proposed medical cannabis dispensing facility will be located within a multitenant condo building consisting of 85,500 square feet of gross floor area and 46 condo units.
The petitioner has included a security plan on Pages 14-15 of Attachment 2, which is subject
to the State’s review for compliance with the Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Pilot
Program Act and all other State requirements. While the petitioner has not submitted a
building permit application, the proposed facility will be subject to all requirements of the
Naperville building and fire codes.
3. Hours of operation and anticipated number of customers/employees.
Response: The proposed facility will be open Monday thru Saturday from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m.
with peak hours being 2-7 p.m. A total of 5 employees will be working at the facility
including a receptionist, a technician, an Agent in Charge (pharmacist), and 2 security guards
and the petitioner has projected that it will serve approximately 30 patients each day for its
first year.
4. Anticipated parking demand based on Subsection 6-2-32:3.3 and available private parking
supply.
Response: The subject property, known as the Fort Hill Business Center, was originally
intended to be developed and operated not as a retail shopping center, but as a semi-industrial
business park. Based on this intention, the City did not apply the minimum parking ratio of
4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet for a typical commercial shopping center at the time of
approval for the subject property. Instead, it was assumed that the Center would be occupied
by a combination of offices and warehouses with lower parking ratios (3.3 spaces/1,000
square feet for offices and 1 space/1,000 square feet for warehouses). Based on these
assumptions, a total of 244 off-street parking spaces were constructed for the 85,500 squarefoot building on the subject property at a ratio of 2.85 parking spaces/1,000 square feet.
Greenway Herbal Care – PZC 14-1-113
October 8, 2014
Page 3 of 4
This means that approximately 5.14 parking spaces are available for each condo unit which is
typically 1,800 square feet in size. The parking supply would not be sufficient to support the
full use of a single tenant space as a retail or medical office use, but would allow a mixture of
professional/business office and storage spaces within each unit. Given the above
information, since the inception of the Fort Hill Business Center, the City has been enforcing
a five-parking-spaces-per-unit requirement through the tenant build-out process. For every
application of occupancy permit for the subject property, staff reviews the interior floor plan
and the proposed mix of uses within the unit to ensure that the parking demand per code
would not exceed five spaces per unit. This restriction is also enforced by the condominium
association of the Fort Hill Business Center per the information submitted by the property
management group (see the Fort Hill Business Center Parking Restrictions in Attachment 7).
Per Section 6-2-32:5.4 of the Municipal Code, for the purpose of determining parking, a
medical cannabis dispensing organization shall be classified as a medical office, which has a
required parking ratio of 5 spaces/1,000 square feet. Unit 103, in which the proposed
medical cannabis dispensing facility would be located, consists of 1,800 square feet and
would require a total of 9 parking spaces to be provided for both employee and customer
parking. The petitioner has indicated that there will be 5 employees working on site which
will require 5 parking spaces. While the petitioner has estimated approximately 30 patient
visits each day for the first year, this estimate is not based on any actual data or experience.
The petitioner has not provided substantial evidence to confirm the amount of customer
parking that is required for the proposed facility. Therefore, staff believes that it is necessary
to verify at least 9 parking spaces would be available per code for the petitioner’s use on the
subject property.
The petitioner’s parking study includes actual parking counts of the Fort Hill Business
Center, which indicates that the parking lots located on the north and west sides of the
building are about 70% vacant most of the time. In addition, based on the five-space parking
requirement per unit, a total of 230 parking spaces would be required for all 46 units on the
property, resulting in approximately 14 surplus parking spaces that are shared by all units for
overflow parking. However, due to the unique parking restrictions on the subject property,
staff recommends a conditional of approval that the petitioner obtain approval from the
condominium association to allow use of 9 parking spaces by Unit 103 on a permanent basis.
5. Traffic generation and adjacent roadway capacity.
Response: Based on the anticipated numbers of customers and employees, staff finds that the
traffic generation from the proposed use could be adequately accommodated by Fort Hill
Drive and other adjacent roadways.
6. Site design, including access points and internal site circulation.
Response: The subject property is served by two points of access including a full access on
Fort Hill Drive (shared with the adjacent property to the north) and a second access on a
service drive along the east side of the property. The site complies with all City standards
regarding site design and internal site circulation. Staff finds that the proposed use can be
adequately served by the current access and site design.
Greenway Herbal Care – PZC 14-1-113
October 8, 2014
Page 4 of 4
7. Proposed signage plan.
Response: The petitioner has not presented a signage plan yet. Any signage proposal for the
business is subject to compliance with the City’s sign ordinance and approval of a sign
permit.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Conduct the public hearing.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Greenway Herbal Care – Application – PZC 14-1-113
2. Greenway Herbal Care – Business Plan – PZC 14-1-113
3. Greenway Herbal Care – Affidavit for Section 6-2-32:5 – PZC 14-1-113
4. Greenway Herbal Care – Response to Section 6-2-32:3 – PZC 14-1-113
5. Greenway Herbal Care – Parking Study – PZC 14-1-113
6. Greenway Herbal Care – Tenant Roster – PZC 14-1-113
7. Greenway Herbal Care – Fort Hill Business Center Parking Restrictions – PZC 14-1-113
8. Greenway Herbal Care – Legal – PZC 14-1-113
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 1
THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS AND SHALL NOT BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT WITH SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE. ANY DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.
Drawings Prepared By:
Schmidt Architects, LLC
11350 S Belmont Drive
Plainfield, IL 60585
ATTACHMENT 1
PM/PA
-
08-13-14
ISSUED FOR CITY OF NAPERVILLE REVIEW
424 Fort Hill Drive, #103
Naperville, IL 60540
Medical Cannibas Dispensary
PROJECT COVER SHEET
SITE LOCATION MAPS & ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN & EXISTING REFLECTED CEILING PLAN
PROPOSED PLAN, PROPOSED SECURITY PLAN & PROPOSED LIGHTING PLAN
-
Drawings Prepared For:
Greenway Herbal Care
424 Fort Hill Drive
Naperville, IL 60540
TITLE SHEET
T1.0
A1.0
A1.1
A1.2
REMARKS
DRAWING LIST:
DATE
ISSUED FOR City of Naperville Zoning Review:
August 13, 2014
NO.
planning
4 2 4 T o w e r R o a d, # 1 0 3
Naperville, IL 60540
architecture
©
interior design
DRAWN BY:
D. SCHMIDT
JOB NO. :
14-015
D. SCHMIDT
T1.0
SHEET
www.scharchllc.com
t 815.254.1423
f 815.254.1423
c 630.297.5646
11350 S. Belmont Drive
Plainfield, IL 60585
COPYRIGHT 2010 - SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS.
Medical Cannabis Dispensary
ARCHITECT'S SEAL
3
18
PROPERTY
LINE, TYP.
9
ENTRY
WALK
244 TOTAL
PARKING SPACES
UNIT #103
PROPOSED
DISPENSARY
LOCATION
1,800 S.F.
11
LOADING
ENTRANCE
EXISTING 1-STORY
OFFICE-USE
BUILDING
EXISTING 1-STORY
OFFICE-USE
BUILDING
26
25
1
NOT
A1.0
FOR
NOT TO SCALE
25
26
DELIVERY ALLEY
26
5
MAIN
ENTRANCE
13
12
DELIVERY ALLEY
11
5
ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 35'-0"
CONSTRUCTION
ATTACHMENT 1
OVERHEAD
DOOR
EXISTING 1-STORY
OFFICE-USE
BUILDING
20
PROPERTY
LINE, TYP.
PM/PA
424 Fort Hill Drive, #103
Naperville, IL 60540
Medical Cannibas Dispensary
SITE MAP 2
-
A1.0
ISSUED FOR CITY OF NAPERVILLE REVIEW
NOT TO SCALE
08-13-14
SITE MAP 1
-
2
Ave
TITLE SHEET
A1.0
ora
REMARKS
Aur
.
architecture
planning
Fort Hill Drive
PROPOSED SITE:
424 Fort Hill Dr.
interior design
2010 - SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS.
EXISTING 1-STORY
OFFICE-USE
BUILDING
12
DRAWN BY:
D. SCHMIDT
JOB NO. :
14-015
D. SCHMIDT
A1.0
SHEET
www.scharchllc.com
t 815.254.1423
f 815.254.1423
c 630.297.5646
11350 S. Belmont Drive
Plainfield, IL 60585
424 Fort Hill Dr.
DATE
Unit #103
W. Ogden Ave.
Fort Hill Drive
© COPYRIGHT
PROPOSED SITE:
NO.
FORT HILL DRIVE
THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS AND SHALL NOT BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT WITH SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE. ANY DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.
Unit #103
W. Jefferson Ave.
ARCHITECT'S SEAL
interior design
www.scharchllc.com
t 815.254.1423
f 815.254.1423
c 630.297.5646
11350 S. Belmont Drive
Plainfield, IL 60585
2010 - SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS.
© COPYRIGHT
planning
E
E
E
E
architecture
E
REFLECTED CEILING PLAN LEGEND:
EXIST. 2'x4'
ACOUSTICAL CEILING
GYP. BD. CEILING
EXIST. F.D.
EXIST. FLOURESCENT
LIGHTING
EXIST. FLUOR.
WORKLIGHT,
TYP.
EXIST. EXTERIOR LIGHT
EXIST.
SPRINKLER
LINE, TYP.
EXIST. SWITCH
UNIT 103
1,800 S.F.
OPEN TO ABOVE
EXIST. EXHAUST
FAN/ LIGHT
3
A1.1
EXIST. EMERGENCY
LIGHT
EXISTING EXTERIOR FRONT ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
EXIST. CMU 1-HOUR
TENANT SEPARATION
WALL
EXIST. EXIT SIGN/
EMERGENCY
LIGHT COMBO
EXIST. PULL STATION
& HORN / STROBE
P
EXIST. CMU 1-HOUR
TENANT SEPARATION
WALL
EXIST. HORN / STROBE
EXIST. CEILING-HUNG
GAS UNIT HEATER
PLAN LEGEND:
B/ ROOF DECK
16'-4 14"
424 Fort Hill Drive, #103
Naperville, IL 60540
ARCHITECT'S SEAL
Medical Cannibas Dispensary
E
EXIST. DUPLEX ELEC. OUTLET
B/ JOIST
14'-8 1 2"
EXIST. QUAD ELEC. OUTLET
EXIST. SWITCH
EXIST. F.D.
B/ CLG.
12'-0"
FE
EXIST. FIRE EXTINGUISHER
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
NOT
EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
FOR
CONSTRUCTION
2
A1.1
NOT
EXISTING REFLECTED CEILING PLAN
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
FOR
PM/PA
CONSTRUCTION
ISSUED FOR CITY OF NAPERVILLE REVIEW
-
1
A1.1
P
08-13-14
EXISTING SECTION
EXIST.
OVERHEAD
DOOR
FE
-
4
A1.1
EXIST.
SPRINKLER
LINE, TYP.
DATE
T/ FLOOR
0'-0"
TITLE SHEET
EXIST. 200A
ELECT. PANEL
REMARKS
EXIST.
K-SERIES
JOISTS, TYP.
NO.
THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS AND SHALL NOT BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT WITH SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE. ANY DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.
FE
P
D. SCHMIDT
DRAWN BY:
D. SCHMIDT
JOB NO. :
14-015
SHEET
A1.1
ATTACHMENT 1
(3) CONTROL BUTTONS FOR
DOOR BUZZERS
NEW STUD WALL
POINT OF SALE STATION CAPABLE OF ACCESSING THE
DIVISION'S VERIFICATION SYSTEM
P.O.S.
NEW 4" CMU WALL
(2) MONITORS FOR SECURITY
CAMERA VIEWING - 19" MIN.
CONTROLLED - ACCESS
METAL DOOR
(6) PANIC BUTTONS
BULLET-PROOF GLASS
SERVER/ VIDEO/ NETWORK
RECORDING SYSTEM
P
RECESSED CAN LIGH
΄
SWITCH
΄ͤ
3-WAY SWITCH
2'x4' FLUORESCENT
CEILING FIXTURE 'NIGHT LIGHT'
FIRE ALARM PULL STATION
FIRE ALARM
HORN/ STROBE COMBO
planning
ENTRANCE SHALL BE CLEAR OF ANY BARRIERS,
LANDSCAPING AND SIMILAR OBSTRUCTIONS THAT MAY
BLOCK THE VIEW SO THAT THE ENTRANCE AND
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS IS CLEARLY VISIBLE FROM THE
PUBLIC STREET, SIDEWALK AND PARKING AREA.
1
SECURE ENTRY TO
RESTRICTED AREA
WITH ELECTRIFIED
BUZZER
2
P
architecture
PRIVATE
CONSULTING
AREA
68 S.F.
2'x4' FLUORESCENT CEILING
FIXTURE
EMERGENCY
LIGHT
SHADED AREA = AREA
RESTRICTED TO PATIENT ACCE
WALL-MOUNTED
SCONCE LIGHT
RECESSED CAN LIGH
'NIGHT LIGHT'
EXIT SIGN/ EMER.
LIGHT COMBO.
SHADED AREA = AREA
RESTRICTED TO PATIENT ACCESS
MAIN ENTRANCE
NEW 2'x4' CEILING GRID W/
ACOUSTICAL CEILING TILES @
9'-0" A.F.F., TYP.
NEW EXTERIOR WALLMOUNTED LIGHT. FIXTURE
SHALL BE ONE FOOTCANDLE, MIN.
AND SHALL REMAIN ON UNTIL
AT LEAST ONE HOUR AFTER
CLOSING OF DISPENSARY.
UNIT 103
1,800 S.F.
UNDER-WINDOW
SECURE
TRANSACTION
DRAWER
LOBBY / WAITING
AREA
225 S.F.
BULLET - PROOF
TRANSACTION
WINDOW
SECURE VESTIBULE
30 S.F.
www.scharchllc.com
NEW 36" DOOR
EXIST. EXTERIOR
CONCRETE WALL
© COPYRIGHT
(16) SECURITY CAMERAS
΄ͤ ΄ͤ
΄
ATM
3
EXISTING BATHROOM
CEILING ITEMS:
x
GYP. BD. CEILING
x
EMERG. LIGHT
x
HORN/ STROBE
x
EXHAUST FAN
x
SPRINKLER HEAD
EXISTING ADA COMPLIANT
UNISEX BATH.
49 S.F.
I.D. CHECKPOINT
34 S.F.
5
6
NEW
FURNACE
7
OPEN TO ABOVE
P.O.S.
2
UTILITY ROOM
52 S.F.
DISPLAY
CASE,
TYP.
DISPLAY
CASE,
TYP.
8
3
P.O.S.
4
΄
P.O.S.
BREAKROOM /
SERVER ROOM
72 SF
DISPLAY
CASE,
TYP.
΄ͤ΄ ͤ΄ͤ
12
9
΄
OFFICE 1
78 S.F.
P.O.S.
5
FE
13
15
EMERGENCY
EXIT
08-13-14
EXISTING OVERHEAD
GARAGE DOOR
FE
AFTER-HOURS
STORAGE SAFE WITH
BIOMETRIC LOCK
14
-
SECURE
STORAGE
AREA
215 S.F.
EGRESS
VESTIBULE
76 S.F.
REMARKS
΄
DATE
΄ͤ
΄ ΄ͤ
SERVER/
VIDEO/
NETWORK
RECORDING
SHELF
SAFE/
VAULT AREA
NO.
11
TITLE SHEET
6
10
P
16
PM/PA
1
A1.2
NOT
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
FOR
CONSTRUCTION
2
A1.2
NOT
SECURITY PLAN
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
FOR
CONSTRUCTION
3
A1.2
NOT
LIGHTING PLAN
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
FOR
CONSTRUCTION
ATTACHMENT 1
-
DISPLAY AREA
(RESTRICTED AREA)
530 S.F.
ARCHITECT'S SEAL
ISSUED FOR CITY OF NAPERVILLE REVIEW
SECURE ENTRY TO
RESTRICTED AREA
WITH ELECTRIFIED
BUZZER
424 Fort Hill Drive, #103
Naperville, IL 60540
1
Medical Cannibas Dispensary
΄ͤ΄ ͤ΄ͤ
4
΄
THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS AND SHALL NOT BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK EXCEPT BY AGREEMENT WITH SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED ON THE JOB SITE. ANY DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.
NOTE:
DISPENSARY BUILDOUT SHALL CONFORM TO THE
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR NOISE, VIBRATION,
SMOKE, DUST, ODOR, HEAT, GLARE, FIRE HAZARD AND
OTHER OBJECTIONABLE INFLUENCES ESTABLISHED BY
THE STATE OF ILLINOIS AND ADMINISTERED BY THE
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ADMINISTERED BY
THE FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCY, AND ANY
ORDINANCE OF DUPAGE COUNTY OR THE CITY OF
NAPERVILLE.
EXIST. EXTERIOR WALLMOUNTED BLDG. LIGHT
ELECTRIFIED BUZZ-IN
DOOR LATCH
interior design
2010 - SCHMIDT ARCHITECTS.
EXIST. INTERIOR
CMU 1-HOUR TENANT
SEPARATION WALL
LIGHTING / REFLECTED CEILING PLAN LEGEND:
ARMED SECURITY GUARD
EXIST. DOOR
t 815.254.1423
f 815.254.1423
c 630.297.5646
SECURITY LEGEND:
EXIST. INTERIOR
STUD WALL
11350 S. Belmont Drive
Plainfield, IL 60585
LEGEND:
D. SCHMIDT
DRAWN BY:
D. SCHMIDT
JOB NO. :
14-015
SHEET
A1.2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 4
ATTACHMENT 4
ATTACHMENT 4
ATTACHMENT 4
ATTACHMENT 4
ATTACHMENT 5
ATTACHMENT 5
ATTACHMENT 5
ATTACHMENT 5
ATTACHMENT 5
ATTACHMENT 6
Fort Hill Business Center Parking Restrictions
6/4/2009
The new parking restrictions go into effect immediately. All vehicles that do not comply with the new
restrictions will be towed at the owner’s expense by the contracted towing company.
1.
Each unit is entitled to five (5) lined parking stalls in the complex.
a. Parking is on a first come, first served basis, there is NO RESERVED PARKING in the complex.
b. All oversized trailers or vehicles must park in the front center stalls only (please see attached parking plan). Each
double stall shall count as two parking spaces.
c. No truck or trailer parking is allowed in the lined parking stalls along Fort Hill Drive.
d. No limousine or oversized vehicles are allowed to park in the lined parking stalls adjacent to the Enterprise lot, on the
south west end of the complex.
e. Limousines are permitted to park in the lined stalls along Fort Hill Drive, provided that they do not hinder the flow of
emergency ore vehicle traffic.
2.
Absolutely no boats, RV’s, campers or recreational vehicles are allowed to park in the complex at any time.
a. Any recreational vehicles parked on site will be towed at the owner’s expense.
3.
All vehicles parked on site must display valid license plates. Any vehicles without a current license plate will be tagged and
have 5-days to provide management with proof of current registration.
a. Following the 5 day notification, any remaining vehicles parked on site without valid license plates will be towed at the
owner’s expense
4.
All vehicles parked on site must be operable.
a. Inoperable vehicles include vehicles with flat tires
5.
Any vehicles which are abandoned, or have not moved in 30 days will be towed at the owner’s expense.
6.
Any vehicles parked illegally, or not within a designated parking stall will be towed at the owner’s expense.
7.
Any vehicle parked in a designated handicap stall without proper handicap validation will be towed and or ticketed at the
owner’s expense.
8.
Any vehicle blocking the Right of Way or preventing the Flow of Traffic will be towed at the owner’s expense.
9.
Absolutely no vehicles are allowed to park in between the two buildings. This area is for loading and unloading ONLY.
10.
No truck or trailer parking is allowed in the parking stalls along Fort Hill Drive.
11.
No Semi-Trucks or vehicles of Semi length are allowed to park on property.
1900 South Highland Avenue, Suite 104 • Lombard, Illinois 60148 • (630) 424-8902 • fax (630) 424-8916 • www.sequoiarg.com
ATTACHMENT 7
ATTACHMENT 7
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LOT 2 IN CENTERPOINT BUSINESS PARK, UNIT 4, BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT
4 IN CENTERPOINT BUSINESS PARK UNIT 3, A SUBDIVISION IN THE NORTHEAST ¼
OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 38 NORTH, RANGE 9 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL
MERIDIAN, RECORDED OCTOBER 28, 2005 AS DOCUMENT R2005-241507 IN DUPAGE
COUNTY, ILLINOIS.
Address: 424 Fort Hill Drive, Naperville, IL 60540
PINs: 07-22-209-001 through 07-22-209-046 (details below)
PINs (Common Areas): 07-22-208-014
07-22-208-002
07-22-208-024
PINs (Units):
Unit No.
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
PIN
07-22-209-001
07-22-209-002
07-22-209-003
07-22-209-004
07-22-209-005
07-22-209-006
07-22-209-007
07-22-209-008
07-22-209-009
07-22-209-010
07-22-209-011
07-22-209-012
07-22-209-013
07-22-209-014
07-22-209-015
07-22-209-016
07-22-209-017
07-22-209-018
07-22-209-019
07-22-209-020
07-22-209-021
07-22-209-022
07-22-209-023
Unit No.
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
PIN
07-22-209-024
07-22-209-025
07-22-209-026
07-22-209-027
07-22-209-028
07-22-209-029
07-22-209-030
07-22-209-031
07-22-209-032
07-22-209-033
07-22-209-034
07-22-209-035
07-22-209-036
07-22-209-037
07-22-209-038
07-22-209-039
07-22-209-040
07-22-209-041
07-22-209-042
07-22-209-043
07-22-209-044
07-22-209-045
07-22-209-046
ATTACHMENT 8
CITY OF NAPERVILLE
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
September 24, 2014
TO:
Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM:
Ying Liu, AICP, Community Planner – TED Business Group
SUBJECT:
Correspondence Item – 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Calendar
The Planning and Zoning Commission typically meets at 7 p.m. on the first and third Wednesday of
every month in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Center at 400 S. Eagle Street. A draft of the
Planning and Zoning Commission meeting schedule for year 2015 is included below:
2015 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Schedule
January 7
January 21
February 4
February 18
March 4
March 18
April 1
April 15
May 6
May 20
June 3
June 17
July 8*
July 22*
August 5
August 19
September 2
September 16
October 7
October 21
November 4
November 18
December 2
December 16
* Scheduled for the second and fourth Wednesday of the month due to the Independence Day Holiday.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting calendar.