G68-03 tom- Ordinance No. G68-03
AN ORDINANCE
GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO PERMIT
A GROCERY STORE, A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, AND AN
ACCESSORY PARKING LOT IN THE RC3 RESIDENCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT
(659 Raymond Street)
WHEREAS, written application has been made for a conditional
use for a planned development which will allow for a grocery store
and an accessory parking lot in the RC3 Residence Conservation
District Corridor Overlay District at 659 Raymond Street; 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 November 6, 2002 , 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 a grocery store, a single family residence,
and an accessory parking lot in the RC3 Residence Conservation
District at 659 Raymond Street and legally described as follows :
LOT 1 OF GROTE AND WALDRON' S FIFTH ADDITION TO
ELGIN, IN CITY OF ELGIN, KANE COUNTY, ILLINOIS .
be and is hereby granted subject to the following conditions :
1 . Substantial conformance to the Statement of
Purpose and Conformance submitted by Rogelio Salgado,
dated 10-30-02 .
2 . Substantial conformance to the Site Plan, dated
October 30, 2002 .
3 . Substantial conformance to the Shed and
Building Elevations, dated October 30, 2002 .
eisk
4 . The improvements to the buildings and the
construction of the parking lot shall be completed by
May 30 , 2002 .
5 . The concrete located within the parkway along
Raymond Street shall be removed.
6 . A sign elevation shall be submitted prior to
consideration by the City Council .
7 . Signs for the business shall be limited to one
wall sign, containing a maximum of 40 square feet of
surface area, located on the Raymond Street building
facade. No window signs (including promotional window
signs) or freestanding signs shall be permitted.
8 . The chain link fence located in front of the
single family residence shall be removed.
9 . Any obstructions within the street yard not
permitted by the zoning ordinance shall be removed.
10 . Compliance with all other applicable codes and
ordinances .
Section 3 . That the conditional use granted herein shall
expire if not established within one year 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 Schock, Mayor
Presented: July 23 , 2003
Passed: July 23 , 2003
Omnibus Vote : Yeas : 6 Nays : 0
Recorded: July 24 , 2003
Attest :
Dolonna Mecum, City Clerk
eft
," November 6, 2002
FINDINGS OF FACT
Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board City of Elgin,Illinois
SUBJECT
Consideration of Petition 59-02 Requesting a Conditional Use for a Planned
Development to Permit a Grocery Store and an Accessory Parking Lot in the RC3
Residence Conservation District; Property Located at 659 Raymond Street by Rogelio
Salgado, as Applicant and Owner.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Requested Action: Conditional Use Approval
Current Zoning: RC3 Residence Conservation District
Intended Use: Grocery Store
Property Location: 659 Raymond Street
Applicant and Owner: Rogelio Salgado
Staff Coordinator: Lauren Kieck, Planner
LIST OF EXHIBITS
A. Location Map (see attached)
B. Zoning Map (see attached)
C. Parcel Map (see attached)
D. Aerial Photograph (see attached)
E. Site Photographs (see attached)
F. Statement of Purpose and Conformance (see attached)
e►. G. Draft Conditional Use Ordinance (see attached)
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 59-02 November 6, 2002
BACKGROUND
An application has been filed by Rogelio Salgado requesting a conditional use for a
planned development to permit a grocery store and an accessory parking lot. The subject
property is located at 659 Raymond Street (reference Exhibits A, B, C, D and E).
The subject property is improved with a lawful nonconforming grocery store and a single
family residence. The applicant proposes to improve the subject property in several
ways. The applicant proposes to establish a new, paved parking area, provide new signs,
and enclose the existing garbage dumpsters with a six foot solid wood fence. In addition
to these improvements, the applicant also proposes to modify the existing structures on
site by joining the roofs between the existing store and residence, and by providing a
single roof structure for the two existing sheds. Because the grocery store is a
nonconforming use, the expansion of the floor area, and the addition of a parking lot, is
not permitted by the zoning ordinance. Accordingly, the applicant is requesting approval
of a planned development to permit these changes and to establish the grocery store as a
conforming use(reference Exhibits F and G).
The purpose of the provisions which permit planned developments as a conditional use is
to provide an ultimate element of flexibility in the zoning ordinance. Under these
provisions, an applicant can literally request anything for the consideration of the Zoning
Board and the City Council. Accordingly, each request made under these provisions
should be highly scrutinized with respect to the standards for planned developments.
GENERAL FINDINGS
After due notice, as required by law, the Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
conducted a public hearing in consideration of Petition 59-02 on November 6, 2002. The
applicant testified at the public hearing and presented documentary evidence in support of
the application. Interested parties spoke at the public hearing neither in support or
opposition of the proposal. No written correspondence has been submitted. The
Community Development Group submitted a Conditional Use Review dated October 30,
2002.
The Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board has made the following findings concerning
the standards for a conditional use for a planned development:
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
and any existing improvements.
Findings: The subject property is suitable for the proposed planned development
with respect to the site characteristics standard.
2
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 59-02 November 6, 2002
The subject property is an irregularly shaped property containing 8,411 square
feet of lot area. The property is improved with a commercial building, a single
family residence, two sheds, and accessory gravel parking areas.
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 water, sanitary treatment and stormwater control
facilities.
Findings: The subject property is suitable for the proposed planned development
with respect to the sewer and water standard.
The subject property is served with municipal water, sanitary sewer, and storm
water control facilities.
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 proposed planned development
with respect to the traffic and parking standard.
The subject property is at the intersection of Raymond Street and Jay Street.
Raymond Street is a collector street serving the east side of the city. Jay street is a
local street also serving the east side of the city.
The applicant proposes to provide a new paved parking lot where the existing
gravel parking area is located. The zoning ordinance requires 9 parking stalls for
both the residence and the business. The subject property; however, can only
support 8 parking stalls.
D. Zoning History Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the
proposed 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 property was
zoned as follows for the years listed:
1927: B Residential District
1950: B Residential District
1960: B Residential District
1962: R-3 Two Family Residence District
1992: R-3 Two Family Residence District
Present: RC3 Residence Conservation District
3
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 59-02 November 6, 2002
The subject property has been continuously zoned for residential use since the city
first adopted a zoning ordinance in 1927. A grocery store has occupied the site
since at least 1926, prior to the adoption of a zoning ordinance. The underlying
zoning only permits residential uses. However, because the grocery store was
originally established as a lawful use, it is considered a lawful nonconforming
use. Lawful nonconforming uses may continue to exist, but may not be expanded.
E. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Standard. The suitability of the subject
property for the intended conditional use for a planned development with respect
to consistency and compatibility with surrounding land use and zoning.
Findings: The subject property may be suitable for the proposed planned
development with respect to the surrounding land use and zoning standard.
The areas to the north, south, east, and west are zoned RC3 Residence
Conservation District and are developed with a mix of single family residences,
lawful multiple family residences, and multiple family conversions.
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 may be suitable for the proposed planned
development with respect to the trend of development standard.
The subject property is located within an established residence conservation
district.
G. Zoning District Standard. The suitability of the subject property for the
intended conditional use for a planned development with respect to conformance
to the provisions for the purpose and intent, and the location and size of a zoning
district.
The purpose of the RC3 Residence Conservation District is to conserve the urban
residential environment of the mature residential neighborhoods of the city, which
developed predominantly subsequent to 1950 with single family detached
dwellings.
Findings. The subject property may be suitable for the intended conditional use
for a planned development with respect to conformance to the provisions for the
elkpurpose and intent, and the location and size of a zoning district.
If approved, the proposed planned development will allow a long standing
neighborhood convenience store to continue to exist as it currently operates.
While not a permitted use in a residence district, the proposed grocery store has
4
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 59-02 November 6, 2002
been located at the subject property for nearly 80 years, and provides a service
within the local neighborhood. The applicant proposes to make several
modifications improve the site which will improve its appearance and function,
and therefore,provide an improved benefit to the neighborhood.
H. 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 to the provisions for the purpose and intent of planned
developments.
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 is 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.
The proposed conditional use for a planned development provides 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 zoning ordinance. The grocery store located at the subject
property exists as a lawful nonconforming use. The applicant proposes to
upgrade the site by providing a paved parking lot with landscaping, making
several changes to the building, and upgrading the existing signage. These
modifications are not permitted under the standard regulations of the zoning
ordinance; however, the approval of these modifications would provide an
improvement to the property, and thus bring the property to a new level of
compatibility with the neighborhood. Additionally, the successful operation of
the store for nearly 80 years at this location indicates a need in this area for a
grocery store.
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.
5
Findings of Fact ' Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 59-02 November 6, 2002
Findings: The subject property is suitable for the proposed planned development
with regard to the comprehensive plan standard.
The subject property is designated as "urban residential" by the Official
Comprehensive Plan of Elgin (1983). While this designation does not allow for
the inclusion of business activity within the neighborhood, the existing grocery
store serves as a neighborhood convenience which has existed for a significant
length of time.
J. 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 proposed planned development
with regard to the natural preservation standard.
The subject property contains no significant natural features worthy of
preservation.
K. 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 proposed planned development
with regard to the internal land use standard.
No evidence has been submitted or found that the proposed planned development
will be located, designed, or operated in a manner that will exercise undue
detrimental influence on itself or surrounding property. The grocery store as
proposed has existed at the subject property for a significant length of time and
serves as a neighborhood convenience. The applicant proposes to make several
changes to the property in an effort to bring the property into compliance with the
code, and to also improve its compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood.
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DEPARTURES AND EXCEPTIONS
A planned development may be granted certain departures from the normal standards,
regulations, requirements, and procedures of the Elgin Zoning Ordinance. The applicant
is requesting the following departures from the standard requirements of the RC3
Residence Conservation District:
6
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 59-02 November 6, 2002
1. 19.20.630 Permitted Uses (A.). Grocery stores are not listed as a permitted or
conditional use in the RC3 District. The applicant is proposing to establish a long
standing nonconforming grocery store as a permitted use at the subject property.
2. 19.20.630 Permitted Uses (A.). Parking lots are not listed as a permitted or
conditional use in the RC3 District. The applicant proposes to establish a parking
lot to provide off street parking for the proposed grocery store.
3. 19.20.630 Permitted Uses (A.). Refuse collection areas are not listed as a
permitted or a conditional use within the RC3 District. The applicant proposes to
provide a refuse collection area for the existing garbage dumpsters.
4. 19.50.070 Allowable Signs by Zoning District (A.). Wall signs are not listed as
an allowable sign within the RC3 District. The applicant is requesting approval
for one wall sign to be located on the Raymond Street building façade which will
not to exceed 40 square feet in surface area.
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. Summary of Findings.
1. Positive Attributes. The applicant proposes to make several modifications
to the property in an effort to bring the site into compliance with the code,
and to also improve its compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood.
The applicant proposes to provide a paved parking area on the site. This
improvement will reduce on street parking in the area which is generated
by the business. The applicant also proposes to make several structural
modifications to the buildings located on the property which will improve
the aesthetic appearance of the site.
2. Zoning History. The subject property has been continuously zoned for
residential use since the city first adopted a zoning ordinance. A grocery
store has occupied the site since at least 1926, prior to the adoption of the
City's first zoning ordinance in 1927. The current zoning only permits
residential uses. However, because the grocery store was originally
established as a lawful use, it is considered a lawful nonconforming use.
3. Planned Development. The modifications proposed by the applicant are
not permitted under the standard regulations of the zoning ordinance.
However, the approval of these modifications would provide an
improvement to the property, and thus bring the property to a new level of
compatibility with the neighborhood. Additionally, the successful
7
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 59-02 November 6, 2002
t""'
operation of the store for nearly 80 years at this location indicates a need
in this area for a grocery store.
B. Summary of Unresolved Issues.
There are no unresolved issues.
C. Summary of Alternatives.
Other than approval, denial, or an approval with some combination of conditions,
there are no substantive alternatives.
RECOMMENDATION
The Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board hereby recommends the approval of Petition
59-02. On a motion to recommend approval of Petition 59-02, subject to the following
conditions, the vote was five (5) yes and zero (0) no, subject to the following conditions:
1. Substantial conformance to the Statement of Purpose and Conformance
submitted by Rogelio Salgado, dated 10-30-02.
2. Substantial conformance to the Site Plan, dated October 30, 2002.
3. Substantial conformance to the Shed and Building Elevations, dated
October 30, 2002.
4. The concrete located within the parkway along Raymond Street shall be
removed.
5. A sign elevation shall be submitted prior to consideration by the City
Council.
6. Signs for the business shall be limited to one wall sign, containing a
maximum of 40 square feet of surface area, located on the Raymond Street
building facade. No window signs (including promotional window signs)
or freestanding signs shall be permitted.
7. The chain link fence located in front of the single family residence shall be
removed.
8. Any obstructions within the street yard not permitted by the zoning
ordinance shall be removed.
9. The improvements listed herein shall be completed by May 30, 2002.
8
Findings of Fact Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
Petition 59-02 November 6, 2002
10. Compliance with all other applicable codes and ordinances.
Therefore, the motion to recommend approval of Petition 59-02 was adopted.
': - 4 'ho,
Robert angl , Cha an
Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
David Sundland, Secretary Ci0
Zoning and Subdivision Hearing Board
r
9