Chambana Sun

City of Woodstock Plan Commission met April 27.

Here is the minutes provided by the Commission:

The regular meeting of the Woodstock Plan Commission was called to order at 7:00 pm by Chairwoman Katherine Parkhurst on Thursday, April 27, 2017, in the Council Chambers at City Hall.

A roll call was taken.

Commission Members Present: Donna Besler, Donald Fortin, Steve Gavers, Robert Horrell, Darrell Moore, Doreen Paluch, Erich Thurow, Jackie Speciale, and Chairwoman Katherine Parkhurst.

Commission Members Absent: None

Staff Present: Building & Zoning Director Joe Napolitano, City Attorney T. J. Clifton, and Economic Development Director Garrett Anderson; City Planner Nancy Baker.

Approval of Agenda:

Motion by Paluch, second by Thurow, to approve the agenda as noticed:

Ayes: Besler, Fortin, Gavers, Horrell, Moore, Paluch, Thurow, Speciale, and Chairwoman Parkhurst. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Motion carried 9-0.

Approval of Minutes:

Motion by Paluch, second by Horrell, to approve the minutes of the March 23, 2017 meeting:

Ayes: Besler, Fortin, Horrell, Moore, Paluch, Thurow, Speciale, and Chairwoman Parkhurst. Nays: none. Abstentions: S. Gavers. Motion carried 8-0-1.

1. Public Comment

None

2. Old Business

Garrett Anderson, Economic Development Director, provided an update on the Downtown Plan process. He shared a timeline for the proposed update and a list of tasks to accomplish. Specific goals were identified for each month of the process. He noted that he is meeting with other boards and commissions and will be setting up individual meetings with Plan Commissioners in the very near future. Director Anderson identified the areas of focus for the plan and of these areas, he asked the Commissioners to play close attention to Site Opportunities and Public and Cultural Uses. He presented information on specific Tapestry Segments which use data on the types of persons living and shopping in an area to classify them into certain segments. Information such as this will be used in the preparation of the plan. He noted that he would be around after the new business items if the Commission had questions.

3. New Business

Public Hearing: Zoning Map Amendment from B3 to B2C for Properties on Hutchins Street

Chairwoman Parkhurst opened the Public Hearing at 7:24PM to consider a Zoning Map Amendment from B3 Service & Retail District to B2C Central Business District for Properties on Hutchins Street.

A roll call was taken.

Commission Members Present: Besler, Fortin, Gavers, Horrell, Moore, Paluch, Thurow, Speciale, and Chairwoman Parkhurst.

Commission Members Absent: None.

Chairwoman Parkhurst noted a quorum was present and invited the petitioner to approach the Commission.

John Knuth, Petitioner, 128 Hutchins Street; Randy Redman, 123 Hutchins Street; Paul Meyer, 129 Hutchins Street; and Lisa Brown, 117 Hutchins Street, were all sworn in by City Attorney T.J. Clifton.

Mr. Knuth explained that in February, he attempted to sell the single-family home at 128 Hutchins Street which he has owned for several years. The sale could not proceed because it was discovered that the property is zoned B3, which does not allow single-family homes. Therefore, the underwriters would not approve the purchaser’s loan. The property has been used as a single- family home for many years and Mr. Knuth was surprised to learn of the B3 zoning on the block. He approached other single-family homeowners on Hutchins Street and informed them of this issue and how it might affect their ability to sell the property in the future. Three of those property owners decided to join in on the rezoning request, while a fourth did not respond.

Mr. Redman indicated that he went through a similar situation with property he owned on Madison Street. That property was also a single family home with B3 business zoning.

Commissioner Moore stated that he could appreciate the applicants’ concerns about the existing zoning. The homes are legal nonconforming which allows the continued use, but does pose a problem if rebuilding is necessary.

Commissioners Thurow and Fortin stated that they had no concerns with the request.

Commissioner Paluch asked staff why B2C zoning was being requested. Director Napolitano noted that older zoning maps were reviewed and the subject property was zoned B3 as far back as 1947. At some point, the property was deemed appropriate for commercial uses. The B2C District would keep open the option for the property to be developed commercially, but would also bring the existing single family homes into compliance. B2C allows single family homes, but the B3 does not.

Commissioner Besler asked why the question did not come up before. Mr. Knuth stated that when he bought the property in 1996, the zoning was not a concern and perhaps lenders were more forgiving. Commissioner Gavers expressed his support for the request.

Commissioner Speciale asked if the Special Use Permit for 117 Hutchins would be affected by the rezoning. Director Napolitano replied that it would not.

Commissioner Horrell asked for clarification on the application. It was confirmed that there are four (4) properties on Hutchins Street seeking to have the property rezoned to B2C.

Commissioner Moore expressed concerns about other similarly zoned and used properties in the neighborhood and was concerned about creating an island of B3 zoning. Chairwoman Parkhurst stated that she had the same concern about not including all similar properties. She would be in favor of other resident’s petitioning for rezoning as a group.

Chairwoman Parkhurst opened the floor to public comment.

Randy Tipps, 124 Newell Street, said he received notice about the public hearing and spoke to Director Napolitano about the zoning. He learned that his and his next door neighbor’s property on Newell Street are in the same situation. Director Napolitano stated that after meeting with Mr. Tipps, he did a cursory review of the area and determined that there were other properties in the same situation. He suggested that the Plan Commission direct staff to perform a comprehensive review the zoning and land use in the area and consider bringing forward additional zoning map amendments to correct these discrepancies.

Chairwoman Parkhurst closed the public comment at 7:42 pm.

Motion by Commissioner Horrell, second by Commissioner Gavers, to recommend to the City Council approval of a Zoning Map Amendment from B3 Service and Retail District to B2C Central Business District for the properties at 117, 123, 128 and 129 Hutchins Street in accordance with the findings of fact as stated in the Staff Report.

A roll call vote was taken. Ayes: Besler, Fortin, Gavers, Horrell, Moore, Paluch, Thurow, Speciale, and Parkhurst. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Motion carried 9 – 0.

The Plan Commission directed staff to review the existing zoning and land use in the general area of Hutchins Street to determine if there are other improperly zoned properties and consider taking necessary action to correct the zoning where appropriate.

Public Hearing: Zoning Map Amendment from M1 to B3 for 333 E. Judd Street and 350 E. Church Street:

Chairwoman Parkhurst opened the Public Hearing at 7:46 PM to consider a Zoning Map Amendment from M1 Limited Manufacturing to B3 Service & Retail District for 333 E. Judd Street and 350 E. Church Street.

A roll call was taken.

Commission Members Present: Besler, Fortin, Gavers, Horrell, Moore, Paluch, Thurow, Speciale, and Chairwoman Parkhurst.

Commission Members Absent: None.

Chairwoman Parkhurst noted a quorum was present and invited the petitioner to approach the Commission.

Rodney Poore, Petitioner and owner of 333 E. Judd Street and 350 E. Church Street was sworn in by City Attorney T. J. Clifton.

Mr. Poore noted that he appeared before the Commission on a discussion basis only last month and based on that meeting, he decided to pursue rezoning of his property. Mr. Poore referenced a handout he provided to Commissioners that explained his proposed use for the building. He would like to create a meeting/event space for things such as special events, parties, training and entertainment. He believes there is a lack of such space in the Woodstock area and that this use can fill a demand. He has discussed this idea with several local residents and has received a good response. Mr. Poore stated that this use could help local businesses since people may want to have food catered in for certain events or utilize bouncy houses and other play equipment.

Mr. Poore indicated that he has owned the property for several years and operated a manufacturing business that is no longer viable. He has tried to sell or rent the building for manufacturing uses for over two years without success. The neighborhood has changed as manufacturing has ended and buildings have become vacant and neglected. This project could be a catalyst for change in the area. He understands that parking is a concern and will work to provide as many spaces as possible. There is a vacant lot on the north side of Church Street and Mr. Poore has talked to the owner about the possible purchase of this land for additional parking.

Commissioner Moore stated that his main concern is about parking. However, the request is for rezoning so it is important to remember that the property could be used for any B3 use, but manufacturing uses tend to be dirtier, noisier and have more truck traffic than uses allowed in B3. He noted that if it was determined that a variance was necessary for parking, the applicant would have to come back to the Plan Commission.

In response to a question from Commissioner Moore regarding on-street parking, Director Napolitano stated that on-street parking spaces cannot be counted toward meeting required spaces.

Commissioner Fortin stated that he did not believe the area was suitable for manufacturing and he would like to see the entire area trend away from that.

Commissioner Thurow stated that the B3 zoning is appropriate but parking for the proposed use is a concern.

Commissioner Horrell said the he was OK with the B3 zoning. He noted that the applicant would have to comply with all code requirements for signage, lighting and noise.

Chairwoman Parkhurst asked if the small building on the north (350 Church) would be removed. Mr. Poore stated not at this time, although he might consider removing it and using the land for parking if necessary. He said that his plan is to create an outdoor area inside the building (patio concept). He would also construct a new entrance on Seminary. There would not be a kitchen but there is an existing room that could be used by caterers who bring food to the site. Chairwoman Parkhurst stated that the 350 Church building is an eyesore. Mr. Poore said that if he keeps the building he will improve the appearance.

Commissioner Paluch noted that the request is for rezoning so all potential uses must be considered. The property has been vacant and M1 zoning is no longer appropriate. Rezoning this property can have a ripple effect on the neighborhood and bring positive change. She stated that she also has concerns about parking.

Commissioner Besler indicated that the applicant has invested significant time and money to research this type of business. She noted that while parking is an issue, it is similarly an issue throughout the downtown.

Commissioner Gavers stated that this proposal shows great vision and can be a trend setter for the area. Parking is an issue but parking for downtown developments is always a challenge. The improvements to the site will enhance the look of the area and he believes there is a need for this type of facility in the community.

Commissioner Speciale agreed that the area is no longer suitable for manufacturing. She appreciated Mr. Poore’s willingness to invest in the area.

Chairwoman Parkhurst stated that if the lot to the north is purchased for parking, Mr. Poore should consider rezoning it to something other than M1.

Chairwoman Parkhurst opened the floor to public comment.

Michael Rein, 329 N. Seminary Avenue, stated that he has lived on that block for many years and has a different vision for the area. There are many long term residents in the area who have lived through change in the neighborhood. They have lived with manufacturing uses but M1 zoning is limited and he read the purpose of the district and some of the potential uses. He stated that a petition was circulated and he obtained approximately 30 signatures from 20 different properties opposed to the rezoning. This petition was presented to Chairwoman Parkhurst. Mr. Rein noted that many of the surrounding buildings are vacant, but if there is a trend in the area it is towards residential, like the Emerson Lofts. This is a neighborhood with children and school bus stops. Changing the zoning to B3 could bring a lot of traffic and uncertainty as to how the area would be 20 years from now. Some of the B3 uses are pretty intensive and would be a big change. Mr. Rein expressed concern about the proposed event center noting that it could bring alcohol, with undesirable effects, as well as noise and light spillage. A strip mall could be constructed in B3. He asked Commissioners how they would feel about B3 if there were a clean slate. Residential land use would be better. The area is a neighborhood and is not suitable for B3.

William Pekorny, resident of Emerson Lofts, said that this is an unsightly area. He had big concerns about parking and thought that for 200-250 persons, you would need at least 175 parking spaces. He does not want property values to be lessened. He felt that this request should be continued until the parking issues can be resolved.

Commissioner Horrell asked about the petition submitted by Mr. Rein. Chairwoman Parkhurst read the petition into the record.

Jason Carpenter asked for clarification relating to the petition.

Commissioner Moore asked if the exterior improvements proposed by Mr. Poore had gone to the Historic Preservation Commission. City Planner Baker responded that they had and were approved.

Commissioner Paluch noted that the Comprehensive Plan shows the area as suitable for commercial uses and activities.

Chairwoman Parkhurst closed the public comment at 8:40 pm.

Motion by Commissioner Moore, second by Commissioner Besler, to recommend to the City Council approval of a Zoning Map Amendment from M1 Limited Manufacturing District to B3 Service and Retail District for 333 E. Judd Street and 350 E. Church Street in accordance with the findings of fact as stated in the Staff Report.

A roll call vote was taken. Ayes: Besler, Fortin, Gavers, Horrell, Moore, Paluch, Thurow, Speciale, and Parkhurst. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Motion carried 9 – 0.

Public Hearing: Variance from the Sign Requirements to allow Four (4) Banners with 16 Items of Information at 1270 McConnell Road

Chairwoman Parkhurst opened the Public Hearing at 8:43 pm to consider a Variance from the Sign Requirements to allow Four (4) Banners with 16 Items of Information at 1270 McConnell Road.

A roll call was taken.

Commission Members Present: Besler, Fortin, Gavers, Horrell, Moore, Paluch, Thurow, Speciale, and Chairwoman Parkhurst.

Commission Members Absent: None.

Chairwoman Parkhurst noted a quorum was present and invited the petitioner to approach the Commission.

Michelle Bidwell, Petitioner, was sworn in by City Attorney T.J. Clifton.

Ms. Bidwell stated that she is the owner and operator of Elite Warrior Training. Her business has expanded and she moved to her current location on McConnell Road last year. The proposed banners would help to better advertise her business. People are unaware of type of business she operates and by using the banners, she can convey this information to residents and persons travelling along McConnell Road. Her desire is to have a clean, attractive appearance and she referred to the illustrations of the banners in the packet. The banners would add flair without using neon and will be less intrusive to surrounding residents. She also stated that she plans on improving the landscaping in front of the building.

Commissioner Horrell asked for clarification of ownership of the property. Ms. Bidwell responded that she rents the property from Guy Spinelli, the owner. He then asked Ms. Bidwell to explain the hardship. She responded that at her previous location people did not know her business and the services she offered. Some people mistook the business for a truck driving school. Better visibility is needed and the banners would provide the information she needs to convey. Commissioner Horrell asked if she contacted the residential neighbors across the street. She noted that she complied with notification requirements but did not contact personally. He also inquired if the building sells, is the variance still valid and it was noted that the variance ends if the business moves. Regarding durability, Ms. Bidwell responded that if the banners become unsightly, she will replace them.

Commissioner Thurow also questioned durability. He asked how the 16 items of information was calculated and City Planner Baker noted that it includes the ground sign.

Commissioner Fortin asked if the proposed material was acceptable. City Planner Baker responded that this is part of the reason for the variance. Banners are usually considered temporary signs and are allowed for shorter periods of time.

Commissioner Moore said he does not like the blade signs he sees around town. He asked if they could be displayed each day and taken in each night and if those currently existing are following the rules. City Planner Baker responded that the ordinance allows a business to obtain a permit for up to four temporary displays each year, with a total display time of 60 days.

Chairwoman Parkhurst said she appreciates the applicant’s business growth but does not normally support sign code variances. She felt that a ground or wall sign would be sufficient to convey the business information.

Commissioner Paluch noted that the City has sign regulations for a purpose, to avoid clutter and maintain appearances. She was not even aware of the applicant’s previous location and said the proposed signs look professional and are not intrusive. A wall sign may have a less attractive appearance. She noted that the number of items does not present a problem for her. For clarification purposes, Commissioner Paluch stated that although her name appears on the survey, it is because she represented the previous building owner during the sale of the building.

Commissioner Besler stated that the signs are tastefully done. The applicant is growing her business and this is what the City wants.

Commissioner Gavers said it “classes” up the building. Without appropriate signs, you can’t find a business.

Commissioner Speciale stated that she likes the way it looks but is struggling with the hardship.

Commissioner Moore asked if there could be a lesser variance requested, perhaps 2 banners instead of 4. He reviewed the 3 criteria for considering a variance and questioned what was the practical difficulty or hardship. Ms. Bidwell stated that the other options do not present as attractive and appearance. City Planner Baker said that it is not necessary to meet all three criteria for a variance.

Chairwoman Parkhurst opened the floor to public comment. There was no public comment.

Commissioner Horrell stated that if the petitioner conformed to the wall sign requirements, it would not have a pleasing appearance. Commissioner Fortin said the request looks good, but he is struggling with the hardship

Commissioner Paluch reviewed the three criteria for granting a variance and thought that the request meets the purposes. She noted that if the code requirements were met, it would not be harmonious with the purpose and intent of the regulations and could have a negative impact on surrounding properties. The nature of the business is a unique circumstance as there are a variety of programs offered and the applicant needs to communicate this information without having an offensive looking sign. And finally, the banner signs do not negatively affect the overall character of the area.

Commissioner Horrell agreed and noted that sometimes ordinances don’t really do what we intended them to do. The banners are harmonious and convey information in a less offensive way; there is a hardship due to the unique nature of the business and the banners will enhance the architectural character of the building.

Chairwoman Parkhurst asked about other signs. City Planner Baker noted that one ground sign is allowed. The ordinance allows a permanent projecting sign with a maximum area of 9 square feet mounted perpendicular to the wall. Chairwoman Parkhurst expressed concern that other business may want to have banners if this request is approved.

Chairwoman Parkhurst closed the Public Hearing at 9:20 pm.

Motion by Commissioner Moore, second by Commissioner Besler, to recommend to the City Council approval of a Variance from the Sign Regulations to allow four (4) banners with 16 Items of information at 1270 McConnell Road.

A roll call vote was taken. Ayes: Besler, Fortin, Gavers, Horrell, Paluch and Thurow. Nays: Moore, Speciale, Chairwoman Parkhurst. Abstentions: none. Motion carried 6 – 3.

Public Hearing: Special Use Permit to allow a Planned Unit Development with a Gasoline Station and Approval of a Preliminary Plat of Subdivision for 2000 S. Eastwood Drive

Chairwoman Parkhurst opened the Public Hearing at 9:23 PM to consider a Special Use Permit to allow a Planned Unit Development with a Gasoline Station and Approval of a Preliminary Plat of Subdivision for 2000 S. Eastwood Drive.

A roll call was taken.

Commission Members Present: Besler, Fortin, Gavers, Horrell, Moore, Paluch, Thurow, Speciale, and Chairwoman Parkhurst.

Commission Members Absent: None.

Chairwoman Parkhurst noted a quorum was present. She indicated that the petitioner requested a continuance of the public hearing, time specific, until the next regularly scheduled Plan Commission meeting at 7:00 pm on May 25, 2017.

Motion by Commissioner Paluch, second by Commissioner Moore, to continue the Public Hearing on the request for a Special Use Permit to allow a Planned Unit Development with a Gasoline Station and Approval of a Preliminary Plat of Subdivision for 2000 S. Eastwood Drive until the May 25, 2017, meeting.

A roll call vote was taken. Ayes: Besler, Fortin, Gavers, Horrell, Moore, Paluch, Speciale, Thurow and Chairwoman Parkhurst. Nays: None. Abstentions: none. Motion carried 9 – 0.

4. Discussion –

Discussion relating to the Downtown Plan proposal continued. The topic of parking was discussed and it was agreed that more education is needed as well as better identification of where parking is available. Director Anderson discussed residential densities and how greater density is appropriate in downtown locations.

Commissioner Paluch asked if downtown property owners would be involved. Director Anderson replied that there will be outreach to the owners, as well as a survey to gain their thoughts and observations. He noted that the Economic Development Department has reached out to business owners in the past and has regular meetings to discuss various topics.

Commissioner Speciale stated that it was important to engage others, especially those that are not using the downtown. She also noted that the Farmers Market would be a good place to get opinions on the plan.

Chairwoman Parkhurst noted that the City should look at other successful downtown developers in the Chicago area. They might be willing to discuss what

Commissioner Horrell stated that there is still a misconception that Woodstock was a no growth community but he clarified that we encourage sustainable growth.

Commissioner Moore stated that it was important to look at the competition. Director Anderson encouraged Commissioners to look at “peer cities” with similar downtowns and provide him with input as to what works well in those cities, what they like and dislike. This can be the focus for the discussion at the July meeting.

Adjourn:

Motion by Commissioner Paluch, second by Commissioner Moore, to adjourn this regular meeting of Woodstock Plan Commission to the next regular meeting scheduled for Thursday, May 25, 2017, at 7:00 pm in the Council Chambers at City Hall. Ayes: Besler, Horrell, Fortin, Gavers, Moore, Paluch, Speciale, Thurow, and Chairwoman Parkhurst. Nays: none. Abstentions: none. Motion carried 9-0. Meeting adjourned at 9:57 pm.

http://www.woodstockil.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/plan_commission/meeting/7701/04-27-17_plan_commission.pdf