[4:13] Members of the Commission, the audio is now streaming on the internet.

[4:19] We can't start for another five minutes.

[5:54] Hello.

[5:55] Good evening.

[5:56] Brian.

[5:57] Good.

[5:58] Good evening.

[6:19] I love it.

[6:21] He has a cigarette.

[6:24] First time in a minute.

[6:25] She's so cool.

[6:26] She's so cool.

[6:27] No, no, that's the agenda.

[6:32] That's for you.

[6:35] Yeah, I can do it.

[6:37] You're a little bit nervous.

[6:39] Can you see the presence?

[6:39] And the presence is kind of cute to sign.

[6:42] No, the voice is kind of cute.

[6:44] Oh.

[6:46] You can see the other.

[6:48] Yeah, the other.

[6:50] The action results.

[6:51] We're in the lead count as a checking of the number.

[6:54] Yeah.

[6:54] That's the less, we're in the west.

[6:59] I mean, the walls.

[7:00] I mean, the west roof.

[7:03] We'll be here.

[7:04] I can't wait to get out of the gate.

[7:06] That's the real thing.

[7:07] That's right.

[7:08] For a human's to show you.

[7:10] That's the real thing, right?

[7:11] It's the real thing, right?

[7:20] Well, Nancy's winning big, you know, it's early and it's very tight for, yeah, through

[7:30] That's too close to go.

[7:34] Yeah, you only need to finish.

[7:36] You don't need to beat everybody.

[7:41] Man, what's up?

[7:43] What's up?

[7:44] Hi.

[7:46] Hi.

[7:49] What's up?

[7:50] What's up?

[7:52] What's up?

[7:53] What's up?

[7:54] What's up?

[7:56] What's up?

[7:57] What's up?

[7:58] What's up?

[8:00] I'm not staying that way.

[8:03] I'm not staying that way.

[8:03] All right, I'm checking one more thing and then we're going to start it.

[8:15] I know,

[8:20] I'm thinking I like that idea.

[8:24] I'm trying to help you.

[8:26] Now, if you want to put out some food,

[8:28] I don't think you're going to do this thing.

[8:30] I'm okay with that.

[8:33] Come on, one more, come on, that's to me.

[8:35] Tell me one, thirteen.

[8:37] I'm trying to help you.

[8:39] I'm not here.

[8:44] I'm trying to help you.

[8:47] I'm trying to help you.

[8:49] I'm trying to help you.

[8:52] It's disappointing, but the only need to finish in the four.

[9:00] I like to be fashionably late, it's 7.30.

[9:07] I'm sorry, but what did you go with the picture?

[9:10] I hear by call the April 2nd 2019 meeting of the City of Highland Park Plan and Design Commission, open for business, and I have a roll call please.

[9:30] Yes, Mr. Chairman.

[9:33] Annette Littleer.

[9:34] President.

[9:35] Jenna Pearlstein, Michael Leath, Ben Kutscheid, Adam Glazer, Ernie Ryanstein, Herr, Chairman

[9:44] Hack, Herr, Mr. Chairman, we have a forum.

[9:48] Thank you.

[9:49] First item up for business is approval of the minutes of the last meeting on March 19,

[9:54] 2019.

[9:56] Mr. Chair, as a point of order, through a computer error, these minutes were not included

[9:59] in the packet.

[10:00] They are available for public viewing outside and the meeting had a lot to do is very policy heavy meeting with some zoning text amendments being discussed

[10:08] So if the commission is willing I would I would recommend or ask for a motion to continue the approval of these minutes to the April 16 agenda

[10:17] So that they can post it online and available for public review.

[10:20] I wasn't here.

[10:21] Oh, almost second.

[10:23] All in favor.

[10:24] I

[10:25] Motion carries the approval of those minutes will be continued to the next meeting.

[10:30] I'm just scheduled business, we're, before we begin,

[10:35] a couple of things, one, we have a packed agenda tonight,

[10:38] with this, everybody can see a large,

[10:41] a lot of people that want to speak on all of them,

[10:45] on all the matters really that are on the agenda tonight,

[10:49] in order to keep things moving,

[10:51] I am going to limit the amount of time we spend on each,

[10:55] not that we're going to necessarily vote at the end of that time,

[10:58] But just that everybody gets an opportunity.

[11:03] We're going to move through the agenda fairly quickly.

[11:05] And if we're not done on one item,

[11:07] we will continue to the next one.

[11:09] And also I understand that item number three

[11:12] on the agenda is that the applicant is under some time

[11:15] constraints, so we do want to get to that one tonight

[11:18] at least to open the public hearing.

[11:22] We're going to limit each person to three minutes.

[11:25] I'm also going to ask that we try not to bring in redundant testimony, I understand a lot of you will feel exactly the same way as the person who spoke before you, but I'd ask that just so we can give everybody an opportunity to speak and also to move forward on these items so that the applicants get a decision and at least as timely of a manner as we can.

[11:52] We'll try to limit comments to new to something that hasn't been said so much in the past.

[12:03] But again, we will give everybody an opportunity to be heard within those constraints.

[12:13] Also, under the rules of this commission, the meeting is supposed to end at roughly 1030.

[12:21] As best we can, I'm going to adhere to that just so that we're all respectful of everybody's time and the fact that we have other commitments and so on.

[12:32] That being said, again, I do want to get through as much of the agendas we can and we'll make every effort to do so.

[12:41] I want to thank everybody in advance for just helping us out with that.

[12:46] The, on the agenda itself, we have five items, although the first two relate to the same property, and first three.

[12:57] That's correct, Mr. Chair. The first three item.

[13:00] The minor continuation.

[13:01] And we're helping the situations of a matter that was opened two hearings ago.

[13:09] That's correct. It was open in the first meeting in Mark March, and I'm trying to black as the date that was.

[13:15] but I think it was the stage fifth, right?

[13:18] And at that time, we handled that as a consolidated application.

[13:23] So again, to avoid some redundancy,

[13:25] and we're going to do that again today.

[13:27] So we're going to start with that item,

[13:30] which is items one, two, and three.

[13:33] The continuation of the following public hearings,

[13:36] 18-11-PUD-01, for a special use in the nature

[13:41] plan development for a senior housing facility, public hearing 18-12-REZ-002 for a zoning

[13:51] map amendment that changed the zoning district from I industrial to RM1 medium to high

[13:59] density residential. And then the third is public hearing 18-12-SUP-004 for a special use

[14:08] consideration to allow and nursing home care facility as a conditional land use in the RM1 zoning

[14:15] disk.

[14:18] That public hearing was opened again a month ago, so we'll move directly to our staff

[14:23] presentation.

[14:25] Thank you, Chairman Hect.

[14:26] Good evening.

[14:27] My name is JB Jackson.

[14:28] I'm a planner with the city.

[14:31] So we are talking about 1535 Park Avenue West, the proposed senior living facility.

[14:36] Just to refresh where the site is located, it is on the north side of Park Avenue West directly west of the rail tracks in U.S. 41.

[14:48] A brief overview of the application, the applicant is proposing independent living units, assisted living units, and memory care units.

[14:58] As Chairman Heck said, this is...

[15:00] It's three concurrent public hearings, so they are also requesting a zoning change to downzone the property from a light industrial district to a multi-family residential district and also to allow for a conditional use within that multi-family district.

[15:23] So, brief review of what we've discussed so far back in November. There was a pre-application meeting. The Commission provided feedback and that was used for the presentation on March 5th.

[15:36] After that presentation, there were several questions posed by the Commission and staff has

[15:41] prepared this presentation to go over those additional questions and request for information.

[15:50] So we'll walk through each of these 10 items plus some additional items as well.

[15:55] So first was the market study at the time of the public hearing a march this last time.

[16:00] The applicant had submitted a market study, but the Commission had not had a chance to review

[16:05] that study. So they have that now. In addition, the applicant has included an additional

[16:12] market study. The first one was prepared by CDRE. There were some concerns about

[16:17] conflicts of interest with that. So they have submitted an additional market study by

[16:23] Jones-Langless Health. Both of them essentially say there is unmet demand for senior

[16:28] living facilities.

[16:33] The second area that was discussed was stormwater management. The city

[16:38] Pile and Park staff has confirmed that the initial stormwater proposal submitted meets code

[16:44] requirements.

[16:46] The applicant has since updated that stormwater management program, and they are going to

[16:53] be allowing for increased stormwater that is actually required by code.

[16:59] So, the site will actually be able to handle additional stormwater than what is needed.

[17:08] Again, here's a preview view of that, and the applicant can get in to a little bit more detail.

[17:17] Third item, there's a question about the retaining walls and what those look like.

[17:20] So as you can see on the west side of the property, the side that is facing the properties that are on grained road,

[17:27] there's a retaining wall and a fence that will help screen the parking lot on the west side.

[17:33] Behind that there's also going to be landscaping.

[17:36] on the east side, the side that faces the railroad tracks, they propose a similar design

[17:41] sightly different kinds.

[17:47] There are questions about the delivery schedule and the applicant provided the following

[17:51] information for deliveries and noted that all of these deliveries will be outside of peak traffic

[17:56] hours.

[18:02] In addition, for example, just for the benefit of everybody, we're telling us what the city

[18:07] views is the peak traffic hours.

[18:10] Generally, and I believe it's to the traffic engineers, but generally you're considered

[18:13] rush hour time, so I want to say between seven to nine a.m. in the morning and between

[18:19] four and six p.m. in the evenings. But please traffic people correct me. Similarly,

[18:27] with the facility staffing, there are some questions about how many staff would be there,

[18:32] and again, these staff changes are outside of those peak traffic hours generally.

[18:36] That's the number of that are changing each, that those, I believe that, yes, and the applicant can clarify that.

[18:49] With regard to parking, there were some questions about whether or not the parking that is provided can accommodate special events and holidays.

[19:00] Based on the applicant's experience with this type of development,

[19:04] They have provided these estimations of utilization rates for parking lots, so even on the

[19:12] busiest holidays, they estimate that the lot will not be fully utilized, and on a general basis,

[19:19] they'll be quite a few open parking spaces.

[19:30] There's a question about the cost of development,

[19:32] and some of the numbers around the fiscal analysis. They estimated cost of the development is

[19:36] approximately 40 million at this time and in addition there are some questions about the fiscal analysis as it related to a staff report when we discussed

[19:47] industrial land uses on a separate topic.

[19:50] I just want to clarify that those numbers wouldn't match because they are measuring very separate things.

[19:56] So the fiscal analysis measure the building says value per square foot of the building where the staff report measured tax revenue

[20:04] per square foot of the entire land area.

[20:08] So very different numbers.

[20:10] We as staff use that tax revenue as a comparison for

[20:13] multifamily residential versus industrial.

[20:15] So we use that same methodology.

[20:18] But it wouldn't compare equally to the fiscal analysis.

[20:26] So the applicant provided additional renderings for the

[20:29] site design and character.

[20:31] So there's a better idea of what this might actually look like.

[20:34] For example, from Park Avenue.

[20:36] So if you are looking west at Park Avenue,

[20:40] you can see the before picture or the existing picture

[20:43] on the left-hand side of the screen

[20:44] and the bottom right shows what potentially it would look

[20:47] like with all the landscaping and the development as proposed.

[20:53] Here's another view looking down or looking north

[20:58] at the development from a parent.

[21:06] And again, another view of the site looking north from Povell.

[21:14] The applicant is also submitted these renderings of the night use to show the light shed.

[21:22] As you can see, a lot of the light is not reaching the property line, so it will be mostly contained within the site itself.

[21:34] The applicant is also updated their landscape plan.

[21:36] They've added 53 additional trees to further screen the property.

[21:43] And that includes further screening on the West to protect those neighbors that are on

[21:49] greenish road.

[21:56] Finally, there are some questions about the public benefit.

[21:59] The applicant has agreed to provide a public benefit that includes a sidewalk on the

[22:04] north side of the street in front of the facility, as well as extending that sidewalk to

[22:09] the east to connect to the trail system that is currently there.

[22:13] that includes working with the railroads and city staff to provide all the necessary safety requirements

[22:20] for rail crossings. In addition, we'll get into this in a bit for another requested variation.

[22:26] The applicant has proposed that the storm on our management, which goes above the code requirements,

[22:33] also be included as a public benefit.

[22:39] So that sums up some of the discussion points and

[22:42] questions that we had at the last meeting. There are some other things that staff wanted to add and

[22:47] that the applicant submitted that we wanted to review as well and some revisions to what we're

[22:51] previously submitted. So the first thing is the height. So originally the applicant measured the height

[23:00] of the building from grade. So it was a certain height from where it stood on the ground. However,

[23:07] Our city measures from average grade as planner crosses explain before this is measured from the setbacks of the building

[23:14] So this side is slightly sloped up into a hill, which does change the

[23:20] Measured height of the building

[23:23] But I do want to add that the height of the building as you see it hasn't changed so with regards to the rendering how it's viewed

[23:30] That's remained the same. It's just a matter of how it's measured at this point

[23:34] But that does impact the level of relief.

[23:40] So, this exhibit shows a little bit how that height has changed so you can see how measured from grade.

[23:47] These garages would meet the code, but because the average grade sits below where these garages are sitting.

[23:57] The actual height as measured per average grade is a lot higher.

[24:03] So with that in mind, the entire building has risen as measured from average grade, so the

[24:12] requested relief for height has increased.

[24:15] So previously, only the peaks that are highlighted there were the areas that were requested

[24:21] for relief that go beyond that 35 height limit for the RM-1 district, but now the entire

[24:27] building is above that 35 height limit.

[24:39] The application has gone through fire review, and there's been revision for that, and the latest fire review from a third party consultant has recommended conditional approval, and the conditions are based on reviews for permanent applications.

[24:54] So all that would go through when it goes through permitting.

[24:57] But for now, as far as fire safety goes, it is safe.

[25:04] Staff that it would be important to provide emergency call data, as you recall, the capital

[25:09] senior housing project that went into place and was approved several months ago, included

[25:15] this data, so I just wanted to provide that again, to just give an idea of how many calls

[25:20] for these types of senior living facilities occur on a regular basis.

[25:25] So two senior living facilities that are currently in Highland Park include

[25:29] Silverado and Sunrise.

[25:31] Both of them are solely assisted living in memory care.

[25:35] There are no independent units as proposed in this proposal.

[25:39] On average, there's less than one call a week for emergency services.

[25:45] So you notice nine one one calls those are the super merge.

[25:48] She's generally it's a lot of three one one calls general inquiries things like that.

[25:59] The next component is inclusionary housing.

[26:02] So because this development includes 87 independent living units,

[26:08] they are required to have inclusionary housing per article 21.

[26:13] Now they are proposing to put some of them on site,

[26:16] but the applicant is also requesting that they can pay out of some of them.

[26:21] Now, code requires that all of them are on site.

[26:23] And so they are requesting a variation to allow to put part of them on site and part of them off site.

[26:33] The applicant will work with staff and the housing commission to determine exactly how much that will be.

[26:38] But part of that also includes allowing for those affordable unit bonuses that come with putting housing on site.

[26:47] So again, the numbers have not yet been determined and that will be worked out with staff and the housing commission.

[26:58] With regard to public testimony, there was certainly a lot, and your packet includes several

[27:03] submissions, and those have all been included.

[27:08] After the staff report was submitted, there were additional public testimony letters

[27:13] that were submitted.

[27:14] You have those as is if it's A, B, and C.

[27:18] Generally, the ones that were submitted, and then are included, then staff report

[27:22] are in opposition of this project, the ones that are submitted and before you are for this project.

[27:29] And so it earned support of this project.

[27:33] A couple other things, just want to provide some clarification to ensure that all the facts are straight.

[27:40] There was some testimony about setbacks and how far the parking lot would be on the west side.

[27:45] And now close that would be to the properties on Grange Road.

[27:49] They are, in fact, 16 plus feet from that set back.

[27:55] So they meet code with that regard.

[27:59] There was a comment about Park Avenue needing upgrades,

[28:03] based on a conversation with the deputy fire chief,

[28:07] staff verified with the fire chief,

[28:09] whether or not Park Avenue needed any upgrades,

[28:12] based on that department's view of it, and they verify that no, in fact, they have no

[28:19] statement with regard to Park Avenue needing upgrades. Finally, just want to clarify any

[28:25] confusion about which master planning district, this proposal lies in, it is within the

[28:32] Skoki Highway Court or District. Now, adjacent to it is the Northwest Neighborhood Planning

[28:38] district and that is a very residential oriented district. However, the site is not within that

[28:43] planning district. So those policies do not necessarily apply to this site.

[28:52] So to summarize

[28:53] three-quested zoning relief, the first two are the same as they were before as presented for the

[28:59] side setbacks and those are for the garages and the parking lot on the east side, the side facing

[29:05] the railroad tracks number 3 and 4 have been updated to reflect the revised height and finally

[29:13] article 21 is an additional request for relief for that bifurcation of the inclusionary

[29:20] housing requirement.

[29:25] And with that, I ask that commission, consider the application and have a

[29:31] discussion. The applicant is here to present and answer any questions that you might have as well.

[29:37] Thank you.

[29:38] Mr. Chair, if I may?

[29:40] Just to just be really clear, so in terms of that relief, it's for the bifurcation of the

[29:45] affordable housing in terms of providing some onsite and some offsite, I mean, some onsite

[29:50] and some by payment and loo, and essentially allowing the project to benefit from the market

[29:56] rate unit bonuses for the units that are actually provided on.

[30:02] Right now, the way the code is, is if you do not provide all of the required units on site, you have no market rate unit bonus.

[30:10] So this is the same relief that the commission considered for the al veon at their preliminary application as well.

[30:17] Like how proposal would be made is what that split would look like.

[30:22] I would defer to the applicant, but what I know is that they are looking to do a split and not pay for all of them in lieu as they had originally indicated.

[30:31] In what is the bonus represent to the development?

[30:37] You get a certain number of market rate unit bonuses for every affordable unit that you provide on site.

[30:44] So that allows more units to be built.

[30:48] You could use a market rate unit for us to increase density,

[30:51] or you could use it to essentially,

[30:53] just not increase density, but essentially drive down

[30:57] the percentage of affordable units required.

[31:03] I was confused about this from the staff report,

[31:07] but I understand you to say that the relief

[31:13] It will be tied in only to the number of inclusionary units that they actually build as opposed

[31:22] through those that are counted for with a payment in lieu.

[31:28] Correct.

[31:29] So the really thing, what this would allow is them to receive market rate unit bonuses for

[31:35] the units that they do actually provide on site.

[31:38] Correct.

[31:38] So whatever proportion that is would be proportional to the market rate unit bonuses would

[31:43] personal to whatever they provide. And we have and maybe it's a question for corporation

[31:47] council. We have the the authority to grant that kind of relief under Article 21 based on a split

[31:57] of the inclusionary unit. That's the modification on the code. It's like any other

[32:02] modification that's part of a PUD. You can modify anything but density. It's a standard.

[32:12] There's

[32:12] use conditional in our M1, all of the uses?

[32:17] No, the independent living units are would be by right with the RM1 district.

[32:22] Okay.

[32:27] Any other questions or staff?

[32:32] Thank you.

[32:33] Thank you.

[32:33] We'll hear from the applicant.

[32:43] Thank you.

[32:44] Mrs. Jackson.

[32:45] Mr. Chair, members of the Commission and staff.

[32:47] I'm Brady Hamilton with Tramil Crow Company.

[32:51] I appreciate the opportunity to share the updates we've made to our proposed projects

[32:56] since our last presentation on March 5th.

[33:00] We heard the questions and concerns

[33:02] that came from the commission as well,

[33:03] as the public during that meeting

[33:05] and Mrs. Jackson, her presentation,

[33:07] covered several key updates to the project.

[33:11] We've made sense and an effort to address these

[33:13] to help describe these changes.

[33:15] I would like to go into a bit further detail

[33:18] on the following topics.

[33:20] First, the building and garage height.

[33:24] Next, excuse me.

[33:24] uh... next the storm water management topic that she covered

[33:28] third

[33:29] a brief review of the market study the most recent one that was provided by jl

[33:35] next and updated summary of our public benefits proposal

[33:39] following that a review of the results of the fiscal study that was commissioned by

[33:44] testa and independently verified by the city

[33:46] and for the next topic on operations and an invite joe micklitch of legros senior living

[33:52] up to discuss operational concerns we've heard during previous meetings and then to conclude

[33:57] all summarized feedback we've received during this process as well as our efforts to address

[34:02] these concerns along with the comparison of the proposed project and alternative uses permitted

[34:08] under the light industrial zoning code. So starting with height is Mrs. Jackson shared in her

[34:14] presentation we've reduced the height of the accessory garage structures on the east side of the

[34:19] property but not the primary structure. And as she went into great detail and I won't go into further detail, the calculation is all that changed.

[34:27] The building itself has not changed. In previous hearings we have provided shadow studies and shading studies.

[34:34] Those studies also have not changed by virtue of what's been revealed in the time since the last hearing.

[34:41] And in all cases during three times a day and several seasons during the year, our proposed project and its design and height does not shadow any adjacent property structures.

[34:55] Mr. Hamilton, you're still asking for significant height relief over seven feet of height relief as it's now measured.

[35:02] What efforts have you made to minimize the amount of height relief that you need?

[35:11] Very good point and one that I'd like to mention, part of that height relief that we're requesting is actually an aesthetic design feature in several portions of the building.

[35:21] So the height relief reflects the fact that in certain areas of the building we've extended the fenestration of the building to provide that aesthetic design relief.

[35:30] Outside of that, we haven't based on the way that the buildings constructed, designed,

[35:36] prototypically for this use, we aren't able to reduce it by a full floor.

[35:42] And so our intention when beginning with the light industrial zone and guidance of 45 feet

[35:47] working to try and create an alternative use that had lower intensity.

[35:52] We worked with RM1 with the aesthetic design features really being the primary source of relief.

[35:58] we were requesting and in the meeting since we discovered that the calculation around the

[36:03] three corners as it turns out on this site as opposed to four at the setback is where

[36:09] that calculation was deemed to be drawn and we have not changed the project since our March

[36:16] fifth hearing with the exception to the accessory broad structures which we have reduced

[36:21] in height.

[36:22] Right, I heard you say that, but if it's the aesthetics that we're talking about, can you

[36:26] to find out how much we're talking about.

[36:28] It's going to be difficult to perceive,

[36:34] but this area is 38 feet, 4 inches or less.

[36:40] These aesthetic design features go

[36:45] up to in the middle, 42, 4, 40 feet, 8 inches, 39 feet,

[36:51] 10 inches.

[36:53] So, at the flat roof condition, which we could maintain throughout the project, we just

[36:59] think it would not allow us to take advantage of the aesthetic design features in the code

[37:04] as an opportunity to address the perspective that the building creates on neighboring properties

[37:14] as well as Park Avenue. We couldn't keep it at 384 and then I request for relief. I believe

[37:20] if I'm calculating this correctly, Mr. Cross, Mrs. Jackson would be three feet four inches.

[37:28] Now, all of a sudden, you're sound reasonable.

[37:35] We're going to be somewhat reluctant up here to grant height relief for aesthetics.

[37:40] I mean, if you tell us that you can't possibly build your structure as an operational

[37:44] matter without this height relief, it's one thing.

[37:48] But to come in and ask the commission for this kind of height relief over seven feet

[37:51] based on aesthetics, that's a tough sell.

[37:53] Yeah, and I want to know about this at the last hearing, the calculation, discrepancy.

[37:59] We certainly would have addressed this at the March 5th hearing.

[38:02] This was determined in the time since, as we were continuing to work through the comments and

[38:06] feedback that we received from staff that we disclosed or discovered.

[38:11] And so we haven't had an opportunity before the public or before this body to address alternatives.

[38:18] I think the alternative that I just presented as one that we certainly would be wanted to consider.

[38:22] and it certainly wouldn't minimize the request.

[38:24] It would still be beneath the 45 feet

[38:26] that's permissible under the light and industrial zoning,

[38:29] not that we're using that as a guide,

[38:31] but that's what we interpret it at this site

[38:34] when we first pursued it and perceived its ability

[38:37] to be considered for an alternative less intense use.

[38:41] I understand.

[38:41] I'm not going to fingers, but since you've had

[38:44] a very short time to get used to the actual measurement

[38:47] from grade, you know, it is something

[38:49] that you may want to think about for us.

[38:53] Also along those lines, one of the letters from the constituents and from the neighbors also suggested flat roofs, as a possible way of keeping down the height, and said that that might be more aesthetically acceptable in light of the height.

[39:11] So I do think it's a very good point to consider.

[39:13] One other thing is that the finished floor elevation in the building is five feet above what is ground level now.

[39:24] And I understand that that's where you're getting your detention requirement by bumping the entire building up by feet.

[39:34] And that's also causing some aesthetic concerns around the edges, so that's kind of all ruling

[39:42] together.

[39:45] But I'm just pointing that out.

[39:48] The good news is that I could practice here this evening, so we can certainly try and address

[39:52] some of this in greater detail on that specific point.

[39:55] If necessary, I'd be more than happy to introduce into the commissioners to see if there's

[40:01] any dialogue.

[40:01] and particularly with staff as it relates to my calculation of what that revised relief request would be.

[40:09] This image before you just reflects the accessory garage structures again, we reduce the height of those as measured by two feet.

[40:19] And one of the highest groundwater management, we'll understand that this is a more

[40:25] full concern for the most closely affected neighbors and particularly the residents

[40:29] along Grange Road.

[40:31] And before I allow proposed design, we'll enhance the current stormwater management efficiency.

[40:37] I'd like to first explain how the site tools drawn around for our events of any volume today.

[40:43] As the site exists today, there's essentially a natural topographic ridge that starts up in the northeast corner and kind of extends down the site in this fashion.

[41:00] So, during a large rain event and of course there is no detention other than the drainage swales and drainage ditches that exist.

[41:08] During a heavy rain event, 5.65 acres of this 7.5 acres site, currently drained of the west,

[41:18] which definitely in heavier rainfall events comes in conflict or in competition with rainwater that could be surface draining from the west from those properties to the west.

[41:30] The remaining 1.8 acres on the east side of that natural ridge

[41:35] drains to the east into the drainage ditch that's part of the railroad right of way.

[41:43] So, during the design process for this project we certainly began to consider the codes applicable for development

[41:51] not just in Highland Park, but Lake County as well to determine the thresholds for on-site stormwater storage and release rates.

[41:57] In our case, the proposed project design, see if I can get to that, the proposed project design

[42:07] will allow the project to meaningfully exceed code as Mrs. Jackson reported by providing volume

[42:13] control on site that accommodates the storage of an additional 29,326 gallons of storm

[42:21] than code requires or 80% above code.

[42:24] This will serve as a public benefit really in two ways.

[42:28] First, all the storm water on site that will be collected from the impervious surfaces that will be adding as a part of this project.

[42:36] We'll be directed towards these basins up here.

[42:40] And in heavier rain events, the volume will be retained and the release will be controlled by way of these detention systems.

[42:47] So that it doesn't tax the off-site storm sewer infrastructure, but also by doing this, we've really changed the ratios of relationship of any pervious surface runoff.

[43:03] On the west, we now have less than an acre that really works to use the drainage swales on the western side of the property. The balance of the site will be working within this system.

[43:13] hand to the drainage ditches on the eastern property adjacent to the railroad right of

[43:22] weight.

[43:23] So I need to spot the impression that any development on this site would worsen the

[43:28] already challenged storm water conditions.

[43:31] We believe that this solution actually will enhance those storm water management conditions.

[43:38] Moving on, I'd like to address the JLL market study very briefly on the screen is

[43:43] essentially an excerpt from their conclusion it was some comment made in the last hearing that

[43:50] as Mrs. Jackson pointed out a conflict of interest may exist JLL and CBRE are both

[43:55] globally recognized commercial real estate services firms that are actually competitors

[43:59] and the conclusions drawn by JLL study very much mirror the conclusions drawn by CBREs

[44:07] to point out what JLL's study suggests is that the primary market area defined to be five miles

[44:14] from this location. In 2021, we'll have unmet demand for 355, including this project, by the way,

[44:22] including existing product and including others that are underway or planned. The primary market area

[44:29] will have unmet demand in 2021 for 355 independent living units, 295 assisted living units,

[44:36] in 247 memory carry units.

[44:40] CBREs forecast essentially reported similar findings.

[44:44] We reviewed some of those in the last hearing.

[44:46] I won't go through those again.

[44:48] And I think any each independent study we presented

[44:50] the conclusion is consistent that there is a need in this community

[44:54] to help address the needs of the aging population.

[44:57] We mentioned this last time.

[44:58] It's important.

[44:59] I mentioned again.

[45:00] I think that this will be the only project in Island Park that will contain independent living units, assisted living units, and memory carry units all in one facility.

[45:10] So that's a distinction from some of the other projects that you've seen recently or already have in town.

[45:18] In the time since our last hearing, we've also modified the public benefits we're providing to the city as a part of this proposal.

[45:25] I've just mentioned in detail the storm that I won't go through that again, but that certainly is among them, and then as was pointed out, our sidewalk extension proposal to bring

[45:36] along the north side of Park Avenue from that property all the way over to the railroad right away and then working closely with the city and staff

[45:44] to engage with railroad authority to create a crossing with what hopes to be able to allow the neighborhood better access to that recreational trail.

[45:53] Next, I think at this point it's important, I'm going to review the fiscal study that was submitted as a part of the proposal, but I do want to make clear that we're not characterizing he's his public benefits.

[46:08] I just think that they are relevant in the consideration of the request for the zoning map amendment for light industrial to RM1.

[46:16] As Northern and the fiscal study, this project, which, by the way, the fiscal studies

[46:19] are requirement of us, we don't control the fiscal study, we provide it.

[46:25] The all we do is provide the number of units in the type of housing and the name gauge

[46:28] with staff in their fulfillment of that study.

[46:33] As Northern and the fiscal study, the project will contribute the following to the city and

[46:37] in school districts and that's mentioned other taxing bodies.

[46:39] The proposed project requires us to pay an up front fee of about $443,000 based on current

[46:46] calculations for city school park and library fees, while generating, of course, no additional

[46:53] burden to the school system.

[46:56] By way, this project, none of that permitted light industrial uses that have been outlined

[47:00] in Mrs. Jackson's presentation and staff report would be obligated to pay the same fee.

[47:06] It's also worth noting that the availability of these proposed units will allow current age and

[47:11] residents within Halen Park to remain in Halen Park, sell their single family homes and

[47:16] and allow new families to enter the community.

[47:21] This will currently generate, this is going to be a little difficult to read, I apologize,

[47:25] but the site currently generates $45,000 a year in property taxes.

[47:29] And that's for operational and stabilized our proposed project is projected by TASCA Associates

[47:35] again the author of the fiscal study to generate over $600,000 per year in taxes.

[47:41] Over 10-year period, this amounts to just under $2.6 million, or a district 112, just under

[47:49] $2 million for a district 113 and just under $500,000 for the city of Highland Park.

[47:55] And this doesn't include revenue that would be generated for additional taxing bodies, such

[48:00] as the Library of Pension Funds in Lake County.

[48:04] The inclusionary housing topic also came up.

[48:07] We did come to the March 5th hearing requesting full payment in lieu of those and we are

[48:12] working with staff in the housing commission to bifurcate that requirement both on site

[48:17] and in fee in lieu and I think much has been discussed of that.

[48:21] So I will now introduce Joe McLish, who is before we start.

[48:25] So over that, we didn't get a breakdown.

[48:26] Are you in any position to talk about a breakdown on the inclusionary housing?

[48:32] We haven't had the discussion with what has commissioned out a difference in respect for

[48:36] this step in the process, but our expectation is to advocate that requirement we're committed

[48:42] to that.

[48:43] We are still asking for the article 21 variation as a function of splitting it and not providing

[48:48] all on site, but our offer would be to provide is close to 50% of those on site as possible.

[48:58] that's roughly what you're targeting for you know and we haven't had a conversation with

[49:02] the housing commission yet out of reference for the step in the process we have certainly

[49:07] with staff and and and that would be the approach we'd like to take and

[49:13] uh...

[49:14] across the ask you have

[49:16] don't we get a report from the housing commission after they've had a discussion

[49:20] yes often yes the uh...

[49:23] The Housing Commission will often provide a report to the Plan and Design Commission

[49:26] if the timing works out that will play a part with meeting dates and they will come

[49:32] to them.

[49:33] The Plan and Design Commission is part of the preliminary recommendation.

[49:36] Director?

[49:36] Yeah.

[49:37] Mr. Chairman, the 2108 required fine, the 2108 is the section of code with regard to alternative

[49:47] means of compliance that has that requires that there is a recommendation from the House

[49:53] commission that then goes to the City Council at a minimum. It frequently does come to the commission,

[50:00] but not necessarily. Yes. Okay. Sounds like it would be helpful if we had that before we went

[50:06] forward on this. The request for relief doesn't, it has no varying on that. It's a question of whether or

[50:12] not even want for whatever units provided on site that the market rate unit bonuses be proportionally

[50:19] apply to those units. That's that's all it would be. Doesn't specify the number of units or anything

[50:26] that's all. I'd add it for $2,000,000. I don't think $2,000. I understand, but it would, you know,

[50:31] in terms of gaining a level of comfort with this, if we turns out that they're going to comply,

[50:36] you know, with 5% of the inclusionary housing versus 50% you know, by having the units on site,

[50:42] it might make some folks more comfortable or less comfortable. To the commission.

[50:49] Do we have any, do we know when the housing commission is,

[50:54] we'd be discussing this?

[50:57] We're at a preliminary stage now.

[50:59] The housing commission is not taking this up yet,

[51:01] but we need to get the application from the applicant,

[51:06] plenary app, and it will be scheduled for meeting.

[51:09] They meet monthly.

[51:10] So their next meeting is tomorrow night.

[51:12] It is not.

[51:12] It's not going to happen tomorrow.

[51:14] That's my knowledge.

[51:15] No, unless I've missed something.

[51:17] That's tomorrow night.

[51:17] Okay, and next month I would

[51:21] three to the applicant, Mr. Chairman.

[51:24] I don't I don't have possession of that.

[51:27] So that's enough of them.

[51:29] They'll pose that question.

[51:30] When do you plan to have those discussions?

[51:35] I would like to move to that step next.

[51:37] As quickly as we can, based on the support of this commission.

[51:42] As to the approach that we've suggested,

[51:43] and I'd be more than comfortable having

[51:45] some guidelines on that approach to the point that Commissioner Glazer made, 5%

[51:50] different than 50. We certainly are willing to move forward with some expectation on

[51:55] the part of this commission to have that meeting and then report back, following the

[51:59] housing commission presentation that we have.

[52:03] Be waiting for guidance from us, I think.

[52:05] Yeah. I would say a good rule of thumb is a closer you get to 100 the better,

[52:11] but I don't think we need to tell you that. Okay. So, but I'll, if anybody else wants to comment,

[52:17] I'm going to let them do that.

[52:21] There we go.

[52:22] Again, at this stage of the presentation, I'll deal with some of the operational concerns

[52:26] that have been raised by both the commission and members of the public in previous hearings.

[52:32] I'd like to invite John McClish, senior vice president with a legroom senior living.

[52:36] He's going to talk about staffing, parking deliveries and emergency visits to the properties.

[52:42] Well, as I answer any other questions, the commission may have as it relates to the operational

[52:45] details of the project.

[52:53] John McLitch, I work for Allegro Senior Living at 212, South Central Avenue, St. Louis,

[53:00] Missouri, 63105.

[53:06] Just a little bit of background on Allegro.

[53:09] We are a part of the love companies.

[53:11] Love companies are a private family-owned business that's been in operation since the 1800s,

[53:17] based on St. Louis.

[53:18] start out in banking and financing, got into development in the mid 1900s and anticipated

[53:26] the silver tsunami as you are here referred to today as the aging demographic trends in

[53:32] this country and in the late 1990s focused in on senior housing and we started out in Northern

[53:40] Florida, again based on demographics and need, and really focused in on a little bit of a

[53:49] different model. I know you have several assisted living communities in Highland Park already.

[53:58] Sunrise, Silverado, Capital Center Housing, are all very reputable high quality firms.

[54:05] What makes us a little bit different is the focus on a continuum of care model.

[54:10] and including the independent living, and that's more of what we consider to be a social model.

[54:16] It's a luxury, it's not a need. What it allows the local residents is it's a housing option

[54:24] that is maintenance-free, allows residents to downside and enjoy the dining, the housekeeping,

[54:32] the amenities that we provide on site, and it also provide transportation, which is key. A lot of times

[54:40] A decision to move into one of our community's communities is based on a realization that driving is no longer a good idea.

[54:51] So we have town cars and we have bus transportation.

[54:56] The town cars will drive our residents anywhere within a 10 mile radius of our communities for no charge.

[55:03] That's for all doctors, shopping, whatever our residents need.

[55:06] is just reserved ahead of time, and we're there.

[55:09] And then we also provide regular scheduled transportation

[55:13] for shopping, events, and the like.

[55:17] So you'll hear us, and you'll hear the traffic engineer talk

[55:20] about our low impact on roadways, and that's a big reason

[55:25] why.

[55:27] We really want to provide a completely maintenance free lifestyle

[55:32] for our residents.

[55:35] That's where you will see half of our units over half in this case are independent living.

[55:39] We do provide separate living space for the independent living assisted living.

[55:45] Obviously, memory care residents are in a separate lockdown secured portion of the building.

[55:51] And this gives our residents peace of mind that as they age, they won't need to move off site to get additional services.

[56:00] So they can move in with us when they're independent living appropriate.

[56:04] They don't need any assistance with their activities of daily living.

[56:09] But then as their physical needs increase,

[56:14] then they can move into our assisted living neighborhood

[56:16] and have all the care that they need.

[56:18] And then, finally, if there's any mental deterioration,

[56:22] we do have the secure memory care unit for residents that have Alzheimer's.

[56:28] So that's just a difference between when LeGro would bring tile and park versus what the existing

[56:35] communities provide today.

[56:38] We did talk a little bit about staffing.

[56:41] I would estimate around 130 employees total, a lot of them are going to be part-timers.

[56:47] We have to do a lot of variable staffing to meet our current resident pools needs and any given

[56:54] point you could have a set of residents that are highly functioning and we would have less care

[57:00] staff and other times. If they're aging in place we could need more care staff to handle

[57:05] all of our residents' needs. But I would say that at that slide that we saw earlier that was

[57:11] just talking about the care staff. We do have frontline administrators. We have housekeepers,

[57:21] maintenance people, but our peak our shift is going to be week day, day time shift. That's

[57:27] 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. and we might have around 40 employees on shift at that time of day.

[57:36] As mentioned, we do shift to start our shifts at non-peak traffic hours.

[57:41] So one shift goes from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m., one goes from 3 p.m. to 11 p.m.

[57:51] and then

[57:51] And that is more of a skeleton fruit.

[57:53] We will still have a nurse on site 24-7, in case there are any emergencies.

[57:59] But through the night you might see 10 to 15 employees.

[58:05] Parking, I noticed, has come up, you know, in our experience,

[58:10] we have always been thrilled with a one-to-one parking ratio.

[58:15] That slide shows that very few of our residents continue to drive once they move on sight

[58:21] and see the transportation options that we provide.

[58:24] Your car for a lot of people can still be a symbol of independence, so a lot of residents want to still keep their car on site and they'll just sit in the parking lot for the most part.

[58:35] Beyond that, even if you factor in staff and guests, we should have plenty of parking with the 190 spaces that are proposed.

[58:47] And, you know, peak visit times are on weekends and holidays in particular, in those cases

[58:55] where we think there could be some need for overflow parking.

[58:59] We've always partnered with a local church, a school, or a country club, somewhere that

[59:04] doesn't have that traffic volume on those holidays.

[59:08] And then we will use our bus to shuttle visitors and residents to and from those parking

[59:14] lots to our community.

[59:16] so there should be no need for street parking or anything, we will not be parking on the

[59:23] side streets around this community. We have more than sufficient parking on this current

[59:29] site plan. I know we've also talked about deliveries. I don't have much to add beyond what is

[59:37] shown up there. We do have regular deliveries mostly for food but also for maintenance for

[59:43] linens but you know you're talking about no more than one delivery per day and we always work with

[59:49] the local vendors to make sure that we're not adding to peak our traffic times. What about sleeping

[1:00:01] Well, you have to keep in mind that, you know, we have, you know, we'll have a lot of residents that are also very demanding, you know, none of our, our communities, our, you know, our communities like ours are going to be cheap. So we, we have, you know, very sensitive residents as well. So we do not have deliveries come at all hours of the day.

[1:00:25] You know, traps is picked up, you know, pretty much in the same time as the rest of the community.

[1:00:31] But we really try to avoid any disruptions, especially through nighttime hours.

[1:00:35] So we will work with our vendors to try to schedule, you know, probably mid-morning deliveries.

[1:00:41] And it's my assumption that when the trucks pull in, they go, drive all the way down the west side,

[1:00:49] and loop around to the east side and then back into the loading dock and then out.

[1:00:55] Yes, is that the traffic movement?

[1:00:58] That's right.

[1:01:00] And the receiving area is on the eastern side of the building away from the residents.

[1:01:06] So our building should act as a screen to those deliveries coming in and any idling trucks.

[1:01:13] They should also provide a buffer for the noise.

[1:01:15] As well as the refuse.

[1:01:18] And then if a ambulance were to come to your facility, how would that happen?

[1:01:24] Well, we also, you know, I saw the data and I can't argue with that.

[1:01:28] I would just point out that we draw a lot of our residents from a close proximity to our communities.

[1:01:34] I guess I'm interested in when the ambulance pulls up, how does that happen?

[1:01:39] Right, and if it's a real life or death emergency, we need to get them in the main entrance,

[1:01:43] the closest point to Lake Avenue, so they would be pulled up under the port to share.

[1:01:51] But we also, again, that's a similar situation where an ambulance could be very disruptive

[1:01:55] to our residents.

[1:01:57] So we will always work with the local EMS to try to ask them to cut sirens to cut lights

[1:02:04] for they get close to our property.

[1:02:07] And typically, they'll do that as long as there's not traffic, and they don't need to actually

[1:02:10] your cars out of their way to get to our property.

[1:02:14] And if we can work with them, if it isn't a real emergency, then we would also like to

[1:02:19] direct them to that same back of house area to again disrupt resident lifestyle as little

[1:02:26] as possible.

[1:02:33] So, but you know, along those lines, I mean, I do think that we would be, you know, impacting

[1:02:37] EMS but we've worked closely with all of the ambulance and fire departments around our

[1:02:45] communities and we've heard some interesting stories because we draw our residents from

[1:02:51] such a close proximity to our site. It's not necessarily that all those calls that you see

[1:02:56] coming from our communities are added to the infrastructures adding to the burden because a lot

[1:03:05] Sometimes if you have a resident living in a single family home in their 80s or 90s, if there's

[1:03:12] any accidents, slip, whatever, even in some cases, it's loneliness.

[1:03:19] One of the fire departments that we work with in Florida is that they get the most calls

[1:03:23] of the year on Mother's Day.

[1:03:24] And a lot of times, it's a non-emergency call that somebody just needs somebody to talk

[1:03:29] to.

[1:03:30] We have a professional staff nursing around the clock.

[1:03:34] So some of these more minor incidents that are resident that's in a single-family home

[1:03:38] would have to call 911.

[1:03:40] We actually have trained staff members on site to help them and it's only the real emergency

[1:03:46] calls that actually get made and are generating calls to our communities.

[1:03:53] So that's really a brief overview.

[1:03:58] I've, you know, quite more information if you want it, but I think that covers the main concerns

[1:04:05] that I was alerted to.

[1:04:07] So if you have any other questions, I'd be happy to answer that.

[1:04:10] I just looking at your utilization figures for really for independent living.

[1:04:19] How did you determine a 30% utilization rate?

[1:04:22] It was polling all of our existing communities that have independent living and to really

[1:04:27] look at some of our residents, all of our residents that have a car on site register that car

[1:04:34] with us. So we know who's cars in our parking lot. So that was more an informal pull of

[1:04:40] all of our communities. We have 18 operating communities right now and I'd say maybe 12 or 13

[1:04:46] of them have independent living. Okay, and you didn't, there isn't some sort of national standard

[1:04:56] for that. It's right in line with the nation.

[1:04:59] This is eight, it's 12, that's not that many. Right. And I don't know how nationally

[1:05:06] independent living facilities, and even more so those that have assisted living in, memory

[1:05:13] care, and the same site, but they have a determined those utilization rates. I have no idea

[1:05:21] personally, it just seems off of load of me.

[1:05:23] That, I mean, it's a little bit more dependent living or only 30% of them are going to have cars.

[1:05:29] And it could be correct.

[1:05:29] I just was wondering how you came up, how that was calculated and the methodology behind it.

[1:05:35] We can provide some numbers on that and actually provide a chart with showing each community and how many of the IL residents have a car.

[1:05:45] I could tell you, one of our projects had a point eight to one parking space to UNIT ratio and it wasn't enough.

[1:05:52] We actually had to lease the parking lot across the street to get those extra 30 or 40 spaces to get that one to one ratio.

[1:06:01] So we have enough of a track record to be very comfortable with the amount of parking on this site plan being sufficient for our needs.

[1:06:12] What according to that? It means the 50% on memory care am I reading this correctly?

[1:06:23] No, no, nobody in memory care is driving.

[1:06:26] No, no.

[1:06:27] Not exactly in a bad driving.

[1:06:28] We're not there.

[1:06:29] I'm just saying that 50% of your residents are either in independent living or assisted living,

[1:06:36] hurting to 13 to 20.

[1:06:37] Am I broke of 50?

[1:06:38] No.

[1:06:39] No, no, no.

[1:06:40] No, no, no.

[1:06:40] It's just saying that 30% of the independent living and 20% of this, the living,

[1:06:46] have a car. Yeah, I'm saying, okay, that's what I wanted.

[1:06:53] What's the age of independent living?

[1:06:57] Our average resident is 84 years old when they move in with us. That's a video.

[1:07:05] Isn't it really just more assisted living in? Well, it still, it comes down to the physical well-being.

[1:07:13] I mean, every resident when they move in with us has to get assessed to make sure we understand

[1:07:19] their physical needs, so you really do have to come in needing no assistance in your day-to-day

[1:07:26] life to be able to qualify for independent living.

[1:07:32] Okay, I mean, I appreciate the clarification I was, I thought, have been dependent living

[1:07:36] as being independent.

[1:07:38] I've been your camera around doing your own shopping.

[1:07:40] But that doesn't work.

[1:07:40] my contribution.

[1:07:43] Our independent looking risen age has gone up about five years over the last 10 years.

[1:07:49] So it's gone from average to age of 80 when I moved into with us to 85.

[1:07:53] And I think it's really a sign of people taking better care of themselves and medicinal

[1:07:58] improvements.

[1:08:01] Thanks.

[1:08:01] Thank you.

[1:08:04] And if I also just go to, I saw in the pack, if you were discussing the number of

[1:08:10] employees, yep, you have sort of shift changes, I think the highest number you have is eight.

[1:08:16] Right, and that was just care staff. Right. So we have, you know, many of the employees that are there through the day,

[1:08:23] didn't know that as much it really is just, you know, receptionist, maintenance people are on site, the care staff is on site.

[1:08:31] The tournament day, you have a lot more activity, housekeepers, winners,

[1:08:36] chef, kitchen staff, marketers, executive director, so

[1:08:42] I said, thank you. Your peak shift is going to be right around 40 employees

[1:08:47] with that community this size. Okay, and how many of those would change?

[1:08:52] I guess the peak shift change would be 3 p.m., and so that would be 40 people

[1:08:58] coming in 40 people though, is that doesn't, you've got staff max and shift change of 50.

[1:09:08] I'm gonna seem, at least for a short period of time, it's really 80.

[1:09:12] 40 that haven't left yet, and 40 that are getting there, and they're gonna do this, but

[1:09:17] there is for some short period of time, it's not 50's 80.

[1:09:23] Right, you have 40 leaving, 40 entering the size.

[1:09:26] eight sounded awfully low right yeah every carry in it but 40 makes a little bit more

[1:09:32] stand right

[1:09:35] can

[1:09:41] I just two quick questions one is more of a statement the in terms of the hours the

[1:09:48] care staff hours it may be worth checking with the hospital because I think that may

[1:09:54] line up I'm looking at a net because I think we talked about this with the high school

[1:09:59] traffic and parking situation, but those look to me like the hours of the hospital shift

[1:10:04] changes.

[1:10:05] Exactly.

[1:10:06] Okay.

[1:10:08] And that is just down the road.

[1:10:11] I don't know how many of those people travel across the highway, but it may be worth

[1:10:16] staggering those hours a little bit from the hospital.

[1:10:18] And the hospital my recollection was unbending.

[1:10:23] There was no possibility of changing their shift hours.

[1:10:26] So, that's one thing to consider, and my question is, in terms of people having care

[1:10:34] private caregivers, does that happen, and how is that accommodated in terms of your parking?

[1:10:41] It's described, we really believe in the care that we provide, but in some cases there

[1:10:47] might be a couple that want to stay independent living, and one of the spouses will need

[1:10:52] care so we will allow personal care staff to come in in those cases.

[1:10:59] Again, you know, that would be included in the guest estimate.

[1:11:05] Because we do have a few other, you know, every so often, you know, we'll have a visiting doctor

[1:11:11] come in and we'll have a therapist come in and we do have a few other vendors that are on

[1:11:18] like the hair salon out there on staff. So that is included in the staff number, but the

[1:11:24] personal care would be incorporated by the gas dumper.

[1:11:32] Any other questions?

[1:11:36] Thank you.

[1:11:37] Thank you.

[1:11:39] I would ask and I would kind of had a target of on this matter of an hour.

[1:11:46] Yep.

[1:11:47] We're getting close to that and we didn't start right at 7.30.

[1:11:51] just and I know the public would like to do that and I appreciate that was a really helpful

[1:11:59] discussion because there has been a lot of concern and question related about our relations.

[1:12:05] I'm just going to say a couple of additional pieces of feedback we've received through the

[1:12:10] course of this process and how we've worked to address them. The first we've talked about

[1:12:14] I'm trying to share in the box that I'm trying to pick pad, which are these illustrations in the past.

[1:12:22] This used by comparison to other rubber, permitted uses, all of the light and industrial zone on the street.

[1:12:28] More about fewer varied trips, as well as fewer pit trips or proposed development being on the far left in both cases.

[1:12:38] for total damage at the MP strip.

[1:12:42] Peep period trips, excuse me.

[1:12:45] I don't think it's important to take care of cohorts,

[1:12:48] but consideration is just what those alternatives

[1:12:51] uses could look like in a proposal that could

[1:12:53] come forth to this question.

[1:12:55] I'm going to start off first.

[1:12:57] I don't know if you've been through this last second

[1:12:59] and in front of our distribution

[1:13:02] of our hospitality that could come forth.

[1:13:06] But that's what I'm concerned for, I don't know if we're going to start learning this

[1:13:10] next time.

[1:13:11] I'm going to add a sign to the file from the rest of your protocol that they've in the

[1:13:15] last turn.

[1:13:16] The retention line in this sense material is a tale of the help of the head rights from the

[1:13:22] rest of your property line from ever following a well-earned, ill-tuned, legalized

[1:13:27] properties and running out to as an offset to that.

[1:13:30] That's what's kind of the plan for all that that looks like.

[1:13:34] around that sort of transmissions and reflect the bus route of 50-20 seconds since the last

[1:13:39] turn.

[1:13:40] The route going in turns are reflected as well from the last hearing.

[1:13:45] And what we did is we run across the part of it, the part of it, found as well as this natural

[1:13:50] buffer.

[1:13:51] So, all the dirt going in turns are better preserved, so there's a lot of material to

[1:13:54] do.

[1:13:55] We're out on additional work green turns in addition to that fact that I just showed in

[1:13:59] I'll show you the hotel now and as well the way design preserve all the stuff of that way in your

[1:14:07] providing any spill-off how many trees are you are we losing I have to defer to our

[1:14:14] subordinates not question would be happy to do that in the hundreds sure do you have a sense

[1:14:20] for that in the place in the hundreds correct

[1:14:30] excellent excuse to step up to the

[1:14:34] input.

[1:14:42] You know, it can you just see the appointment address for the

[1:14:44] I don't know what I'm going to do. Grow up with Kim Lee Horne and my

[1:14:46] landscape architect on the project is one thousand one Warrenville

[1:14:53] Road by all.

[1:14:57] Grow, GROVEE.

[1:15:00] So, in a practical tunnel, where I take note of both of the two trails that we're taking down for good forestry practices. These are ones that are, we had a, we worked with a certified obrist on this project and work closely with the village forest of the city forester.

[1:15:20] And so there's a number of trees that we're taking down that are in poor condition or poor quality trees.

[1:15:25] We're trying to preserve as many as possible of the trees that are creating a buffer and

[1:15:32] creating character on the site where we can.

[1:15:35] So there are a lot of energy over those trees that are out here and now additional trees that we're

[1:15:39] removing that are protected. So those are ones that we are being

[1:15:43] we will have to provide replacement quantity for.

[1:15:48] Does that answer the question?

[1:15:49] And then I'll go back in.

[1:15:52] We are adding in

[1:16:03] the 936 replacement trees in total.

[1:16:07] The rest of the replacement value will be three in love.

[1:16:11] And in addition to that, we have about 40 additional trees in addition to those 136.

[1:16:24] So about 176 trees total.

[1:16:26] So the 109 part of 136?

[1:16:30] The 100.

[1:16:31] Yeah.

[1:16:32] You said you had to ever play.

[1:16:34] He said there's 106.

[1:16:36] You put it in.

[1:16:38] And he said there were 109.

[1:16:40] That he could just take me out from 107 to leave.

[1:16:43] He had to put in.

[1:16:44] Of 109 parts of the new version.

[1:16:48] We're going to have to protect the tries you have to put.

[1:16:51] From the side to the side.

[1:16:53] To the front.

[1:16:54] I'm sorry if I'm...

[1:16:55] Great.

[1:16:56] So that is the 16th.

[1:16:59] That's fine.

[1:17:00] Thank you.

[1:17:03] So, what do you mean?

[1:17:04] No, I mean.

[1:17:08] There's a lot of trees that you know.

[1:17:10] A lot of trees are there.

[1:17:12] And a lot of trees have shrines and lands and falls of sepany leaves.

[1:17:19] So, the 16th is 109, or 305, or anything.

[1:17:23] Six?

[1:17:23] Well, I think so.

[1:17:30] This is a total

[1:17:40] number of trees on the site that are going to be coming down.

[1:17:48] And then tell us how many of those are trees which were placement in the view.

[1:17:57] Yes.

[1:18:15] Yes.

[1:18:33] This is total.

[1:18:34] 182.

[1:18:35] So hundred and seventy two we're going out and a hundred and eighty two are coming.

[1:18:40] Okay.

[1:19:08] one slide please. Sure. I think that's, no, forward. That slide to me is very

[1:19:16] deceptive. Is your looking at different seasons?

[1:19:24] We will certainly be happy to try and locate a future we haven't had the ability to

[1:19:31] find a take a picture in a season other than the one we're in, but we're certainly

[1:19:38] same season and could have had two slides in the packet that show different seasons.

[1:19:44] I could see the same season.

[1:19:46] But that was actually the one image that was hard for us to perceive.

[1:19:50] If you see this one, the top we were able to get an existing picture that reflected

[1:19:54] more maturity in the foliage.

[1:19:57] So I think those are pretty representative.

[1:19:59] The first one I acknowledge maybe not.

[1:20:01] And this one as well.

[1:20:02] So two of the three we were able to get proper foliage maturity.

[1:20:06] the first one we weren't and I'd be happy to remove that or find another one that helps better portray

[1:20:11] that for you. If that's if that's something we could do following this meeting or with staff,

[1:20:16] we'd certainly do willing to do that. And what is the eye height? It's the eye height six foot

[1:20:22] for both of those representations or we would say, approximately, yes, it would be a pedestrian height

[1:20:29] So, between five and a half and six feet.

[1:20:37] Now, to the concerns we've heard along the way, we certainly recognize stormwater, operational

[1:20:44] traffic, inconveniences associated with operation site lighting and density.

[1:20:50] We feel we've enhanced our plan to address these concerns while also acknowledging that most

[1:20:56] of the most closely affected neighbors are likely not still in sport of this plan, but we

[1:21:02] that the commission sees the effort we've undertaken to soften these issues and the

[1:21:08] and also the alignment of this proposed plan with respect to the city's master plan for

[1:21:13] the Skokie Highway Court or District. As you've heard, I'm joined by our architect, our

[1:21:18] operations team, civil and traffic engineers. As questions arise, we'd be happy to help and I

[1:21:24] thank you for your time.

[1:21:28] Thank you.

[1:21:32] And there are no other questions for the applicant.

[1:21:37] Okay, we do have some time to, and just for the public to be aware, it does certainly seem

[1:21:44] like the applicants going to be making further revisions, at least that's the way it looks

[1:21:49] to me.

[1:21:53] And so just to kind of keep that in mind, while we have, you know, comments from the public

[1:22:00] who, you know, on the neighbors, some of the issues that, at least I've heard certainly in

[1:22:06] the previous meeting, you know, there, things may be changing, so just to kind of keep

[1:22:11] that in mind. But on that note, who wishes to speak on this if we could stand, please?

[1:22:29] Okay, so I know some of you, I think we're here at the last meeting and we're already sworn

[1:22:32] in. Who was here at the last meeting? And it was sworn. Is there anybody that it wasn't?

[1:22:39] It's probably, is it okay? If I could have, I think that the four of you come over to the

[1:22:44] podium and then be sworn in, we'll have you just say your name and address and we'll swear you

[1:22:51] in and then we can.

[1:22:59] Do you want to have the people who are going to speak line up? I will, but I want to

[1:23:05] get this one in first.

[1:23:09] Okay.

[1:23:13] First.

[1:23:15] Thank you for letting me speak.

[1:23:16] Yeah.

[1:23:17] You have a chance.

[1:23:19] I need to do the four of you.

[1:23:21] I think it was four of you.

[1:23:22] That we're not here and have not been sworn in.

[1:23:25] I do need to swear you in.

[1:23:26] And then one of what I'll do is we'll have everybody who's going to speak even if you're

[1:23:30] here last time and line up and then we'll just take one at a time.

[1:23:34] So if we're going to have the the four that have not been sworn in, please step up to the microphone.

[1:23:42] Okay, that's, is that the four of you?

[1:23:43] Can you just, all of you, just one, each of you, state your name and address for the record?

[1:23:51] No, but I, while I swear, man, I wanted to help.

[1:23:54] I'm Jesus, I'll swear.

[1:23:56] I mean, 265, we're being guided.

[1:23:59] My name is Steve Franks, 1963, Macquarer and Road.

[1:24:02] Hi, I'm Bert.

[1:24:04] Elizabeth, Estle, 1861, come down.

[1:24:08] Steve Lace, in 1626, Little John.

[1:24:12] Steve, 1881.

[1:24:14] That's me.

[1:24:15] You have a little woman, 177, Karen?

[1:24:19] You're very, very monster, 1901, York.

[1:24:23] I think, Jerry, were you here last time?

[1:24:25] We've sold.

[1:24:25] OK, so are you?

[1:24:26] Well, I need to swear you're going to get me.

[1:24:30] Okay, just need the people who weren't here, so could you raise your right hand please?

[1:24:35] You swear the testimony you will give here tonight will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing

[1:24:39] that's truth.

[1:24:40] Thank you.

[1:24:41] Okay, so then now I have everybody who wants to speak, come line up and then we'll take you

[1:24:45] one at a time and I'll have you, give you your name and address again for everybody.

[1:24:50] Each time.

[1:24:55] So again, thank you very much for allowing me to speak.

[1:24:57] I came here with no intention of speaking, my wife usually would do this, but I'm here

[1:25:04] in place over.

[1:25:06] I'm going to rate this because as I sat here, this is what I learned about the company that

[1:25:11] is giving its presentation.

[1:25:14] Let's come back a little bit now, here's a very poor reading, in terms of further importance,

[1:25:19] via that organization, they have about 2.8 stars on both in Dead.com and Blaster.com.

[1:25:27] There have come up with rights of long-for-deaths, and there are some laws in our

[1:25:32] province of Westidence, far and faring in their feces.

[1:25:37] This company has reportedly a well-washed, well-washed staff, and for now, if that's due

[1:25:42] to the poor wages, they pay their staff.

[1:25:46] This compromise, seek out substantial amount for our supply, where we have a lot of facility

[1:25:50] that we'll have on a half-month rise in a potential loss to try to stop its residents.

[1:25:58] I certainly appreciate the information that's not something that we can consider.

[1:26:04] We have certain standards we have to follow, and again I appreciate the information.

[1:26:07] I've never been to the other standards.

[1:26:09] I apologize.

[1:26:10] Yeah, and that's what we're about.

[1:26:12] If God forbid something like that would happen,

[1:26:15] assuming this is approved, that's really more for a city and probably police.

[1:26:21] But that's not, unfortunately, that's not something that we can really take into consideration.

[1:26:24] Well, what you can't talk into consideration is the relief that they're asking and in light of this

[1:26:30] organizations reputation. I believe that our city can and does deserve better.

[1:26:38] Thank you.

[1:26:42] Okay, so my name is Jean Solstroy. I've been in the community now for 34 years.

[1:26:48] My kids went to the school in the area of where the development is. They went to Wayne

[1:26:53] Thomas Northwood, junior high and I thought back to the late 1980s when we had a three

[1:27:03] separate school districts in Highland Park and there was a big discussion, a big problem

[1:27:07] at that time.

[1:27:09] Property values were suffering as a result of the conflicting school districts.

[1:27:18] There was a consolidation movement.

[1:27:21] Most of the people who had children in the school system voted against the consolidation movement

[1:27:27] The others of the community at that time

[1:27:32] Encouraged the community to go for the the consolidation because it would improve the schools and it would improve property values throughout Island park

[1:27:41] Now

[1:27:42] Let's go and out over the last few years

[1:27:44] I don't know if any of you have looked at your property values, but they've gone down part of the reason that they've gone down is

[1:27:50] because there's a lot of controversy about our school districts.

[1:27:54] Our school districts have, they can't make,

[1:27:57] I don't have any hard time keeping teachers.

[1:27:59] They're having a hard time keeping administrative staff.

[1:28:03] And as a result of this, people are moving to deer,

[1:28:05] they're moving to Northbrook and they're moving

[1:28:08] with, and these are people who grew up in Island Park

[1:28:11] who are not regenerating the community.

[1:28:15] And when I look at this project,

[1:28:19] My kids are all in the school district. It's not going to affect my kids.

[1:28:23] They're all grown up and working on their own and had a really great experience in

[1:28:27] Helen Park schools. But when I look at this project and I see the input of $400,000 a year

[1:28:34] of money into the school system, I say, how can you turn this down? This is a key to improving

[1:28:42] school district making our education better and improving property values throughout the community.

[1:28:50] And so I'm not going to be people who are here a lot of people here don't

[1:28:55] aren't pleased what I have to say.

[1:28:59] There's no one.

[1:29:01] Not a chance.

[1:29:03] We don't want to.

[1:29:07] Folks.

[1:29:10] Folks.

[1:29:16] I need all one person at a time.

[1:29:18] Please.

[1:29:19] Everything needs to be addressed.

[1:29:20] So my chair.

[1:29:21] We can't have back and forth between the audience and the person speaking.

[1:29:26] And now I'm here to debate this.

[1:29:27] just here to tell the facts that your property values will up and it'll be a benefit for your children

[1:29:33] and in many cases your grandchildren when they come back to Island Park. Thank you.

[1:29:41] I'm Betsy Kessler. I live at 1861 Kadelle. I've lived in Island Park in the same house for over 42 years.

[1:29:49] I'm a neurologist. I have a lot of professional and unfortunately personal experience with

[1:29:54] long-term care facilities.

[1:29:57] Many people in long-term care facilities have their...

[1:30:00] On caregivers, it is disingenuous to say that there will be a few people there as guests. Many people have daily caregivers, more than one shift of caregivers, even though they're living in a facility that claims to be able to provide care.

[1:30:16] So to not add all of those people to the calculations is simply not accurate.

[1:30:22] Comparing this enormous project to Silverado is also not accurate.

[1:30:30] This Silverado is only memory care.

[1:30:33] It is not assisted living.

[1:30:35] The majority of the patients there are not going to be transferred to a hospital.

[1:30:41] ambulances don't go to Silverado very often.

[1:30:44] So to say that, that is an indication of what would happen in this large community of elderly people is also not accurate.

[1:30:55] The intersection at Park and 41 is already a mess.

[1:31:00] It's very difficult to get through there with people pulling in and out of going through this.

[1:31:07] And all of the caregivers, all of the employees who are going to be going back and forth there is going to make it very difficult for those of us.

[1:31:16] who live in this community to get to work and I think the fact we could put lots of things in that

[1:31:24] in that property that would make tax money that doesn't mean that the residents and the

[1:31:31] quality of life of the residents shouldn't be taken into account. This is totally out of character with

[1:31:37] neighborhood.

[1:31:44] We need to keep trying to avoid the applause and other people's supports, certain viewpoints,

[1:31:51] but we need to keep the meeting moving, and every member of this community has a right

[1:31:55] to speak on us whether you live nearby or not, and whether you like what they say or not.

[1:31:59] So if we can show the speakers respect to just let them say what they have to say and to keep the

[1:32:07] meeting moving.

[1:32:07] Thank you.

[1:32:08] Thank you. My name is Stephen Lace, and I live at 1626,

[1:32:12] Ligeon. I live there for about 25 years.

[1:32:15] I'm a general internist. I work at Lake Forrest and Highland Park Hospital.

[1:32:20] I also have privileges at a place called Lake Forrest,

[1:32:24] a place called Belmoral and Lake Forrest,

[1:32:25] it's a similar community to what's being proposed here,

[1:32:29] and it's a continuum of care, a community.

[1:32:32] And in those communities, when I was there, even this morning,

[1:32:36] you have to sign in. And when you sign in, I've the last couple of times I've been there,

[1:32:40] I've looked at the sign in book that one sign in page for physicians, caregivers, providers,

[1:32:47] people are coming in to see the residents and then for other people who are there just to

[1:32:52] make deliveries. And I looked at the last couple of times I was there. There was about anywhere between

[1:32:58] 30 and 50 caregivers physicians on each of the days. I was there as well as 30 to 50

[1:33:06] other people providing services. There could be as many as 100 people coming in each day

[1:33:12] for those people who are living there. So I think the numbers that we're getting are not

[1:33:17] really truly accurate. The number of people are going to be going in and out are going to be way

[1:33:21] higher than what we're being told. It's not just eight nurses who are going to be coming in and out

[1:33:25] in a shift. There's going to be like 100 people going in and out throughout a day plus lots of

[1:33:31] versus lots of staff, lots of deliveries and with a continuum of care, there will be increasing

[1:33:38] number of ambulances and things like that in an area that's already very congested with

[1:33:43] the new development for the bank and CVS as well as the Dunkin Donuts on the other side

[1:33:49] of the street.

[1:33:51] So I just think that as well as they talk about the parking, the parking in these places is always

[1:33:57] I always have trouble getting parking.

[1:33:59] So on the days like the weekends and others day and things like that,

[1:34:03] the parking will always be a problem and it will overflow into the local area there.

[1:34:07] So I think that one thing maybe is the members of the committee you may want to do is

[1:34:12] perhaps have the, is you can might be able to get statistics from the similar community

[1:34:19] that's right in like force.

[1:34:20] It's 10 minutes from here.

[1:34:22] I'm sure you can get all these statistics.

[1:34:24] If you don't have to reject, you know, recreate the wheel and you can get all the information

[1:34:29] you need from a similar community and find out all the data you need rather than trying

[1:34:34] to get all the information from the people who are trying to sell it to us.

[1:34:38] Thank you.

[1:34:46] Thank you very much, sir.

[1:34:49] I have a lot of data in this tomorrow for 52 years and I know the site very well.

[1:34:56] I have to be a licensed architect.

[1:34:58] I wasn't employed by Dr. Grubber. Oh, maybe 18 years or so ago to examine the size for development.

[1:35:09] And I'm only here to talk about what I know, what I think I know.

[1:35:16] I don't want to talk about the density and the architecture because I think all that will cure out in time.

[1:35:25] I'm more concerned about the ground, what's in the ground.

[1:35:31] I don't know if you folks know, and I don't know if even if the developer knows what was there before.

[1:35:39] Because there was a big mound in the back that reacted type of thing.

[1:35:45] They not only provided MRI,

[1:35:54] which is imaging facilities, but also the treatment in the old warehouse building that still exists.

[1:36:02] So I don't know if the developer has gone far enough to look at the site.

[1:36:12] I don't even know if the city knows what's going on, because there are kind of blacks and

[1:36:18] days to go at times and anyone knows that knows me knows that I speak out and I speak

[1:36:24] the truth.

[1:36:26] So I'm concerned if this is really a feasible site to develop what they want to develop

[1:36:33] there.

[1:36:34] I'll leave that up to the rest of the folks.

[1:36:37] Thank you.

[1:37:04] I'll talk fast. I spent a lot of time on this. It's a little bit difficult to take and read

[1:37:12] a couple hundred pages and four days, but I'm going to just hit some salient points here.

[1:37:17] It was rather disappointed in the market study with a lot of the flaws that I've seen in there

[1:37:21] and basically points to lack a concern for accuracy and the fact that they listed Lake Forest

[1:37:27] Hospital is in the nearest hospital was so blatant on page 33. It just floored me. With

[1:37:33] that being said, I didn't have a chance to pick a part of the JLL study, but that's next

[1:37:38] on my list. However, one of my main concerns is actually reviewing the drainage area and I'm not

[1:37:44] an engineer, but when you take and tell me that you're increasing the impervious area by about

[1:37:50] 3x and you're going to reduce the yelp flow by about down to about 37%, that's about a factor

[1:37:57] of 9 from 1 area to the other, and I can't fathom how that's going to take and happen.

[1:38:04] Numbers are numbers.

[1:38:05] I was an accountant.

[1:38:07] I can make the numbers say whatever they want, so being an engineer of possibly 2.

[1:38:13] But my main point here is I would appreciate the board taking a look at the master plan again.

[1:38:20] I read the master plan.

[1:38:22] It's specifically omits this property from both districts as it's listed there.

[1:38:29] It's not listed in the North-West District as it is excluded in one of the drawings.

[1:38:34] However, if you take and read the description, it says, the North-West District is bounded

[1:38:40] by the Union Pacific Railroad Tracks on the East, Park Avenue on the West, and the city

[1:38:45] limits on the West and the North.

[1:38:47] This area should be zone to match the existing, contiguous area, our three with 40,000 square foot blocks and match the surrounding area.

[1:39:01] Sparkling springs water, which was at the end of the range in Park Avenue, was reverted to residential work, residential.

[1:39:07] So, only because the city would not take an allow it to take and develop anything differently.

[1:39:14] This preparation not be any different than sparkling springs.

[1:39:17] Thank you so much for your time.

[1:39:27] My name is Steve Gold.

[1:39:29] I live two doors down from Greenberg on the north side of Park Avenue West, 1581 Park Avenue West.

[1:39:37] Thank you all for the opportunity to speak to the commission this evening.

[1:39:40] I wrote a letter to the commission that talks about the traffic issues with this proposed

[1:39:46] development and I did that not because I think the traffic is the most important issue

[1:39:51] here.

[1:39:51] I think that most important issue may go to the reduction in property value or the increased

[1:39:56] water that we're going to suffer with a lack of conformity with the master plans.

[1:40:00] The last speaker just mentioned, but I do think that the traffic issues will illustrate that

[1:40:06] information provided by the developer and the staff here do not provide you with enough information

[1:40:12] on which to make a conclusion and determine if this development meets the standards that

[1:40:19] you need it to meet in order to give the variance as requested.

[1:40:23] I won't belabor the the points that I raised in the letter.

[1:40:26] I walked through 15 issues that I saw from a review of the traffic materials that were included

[1:40:31] in the proposal, nothing I've heard today other than a little bit of a discussion about

[1:40:36] emergency services response to any of those issues.

[1:40:40] But we'll call out to you that the New York Times yesterday on the front page of its New York

[1:40:45] edition address the topic of traffic congestion admittedly focusing on more urban setting than

[1:40:53] highland park.

[1:40:54] But in that discussion of traffic issues, they discussed some major contributors that are

[1:41:06] that are nowhere covered in the traffic materials and that could not have been covered in the underlying

[1:41:13] ITE traffic data on which the developers in generalize because that data goes back to 1980 when

[1:41:20] none of those things existed. I give them a little bit of time, I just want to hit world or

[1:41:27] topic and that is the argument that we heard tonight from the developer that we heard extensively

[1:41:33] leave at the last hearing that it could be worse.

[1:41:37] There are worse things that could happen in the eyes-owned area.

[1:41:41] That's just not relevant.

[1:41:44] The proposal before us today is this proposal by this developer with these requested

[1:41:49] variances today.

[1:41:51] And the commission has to look at this proposal and determine whether it meets the standards

[1:41:56] in order to give these variances.

[1:41:58] Does it's a substantial duration impair the value of other property and immediate

[1:42:02] neighborhood doesn't want to be a journalist to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity.

[1:42:10] That and that's some hypothetical other possible development is what you need to be looking at.

[1:42:15] Thanks very much for your attention.

[1:42:24] My name is Marty Kinzel.

[1:42:26] I live in 1979.

[1:42:29] Hi.

[1:42:30] Marty Kinzel.

[1:42:31] I'm a current and I want to thank you guys for your volunteering your time.

[1:42:35] I know what it's like to volunteer time.

[1:42:37] I've served on the library board and don't get this kind of crowd that we're going to

[1:42:43] miss you.

[1:42:44] If I could just jump in real quick, I'd like to bring up a few points relative to the

[1:42:50] CBRE report that was included in there.

[1:42:53] If you look at there, there's several points within our report pages 1824 and 81 in the board

[1:42:59] packet, that line appraiser didn't even come out to visit the property.

[1:43:05] This is basically a standard type of thing if you're in a praise or you're going to visit

[1:43:09] the site unless it's specifying the scope or you can get around it.

[1:43:14] I think that's important for a neighbor, for someone to have a feel for that neighborhood.

[1:43:19] Same thing with Jones Langel's cell, the best thing now, I'll just carry a code 204 or either

[1:43:22] Dallas or California.

[1:43:23] I don't think they flew out here for that.

[1:43:27] If you look at four pack of page 23 or page 80, how in park is 90 the intended user of

[1:43:33] report this is an internal document or a terminal crow to evaluate the deal. This is an investment

[1:43:40] deal and it's supported by pages 45 through 49 in your board packet where you're going to

[1:43:46] cap rates, revenues per bad of seven hundred five they have a sale and like fours, additional

[1:43:52] streams of revenue and whatnot. I'm fine with people making a dollar. I'm totally for that, but

[1:44:00] your de-rolls to value at the expense of the community for that.

[1:44:06] We're not to the GLR report. Every single comparable that they have in their report, they have seven.

[1:44:13] All but one is located on a major street. These are major street developments.

[1:44:19] The only one that is not is the one in Lake Forest, which is adjacent to Lake Forest's Haskell, access only through West Marlin.

[1:44:27] Okay, so that's just touching on there and to how I've mentioned the pages where we are not home parts 90 attended user, you rely on it at your own risk, specifically stated throughout their report.

[1:44:41] And my lawyer that I mentioned, my concerns relative to our community is Crown Park currently has an 18% rental rate within our community.

[1:44:51] This is ice cream and this is information you should have in your packet.

[1:44:55] Your field, 13%, Northbroke 14, Lake Forest, 11, Glencoe.

[1:45:00] 7. These are our neighbors, all of the net 5 mile radius. We are the highest. Every additional, it's 200 additional units. We're going to get hit 20%.

[1:45:11] Our relative to, we have a GW range development across the street that was approved, that man stayed within, that developer stayed within the coast. What kind of message are we sending to business people that we can kind of shoehorn a deal with multiple variations and whatnot?

[1:45:30] Um, again, everything I, I, I wrote it in there and I just appreciate your time.

[1:45:35] I truly do and I appreciate you taking your time on your decision.

[1:45:41] Thank you.

[1:45:50] My name is David Riggold.

[1:45:51] I'm also a 1581 Park Avenue West, two doors down from the proposed site redevelopment and

[1:45:58] bare no relation to the other goal to spoke other than through marriage and we operate

[1:46:02] independently.

[1:46:03] like so I reserved that right to speak into it.

[1:46:07] I wanted to focus the commission and all the reviewers on some of the same themes with a slightly different twist.

[1:46:13] And that is on the plans and the standards.

[1:46:17] As others have said, what it could have been or that it could have been worse isn't the standard.

[1:46:21] It's Stanton's Quo anti as it exists as it's existing use.

[1:46:26] Secondly, none of this takes into account any of the plan, at least in consistencies, as to where this site falls, and it appears likely, and I'm happy to lay this out in more detail for the commission, there may have been an orphan site, it's carved out in one place, but not in narrative of another, it is clearly not shown in the scoky highway district, indeed that district map, which is core to this, cuts right through the property, so how could it have been included?

[1:46:55] I realize that's not a commission act but it's part of the legacy that bears

[1:46:59] examination here. Mostly the plans like many of the standards call for

[1:47:05] review of what I would call compatibility which is can the proposed land use

[1:47:11] coexist in relative proximity and in stable fashion over time without

[1:47:16] negative impacts to the surrounding areas and I submit that there is insufficient

[1:47:22] independent or credible evidence for the commission to make that finding.

[1:47:25] Either is a finding effect or as a favorable decision to green light this for further proceedings.

[1:47:31] Frankly, I think we've heard a lot of shuffling facts today, and it's just not ready for primetime yet.

[1:47:37] What evidence there is on the standards, I would say, if you look at there's a document that is of indeterminate authorship,

[1:47:46] at least by me, I can't tell who wrote it, that reports to list the standards and then show

[1:47:51] the answers,

[1:47:54] and those answers are often non-responsive, they talk about something completely

[1:47:59] different or address only part of the standard, and I would suggest that that is done repeatedly

[1:48:04] by injecting marketed verbiage from other proposal language, that it's to the extent of being

[1:48:16] is also not addressed, and the intent of the master plan documents is as others have said that this

[1:48:21] we used in a step-down way moving more toward low-impact, low-density land use as was done in the

[1:48:28] Grange proposal. Finally, I just touched on the stormwater in a legroom really quickly.

[1:48:36] Stormwater, some of us have existing spot-pulling if not flooding in our properties.

[1:48:40] We're directly west of this facility that's true of Greenwich Avenue homes that they're back faces up on it

[1:48:48] And again, someone said visit the site or we can produce pictures of that. This will make it worse

[1:48:52] You can't avoid that fact but at an understanding of the impervious

[1:48:58] Expans that will be increased by this proposed development

[1:49:01] Secondly on a leg row while I'm delighted to see them officially surface and be able to answer questions

[1:49:07] They've been an instrumental part of y'all along.

[1:49:11] They are the operating day-to-day manager.

[1:49:14] And frankly, no of what they say can be binding on them

[1:49:19] or on trample crow unless it's in the form of restrictions

[1:49:22] that run with the land.

[1:49:26] And I would think there are other areas of investigation

[1:49:29] for a leg or that may not be part of the commission.

[1:49:32] But that would be relevant, including their financial ownership,

[1:49:36] which I saw a part and parcel of another plan in Boko Raton that was rejected, but at

[1:49:42] least required disclosure of their ownership that runs up to two individuals.

[1:49:47] Thank you very much.

[1:49:52] My name is Lehi Metnik.

[1:49:53] I've lived on the current road over 40 years

[1:50:00] speaking of other alternatives.

[1:50:03] My first move in where hibernia developed the development is now that used to be a cornfield.

[1:50:11] So, if we want to visualize what else could be, I think everybody would admit,

[1:50:15] hi-Gernia is a positive addition to Highland Park,

[1:50:19] I don't know why that can't be at the Greenburg site.

[1:50:22] You know, as I'm sitting here, I can't help but think of

[1:50:26] that development on Central Avenue with their,

[1:50:29] a lot of construction going on, but there's one house that's standing.

[1:50:33] I'm sure everybody's aware of that.

[1:50:35] Why is it there?

[1:50:36] Because of the historical commission is fighting for the apartheid floor,

[1:50:43] to significantly significant for the highland park residents. My final plea is I wish you

[1:50:51] would show as much compassion for us as a historical commission is showing to that

[1:50:56] park a floor.

[1:51:09] Can you, HL, okay?

[1:51:16] It was a good one.

[1:51:21] Okay, so I'm just going to talk real quick on wasn't prepared to speak so my words perhaps

[1:51:24] and I can be as eloquent as some of the people that went before me.

[1:51:27] But I think one piece that I haven't heard much about are all of the kids.

[1:51:32] We're in a very, you know, in Grandkids, because I think there's many of those as well.

[1:51:37] On our street, in the current alone, I think there's probably 30 kids new moving in every day as the

[1:51:43] neighborhood's turn. Many grandkids. And if you ever dive down the current, people use it as a

[1:51:49] short cut. There's always excessive speeding. I contacted the police about it many times.

[1:51:54] because I'm worried for my kid's safety.

[1:51:56] And even for those of us who go down park on a regular basis,

[1:51:59] it's the same thing. There's always kids about.

[1:52:01] And as you look at the traffic impact and burden on the community,

[1:52:07] which I think some people said very well,

[1:52:09] was perhaps underrepresented.

[1:52:13] You know, what is that going to do to all of these kids that are out there praying?

[1:52:16] And many of us moms can't be here. It's really hard with activities and getting them to bed,

[1:52:21] fed and all that kind of stuff. So I just wanted to make sure to point out that was a concern.

[1:52:27] And then I think this got hit on a little bit, but there was, you know, those of us that

[1:52:31] have to get kids on the bus in the morning, you know, 7 a.m. this one, the high school and little school

[1:52:36] buses come and, you know, safety isn't much too. And then 3 p.m. is about like time those kids are

[1:52:42] dropped off and are walking home. So just to kind of point that out, and my last point would be,

[1:52:49] Um, you know, as I worry about, you know,

[1:52:51] McCrayer and the burden on the local people cutting through already.

[1:52:56] What will happen with ambulances?

[1:52:57] Because I think we all know there's a trained free train that goes through

[1:53:00] that blocks that intersection for a significant amount of time.

[1:53:04] So then what will happen?

[1:53:06] Because obviously it's a direct pass from

[1:53:08] Park down to Highland Park Hospital.

[1:53:11] What I don't know what happens when like a train goes by.

[1:53:14] Does that mean McCrayer and Reconval

[1:53:15] are the cut-through routes for those people to be

[1:53:18] get transported to the hospital?

[1:53:20] Yeah, that's all.

[1:53:22] All right, let's all have.

[1:53:40] Wait in, all right.

[1:53:49] Hmm?

[1:53:56] Should we bring you?

[1:53:59] Shall we go?

[1:54:00] 16, 11.

[1:54:04] Yes.

[1:54:05] Maybe 20.

[1:54:07] I don't think it's, I don't think.

[1:54:17] Do you use your cover, but it doesn't bother me.

[1:54:20] Don't worry.

[1:54:29] I'm sorry,

[1:54:33] these are other colors, I'm sorry,

[1:54:42] would be your copy when the commissioner said,

[1:54:49] and then those.

[1:55:12] I'm sorry about that.

[1:55:14] I'm sorry about that.

[1:55:18] I've always given slide shows by the developers.

[1:55:21] I wanted to present a few things here.

[1:55:24] You want me to start, it's a guy like to get those, but

[1:55:32] what's your name?

[1:55:33] Michael Laxon, I'm sorry, Michael Laxon, in the 1960s.

[1:55:44] It's really, there's some photos in there that I didn't want to give everybody

[1:55:48] by the color copies or hit my pocketbook a little bit too much.

[1:55:55] I think two of you have colored copies if you want to look at a better perspective.

[1:55:58] You would have to ask those.

[1:56:00] The mission is to show you.

[1:56:03] Are we ready here in here?

[1:56:06] Okay.

[1:56:06] Did you give a copy of this to the developer?

[1:56:08] No, I did not.

[1:56:09] I don't have a spare.

[1:56:11] I'm sorry.

[1:56:12] I didn't.

[1:56:14] No, I'm sorry.

[1:56:15] I didn't realize that.

[1:56:16] Okay.

[1:56:17] The first image is just what I consider the excessive height really being sought.

[1:56:24] I think even though they get the measure from the eaves to the peak,

[1:56:27] The meeting in between, I think a federal comparison is peak to peak because in the air

[1:56:33] 3 is owning, you're only allowed 35 feet to the peak, and in the air 6 across the

[1:56:38] street on Park Avenue, you're only allowed 30 feet.

[1:56:41] The maximum point they're looking at now is 47 feet, 6 inches, and that was making a comparison

[1:56:46] to the 45 feet allowed under the commercial, right now under light industrial.

[1:56:50] Well, they know I've seen that in certain,

[1:56:53] in the corners and the main entranceway.

[1:56:58] But I just wanted to quite that out

[1:56:59] that I think is a fair comparison to go to pick the peak

[1:57:02] for her joining neighbors, and then we'll get it

[1:57:04] over 1,700 feet.

[1:57:06] Our 17 feet, six inches across part of Avenue,

[1:57:09] and 12 feet, six inches in comparison

[1:57:11] to houses on Grandi's Avenue.

[1:57:17] This one I might need a pointer.

[1:57:19] I'm sorry.

[1:57:19] Now, that is present that they try to give a perspective of reducing the bulk, and now that we're talking about this success of height, now we can add kind of like what the width is.

[1:57:32] If you're going to look at this with Park Daddy, if you go across their walls in this direction, this is all going to be viewable with Park Daddy.

[1:57:40] If you stretch this line out, you would cross them here to hear the cross that whole property.

[1:57:44] We'll face with that whole bulk face and also face with all the windows that are going to be facing, facing directly under the street.

[1:57:52] It just feels very like a big imposition into our neighborhood as far as what's existing there is in the residential area.

[1:58:03] And, you know, it kicks from these comparisons to what can happen in the worst case scenario in the light industrial.

[1:58:09] Well, well, we've got the zoning code for the scope, there is a section under the scope

[1:58:14] of your highway business, please.

[1:58:16] They would only be allowed to move that type of development or the next one that's going

[1:58:20] to be shown if there's other 25,000 square feet.

[1:58:24] So, the line on the outside scenarios would not actually be allowed.

[1:58:27] They would have to go through the PUD process.

[1:58:29] It wouldn't be by right.

[1:58:31] And I think that definition kind of, and you can go to it, it's in your pamphlet.

[1:58:35] It throws it into this array that, okay.

[1:58:39] That's just an array, because it's two bounds that again would fall under the plug based

[1:58:42] on that section of the zoning, okay.

[1:58:48] So, I have two uses that, you know, as possible there, that one necessarily may have high intensity.

[1:58:53] It's simply a two-star storage facility, and I have only two cards in a partner line.

[1:58:57] I probably took this about 233 and you have to know it on a bike drive, next thing.

[1:59:02] And, uh,

[1:59:05] okay, so you see just simply that a nursery, and this is basins at the corner of

[1:59:09] the block here in it and, uh, halfway road, so, so those are the latter of our time of the

[1:59:13] use is listed underlight industrial that could be used.

[1:59:17] The other one is just that we've found a line that you can look at a little quickly, if you could

[1:59:21] pass through it on here quick.

[1:59:23] That was about the buffers on actually, that wasn't a lot.

[1:59:26] Yeah, if you could just pass through it.

[1:59:27] That's what the wedding calls are actually going to look like.

[1:59:29] Very similar.

[1:59:30] This is a car wash.

[1:59:34] That's what it looks like at night.

[1:59:36] That's a close up.

[1:59:37] Next one would be looking at it farther from the distance.

[1:59:40] It's not what the length goes away.

[1:59:41] Yes, it's projected down.

[1:59:42] But you're going to be faced with this.

[1:59:45] And that's what our micron looks like at night when you take an image down it.

[1:59:49] Next image would be cool.

[1:59:50] Take an image down.

[1:59:53] And then that's the way this, you know what?

[1:59:56] And then is that it in?

[1:59:57] Is there more?

[1:59:59] That's what's Sunday.

[2:00:00] I'm still a rattle, look like at night. So it's not, you know, this is a vote. It's going to be this quiet little imposition in our neighborhood. It's going to have an effect. Thank you.

[2:00:30] Thank you, I think the applicant was been given some feedback and there's certainly additional information that the

[2:00:38] Commission has requested and some concerns that the Commission has expressed.

[2:00:47] I'm assuming there's not going to be a motion with regard to the application.

[2:00:53] Is there,

[2:01:00] they got to come back anyway, I need to let them respond. Do we just continue it?

[2:01:11] I have an option to continue this matter to the next to the next meeting.

[2:01:17] Mr. Chair, I don't think the next meeting is on April 16th.

[2:01:21] And I think it works well to continue to that.

[2:01:24] Not only if the applicant decides they need more time to create a set of role materials,

[2:01:29] then it will be contained without discussion then to the first meeting in May.

[2:01:34] And we will be able to post that and make that information public.

[2:01:38] Just so people don't waste a trip here.

[2:01:39] Right, okay. So for this purpose though, it's

[2:01:43] to continue to the next meeting.

[2:01:46] And then the applicant can decide to postpone it for this.

[2:01:49] My thought.

[2:01:50] Director gives me something.

[2:01:51] I mean, we do have a pretty tight turn around on additional

[2:01:53] submittals to make it to that next meeting.

[2:01:56] Okay.

[2:01:57] Well, I mean, the applicant needs a further needs more time

[2:02:00] than they can ask.

[2:02:03] Okay.

[2:02:08] We should continue this matter to April 16th, 2019.

[2:02:40] Some of...

[2:02:42] And we'll take this very seriously in our deliberations.

[2:02:47] Thank you for being able to do that.

[2:02:48] I'm looking back at this.

[2:02:50] Right on sale.

[2:02:51] I'm going to take a picture.

[2:02:53] I'm not going to discuss this.

[2:02:55] I'm going to discuss this.

[2:02:56] I'm going to take a picture.

[2:02:59] Can I take a picture?

[2:03:00] Do you?

[2:03:01] I'm going to take a picture.

[2:03:03] I'm going to take a picture.

[2:03:04] I haven't changed, so.

[2:03:06] I haven't changed.

[2:03:07] It's good.

[2:03:09] Maybe five?

[2:03:11] Maybe.

[2:03:44] I mean 500 of those?

[2:03:46] I think he said fans, that's about one of those.

[2:03:51] Well actually 20,000.

[2:03:55] I can't see the new one.

[2:03:56] And it's the big one for me.

[2:03:58] Yeah, it was at about 20% of the people who were over.

[2:04:02] It's about 20,000.

[2:04:03] The 20,000 people don't count, but that is very cool.

[2:06:48] 404-SUP-001 for a special use consideration to allow a child care facility as a conditional

[2:06:55] land use in the R-4 single family zoning district at 640 Ridge Road.

[2:07:04] Welcome to the regular meeting of the Highland Park Plan and Design Commission.

[2:07:08] My name is Adam Hect, a quorum of the Plan and Design Commission being present.

[2:07:11] The members of the Plan and Design Commission will now introduce themselves for the record

[2:07:15] from my right.

[2:07:17] Annabletower?

[2:07:18] Can I cross?

[2:07:19] Ernie Rangstein.

[2:07:21] Adam Glaser?

[2:07:22] Ben Kutcheid, Michael Leef.

[2:07:24] Plan and design commission is charged with hearing

[2:07:26] applications for rezoning, planned developments

[2:07:29] and subdivisions under the zoning ordinance,

[2:07:31] and subdivision regulations of the city of Highland Park.

[2:07:34] In all matters, we recommend to the city council

[2:07:36] based upon the testimony presented to us in the hearing.

[2:07:40] We are required to decide cases

[2:07:41] within 45 days after receipt of the transcript.

[2:07:44] All testimonies under oath, both applicants and others who wish to speak on a particular case should present specific evidence as to why a proposal meets or fails to meet the standards for the relief requested.

[2:07:56] Reclarity of our record only one person at a time will speak and all questions will be directed through the chair.

[2:08:03] We ask that you make every effort to not be repetitive in your testimony.

[2:08:07] Finally, we will make every effort to adhere to the schedule prepared for tonight's hearing,

[2:08:12] a traditional time is needed on a matter.

[2:08:14] It will be continued until the next available agenda.

[2:08:19] With that, I open the floor for the staff to the Plan and Design Commission to read

[2:08:23] into the record proof of publication and ownership.

[2:08:26] Mr. Chairman, proof of publication and ownership are available for viewing

[2:08:29] at the offices of Community Development, 1150 Half-Day Road and Halemper.

[2:08:33] Thank you.

[2:08:34] Is there anything we can do to, they all downstairs?

[2:08:41] Yeah, and I just, you know, we don't have the U.S. marshals.

[2:08:47] We don't have the U.S. marshals.

[2:08:47] Yeah.

[2:08:49] So, at least while we have the low roar of just make sure everybody speaks up.

[2:08:55] Okay.

[2:08:56] I'll try.

[2:08:56] All right. Well, Mr. Chair, thank you, Mr. Chair.

[2:08:58] Members of the Plan Commission.

[2:09:01] This is a public hearing for a special use permit, which is required to conduct a land use that is identified as a conditional land use in a given zoning district.

[2:09:12] The applicants in this case are the Highland Park Community Daycare Nursery School and Daycare Center.

[2:09:18] I'm almost sure I have that right.

[2:09:20] But we always just refer to them as HP community and so you'll see them refer to that way in the staff report and throughout the PowerPoint presentation this evening.

[2:09:28] And their particular petition is to establish a child care facility, which is a conditional

[2:09:34] land use in the underlying R for zoning district.

[2:09:39] This is the property where the project is being proposed, which is referred to as the subject

[2:09:43] site.

[2:09:45] It's just to help get your bearings.

[2:09:47] This is, of course, Skoki Valley Highway, and this is Ridge Road.

[2:09:50] This is on the west part of town, and the solo cup site that's been subject to some discussion

[2:09:54] Lately is just up north of the TV screen right there, and heading down here is District 112's

[2:10:00] school, sort of campus right here, with three facilities on red oak lane, and then Ridge

[2:10:05] Road here, I had in southbound with my mouse, and the park district of Highland Park's West

[2:10:11] Ridge Center right there, and there is a 2.8 acre piece of land owned by District 112 by

[2:10:17] here, and they have consented to allow HP community organization to come forward to the application

[2:10:23] to establish the childcare facility on this property. So it is a district owned property next to

[2:10:31] a park district owned property for a use by another nonprofit here in town. One key item that we'll

[2:10:39] get into later is that the school district did allow the use of that property, but look at the

[2:10:53] existing school facilities and the district was adamant about that. So that's an important part of this application will see as we're moving forward

[2:11:00] So just a couple other salient points of the special use permit petition

[2:11:04] There is currently a 5800 square foot building proposed on the property, but a key part of this is room for expansion

[2:11:10] So we'll see about a 2,500 square foot area adjacent to the building on the site plan that they'd like to expand in the future

[2:11:17] We'll be examining parking here in some detail and also site management and traffic impact.

[2:11:24] So there is parking on the site and off properties.

[2:11:27] We'll be digging into all those bits in a bit here.

[2:11:30] A bit more about the land use just to familiarize yourself with kind of how this is being approached.

[2:11:34] You can see the property there is well-in-scanced in yellow.

[2:11:38] That is the R for zoning district or this property is located.

[2:11:41] And then we have this land use table.

[2:11:43] You've seen referenced in other staff reports that has come before you that identify not only the permitted land uses in each zoning district, but those that are p permitted with no special use process or see conditional and you can see here how the child care facility is identified as a conditional and a special use process is what's required to approve that the conditional land use or special use process authorizes the commission to enact specific conditions.

[2:12:09] We've already referenced them now a few with the previous public hearing riots, so I won't go into too much detail

[2:12:13] But as a unique planning tool that allows the commission to address very site specific context specific and land use specific issues that are associated with not only child care facilities

[2:12:24] But monasteries and cemeteries and cemeteries as well in the other zoning districts

[2:12:31] So a look at the site plan can really help understand a lot about the proposed use and it's most unique feature is how it abuts the

[2:12:38] hard district's west ridge property to the west there and how it interacts with it.

[2:12:43] We see red oak lane here off to the east, after the west rather, and as you'll see,

[2:12:48] the no access is proposed there per the condition with the property owner district 112.

[2:12:54] So the proposed, built structure is located on the eastern portion of the lot.

[2:13:00] Here is the area for expansion. I noticed earlier, and so this site plan will be included if approved

[2:13:06] this part of the special use permit and allow that and the property interacts here with

[2:13:11] the park district property such that it utilizes the park districts and I'll say the

[2:13:17] West Ridge Center is parking lot for access to West Ridge Road. The West Ridge Center utilizes

[2:13:24] this parking largely for staff parking. You can see down here off of Ridge, they've already

[2:13:29] got a dedicated turn around area. So the really peak intensity of drop off and I pick up

[2:13:35] drop-off activities occur elsewhere on the western side and not here in the parking lot.

[2:13:41] So this and here we have an arrow kind of showing the ingress to the property and the

[2:13:47] egress would be around the roundabout back and through out on the ridge and this roundabout

[2:13:52] here is new.

[2:13:55] The purvious or impervious surface really here, the parking lot ends near this dash line on

[2:14:01] The Westerage property this roundabout is new and provides access to the 22 space parking lot proposed on the on the subject property there at 640 Ridge serving the school building.

[2:14:16] It's just noting here the setbacks are identified on this property and are satisfied by the location or you know by the location of the post building.

[2:14:24] There is the dedicated turnaround there providing access to the

[2:14:28] the Westridge facility and as we'll see here in a few slides momentarily

[2:14:32] the traffic analysis provided by the applicants and reviewed by the

[2:14:36] city's third party traffic consultant

[2:14:38] concurred that this dedicated dropoff pick-up zone for Westridge

[2:14:42] will avoid a lot of conflicts with pick-up and drop-out activities for the

[2:14:46] HP Center, HP Community Facility.

[2:14:50] that access that you so identified with that red arrow will require a permanent

[2:14:55] access easement over the part district property.

[2:14:58] So that is an important

[2:15:00] Document, as I mentioned, the staff report that the HP community group is working on having finalized prior to consideration by the city council.

[2:15:10] There are vehicle turning exhibits that are included in your staff report and that verify a full and efficient maneuverability of vehicles around the site.

[2:15:20] And the site plan was reviewed and, in fact, created in concert with the Fire Chief, Chief Samachief Amade.

[2:15:26] He took a rig out there and worked with the applicants to really verify exactly how much movement was needed,

[2:15:31] how much turning radio I needed to be provided.

[2:15:34] So, the site has been approved by the Fire Department, the Police Department reviewed it as well.

[2:15:38] As I mentioned in the staff report, a lot of the police departments concerns were not with ingress egress in access,

[2:15:44] but really more about security related to the school facility itself.

[2:15:47] And as the applicants can brochure, talk about later this evening, they're incorporating many of the,

[2:15:53] really, if not all of the police department's comments without even, with no prodding, they were just already part of their plan.

[2:16:00] So this is one of the several maneuverability exhibits provided by the petitioners,

[2:16:05] and it shows the turnaround area, and I guess that would be the southeast corner of the new parking lot, that allows full maneuverability.

[2:16:12] It can be difficult to have a parking area like this with just one point of ingress and egress.

[2:16:17] And so this turnaround area was an important addition.

[2:16:20] Right in front of the school, you'll see outlined a dedicated loading area.

[2:16:24] Our zoning.

[2:16:25] Yes, sir.

[2:16:25] I can move on.

[2:16:26] Could this explain how that works?

[2:16:28] Because I wanted to go as an eye to not understand it.

[2:16:30] I want to understand it.

[2:16:31] And so picture a car driving on the correct side of this lane.

[2:16:36] And so the vehicle will be on the right side of the lane.

[2:16:40] Groundling southbound will can park here to, you know, undertake any pickup and drop off activities,

[2:16:45] but then it will pull place forward into this turnaround area facing east, back out here,

[2:16:52] into this, uh, back out, you know, this area, there's no parking allowed here.

[2:16:56] This is just, you know, an access area and then exit northbound and taking the right

[2:17:01] into the roundabout. So there's no turn around, they have to air, so you go to the right

[2:17:06] And that's if you're engaging in this property, if you don't want to

[2:17:10] have these parking spaces, I don't want to have the wrong amount of

[2:17:12] service as around about. And that's exactly what a fire truck will do.

[2:17:18] It's within an allowable distance for hoses and EMS access that an

[2:17:23] emergency vehicle doesn't have to travel down this parking lot.

[2:17:27] It can just utilize the roundabout itself and not because they don't like

[2:17:32] and three point turns fire department representative told me we don't back up our trucks

[2:17:36] that's just not you know that's not ideal so what are those vehicles what are they meant to

[2:17:41] represent that's a so the single occupancy vehicle right there that's just a 19 foot standard

[2:17:46] you know are late car so is the parking lot meet our code is it right side yes it does okay

[2:17:54] yep and by that commissioner rhinestone it is the vice chair rhinestone the aisle width is 24 and

[2:18:02] for a 90 degree, you know, 2A 90 degree traffic.

[2:18:05] The parking stalls themselves, all meet the required specs.

[2:18:09] As I mentioned, the staff report, the one thing we're going to work with the applicants to confirm

[2:18:12] is that handicapped or accessible stalls have this access aisle

[2:18:17] and the access aisle themselves have very specific specifications.

[2:18:22] And so we'll need to make sure that those measurements are satisfied.

[2:18:24] Does the traffic or the parking counts reflect the expansion?

[2:18:32] Yes.

[2:18:33] The expansion is not going to represent and increase in or we can't represent and yes it does.

[2:18:41] The charter answer.

[2:18:42] They have to stand.

[2:18:43] They're not.

[2:18:45] It also does.

[2:18:46] In fact, the all the site planning has gone into the expansion being in there.

[2:18:51] And that's a stormwater drainage and the parking is for full buildout.

[2:18:55] Here's a helpful graphic to demonstrate how the parking is going to be accommodated.

[2:19:01] The parking requirements in the zoning code require 30 spaces for this land use based on its size and scale.

[2:19:09] And there is room for 21 of those on site and 9 will be off site on the Westridge property.

[2:19:16] This is allowed by code. It's referred to as off site parking, and the code allows it, but boy, it has to be documented.

[2:19:23] Not only must there be a lease on file with the city, but a covenant is recorded against the property, saying that these nine spaces must always be available and must be maintained.

[2:19:33] So there's a lot of documentation that goes into that, and that serves a good purpose, and it's a very thorough.

[2:19:39] And so again, these document, this documentation will need to be part of the city council's consideration about for the special use permit when they take it up in the future.

[2:19:51] So, this, again, identifies where the off-site parking is located on the Westridge property.

[2:19:58] The traffic impact analysis is a pretty standard portion or element of a review of this nature.

[2:20:04] So, KLOA is a very well known Chicago traffic engineering firm, and they provided a traffic impact analysis for this project.

[2:20:13] Some of the findings there are summarized here, paraphrased, but you get the idea that they didn't identify any major conflicts with how this is proposed.

[2:20:23] are staffed at the City of Highland Park is very well qualified, but we don't have traffic

[2:20:27] experts.

[2:20:29] And so we send these traffic engineering products, analyses, out for a third party, subjective

[2:20:35] review with a consultant in Chicago that the City contracts with yearly.

[2:20:41] And that finding, or the report rather from this third party analysis, concurred with these

[2:20:45] main findings, concurred with the modeling and the assumptions made, and offered several recommendations

[2:20:51] for improvements to the site and so let me go back one.

[2:20:57] And so the applicants took those recommendations and implemented many of them into their project right now.

[2:21:04] You noticed an exhibit that shows signage and striping for the roundabout to help with navigability, maneuverability.

[2:21:10] And so that and a number of other recommendations from this third party review were implemented in the site.

[2:21:15] Store water management. As you saw in that aerial photograph, this site is grass. And the

[2:21:22] introduction of built structure and impervious surface is going to impact storm

[2:21:26] water runoff. So to address that issue, the applicants and their civil engineer are

[2:21:31] proposing a drain at storm water detention pond on a north side of this property. One

[2:21:37] of the plans with this, one of the preliminary engineering plans in the commission's

[2:21:42] it identifies a certain amount of capacity in this pond, but there's important missing information.

[2:21:48] Is that enough capacity to address the runoff?

[2:21:50] So there are important calculations that are still need to be addressed, and the applicants

[2:21:54] will be providing that.

[2:21:56] They need to.

[2:21:57] So not only can the commission require that or include as a condition in a motion to provide

[2:22:02] a complete storm-order drainage information, but it will be required to look at that bottom

[2:22:07] bottom bullet point, that all drainage and grading plans have to be approved before any permits

[2:22:14] can be issued for construction on the property.

[2:22:17] So the Highland Parks Engineering Division reviewed this, of course, reviewed these preliminary

[2:22:21] plans, and their first comment was calculations that required to show that what you're proposing

[2:22:27] is going to do the job.

[2:22:29] So the applicant and their civil engineering team are working on those and will be providing

[2:22:32] those.

[2:22:34] Let's talk landscaping, landscaping, screening and beautification are a big role, have a

[2:22:40] big impact in how this site newly developed site will present itself to the neighborhood

[2:22:44] and how will impact neighboring properties.

[2:22:47] So there are five elements that are going on on the site that will trigger the need for landscaping

[2:22:52] and screening improvements that are listed there.

[2:22:54] And so to show how the applicants are addressing those, a landscaping plan was submitted.

[2:22:59] certainly was included with your packet, hopefully in a chance to look at it.

[2:23:04] Some of the key elements here, I'll share with the commission, are the 10-foot buffer around the landscape open area, around the detention pond,

[2:23:12] so that is certainly included foundation plantings around the base of the building.

[2:23:16] We've seen this in all new construction in Highland Park, so nothing new there.

[2:23:20] It can be interrupted for doors, obviously garage doors, may architectural features,

[2:23:25] And that's really what the applicants have done here provided it, but given it breaks where it needs it.

[2:23:31] There's a ground sign that requires some plantings around its base.

[2:23:35] And then there are plantings required in the new vehicular use area or the parking lot.

[2:23:41] Not only interior plantings in larger lots but also perimeter buffering.

[2:23:46] That's a landscape open space around the border of it.

[2:23:49] And since this is a new vehicular use area in a residential zone,

[2:23:53] offenses required around the relevant property lines.

[2:23:59] So given the nature of the development,

[2:24:02] the scale of it, and the three acre size of the property,

[2:24:05] the applicants are requesting some important variations

[2:24:08] to article 22.

[2:24:10] So it's important we just hit on these.

[2:24:12] The quantities are measured by the length of a lot lines.

[2:24:16] And as you saw, there are significantly

[2:24:17] long lot lines here that they could potentially trigger buffering

[2:24:22] or trigger the need for landscape buffering.

[2:24:24] And so you'll see here that they're proposing slightly fewer quantities

[2:24:29] and allowed by code than required by code.

[2:24:32] Number two there, the location of buffering around the hicketer U-seria.

[2:24:36] You saw that the hicketer U-seria crosses the property line.

[2:24:40] So it doesn't make sense, obviously, to buffer it along that property line

[2:24:43] because that would obstruct traffic.

[2:24:44] So for that, in other reasons, the applicants

[2:24:47] explain in great detail in the project narrative,

[2:24:49] They're requesting relief to wear the open space perimeter landscaping is going and then the requesting relief to the requirement to provide a solid fence or wall along a lot lines adjacent to a residential district.

[2:25:01] As you saw in that zoning map, there's residential residential districts all around this property.

[2:25:06] So the request is to not be required to install a fence around all the perimeter and have relief from that requirement.

[2:25:16] Like all variations in the city code or in the zoning code, there are standards that need to be addressed.

[2:25:20] Here they are.

[2:25:21] The applicants do a good job explaining how these are addressed in their right up and the commission can use these standards as a basis to evaluate the version of West.

[2:25:32] A couple closing slides here on the new construction itself.

[2:25:35] Highland Park has a whole chapter of the city code dedicated to design review and that includes standards specific to new construction.

[2:25:42] I reference those in detail in the staff report.

[2:25:45] The applicants have also addressed them in a narrative.

[2:25:49] This is a fairly unique element of, well, a style of architecture or construction that's

[2:25:54] not well represented in Highland Park, it's a modular construction, built largely off-site,

[2:25:59] trucked to the property, and then built on the property.

[2:26:02] As I mentioned, the building is about 58 square hundred square feet.

[2:26:06] Their idea is to approve a possible expansion in the future.

[2:26:10] One thing you'll notice, there are no rooftop units, all the HVAC and air conditioning units are window-based and are screened with a special screening system that's described in detail in the application on the sides of the building.

[2:26:26] Just kind of a few notes about here on what's going to go on it, what's composed. There are four plans in the application materials, but for the benefit of the public and that maybe viewing this, there's four classrooms in there, a kitchenette.

[2:26:37] There is a vestibule that's an important security feature that the police requested

[2:26:42] A vestibule to carefully regulate who can gain ingress into the building

[2:26:46] And then the applicants provided the closing sentence there on the bullet point in reference to the color

[2:26:52] It kind of the color palette for the building

[2:26:57] There are site lights proposed here not only in the parking lot, but bothers along the walkway

[2:27:03] And wallpacks to illuminate important parts of the building

[2:27:07] uh... the uh... lighting and this is the photometric plan measures put candles and brightness

[2:27:12] and there were a number of conflicts

[2:27:13] in this uh... proposal with the city co-a with the zoning code the lighting standards

[2:27:17] so the applicants have indicated

[2:27:18] that they will be revising the lighting plan because they will not be requesting any

[2:27:22] zoning relief related to lighting

[2:27:24] so uh... i would ask the commission to include also a condition

[2:27:28] of approval with any motion that maybe made this evening

[2:27:31] that they're requiring the applicants to submit a conforming light plan

[2:27:34] and uh... and we'll move forward from there

[2:27:39] There, just in closing here, again, this is a special use consideration.

[2:27:43] It's not a PUD, it's not a rezoning.

[2:27:45] These are certainly things we've seen with a number of petitions that have come before

[2:27:48] the Commission lately.

[2:27:49] This is just a special use consideration, and there are a set of standards identified in the

[2:27:53] staff report in Article 14 to the code, that address some of the issues that can arise.

[2:28:01] These are the standards are more broad, but they can be really interpreted to be very specific

[2:28:06] four land uses and so the findings of fact that will be considered by the commission will reference

[2:28:12] these standards. I certainly won't go through them individually unless it's interest in the

[2:28:16] part of the commission to see them in more detail. So with that, I'll close my recommendation and

[2:28:21] that's to open the public hearing to public testimony. The applicants will also have a presentation

[2:28:27] I think they'd like to share and then staff further recommends if it's appropriate to direct

[2:28:33] to have to draft findings the fact this evening, and then those could be brought back to a subsequent meeting

[2:28:38] for approval by the plan to design commission.

[2:28:42] Note the two conditions there that I referenced here in my comments this evening, relating to the engineering drawings and landscaping.

[2:28:49] So with that, I'll close my comments.

[2:28:51] I'm happy to answer any questions.

[2:28:52] Otherwise, the applicants I know have some comments prepared and are eager to address the commission.

[2:28:57] Thank you.

[2:28:58] Any questions for plan across?

[2:29:00] Thank you.

[2:29:01] Okay,

[2:29:05] good evening.

[2:29:06] I'm David Meek and I'm here to talk about the other end of the life spectrum, everybody who's

[2:29:11] you're going to have testified for the applicant for yes.

[2:29:13] I need to swear everybody.

[2:29:14] Excellent.

[2:29:15] All right.

[2:29:15] We have our email folks, our consultants,

[2:29:20] Joe, I don't think you can see them.

[2:29:22] You want Lisa?

[2:29:25] Yeah.

[2:29:25] Okay.

[2:29:26] All right.

[2:29:27] All

[2:29:32] right.

[2:29:33] You raise your right hand please.

[2:29:35] You swear the testimony you'll give for you tonight will be the truth, the whole truth,

[2:29:38] nothing about the truth. Thank you. And when each person speaks, they get

[2:29:43] else asked you to just stay your name and address for the right thing. And just to be

[2:29:48] clear, we're not necessarily going to speak role here available. No, that's why I

[2:29:51] should see that. We'll try to move this along. And Andy, thanks very much for your

[2:29:56] summation of the issues. And I will.

[2:30:00] Thanks. We have our own presentation we'd like to go through.

[2:30:07] You've seen everybody who's here. We have our architect. We have Lisa Edelman, is the executive director, Zack Waiklin, is one of our board members, and he'll be speaking with me, our architect Maria Seagull, traffic consultant, Louis Abuna from Kalaway, John Mundi, has provided value impact, statement, and terror jankens as our landscape architect.

[2:30:26] So, we've been working on this site for some time now.

[2:30:30] Actually, I would like to give you a brief little background on how we got to this and how we chose this site and then I'll work you through some of the site design considerations and other aspects.

[2:30:42] Touch guns and other things that Andy did and a few other details we'd like to add.

[2:30:46] Does that?

[2:30:52] Is that a quickman?

[2:30:53] What else can I tell you?

[2:30:55] Address.

[2:30:55] 19 hundred Beverly plays here in Island Park.

[2:31:02] Community to present this proposed development tonight.

[2:31:06] So we're going to talk about these peak community.

[2:31:08] How in park community nursery school and daycare center.

[2:31:11] This is on particularly education.

[2:31:16] Work education.

[2:31:17] Publicity on 1851, here in Island Park, right on Laurel Street in a single family home,

[2:31:22] that eventually became part of the library expansion.

[2:31:26] And so we moved to the Carter Center with the Park District in 1966.

[2:31:31] We've been there ever since.

[2:31:33] And now it's time to make a move to a third location.

[2:31:37] We still have two to five years old.

[2:31:40] We provide full day care from 7.30 a.m. to 5.30 p.m.

[2:31:44] year round primarily for working families that need that full day care.

[2:31:50] Well, also the only program in the area that has a state contract to provide preschool for

[2:31:57] all

[2:31:58] data services.

[2:32:01] This is a program that provides state funding for low and moderate income students

[2:32:05] so that we can subsidize their care at HP community.

[2:32:10] We also supplement that with additional scholarship dollars so that we can serve those

[2:32:16] You know, those members of our community that may be vulnerable and may just need that little bit of a leg up at any point in time.

[2:32:26] So we're going to grateful for this opportunity to present the project at the District 112 on property at 640 Ridge Road.

[2:32:33] The process up until now has been the process of looking for a place to move has been quite challenging.

[2:32:41] And as we look for somewhere that meets all of the DCFS early childhood center requirements, the early childhood fire code, and then looking at existing facilities in Highland Park,

[2:32:53] that would be able to meet that, that may be the upgraded to that, the least terms that may be available there.

[2:33:00] All these factors played together to lead us to talking with the school district about this open parcel of land and putting in a new construction building.

[2:33:10] So, we look forward to presenting the rest of the project, and I'll have back to David.

[2:33:18] Thanks, Zach.

[2:33:20] What we're looking for is a project that is

[2:33:24] Subdationally compliant with any code.

[2:33:25] It's in fact the only thing we're asking for really from our some landscape

[2:33:29] various, which I think are driven by just the kind of site we're working in,

[2:33:33] the kind of community adjacent to a public park.

[2:33:36] And so those landscape design features, which we'll talk about in a little more detail,

[2:33:41] are necessitated by that context.

[2:33:44] Good picture of the school district owns this site,

[2:33:47] and it is zoned in the R4 where elementary and high schools

[2:33:51] are permitted uses, child care facilities,

[2:33:53] are conditional uses, especially use review process.

[2:33:57] And the school has made a determination

[2:33:59] that it would be within the mission

[2:34:03] of providing educational services in the city

[2:34:07] to have use like ours located in this location.

[2:34:12] The one condition that they made on us as the landlord

[2:34:15] was that we not provide access off of Red Oak Lane

[2:34:19] and that we had to figure out access through a Westridge Park.

[2:34:23] We started this project in collaboration with the Park District

[2:34:26] and have been meeting with the Park District

[2:34:29] since they actually suggested we take a look at this site.

[2:34:34] We had been looking at a different site.

[2:34:35] We look at this site and so we have had a number of meetings with Park District and our satisfying

[2:34:43] ourselves and there's satisfying themselves that we can provide access through their

[2:34:47] staff only parking area and do it in a way that meets the needs of their operations, meets

[2:34:54] the needs of our operations, fire and safety as well and our operations, I mean staff and

[2:35:01] also mean our families who are coming and we'll describe in a little bit more detail how we

[2:35:06] function so you get a sense of the hat as a part of this project. Our site design, let's

[2:35:14] see, I don't know.

[2:35:18] Okay, there we go. So there's the site in its context and the residential

[2:35:22] neighborhood and as a part of the open public parks and school district, if you will, campus

[2:35:27] area. And here are a few images of the existing facility looking to east at the West Ridge

[2:35:32] Center, which is an old school building,

[2:35:36] looking to from the site to the north to the

[2:35:39] residences. That's red oak lane. There are two residences, which are but this property

[2:35:45] inter-separated by existing trees and shrubs and other foliage. And then this is from the center

[2:35:53] site looking to the south and east at Westridge and the open space park. This is an overlay

[2:36:01] of what we're proposing in the context of the existing park. We're a 2.8 acre component of

[2:36:08] this area that I think to the public is always felt like part of Westridge Center, Westridge Park.

[2:36:15] This is a facility that the park district has been allowed to use by the school district.

[2:36:23] As

[2:36:23] which are integrated into what appear to be public works.

[2:36:27] There are mainly over nine nearly ten acres of space,

[2:36:31] not including the Westridge Center office and educational services building,

[2:36:35] but everything south is, it remains for open activities.

[2:36:40] And currently this site is used principally for table activities,

[2:36:46] which the park district is indicated they can readily find a new location for.

[2:36:49] So programmatically, they're accepting of the loss of this space for their programming because it's really an underutilized,

[2:37:01] not very well utilized, parcel for them, in part because of the topography and it's kind of a wet field.

[2:37:08] So it's kind of very limited window opportunity for them.

[2:37:12] But as you can see from this, and we'll go in a little closer to tail, there's a lighter gray area,

[2:37:17] which is the existing parking lot, and we'll show how traffic goes around there.

[2:37:22] We're adding, as compactly parking area as possible, to the east side.

[2:37:28] One of our design principles was to minimize, as much as we could, the impact on open space,

[2:37:36] to allow for viewsheds, to allow for still open activity areas, but there were some parameters

[2:37:41] we had to have a building.

[2:37:42] We had to have some on-site parking.

[2:37:44] We also had to provide storm water management facility on our site, who designed everything as best we could in that respect storm water management is on the north side due to the existing topography.

[2:37:56] When a clarification, it is a dry bottom detention basin. It is not pond. It's not standing water. This collects whole water as slow release into the existing storm sewer system. So this is not a standing pond. It will look and we have images.

[2:38:09] but it will be natural landscaping grasses, wildflowers, et cetera.

[2:38:14] It's not going to be upon.

[2:38:18] So again, minimal variations from landscaping.

[2:38:25] And so I'd like to talk a little bit about the site plan.

[2:38:31] Okay, that's, again, that's the property boundaries.

[2:38:34] And so you can see what parts are on,

[2:38:37] our property what parts are on the part district.

[2:38:40] And this is the site plan.

[2:38:43] So again, we have all of our utilities are coming

[2:38:48] onto the site underground as required by code.

[2:38:52] We have the building, 1500 square feet,

[2:38:56] to the west side here, what we want to have

[2:38:59] as a part of the special use, the concept of a phase

[2:39:02] to expansion.

[2:39:03] We understand we have to come back for design review

[2:39:05] for any addition to the building. We also have an outdoor play area and closed. This is going to be

[2:39:13] you know major part of our programming forces extent the weather will allow outdoor play. It will be a

[2:39:21] fast-in area activity area. It will show in our landscape plans with the details there.

[2:39:26] Is there a cover of the south boundary line? No, in fact the south boundary line is at the bottom

[2:39:31] the screen here, this line here is a setback, so we're within the setback, the fence area

[2:39:39] crosses a setback, but that's permissible. We have very generous setbacks. We have

[2:39:46] dimensioned and I narrated in our application, the setbacks from all of the various sides

[2:39:50] everything is much more generous than is required by the code.

[2:39:57] We're a very slow use on a very

[2:39:59] large piece of property, rough estimate is that a permitted use could have up to 19,000 square

[2:40:06] feet of development on this site. You could probably have five or six homes on this site.

[2:40:12] This is up to 677 square feet. No, it's sorry, 8700 square feet. It's no longer than we'd originally proposed.

[2:40:25] It's probably for a variety of reasons, but we won't get into that.

[2:40:30] So we've got a design model that has been for some access that has been prepared in consultation

[2:40:38] with the Fire Department as Andy mentioned.

[2:40:42] I'd love to actually go back from it and talk about the building and then we'll talk a little

[2:40:47] bit more about the site.

[2:40:49] So Maria, I think you and I will talk about the building.

[2:40:53] We have, let's say, where are the images? Here we go.

[2:40:57] This is your work product. Once you come up and tell us a little bit about what you have presented for us and why you came up with the design.

[2:41:14] You want my address?

[2:41:17] I live in the city.

[2:41:18] 2015 less school.

[2:41:26] So this is a modular building.

[2:41:29] And our goals in terms of design,

[2:41:33] it's very long and not very tall.

[2:41:38] So what we wanted to do,

[2:41:40] to use the elements of the design to give it a little more to break up this elongated form.

[2:41:49] The windows, we tried to maximize natural light for the children in the classrooms,

[2:41:55] and there is big as we could afford, and that was a very important part of the design.

[2:42:02] Also the windows go all the way down to the almost to the floor, which is nice for children lying on the floor,

[2:42:08] or, you know, because of their size,

[2:42:14] okay,

[2:42:17] the verticality of the windows also kind of breaks

[2:42:20] up the length of the kind of squat facade, the form of the building, which is a given

[2:42:27] from the modular system that we're working with.

[2:42:30] And then it was brought up before that HVC units are mounted to the wall.

[2:42:36] So we came up with this idea to build these trellis pieces that are colorful on their muted colors, but that also serves to kind of break up

[2:42:47] What is a very simple form of a building and then we use that as well on the front facade. How do I go back?

[2:42:56] That's forward. Okay, there we go.

[2:43:00] So that cellus, which is a allows air through for the wall-mounted HVC units here, as also used

[2:43:14] on the front of the facade, which is appropriate for our early childhood center.

[2:43:19] And that kind of environment.

[2:43:24] We do it, yes, do we want to look at that now?

[2:43:27] We have material samples at some point we want it.

[2:43:31] Can you just walk us through what the materials are on the skin and the building?

[2:43:38] The line of a siding is vinyl siding.

[2:43:42] We're using PVC trim.

[2:43:45] And then the screen is actually fabric cement concrete.

[2:43:51] Bords five quarter by six and eight and ten inch boards.

[2:43:55] which is a very stable material which ever needs to be repainted and these are the colors

[2:44:01] they've been holding up for you.

[2:44:07] The color of the siding is very neutral.

[2:44:17] The accent color

[2:44:19] on all the trims and the panels above the doors are one of the colors.

[2:44:26] Is the trim the accent above the windows and the trim the fiber? No, it's PB's

[2:44:33] see it's another product by the siding company. We're working within a pallet of materials that's

[2:44:40] available through this modular company.

[2:44:43] There are a lot of black guys, so there's no dimension that other than what you read from

[2:44:48] the different colors, is that correct?

[2:44:50] You know, the trims will project a little bit off the siding, and yeah, it's other, yeah.

[2:44:56] And curious about how to make it?

[2:44:59] Yes, except...

[2:45:00] Or these trellis, screens, what we're calling them, those project out.

[2:45:06] Those windows across the top, or is that just a different color?

[2:45:10] This is a panel, a decorative panel.

[2:45:12] Yeah, it makes the four more vertical to break up the horizontality.

[2:45:17] And the windows are the operable?

[2:45:19] The air.

[2:45:20] Yeah, not the bottom part, but the upper prize casement.

[2:45:25] So, and I'm going to make it appear to not look like a typical modular building

[2:45:31] is the eve of the roof.

[2:45:34] So, projects out over on the sides, if you see other modulars, there's a more recognizable roof lining.

[2:45:39] This is where we meant to look more like a simple wood, conventionally framed wood structure.

[2:45:48] Modular is a type of construction, but it's a way of doing construction off-site.

[2:45:54] We have a very tight time frame, and so a choice to do modular was to be able to do construction while sight work is going on.

[2:46:02] so that we can have delivery of a building that can then be erected rather quickly.

[2:46:06] It will then be faced as then the other building.

[2:46:09] So it's the internal guts of the building that are built early on.

[2:46:12] So we've got the piping and the conduit and the plumbing.

[2:46:15] Everything sort of interconnects like Lego pieces.

[2:46:19] This gets shipped in segments and assembled on to a foundation

[2:46:22] and it is secured to a foundation like any other building.

[2:46:26] So it meets all building code requirements of the city.

[2:46:29] It's just a prefabrication, which then looks and operates and feels like any other educational building.

[2:46:38] This is not a temporary trailer kind of thing.

[2:46:42] This is not the kind of thing that you would see over a site's school that's going to have

[2:46:49] what ramps leading up to it.

[2:46:51] This is going to be integrated into the landscape.

[2:46:53] It's going to be at grade and you'll see our landscape and treat that.

[2:46:57] Yeah, this is one of the concrete perimeter foundation, you know, with a concrete slab under the crawl space, and the great, like David said, comes right up, so you're not, you're not having all these ramps in.

[2:47:14] Thank

[2:47:20] you.

[2:47:22] We went through, if you're at all interested, these are some of the other perspectives.

[2:47:28] Every image that we have up here is in your, your package, but this is probably for the public benefit.

[2:47:33] You can see the size of the scale of the building.

[2:47:35] This was kind of a walk around and you can see how the trellises project out.

[2:47:39] This is actually an image of a somewhat similar facility in Minnesota by the same modular

[2:47:46] company, innovative modular solutions.

[2:47:49] This is a permanent preschool,

[2:47:57] and this is our floor plan.

[2:47:58] We have four classrooms office space.

[2:48:02] If we do an addition, we're hoping to get an additional,

[2:48:06] I think it's an additional classroom and additional

[2:48:08] office space and storage space, because that's challenging right now

[2:48:12] with these size and the building that we're doing.

[2:48:14] Proposing, oops, I'm going to run away.

[2:48:16] Okay.

[2:48:20] Our design functions are also driven by DCF S licensing requirements.

[2:48:25] In terms of access number, if doors we have to have window placement, et cetera.

[2:48:29] So there's a number of constraints that we had to operate within in terms of designing this building.

[2:48:37] And that's this in circulation.

[2:48:41] So we're going to be, as we said, coming off of Ridge Road.

[2:48:44] Staff, who are working at the Park District, will continue to travel in this fashion in a counterclockwise fashion through the site.

[2:48:57] Our visitors and staff will come around the circle.

[2:49:01] Some of our staff may actually do this,

[2:49:03] because we're going to be nine dedicated staff parking spaces there,

[2:49:06] and that will be by easement, and that will be signed,

[2:49:09] dedicated to staff parking during the week.

[2:49:12] And then our other visitors and staff will come down here.

[2:49:15] Our staff will also park on this side,

[2:49:19] and then the remainder of this will be identified for student drop-off.

[2:49:24] And because of the age of the children coming,

[2:49:27] everybody is coming and being walked in and signed in by their parents.

[2:49:33] And so short, relatively short duration,

[2:49:35] we're also staggered start.

[2:49:36] We don't have a hard start or stop time.

[2:49:40] So we know how our facility operates at the Carter Center,

[2:49:42] we're actually a smaller here.

[2:49:44] So we're very confident that we've got more than adequate space

[2:49:47] for our families coming to the site.

[2:49:51] Well, that was one of my questions.

[2:49:52] We have 30 parking spots.

[2:49:54] how many spaces are going to be used for staff?

[2:49:58] So our staff peak is in the middle of the day

[2:50:00] when we really don't have our students coming and going.

[2:50:03] Our staff peak is also an overlap staff.

[2:50:06] So there's some staff coming, some staff going.

[2:50:09] If we do have to have staff there when the kids are being dropped off.

[2:50:13] Wait, we're all right.

[2:50:14] Our last one is the peak is 21 in the middle of the day.

[2:50:17] And that's on the assumption of a larger building

[2:50:19] that we had had, which was 11,000 square feet.

[2:50:21] So a larger facility somewhere.

[2:50:22] How do you drop off 87 kids?

[2:50:25] So 87 kids?

[2:50:26] It's standard.

[2:50:27] I'm saying that.

[2:50:28] But even if it's 40 at one time and 40 at another, how do you drop off very small children

[2:50:33] and believe in infants like that?

[2:50:36] So we have years of records of scientists.

[2:50:39] How many people are on site and for how long?

[2:50:43] Because a sign in and out.

[2:50:45] We know that a lot of people come, they're siblings,

[2:50:49] and so they come together.

[2:50:51] there's car pooling, and we're very confident that we have 14 or 14 on the west side of our parking lot alone, and we're very confident that would be sufficient for our families,

[2:51:10] given how people come and go from the Carter Center right now, and that's a larger facility larger capacity than we're going to have because that's what we have.

[2:51:18] And that's also a licensed capacity number.

[2:51:21] That's why the maximum we could have capacity for

[2:51:25] in the 87th figure that we have in the application

[2:51:28] is with an expansion edition of classrooms.

[2:51:32] In practically speaking, we're going to have many,

[2:51:35] we're going to have fewer than 87.

[2:51:37] We're probably going to have, at least I can speak to this,

[2:51:39] probably 74 students.

[2:51:43] And again, because we serve working families,

[2:51:45] We have people coming for win the work. We families work. So some people will only work a few days a week. Some people need a five days a week

[2:51:52] So it's a it's a very fluid, flexible

[2:51:54] kind of facility

[2:51:56] We you know, we adjust our programming based on what the community needs and our programming adjustments are occurring in collaboration with the school district as it's changed

[2:52:05] you know, it's wraparound

[2:52:06] provision of of childcare and so we're going a bit younger in the future

[2:52:14] Well-point clarification on site circulation, Andy talked about this little corner area here.

[2:52:21] That's really only for use, that's not everybody's going to use that.

[2:52:26] It's going to operate like a normal parking lot in a parking lot that's needed to be parking.

[2:52:29] You're going to turn around and you're going to pull out of the aisle and go, right, you're

[2:52:32] not going to do this 3.0 turn.

[2:52:34] That's really because for code, it's a single entry parking module, and so that's a 3.0 turn

[2:52:41] In the event that the whole parking lot was full, you couldn't go anywhere to turn around.

[2:52:45] If you go down there, that's where you get your outlets, so you're not backing out into the traffic circle.

[2:52:53] We have exhibits, I could show you if you want, you've got it in your packet, that demonstrate throughout a turn, that the fire department, fire trucks,

[2:53:00] large trucks will circle through the site and they've reviewed, and the fire consultants have reviewed the operation at this site.

[2:53:09] And

[2:53:14] in terms of traffic generation, it's a summary of the investigation and the accounts

[2:53:24] demonstrated that there was absolutely acceptable impacts on the rate road and the intersections

[2:53:31] with this use given the volume.

[2:53:38] loading, I just want to touch on loading, we expect food service deliveries once every two

[2:53:44] weeks.

[2:53:45] So we have a designated loading area.

[2:53:47] We have to have a loading area, and that is in here, these parking spaces, that will

[2:53:54] be designated for loading only prior to 70, I'm prior to when families are showing up.

[2:53:59] And that's where we'll have our loading operations.

[2:54:02] One of the things I do need to raise with you and ask for you under your codes is a consideration of,

[2:54:10] since this is a residential district, this commercial operation with a loading facility would need to be identified

[2:54:16] and called out under your nuisance code as an acceptable operation so that we can call out in the ordinance

[2:54:26] that the, I'm not saying this quite well, it well enough, that the operation of deliveries to this site is not a public nuisance.

[2:54:39] And our operation is once every two weeks one truck coming for up to 30 minutes to unload some food supplies for us.

[2:54:53] landscaping.

[2:54:54] Here are Jenkins. I'd like you to come up please and walk us through your landscaping

[2:55:00] before going the wrong way. Your landscaping plan and talk to us about it.

[2:55:05] This is the site before if you want to see how the site function.

[2:55:09] And here is our lovely landscaping plan.

[2:55:14] 10 seconds, eight, nine, seven, just go court and high on park.

[2:55:22] Jenkins.

[2:55:23] Tara.

[2:55:25] The flu.

[2:55:27] Like pitcher.

[2:55:28] I'm going to make this really brief.

[2:55:31] You know, I want to focus on first of all safety for the kids.

[2:55:36] Have, you know, plans here.

[2:55:37] That's not.

[2:55:38] Thorns on them, or at the berries are not poisonous.

[2:55:41] Because, you know, we do want these kids to walk around with, you know, having a field trip

[2:55:45] explore nature and wildlife and have fun with it.

[2:55:50] Second is having mostly all native species to you because it's less maintenance.

[2:55:59] It's, you know, brings in wildlife and birds.

[2:56:03] And also it's creating a natural environment for this area.

[2:56:08] And also along the tension area, having a native buffer zone,

[2:56:12] It seems to be the most fitting.

[2:56:16] The third is discovery.

[2:56:18] I chose these plans to really spark interest in the kids,

[2:56:24] with having fragrant flowers, for the shrubs,

[2:56:29] really beautiful fall colors.

[2:56:33] Also, the two in the front of the building with the facade,

[2:56:36] we talked about.

[2:56:39] We created Column Artaries to kind of break up

[2:56:42] horizontal line of the the building also having the spruces on the corner to soften the building as well

[2:56:50] and we talked about the low windows of the building. So having like service vary and ride

[2:56:56] button close close to the windows the kids can see the you know the birds coming up and picking the

[2:57:02] berries and you know I'm creating interest, creating making this a fun environment and then buffering

[2:57:10] the Jason properties. So on the east side of the parking lot, we had natural dogwoods and

[2:57:18] pre-drops seed, mill maintenance, and native variety. The top portion of the detention areas,

[2:57:28] you know, a variety of birches, dogwoods, diapers that can take, you know, wet feed and

[2:57:38] that thrive in that environment, and also having landscape

[2:57:43] vary around the signage as well, that's it in a nutshell.

[2:57:50] Thank you, and so, right, I got a couple more points to emphasize.

[2:57:54] So we're creating one of our design aesthetic here was to create kind of a variety of

[2:58:02] screenings from the residences to the North.

[2:58:05] There's a house at 655 Fredo can have the 655 Fredo that are directly

[2:58:12] abutting the property.

[2:58:13] There's an existing stand of trees, I keep going on the wrong way, sorry folks.

[2:58:19] Oh, and neither of these are some of the trees and the shrubs that Tara has selected for

[2:58:26] us.

[2:58:28] Sorry.

[2:58:29] A floor of the detention basin?

[2:58:31] It, on the landscape plan, it's not listed as being planted.

[2:58:36] I'm assuming it will be planted, is that with a native plant mix as well.

[2:58:44] So, Dan,

[2:58:47] what was your intent with respect to the basin of the basin?

[2:58:54] Just grass.

[2:58:57] Okay, so we had taken the record that there'd be a 10 foot landscape buffer around.

[2:59:04] A geese did in your thoughts on grass versus the plantings in the area.

[2:59:12] Looking at the plant as well, it appears that the 10 foot buffer starts to normal or the normal water or low water level rather than the high water level.

[2:59:23] And is it the intent for the buffer to start at the high water level?

[2:59:29] Is that the intent of the buffer?

[2:59:32] From a perspective of code?

[2:59:36] But I don't know about that specific.

[2:59:37] It's just supposed to be more of a perimeter,

[2:59:40] which I'm assuming would be out of the water.

[2:59:43] Well, it's

[2:59:47] typically from the high water level back.

[2:59:49] Yeah, it would be out.

[2:59:52] Right, out.

[2:59:54] Because right now it looks like it just covers the area between the high water level and the normal water

[3:00:00] Their level at the no water level, in this case.

[3:00:05] So, yes, as the answer to, it should be on the outside of the basin.

[3:00:14] Okay. The ten foot buffer. We throw the impacts of that, but I think we don't.

[3:00:24] What we're not trying to be to cheat anything on this, we're trying to understand the functions well and that we'll maintain itself well and that we'll interfere with the operation that we're adding drainage operations to the extent that native findings might interfere, because dancing justing that the basin be grass, at least the low parts.

[3:00:45] Yeah, I know that there's mixes, mostly craft, that put in prenails,

[3:00:54] and the sedges, and those other

[3:00:56] material that work well on the bottom of the tension basins, and that the sedmix is really

[3:01:02] pretty good, and just chose the appropriate sedmix for the base and it'd be nice if it were

[3:01:11] Parmator, you know, kind of directed toward the pollinators, but that's a little tougher because the tension basins are kind of the toughest places that we

[3:01:21] Think in

[3:01:23] Another thing that you should be careful with is sometimes in those mixes that they do have

[3:01:29] Sades that are not children friendly

[3:01:33] So just be careful as you review those seed mix, right?

[3:01:39] What's the buffer, the buffer should go all the way to the property line, and that leave

[3:01:43] that little sliver of turf between the buffer and property line to the north to the north?

[3:01:52] Okay, so the, the,

[3:01:56] the, the, there's just a little, there's just a little, there's just a little,

[3:02:01] there's just a little curve hatch should go all the way to the property line.

[3:02:05] Okay, I mean, that, right, that area is, is basically what it across the property line as it

[3:02:10] is, but we'll be stafing the property line and a couple other comments with the two areas

[3:02:20] to the north of the building. You've got two little semi-circle. At least one of those needs

[3:02:26] to be accessible to me, Title II ADA code, in terms of a payback pathway. In terms of, you

[3:02:37] have to be able to get access to those, to one of those, to meet the code, and then

[3:02:47] what quick real of the area to the south of the building to play area, you need to meet

[3:02:52] CPSC,

[3:02:56] which it, just looking at the, you have the balance beam in there that is right

[3:03:01] up against the fence, and it just doesn't, so, you need to make sure that that happens.

[3:03:07] Okay.

[3:03:08] I'm, um, Lisa, Adam and I are executive directors, I'm sure quite familiar with requirements

[3:03:14] and we'll look into that.

[3:03:15] You and you, you're, we're all of that.

[3:03:17] Thank you.

[3:03:20] And then the parking lot, the handicap parking space is needs to meet Illinois accessibility code.

[3:03:30] Which does not allow a van.

[3:03:32] Illinois accessibility code doesn't have van parking.

[3:03:36] The general

[3:03:42] of the planting is is fine.

[3:03:45] I don't have a problem with the planting in general.

[3:03:47] Okay.

[3:03:47] Thank you.

[3:03:51] As I said before, we've actually submitted it.

[3:03:55] This hasn't been put in your packet.

[3:03:57] A code compliant lighting plan.

[3:03:59] Otherwise it darkens the dry regulations.

[3:04:02] We made some adjustments to the fixtures.

[3:04:05] The patina there will be dark bronze.

[3:04:06] We do have signage located on the property in this area off of the roundabout and so there's our lighting plan.

[3:04:21] There's the sign. This would provide visibility at the end of the driveway here.

[3:04:25] This is a look looking to the west across the existing staff parking lot.

[3:04:30] And these are, I, I see what you mean about the, the buffer being, uh, uh, uh, way from the north property line.

[3:04:38] All right, so we discussed with, uh, a recap quickly of our, our variance requests.

[3:04:42] Um, we have narrated this way of identified them, uh, and you did a summation.

[3:04:47] Basically, um, it's, as to quantity, there are a few, it's an open space.

[3:04:53] We didn't want to, frankly, overburden the space and start planting and filling up opportunity areas.

[3:05:02] So we thought we tried to strike a balance.

[3:05:04] And that's with respect to trees evergreen and shade more in a mental with respect to scrubs.

[3:05:11] We're 40-some under the requirement, but that's still on a shrubs for the site.

[3:05:15] It's not building on a big site, and it's quantity is measured by the size of the perimeter of the site.

[3:05:21] So that's sort of the basis for that request and again the standards have been addressed in your application materials and some contextual photographs of the site and you're all familiar with that.

[3:05:36] Excuse me, how many trees are you going to be taking out?

[3:05:39] No, I'm not taking out four dead trees and that's it.

[3:05:43] And so nothing needs to be replaced with that?

[3:05:51] We have addressed the special use standards.

[3:05:55] We've looked at each one of them.

[3:05:56] We've provided our argument as to why we meet,

[3:06:00] and what ways we meet each of them,

[3:06:02] and we've done the same with the design of new standards.

[3:06:07] I think we've tried to nearly this as best we can.

[3:06:10] We have, again, a special use with four devices,

[3:06:15] as to landscaping,

[3:06:16] We'd like to get recognition of this as heavy a second phase of the 25-square-foot addition.

[3:06:24] We'd like a statement that the noise is associated with the operation of a food delivery

[3:06:28] truck across the park district parking lot in the high-owned park community site would be acceptable

[3:06:33] and would not be deemed a public nuisance and we understand conditions of approval that might

[3:06:40] necessary with respect to engineering matters, lighting, and so we'd ask for your favorable

[3:06:47] consideration of this matter. We're looking forward to being in a new location in Highland

[3:06:52] Park. We think this is an appropriate place for us, and thank you very much.

[3:07:00] Thank you.

[3:07:00] Any questions for the applicant?

[3:07:02] I got one quick question out. So there's a field that runs all the way to Red Oak

[3:07:07] Lane, roughly.

[3:07:10] Yeah, I mean, is that part of your site who takes care of that?

[3:07:13] What happens with that?

[3:07:14] Oh, which is okay.

[3:07:15] So right now, the entire site is maintained by the Park District, with permission from the school district.

[3:07:23] And we've been in conversation with Park District over operational matters, and they've agreed to continue to mow the open spaces.

[3:07:29] They won't maintain our landscaping, we'll maintain that.

[3:07:33] And we've got an agreement in principle that's being documented with respect to snow plowing and they'll continue to do lawn mowing and all of those practices will be with respect to landscape maintenance will be consistent with the purpose districts practices for their open spaces and their landscaping.

[3:07:53] of all agreements in place with the park district.

[3:07:56] No, we're working on that.

[3:07:58] We have all the terms, we're looking at the legal document right now, and we're bringing

[3:08:03] that forward.

[3:08:05] Now, we're having discussion with staff, we've had discussions with Park Board Member.

[3:08:11] We are bringing this in front of School District and Park District, and we are speaking

[3:08:16] again on Thursday night, and we're bringing this all together in the next couple of weeks.

[3:08:20] Okay.

[3:08:21] Did you get only a million feedback from the neighbors to the Northland?

[3:08:26] So we've been there today public meeting on this project February 5th at the police station.

[3:08:34] We got probably a dozen folks from Ridge Road in the immediate neighborhood to the North,

[3:08:39] who wanted to know what our plan was, wanted to see what our plan was, and we got dialogue.

[3:08:44] We probably were there for our 1.5-2 hours.

[3:08:48] And we kind of went through what we knew at that point, and we had a pretty good site plan to narrow landscape plan to develop,

[3:08:56] but we took feedback about concerns about buffering and how to how this site would operate.

[3:09:04] There were, you know, I think some of the neighbors are here, we'll probably speak.

[3:09:11] We've had some follow-up discussions with some of the neighbors, and again, they can speak to them for themselves as to what they're continued concerns if any are about this.

[3:09:24] I think we've tried to be considerate of their properties with respect to how we've located building, how we've landscaped it, and with respect to lighting.

[3:09:37] are going to be on timers and photosels so that they're only on when they need to be on and

[3:09:42] they're not coming on overnight. So we're our staff are done by 630. We're going to shut off

[3:09:47] those lights. Our staff are arriving around between 637. That's when the lights are going to come

[3:09:53] on. One other point of clarification with respect to the lighting. The lighting designated area

[3:09:57] will be loading only for 6AM to 7AM. So we're not talking about overnight loading. We're talking

[3:10:02] 16 to 7 a.m. one day a week. One truck. Well, the air conditioner is also not work not beyond during the night.

[3:10:11] I don't know.

[3:10:13] And we thought about that.

[3:10:20] What was the answer?

[3:10:20] Sorry, the answer is they would be on.

[3:10:22] They would be on that.

[3:10:23] Yes.

[3:10:26] So did the drainage and lighting plans come back to us when they are finalized?

[3:10:30] No.

[3:10:33] That's a staff staff does that too.

[3:10:36] Is there a school season associated with your use?

[3:10:40] We are required by states contract to be open 49 weeks of the year.

[3:10:46] For no weeks, right, for no months, for no weeks.

[3:10:48] For no weeks, for no weeks, for no weeks.

[3:10:49] For no weeks.

[3:10:50] For no weeks.

[3:10:50] Our work this year is going to be when we move out of cargo

[3:10:56] and hopefully we move into here.

[3:10:59] There should be a general and a typical time for when we're doing it, and this summer early fall.

[3:11:08] So, I guess I'd ask for this, I'd ask for you to give consideration of this tonight.

[3:11:15] We've, maybe I don't know if you like me saying this, but we've prepared suggested findings of fact.

[3:11:20] I'd implore you to take consideration of this even tonight.

[3:11:23] We would like to bring this as soon as possible to city council for consideration.

[3:11:29] given our need to vacate Carter Center on September 1st.

[3:11:35] We have a very aggressive plan, which we have an opportunity to execute on in the timeline

[3:11:41] that we need any consideration you can give to us to of your review of this recommendation

[3:11:49] to City Council.

[3:11:50] Be greatly appreciated tonight.

[3:11:53] Thank you.

[3:11:54] questions for the applicants. Thank you. Members of the public wish to speak.

[3:12:04] If you could

[3:12:05] all actually, if everybody wishes to speak, even if you're not sure, but you might,

[3:12:10] at least, and because I want to swear you all in it once, you decide not to decide not to.

[3:12:15] You can all come up to the podium, please.

[3:12:22] Yep.

[3:12:22] I'm just kidding.

[3:12:26] Can I?

[3:12:40] See you.

[3:12:41] Set the podium.

[3:12:43] Six, six, six.

[3:12:44] Right on the plane.

[3:12:45] Right there.

[3:12:46] Mm-hmm.

[3:12:54] And we're talking hours right there.

[3:12:55] No, I promise.

[3:12:56] That's what we're all in at once.

[3:12:57] We get all just actually just raise your right hand, please.

[3:13:01] Yes, we're going to test them all.

[3:13:02] We'll be through tonight.

[3:13:03] We'll be the truth.

[3:13:04] The whole truth and nothing but the truth.

[3:13:06] Thank you.

[3:13:06] Okay.

[3:13:06] And each will come up to speak, please see your name and address for the record.

[3:13:12] Can I go first?

[3:13:14] I'm, uh, I have another, uh, six, six, five, five, five, five.

[3:13:17] So our property is that one right there.

[3:13:20] In the picture, outside of there.

[3:13:22] And so, uh, I think we have, um, actually, we've just talked about that.

[3:13:26] We have been attending the meetings.

[3:13:29] I, um, uh, I think we have a couple of concerns about this proposed property.

[3:13:33] Uh, predominantly the idea that we're putting it in this particular location.

[3:13:37] we already have, as you know, moreally schools vote here, but I was kind of bad.

[3:13:45] Obviously, that's not all, this is your fault.

[3:13:47] That's outside the fact that we've got the West Ridge Center.

[3:13:49] We have one oak.

[3:13:51] We have sure wood, and we have all the other schools in that area.

[3:13:54] It's a very congested area.

[3:13:55] We're adding more to that area as well as getting rid of our open space.

[3:14:02] Our dark concerns, I think, you know, are that we've added a street.

[3:14:07] Right now, this property is actually on red oak, it is not on ridge, and we're adding a street from a ridge all over to red oak.

[3:14:17] If we were to do this, it makes a hell of a lot more sense to have it come off of red oak.

[3:14:21] I know that doesn't make sense for the schools and timing and all that, but we're now at my backyard now is going to be a parking lot.

[3:14:29] It doesn't make traffic every day of kids being dropped off.

[3:14:33] I think that the building looks lovely, the landscape looks lovely, I don't have any issues with that but I don't know why we have to put in all of these parking spaces and all this traffic and this particular location. Why can't we take it away and put it farther away from the residential buildings?

[3:14:53] Again, Seth Bender's 665 Redo Plane, you know.

[3:15:00] I just have a few concerns as well. You know, I'm reacting mostly to what was presented tonight. I haven't seen any of those documents before then, so that's why I urge you at least to not necessarily vote on this tonight, so that the community at large can kind of see some of what is being proposed. And with that said, it had been following this very regularly as they know they see me at all the meetings.

[3:15:26] But some concerns are, I haven't seen it in actual full plan yet that actually details where the property lines are.

[3:15:35] I'm actually quite concerned that the ten-foot buffer that was referred to earlier isn't necessarily being respected in regards to the property on a six-six-five-red-of-lane.

[3:15:50] Thank you.

[3:15:50] Do we have an area where I don't understand where these people live?

[3:16:24] Yes, the first one you were pointing at.

[3:16:27] Thank you.

[3:16:28] So the questions I have are regards to.

[3:16:34] One, our property actually for some strange reason.

[3:16:39] It's not represented by the fence on our property, so I don't know if you've been drawing things to the fence or the actual surveyed land.

[3:16:48] And, you know, looking at where that driveway is, I don't exactly understand how rainwater, how is drawn and I haven't looked at any sort of maps that,

[3:17:01] If the idea that it all goes into the retention that's there, or is that just going into our backyard north of where that driveway is,

[3:17:11] it flans.

[3:17:13] Well, we don't know. We're not. We can't do back and back.

[3:17:17] Those are questions I have.

[3:17:19] I want to just somehow point directed toward Mr. Leaf, Commissioner Leaf.

[3:17:24] You asked what do the neighbors think, the numbers, what? That February meeting.

[3:17:29] they were vast people who lived in there were very upset at such a, you know, that such a building

[3:17:37] was going up in that space and kind of tearing up the local park, there was also, and I

[3:17:42] can share this with any of the people on the cushion, a, you know, a change.org petition

[3:17:48] that 137 members of the community have signed saying they would not be for the school in

[3:17:55] there. Thank you.

[3:18:04] It wasn't for me. That was. Hi, I'm Ed Brawl. I live at 669 Ridge Road.

[3:18:11] So my driveway is basically right across from where the ingress will be for this. I attended

[3:18:17] Westridge School myself and then Red Oak enjoys my adult life. I've chosen to move to Ridge Road

[3:18:23] to be near all the amenities of Southwest Highland Park. I have two children who are at or were at

[3:18:29] at Oak or Sherwood Schools, and I want the dog in the Westerage Park every day. My kids

[3:18:34] take classes there. I think having active children in the park and the playground and the

[3:18:39] park district facilities a wonderful aspect of living in the area. So my point of view is probably

[3:18:45] quite the opposite. I think, you know, we have plenty of schools in the area but why not more. It

[3:18:50] shows that our neighborhood is supportive of bringing new families in a highland park who need

[3:18:55] The enrollment is small and is open to a broad section of the community supported by the community in the state.

[3:19:03] Every reference I've seen to this organization has been positive.

[3:19:07] Well, until I heard the loading bit at 6am, I'm kind of not cool with that one, but maybe we can work on that.

[3:19:13] So I don't really have a job in this hunt.

[3:19:15] I don't know anyone on the project.

[3:19:16] I was personally very against the middle school campus plan,

[3:19:20] But I kind of think that the best defense is a good offense.

[3:19:23] And if we adopt a small scale in criminal school,

[3:19:26] that kind of says, OK, we're done.

[3:19:28] It fits very well with the overall facilities

[3:19:31] that are in the area.

[3:19:33] And I think even addresses some things like drainage

[3:19:35] problems, the practices had on the property.

[3:19:39] So a couple of classrooms, and some more students,

[3:19:43] some more happiness in the neighborhood.

[3:19:44] I think that's a very good thing to have more kids around

[3:19:47] and have them playing outside all year long.

[3:19:51] I don't typically think of Southwest Island Park as a Nimbee neighborhood.

[3:19:54] I've lived there more than half of my life.

[3:19:56] And I think this proposal feels natural and aligned with what we offer.

[3:20:00] So I think we should endorse and support it.

[3:20:02] Thank you, real, dear.

[3:20:15] I know it was one,

[3:20:18] two, one, five, one.

[3:20:20] Anglewood Port.

[3:20:21] I don't know.

[3:20:23] I like your plan, everything else, but I'm really opposed to putting anything in a park.

[3:20:29] We have these parks, let's say once we put a building there, the park is gone.

[3:20:36] Let's not forget that.

[3:20:38] We need the parks more than we need anything else.

[3:20:41] Thank you.

[3:20:50] Anybody else who wishes to speak?

[3:20:53] Okay.

[3:20:53] I'll give you the applicant at the time chance to respond.

[3:20:58] All I want to address is Mr. Bender's question about drainage because I can absolutely appreciate that concern.

[3:21:14] So we have to contain the water on our property, and we have to drain the water that's on our property and coming off of our property.

[3:21:22] So there's codes that address, sorry, I should be just in the chairman of that.

[3:21:27] There's codes that I kind of mirror and that address this.

[3:21:33] So we've got underground drainage that's taking the water from the impervious that we're adding to the park district property

[3:21:39] And it's taking the water from our site, and it's all conveying it underground into the existing storm sewer system.

[3:21:47] It is in that residential subdivision up there, which runs along the property line.

[3:21:53] And the tension basin is designed with burying to hold water there.

[3:22:00] So right now there is water from our site that is flowing off onto your property.

[3:22:07] We're taking the water on our site and controlling it.

[3:22:14] Then you control up to the 100-year farm.

[3:22:19] Dan Cranie, our civil engineer, can speak to that.

[3:22:24] And it goes over the 100-year storm.

[3:22:27] Dan, why should you come up here, please?

[3:22:29] Dan Cranie.

[3:22:37] Good evening. Nice to see all the people.

[3:22:41] Dan Cranie, Dan Cranie company in North Brooklyn, Illinois.

[3:22:47] Thank you.

[3:22:50] The storm road attention is designed to meet the city of the House of Parks College as well as

[3:22:54] Lake County Stormwater Management.

[3:22:57] It's designed to retain the order up to the 100 years storm and if it does, I will

[3:23:03] flow out of the same direction that it does now, but it, I know, presently the water comes

[3:23:10] into probably that lower area by your property in the time it rains because of the lower

[3:23:16] storm structure in the area and there's no storm water detention.

[3:23:20] One of the people who have decided that it's going to handle the additional amount for the

[3:23:26] problem of the area, we're going to collect it and release it at a slow rate as required by the city.

[3:23:34] This out of the question that was asked.

[3:23:37] Thank you.

[3:23:38] Okay.

[3:23:39] Thank you.

[3:23:45] I

[3:23:47] I don't know anything else though. Oh, it's alright. Pretty line. There isn't existing fence that

[3:23:52] Kind of that

[3:23:56] I have

[3:24:00] to remember where it is. If I had way moved through this. Oh, here we go. Okay, I'm gonna do this. Okay

[3:24:08] Sorry. Oh, yeah. Sorry folks. No, it's late.

[3:24:16] There isn't existing fence that

[3:24:19] runs about 132 feet on the northeast side of the property from our surveying

[3:24:26] There's a little bit of that across the property line, but from the most part, it's on the

[3:24:30] neighbor's property lines, the solid six-foot wood fence.

[3:24:34] There's trees on the other side of the fence, our tree survey shows that, and we have

[3:24:42] good measurements, and we know where the property line is, and we'll have to work within

[3:24:48] that and present the final altar survey for the final engineering.

[3:24:55] But that's what I'll say about that and other than I think I don't have more follow-up.

[3:25:02] Thank you.

[3:25:03] Thank you.

[3:25:05] A couple questions of the fence.

[3:25:08] What's the material of the fence?

[3:25:10] Which fence is the fence around the play area?

[3:25:14] The play area is going to be rubberized.

[3:25:19] How did we narrow it?

[3:25:19] to describe it, rubberized chain length fence.

[3:25:22] And that's in part, and we discussed this

[3:25:24] under an narrative, for usability.

[3:25:29] Right now, we have this kind of fencing at Carter Center

[3:25:32] for our outdoor play area.

[3:25:34] There's visibility that get through that.

[3:25:36] It's also functions for weaving things,

[3:25:39] hatching things with the children to create

[3:25:42] for play in a functioning space for them.

[3:25:45] We also can't have partages on the fences for regulatory reasons.

[3:25:54] And that'll be black?

[3:25:56] Yes.

[3:25:56] Black rubberized.

[3:26:00] And then the building does look like a manufacturer building.

[3:26:05] I know that you've tried.

[3:26:08] But it still really looks like a manufacturer building.

[3:26:14] I, and I'm also kind of surprised that you didn't try to pull any detail from the ridge

[3:26:21] road build by the characteristic building and transfer it over,

[3:26:29] it just, I don't, and it does

[3:26:33] look like a manufacturer building, and I'm struggling with that.

[3:26:40] You're going to have to go on that.

[3:26:41] I mean, it's not here for designers, right?

[3:26:44] We don't have to do this, especially.

[3:26:48] Well, no, there are no other stuff about these extensive reference to the designary standards that are applicable to this.

[3:26:55] But I'm asking for...

[3:26:56] We're not asking...

[3:26:57] We're asking for a designary review as a part of this, which are used to excuse me.

[3:27:01] There's a designary review.

[3:27:01] We're not asking for any exceptions.

[3:27:03] We believe we can apply with the standards for designary view of the site, the building, the landscaping, etc.

[3:27:10] And

[3:27:14] those can confuse you two of you that doesn't, this was a special use.

[3:27:20] It's a special approach with the external design features and so we discussed that,

[3:27:25] you've done a presentation in this effort report.

[3:27:28] We've done a discussion about the reconstruction, but the design standards themselves.

[3:27:37] We provided a tab in our binder of these tab four or four or five

[3:27:42] that addresses each of the design standards and how are the project.

[3:27:46] Yeah, it's five, five, five, five, five, five.

[3:27:48] Is the modular building company here?

[3:27:51] No, they're out of Indiana.

[3:27:53] But we've been working very closely with them, Zach and Maria,

[3:27:58] in particular, I have been working closely with them.

[3:28:00] But the modular is the form of construction

[3:28:03] to bring the building here.

[3:28:04] You could build a building like this that wasn't done modular,

[3:28:07] but it would be a low-pitched groove, a single-story building, and then we've created some design

[3:28:15] features to create some articulation as the HVX screening and the travels in the front,

[3:28:19] and we've done that through some of the paneling and the change in materials, the paneling

[3:28:25] about the windows, the floor, the windows that would go to the ground level and up, and the

[3:28:32] recombination of color and materials, also trying to create some variation to the facade of the building.

[3:28:43] Let me ask you a different question. The comment that was made earlier by Ms. Bender about the road.

[3:28:50] The impact the road is going to have. And I know you said that it wasn't your choice that you were instructed not to use red oak lane.

[3:29:00] but can you share with us your understanding of the basis for that decision?

[3:29:06] Because the school district has a extensive campus area,

[3:29:11] the U.S. is right O'Cline right now, and it is under its existing configuration already two challenged during school days.

[3:29:20] I would pick up and drop off, but they didn't want to add something that even in the middle school to this,

[3:29:28] that was just to create for them, it was a non-starter.

[3:29:33] That was a condition.

[3:29:34] If we were to look at this site as opposed to Kennedy Park,

[3:29:38] which where we have a lease for the Kennedy Park site,

[3:29:42] that when this was presented to us and presented

[3:29:45] to the Park District as well,

[3:29:47] that was the first thing out of the superintendent's mouth

[3:29:50] was that this had to have red oak access.

[3:29:53] So they had to have red road access.

[3:29:56] Like, I mean, I can tell you that I live in the neighborhood there too.

[3:30:01] We're looking to ensure we have staggered, starting in ending times that are different from the rest of 112 for that exact reason.

[3:30:07] I'm not surprised.

[3:30:10] I'm not surprised if that was a requirement by the, by the history.

[3:30:14] I also say to somewhat address the vendor's concerns.

[3:30:22] The way the easement has been crafted and the understanding between the parties with respect to the easement is that it's going to be tied

[3:30:30] to this use, this kind of a use of a non-for-profit educational use.

[3:30:36] So in other words, if the school district, as they have with other assets that they don't

[3:30:40] use, wanted in the future to sell, after the lease term, wanted to sell this property,

[3:30:45] and it was put to say, resident use, that would not be an access route, the resident

[3:30:49] use, this easement would not permit that, this easement in fact, could be terminated by the

[3:30:54] district. So it's really limited. The access is limited to this

[3:31:02] and our lease is a 15-year

[3:31:05] term with two five-year renewal terms. The school district is limited by a lot of 25-year

[3:31:11] lease terms and so we have a new construction facility that will be appropriate for that lease

[3:31:22] firm, and I

[3:31:28] guess it is a number of years, but it's not going to be in perpetuity.

[3:31:44] So, one of the questions you had to clarify something was about the design review aspect

[3:31:50] and on the agenda for tonight, it talks about the special use.

[3:31:54] So the design review aspect is not on the agenda for this evening, which means you're fully

[3:31:59] capable of discussing it, considering it, but when it comes time to

[3:32:03] devoting, I think the idea was to do that at the next meeting if you were going to

[3:32:08] direct findings of fact, or the decision on the designer view.

[3:32:17] So we can't consider designing it.

[3:32:20] You can discuss it, but in terms of voting.

[3:32:23] This isn't about it. It needs to be on the agenda.

[3:32:26] That's right, that's what we're.

[3:32:28] That's I don't have some of the confusion.

[3:32:31] So now, that said, you know, having a conversation,

[3:32:35] but that's not just perfectly appropriate and fine,

[3:32:37] and then next time when you're considering it,

[3:32:41] obviously, you've already heard a lot of the information.

[3:32:45] You don't need to do it all again.

[3:32:47] We're just voting on designer view tonight,

[3:32:50] because it's not on the agenda.

[3:32:51] Can I actually, this is going to clarification

[3:32:54] in the public notification letter, indicates that there's design review tonight.

[3:33:01] The public notification of this case, this case, then, is being captioned as a special

[3:33:05] user with design review for purposes of legal notifications.

[3:33:08] So I guess I, although the, the, the, the posted agenda for tonight's meeting may not

[3:33:16] call that out.

[3:33:17] I think that there's a basis to the case we made that it was legally notified as such, and

[3:33:23] the case was captioned as spectre use with design.

[3:33:28] So I'll defer to you, Council on that.

[3:33:30] So under the Open Meetings Act, it's required to be in the agenda.

[3:33:34] Now that said, if you wanted to take a vote this evening, if you're next eating ratified

[3:33:39] that decision, would understand that under the Open Meetings Act, you have to have it

[3:33:46] on the agenda itself for the consideration for the final vote and action on design of

[3:33:53] So, the notice itself is that that's good and means we don't have to re-notice it for the design review.

[3:34:01] Well, the design review doesn't require public hearing anyway, so the issue is whether it was included in a mail notice or publication notice is a separate issue of what's on the agenda.

[3:34:12] So, the agenda itself for any action 40 hours in advance has to state what actions you're going to take final action up.

[3:34:22] But the commission could make some recommendations as to what they want to see in the findings of fair act.

[3:34:30] Right, and certainly, and then vote on the out of the next meeting.

[3:34:35] If I'm in the finalised fight, if I'm in the fact that I'll come back the next meeting anyway, I think I've drafted.

[3:34:40] And the desire for pressure on the quality of charge, the modification is a little reflected on the agenda, which is 48 hours for the moment.

[3:34:48] It makes out a lot of educational requirements in the code, so we'll certainly be legally far making a formal design review vote.

[3:34:58] If that's, that's how we're being directed by collaboration council and we need to separate design review vote at this point.

[3:35:03] for this item that can certainly be undertaken at the next meeting without slowing down or

[3:35:07] additional delays in the project.

[3:35:09] Right.

[3:35:09] We're coming back anyway.

[3:35:11] Okay.

[3:35:13] Is there any other questions or comments from the commission?

[3:35:19] Well, I mean, yeah.

[3:35:22] Comments.

[3:35:22] But let me ask another question of corporation council.

[3:35:24] We were asked about

[3:35:31] almost as if we're going to issue with the clearatory

[3:35:34] judgment that the arrival of delivery trucks would not

[3:35:39] constitute a nuisance under, excuse me, under Illinois Law.

[3:35:47] Is that something that we're in any position to declare?

[3:35:52] Can we provide that kind of assurance?

[3:35:59] I don't—the findings that you'd be making are on the special use standards, and whether

[3:36:05] you believe they meet them or not, whether they would be, technically, a nuisance under

[3:36:11] Illinois law, common law nuisance, or whether or not certain deliveries may violate to

[3:36:20] at a noise regulation. It depends how it's done and it doesn't provide assurances. But based

[3:36:27] on the evidence before you, you know, and the special use factors, that's what your consideration

[3:36:32] is and whether the standards have been matched for a special use.

[3:36:37] Can I address exactly where this came from? Your section 95.005 in your code of regulation says,

[3:36:46] Notwithstanding provisions of 95.001-0 of this code, so that talks about commercial activities

[3:36:55] within a range of the digital zoning district, being declared a public nuisance.

[3:37:02] So it's notwithstanding that, to the contrary, noises generated by any of the following activities shall not be deemed public nuisance.

[3:37:09] and IDMD is activities approved as part of a special use permit granted

[3:37:14] pursuant to chapter 150 of this code, but only to the extent that such

[3:37:18] noises are specifically identified and approved in the ordinance granting such

[3:37:24] special use. So maybe I phrased it wrong. Maybe instead of making a declaration

[3:37:28] that it's not a public nuisance, it's that the noise of a commercial food vehicle

[3:37:34] truck is is is is allowed as a part of the special use.

[3:37:40] Yeah, that's how I ended. That's how that sounds to me.

[3:37:43] Yeah, it's not a it's not a it's not a nuisance to finding it's permitted

[3:37:47] under the special use. It's finding is proved by operation of how this

[3:37:51] section works that finding would declare that under city code.

[3:37:54] It's not a public nuisance. And that doesn't affect the island of

[3:37:58] common law nuisance claims though.

[3:38:00] I'm not going to give an opinion about.

[3:38:02] No, I'm not even able to identify all the code issues because.

[3:38:08] Right.

[3:38:09] And then I think I'm a zoning perspective.

[3:38:11] I mean, it has to be operated in a way that would comply with Illinois law.

[3:38:14] Right.

[3:38:15] And so that would be kind of a separate issue of this in the code.

[3:38:18] You know, for example, if, you know, any regardless,

[3:38:22] especially if you're not, you can't drive around, you know,

[3:38:24] just laying on your horn all the time, waking everybody up before morning.

[3:38:29] So that's kind of a separate issue, and of course that would be something that we, you know, the city would look into as if it was that type of violation.

[3:38:38] And again, if it had rise, something were to rise at the level of a common law, the nuisance that would be a private action by, you know, the field of suicide.

[3:38:49] So I hope that helps and answers the question.

[3:38:52] I

[3:38:55] mean, I've got a question, I mean, I don't think if I'm following the bouncing ball correctly that we're not really waiting for any more information from the applicant, I think we have findings of fact drafted by staff, is there any reason why we can't, we don't, we don't have.

[3:39:16] I mean, is there any reason why we can't direct bone-on directing staff tonight on the special use, consideration?

[3:39:28] You could.

[3:39:28] That's what they're doing.

[3:39:30] Okay.

[3:39:30] Yeah, that's the next step.

[3:39:32] All right, subject to conditions of approval, the engineer drawings, the landscaping comments

[3:39:37] that then made the lighting to comply, and subject to the legal documents and easings,

[3:39:44] etc.

[3:39:44] that they need. I've got a motion, sir. The engineering drugs. I got the,

[3:39:53] I got the, I got

[3:39:54] the delivery schedule. Right. The 6 to 7 am, so it's not a nice thing. So I stopped here. Okay.

[3:40:02] That's that. Did you say lighting? I did. Okay, so we have a motion. Is there a second?

[3:40:11] What about the, yeah, just, and I know the hour, I'm leaving. I'm well aware of it. It's hard to stay awake.

[3:40:16] a certain point. But I want to take note of one thing. I think this is a very good plan.

[3:40:24] I think we're all very comfortable with it. But I don't know how many years I've been on this

[3:40:32] commission now. You probably know Andy. It's been a long time.

[3:40:38] It has. You didn't have to

[3:40:48] or if we have, it certainly hasn't been very often.

[3:40:53] The neighbor, Mr. Brill, got up there and he told us that he didn't believe that his

[3:41:02] neighborhood of Highland Park was a Nimbi neighborhood.

[3:41:06] And even though this is going to affect him just as much as it is anybody else, he stood

[3:41:12] up at that podium and told us that he thought this change was good for Highland Park, that

[3:41:17] He was encouraged to have more children in the neighborhood that sure there would be an impact.

[3:41:22] Anytime there's a development there's going to have some impact on the neighborhood.

[3:41:26] But Mr. Brill was happy to have that impact.

[3:41:29] He welcomed the impact and he appreciated that the children would have a positive impact in the neighborhood.

[3:41:36] Ordinarily the view of everybody who gets up here is good as long as it happens somewhere else as long it doesn't happen in my neighborhood.

[3:41:44] But I appreciate very much Mr. Brille coming here and telling us that he embraced this change and welcomed it into his neighborhood, because we rarely, if ever, hear that from folks who are as effective as he is by this change.

[3:41:56] Here, here.

[3:41:57] How did it?

[3:41:59] That's someone who lives in the S.1 studio over for Mr. Brill.

[3:42:03] I seconded that statement and certainly affected me.

[3:42:07] Like, do we need a roll call on the, yeah?

[3:42:09] Yes, we do.

[3:42:10] We need to send any other comments.

[3:42:12] I thought we had an agenda before we vote.

[3:42:13] We do have a second.

[3:42:15] I'm assuming the designer view is coming.

[3:42:19] That's nice.

[3:42:20] We'll handle that when we vote on the same time we handled the findings.

[3:42:24] Okay.

[3:42:27] I will say that, again, the same thing that I live in this neighborhood.

[3:42:33] If I could hit a golf ball straight from my front yard, I'd hit the Western Center.

[3:42:38] So I, and, and, and, and he, I was, I was, I was based on the, um, some of the initial

[3:42:45] reporting and the local press was, was saying, well, you know, we've already got what four

[3:42:50] schools and and Westridge there like how could we possibly handle more. I've driven through

[3:42:57] the carpool line to Red Oak for ten years before my youngest finally got to edge with

[3:43:01] this year and it's a nightmare. But I think you've had a lot of interest in those concerns

[3:43:12] and I don't feel the same way I did before. Although I think that the neighbors around Kennedy

[3:43:17] who ejected to this are really losing something, so that it has a roll call.

[3:43:23] Mr. Jordan?

[3:43:27] To direct that, drafting findings in the affirmative with those conditions.

[3:43:34] I think the mission is recommended.

[3:43:37] And that with our...

[3:43:38] It's saying...

[3:43:41] Commissioner Forresting.

[3:43:42] Right.

[3:43:43] Commissioner Leigh.

[3:43:45] Commissioner Cutshire.

[3:43:47] Commissioner.

[3:43:48] one second just to want to clarify something as we're voting. I want to make sure we're clear on the motion because I've heard two different things about

[3:43:56] Are you voting on the findings that have been presented by the applicant as is tonight or are you directly going to come back?

[3:44:03] Come back. Come back.

[3:44:05] Okay, I want to make sure we clear what we're voting. I don't got it. And so then the final vote will be next.

[3:44:12] Oh, I'm changing my mind.

[3:44:13] So Mr. Chairman, I'm going to retake that roll call then.

[3:44:19] Okay, with that clarification for quite a bit.

[3:44:21] I think that.

[3:44:25] Mr. Oliar.

[3:44:28] Mr. first thing.

[3:44:30] Commissioner Lee.

[3:44:32] Commissioner Kutschai.

[3:44:33] Mr. Glazer.

[3:44:36] Commissioner Mason.

[3:44:37] Chairman Hack.

[3:44:38] Hi.

[3:44:38] The eyes have it, Mr. Chairman.

[3:44:40] The vote is unanimous.

[3:44:42] Staff will prepare those.

[3:44:45] Planning is a fact, recommending approval with conditions

[3:44:48] as indicated by the commission.

[3:44:50] And we'll have it at your next meeting, which is April 16th.

[3:44:54] There will be no additional notice for that meeting,

[3:44:56] so the notice is actual, but that meeting will be taking place.

[3:45:00] At 730 PM in this room, a city hall on the 16th of April. The matter of design review will also be taken up that night, Mr. Chairman, and appropriately on the agenda.

[3:45:12] Thank you.

[3:45:13] Thank you.

[3:45:15] So I'd recommend a motion to continue this item to the next meeting.

[3:45:19] Yes.

[3:45:20] That's a very good one.

[3:45:21] Another motion to continue this item to the next meeting.

[3:45:24] Some of their second second seconds

[3:45:29] all in favor of our

[3:45:30] Hi

[3:45:31] You do the most carries

[3:45:36] We do this fan that thing

[3:45:40] Yeah

[3:45:40] Yeah, I

[3:45:41] Second

[3:45:42] I can't hear it doesn't matter

[3:45:44] I don't hear you just say that but

[3:45:47] So this year

[3:45:48] I can't hear it

[3:45:50] Oh, can you really that here?

[3:45:52] Please

[3:45:52] I can't even know what it is for you.

[3:45:55] I'll figure something out.

[3:45:57] I'm gonna do mine too because I have a lot of money.

[3:46:03] Okay, so you know you want to do mine?

[3:46:05] I was gonna carry her back to the office.

[3:46:08] I can't leave stuff here at the city hall.

[3:46:10] I'm gonna have all of them back here.

[3:46:14] Okay.

[3:46:15] No.

[3:46:16] No.

[3:46:18] Sir, I guess?

[3:46:20] No, we can't.

[3:46:22] We're going to move fast.

[3:46:26] I don't need a motion, then we'll continue the next item.

[3:46:30] Mr. Chairman, there is one last book in here this evening.

[3:46:34] And as I know, it is the chairman's prerogative on that item,

[3:46:37] but I just call that up.

[3:46:40] What's the agenda look like for 16?

[3:46:44] 16.

[3:46:46] 16.

[3:46:46] Thank you.

[3:46:47] I've got Audi, did you have one of the world blindings on the 16th that are inclusionary,

[3:46:56] inclusionary in the brother gate?

[3:46:59] Cheers, don't.

[3:47:00] Yeah, it's a big meeting.

[3:47:02] Shall we throw?

[3:47:04] We'll see if they make it back to that meeting.

[3:47:06] I know that was continued to that, but that's what we have.

[3:47:10] All the rest is mine.

[3:47:12] We're not going to be able to take it.

[3:47:14] Okay, you want to get your stuff in the face, sir?

[3:47:16] Hold on, let's call it up.

[3:47:17] I'll just go over here.

[3:47:19] Seriously?

[3:47:20] Uh, so I just got buried in the face.

[3:47:21] They're still out there.

[3:47:25] So...

[3:47:26] Yeah.

[3:47:28] April 16th, V.H.

[3:47:29] I was 35.

[3:47:30] Uh, she does not, we have the Northwood Middle School Design Review.

[3:47:35] I exchange a minor amendment.

[3:47:37] Pretty bad.

[3:47:39] Hold on, let's do that.

[3:47:40] I'd be pretty sure he has it.

[3:47:41] There's also some concern, I don't think we saw anything about this in the packet.

[3:47:46] What's that?

[3:47:47] The acorn lane.

[3:47:48] Who's in there?

[3:47:49] It's starting on page 505.

[3:47:52] It's not calling this, it doesn't mean I meet you.

[3:47:55] Yeah, it's the list one.

[3:47:57] Yeah, I don't mean anything.

[3:47:59] Thank you.

[3:48:01] Yeah, I don't know what to do.

[3:48:02] No one need comments.

[3:48:11] I don't know where any issue is, because we do.

[3:48:13] Mr. Chair, one moment all the conferred here with Director Fontaineble.

[3:48:17] We do have a lot on the agenda, Mr. Chair, in particular,

[3:48:20] if it's Chairman Crow, we will discuss that with Chairman Crow.

[3:48:27] See, if they will be prepared for that meeting.

[3:48:32] It's going to be tough, Mr. Chairman.

[3:48:34] There's a lot on the agenda, so I don't know how many people

[3:48:39] here tonight either on what the same you're saying otherwise if we could do it

[3:48:44] on 16th it's gonna be another long very long meeting too um what what

[3:48:49] is there anybody here yeah yeah there are people here who who's here

[3:48:54] oh yeah yeah I mean look if it's 10 after 11 I do if we can I don't know how much time

[3:49:00] we need but I mean if we can get through this quickly fine but otherwise I would ask

[3:49:08] through your Mr. Chairman, maybe you can inquire with folks here if they're here for

[3:49:13] the applicant or the butters, I just don't know who's here tonight right now.

[3:49:19] Mr. Chairman, I'll tell you what's going to be up for the applicant. This is a

[3:49:24] tool that's subdivision. I'm just thinking of one variation. I think we can get through

[3:49:28] this very quickly because the issues are very transparent and so this is not a complicated

[3:49:34] issue.

[3:49:36] All of that.

[3:49:41] 10 minutes.

[3:49:42] All right.

[3:49:43] You've got three minutes.

[3:49:46] You've got three minutes.

[3:49:46] I'm running.

[3:49:48] Okay.

[3:49:48] Is this a new one?

[3:49:51] Is this a public hearing?

[3:49:52] It is not.

[3:49:53] And then you don't need to.

[3:49:54] No public hearing.

[3:49:56] You've got three minutes.

[3:49:57] You've got three minutes.

[3:49:58] Let's say I've done.

[3:50:00] Of course.

[3:50:02] This will be taken up by the city council.

[3:50:05] What I'm on there was notice about that as well.

[3:50:11] So the plan design conditions, consideration of this type of application is actually limited in scope, so I'll provide the brief background and go from there.

[3:50:22] So I'll try and move through this very quickly. Then if there are questions, please let me know.

[3:50:26] This is the subject property. It is 62 a corn lane. It's one ownership property. It's three separate tax parcels. Those are tax parcels.

[3:50:36] Those don't correspond to buildable water.

[3:50:39] This is correct.

[3:50:40] It's just one property.

[3:50:42] And they want the applicant proposes to subdivide it into two buildable lots.

[3:50:48] So this is an aerial property.

[3:50:50] This is the hole that's on it right now. The applicant proposes to divide and do.

[3:50:54] provide a new property down here.

[3:50:58] A very quickly, so this is a minor pre-limiter and final plan of subdivision by the applicant

[3:51:03] property owner, Marjorick.

[3:51:05] It's one existing property with one single-family home.

[3:51:07] The applicant proposes two billable lots for two single-family homes.

[3:51:11] One variation is required.

[3:51:12] There's also an engineering division memo within the packet.

[3:51:15] The storm suit will be required ultimately with any type of new construction.

[3:51:20] If the plant is approved.

[3:51:21] There were neighborhood comments included in the packet, this neighbor submitted comments, and this neighbor submitted comments.

[3:51:31] Do we have those?

[3:51:33] Yes.

[3:51:34] Yes, chair.

[3:51:35] Of course they are not actually.

[3:51:37] So are those lines still the pin?

[3:51:38] Five, nine.

[3:51:39] Yes.

[3:51:40] These white lines are pins.

[3:51:43] So do you have those?

[3:51:43] Where's the picture of the subdivision?

[3:51:45] Yes, sir.

[3:51:46] Moving on.

[3:51:47] So to the left here we have an existing flat of survey that shows the price.

[3:51:51] property, should the right here? This is what's proposed.

[3:51:56] One, and then one, two, which is the smaller one on the bottom.

[3:52:00] So it gives you an idea of where their house is at and how they want to subdivide it.

[3:52:05] When you say two buildable lads, you certainly.

[3:52:09] One, the existing structure is going to remain.

[3:52:12] As far as we know, that is absolutely correct.

[3:52:15] Thank you.

[3:52:16] So, that would speculate that as far as we know about some of the African submitted,

[3:52:23] the existing house, at least for the foreseeable future will remain,

[3:52:27] they could tear it out if they wanted to go to the HPC process for consideration.

[3:52:32] And then they probably had to send a bill that's full on the proposal at two.

[3:52:38] Is the lot too in compliance with their zoning code for their neighborhood?

[3:52:45] I'm not just really quick, this is all in the report, it's a complicit dependency requirements.

[3:52:50] This is in the offer zoning district, the minimum square footage is 20,000 square feet.

[3:52:54] Both are going to exceed that they meet the minimum average widths.

[3:52:59] This is a table that included in the packet.

[3:53:02] Green means good, red means issue.

[3:53:05] So there was an issue for the Council that considered related to the requirement for

[3:53:12] Storm Sewer.

[3:53:14] And then the reason why this is before the Plan and Design Commission today, it's because

[3:53:17] a very issue this saw, and I will discuss that now, so this is the section of code, relationship

[3:53:24] to Streets.

[3:53:25] This is the subdivision code, by the way.

[3:53:27] Each slap shall have principle of funding on a public street through lots of prohibited.

[3:53:32] This is not a public-straight of cornlane as a private lane.

[3:53:36] This is a private road with a 30-foot wide right away.

[3:53:39] Surface with asphalt and this is approximately 12 feet wide.

[3:53:43] The proposed subdivision is not extended.

[3:53:45] It does not propose to extend a cornlane.

[3:53:48] Not only for insisting homes on the south of a cornlane that would be equal to greater

[3:53:51] in distance from the Lawrence Lane axis point.

[3:53:55] A few pictures really quick. This is looking south.

[3:53:58] I'm at Lawrence Lane looking south.

[3:53:59] So the subdivision is all the way back into the right.

[3:54:03] So this is what a coin lane looks like.

[3:54:05] It's a private road as I stated.

[3:54:07] This is a coin lane again.

[3:54:09] This is me looking north towards the access point

[3:54:11] at Lawrence Lane.

[3:54:14] This is the applicant's home right now.

[3:54:17] And this is the subject property.

[3:54:18] And this is like I said, this is the existing home on it.

[3:54:21] Essentially, they want to subdivide a new one on the south side,

[3:54:25] which is kind of like this mature treaty growth

[3:54:28] It's occurring, and then that's the closest neighbor to the South.

[3:54:30] They submitted one of the emails in the packet.

[3:54:34] Again, moving on, right across.

[3:54:36] This is just a photo of the neighbor to the South,

[3:54:38] and shows kind of what a lot of line is.

[3:54:41] Obviously, I don't know where it is exactly,

[3:54:43] but it's somewhat in there,

[3:54:44] between when that mature tree growth is,

[3:54:46] and then where there are properties on the South.

[3:54:47] So they'd want to put a driveway into the private lane,

[3:54:51] instead of a public, and that's why they're asking us

[3:54:54] for the variance.

[3:54:54] That is correct.

[3:54:55] And why, and it seemed like the neighbors were upset because there's seven and four streets said no, because

[3:55:02] 74 trees coming down.

[3:55:04] Yes, I've come to forestry in just a moment, but you're correct.

[3:55:09] Speaking of forestry, I'll come to that now.

[3:55:12] So, there was an engine line, I'm going to try to keep this going fast.

[3:55:15] So, the engine and animation did seem like a, uh, uh, a, um,

[3:55:20] referral, this was included in the packet, uh, it has to be a string of sewer.

[3:55:25] If the details on the report, I would refer you to their report, the storm sewers are not

[3:55:31] configured by any crew, but the system is still a minor subdivision, and the gist of it is

[3:55:36] that no proof if this is approved, if this is approved by council, no permit should be issued

[3:55:40] by the city for the construction, and there is no structure on any of the subivalent

[3:55:44] properties prior to the construction of the sewer and acceptance by that of the city.

[3:55:49] Moving on, the forced revision counter, we have key on the facility on the sewer, at the end

[3:55:54] this project?

[3:55:55] I would like yes, because the city has to accept those improvements.

[3:55:58] That's my understanding.

[3:56:01] First for division, the memo did state concern for key protected inherited trees on site.

[3:56:06] I do want to be very clear about the forestry memo.

[3:56:10] We asked them for a memo.

[3:56:11] It's important.

[3:56:11] We want that information put out for public consumption.

[3:56:16] There is not a tree standard within the subdivision code.

[3:56:19] So there's no violation request of that.

[3:56:20] There's no tree standard.

[3:56:22] And important now, if the subdivision is approved, that approval does not obligate the zoning board of appeals to approve any registry variation from Chapter 94, that may be required to build on any newly created lots.

[3:56:38] Yes, sir.

[3:56:39] Does the width of the lock that's being created have any impact on the variation they're asking for?

[3:56:45] No, no, sir.

[3:56:46] They comply with zoning and subdivision requirements for a lot with.

[3:56:50] Okay.

[3:56:51] More than a normal stance.

[3:56:52] So this just gets the plan of the Commission's consideration.

[3:56:57] This is a more sub-division.

[3:56:59] My sub-divisions are the code.

[3:57:02] I only go to the chair.

[3:57:03] The chair just looks at it.

[3:57:05] And if the chair agrees, the chair signs it.

[3:57:07] And then it goes onto the city council.

[3:57:08] There is no public hearing for sub-divisions.

[3:57:14] There are doors have a public meeting at city council.

[3:57:17] And that is noticed with letters, staff takes care of that.

[3:57:23] So the plan in design commissions consideration or role in this, in this particular application,

[3:57:30] as to do with this section from code.

[3:57:31] And it says that the variations from these regulations shall not be granted as the right.

[3:57:36] However, the plan commission may recommend, in the City Council,

[3:57:38] make grant variations from the regulations contained in the subdivision code.

[3:57:42] In specific cases, which do not affect a general plan

[3:57:46] or the spirit of the subdivision code, and it goes on and says such recommendations shall be communicated to the city council and writing.

[3:57:52] Um, so the standard, if you're asking me, well, what is the standard? How should we know if we should recommend approval of this variation or not?

[3:58:00] The standard is in specific cases to not affect the general plan or the spirit of the subdivision code.

[3:58:06] And then in my next two slides, I have the seven intent and purpose statements from the subdivision code.

[3:58:14] These are not necessarily a general plan of the spirit for sale, but this is the intent and purpose in gets to that.

[3:58:21] And I can of course come back to these as the Plan Design Commission, deliberate.

[3:58:25] I believe I'm almost done. I have one more slide.

[3:58:28] Recommendation. So yes, the city staff just recommends the Plan Design Commission to consider the proposed minor preliminary final plan of subdivision.

[3:58:35] And the great recommendation regarding the request of variation.

[3:58:38] If the Plan Design Commission is ready to make a recommendation, the application has been noticed at the request of the applicant.

[3:58:44] for the Aprilet City Council meeting, you know, you're not obligated to make a decision.

[3:58:49] Of course, you can recommend it or not, staff will re-noticed as appropriate.

[3:58:53] I will state, normally this is my last comment, and I can take questions.

[3:58:58] I will state that the way this is normal done for money subdivisions is staff just provides

[3:59:03] a very simple document for the child's sign, and so I do have a document here that

[3:59:09] check inside and I can if if the plan design commission is considering

[3:59:13] upgrading uh recommending approval of the variation tonight I can pass these

[3:59:18] documents as well for your review before any final action occurs so.

[3:59:22] Do we know what the history of this area is, why is the street private, how many

[3:59:29] blocks are there?

[3:59:30] Yes absolutely.

[3:59:31] But what do we know about all of this?

[3:59:34] There are, I believe there are 10 blocks, I'll comment real quick, just to make sure I'm

[3:59:38] right.

[3:59:38] No, they're actually not here.

[3:59:44] 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and then this is number 10 because it serves that serve by its own driveway

[3:59:52] or on private road here.

[3:59:54] So there are 10 total and now single family residents is served by this in terms of history.

[4:00:00] I believe the first subdivision for this area was the McKillup 1 in 1927. I do think I had that in my report and that's also when the Bitcoin line was established, you know, with or can count with that subdivision in the curf and 1927.

[4:00:19] a little strange when Googleman's subdivision occurred later, I think in the 40s or 50s,

[4:00:25] they actually called their strict here of public interest in egress easements, but the

[4:00:31] rest of it from here on North for May the private wing.

[4:00:35] It's too bad our new one like the day I can't understand where I'm going to remember that,

[4:00:39] and he can tell us about it.

[4:00:42] I can say this the most recent subdivision to occur on this block.

[4:00:45] I think it's called the A for subdivision. It's from 1991.

[4:00:51] That was up here and evidently at the time.

[4:00:53] It was not a requirement for a run-of-way dedication.

[4:00:57] So we're going to...

[4:00:58] I mean...

[4:01:00] I'm sorry, sir.

[4:01:01] It was one owner and they drew certain lines for, with certain meaning.

[4:01:07] I mean what?

[4:01:08] Me and back in 1927. I'm afraid I don't have that answer, sir.

[4:01:12] As Tony.

[4:01:13] Thank you, sir.

[4:01:15] Let me ask you a different question, Commissioner.

[4:01:17] I mean, a planner, perhaps.

[4:01:24] I didn't mean to insult you.

[4:01:33] The foresters recommendation is adverse to this.

[4:01:39] And going back to my days on the zoning board,

[4:01:41] It's always been hard for me to do anything other than follow a foresters recommendation, but you had a slide up there that talked about the zoning board's consideration

[4:01:51] Yes, sir. Would the ordinary course here be that if if this body passed or recommended approval of this

[4:01:58] that before

[4:02:00] the

[4:02:01] Heritage trees could be upset the zoning board would have to

[4:02:07] considerate.

[4:02:08] In fact, that's like correct.

[4:02:09] Just rub briefly in some way.

[4:02:11] So, you have correct the force to provide it.

[4:02:13] I know that does that support this application?

[4:02:17] I do want to make it clear that that's not a standard in the subdivision called true protection.

[4:02:23] But within the answer, your question specifically, we don't want to put the application

[4:02:27] and property on our notice that if they do, if they don't, if they don't,

[4:02:35] unless they go to the zoning board of appeals, and there's no, of course, guaranteed it.

[4:02:39] That would occur.

[4:02:40] I'm not saying that.

[4:02:42] I wasn't an inventory.

[4:02:45] Excuse me.

[4:02:46] There was a site plan that showed the tree locations approximately.

[4:02:50] And that was just after the forester's memo.

[4:02:52] And it did identify the heritage tree.

[4:02:55] It's not in the middle of the billable area.

[4:02:57] It is in the billable area.

[4:02:59] Will it be impacted?

[4:03:00] I don't know.

[4:03:01] It's possible the applicant could design around it.

[4:03:03] it's it could be in a worse position I'll say that and you know how many protected trees we're talking about

[4:03:09] There's a few more than I think there's one here. Well, there are several heritage trees, but I think there's one specifically the force that was concerned with

[4:03:17] I do not remember the number of protected and key trees in Miss chairman if I

[4:03:26] If I may miss the chairman it's so the power is to date comments on this and and so

[4:03:33] In his comments, it wasn't as precise as perhaps, maybe it could have been in terms of

[4:03:39] he indicated in a support for the subdivision application.

[4:03:43] What would be more precise is that if he said that he wouldn't be or didn't support removal

[4:03:48] of the heritage trees on the site, which would be a subject of a chapter 94 variance consideration

[4:03:54] by the Zoning Board of Field, which this decision has no bearing on. That's a separate

[4:03:59] code and it applies. So as somebody comes in and looks for a building permit to build,

[4:04:05] whatever structure is going to be posed with over home, if that necessitates a removal of a

[4:04:12] heritage tree, it can't go forward until that variance is considered and approved. And so that's

[4:04:18] our standard process and the forest would be involved in that as well. And so we provide the forest

[4:04:24] these documents to review, so as to provide a heads up to applicants, so that they don't

[4:04:31] find out, all the way down the road, having already subdivided and things, and no one said

[4:04:35] anything, quote unquote, you know, about this issue. And even though it's not app for this

[4:04:40] consideration, it's still nonetheless a service to customers to provide that awareness,

[4:04:45] and so that things don't get missed down the line, and then people get a little ahead

[4:04:50] themselves over their skis, if you will, and that just becomes more problematic for everyone

[4:04:56] about.

[4:04:59] Thank you.

[4:04:59] I just wanted to make that clarification.

[4:05:00] I have a question.

[4:05:02] After the sewer is put in, it was mentioned in the packet that there's flooding concerns

[4:05:07] in the area.

[4:05:09] Is it the expectation by the city that the owners along A-Corn would have to pay for the

[4:05:19] act or an optional act.

[4:05:24] My understanding is that this comes from the infill development ordinance, this is how

[4:05:28] I put that's not normally my more corporate competence, mine is the subdivision code in

[4:05:32] this zoning code.

[4:05:33] So I will not speak beyond which I know but I think there's a there's like a 250 square foot threshold.

[4:05:41] If you meet or exceed that infill development ordinance says that you have to tie in

[4:05:45] if feasible to the storm sewer.

[4:05:47] So, the way this may work is there are conditions being placed on this proposal here that before they could ever pull a building permit on a new any new structure for any of the two new lots

[4:06:00] The owner or their successor would have to have this storm sewer installed all the way from Lawrence Lane down down to their property and then to answer a question about the other properties that are up

[4:06:12] They would only be triggered to tie into that if they met that infield development ordinance.

[4:06:19] But I can't comment on terms of who's going to pay for what I refer to the engineering divisions memo.

[4:06:28] Depending on what development they're doing, they would either trigger connecting in or not.

[4:06:32] But it could stay as is.

[4:06:34] They don't.

[4:06:35] Now this doesn't necessitate everyone to do anything in spend money.

[4:06:38] Now this subdivision approval will not do that.

[4:06:41] It necessitates the certain improvement, but it doesn't necessitate everyone else connecting

[4:06:45] into that improvement.

[4:06:47] Although they would have rights to them.

[4:06:51] They'd have answers to them.

[4:06:52] They could, but they wouldn't have to if they're doing nothing, but if they do certain things like

[4:06:56] Carl mentions, they could trigger needing to do that, and since it's available, they

[4:07:01] could be made to do that if they were doing some sort of additional development themselves.

[4:07:08] I see the, I'm sorry, I see a aerial again.

[4:07:10] Yes sir. How many lines are on the east side of the street? How many are on the west?

[4:07:17] How many on the east and how many are on the west?

[4:07:20] So on the west there are 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Five counting the subject property.

[4:07:28] On the east, just those properties that take their access off of Vacorn Lane.

[4:07:33] You know there are two up here but they don't take their access off of Vacorn Lane.

[4:07:37] Then you have 1, 2, 3, 4, and then the fifth one here that's a lot of depth, the 5.

[4:07:45] So the 5 on the west is the subject parcel in its current form, not subdivide.

[4:07:54] Correct, there's an integral B6 lots, then if we approve this.

[4:07:57] You correct sir.

[4:08:00] Yeah, 5 and 1.

[4:08:09] Thank you sir.

[4:08:13] Mr. Bernstein.

[4:08:18] I just cut the chasing go to the questions that were asked with regards to the trials.

[4:08:25] At the end of the mirror from the city forest where you mentioned there are 74 trees.

[4:08:29] But that's including both lots.

[4:08:30] And many of the heritage trees that he talks about are actually on lap one, which is with the existing home is located.

[4:08:37] Lot 2 is one that they're trying to create, planted there are trees on that property also, like any other property that would be.

[4:08:44] But there's one heritage tree that is, that the city forest are focused on.

[4:08:51] We don't know where the footprint of a house potentially can go on this property, there's no proposal to do that.

[4:08:57] there's, this is just trying to create, this is a,

[4:09:01] a two acre of blot, this is bushing.

[4:09:03] This is a two acre lat in area where lots are much smaller

[4:09:06] than that, trying to create an additional,

[4:09:08] whether it will be sold, whether it will be developed,

[4:09:11] who knows?

[4:09:11] But we're trying to create, this is, as a matter of right

[4:09:14] and we thought, when we originally filed the application

[4:09:17] that we wouldn't be before you,

[4:09:19] that we would be just going to the city council

[4:09:20] at that, and that the chairman of the Plan Commission

[4:09:23] would just be signing this as a matter of right

[4:09:25] to go forward. In fact, that was done back in February, and then we discovered that acorn

[4:09:31] lane was a private road, which triggered this variation procedure. So this was, this was

[4:09:37] we done back in February, we were supposed to be a council, and then this was triggered when

[4:09:41] we discovered that acorn lane was a, was a private road, not the answer. Commissioner leaves

[4:09:47] a question with regards to the water before you leave it. So as part of the process that you're

[4:09:52] us to consider and that you want us to approve. No trees are coming down.

[4:09:57] No, at this point, no.

[4:10:01] Building from it.

[4:10:02] Yeah, if the properties ever developed, then there'll be most likely

[4:10:06] there'll be trees that removed and the heritage tree will have to be dealt with,

[4:10:10] either be built around or they'd have to separate process and go to the zoning board with this.

[4:10:14] But there is no proposal currently in place to develop this lot,

[4:10:19] develop a house in the slot. Okay, so all you're asking us to do is to permit the additional

[4:10:29] lot, but no, that doesn't impact this vote would not impact the subject of the forester's memo.

[4:10:36] No, we have nothing to do with them. And then the other issue is with regard to, in response to

[4:10:42] the two letters that came from the neighbors who are talking about the stormwater. Currently there is no

[4:10:46] storm sewer on anywhere on a corn lane.

[4:10:50] And so one of the conditions, and current point to

[4:10:52] this out, is in the infill ordinance, is that if you're

[4:10:55] creating a lot, you need to create a storm sewer.

[4:10:57] So what the applicant is agreed to is a covenant that would

[4:11:00] run with a land would be recorded against the property.

[4:11:03] If the subdivision is approved, and that covenant would say

[4:11:06] that if this lot is developed, then whoever owns the property

[4:11:11] will have to build a storm sewer from lords with the street

[4:11:16] to the north, all the way to this property in order to address any possible concerns regarding

[4:11:22] stormwater runoff from the additional house into that, into that acorn lane.

[4:11:26] So that's, that'll only be triggered if this lots of never developed, that stormwater won't,

[4:11:31] that storm sewer won't be built, but if the lot is developed, then whoever owns that lot is

[4:11:36] obligated to build a storm sewer at their cost.

[4:11:39] Question for you.

[4:11:40] Will that sewer be sized to handle the whole neighborhood?

[4:11:45] That was not discussed with the engineer.

[4:11:48] That could be done under that scenario, what I would anticipate if that happens is that

[4:11:53] they would go to the neighbors and say you interested, and then at that point there probably

[4:11:57] be a recapture agreement, which would provide that those neighbors if they tap in would

[4:12:02] have to contribute to the size of that storm sewer.

[4:12:04] I thought I'm wrong, maybe.

[4:12:06] I mean, the storm sewer is urban, gutter, right?

[4:12:09] I mean, very, very, very, I mean, everybody just drained it under their line now.

[4:12:15] The almost ran a lot, and there's a swell that's directly west of acorn lane, or acorn lane

[4:12:21] drains into.

[4:12:22] So basically, everyone's, the water water is being drained on site right now.

[4:12:26] I believe there's a sanitary, I've there as a sanitary, so there's a sanitary sewer,

[4:12:30] but no storm sewer.

[4:12:31] One last question, sorry, if you know how the size of your lap two compares to the other eight

[4:12:37] laughs that are already on this lane, I think that they're very capable because they make the

[4:12:41] requirements of the air forward zoning district. So the only reason we're here tonight is because this is a private

[4:12:46] street, not a public street. You, you haven't looked at it. No, obviously, I'm just looking at buying it from the GIS.

[4:12:55] So that helps kind of on your analysis. The real reason that that there's this

[4:13:01] provision in the subdivision code about private roads is because

[4:13:06] a planning perspective

[4:13:08] the city is decided it really does not want to encourage private roads.

[4:13:13] They don't have the same standards, whether it's with whether it's

[4:13:17] great quality of the concrete or asphalt, and it creates a lot of

[4:13:22] issues of planning perspective.

[4:13:26] So how is it maintained and who takes care of it and what

[4:13:29] happens if the owners don't come up with a money and it creates all these issues.

[4:13:33] Now, this also is in a situation where there's a new private road being requested.

[4:13:39] The subdivision, and so the real question is that you're evaluating, is do you think that

[4:13:45] this variation isn't keeping with the purposes of the subdivision code?

[4:13:49] Do you see it as problematic?

[4:13:51] Do you see it as the road's already there?

[4:13:54] It's fine from that perspective, but that's really what you're focusing on.

[4:13:58] Is the practice about it?

[4:14:00] Is the provision that says you are not to create lots in the private road, but we, you

[4:14:05] know, isn't so now there's a request for a variation.

[4:14:08] So some of these other ancillary issues that we think about are some of it really have

[4:14:14] kind of outside of the variation issue that is before you.

[4:14:18] So that's how I kind of focused your thought on the variation.

[4:14:23] And I would remind, I would remind them, the commission here that the proposed lot meets the minimum

[4:14:31] lot with that area that's in the zoning district.

[4:14:35] So, before this situation or this is a private road, it meets the provisions of the sub-division

[4:14:40] code and meets the spirit of the code.

[4:14:43] And that's why we came before you and seeking to create a lot.

[4:14:49] It's all we have.

[4:14:50] Did you guys meet with the neighbors?

[4:14:52] No, we did not.

[4:14:53] And why don't want to see it?

[4:14:55] Could the street be dedicated to the city?

[4:14:57] I know it's only one way.

[4:14:58] I have friends on the street.

[4:14:59] So I've driven it.

[4:15:00] Mr Chairman, the city would not want to accept that street as a substand. I'd say that's a speak on behalf of the director of public works, but I could say that I could hear him saying that in my head right now.

[4:15:30] If this line is underdeveloped, and the hardest trick is an issue, obviously the neighbors

[4:15:35] will be notified through the zoning board variation procedure, and they'll be able to

[4:15:40] open at that point with regards to how they feel about this, because right now it's

[4:15:45] we're not at that point where this line would be developed, and we don't know why our house

[4:15:48] will be located, and what trees would be removed.

[4:15:51] Any more

[4:15:54] questions they have?

[4:15:59] Thank you.

[4:16:00] There is one neighbor here that's just, oh.

[4:16:02] Do you like to speak?

[4:16:06] Yes.

[4:16:07] There's no other property here.

[4:16:08] There's no other property here.

[4:16:10] I don't believe you.

[4:16:12] I can't.

[4:16:13] I can't.

[4:16:14] What do you start to talk?

[4:16:15] Can I?

[4:16:16] Before you do anything for me?

[4:16:17] I do.

[4:16:18] No.

[4:16:19] I can't.

[4:16:20] Can you raise your right hand?

[4:16:21] Oh, it's not a public hearing.

[4:16:22] I don't want to raise your right hand.

[4:16:25] That's that is on the on 62 acorn lane was built by Tom Nathan who owned

[4:16:30] craftwood and he was also a city councilman member so he owned a lot he

[4:16:37] was a two acre lot I'm actually the north of him and I haven't lived in

[4:16:41] in 1973 and I've been in Highland Park my whole life lucky enough to be I'm

[4:16:47] concerned about the water and I have plenty of water in my yard and I have a

[4:16:52] water out of the street. I was told when I left the house, but I guess we dedicated the

[4:16:59] lane to the city that our side of the street, the west side of the street, was going to

[4:17:06] be the, I guess we would take the impact of the storm storm. It would be felt for all our side

[4:17:14] of the street, which I don't know what it is now, 40 something, 40 feet, 40 yards, I have no idea.

[4:17:20] But that's what I was told when I had the house.

[4:17:23] Also, we used to come out from Leca Road.

[4:17:28] If you've seen the area, we had the fence at Lake Cook and Acorn.

[4:17:34] Because Leca, North Dakota was built.

[4:17:37] And a lot of people who were using an umbrella line to come through.

[4:17:41] So they put a barrier there.

[4:17:45] And then, by neighbors who were the hellers,

[4:17:48] They donated the fuck of their yard, which was very nice to them, to come throughout because

[4:17:54] Equaline was built, because Equaline is a new one, relatively new lane.

[4:17:58] So that whole AI was rebuilt.

[4:18:00] There used to be one house behind me, now they're what, 16.

[4:18:04] So that's that's that area.

[4:18:07] So if you're right around, you'll see, I'm just concerned about the process of getting the

[4:18:12] storm so far as I know, there are other people on the lane that are also concerned

[4:18:17] I'm the only one that's here, but I think that they made some phone calls to some of you and maybe the mayor.

[4:18:25] So.

[4:18:25] Okay.

[4:18:26] So.

[4:18:27] Thank you.

[4:18:28] Thank you.

[4:18:41] Okay.

[4:18:42] It sounds funny to 12, but no pressure.

[4:18:48] We're good.

[4:18:48] Do I have any comments of the commission emotion?

[4:18:57] Somebody just said.

[4:19:04] Mr. Sherman, I would move.

[4:19:07] that we, uh, we, we approve, uh, where we are.

[4:19:13] We have a knockout, my recommendation, what the motion might be this evening.

[4:19:16] It's not.

[4:19:18] Normally, if, if the commission is really normally what happens is this is signed by the chair,

[4:19:24] just before or after the meeting.

[4:19:26] But since this one is actually going before the commission for a recommendation on the variation,

[4:19:32] I actually have prepared something I can hand it out real quick and I'll give a copy

[4:19:36] to the applicant and to the neighbor.

[4:19:42] Would you have permission chair?

[4:19:44] I should ask, I'm sorry.

[4:19:44] Would you have permission?

[4:19:45] Can I hand these out?

[4:19:46] I apologize to you.

[4:19:47] Can you give it to the commission first?

[4:19:49] Oh, sorry.

[4:19:58] The document is the last page.

[4:20:03] Just code code and a signature block from the chair.

[4:20:07] The front page is the only thing I've been understanding.

[4:20:10] And that's just the recommendation.

[4:20:13] Then the findings of the facts.

[4:20:21] The plan design commission is only making a recommendation on the variation, that's it.

[4:20:30] Otherwise, the chain normally reviews minor subdivisions and signs off on that.

[4:20:35] And so I hope I've encompassed that with this document.

[4:20:40] Admittedly, I did have to...

[4:20:41] It just occurred to me because this is kind of a hybrid application.

[4:20:44] And so admittedly, this occurred to me just a few days ago.

[4:20:47] And I realized I'd have to alter what's normally done,

[4:20:49] because it's normally just give something to the chair.

[4:20:54] So plan a wrap is I understand that the emotion would be to make a recommendation or to recommend granting the variation?

[4:21:02] Correct.

[4:21:09] So move.

[4:21:10] Second.

[4:21:12] The roll call please.

[4:21:20] Pressure leader.

[4:21:21] Aye.

[4:21:22] Mr. Pearlstein.

[4:21:24] Mr. Leap.

[4:21:25] Aye.

[4:21:26] Mr. Kutscheye.

[4:21:28] Mr. Glazer.

[4:21:30] Mr. Rensley.

[4:21:32] Chairman Hect.

[4:21:33] Aye.

[4:21:34] Okay, you guys have it Mr. Chairman, the motion carries, and the variance is recommended to be a proof.

[4:21:43] I have to sign this wrong.

[4:21:50] Yes, now we call everything is in accordance, but for the variation it all meets the stand.

[4:22:01] I can't talk about it, I don't want to be filmed.

[4:22:04] Let me film some things that we'll talk after the meeting.

[4:22:07] Mr. Chair, a couple of them, a couple of them, a couple of them.

[4:22:09] First, the celebration for you, something else.

[4:22:12] Staff email about the briar get will end you survey once again.

[4:22:16] And so please make it effort to complete that.

[4:22:18] That's very important. I'll be helping us out a lot.

[4:22:21] I did that already.

[4:22:23] I did.

[4:22:24] We have a standing machine to adjourn, is that there is a set part of the day.

[4:22:30] I'm so scared.

[4:22:31] I'm so scared.

[4:22:32] All right, we're adjourned.

[4:22:34] Well, oh my God, you had to wake us up.

[4:22:37] We were sleeping so wonderful.

Plan and Design Commission Regular Meeting

Transcript