Antioch board approves special use permit for drive-thru
The village of Antioch Planning & Zoning Board met June 23 to approve a special use permit for a drive-thru at Subway.
Here are the meeting's minutes, as provided by the village:
APPROVED MINUTES VILLAGE OF ANTIOCH PLANNING & ZONING BOARD, SPECIAL MEETING Municipal Building: 874 Main Street, Antioch, IL June 23, 2016
Secretary Slazes called the June 23, 2016 Planning & Zoning Board meeting to order at 7:31 PM in the Municipal Building: 874 Main Street, Antioch, IL.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Secretary Slazes and the Planning & Zoning Board led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Roll call indicated the following members were present: Johnson, Weber, Ralston, Kaiser and Ipsen. Also present were, Attorney Long, Director of Community Development Michael Garrigan and Secretary Slazes.
Member Johnson moved, seconded by Member Ralston, to appoint Member Kaiser as temporary chair for the meeting. Upon roll call, the vote was: YES: 4: Johnson, Weber, Ralston and Ipsen. NO: 0. ABSTAIN: 1. Kaiser. THE MOTION CARRIED.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE
Approval of the May 12, 2016 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting minutes as presented–
Member Johnson moved, seconded by Member Ralston, to approve the May 12, 2016 Planning & Zoning Board minutes as presented. Upon roll call, the vote was: YES: 5: Johnson, Weber, Ralston, Kaiser and Ipsen. NO: 0. ABSENT: 0. THE MOTION CARRIED.
As a courtesy, Chairman Pro-Tem Kaiser moved the first item of new business to the top of the agenda. Secretary Slazes administered the oath to those wishing to testify.
PZB 16-09/SU – Proposed Special Use for a drive-thru at a Subway Store located at Town Square at the northwestern corner of Main Street and Route 173; PIN 02-17-101-052
Director Garrigan presented his staff report. The applicant is proposing to use an existing drive- thru window that was previously used by Walgreen’s. While staff does not believe that the proposed drive-thru use would have a negative impact on the surrounding properties, staff continues to be concerned about the potential impact this drive-thru could have on the functionality of this retail center. The applicant has submitted most Subways have a low volume of cars compared to the typical fast food chain. Their submission states only one to two cars at a time and that 75 to 80% of their business is walk-in. Staff feels if the proposed drive-thru exceeds more than three or four cars at the menu board, there would be a negative impact on the traffic flow within this retail center.
Matthew DeMartini, Attorney for the applicant, then explained to the board why they feel the stacking of cars will not pose a traffic problem. They met with Walgreens and said Walgreens would have an average of 1,187 cars per week at the drive-thru. Currently, at their new location across the street from the property in question, Walgreens sees approximately 170 cars per day. Subway’s corporate office feels the drive-thru would increase their business by 20%. Therefore, to match Walgreen’s volume, Subway would have to increase their business by 566%. Mr. DeMartini explained the order board is not the same as other drive-thrus. This menu board is a touch menu and completely automated where you order and pay right there either by phone or credit card. He also stated the owners have a dedicated staff to make sandwiches for the drive-thru and any volume within the store would not create a problem for the drive-thru. The applicant also feels cars in the drive-thru will make parking spaces more available for other businesses in the plaza.
Member Weber asked if the touch screen kiosk is also inside the store. Bob Ocwieja, co-owner of this Subway and the other Subway off of Route 173, stated no, the only kiosk would be for the drive- thru. Member Ralston asked if there would be traffic at the rear of the plaza. Mr. Ocwieja stated there would be no increase due to the drive-thru. The traffic in the back would remain the same as it is now with deliveries. Member Ipsen inquired as to what may happen should they run out of something, where would they ask the customer to park. Mr. Ocwieja explained the possibility of running out of any one item is very slim and in addition, they have the other store in town to “borrow” from. Member Johnson
APPROVED MINUTES asked what the time is from ordering at the kiosk to sandwich delivery. John Rinaldi, manager of the Subway, stated two minutes or less.
Member Johnson moved, seconded by Member Weber, to approve PZB 16-09/SU proposed use for a drive-thru at a Subway Store located at Town Square at the northwestern corner of Main Street and Route 173 with the condition that the applicant will continue to work with staff in regards to landscaping at the menu board. Upon role call the vote was: YES: 5: Johnson, Weber, Ralston, Kaiser and Ipsen. NO: 0: ABSENT: 0: THE MOTION CARRIED.
PZB 16-03/TA – Proposed Text Amendment to the Street Graphics Regulations, Village Code Chapter 14 – Continued from the April 14 and May 12, 2016 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting
Director Garrigan outlined changes made to the proposed Text Amendment from the last meeting. The proposed ordinance has been changed to mirror the current ordinance with respect to monument signage, to mirror the same language as it pertains to wall signage and to mirror the same language pertaining to landscaping. The new proposed ordinance also contains a “Downtown Sign District”, addresses temporary signage and new home builder’s signage. Prohibited signs are as follows: 1) Attention getting devices; 2) Inflatable signs within the Antioch Downtown Sign District; 3) Billboards; 4) Illustrated window signs larger than 6 square feet; 5) Off-site directional signage; 6) Sidewalk signs located outside the Downtown Antioch Sign District; 7) Roof signs; 8) Home occupation signs, along with a number of other signs that have been identified as being prohibited.
Member Ipsen stated he is fine with the new sign ordinance but does not care for LED signs. Director Garrigan explained LED signs are prohibited. Member Johnson asked if LED signs would come before the board as a Special Use. Director Garrigan said no, the LED signs are prohibited.
Member Johnson moved, seconded by Member Ipsen, to approve PZB 16-03/TA – Proposed Text Amendment to the Street Graphics Regulations, Village Code Chapter 14. Upon roll call the vote was: YES: 5: Johnson, Weber, Ralston, Kaiser and Ipsen. NO: 0. ABSENT: 0. THE MOTION CARRIED.
PZB 16-05/TA – Proposed Text Amendment to Village Code 10-11-3 through 10-11-18 and replacing Chapter 13 for the adoption of a Site Plan Review Ordinance – continued from the May 12, 2016 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting.
Director Garrigan explained the Village currently does not have architectural standards in place for any new developments that may come to the Village. Staff is proposing that all future commercial, industrial, office, multi-family and townhome developments go through a site plan review process before the Planning and Zoning Board and Village Board. This proposed ordinance uses ideas from the “Urban Design Manual” (which was never adopted) and the Village’s existing landscape ordinance. Staff’s proposal is to unify all the Village’s design regulations (with the exception of single family) into one document that would regulate architecture, landscaping, lighting, trash enclosures, parking and other miscellaneous elements. This document would also require the use of quality materials such as face brick, glass, native stone or cultured stone. It also addresses design standards for drive-thru facilities, multi-family structures and townhomes, landscaping and parking designs. Director Garrigan stated this proposed document is an attempt at creating a more user-friendly document specifically outlining most of the Village’s current development regulations consolidated into one document that will provide the Planning and Zoning Board and the Village Board the opportunity to review new developments. He further explained the proposed document is an attempt to establish a series of minimum design criteria that will help preserve the Village’s character. It is also an attempt to raise building standards and architectural design. Director Garrigan questioned whether the Planning and Zoning Board wanted to wait to address this agenda item until they have a full board. Member Kaiser asked when that might be and Director Garrigan explained the newly appointed Board Member, Jim Rapp, was traveling for business that evening.
Member Weber stated she feels the proposed design standard continues to dictate too stringently and feels Staff “isn’t there yet” and all new construction will look the same. Member Weber stated she doesn’t agree with having garages recessed or having windows in garage doors. Member Ralston asked about the color suggestions and feels neutral colors can be boring. Attorney Long stated dictating colors can be a problem. Director Garrigan said he can soften the language on that matter. Member Johnson wanted to be clear that the Planning & Zoning Board will be able to review new construction that comes into the Village, but feels the language in the proposed text amendment could be modified. Director Garrigan suggested bringing in a design consultant to look over the text amendment and make recommendations to the Planning & Zoning Board. He offered to work with
APPROVED MINUTES Member Weber to address her concerns and said prior to revisiting this proposed text amendment, he would be happy to soften the language of the document.
Member Johnson moved, seconded by Member Weber, to table PZB 16-05/TA – Proposed Text Amendment to Village Code 10-11-3 through 10-11-18 and replacing Chapter 13 for the adoption of a Site Plan Review Ordinance for further consideration. Upon roll call the vote was: YES: 5: Johnson, Weber, Ralston, Kaiser and Ipsen. NO: 0. ABSENT: 0. THE MOTION CARRIED.
PZB 16-07/TA – Proposed adoption of Single Family Design Standards Ordinance Director Garrigan presented his staff report stating the proposed ordinance is not intended to micro-manage residential architecture but rather to maintain minimum standards. Currently, the Village of Antioch has no design standards in place addressing a single family development. The proposed ordinance addresses massing, garage placement, roofline variation, window fenestration, use of materials, proportion, landscaping and neighborhood design.
Member Johnson asked if the document addresses limitations on the amount of models a builder can propose. Director Garrigan explained developers would be required to submit a pattern book of the types of products they’re proposing. Member Johnson asked if wording could be changed to stop a developer from having too many of the same elevations in one neighborhood. Director Garrigan said yes and that stricter provisions could be added to the monotony code. Member Johnson said he would like to see bicycle lanes and walking paths in larger developments to make them more pedestrian friendly.
Member Weber said she wants to have design standards but does not agree with what is proposed regarding garages. She feels many people want 3-car garages and this design standard does not address that. She also feels an 8-foot porch is going to be a problem and does not agree with requiring windows on all four elevations. She feels many of the requirements listed in the document is cost prohibitive, i.e. wood trim around windows & brick chimney chases.
Member Ipsen asked if the document could contain lot sizes. Director Garrigan responded that lot sizes are addressed in the zoning ordinance.
Attorney Long wanted to clarify when this document would apply. Director Garrigan responded that it would be from this point forward and would not apply to a subdivision such as Clublands which has their own pattern book.
Mr. Paul Green, an Antioch Township resident, wished to address the board. He stated he is in favor of the proposed design standards as he has seen many “cookie-cutter” neighborhoods.
Stuart Malsch, a resident of Antioch, wanted to speak in regards to Windmill Creek Subdivision. He was told by other older residents that this subdivision was supposed to be geared towards senior housing. He feels in new developments, based on what he’s seen in Windmill Creek, if all the lots are not sold, the developer will come back to the Village and ask for a new product.
Member Johnson moved, seconded by Member Weber, to table PZB 16-07/TA – Proposed adoption of a Single Family Design Standards Ordinance for further consideration until the July 14, 2016 Planning & Zoning Meeting. Upon roll call the vote was: YES: 5: Johnson, Weber, Ralston, Kaiser and Ipsen. NO: 0. ABSENT: 0. THE MOTION CARRIED.
There being no further discussion, Member Weber moved, seconded by Member Ralston to adjourn the regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board at 9:38 p.m.
__________________________ Nancy M. Slazes PZB Secretary