City of Highland Park Plan and Design Commission met April 5

By Kristine Gonzales-Abella

Aug 10, 2022

City of Highland Park Plan and Design Commission met April 5.

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: Quinlan, Bruckman, Kerch, Weil, Hecht (6:40), Moore, Hainsfurther

Members Absent: None

Director Fontane took the roll and declared a quorum present.

Staff Present: Burhop, Fontane

Student Rep. Mendoza

Council Liaison: None

Corporation Counsel: Martinez, Passman

III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

March 15, 2022 Regular Meeting

Chair Hainsfurther entertained a motion to approve the minutes of the March 15, 2022 meeting. Vice Chair Moore stated on page 3 “thinner” should be “finished.” Vice Chair Moore so motioned, seconded by Commissioner Weil.

Director Fontane called the roll:

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

Nays: None

Motion passed 6-0.

IV. SCHEDULED BUSINESS

A. Public Hearing #2022-PUD-003 for a Special Use Permit in the Nature of a Substantial Amendment to a Planned Development, as approved by Ordinance #13-06 and subsequently amended, for second story additions on two existing structures, including zoning modifications and other City Code variations and design review, for Ravinia Festival Association, at 418 Sheridan Rd. and 201 St. Johns Ave.

Planner Burhop made a presentation for the above item including summary, updates, zoning relief/modifications - no changes, findings of fact and recommendation.

Commissioner Weil stated overall she was happy with the responses to the issues that were raised at the last meeting. In the renderings of the west view trees and bushes are shown and she asked if they exist or were they just drawn in or will they be added.

Mr. Jim Schmitz, Applicant, stated they do exist and they took photos and sent to the architect so he could render them on the drawings. The volume of plant material is accurate.

Chair Hainsfurther stated the color of fence is listed as brown. When he looked at the sample it looked purple. He wanted to make sure what it is.

Mr. Schmitz stated they got sample and it is brown. It is not intended to be purple. Chair Hainsfurther stated it looks like the fence is solid and the good side should face out. Mr. Schmitz stated that was no problem.

Mr. Brett Tolpin, 283 Leslie Ln., Highland Park, IL, Resident, stated he reviewed the findings and objected to the amendment. The Festival does not need more bulk or indoor space. The Music Box was supposed to be for the kids and Council allowed it to pass and told the Festival not to come back and ask for more buildings. This was on the heels of the proposed building to be constructed to the west and was sold as necessary for health and safety. This was not the real reason. The driving factor for this was the Festival secured a lease from a Fortune 500 telecon company called Crown Castle and was going to lease the land and use it as a data hub. This was in violation of deed restrictions. They want another special use permit for two buildings. This cuts against the trend and there area feasible alternates such as leasing space nearby and inconvenience was the primary reason and they wanted to build upward. The green space is highly valued by the neighbors. More indoor space for a seasonal outdoor music park is setting Ravinia up for transforming into year round events. It is out of line for a lower density residential zone. Every time the City allows Ravinia to expand upward or outward the character of the park is transitioned toward a full time reality. There are three questions to consider: does the PUD act as guardrail against all the building, should the standard for granting such a building need to be a compelling reason and that no feasible alternates are available and why does the summer outdoor music venue in a residential neighborhood require a skyline reaching a mile from south to north. He questioned what they do not know. Ravinia has a history of taking certain liberties and how they represent their needs to get away with what they want. The Commission should consider saying no particularly if the problem is not much of a problem and there are feasible alternates. There is leasing space on Roger Williams and they have purchased many houses around the Festival and there are excess vacancies. After Ravinia Brewing demolished the corner building adjacent to Walgreen’s Ravinia stated they owned the trademark for Ravinia and attempted to extract a royalty for every beer they resold. The trademark dispute stopped the business from building out the space. The old Ravinia BBQ and Grill space is vacant along with eight other properties on Roger Williams. There is also the old Bob’s Pantry. This would be a community benefit. He wanted to run this solution by the board members of the Ravinia HOA. This could be a good solution. Great does not always mean good and the PUD exists for a good reason.

Mr. Lawrence Dunlap, 221 Blackhawk, Highland Park, IL, Resident, stated he backs up to the Green Bay trail across from the proposed site. He represents 10-15 neighbors who are nearby. He read the packet and it stated the Commissioners were requesting a soundproof fence around the garbage collection area. They are the closest neighbors and can hear everything and a lot of it is Lakeshore Recycling. There are times when Ravinia is doing clean up and it is quite loud. He is requesting a soundproof fence, not just a slatted wood fence. He liked what they were doing with the tree and was concerned with the AC and it was not going to be enclosed. He asked for decibel testing after completion. There are areas of Ravinia outside of the decibel levels. There are sound problems with the west lot. He mentioned the construction time and asked for no idling or beeping before 7:00 AM and they are to respect the sound ordinances. He was told mention was made of a 10-year plan for Ravinia because they are being approached too many times. This would be good for the neighbors and knowing what to do with their property.

Chair Hainsfurther stated he was going to mention the master plan and did not expect to see it at this meeting. They take a while to develop and they deserve the time to do that and give it some thought. It is not something that can be done in three weeks. They are at the maximum FAR they can have on site and he anticipated they would not see very much in the way of additional structures placed on the site.

Mr. Dunlap stated in investigating the piano bar, they stated it was part of the ten-year plan. They dug the reservoir that added footage for runoff water and he had copies of another building that may or may not occur. Mr. Welz Kaufman is on record stating this was a part of their ten-year plan. It affects their property values and whether people want to stay there.

Mr. Hal Francke, Attorney, asked Mr. Tolpin where he lived in relation to the property. He stated Mr. Tolpin was not touching the specifics of this application, but it was more of a philosophical problem.

Mr. Tolpin stated he was more sensitive to the west park than the east. These buildings do not impact sight and sound. He was opposed to more building on the parcel. Mr. Francke stated he had nothing else.

Chair Hainsfurther called for a motion. Commissioner Kerch motioned to adopt the draft findings of fact with the two conditions. He stated he was agreeable with all four conditions. Vice Chair Moore seconded.

Planner Burhop stated there were two with the report and two additional conditions. One is it should be in substantial conformance with the plans and second submission of the updated site plan indicates the location of the fence which the applicant submitted to staff. The two additional ones are adding conditions for the lighting and mechanical screening.

Vice Chair Moore she wanted to clarify that Mr. Dunlap said his neighbor, Mr. Quinn, stated it was mentioned at the last meeting that the Commission would require a soundproof wall. She did not believe the condition required it and it was a request by one of the neighbors. She did not think it was on their list of requirements.

Chair Hainsfurther stated he did not know if there was such a thing as a soundproof wall.

Commissioner Quinlan stated he had a sense the last time a master plan was done (unintelligible) and is there an intention to have a master plan in the future and has the scope changed (unintelligible)

Mr. Schmitz stated there is no current master plan. Mr. Dunlap may have seen some sketches or renderings of different things that did not come to pass. Part of his job to think about the future and they do discuss replacement schedules. With the new CEO

coming in and new senior leadership, anything said three to four years ago is not as relevant now. They are starting to have that discussion and there is nothing tangible at this point that projects beyond this project.

Chair Hainsfurther asked when there is something tangible they will come back.

Mr. Schmitz stated this is a senior leadership and board discussion and it is hard to answer. Transparency is important and they have nothing to hide.

Chair Hainsfurther stated transparency is a great way to diffuse a lot of problems. Mr. Schmitz agreed and stated he was available to talk.

Commissioner Quinlan asked about increase in volume and scope (unintelligible)

Mr. Schmitz stated there are two different tracks that are happening. If he was talking about Ravinia setting up to be a year round venue, that is not a reality. Their education programs are a big part of what they do and they have more instructors and more site managers. A lot of these programs take place on site and away. Staff has been expanded and that is one of the reasons they are here tonight.

Commissioner Bruckman stated at the last meeting they mentioned they will be adding more staff and looking elsewhere was not an option. She asked how many staff they plan on adding on site.

Mr. Schmitz stated most have already been added. The original building was built in 1995 and a lot has to do with technology and positions that did not exist in 1995. Most of the rest has to do with education programs and it is the biggest department with 25-30 people. A lot of the positions are off-site and they do not have space to work here. The other part is they have had to expand security.

Commissioner Kerch stated he liked the way they responded on what they put forth three weeks ago. He thought the design was in keeping with the rest of the project and the improvements to the fence and screening along the west side are a major improvement. He thought the relief being sought is commensurate with the on going benefits of the programs. He was in favor of the project.

Commissioner Weil stated she appreciated the residents’ comments. She lives in Braeside two blocks south of Ravinia and understands the concerns. She had philosophical concerns and did not think the building concerns her. They are maxed out at FAR with this addition and she did not imagine anything being approved very easily in terms of new buildings. It would be nice if they could use some vacant space on Roger Williams and they have valid reasons for wanting to keep staff on site. She did not see how these additional office spaces would be expanding the focus of Ravinia being a year round venue. She did not think there would be a lot more development on the site in the future. She was comfortable with the applicant.

Commissioner Hecht stated in listening to the residents he did not find some of the concerns to be an issue. He lives on the west side of Highland Park and could have moved to Ravinia but did not because he did not want to deal with the noise. To an extent there is ordinary noise coming from the Festival that is to be expected. Ravinia has come multiple times and he recalled every time they said this was the last time and they will not ask for anything else. He did not think there was a concern with a year round venue, at some point there has to be recognition this is in a residential neighborhood and not a park. At some point they cannot put in any more. He heard the other commissioners say they are maxed out at FAR, but they can come for variance for FAR. This includes the west lot which is not buildable. He asked if they had looked into leasing space nearby and they answered they did not want to do that. Two years ago everyone had to be in the office and now nobody wants to be in the office. They want to work from home and come in once or twice a week. Are people going to be there and is there a reason they have to be on campus. Are there any alternates that do not require or require less of (unintelligible). He did not see either of those discussed. There are other alternates that are not so onerous that we should ask them to look into them. There is plenty of space on Roger Williams and they do not need to add bulk in the middle of a residential area where people have to look at it all the time. He wanted to hear something about that from the Festival giving an objective reason.

Vice Chair Moore stated she could see everyone’s side and felt they need to be able to look at a PUD and make changes as the applicant grows and changes their business model. They need to be able to accommodate that. She did not think they should punish them for past transgressions. They have a process of requiring variances and have conditions for a good reason.

Chair Hainsfurther stated he did not like to see things in bits and pieces which is why he suggested a master plan. It would be nice to see a vision for the whole complex that can be relied on. That takes time and they have new leadership and deserve the opportunity to roll up their sleeves and figure out what they want to do with the Festival long term. It has not been a normal season. With the request they are not increasing the footprint of the complex nor are they taking more surface area. They have responded positively to everything the PDC has asked of them previously. It is obvious there is still some work they need to do long term with the neighbors and he suggested regular conversations on an organized basis through the Ravinia Advisory Commission or the Ravinia Neighbors’ Assn. He was not worried about a year round operation and it is to some extent currently. They have programs on campus year round which are not major events as in the summer. He could not comment on how Council questioned the Festival previously and if this is approved it will be in front of Council. They can go to Council and remind them of what they said. He was ready to move this matter forward.

Commissioner Quinlan stated they mentioned 1995 and if that was the last time the master plan was circulated.

Mr. Schmitz stated that was the last time a master plan scaled project was completed. Director Fontane called the roll:

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

Nays: Hecht

Motion passed 6-1.

V. OTHER BUSINESS

A. Messrs. Passman and Martinez conducted Legal Training for the ZBA.

B. Next Special Meeting - April 19, 2022.

Planner Burhop stated there will be two items for the next meeting - the continuation of the 1950-64 Sheridan Rd. project and a sign request.

C. Case Briefing - None.

Commissioner Quinlan asked about design review and if there were any design guidelines available.

Director Fontane stated there is a design guideline document for downtown areas and Planner Burhop will follow up with him.