HomeMy WebLinkAboutG24-09 -�. Ordinance No. G24-09
AN ORDINANCE
GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING ADDITIONS, EXTERIOR AND
INTERIOR BUILDING RENOVATIONS AND A PARKING LOT IN THE
CF COMMUNITY FACILITY DISTRICT
(316, 320 and 360 Douglas Avenue)
WHEREAS, written application has been made for a conditional use for a planned
development which will allow for the construction of building additions, interior and exterior
building renovations and a parking lot within the CF Community Facility District at 316, 320 and
360 Douglas Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board conducted a public hearing after
due notice by publication and has submitted its findings of fact and recommended approval; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Elgin concurs in the findings and
recommendation of the Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ELGIN, ILLINOIS:
• Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Elgin hereby adopts the Findings of Fact,
dated March 18, 2009, made by the Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board, a copy of which is
attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference as Exhibit A.
Section 2. That a conditional use for a planned development which will allow for the
construction of building additions, interior and exterior building renovations and a parking lot
within the CF Community Facility District at 316, 320 and 360 Douglas Avenue and legally
described as follows:
The North 2 chains of the East 2 chains of Block 7 of P.J. Kimball Jr.'s Third
Addition to Elgin, also the South 1 chain of the North 3 chains of the East 2
chains of Block 7 of P.J. Kimball Jr.'s Third Addition to Elgin, and also the East
66 feet of the West 198 feet of the South 66 feet of the North 198 feet of Block 7
of P. J. Kimball Jr.'s Third Addition to Elgin, all in the City of Elgin, Kane
County, Illinois (Property Commonly Known as 316 Douglas Avenue)
And,
The South 132 feet of the East 115.5 feet of Block 11 of P.J. Kimball Jr.'s Third
Addition to Elgin, all in the City of Elgin, Kane County, Illinois (Property
Commonly Known as 320 and 360 Douglas Avenue)
is be and is hereby granted subject to the following conditions:
• 1. Substantial conformance to the Site Plan (Sheet SD-1), dated November 28, 2008;
Floor Plans (Sheets A2-0 and A2-1), and Building Elevations (Sheet A5-0), dated
November 26, 2008, prepared by Burnidge Cassell Associates.
2. All proposed changes to the existing signage shall conform to the Zoning
Ordinance, Chapter 19.50 Street Graphics.
3. The foundation and slab of the existing four car garage shall be removed upon the
issuance of a demolition permit.
4. The chain link fence in the front yard along the west property line shall be
removed.
5. Two ornamental trees shall be installed in the front yard along Douglas Avenue on
the subject property.
6. Compliance with all applicable codes and ordinances.
Section 3. That the conditional use granted herein shall expire if not established within two
years from the date of passage of this ordinance.
• Section 4. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately after its passage
in the manner provided by law.
Ed Scho , ayor
Presented: April 29, 2009
Passed: April 29, 2009
Omnibus Vote: Yeas: 7 Nays: 0 FnWU
Recorded: April 30, 2009
Published: ' .}
-
Attest:
Diane Robertson, City Cl rk
•
March 18, 2009
FINDINGS OF FACT
Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board City of Elgin,Illinois
SUBJECT
Consideration of Petition 30-08 Requesting a Conditional Use for a Planned Development in the CF
Community Facility District, to Permit the Construction of Building Additions and Exterior and
Interior Building Renovations; Properties Located at 316, 320 and 360 Douglas Avenue by The
Salvation Army of Elgin, as Applicant and Owner.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Requested Action: Conditional Use for a Planned Development Approval
Current Zoning: CF Community Facility District
Existing & Church,Educational and Meeting Facility,Recreation&Community
Proposed Use: Services and Parking Lot with Playground
Property Location: 316, 320 and 360 Douglas Avenue
Applicant& Owner: The Salvation Army of Elgin
Staff Coordinator: Denise Momodu, Associate Planner
LIST OF EXHIBITS
A. Location Map (see attached)
B. Zoning Map (see attached)
C. Parcel Map (see attached)
D. Aerial Photo (see attached)
E. Environmental Map (see attached)
F. Site Photos (see attached)
•
EXHIBIT
b
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 30-08 March 18, 2009
G. Development Application (see attached)
H. Draft Conditional Use Ordinance (see attached)
I. Related Correspondence (see attached)
BACKGROUND
An application has been filed by The Salvation Army of Elgin, requesting a conditional use for a
planned development in the CF Community Facility District.The subject property is located at 316,
320, and 360 Douglas Avenue (reference Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, and F).
The subject property is improved with an existing brick building,paved vehicle use area and.a four
car garage. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing garage and remodel the interior and
exterior of the existing 14,000 square feet building by incorporating elevators and ramps to meet the
requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Other changes include raising the
ceiling height of the gym by replacing the existing flat roof with a barrel type roof.
In 1970, when the existing building was constructed it met the allowable setbacks in terms of site
design. The proposed improvements and existing building do not comply with the current zoning
ordinance with regard to setbacks. The applicant is requesting departures from the standard
• requirements of the CF Community Facility District (reference Exhibits G, H, and I).
The purpose of the provisions which permit a planned development as a conditional use is to provide
an element of flexibility in the zoning ordinance. Under these provisions, an applicant can request
departures from the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Accordingly, each request made under
these provisions should be reviewed and considered with respect to the standards for planned
developments. The applicant is requesting a conditional use for a planned development since the
subject property is less than two acres in acres.
GENERAL FINDINGS
After due notice,as required by law,the Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board conducted a public
hearing in consideration of Petition 30-08 on March 18,2009. The applicants testified at the public
hearing and presented documentary evidence in support of the application. No objectors were
present. The Community Development Group submitted a Conditional Use Review dated March 13,
2009.
The Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board has made the following general findings:
A. Site Characteristics Standard: The suitability of the subject property for the intended
• conditional use for a planned development with respect to its size, shape,significant natural
- 2 -
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 30-08 March.18, 2009
• features (including topography, watercourse and vegetation), and existing improvements.
Findings: The subject-property is suitable for the intended conditional use for a planned
development with respect to the site characteristics standard.
The subject properties are composed of five rectangular shaped parcels containing a total of
1.1 acres in area. The southerly parcels are improved with a large two-story brick
institutional building,containing 14,000 square feet of floor area;a detached four car garage;
a shared driveway; and paved vehicle use area. The northerly parcels are improved with a 14
car parking lot and a playground. The subject properties are relatively flat. There are no
significant natural features on the site.
B. Sewer and Water Standard: The suitability of the subject property for the intended
conditional use for a planned development with respect to the availability of adequate
municipal water, wastewater treatment, and storm water control facilities.
Findings: The subject property is suitable for the intended conditional use for a planned
development with respect to the sewer and water standard.
The subject property is served with municipal water and sanitary sewer.
C. Traffic and Parking Standard: The suitability of the subject property for the intended
conditional use for a planned development with respect to the provision of safe and efficient
on-site and off-site vehicular circulation designed to minimize traffic congestion.
Findings: The subject property is suitable for the intended conditional use for a planned.
development with respect to the traffic and parking standard.
The subject property is located on the west side of Douglas Avenue,north of Kimball Street.
Douglas.Avenue is a collector street serving the downtown and the adjoining residential
neighborhoods.
An existing parking lot containing 14 off street parking stalls,located at the northwest corner
of Ann Street and Douglas Avenue,is owned by the Salvation Army. An additional off street
parking lot, containing 7 parking stalls, is being proposed to be constructed behind the
existing building at 316 Douglas Avenue. The proposed lot is in conformance with the
City's Off Street Parking Ordinance design regulations for on-site circulation,parking aisles
and stalls.
The existing use of the building is not being intensified;therefore the parking demand is not
being increased. The applicant is merely proposing to enhance the functionality of the
existing building and meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
• D. Zoning History Standard: The suitability of the subject property for the intended
- 3 -
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 30-08 March 18, 2009
• conditional use for a planned development with respect to the length of time the property has
remained undeveloped or unused in its current zoning district.
Findings: The subject property is suitable for the intended conditional use for a planned
development with respect to the length of time the property has remained undeveloped or
unused in its current zoning district.
The subject properties were zoned as follows for the years listed:
1927: B Residential District and C Residential District
1950: C Residential District
1960: C Residential District
1962: R-5 General Residence District and B-1 Retail Business District
1992: R-4 General Residence District and B-1 Retail Business District
Present: CF Community Facility District
The subject properties were zoned for single family residence from 1927 until 1962. In
1962, a City-wide amendment to the Zoning Ordinance was approved and the southerly.
properties were rezoned from C Residential to B 1 Retail Business District,and the northerly
properties from C Residential to R5 General Residence District. A special use ordinance for
a church and accessory uses was approved in 1969. In 1992, the subject properties were
• rezoned to CF Community Facility District as part of the. City-wide comprehensive i
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.
E. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Standard: The suitability of the subject property for
the intended zoning district with respect to consistency and compatibility with surrounding
land use and zoning.
Findings. The subject property is suitable for the intended zoning district with respect to
consistency and compatibility with surrounding land use and zoning.
The areas surrounding the subject properties are zoned RC3 Residence Conservation District
and are developed with residential uses. The subject properties are located in an older
established residential neighborhood and are part of the Spring-Douglas Historic District.
F. Trend of Development Standard: The suitability of the subject property for the intended
conditional use for a planned development with respect to its consistency with an existing
pattern of development or an identifiable trend of development in the area.
Findings: The subject property is suitable for the intended conditional use for a planned
development with respect to the trend of development standard.
• The Salvation Army is an existing facility that was established in 1970, after it received a
conditional use approval. The use was suitable with the trend of development when it was '
- 4 -
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 30-08 March 18, 2009
• built and remains suitable at present.
G. Conditional Use for a Planned Development Standard: The suitability of the subject
property for the intended conditional use for a planned development with respect to
conformance for the purpose and intent of the planned development.
No conditional use for a planned development should be granted for the sole purpose of
introducing a land use not otherwise permitted on the subject property. The purpose and
intent of the provisions for planned developments are to accommodate unique development
situations. For planned developments as a conditional use,the planned development should
demonstrate the following characteristics:
1. An opportunity to realize a development of demonstrated need with respect to the
types of environment available.to the public that would not be possible under the
strict application of the other chapters of this title.
2. The public benefit realized by the establishment of the planned development is
greater than if the property were to remain subject to the standard requirements of the
zoning district in which it is located.
3. Extraordinary conditions or limitations governing site design, function, operation,
and traffic are imposed on the planned development.
• Findings: The subject property is suitable for the intended conditional use for a planned
development with respect to conformance to the purpose and intent of a conditional use for a
planned development standard.
The existing church building is lawful non-conforming with regard to site design.
Furthermore,the subject site does not meet the minimum district size requirements for a CF
Community Facility District. The proposed conditional use for a planned development will
bring the subject properties into conformance.
H. Comprehensive Plan Standard: The suitability of the subject property for the intended
conditional use for a planned development with respect to conformance to the goals,
objectives, and policies of the official comprehensive plan.
r
Findings: The subject property is suitable for the intended conditional use for a planned
development with respect to the Comprehensive Plan Standard.
The subject property is designated as "Urban/Traditional Residential (2.1 — 8.7 dwelling
units per net acres)"by the City of Elgin's Comprehensive Plan and Design Guidelines dated
2005. The Urban/Traditional Residential designation is suitable for any area where urban
density land use, including detached and attached single family homes, and higher density
multiple family dwellings exist or are desired. These areas generally include that part of the
• community that developed between the 1850's and early 1960's,but may also include areas
around mixed use centers and along transportation corridors identified. Other uses allowed
- 5 -
4
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 30-08 March 18, 2009
• f
in this category may include neighborhood commercial centers, churches, and schools in
locations deemed appropriate by the City. The proposed development is in conformance
with this designation.
I. Natural Preservation Standard: The suitability of the subject property for the intended
conditional use for a planned development with respect to the preservation of all significant
natural features including topography, watercourses, wetlands, and vegetation.
Findings: The subject property is suitable for the intended conditional use for a planned
development with regard to the natural preservation standard.
There are no significant natural features on the subject property.
J. Internal Land Use Standard: The suitability of the subject property for the intended
conditional use for a planned development with respect to the land uses permitted within the
development being located, designed, and operated so as to exercise no undue detrimental
influence on each other or on surrounding property.
Findings: The subject property is suitable for the intended conditional use for a planned
development with regard to the internal land use standard.
• No evidence has been submitted or found that the proposed conditional use for a planned i.
development will be located, designed, or operated in a manner that will exercise undue
detrimental influence on itself or surrounding property.
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DEPARTURES AND EXCEPTIONS
A planned development may be granted certain departures from the normal standards,regulations,
requirements, and procedures of the zoning ordinance. For the purposes of this section, the most
similar zoning district is the CF Community Facility District. The applicant is requesting the
following departure from the standard requirements of the CF District:
1. Section 19.30.135(E)(1)(a)Street Setback. The CF Community Facility District requires a
minimum 25 foot building setback from a street. The existing building is located 14 feet
from Ann Street and is lawfully non-conforming with regard to the site design. The applicant
proposes to locate the new building addition(new storage entrance and stair enclosure)9 feet
from Ann Street. Accordingly, a 16 foot (64%) departure from the minimum required
building setback from a street is proposed.
2. Section 19.30.135(E)(1)(c) Transition Setback. The CF District requires a minimum
building setback from a transition lot line of 50 feet for a zoning lot this size. The existing
• building is located 4 feet from the west property line and is lawfully non-conforming with
regard to the site design. The proposed location of the addition (stair enclosure) is 4 feet
- 6 -
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 30-08 March 18, 2009
• from the west lot line. Accordingly, a 46 foot(92%) departure from the minimum required
building setback from a transition lot line is proposed.
3. Section 19.30.135(H)(2) Transition Landscape Yard (Southerly Lot — Existing
Building). The CF District requires a minimum transition landscape yard setback from a
transition lot line of 25 feet fora zoning lot this size. The applicant proposes a transition
landscape yard setback of 6 feet from the west lot line for the construction of the new parking
lot. Accordingly,a 19 foot(76%),departure from the minimum required transition landscape
yard setback is proposed. A compact continuous screening hedge comprised of shrubs will
be installed on 3%2 foot centers, and maintained at a height of 8 feet to provide a 100%
screening along the entire length of the vehicle use area.
4. Section 19.30.135(H)(2)Transition Landscape Yard(Northerly Lot-Existing Parking
Lot). The CF District requires a minimum transition landscape yard setback from a
transition lot line of 25 feet for a zoning lot this size. The existing parking lot is located 6
feet from the west property line, and 15 feet from the north property and is lawfully non-
conforming with regard to the site design. Accordingly, a 19 foot(76%)departure,and a10
foot (40%) departure, from the minimum required transition landscape yard setback are
requested.
5. Section 19.30.135(1)Maximum Floor Area.In the CF District the maximum floor area for
• a zoning lot this size is 17,209 square feet. The existing building floor area of 25,462 square
feet is exceeding the maximum allowable floor area. The applicant is proposed to increase
the floor area to 30,405 square feet. Accordingly, 13,196 square feet of floor area(43%)
departure from the maximum allowable floor area is proposed.
6. Section 19.30.135(.)) Building Coverage. In the CF District the maximum building
coverage for a zoning lot this size is 10,197 square feet. The existing building coverage of
14,217 square feet is exceeding the maximum allowable building coverage. The applicant is
proposed to increase the building coverage to 16,280 square feet. Accordingly,6,083 square
feet of building coverage(37%)departure from the maximum allowable building coverage is
proposed.
r
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, UNRESOLVED ISSUES, AND ALTERNATIVES
The Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board has developed or identified the following findings,
unresolved issues, and alternatives:
A. Findings.
1. Conditional Use for a Planned Development Standard: The existing church building
• is lawful non-conforming with regard to site design. Furthermore, the subject site
does not meet the minimum district size requirements for a CF Community Facility
- 7 -
I
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 30-08 March 18, 2009
• District. The proposed conditional use for a planned development will bring the
subject properties into conformance.
2. Traffic and Parking Standard: The existing use of the building is not being
intensified; therefore the parking demand is not being increased. The applicant is
proposing to enhance the functionality of the existing building and to meet the
requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
B. Summary of Unresolved Issues.
There are no unresolved issues.
C. Summary of Alternatives.
Other than an approval,a denial,or an approval with some combination of conditions,there
are no substantive alternatives.
DECISION
The Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board recommends the approval of Petition 30-08. On a
• motion to recommend approval of the conditional use,subject to the following conditions,the vote
was five (5) yes and zero (0) no:
1. Substantial conformance to the Site Plan (Sheet SD-1), dated November 28, 2008; Floor
Plans (Sheets A2-0 and A2-1), and Elevations (Sheet A5-0), dated November 26, 2008,
prepared by Burnidge Cassell Associates.
2. All proposed changes to the existing signage shall conform to the Zoning Ordinance,Chapter
.19.50 Street Graphics.
3. The foundation and slab of existing four car garages shall be removed when a demolition
permit is issued.
4. The chainlink fence in the front yard along the west property line shall be removed.
5. Two ornamental trees shall be installed in the front yard along Douglas Avenue on the
subject property.
6. Compliance with all applicable codes and ordinances.
Therefore, the motion to recommend approval of Petition 30-08 was adopted.
- 8 -
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 30-08 March 18, 2009
•
Respectfully Submitted,
s/ Daniel Weiler
Dan Weiler, Chairman Pro-Tem
Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
s/ Matthew Fitzgibbon
Matthew Fitzgibbon, Secretary
Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
•
- 9 -