North Cook News

North Cook News

Tuesday, October 22, 2019

Village of Bartlett Zoning Board of Appeals met September 5

By Kristine Gonzales-Abella | Oct 11, 2019


Village of Bartlett Zoning Board of Appeals met Sept. 5.

Here is the minutes provided by the board:

M. Werden called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.

Roll Call

Present: M. Werden, G. Koziol, B. Bucaro, J. Banno and G. Papa

Absent:

Also Present: Roberta Grill, Planning & Development Director and Renée Hanlon, Senior Planner

Approval of Minutes

A motion was made to approve the minutes of the July 1, 2019 meeting.

Motioned by: G. Koziol

Seconded by: B. Bucaro

Roll Call

Ayes: G. Koziol, B. Bucaro, J. Banno and M. Werden,

Nayes: None

Abstain: G. Papa

The motion carried.

Case (#19-11) MoRE Brewing

Variations:

a) A reduction in the required number of off-street parking spaces,

b) A reduction of the rear building setback,

c) A reduction of the corner side building setback,

d) An increase in the allowable building floor area ratio,

e) A reduction of the required open space, and

f) Elimination of the required off-street loading space.

PUBLIC HEARING

The following Exhibits were presented:

Exhibit A - Picture of Signs (2)

Exhibit B - Mail Affidavit

Exhibit C - Notification of Publication

Petitioner, Matt Cotherman and Kasey Kluxdal were sworn in by M. Werden.

R. Hanlon stated the petition is for #19-11 MoRE Brewing at 121 W. Railroad Avenue. This is the vacant property on southeast corner of Railroad Avenue and Oak Avenue. The Petitioner is requesting a Site Plan Review to construct a 7,301 square foot building on the subject property. A sit down restaurant (MoRE Brewing) will occupy the entire building. The building includes, along with functional areas such as kitchen and bathrooms; a first floor dining room, first floor patio, a mezzanine dining room, and an additional patio on the mezzanine level. The restaurant will serve food, alcohol, and locally brewed beer. The Plan Commission will review the Site Plan and Special Use Permit requests on September 12, 2019.

The Petitioner is requesting that the following Variations be considered by the Zoning Board of Appeals:

A 100% reduction in the number of off-street parking spaces required. The Zoning Ordinance requires 132 off-street parking spaces to accommodate this use. This requirement is based on providing one (1) space for each three (3) seats in the dining and patio areas, plus one (1) space for each three (3) employees at peak shift. The proposed floor plan indicates a total of 368 seats and the Petitioner anticipates a maximum of twenty-five (25) employees at peak shift. Due to the large amount of public on and off-street parking located nearby, the anticipated parking demand may be accommodated off-site in this case. In the packet is a map and data table that illustrates the location and availability of public parking within close proximity to this proposed restaurant.

A 95% reduction in the building setback along the rear lot line. A twenty foot (20’) rear building setback is required however the Petitioner is proposing a one foot (1’) building setback along the rear lot line. The south lot line is considered the rear lot line.

A 95% reduction in the building setback along the corner side lot line. The Zoning Ordinance requires a twenty foot (20’) building setback along the S. Oak Avenue lot line. The Petitioner is proposing a one foot (1’) setback from the S. Oak Avenue lot line. This lot line follows the inner edge of the existing public sidewalk pavement.

A 30% reduction in the amount of open space provided on the lot. The Zoning Ordinance requires that fifteen percent (15%) of the lot area be preserved as open or green space. The petitioner is proposing to provide five percent (5%) open space on the lot. This open space is located at the northwest corner of the property and will be maintained with natural grasses and an appropriate ground cover. The Petitioner further proposes to maintain large planters on the patios. These planters will be maintained with plant materials such as evergreen shrubs to provide interest throughout the year.

A 40% increase in the allowable building floor area ratio. The Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum floor area ratio of sixty percent (.60). The Petitioner is proposing a floor area ratio of approximately 1.08. The proposed building is one story with a mezzanine and upper and lower patios.

A 100% reduction in the number of required off-street loading spaces. The Zoning Ordinance requires that a 5,000 square foot building provide one (1) off-street loading berth. The Petitioner is asking for a full waiver of this requirement due to the limited lot area of this parcel. The Petitioner anticipates that deliveries will be made through the door on the west side of the building. Delivery vehicles will use the S. Oak Avenue right-of-way to stop for delivery service as was also utilized by the previous commercial entity. The Petitioner plans to schedule delivery services at times that will minimize any disruption of traffic on S. Oak Avenue.

R. Hanlon stated the Petitioners are present to answer any questions.

M. Werden asked if Staff has received any calls or emails regarding this project. R. Hanlon responded no.

J. Banno stated the form base code requires 20 off street parking spaces for this type of facility. He asked if there is a plan for designated areas to park. He sees a problem within the hours of 5 PM to 8 PM being the commuter lot may not have sufficient parking available. R. Grill stated if this project follows the form base code it would only require 20 parking spaces verses the132 spaces that the current zoning ordinances requires. During the work day there are 282 spaces available, and 591 in the evening. In addition, the Village has included in its capital budget, plans for the vacant lot that was purchased to add an additional parking lot just south of the lot next to Banbury Fair. This will add about 22 spaces bringing the total daytime numbers available to 304. R. Grill stated Staff has had discussions with the petitioners regarding their employee parking. Referring to the map located in the packet under BP Lot, located on the west side of Oak Avenue, north of the tracks, there are 24 additional spaces there. This is likely where employees will park. There are also an additional 25 spaces across the street in the Banbury Fair lot, and 22 for the future lot that the Village will build, all within walking distance of this facility.

J. Banno asked if delivery trucks will be unloading in the street and possibly blocking traffic. R. Grill stated when Lucky Jack’s was at this location, their deliveries were made the same way with unloading on the street. There is already a handicap ramp and Public Works said it wouldn’t be a problem to stripe an on street handicap space. Just south of that would be a loading area or parking space when it’s not being utilized for loading and deliveries. MoRE Brewing is asking for exactly what Lucky Jack’s had for many years. B. Bucaro asked if there would be a designated loading time. R. Grill stated this needs to be discussed with the petitioner, most likely during off peak hours. M. Cotherman stated they will work with the petitioners to establish a time for their deliveries so the trucks are there for a minimum amount of time. B. Bucaro stated if someone is parked in this area and a delivery is being made, it could pose a problem. Would it be better to designate it as no parking zone or at least during certain hours? R. Grill stated this could be done by putting up signs. G. Koziol agreed that way it would guarantee the flow of traffic within that area. G. Koziol had a question, looking at the parking map labeled Bartlett Avenue which has 38 spaces, is this public parking? R. Grill stated yes. G. Koziol asked what the usage is during the day and how is it controlled so commuters don’t use this space for long term parking. R. Grill stated it’s signed, however it gets utilized during the day, and it does get crowded. When it was averaged out there were typically 9 spaces available during the day. Commuter parking is further to the east, with permit parking. G. Koziol stated it’s a good idea as long as the commuter parking can be controlled. He also likes the idea of using the surrounding area public parking. B. Bucaro stated he didn’t view this any different than TL’s, JC’s and the Tap using public parking. R. Grill stated all of the commuter lots are available after 6 P.M. B. Bucaro stated he was at the ribbon cutting for the Tap and parked at Banbury Fair’s lot. It would almost be nice for us to have a parking issue, this would mean the downtown area is being utilized. Regarding the setbacks, it is no different than TL’s or JC’s, it’s a downtown lot. Other cities have businesses that take up the entire lot, it’s becoming very common.

M. Werden asked what the timeline is for this project. R. Grill stated she is hoping it goes to Village Board the first meeting in October. M. Werden stated he doesn’t have a problem with the parking, but he does have a problem with the landscaping. In the 1960’s Bartlett downtown was one notch above an eyesore. There was no inducement for anyone to take care of their properties and make them look nice. With the TIF District Bartlett was able to get the nice street lights, paver brick sidewalks, flowers and landscape. M. Werden stated he believes this is a step backward by encouraging less landscaping, which concerns him. M. Cotherman stated the renderings show landscaping on the inside of the wall. On the outside walls will be low bushes and flower beds to mask the stone wall. Also, they can look into adding some small trees in the right of way, if the Village will allow it. They must be mindful of plants that will last through the winter that don’t need to be moved inside. G. Koziol asked since the wall is so close to the sidewalk, will there be any planting there. M. Cotherman stated it may be possible to cut it back a little bit to possibly put some greenery in front of it. K. Kluxdal stated the renderings do not show a landscape plan because they wanted to show more of the building materials rather than showcase the landscaping. However, there is an area on the north side where year round low shrubbery and flowers will go. M. Werden stated there may be an issue with salt in the winter. K. Kluxdal stated if you look at the elevation plan you can see what landscape would look like in front of the wall. M. Werden what type of material will be used for the wall. K. Kluxdal stated it’s a masonry block wall, a product called Techno Block that has variations of depth and finishes. It’s consistent with the design intent the owners were looking for as well as privacy and definition for an outdoor patio. G. Koziol commented on the placement of structure being built to the lot line. He stated if you look at the buildings in downtown Chicago, this is in fact of what we have here. The buildings are occupying the entire lot. He finds this acceptable, consistent with what is happening in the downtown area. Several communities have exactly this type of construction with the building taking up most of lot. M. Werden stated some of the buildings have been built before any of us were born and this is the opportunity to blaze a new trail with new construction that has more appeal that includes more greenery and open space. M. Werden stated he thinks this is way too much building for this small of a lot. B. Bucaro stated he initially thought the same thing, but the lot is not very wide, along with the setbacks, what else can be built on this lot. He views this as a lot of building, and may look out of place, but this could be a spring board for others to invest. Looking at other communities downtown areas both old and new development are pretty much filling the lots.

M. Werden opened the Public Hearing portion of the meeting.

Bruce Suffern owner of Banbury Fair stated he is very excited to see other businesses that want to invest in Bartlett. When Lucky Jack’s was open B. Suffern watched deliveries being made, even with double parking and it was never a problem since there isn’t much traffic in the middle of the day. B. Suffern stated when the Police Department was under construction, his public parking was a slight issue. Once talking to the Chief and the contactors the parking issue was rectified almost immediately. M. Werden thanked B. Suffern for his positive input and that is nice to get testimony from people who are adjacent to an effected change.

M. Werden asked if there were any other people from the audience that had any questions or comments. No one came forward.

M. Werden asked if there were any comments or questions from the Board. G. Koziol stated he was excited to see something like this in downtown Bartlett. For the first time in many years we may have a real destination location for people outside of this community to visit. It’s a win-win for everyone when others see what Bartlett has to offer. J. Banno asked to have “No Parking Loading Area” sign put up. R. Grill stated she would rather put time restrictions with no parking during certain hours rather than not allow anyone to park there. During the evening they may need the parking spaces. M. Werden stated because deliveries usually do not happen after dark. R. Grill stated Staff will work with the petitioners to establish times that will coordinate with their business hours. G. Papa stated there is another location in Villa Park, which have had similar issues being they also have a small tight areas. How were the same issues handled in Villa Park? M. Cotherman stated in Villa Park they share a common parking area with the feed store which has 10 spots between the two buildings. Most parking is off street parking or public parking. There is a U shaped lot behind the building and again the shared lot with their neighbor. Most parking is off street. R. Grill stated she has been to the Villa Park location and she has seen the large number of people that bike to that location. G. Papa stated they have a great following. M. Cotherman stated it’s built between two bike paths, so they get a lot of weekend bikers, and have added bike stands to accommodate them.

G. Koziol made a motion to pass along a positive recommendation to the Village Board to approve case #19-11, MoRE Brewing.

M. Werden closed the Public Hearing portion of the meeting. Motioned by: G. Koziol

Seconded by: G. Papa

M. Werden encouraged the petitioners to add floral and other greenery to the limited space.

Roll Call

Ayes: G. Papa, B. Bucaro, J. Banno, M. Werden and G. Koziol Nayes: None

The motion carried.

M. Werden stated the Committee will be adjourning to Executive Session to Active Shooter Training within a Committee Meeting Pursuant to Section 2(C) 11 of the Open Meetings Act. M. Werden moved to adjourn to Executive Session.

Roll call vote to adjourn the meeting to Executive Session. Roll Call

Ayes: G. Koziol, B. Bucaro, J. Banno, Guy Papa and M. Werden Nayes: None

Absent: None

The motion carried.

https://www.village.bartlett.il.us/Home/ShowDocument?id=10560

Want to get notified whenever we write about Village of Bartlett Zoning Board of Appeals ?

Sign-up Next time we write about Village of Bartlett Zoning Board of Appeals, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Organizations in this Story

Village of Bartlett Zoning Board of Appeals

More News