City of Ottawa Plan Commission met Tuesday, Oct. 4.
"The plan commission shall consist of nine members, residents of the city or persons who reside within territory contiguous to the city and not more than 1 1/2 miles beyond the corporate limits and not within another municipality, to be appointed by the mayor on the basis of their particular fitness for their duty and service on the plan commission. The appointments shall be subject to approval and consent of the council. "
MINUTES OF THE OTTAWA PLAN COMMISSION MEETING October 24, 2016
Chairman Brent Barron called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Ottawa City Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL Present: Barron, Buiting, Burns, Carroll, Etscheid, Reagan, Stone, Volker Absent: Howarter Others: City Planner Tami Huftel
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING Minutes of September 21st and 26th meeting were approved as published.
NEW BUSINESS
a. Review and recommendation of preliminary and final plat of consolidation for CVS #10981
Andrew Kolb, representing CVS development explained they are requesting a plat of consolidation to combined parcels for the CVS store. As part of this process they are requesting the alley to be vacated. They presented staff with a revised plan. Plan commission member then asked to see the revised plan. Chairman Brent Barron advised the public they heard the concerns expressed in the zoning and conditional use hearing. Paul Koeing - 201 Nebraska Street – prefers a smaller drive-way on the north side across from his house. Staff requested the drive to be widen to two lanes. Mike Buiting, traffic signal to the north is a must. The commission again stated there dislikes to the revised plan and strongly prefer the plan shown on the plat before them. There being no further questions or comments, it was moved by Debby Reagan that the OPC recommend the City Council approve the preliminary plat of consolidation for CVS #10981for properties located at 1621 Paul Street, 1625 Paul Street, 1618 Columbus Street, 1626 Columbus Street and that easterly portion of the alley located in Block 4 of Railroad Addition subject to 1.) Site plan being consistent with the recommendation of the conditional use #2 redesign the drive thru so there is no exit to the east – no exit to the east at the northeast corner. 2) City Council approving the alley vacation. Seconded by John Stone. Ayes: Brent Barron, Doug Carroll, Jackie Etscheid, Allen Howarter, Debby Reagan, John Stone, Todd Volker Nayes: Debbie Burns, Michael Buiting Motion carried.
Moved by Debby Reagan that the OPC recommend the City Council approve the preliminary and final plat of consolidation for CVS #10981for properties located at 1621 Paul Street, 1625 Paul Street, 1618 Columbus Street, 1626 Columbus Street and that easterly portion of the alley located in Block 4 of Railroad Addition subject to 1.) Site plan being consistent with the recommendation of the conditional use #2 redesign the drive thru so there is no exit to the east – no exit to the east at the northeast corner. 2) City Council approving the alley vacation. Seconded by Jacki Etscheid Debbie Burns stated she was not against the project just the conditions, Michael Buiting agreed. Ayes: Brent Barron, Doug Carroll, Jackie Etscheid, Allen Howarter, Debby Reagan, John Stone, Todd Volker Nayes: Debbie Burns, Michael Buiting Motion carried.
1
Legally described as: 110 E. Norris (Family Video): TRACT 1: LOT 12 AND THE WEST 1.4 FEET OF LOT 13 IN BLOCK 4 IN RAILROAD ADDITION TO THE CITY OF OTTAWA; TRACT 2: THE EAST 50 FEET OF LOT 13 IN BLOCK 4 IN RAILROAD ADDITION TO THE CITY OF OTTAWA; TRACT 3: LOT 11 IN BLOCK 4 IN RAILROAD ADDITION TO THE CITY OF OTTAWA; TRACT 4: LOT 10 IN BLOCK 4 IN RAILROAD ADDITION TO THE CITY OF OTTAWA; 1621 Paul Street (Brown): LOT 6 IN BLOCK 4 IN RAILROAD ADDITION TO OTTAWA; 1625 Paul Street (Howard): THE EAST 110 FEET OF LOT 5 IN BLOCK 4 IN RAILROAD ADDITION TO OTTAWA; 1618 Columbus (American Trust #2020): THE SOUTH 20 FEET OF LOT 4 AND ALL OF LOT 7 IN BLOCK 4 IN RAILROAD ADDITION TO OTTAWA, IN THE CITY OF OTTAWA; 1626 Columbus Street (Grundy Trust #1487): LOT 3, THE NORTH 40 FEET OF LOT 4 AND THE WEST 30 FEET OF LOT 5, ALL IN BLOCK 4 IN RAILROAD ADDITION TO THE CITY OTTAWA, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PART CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF ILLINOIS BY WARRANTY DEED DATED JULY 1, 1974 AND RECORDED SEPTEMBER 10, 1974 AS DOCUMENT NO. 607292 FOR ROAD PURPOSES; Alley: THAT PART OF THE 20 FOOT EAST-WEST ALLEY IN BLOCK 4 IN RAILROAD ADDITION TO OTTAWA, LYING WEST OF PAUL STREET AND EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF LOT 10 EXTENDED, TOGETHER WITH THAT PART OF THE 20 FOOT NORTH-SOUTH ALLEY LYING SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF LOTS 4 AND 5 EXTENDED;
b. Public Hearing – Wayne Fieldman requests conditional use for a Dairy Queen drive-thru restaurant located at 2535 Columbus Street, legally described as Lot 1 in Brookside subdivision, pursuant to plat thereof recorded as #2008-11756 in the LaSalle County Public Registry, situated in the City of Ottawa, LaSalle County, Illinois. Tom Duttlinger, engineer for the developer presented the site plan. John Stone requested drive- thru signage at the entrance. This is already on the plan. Debbie Reagan expressed concerns with traffic entering and exiting the access point. Suggested City staff contact IDOT requesting a turning lane. Mike Buiting asked about drainage. Tom stated it splits both ways and there are detention basins to handle it. There being no further questions from the audience or OPC members, it was moved by John Stoner that the OPC recommend the City Council approve the request for a Conditional Use Permit for drive-thru facility per staff report located at 2535 Columbus Street. Seconded by Doug Carroll Barron, Buiting, Burns, Carroll, Etscheid, Reagan, Stone, Volker
AYES; Brent Barron, Mike Buiting, Debbie Burns, Doug Carroll, Jackie Etscheid, Debby Reagan, John Stone, Todd Volker. Nayes: None Motion carried unanimously
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Tami L. Huftel City Planner
MEMO TO: Plan Commission FROM: Tami L. Huftel, City Planner DATE: October 21, 2016 REQUEST: Conditional Use for drive-thru facility LOCATION: Columbus Street CURRENT ZONING: C-3 Special Business COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Commercial ________________________________________________________________________
The applicant requests a conditional use permit for a drive thru facility for a proposed restaurant at 2535 Columbus Street, just south of Hardee’s.
This location will have positions for 50 full and part time employees and a maximum seating capacity of 72 with the hours of operation being from 10am to 10pm Monday through Friday.
The front of the building faces Columbus Street with the drive-thru located in the rear. Access to the drive–thru will be through the parking lot and there is adequate stacking ability.
The property is zoned C-3 (Special Business District) in which drive through facilities are allowed as a conditional use. The City recognizes there are certain uses which, because of their unique characteristics, cannot be properly classified in any particular district or districts, without consideration, in each case, of the impact of those uses upon adjacent land and of the public need for a particular use in the particular location. The City Council, after receiving a report from the Plan Commission containing its findings and recommendations, may allow a conditional use in a particular zoning district.
The Zoning Ordinance specifies the Plan Commission shall not recommend, nor shall the City Council grant a conditional use unless it makes findings based upon the evidence presented to it in each special case that the conditions noted in the analysis have been met.
The following is an analysis in terms of the standards as outlined in the City of Ottawa Zoning Ordinance:
(a) That the location and size of the proposed use and the nature and intensity of use in relation to the size of
the lot will be in harmony with the orderly development of the area and compatible with other existing uses.
Hardee’s has a drive-thru window along with several other restaurants in this vicinity.
(b) That the kind, size, location and height of the structure and extent of landscaping on the lot are appropriate
for the use and will not hinder or discourage the appropriate use of adjoining property or diminish the value thereof.
(c) That the design elements of the proposed development, including landscaping, are attractive and suitable
in relation to the site characteristics and style of other buildings in the immediate area, and that the proposed use will not alter the essential characteristics of the area or adversely affect property value in the neighborhood.
3
The proposed building would be a nice enhancement to this area. The proposed building, drive thru facility and parking fit appropriately on the lot.
(d) That the parking and loading facilities, if applicable, are adequate and properly located and that entrance
and exit driveways are laid out to achieve maximum safety.
Ingress and egress from this restaurant would be Columbus Street or Hardee’s.
(e) That streets providing access to the proposed uses are adequate in width, grade, alignment, visibility, and have adequate capacity for the additional traffic and parking generated by the proposed use, and the proposed use will not impede traffic circulation.
Columbus Street is adequate to handle the traffic. Having access through Hardees’s parking lot will provide the option of using a traffic signal.
(f) That the proposed use shall have easy accessibility for fire apparatus and police protection.
(g) That the electric wiring, water supply, the sewage disposal, and the stormwater drainage shall conform with all municipal codes and ordinances; comply with all standards of the appropriate regulatory authority; and not unduly burden the capacity of such facilities.
The location of the building/drive-thru facility would allow fire and police to have access from Columbus Street. Additionally, the applicant will be required to conform to all applicable City Codes.
(h) That the proposed use will provide for the conservation of natural features, drainage basins, the protection of the environment of the area, and sustained maintenance of the development.
Drive-thru facilities generally do not have the opportunity for preservation of natural features.
(i) That the proposed use will not have any detrimental effects on upon the public health, safety, welfare, or property values, and that the proposed use will not conflict with the purpose of this ordinance.
It does not appear the proposed use will have detrimental effects on the public health, safety, and general, welfare, or property values as the use has been designed to minimize traffic conflicts, will add architectural integrity to the area, and can add to the aesthetics of the streetscape through landscaping.
CONCLUSION: It appears the request meets the requirements of granting a conditional use permit for a drive-thru facility and staff recommends approval.
Alerts Sign-up