City of Highland Park Plan and Design Commission met Feb. 15

By Kristine Gonzales-Abella

Jun 28, 2022

City of Highland Park Plan and Design Commission met Feb. 15.

Here are the minutes provided by the commission:

CALL TO ORDER

I. At 6:30 PM Chair Hainsfurther called the meeting to order and asked Director Fontane to call the roll.

II. ROLL CALL

Members Present: Bruckman, Kerch, Weil, Hecht, Moore, Hainsfurther

Members Absent: Quinlan

Director Fontane took the roll and declared a quorum present.

Staff Present: Burhop, Coleman, Fontane

Student Rep.: Nathanson, Mendoza

Council Liaison: Stolberg

Corporation Counsel: Martinez

III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

February 1, 2022 Special Meeting

Chair Hainsfurther entertained a motion to approve the minutes of the February 1, 2022 meeting. Vice Chair Moore so motioned, seconded by Commissioner Hecht.

Director Fontane called the roll:

Ayes: Bruckman, Kerch, Weil, Hecht, Moore, Hainsfurther

Nays: None

Motion passed 6-0.

IV. SCHEDULED BUSINESS

A. Design Review – 581 Elm Place – Shops on Elm Sign Package Amendment

Planner Coleman made a presentation for the above item including photo, existing sign package, proposed sign package amendments, no modifications to code, design review standards, standards for sign packages, approval process and recommendation.

Vice Chair Moore asked if the orange portion of logo for MB bank was included and was that a variation requirement because all the other signs are white.

Planner Coleman stated this is not part of the amendment. These are only for the 10 blade signs hanging under the canopy.

Chair Hainsfurther stated MB is no longer a tenant in the center.

Chair Hainsfurther asked if the color as represented on the plans is grey or teal. Planner Coleman stated the rendering is dark grey.

Mr. Peter Theodore, Applicant’s Architect, thanked Planner Zubin for the presentation. They are reducing the sign area and the colors are representative of what they want to do which is contrast grey background with white letters. The idea is to give the center a more modern feel.

Chair Hainsfurther asked if eventually they were going to change the colors on the trim of the building.

Mr. Theodore stated this was possible when the weather breaks as part of a maintenance program.

Chair Hainsfurther stated is not particular to this request.

Commissioner Kerch stated he saw on the sheet it calls for CG which is Pantone’s cool grey.

Mr. Theodore confirmed this.

Chair Hainsfurther entertained a motion to approve. Commissioner Weil so motioned, seconded by Commissioner Kerch.

Director Fontane called the roll:

Ayes: Bruckman, Kerch, Weil, Hecht, Moore, Hainsfurther

Nays: None

Motion passed 6-0.

B. Public Hearing #2022-SUP-002 for a Special Use Permit to Operate a Medical Cannabis Dispensing Organization in the I – Light Industrial Zoning District at 2030 Skokie Valley Road.

C. Public Hearing #2022-PUD-002 Amending Ordinance 30-12 Granting Special Use Permits for a Planned Development and for the Operation of Drive-Thru Facilities at 2030 Skokie Valley Rd. due to a Change in Land Uses on the Property.

Continued from the February 1, 2022 PDC meeting.

D. Public Hearing #2022-SUP-001 for a Special Use Permit to Operate an Adult Cannabis Dispensary in the I - Light Industrial Zoning District at 2030 Skokie Valley Rd.

Continued from the February 1, 2022 PDC meeting.

Items B, C and D will be considered concurrently.

Director Fontane stated at the last meeting they had an adult cannabis public hearing open and continued to this meeting. Tonight there is a new public hear for medical cannabis dispensing organization as well. The applicant had intended to file for both initially and that is why this item is opening tonight.

Planner Burhop made a presentation for the above items including medical cannabis dispensing organization, proximity to other land uses, off-street parking, variation request, traffic study update, applicant’s response, elevation and recommendation.

Commissioner Kerch asked if they were involved in setting the hours because it is a special use permit or a cannabis dispensary.

Director Fontane stated with special use considerations reasonable regulations related to their operation can be made conditions of approval. Hours of operation are under those reasonable conditions. It pertains to special use permits in general.

Commissioner Weil asked about curbside pick up for medical cannabis and if it was codified in their code or in state law. Is there anything that says it is only limited to medical and that curbside pick up would not be available to recreational purchasers.

Mr. Martinez stated he had not seen anything specific to curbside pick up and he could look into it. He did not believe there was anything specific.

Chair Hainsfurther asked if the Commission wanted to make that a condition of approval, as it is with the scope of their authority to make that recommendation to Council.

Mr. Martinez asked if this would be to require curbside pickup.

Chair Hainsfurther stated it would be to limit curbside pickup only for medical.

Mr. Martinez stated that fits in with what Director Fontane stated earlier. In terms of reasonable conditions, he did not see a legal problem.

Chair Hainsfurther stated with regard to the variation requested, to not have internal delivery, the police do not have problem with it being outside. It was part of the original ordinance and he asked where it came from.

Director Fontane stated it went back in 2015 when they adopted medicinal cannabis dispensaries they included the code you now see in the ordinance and that was adopted. As part of that they participated in various inter-municipal code development activities. It was based on the work coming out of those types of meetings. It was early for IL in 2015 in terms of what security provisions would be included.

Chair Hainsfurther stated he was trying address Mr. Laxner’s letter. If the City is comfortable with exterior deliveries then perhaps they should look at amending the code. If not they are not going to enforce it maybe it should not be in the code.

Director Fontane stated the are enforcing it and it may be modification based. Chair Hainsfurther stated if they do not feel it is necessary maybe they should change it.

Mr. Tyler Manic, Applicant’s Attorney, stated because there is minimal difference between medical and adult use operation, they have pared down their presentation to discuss the medical operations. Planner Burhop went through the various forms of relief they are seeking and each has the ultimate goal of allowing Zen Leaf to relocate its medical and adult use operations. Once the new location is eligible to open the old location must first close.

Mr. Adam Rak, Land Planner, stated their prior presentation included evidence in support of the application and statement of compliance with the special use standards. The evidence adds medical cannabis as a conditional use to the previous request. He mentioned the location along a commercial corridor, cannabis uses are not allowed within certain buffer areas, proposed site meets all City location restrictions, traffic study was revised based on prior feedback and confirmed that the proposed development traffic can be accommodated on the adjacent streets with existing access, proposed parking exceeds the required parking.

Mr. Anthony Marsico, Applicant, made a presentation including revised hours of operation, Mon. - Sat. 9:00 AM to 9:00 PM, Sun. 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM, comparison to other dispensaries, revised building elevations, medical vs. adult use cannabis regulatory differences, medical vs. adult use cannabis operational comparison, no curbside pick-up for adult use, only for medical use.

Vice Chair Moore stated she liked the existing brick and it warms it up and keeps it in line with the rest of the buildings. She mentioned the paint sample and asked about something warmer instead of stark white.

Mr. Marsico stated they are open to suggestions and they want to be as much on brand as possible. He did not know if the vanilla stucco was desirable and would enhance the overall look and they are open.

Commissioner Moore stated it does not need to match the other buildings, but be in the same color family.

Mr. Marsico stated they are open to suggestions.

Commissioner Hecht stated he liked the façade change and tries not tell a business owner how to design their own façade. As long as it fits in with the character of area he was alright with it.

Commissioner Weil stated she had a problem with the proposed hours and they had included comparable locations. She did not think the Niles location was relevant to Highland Park and thought the closest competitors are Northbrook and Highwood. She knew it was in their best interest and did not want to see them lose money. The Northbrook location is open until 9:00 PM three days per week and they are proposing to be open until 9:00 PM six days a week. She would feel more comfortable if they were in line with that. She appreciated all of the other changes and they had been responsive.

Mr. Marsico stated it was in both of their interests to have expanded hours. It meant additional revenue for the City. When they went through this the last time a year or so ago there were the same concerns and the approach is similar to the medical dispensary when it was first approved that they err on the side of caution. There is no crime and no loitering. The Police Chief has stated there have not been issues. He asked what is going to happen between 8:00 PM and 9:00 PM noting will change with the business. It is high traffic/volume corridor and there is no suspicious activity.

Commissioner Weil stated the later they are open the more of a chance of people coming who may have been partaking of something before. They had stated very few visits are spontaneous and are planned in advance and she thought people could plant to be there during their business hours. She was not trying to get them not to open there and thought it was a great use of the facility. She thought people can plan to come and the later they are open there is a chance people will have started partying whether with alcohol or cannabis earlier.

Commissioner Kerch stated the design is good one and thought the white is fine with him. It gives them an identity and the brick matches the other buildings. He was uncomfortable in getting into the hours. Target is open until 10:00 PM, Starbucks is open until 9:00 PM and Dunkin Donuts is open until 10:00 PM. He thought the hours were perfectly legitimate for that business district. He thought the security had been dealt with and they do not do this this for drug stores. He thought it was a good plan and would not mind the extra tax dollars.

Commissioner Bruckman thanked the applicant for the for updated presentation. She liked the new design and liked the compromise with the hours and it will mean more tax dollars for Highland Park.

Chair Hainsfurther stated he appreciated the change in design and was loathe to try and mandate certain colors. They are entitled to their image. He mentioned Mr. Laxner’s letter and deliveries and asked what time of day do they get deliveries of product and what time is the cash removed.

Mr. Marsico stated the hours are not set and by law cultivation centers are not allowed to give exact delivery times. State laws require cultivation delivery vehicles to be back on site prior to them closing and are not allowed to leave prior to opening.

Chair Hainsfurther about the hours for cultivation centers.

Mr. Marsico stated they are all over the map. Some of the delivery vehicles are coming from four hours away and are typically middle of the day. Tuesdays and Thursdays are big delivery days. Cash deliveries are typically in the mornings.

Mr. Ed Farrell, Silver Star Protection, stated they randomize it and switch it up. Chair Hainsfurther asked if it was during daylight hours or at night. Mr. Farrell stated is was daylight hours.

Chair Hainsfurther asked about the delivery sequence.

Mr. Farrell stated they prepare for this and make sure there are no issues. They talk to the delivery team prior to coming and ask them to call before they get here. They prep the site to make sure it is safe and secure. The guards look at the exterior of the store and do randomized patrols. They make sure there is no suspicious activity for the delivery. When they are a minute out they call so if there is an issue they can pull away. The vehicle pulls up during daylight hours. There are always two people in a delivery vehicle and one is required to stay with the vehicle and the other brings in the product. They park outside the delivery door and a guard is in area five minutes before. Once the truck arrives they identify them and they get the product in the building as quick as they can. The inventory is done inside with an agent in charge. They keep an eye on the vehicle and once ready to depart they look at the cameras and they leave. They have been doing this in this state and other states and have over 100 sites and have never had an incident.

Chair Hainsfurther asked if they come in through the employee entrance. Mr. Farrell stated they come in through the restricted access area.

Chair Hainsfurther asked if there were any incidents involved with the current operation.

Chief Lou Jogmen, Highland Park Police, stated staff took a look since the inception of the company and there was nothing that stood out that was concerning. Very little activity has occurred in the time they have been there.

Chair Hainsfurther asked if there were any incidents related to Chase. Chief Jogmen stated there were none.

Chair Hainsfurther stated they seem to be fairly similar in terms of the level of security involved.

Chief Jogmen stated it is a different product and a commodity people are seeking to obtain and you could draw parallels to both organizations.

Planner Burhop read an email into the record from Mr. Shane Rackman.

Director Fontane stated in terms of the façade treatment he understood it is part of their branding strategy. The color choice has to do with the branding strategy. He asked if other locations look similar.

Mr. Marsico stated they do and it is a nationwide branch strategy. He illustrated four designs which looked similar.

Director Fontane stated they are trying communicate a brand through their signage and color combination and there should be deference toward that.

Chair Hainsfurther asked if they should take the three items as a motion. Director Fontane stated they should vote individually.

Vice Chair Moore stated this was their first dispensary in Highland Park and in the code they require the indoor access to the garage door for loading and unloading. If they do a variation that would set a precedent they do not need. Does this need to go to Council to have that requirement taken away.

Director Fontane stated that can be acted on through the recommendation of the PDC for Council consideration as to whether the variance meets the standards. Variances/modifications are contemplated in the code. Where they find variations from standards that recur they do look to change the code. He did not think the Commission should concern itself about that. The City Manager can direct staff to consider text changes. Tonight’s application is before the PDC and they do not have a text amendment tonight and the applicant can apply for text amendments. What is before the Commission is properly before you and can be recommended on. The Commission can transmit to Council they are concerned about that or there is a suggestion about looking into that standard. That is separate and apart from their recommendation to Council regarding the items before the PDC tonight.

Chair Hainsfurther stated they have expressed that concern and Councilman Stolberg noted it. He thought it would be a good idea to include it the memo to them. He was a little concerned about the hours and it is very normal for communities to limit hours of operation of businesses applying for special. He had no issue doing that here or for any other special use. If everyone else closes at 8:00 PM most days of the week and he would be more comfortable matching hours. He did not have a problem opening at 8:00 AM. He thought 9:00 PM is a little different than their existing location because it backs up to residential and the location in Briergate is commercial. He would prefer a recommendation that limits the hours of operation that matches Pure Leaf in Northbrook.

Councilman Stolberg stated they are a recommending body and they appreciate the comments. When it gets to Council that would be something they would discuss. He was on the PDC when they drafted the code and zoning requirements for medicinal. The hours were very much taken into account. As far as the interior loading dock that was not something that was required from the state, and was something they incorporated into their code for a security measure.

Director Fontane stated they worked with other municipalities in trying to figure out how to regulate these. It is not a state requirement and if it was, they could not waive it.

Councilman Stolberg stated he was not concerned about precedent in this instance. What they have allowed before is sometimes open for discussion but more important are the conditions and environment surrounding that location. Walgreen’s delivers many more dangerous things than several hundreds pounds of marijuana. The concern when we talk about an enclosure was that it is a cash business. It has been good business for Highland Park with no problems or complaints. He was glad they are looking for space and would support the idea if they have conditions they feel makes it a stronger recommendation send them to Council for consideration.

Chair Hainsfurther stated the applicant made a good point that if someone one came in looking for the same relief in terms of deliveries and went to the police and they support them they would listen to them. They judge each variation on the merits of that case. If another applicant came forward he would want the same kind of thoroughness that has been testified to here. The City should take a look at whether or not it is a valid condition or say they agree to eliminate the requirement. He wanted to hear about curbside delivery and the law could be changed and then permitted. He did not see it as being a good drive thru business.

Commissioner Weil asked whether it should be a variation in terms of the enclosed delivery or should be taken out of the code. She thought it should stay as a requirement and only given as a variation.

Director Fontane stated he would not be concerned about setting a precedent. They take great care in being consistent in application in these types of considerations. In a case of a similarly situated use request they want to act consistently. These are site and operation specific considerations. It is alright to have a particular combination in one application that come for a modification. In another location it may not be. This is a high visibility location and was a bank with money handling operations.

Vice Chair Moore asked is there a compelling reason to grant variance or do they not want to do it because it is too much trouble. They are moving to new a location that is more visible and changing hours and how they access the facility with money and product. It seems like a lot of changes at once and thought maybe that is why they are uncomfortable.

Mr. Marsico stated the main reason they are asking for the variance is site specific. If they had an overhead door they would utilize it. It is a leased property with no overhead door and it is not conducive to put one in on the side and remove the windows for future marketability. If would have to go back to the landlord. The location is a new business and he hoped they had gained credibility over the years in Highland Park. They are one of the leading operators nationally and in the top five in number of locations. There are case studies specific to IL that do not have overhead doors. They are a proven business and this is not going to be a case study that the jury is out. In conversations with Chief Jogmen and Mr. Farrell, a federal ex-marshal, they have dealt with this outside of their operation. He understood the concerns and assured them that overwhelmingly they are non-issues. Things can happen and IL is one of the most regulated. There are tens of thousands of dispensaries over the country and thing happen. Based on their experience they are not just pulling things out of the hat and they are a proven business.

Chair Hainsfurther stated this a leased facility and they have limitations from the landlord.

Mr. Marsico stated they are thinking about long term viability and he does not know if they will be here for five or ten years.

Chair Hainsfurther entertained a motion to draft findings of fact for Public Hearing #2022-SUP-002. Commissioner Weil so motioned, seconded by Commissioner Hecht.

Chair Hainsfurther suggested limiting the hours to Sun. – Tues. 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM, Wed. – Fri. 8:00 AM to 9:00 PM and Sat. 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM. He asked if that was acceptable to the motioner.

Commissioner Hecht stated the hours they are asking for are reasonable and shortening them by two or three hours a week will not do anything. He did not support and changes.

Chair Hainsfurther stated the motion goes forward as proposed.

Director Fontane called the roll:

Ayes: Bruckman, Kerch, Weil, Hecht, Moore, Hainsfurther

Nays: None

Motion passed 6-0.

Director Fontane stated the item was approved with the hours as proposed by the applicant.

Chair Hainsfurther entertained a motion to draft findings of fact for Public Hearing #2022-PUD-002. Commissioner Kerch so motioned, seconded by Commissioner Hecht.

Director Fontane called the roll:

Ayes: Bruckman, Kerch, Weil, Hecht, Moore, Hainsfurther

Nays: None

Motion passed 6-0.

Chair Hainsfurther entertained a motion to direct staff to prepare findings of fact for Public Hearing #2022-SUP-001. Commissioner Hecht so motioned, seconded by Commissioner Bruckman.

Ayes: Bruckman, Kerch, Weil, Hecht, Moore, Hainsfurther

Nays: None

Motion passed 6-0.

Director Fontane stated for all three items they recommended to direct staff to draft findings in the affirmative approving as stated. They will come back to the Commission for final action on recommendation to Council.

Planner Burhop stated they could schedule this for March 1st. They can continue all three items.

Chair Hainsfurther stated they can do it all at once.

Mr. Martinez confirmed this.

Chair Hainsfurther entertained a motion to continue the public hearings to March 1st. Vice Chair Moore so motioned, seconded by Commissioner Weil.

Director Fontane called the roll:

Ayes: Bruckman, Kerch, Weil, Hecht, Moore, Hainsfurther

Nays: None

Motion passed 6-0.

Director Fontane stated notice is actual and no additional notice will be given. V. OTHER BUSINESS

A. Next Special Meeting - March 1, 2022

Planner Burhop stated there will be tonight’s continuance, a design review application and a special use permit and major PUD amendment for 555 Roger Williams for a proposed conditional use.

Director Fontane asked about legal training.

Planner Burhop stated it is April 5th and they will confirm.

Mr. Martinez stated it is April 5th.

Student Rep. Adriana Mendoza introduced herself.

B. Case Briefing - None

VI. BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC - None

VII. ADJOURNMENT

Chair Hainsfurther entertained a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Hecht so motioned, seconded by Vice Chair Moore.

Director Fontane called the roll:

Ayes: Bruckman, Kerch, Weil, Hecht, Moore, Hainsfurther

Nays: None

Motion passed 6-0.