and we'll get started. Please take your seats.
It's not a major.
All right. Good morning. Good morning folks. It is 10:16
a.m. On May 21st, 2024 in the meeting of the Chicago City
council's committee on zoning landmarks and building
standards is called to order we will start with a roll
call.
Uh Vice chair Lawson's presence all of them aspat.
Omen Hopkins
all the woman dowel
almond Hall
all the woman Harris
all the memorial
all the woman Ramirez
almond Moore
almond Mosley
Lopez
all the person Fuentes
vice mayor brunette
all the woman Crews
Allman Conway
all the Vegas
almond Riley
almond
all the woman clay
We have a quorum. Let me just make sure I didn't miss
anyone laspata Hopkins dowel Ramirez more Mosley viegas
Ramirez Rosa.
No, we have a quorum present. Thank you committee members.
We have non-committee members Lee and Robinson with us as
well. Thanks for joining and I don't believe we have anyone
remotely.
Great. Um.
So moving on uh, I will read the items to be deferred. I
will read the page number the file number the address and
then take a motion for all at the end. We will start on
page 1 the second to the last item document number 0 2023
Dash 0000595 Alderman napolitano's text Amendment regarding
vacant buildings.
Moving on to the middle of page 3 in the second ward file
number 211128 for the address commonly known as 2031 to
2033 North Kingsbury Street next to the top of page 4 in
the 27th Ward file number 222229 for the address commonly
known as 700 West Chicago.
The bottom 2 items on page 8 in the 34th Ward for files
22409 for the address commonly known as 1065 West Polk as
well as file 22410 for the address commonly known as 1073
West Polk.
moving on to top of page 17 for file number 22242001 and
the 39th Ward address commonly known as 48.01 West Peterson
Avenue.
on page 20 the bottom 2 items in the 37th Ward file number
22283 for the address commonly known as
335 to 375 North Pulaski
And filed 22414 in the Third Ward for the address commonly
known as 22.
We'll come back to that.
on page 20
2338
2328 South Michigan Avenue, 2328 South Michigan Avenue,
that's file number 22414 in the Third Ward Bing deferred
referring all of page 21 including files 22399 in the 21st
Ward, but the address commonly known as 100001 to 1235 West
119th Street.
22324 in the 22nd Ward for the address commonly known as
404141115 and 4147 West Ogden.
22400000 in the 27th Ward for the address commonly known as
2011 to 209, North Racine Avenue.
all of page 22 including files 22401 in the 27th Ward for
the area bounded by West Randolph North Mae West Lake and
North Racine.
Lastly 22425 in the 30th Ward, but the address commonly
known is 3631 through 3657 North Central Avenue and 5547 55
through 55557 West Waveland Avenue.
If no questions by committee members Alder clay makes a
motion to defer the previously listed items all in favor.
Say I
Any opposed the opinion of the chair of the eyes have it
and the items are deferred.
Uh, thank you. We have all the more for the roll call
anyone else.
Great. Thank you. Alderman.
Uh this time we will move on to public comments. The public
comment period will be limited to 30 meet minutes out of
respect for everyone's Time Each speaker is limited to 3
minutes.
we have 9 public speakers. Uh, we'll start with um, Mr.
George, Blakemore.
Mr. Blakemore
quite a home here. I've been coming down here for maybe 30
or 40 years and the the game keep continue.
Who is this old man that all painted up and talking loud
and cursed?
I'm somebody and
I know how this system is not working.
When CIS was here.
It was the corrupt and fraud and then they got a new 1. I
think this is the Rosa he I don't know taking his place or
something. It's it's it's all a game.
all the dark and Pony show
you can get anything Zone in the city of Chicago anywhere
and any time if you got money.
This is all about money and some of these zoning lawyers.
I've been seeing for years.
for years
see they got a little niche here.
The people go to these zoning laws and pay and then they
play.
They can get anything resolved.
Now right at burden in Germany a little old irregular lot.
And you couldn't build on it.
It was built on.
How did they do this because of money?
money talk and bull
Is corruption here?
a 1:46 system here the Democratic machine and don't get mad
at the ultimates getting mad at the people. You you you you
you and all of you, you know how this game is played.
you're not new here, and it goes on and on and on because
of you
This is why the city doesn't work.
Don't let all this political hacks these so-called elected
officials.
The machine picks them and then you vote for them.
You don't pick them.
So it's something wrong with each 1 of you and when I was
hauling and cursing what I have 2 meeting at the same time.
Well, they looked at me like I'm crazy.
Maybe you are crazy. Maybe we are crazy may maybe all of us
have a mental health problem.
This is the month of May and oh at the calendar they say
the month of Mental Health.
Health is well, and if something evil here something
corrupted here something an American here.
With the game that being played here now, I'm talking sit
down sit down. You see how disrespectful they say. Look at
them Mr. Sit out.
You political hack lawyer you this is not the time for you
to meeting.
Thank you, Mr. Blackmore.
Uh next up we have with thank you Mr. Blakemore. Please
have a seat next up. We have uh, TJ Hughes Teresa Hughes.
I think I saw her earlier.
This is hi TJ.
And after after Miss Hughes will be uh, Zoe or Zoe Lee.
Go ahead. Miss you. Thank you. Thanks a lot, man. Good
good. Um, good morning everybody. My name is Teresa TJ
Hughes and I am here representing an advocacy for black
contractors and my issue is with the
fact that
the percentages for our black contractors are
pitiful
we are according to the city's records.
We are only getting 3%
of all the contracts that have been let
by the city
which at the time of this it was like 800 and 79 million
that were spent.
And out of that we only got 3% Um, the Asians got less than
7% and the Hispanics got 30% So I'm like I'm with Mr.
Blakemore on that. There is something wrong here.
And I'm here to ask you all to look into eileene Velasquez.
Who is the commissioner for what is she Chief procurement
officer for the Department of procurement Services? I will
ask that you also have the IG looking to that department
along with
The department or Chicago Department on Aviation, which is
Jamie ree because the black contractors are not getting
their fair share and all these things that are happening in
our community. We don't see blacks out there working.
You know, we know how to do the streets and the curves and
all that and this and whatever so I know this is zoning
landmarks and buildings.
It should all come together. We should be a part of that
and you and I we should hold each other accountable. I'm
looking at the audience here. It's only about 5 or 6 of us
black people. What is the deal with that? We need to be
accountable. We need to tell our people get your get get
down here and participate if we're not here to represent
Then we really don't have a voice. We really shouldn't be
complaining and bitching if we're not going to take part of
it.
You know, so hold me accountable.
Because I'm gonna hold you accountable and you know, I love
you in it, but I'm gonna hold you accountable too. Okay.
Thank you so much. Thank you, Miss.
uh up next uh, Zoe Zoe Lee
and followed by Simon shin.
shu
All right, you know I'm gonna start.
then
There are 3 things you can do if you want money for demolish
property if we're just talking about a little bit of money
the Alderman's committee on finance and I'm surprised your
Alderman didn't make the next. All right, so this committee
on zoning landmarks and building standards as you know,
I've been coming down here for a year because the city of
Chicago with the help of the building department illegally
demolished my building which is the 5th Amendment and we
have yet to be compensated. Um,
I've re I've done all the research when it comes to
building standards and what how you're supposed to do this,
but only in the black community. Do y'all get away with
knocking down our buildings and do not compensate because a
lot of us do not know the Constitution or do not know the
Fifth Amendment and do not know the rules when it comes to
demolish property in the state of Illinois. And again, like
I said, there's blight property act 1947 and 1949. If you
feel like it was an issue with the property you have to go
to the governor and then the governor has to go to the
attorney general and then they can eminent domain and you
still have to compensate the person that was my generation
of wealth. That was my commercial building. That was
everything and that's what y'all continue to do in our
communities because no 1 does not do anything. I currently
have a federal lawsuit against the city of
Chicago and on top of that my mother did the second thing
which was to file a claim with the city of Chicago which is
self-insured and you guys refuse to pay out that claim and
said that was the whole um, what was it? Uh, she didn't put
it in on time what she did and that was insurance fraud
which is bad faith in front of us. So that's a whole
another lawsuit. I'm going to continue to come down here.
And then this is election year. I am not the 1 I swear to
God everybody will go down. It'll be operation grade Lord
because at the end of the day it starts with the alderman
the alderman keep f****** selling us out in our communities
and that's just what y'all do and y'all think y'all can
continue to do this, but just you got the right black
person the right black person settle my case Marie Mary
Richardson Lowry.
Sit down with David. Aldermore Moore the 17th War who did
not come to my family and do what he was supposed to do
when it was time to pay us out. I am not the 1
Thank you. Um up next it's Simon Shu and while we do that
I'll just uh, we have additional members viegas Beal Cruise
Fuentes Mosley and Ramirez anyone else I missed.
Great, uh Mr. Shu
hi, my name's
my name is Simon Sue and then uh, I'm talking about the
3200 South wallers. They would like to reopen the web would
bar. Uh, I saw the the code my orderman the Cody have a a
piece of paper 10 of them and then number 3. They just look
like 10 commandments. Okay, a number 3, uh, because uh
within 1 mi we have 5 Elementary School over here and then
uh why we have the bar over there and then uh, uh on her
proposal, uh, I would uh on the weekday. They close at
10:00. I would prefer they close at no. Sorry. They close
at 11:00. I prefer the close at 10:00 because a lot of kid
around the neighborhood have go to sleep and they go back
to school and then uh, seeing uh, this 11 War we should
have at 1 more 11 Commandments. Okay, just like on the in
independent day and uh, uh more more we end we should let
them open a little bit late because
it's a holiday. Okay, and then on July No 1 go to school.
They make calls every day. Later.
Okay, just my proposal just like uh, we have to find a way
how costly thing and then it's like understand because I do
some research a lot of parent with the kick go to school.
They relate the closer earlier, but the single people say
I don't care.
Okay. So for for me, of course, I I live close by I would
like just like against it but somehow a lot of people have
different opinion and then I just want to spin my opinion.
I feel like that whenever they close at 10 p.m. Instead of
11.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Shuh up. Next is uh, Lisa Gantt Parker.
uh who will be followed by Michelle strassburger
Good morning morning.
2 years ago my daughter and I purchased a home at 4029 South
Vincent.
We have been working on the rehab since that time and are
hoping and praying to reach completion soon in April of the
same year a developer purchased the adjacent lot.
the developer rehab the existing 4,914 square foot 3 flat
that was on the 3000 250 square foot property next to ours.
Um, I did send a picture and
the Greystone is to the left.
I'm contesting building on the remaining land as I believe
in believe in doing so my home would become non-compliant
with city code city building code.
for context
my home is a 2 flat that is already attached to another
building on the south side.
It is a traditional Greystone townhouse.
As a result the majority of the homes windows are on the
freestanding north side of the building.
They're a total of 2 windows on the back.
and 13 plus windows on the
South side of the oh, I'm sorry on the north side of the
building. I believe Construction.
of the property at 4023
South Vincent would place the rooms in particular the 3
bedrooms of our building out of compliance with natural
light code 13172 070 set by the city zoning department. I
believe we will no longer be able to meet the 8% minimum
required. As I said earlier. There is already a 49 a 4,900
square foot structure on the 3250 square foot lot.
An additional building would an additional 3 flat would put
the dwelling density at almost 3 times the square foot of
the lot.
It does not take into consideration also.
zoning code 17170304
the lot in question
Is 3,250 square feet?
Splitting the lot would create 2.
1625 square foot Lots
The rm5 zoning indicates that the minimum lot per area
dwelling is 1,000 feet.
3 square units you will need 3,000.
You would need a minimum of 3,000 square feet per lot.
the
proposed building takes up more space than the lot has. I
also saw a an email from the architect on the project. She
indicates that the fire requirement has been met. However,
thank you Miss Miss Parker. Your time is expired. I'm gonna
have staff connect with you. Um, just so we can get more
information as well. Thank you. And we do have your letter
in the packet just uh, so all members know that um up next
Michelle strassburger who will be followed by Ward Miller.
Hi, I'm Michelle strassburger a resident on hubard street,
and I'm speaking today regarding the approved Zoning for
the 400 North Elizabeth project. Um, I'd like to start out
by stating that the stakeholder community members were
misrepresented by the old by Alderman Burnett and John Bosa
from Neighbors of River West if they are referring to the
meeting notes from the hybrid meeting at the church and The
Unofficial and the official vote of residents within 250
feet. It was an overwhelming no majority.
The next WCA and River North meeting 2 Days Later had an
unofficial vote. And again the majority was unknown.
The system is broken. I'm not against change just unwanted
upzoning after square footage was increased by over 300%
from its original zoning 3 years ago.
Guidelines were not adhered to it is the responsibility of
the property owning owner seeking resoning to contact every
residential property owner within 250 residential feet not
including businesses not to be delegated to community
groups only using signup sheets from their previous month's
meeting.
um in order to send out their notifications
How is it that a community representation?
Um
Oh.
Well, I just lost it. Sorry.
um
Of the approximately 60 to 80 residential pin Property
Owners immediately affected maybe only 10 received mailed
notices and no Homeowner Association presidents were even
contacted especially the 1 direct the street.
Um
And additionally the fire department I would how would we
be able to see the fire department approval of the street
level safety plan, um for the Southside, um, Kinsey side.
um because I'm baffled how a fire truck or engine is
supposed to set up for a fire on the south side of the West
Tower as there's only 10 foot 7 inches instead of 20 feet
due to the overhang of the glazed wall of that whole South
elevation.
um
And when was the latest traffic study completed? Um, was it
from the previous life science building or was a new
traffic study done recently. Um because as I'm just
wondering if seed Dot's aware of the blind spot exiting
right onto Ogden and it's it's extremely hazardous. Also
the Hazardous hazards of multiple idling trains and their
fumes deflecting from the new buildings toward the
residents on Elizabeth and Hubert Street as well as the
additional noise.
Solution of multiple trains. Thank thank you Mr.
Strassburger. Uh, your time is expired. Uh up. Next is Ward
Miller, um followed by John Bosa and just uh, also we've
been joined by Alderman laspata, um Community member and
then all the woman Coleman and all them in Cardona, uh, who
are guests.
Got her, uh Ward Miller. Thank you. Good morning, Mr.
Chairman and members of the of the committee. I'm Ward
Miller the Richard H Street House Executive Director of
President Chicago. Uh, we at preservation Chicago support
the minimum lot area reduction Amendment, uh document
number 020248 8948 introduced by Alderman Reilly realizing
that this supports the conversion of former Office
Buildings, many of them historic to residential units and
we feel that uh, this will be an amazing and beneficial,
uh, uh and transformational, uh, aspect to the revisioning
of the Chicago Loop in downtown Chicago and many of the
historic, uh, buildings that uh are currently facing huge
occupancy issues. Uh, also on another note, uh regarding
3731 to 3733 North Sheffield also known as the Wrigley
Field Flats. We want to encourage the uh, the developer
And this commission to encourage preservation at least of
the Limestone facades. These are part of a grouping of
historic buildings that are cross from Wrigley Field, uh,
Chicago Landmark, uh, and recognizing the historic
properties of that, uh development, uh, and the renovation
of Wrigley Field. We think that this uh, really does
support the authenticity of Wrigley Field and the adjoining
neighborhood. Uh, so we want to encourage, um this
development to go forward but to look at uh, revisioning,
uh, and uh, rethinking redesigning those facades to include
these historic, uh buildings these Limestone facades. So,
thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Miller. Uh up next is John Bosa and then our
last speaker will be Adam freedberg.
Good morning. My name is John Bosca neighbors of River
West. I've been part of the community and part of neighbors
of River West now for over 30 years, uh during that time
our boundaries have contracted. We were part of River North
as well as the West Loop right now. Our boundaries are on
the North side, which would be division on the south is
Kenzie to the east is River, uh, the river Chicago River
and then on the west side is the Kennedy and Ogden Avenue.
At this time right now. We're also seeing a huge influx of
development in regards to uh, what was always referred to
as the hole in the doughnut the hole in the doughnut would
be what we now know as the Tribune properties as well as
um,
the north side and South Side the insertion plant as well
as Greyhound, which we know that will be coming along here
soon. The idea of community is something that is important
to us. However, what we've learned though with the recent
adoption of the ordinance for uh, the casino for B's coming
in community host agreement is what the entire city.
It's included in the entire city River West and some of the
neighborhood groups there. Although we were aware of it. We
didn't participate in that host agreement.
In this particular instance. I'm referring to 400 North
Elizabeth 400 North Elizabeth. This is a second time that
we've reviewed this. Um PD. The first time was for a life
science building at this time right now. We were presented
with the residential development 734 units 140 plus units
of affordable that would be there, but the developer has
expressed to us is that their willingness to do more
affordable housing.
as you've heard already from other testimony there is
opposition to this especially for those folks who live
closest if you look at the letter that is uh on file there
is um, there is reference to that as well as people who are
across the way we recognize that on the other hand. We're
also recognizing what development has been proposed by
Planning by the staff there and over time how those
boundaries have changed and expanded to address the
functionally obsolete properties that are there and look
for further development as everyone knows the full Market
District is expanding its booming. It's a huge source of
revenue for the city the unions and for the tax base. So
because of these reasons and because of the work that's
been done already in the precedent is their neighbors of
River West will support 400 North Elizabeth. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bosca, uh and last uh as Adam freeberg.
Hi, good morning. My name is Adam freedberg. I'm the CEO of
Maverick development, uh run a local development company
here in Chicago, uh here to speak in support of the MLA
reduction ordinance, uh, as we all probably know there will
be nearly no cranes in Chicago next year building apartment
buildings, uh, a symptom of interest rates and outside of
our control and
What that means is that we need to be more creative. Um, I'm
committed to building apartment buildings in Chicago and
creating more homes and more affordable homes for the
residents of Chicago. Uh, I think the best way to do that
right now is to look at converting vacant Office Buildings.
It's a no-brainer. They're great locations. They're great
buildings the biggest problem with them for a lot of the
cases is that they're too big and I think a really great
solution is to remove the MLA, um from from those buildings
because it allows us to redevelop those buildings into
vibrant mixed use multi-family buildings where people can
live work, uh in the city of Chicago. So I appreciate your
time and and look forward to uh, continuing to develop and
invest in Chicago.
Great. Thank you, Mr. Freedberg. Uh that concludes our
public comment. Thanks to all of you for participating.
We're going to move on to the agenda. We have 3 mayoral
appointments. Uh, all committee members will find copies of
their resumes before them in their packets. Um,
We're going to bring we have about 1 via zoom and the others
are joining. We also have Alvin Hopkins Committee Member,
uh here for Quorum anyone else sneaking that I didn't see.
No, right.
I got you. I got you. I got you.
um
Great. All right, first up, uh is document number a
202400008929 the appointment of Adrian Soto as a member of
the zoning board of appeals. Uh, we have Mr. Stow here make
sure is Mike is on to introduce himself and answer any
questions.
Great, good morning everybody. My name is Adrienne Soto.
I'm executive director for Greater Southwest Development
Corporation. I'm here to introduce myself and express my
interest in contributing to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
My journey has been Guided by a strong commitment to
Community Development and a passion for fostering
sustainable vibrant neighborhoods.
As a project Chicago native and Son of undocumented Mexican
immigrants. I am driven by a vision to uplift the
communities in our city.
Growing up in the South Side a place rich in history
culture and resilience eyewitness, both the challenges and
immense potential within our neighborhoods.
There's personal connection that's giving me a unique
perspective and a strong motivation to work tirelessly for
the prosperity of our area.
My expertise lies in offering comprehensive resources to
small business owners, including marketing strategies
government procurement opportunities and access to Capital.
Additionally. I have extensive experience in economic and
real estate development focusing on transforming
underutilized properties into Vibrant Community assets.
With almost 20 years of experience. I I have successfully
overseeing initiatives that enhance residents quality of
life promote business growth and improve Community
infrastructure.
In my role at Greater Southwest I have had the privilege
privilege of collaborating with the diverse set of
stakeholders including government agencies elected
officials local businesses residents to drive meaningful
change.
I am here today because I believe in the power of
community-driven development.
I am committed to harnessing this my skills and experience
to support initiatives that increase employment
opportunities strength and small businesses and enhance the
overall well-being of our neighborhoods.
This role represents an opportunity for me to continue
making a positive impact and to ensure that our communities
Thrive for generations to come.
my leadership style is collaborative and inclusive ensuring
that community members voices are heard and integrated into
our projects and I'm dedicated to fostering an environment
of innovation resilience and growth.
So if approved I look forward to working with each of you.
Together we can continue to build a stronger more Vibrant
Community and thank you for your consideration.
Thank you Mr. SoDo. Do we have any questions by committee
members?
All in more. Yes. Uh, thank you chairman. I think um, this
would be a final appointment. Um, oh I know it will be I
worked with uh, Mr. Adrian Soto with the Greater Southwest
Development Corporation, um for um, several years now and
um communication and collaboration all you know, even when
this can be challenging conversations he have them but he
also act to move on things and that I can appreciate um
about him and so, um as we continue to work together, um
over in the um on a greater, uh, Southwest side, uh, this
will be you know, a asset um to that community. So, uh, I
definitely support this and I uh, unless anybody else have
any comments or questions. Um, I move um due pass of this
item, right? Thank you Alvin kuden.
Thank you, Mr. Vice chair and Adrien. Congratulations on
the appointment. Um zoning board of appeals is a pretty
impactful board. There's only 5 regular members and it's a
good thing that these members are finally getting appointed
because without 3 votes matters cannot go through the
board. Um, so 1 question for you. It's a little bit
abstract, but it's going to come.
As um, as you become a voting member of the zba. So um that
that question just how will you balance situations where
there's Community opposition that goes against older manic
recommendation.
That's a great question. I think that's a a sensitive topic
where to come up and and I expect it to come up before the
zba. I think it's a matter of balancing the needs of the
the city as a whole and the local community concerns and
also listening and asking a lot of questions from the local
elected official in this case the alderman so I would try
to get as much information as possible and make sure that
we're adhering to zoning ordinances and laws as well. So
it's it's a balancing act.
Right great great and I'd say, you know study up on those
standards those standards are everything. There's a lot of
gray area and um again just happy that this kind of
impactful independent board is getting filled. So
congratulations, you'll have my support. Thank you.
Great. Uh, thank you Alderman. Uh, we have uh, all Alderman
Rodriguez has also joined us non-member anyone else, uh
wish to speak on this item.
right on time
almond Rodriguez
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I just came down because I saw
that Adrian was being uh, I knew he was on the agenda, but
I didn't know it was coming up so quick. I just wanted to
say he's an absolute Stallworth on the southwest side of
Chicago doing great work on development projects couldn't
think of a better individual to be in the situation. So
happy Adriana is being uh, uh put forth this committee and
I urge my colleagues to um, uh, give an I vote on this 1 so
thank you Mr. Chair. Great. Thank you. All the man anything
else from Members hearing none all in more moves. Uh,
Do pass on the appointment all in favor, please say I any
opposed the opinion of the chair of the eyes have it and
the appointment is passed. Um next. Uh, we are going to
discuss the 2 appointments for the plan commission, uh,
sort of question wise each. I'm going to read both and um,
I know we have uh, Tanya kadakia is
on Zoom
and comma Brooks is here in person. So uh next is document
number a 2024 D 000000 8927 the appointment of Tanya.
Kadakia as member of the Chicago plan commission. I'm also
going to read in uh
the appointment of
it's a 202400000892.
8 925 the appointment of committee Brooks as a member of
the Chicago plan commission, Miss Brooks. Are you here with
us on Zoom?
I'm Sorry Miss Brooks is here in person. I'm sorry, Miss.
Kadakia is here on Zoom.
Yes, great. Um, we will start with Miss Brooks.
good morning, and thank you chairman Lawson and city
council members of the zoning landmarks and building
standards committee for your time and consideration of my
nomination for appointment to the plan commission for the
city of Chicago.
It is with great gratitude and honor to be nominated for
this role and to serve the city of Chicago in this
capacity.
My name is Kamina Brooks. I am a current current resident
of the South Loop neighborhood where my family and I have
resided for the past 6 years.
I currently serve as director of development for the
Community Builders a nonprofit developer with the mission
to build and sustain strong mixed income mixed-use
neighborhoods throughout the city of Chicago.
And my role at the Community Builders, I oversee
developments on the south and west side including Oakwood
Shores a public housing Redevelopment and Bronzeville the S
Kofa Wellness Village a Health and Wellness Center in West
Garfield Park and future phases of South Bridge and
affordable Equitable Transit oriented development in South
Loop.
Furthermore my professional background includes more than a
decade in affordable Housing and Community Development. I
hold a Bachelor of Science degree in interior architecture
and a master of Urban Design and most recently. I received
a master of Business Administration from the Loyola
University of Chicago.
I am passionate about working alongside communities to
bring investments into neighborhoods that ensure every
person in this city has access to housing education jobs
Healthcare amenities and overall better quality of life.
Equally, I value working with communities to understand
their mission vision and goals and aligning resources to
achieve those goals.
If provided the opportunity to serve on the plan
commission, I will draw from my experiences working across
the city and Beyond.
I will respectfully listen to fellow Commissioners and
council members and I will strive to make decisions that
Advance the city of Chicago's economic and Community
Development goals.
Thank you for your time. I look forward to your favorable
consideration of my appointment to the plan commission.
Thank you again.
Thank you, Miss Brooks. Uh, Miss. Kadakia.
Good morning. Good morning Alder persons. My name is Tanya.
Kadakia and
I am honored to be nominated to the Chicago plan commission.
I believe deeply that safe well-managed affordable housing
affordable housing are Central to the success of families
and society which is why I've spent my career more than 25
years in this field.
My housing real estate development experience includes
launching the housing team for Deal 3 rele advisors where I
led the Thrive exchange project in South Shore and the
Thrive Englewood project. Both of which are affordable
Workforce housing developments, um with mixed use aspects
I also LED work on Holston developments Wilson Yard project
which includes seniors and family housing in an urban
format Target store.
My real estate Finance back background includes as vice
president relationship manager at leading companies
including the national Equity Fund Enterprise Community
Investments and be more Harris Bank.
Most recently. I've started my own company wrought iron
Partners to take on the high impact projects that most
interests me.
In starting my business. I hope to be an example to other
women that a career in real estate development and that
starting your own company are both possible and on the
table.
I am particularly proud of my current engagement with local
initiative support Corporation and the Illinois Housing
Development Authority in the NextGen project. The NextGen
capacity building initiative, um is a project for which I'm
developing training and technical assistance to expand the
future Talent Pipeline and increased diversity among a
portable housing developers in the state especially for
develop.
Thing with low-income housing tax credits, which is a very
complex program. Um, and for which there are high barriers
to entry.
My volunteer positions include with the Chicago Housing
Trust where I serve on the finance committee. I've also
served on the board of bigger deck Redevelopment
Corporation women's affordable housing Network and the
rebuilding Exchange.
I would be very excited to be on plan commission to
participate with the city in the city's future in such a
meaningful way and to contribute to making the city its
best and to work collaboratively with other commission
members The Talented City staff and the entrepreneurial and
Innovative residents of our city.
I look forward to working with you and the members of your
ward and I thank you very much for your consideration.
Thank you. Uh, Miss kadakia. Um, I have questions from
committee members all them in the spot up.
Thank you so much cheer, Miss. Kadakia. Miss Brooks a a
preemptive and hopeful and optimistic. Welcome to the plan
commission. I will say it's been 1 of the most.
Thrilling and unexpected opportunities of this term for me
and you all bring such both of you bring such interesting
skill sets and resumes. Um, I'm looking at
Your resume is in your experiences. They feel tailor made
to the work of the plan commission. I will actually
Um, Miss. Kadakia, I will say your reputation precedes you
very glad for your appointment Miss Brooks. I we have not
had as much of an opportunity.
I love what you've done like if I may ask like 2 very
sincere questions.
Your masters of Urban Design. I find that a fascinating
angle on on the planning educational space. I'm so curious
how that informs that degree informs your professional
work. I also saw that you spent a significant amount of
your educational professional life in Charlotte, which is a
city of
Fascinating planning challenges and development opportunity
and I'm so curious how what you learned and experienced in
Charlotte informs the work that you're doing here in
Chicago.
Thank you for the question and great question. I'll start
with the second um part and so I I have spent some time in
Charlotte including uh, studying, uh, getting a master of
Urban Design. You know, when I think about the work that I
did in Charlotte a part of that was focused on what we're
now working on now around process Improvement. I had the
good fortune in Charlotte to spend quite a bit of time
working on a task force that focused on accelerating
affordable housing and so, um spent time there, uh, really
Expediting that work and and working in
partnership with their neighborhood and business services,
which is comparable to the city of Chicago's Department of
Housing on ways in which we they could cut the tape to
accelerate and address the need for affordable housing. And
so I would definitely look to leverage those experiences,
um that I that I gained in Charlotte and bring that here to
uh, Chicago on the plan commission and really focus on how
do we accelerate and increase um, uh delivering housing in
in a in a quicker faster way, uh, because the need for
affordable housing hasn't shrunk yet. And so, um, that's 1
piece and then thanks for the other question around the
master of Urban Design.
You know, I I studied in interior architecture and Urban
Design. So I had sort of a micro and a macro, uh a look at
at at the built environment and have certainly been able to
leverage that when I think about real estate development
and ensuring that uh, the space is in places, uh that are
built uh reflect the needs of the community and certainly
have pulled on and leveraged those experiences from the
educational background. Thank you for those questions.
You're so very welcome. You hitting all the points it it
will be a pleasure serving with both of you. They are long
meetings. So I I look forward to having time to get to know
both of you better. Thank you, too. Thank you. Thank you
all in the spot any other questions by committee members.
uh all them in Robinson
Chairman, thank you for allowing me the opportunity. I I
just wanted to uh, give Kamina Brooks kudos for um a
taking the time and her busy schedule, uh to do this great
work. So Kamina, um, I commend you I work with Kamina and
Community Builders, uh, and the fourth ward ugh and know
that her experience, uh will be very much so needed uh, and
her her new role. So, uh, look forward to working alongside
of you and thank you again and chairman. Thank you for the
opportunity. Thank you Alderman. Uh, anyone else I see none
all of them in a spot makes a motion to approve.
Enthusiastically approve, uh, both nominations, right? Uh
of Tanya. Kadakia and uh, give me a Brooks, uh, all in
favor, please say I
Any opposed nay?
Any opinion and share of the eyes have it and we'll be
reported out at tomorrow's meeting. Congratulations, and
thank you to you both best of luck. Best of luck. Thank
you.
All right moving on to landmarks.
First up is document number 0 2024 - 0000089 05 an ordinance
to approve the adopt a landmark grant funding agreement
with ECG Madison LLC for the preservation project at 801
West Madison 2 South Hallstead in the 34th Ward. Uh, we
we have Daniel klyber of the historic preservation division
of the Department of Planning and Development to present on
this matter and answer any questions. We also have Matt
Crawford as well.
Good, good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee Dan klyber with the Department of Planning and
Development. I'm here with an adopt a landmark Grant
project from dpd's 2023 funding round.
The ordinance before you would Grant ECG Madison LLC a 1.3
million adopt The Landmark grant for restoration work to
the former Mid City Bank and Trust building. The property
is located at the southwest corner of Halsted and Madison
streets on the near West Side. The Bank building was
constructed between 1911 and 1928 and was designated as an
individual Chicago landmark in 2012.
ECG Madison purchased the currently vacant building in 2022
and it tends to convert the former bank for use as the
neighborhood Hotel floor is 2 through 6 will be the primary
Hotel floors with a portion of the ground floor and
basement to be used for hotel lobby and service areas
retail and or restaurant tenants tenant improvements will
be Phase 2 of the project and are not part of the adopt The
Landmark project the scope of work was reviewed and
conditionally approved by the permit Review Committee in
October of 2023 the landmarks Commission in March of 2024
in addition a class L for the overall 53 million project
was reviewed by the Commission in January of this year and
was approved last week by the city council economic capital
and Technology Development Committee.
The main benefits of the project are the creation of
approximately 65 construction jobs, 10 to 15 permanent jobs
energy star requirements as part of the class cell and
mbewe City residency requirements as part of the adopt The
Landmark project.
The project is located in the 34th ward in Alderman Conway
is supportive of the project and is here today as well.
Finally. I believe that Ed cuss is sitting right next to me
and he is present, um, representing the owner that
concludes my presentation.
Thank you, Mr. Cber. Uh, Mr. Cuss no stranger to the
committee. Uh, please add.
For the record Mr. Chairman that cost an attorney with
Taft, um here today on behalf of the applicant and sitting
to my left joining me is Mr. Jonathan Gordon who is the
founder of the neighborhood Hotel Group, which will be the
operator of this particular Hotel. Um, we just wanted to
express our thanks for your consideration for this class L.
Uh, this building is about 100 years old and I don't know
if Dan mentioned it, but it's been vacant since 2005. So
there's been a lot of deterioration to the building and um
Jonathan I know looks forward to um, getting this building
rehabbed and putting back to productive use. So thank you.
We appreciate your consideration. All right. Thank you,
Alderman Conway.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um.
Yeah, as as some of you may recall who are in Economic
Development Committee this this did come up for a
successfully on a class L. Um class L last time in which
both the developer and Unite Here came and spoke in support
of this project, uh as indicated. This is a
beautiful old Bank building that has been vacant and
abandoned for close to 20 years and as Mr. Costs indicated,
it's it's really hard to understand how sort of dilapidated
the inside of this building is and with your help and
support this, uh dilapidated gem will become a real Beacon
for North for North Greek Town. So I I asked for and
appreciate your support. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, right?
Thank you Alderman any questions by committee members
No, uh Alderman Reilly moves due pass all in favor. Say I
any opposed say nay opinion the chair of the eyes have it
the motion has passed and we'll report it out. Thank you.
Best of luck. Good luck with the work. It's very sharp
sharp sharp building.
Uh, next up is document number. Oh 2024 D 0000000 8744 the
Historic Landmark designation for the John B Murphy
Memorial located at 50 East Erie in the 42nd Ward. We have
Matt Crawford of the historic preservation division of the
Department of planning present on this matter and answer
any questions. Thank you chairman Lawson, uh, good morning
for the record Matt Crawford. I'm a planner with the
Department of planning and development and
And also a staff member for the commission on Chicago
landmarks and that body is recommended to counsel that the
John B Murphy Memorial be designated as a Chicago Landmark.
The building was built in 1926 as a home for the American
College of Surgeons. These were surgeons that uh got
together in uh to develop improvements in surgical
practice.
Um, the American College of Surgeons is still headquartered
in Chicago and it's a global organization. I mean
architecture of the building speaks for itself, as you can
see, it's uh Renaissance Revival style building. It's
extremely beautiful building. Um, and the interior is also
fantastic. You can see the image of the auditorium that is
also been recommended as part of the protected features for
the building.
Until very recently. The memorial was owned by the College
of Surgeons and they maintain that extremely well in 2022
the D House Museum acquired the building and they have
consented to Landmark designation. They're undertaking, uh,
restoration and addition that's been approved by the
landmarks commission. They're here. Uh today, they're very
happy to see this moving forward the uh, Murphy Memorial is
in the 42nd ward in Alderman Reilly has indicated his
support. Thank you.
Great. Thank you very much, Mr. Crawford. Um Alderman
Reilly, did you want to add anything on this landmark?
Uh, yes chairman completed nearly a century ago. The Murphy
Memorial is 1 of the finest historic buildings on the near
North Side both on the exterior and interior, uh, it was
designed by Marshall and fox and Architectural firm that
shaped Chicago's Lakefront.
In the early 20th century and this building was constructed
for the American College of Surgeons and international
Professional Organization founded in Chicago and still
headquartered here. Um, so like staff and um,
The department I would strongly encourage and I vote. Thank
you.
Great. Do I have any questions by committee members?
Seeing none all the women Crews moves due pass all in
favor. Say I
all in favor say I
all opposed say nay
somebody's got to say I guys I I know we're we're we're
we're coming out of Co and we're doing it a little
different. Maybe I should have said that at the beginning.
Uh, we're not taking your Quorum, uh from the roll call. We
are doing uh, I and Nae so uh,
All the woman Crews makes the motion to pass all in favor.
Say I
all opposed say nay
bringing the chair the eyes have it. The item will be
reported out. Thank you all very much. Sorry. I should have
been a little more clear that uh, we're going the old way
which is still new for the my colleagues. All right.
Yes.
Given that folks are at a competing, uh, press conference
right now related to shot spotter. Um, I think the upcoming
topics on the agenda might be best for we for us to have
more colleagues in the room to hear Patrick Murphy. Would
it be okay your pleasure to to take another item or 2 while
folks? I I see new issue with that. We have 2 other text
amendments, uh, 1 in the 34th Ward Alvin Conway and the
other in the 27th Ward. I don't with all them in Bernett.
We could hear those or I can move to map amendments. I know
it's a busy day. So we want to accommodate everybody.
Airmen I'm here for however, I could be. All right. All
right, then we'll we will go um, and then uh Vice, I'm
sorry Vice chair. We're not you're good. Uh, if we hear the
sign ordinance as well.
All right, that's up for us actually, so we'll start with
that. So we're going to pass on um, the first item 0202300
6208 and we will come back to that. Um, we're going to hear
document number. Oh 2024 D 0000078 01 in the 27th.
Ward introduced 22124
Um, it's an amendment of the municipal code section 12. I'm
sorry section 1712100005 D regarding occupancy rates of
principal tenants utilizing high-rise building signs. The
items has a substitute ordinance. You'll find a copy of the
substitute as well as a memo prepared by zoning
administrator Patrick Murphy in your packets.
Uh, Alder Co Lopez makes a motion to accept the substitute
all in favor. Say I
Any opposed the opinion of the chair the eyes have it and
the substitute is before us we also have almond Rosa for
purposes of forum. I'm sure if I did that.
um
All right, we have zoning administrator Patrick Murphy, uh
to Enlighten us. Yes. Hi. Thank you chairman, uh for the
record Patrick Murphy with the Department of Planning and
Development. Uh, this ordinance is uh, kind of the
culmination of a couple of years worth of work by our
department, uh, specifically in conjunction with rural
business Chicago to look at some of the regulations that we
currently have regarding high-rise signage, uh, and the
ability for principal tenants to receive the authority to
put a sign on the roof on the top of their building, uh for
the last 18 months or so, uh, and especially coming out of
Co we've seen a reduction in both the volume of square
footage that tenants lease in the city, uh, specifically
downtown and in the uh, uh percentage that that
representation that represents
in the buildings themselves, both of which are thresholds
which currently exists at 350,000 square feet or 51% of the
building, uh, starting last summer, uh working with Lisa
and Robin who are here from World business Chicago we
worked on looking at the leases that have been entered into
the buildings which qualify so a building that could
establish a sign legally at 150 feet above grade and what
the new lease structures have been as far as sizes and
percentages of the buildings that they occupy uh of the
1006 buildings that qualify within the city it generally
speaking. It's going to be within the the greater Loop in
downtown area. There are some on the far Northwest side
near O'Hare but generally speaking we're talking about
downtown commercial buildings, uh, 71 leases excluding
ground floor retail space. We're looked at and of those 9
were for spaces above 100 thousand 100,000 square feet.
4 were for space is above 200 square feet.
And 2 were for spaces above 250,000 square feet. Now. All
of that is less than the 350,000 square foot threshold that
we have today. And so the ordinance that's proposed takes a
very conservative Approach at dialing back some of that
percentage. Uh, we're proposing at 250,000 square feet in
the text. That's before you that represents then a a
reciprocal reduction in the amount of square footage that
can be occupied in the building going from 51% to 36%
This still only allows 1 high-rise sign say for a very
specific exemption related to plan developments and
headquarters. Uh, and it still relies on the same
requirement that landlords dictate through negotiations
with tenants who gets to be uh proposed as the principal
tenant pursuant to these calculations.
Great. Thank you, Mr. Murphy Vice chair Bernett anything
you wanted to add?
Yeah, thank you, uh, Mr. Chairman. So first of all, I want
to thank uh, Patrick Murray and all so, um,
World business Chicago for working with me on this and
giving me the opportunity to work with them on this. Um,
you know, as you know, the way industry is changing now
folks use less square footage, uh in their offices now a
lot of Corporations because they don't have the big desks
and big offices, you know, they have a whole bunch of
tables and a whole bunch of people sitting in them. So they
have they get actually get less square footage, uh, in
order to make these uh corporations run and at the same
time we have these landlords whom they negotiate with uh,
they need to signage in order for them to move in the
buildings and what the loss of businesses moving out of the
city. We want to give them an opportunity to move in the
city and help these landlords to keep tenants in their
building. So, I think this is a good ordinance. I supported
I as for the committee Support also, thank you. Thank you.
You vice mayor brunette. I think I called you Vice chair
last time.
Maybe Alvin Riley.
Thank you chairman. Um and to the ordinance, I certainly I
think 1 of the most sympathetic people here towards
existing building orders in Chicago. Um, I do wish that
ottoman Conway and I had been contacted about this as we
represent.
A pretty sizable, uh majority of the city's downtown
Skyline. Um, you know, I have a pretty conservative view of
of of these kinds of high-rise signs, but given the current
climate and market conditions and occupancy rates and the
struggle that are downtown landlords are facing right now.
Um, I'm willing to to vote for this ordinance despite the
fact that I wasn't engaged as a legitimate stakeholder in
the conversation. Um, so um, but for the current conditions
and
All the challenges facing the real estate community in
Chicago. Um, I would probably be inclined to vote against
it. Um, but again, um, these are folks who need our support
right now and we want to continue to be able to lure
corporate headquarters to uh, the downtown area. So I'll be
voting in favor of it. Thank you chairman. All right. Thank
you Alderman, uh any other members guests who want to speak
on this?
I'm seeing none. Uh Alderman Ramirez Rosa makes the motion
to pass all in favor. Say I
any opposed say nay?
Opinion that chair the eyes have it this item is passed.
Uh next up we have text Amendment. Oh 2024 Dash 0000083 93
introduced by Alvin Conway for the amendment of Municipal
Code, title 17 by modifying various sections regarding
permit specifications and location restrictions for
cannabis business establishments.
Alderman Conway
Um, yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um
So in in summary.
Won't this done is it takes into account? The uniqueness
unique issues that we face in downtown regarding density.
There are a lot of things in the Cannabis ordinance that
make a lot of sense. For example, you can't put a
dispensary within 500 feet of a school and you can imagine
you're an elementary school playground. That's a pretty
good rule.
However, downtown are often times. Our our schools are
located on Floors 4 through 7 of a building in which case
the 500 foot. Uh issue doesn't doesn't make sense.
So what this ordinance this text Amendment does is it um
allows us downtown flexibility for for dispensaries, uh at
a time when
downtown retail is very much hurting.
and it also uh takes some Authority back from the zba and
gives it back to us here in hearing zoning committee
because as you all know from from your community meetings,
it's us who really wear the vest for this, um, when when
uh, you know, when when gayness dispensaries become an
issue, um, so happy to speak more on this but I will say
this on this ordinance if you are for job creation downtown
if you are for additional revenue for this city, then you
are for this ordinance. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you Alderman. Uh Alderman, I'm sorry alderman kson.
Sure, and can I direct questions at the sponsor just to get
some clarifications on the record or great?
Go ahead Alvin Conway. Yeah.
You're not you're not on.
Go ahead.
All right, um, the the the Genesis of this ordinance was a
previous ordinance of mine that made some changes but then
after that an ordinance that Alderman Hopkins wrote
Was then substituted for mine. I am still listed as the
main sponsor. I do understand that, um that uh, Alderman
Hopkins has stepped out for a second. So it may be maybe
before we are subjected to to all the Cannons
cross-examination. Maybe if I had my co-consul here Mr.
Alderman Hopkins that may be helpful. All right, so would
you like to uh hold this item?
Temporarily yes, yes not be not be on the length of this
meeting but perhaps do some map amendments and things
first. Thank you. Yes. All right. So it's a request and a
sponsor. We will come back to this. I can just say that
yes.
No call.
All right, we're going to hold this we're going to go to
the text amendments and then we'll come back to the I'm
sorry. We're going to go to the map amendments. We'll come
back to text amendments when the room is a little more
flush.
All right.
Oh, hold on a second. All right, we'll do science. I should
have done that already next up. We have large signs over
100 square feet in area 24 feet above grade. We will hear
them all together. I will read the word followed by the
address and take a motion at the end and the Third Ward ugh
1414 South Wabash 2 signs in the 13th Ward located at
6417 South Cicero Avenue, 1 side of the 23rd War located at
3944 West 55th Street, 2 signs of the 25th Ward located at
2724 West Cermak Road 1 side of the 25th Ward located at
3059 West 26th Street, 3 signs of the 27th Ward located at
360 North Green Street, 2 signs of the 28th Ward 1 located
at 1101 South Canal and 1 located at 1520 West Harrison 2
signs in the 32nd Ward located at 2300 North Clybourn 1
sign in the 32nd Ward located at 1760 North Kingsbury 1
sign in the 39th Ward located at 5838 North Pulaski 3 signs
in the 42nd Ward located at 5555 North Michigan Avenue. 1
sign in the 42nd Ward located at 679 North Michigan Avenue.
1 sign in the 45th Ward located at 4730 West Irving Park
Road, and lastly 1 sign in the 46th Ward located at 4730
North Sheridan Road. There's no questions by committee.
Members although 1 Ramirez moves to makes a motion to pass
all in favor. Say I
all opposed say nay the opinion of the chair the eyes have
it and these orders are passed. All right, we'll now move
on to the map amendments and an effort to ensure the
committee meeting runs as smoothly as possible. We're
grouped together according to witness and we heard in that
order.
All right.
Uh first item is the First Ward we're going to come back to
that.
Uh top of page 3 document number a 88869 and the 35th Ward
ordinance referred to 21224 common address is 2901 the 2909
North Milwaukee Avenue change requests B22 neighborhood
mixed use district and C13 commercial neighborhood District
to be 31 Community shopping districts. Uh applicant is all
the Romero Rosa.
Thank you so much. Um, I asked the support of my colleagues
to rezone a block of Milwaukee Avenue in the 35th Ward. Ugh
Ugh, as part of our community-driven zoning and development
process. We often engage in reviews of the underlying
zoning, uh, along our commercial corridors, uh, and in this
instance working with local nonprofits, we identify to
block where we felt that um, B3 would be more appropriate
than B2 as you all know, B3 allows for additional uses. Uh,
and we feel that uh, this B3 designation will be critical
towards continuing to support the re development.
And investment along this block. Uh, so we worked with our
department of Planning Development and our zoning
administrator Patrick Murphy to prepare this ordinance to
rezone this block of Milwaukee Avenue from B2, uh to B3,
uh, and we do ask, uh, your support, uh to accomplish our
land use and Zoning policy in the 35th Ward. Thank you.
Great. Thank you any questions by committee members.
Seeing none, uh, all of those bottom moves do pass all in
favor. Say I
any opposed
The opinion of the chair guys have it. We report it out.
Thank you. We're going to go back, uh to the bottom of page
2 document number a 88870 and the First Ward ordinance
referred 22124. Common address is 2240 North Milwaukee
Avenue change request to C15 neighborhood commercial
District to C11 neighborhood commercial District. We have
alderman laspada.
Thank you chair. So this is actually restoring the previous
zoning from a lapsed type 1 zoning change that occurred
before I was in office being a lapse type 1 zoning. We
would have to come back to this anyway for uh a development
to take place on this spot. Um, I am not opposed height
density space a space that's well served by transit but
restoring the zoning from the lapse type 1 allows us to
Simply restart that process C11 is essentially the Zoning
for the majority of that stretch of
Milwaukee Avenue, so it's very contextual to the space. It's
been posted. It's been in the newsletter. We haven't had
any negative feedback from the community on this and I
would hope for
the committee's favorable consideration. Thank you, sir.
Great. Thank you. All there any questions by committee
members?
Seeing none, uh, all the canoes and moves. Uh do pass all
in favor. Say I
Any opposed say nay?
I have it will be reported out at uh Council tomorrow.
All right, bottom of page 2 is
uh item number 22327 in the eighth Ward ordinance referred
1 24/24 common address is 1614 through 1906 East 95th
Street.
Change request M11 limited manufacturing district and
Commercial Business Plan development number 484 to an
industrial plan development.
This item was heard and passed by the Chicago plan
commission. Although the spa makes a motion to incorporate
all records in findings from that hearing all in favor.
Please say I
I'll post their name.
in the chat guys have it and the records are Incorporated
we have with us, uh,
right the go.
On this matter, thank you. Um again, my name is Mariah
Darrow. I'm joined by Robert Buckner and info Buckner both
of the applicant, uh, Flex all uh, Flex all Packaging Corp
of Chicago, uh, which is commonly known as isoflex
packaging. Um, as uh, the chairman noted this matter was
considered at a public hearing before the Chicago plan
commission last Thursday and the plan commission
recommended approval.
isoflex manufacturers specialty plastic films and bags for
various packaging needs they are the largest privately
owned film extruder in North America and operates 7
facilities throughout the us including 1 at 1650 East 95th
Street.
isoflex has acquired the vacant parcel located east of its
current facility and proposes to expand its existing
operations by constructing a 1-story addition and a 1-to-1
standalone building.
The vacant parcel was designated as planned development for
84 in 1989 to accommodate development of a retail
Commercial Center.
In 1989. It was resand from the M District to plan
development.
That project was never built and the property has continued
to remain vacant.
The application seeks to Res the entire site to a unified
M1 district and then to establish an industrial PD
designation.
A key objective of the project is to create a new loading
area that would accommodate truck Maneuvers on site.
currently truck Maneuvers create traffic jams on 95th
Street
The new loading area would allow for all of those Maneuvers
to be conducted on site.
The proposed development is consistent with the urban
industrial character of the surrounding area new Urban
industrial uses would support the Vitality of the of the
existing Industrial Area support the industrial job base as
well as supporting the overall Vitality of the commercial
amenities in and around the 95th Street corridor.
Alderman Harris has uh delivered a letter of support and I
believe she I saw her earlier here, uh, if she were here to
speak in support as well, but we respectfully request your
approval of this plan development and are available to
answer any questions.
Great. Thank you Mr. Go. Uh, we do have the support from
all the women Harris. I know she's been in and out, uh
today if you have any questions by committee members
Uh saying none all of them and Conway makes the motion do
pass all in favor. Say I
Any opposed say nay depending on the chair the eyes have
it. I will be reported out. Thank you. Thank you.
Uh, next is the middle of page 4, uh document number
2220204 in the 27th Ward ordinance referred 62123 common
address is 1 116 to 1 138 South Paulina Street the change
request C13 commercial neighborhood District to be 35
Community shopping district and then to a residential
business plan development.
This item was heard and passed by the Chicago plan
commission Alderman Hall makes a motion to incorporate all
records and findings from that hearing all in favor. Please
say I
Any opposed say nay?
Any opinion the chair is the eyes have it. The records are
Incorporated and we have Rich Cloud to present. Thank you
very much, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee for
the record Rich Cloud dla Piper. Um, as you noted this was
approved by the plan commission last Thursday unanimously,
um, the site's located on the northwest corner of Adams and
Paulina in the West Loop and is currently vacant.
Proposed development by City Church Fellowship consists of
a new 1500 seat Auditorium torium and adjoining retail Cafe
administrative offices multi-purpose conference rooms and
youth programming and childcare areas a future phase that
may consist of up to 7. We're going to have order in the
chamber.
Sir, sorry, I'm going to ask you to take a seat.
All right, Mr. Clout continue.
Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I was mentioning that the
initial phase is a 1500 seed Auditorium with various
amenities 1 second. Excuse me, a second future phase that
may consist of up to 76 residential units would be subject
to Future site plan approval with me. Today is a member of
the church, uh and governing board John Bosa this as he
would speak to is a very important project for City Church.
It's located in the 27th Ward and it will allow them to
continue their impressive Outreach and Ministry in that in
that community and throughout the city. We work closely
with Alderman Bernett and various City agencies, including
dpd CTA and others and there is local community support for
this project as is their um support from Alderman brunette
from whom you have a letter of support. We're available for
any questions. Uh, and thank you very much for your
consideration.
Thank you Mr. Cloud, or we do have the support from
Alderman Bernett Mr. Bows. Did you want to add anything on
this 1 I know we heard from you earlier, too. No, Rich
covered it perfectly great. Thank you. Any questions by
committee members on the spot.
So only thank you chair only speaking on the on that plan
commission meeting you folks, you know, it was genuinely
and enthusiastically received by the Planning Commission as
we talked about then.
fascinating design great layout incorporates all of these
Community spaces that go far beyond just how the
parishioners will use the space because we talked about it
really is the first
Transit oriented new construction house of worship that I
think we've seen in Chicago and even just from that
perspective. It was a
fascinating project to get to review and approve and get to
vote on here. So I just want to share that. Thank you so
much for bringing it forward and bringing it forward so
thoughtfully, thank you chair, right? Thank you, Alvin
Conway.
this uh
Noting that this is actually Katie corner to my ward and
building a 1500 seat Auditorium. I asked how much parking
you have?
John do you want to speak to that?
Sure, um 1 of the reasons why we looked at this site, uh
and was directed to the site was because the parking
because of all the parking that is there. Um, uh
surrounding us is lot D. Um, that's uh, almost 4 Acres
that's uh parking around the United Center. There's
proximately 50 acres of parking directly to the south of us
is a lot that is owned by uh, Rush Medical Center. Um,
again, there's over 500 parking spots there, uh kitty
corner across the street from us is team.
booster City
We reached out to every 1 of those entities including the
Illinois medical District. Uh, they are well aware of what
we're doing in regards to the parking. Um, we're in
constant contact right now with United Center. We're aware
of of what their uh future holds for them. And also we're
in alignment with uh, working with them at the appropriate
time. Again, we're looking at probably 1824 months to um,
To uh, uh enter into any kind of parking Arrangements.
Anything else other than so. I'll repeat my question
because clearly it was not answered. How much parking is
there for this 1500 seat Auditorium. Uh, there is no
on-site parking being provided because of all the
I was going to say it's a very rich Transit served area.
There are lots of options for uh temporary parking
available as John just identified and we don't believe that
any parking is required on site that can't be accommodated
elsewhere.
Uh, all the McCoy has the floor is is there a discounted
parking agreement with the United Center?
Or with any of the other entities both asked about the
United Center first.
Um, we are in discussions with multiple stakeholders in the
neighborhood Alderman. Um, the project has not yet Broken
Ground yet and it's a 2 to 3 year construction, uh project
so though it would be premature to enter into firm
agreements with them at this point, but we are very
confident that there are lots of options in the
neighborhood to provide for the uh capacity that's required
by the church and its uh various. Um programming is uh,
what community groups were consulted in with regard to this
the the ottoman held the public meeting it was uh with him
as well as uh, we reached out to WCA.
Where the was the neighbors of West Loop consulted about
this about this? Uh
About this Arrangement. Uh, I'm I'm unaware of that. I
don't know. I understand. The Chamber of Commerce is of
course behind this, but I didn't know if any of the
residential groups were consulted.
So, um, we've been joined by all the vice mayor Bernett as
well. I apologize this, uh, we started on the the map
amendments. Um anything if you want to add I know all kind
of we have some questions about parking all on the spot out
you want to point of information before we go to the okay.
all the
thank you so much cheer. I I want to speak into this
because we did do you have a point of information you've
already asked question we discussed this at the the plane
commission. It's worth looking back on the videos probably
there.
there there is so much access to public transit you and
your parishioners actually talked gave public testimony
about why this space works for your congregation as a
Transit oriented development.
Any any church in this city built before 1920 guess what?
It doesn't have a parking lot. We've been doing church and
worship as trains are oriented. So to speak for decades
now, thank you. Thank you. Thank you know I appreciate the
the information there. Uh, vice mayor Bernett. Did you want
to add anything on this 1 sure, uh, uh, thank you, Mr.
Chairman. Um, so we did have a community meeting, uh with
Community there were residents from all over uh, the area,
uh,
the the developer sent out the notices there was concern
about parking, uh 1 of the things that the planning
department worked with the developer on is to make sure
that they had some parking uh, which in that area is
surrounded by a sea of parking, uh in that area whether it
be parking from the United Center. It has not used all the
time in or parking from the Unions that's not used all the
time in or parking from Rush.
Hospital that's not used all the time. So there are several
opportunities for parking, uh in this area, uh, this
church, uh quite honestly have been actually holding
services on the lot, right? Uh, periodically, they have not
holding services, but periodically they have a a vent on
the lot and everything works out just fine. Uh, I support
this from the community meeting majority of people in the
community meeting supported I ask for your support.
Great. Thank you. Um, I certainly know there's always
creative parking arrangements with churches in my
neighborhood as well. Um, and because they have to be
because I think there's always going to be a need um, too.
Um any other questions my committee members
sorry, no, I I if I could just say 1 so so I I you know, I
understand we comparing to traditional churches. But you
know, this is a 1500 square foot Auto. It's 1500 seat
Auditorium. So it's a little bit different situation. So I
will I will um, uh obviously have have great respect for
everybody involved here. I will uh be grudgingly support
this, but I just hope that the parking situation as the as
the development continues that will that will be uh be
considered an address, um with regard to the surrounding
residents. Thank you. Thank you Alvin Conway. Anyone else
have questions on this seeing none all the Mosley moves.
Uh, do pass all in favor. Please say I
Let me post today.
Putting the chair of the eyes have it and we reported out.
The bottom of page 4 is document number 22248 and the 27th
Ward ordinance referred 91423 common address is 370 North
Carpenter change request is M23 Light Industry District to
DX7 downtown mixed use District then to a residential
business plan development we have which cloud
Hold On by the
by I was just going to ask for a motion to be approved
incorporating the record of last week's plan commission
into the record here today Alvin Conway, um moves to
incorporate the rest the records and findings from that
hearing all in favor. Say I
I post saying the chair of the eyes have it and the records
are Incorporated. Thank you again for the record Rich cloud
or from dla Piper. Uh, our client is the applica. The
applicant is 370 North Carpenter LLC. That is a single
purpose entity controlled by Sterling Bay Fred croll from
Sterling Bay is here with me today. Um, the property is
located on Carpenter Street and bounded by West Kinsey
Street North Aberdeen Street and the Chicago Milwaukee St.
Paul and Pacific Railroad as you noted the subject property
is currently zoned M23 Light Industry District in light in
Industry district and the applicant seeks in this
application to rezone the property first to the DX7
district and then do establish a residential business plan,
which will allow for the development of a 349 foot
Residential Building.
Building comprising 390 residential units and about 6,700
square feet of retail. The project will also create
approximately 78 are units. The overall far will be 11.2
and the property lies within the Kinsey industrial
Corridor. That means that there will be contributions made
both to the industrial Corridor conversion fund and also to
the neighborhood opportunity Fund in the approximate amount
of dollars. Um, as uh is the case with every project in the
27th Ward, ugh, it received robust Community input we did
have several Community meetings over the course of many
months with local stakeholders, including WCA and Nal as
well as a community wide meeting hosted by Alderman
Bernett. We worked extensively with various City
departments to improve the overall design of the building
and we hereby request that this body recommend approval to
the full city council. And of course are available for any
questions. Um, should you have any thank you. Thank you, uh
vice mayor brunette.
Sure, uh, thank you Mr. Chairman as the counselor said we
did have a a community meeting we did. Uh, they did go
before the community organizations in that area. Uh, they
all gave their approval. Uh, we asked for the committee
Support also. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Vice mayor any
questions by committee members.
seeing none Alderman's teacher Lopez moves due pass as
revised all in favor, please say I
any opposed say nay the opinion of the chair of the eyes
have it and the records are Incorporated.
Uh, next is the top of page 5, uh document number 22318 in
the 27th Ward ordinance referred 121323. Common address is
400 North Elizabeth Street change requests plan development
number 1528 to DX7 downtown Miss mixed use District then to
a residential business plan development. Uh, we have Rich
Cloud. Yes, and again, I would like as a preliminary matter
if I could to propose that you adopt a motion incorporating
last week's plan commission hearing into the record here
today. Thank you all the spot, uh makes the motion to
incorporate all records and findings from that hearing all
in favor. Say I
Any opposed say nay and the opinions to share the eyes have
it? Uh, the records are Incorporated. Thanks. Uh the latest
27th Word program. Uh project of course is 400 North
Elizabeth. The applicant is 400 North Elizabeth land LLC.
The property is located as you can see at the northeast
corner of Ogden and Kinsey as you noted we proposed to
amend PD 1528, which was approved in 2021 and at that time
authorized the development of a Life Sciences building on
the subject property that project proved in feasible in the
current market. And so our request today is to Res the PD's
underlying zoning District to the DX7 district and to a me.
And the PD to allow the development of a 380 foot building
and a 360 foot building which together comprise 724
residential units and 1500 square feet of retail The
Proposal includes approximately 29,000 square feet of
public open space including a pedestrian walkway along
Kinsey retail seating lawn space and in and an internal
driveway, the project will create approximately, uh, 146
on-site Aro units and as it was the case in the prior
project in the addition to contributing to the Kinsey
industrial conversion fund and the neighborhood opportunity
fund. Uh, the project will also contribute an additional
600,000 dollars to a traffic mitigation and neighborhood
beautification fund to underwrite traffic equipment
upgrades and streetscape improvements. Again, this project
received robust Community, uh, input and support, uh with
many, uh meetings with neighborhood stakeholders and City
agencies, including C dot with respect to the traffic
mitigation fund and do with
With respect to the projects development of affordable
housing in the FM or foot and Market Innovation District.
We're available for any questions. Thank you for your
consideration. We asked to pass.
Right. Thank you, uh vice mayor Bernett sure, uh, thank you
Mr. Chairman as the council has said they met with several
Community organizations. We also had a community. We had a
couple of community meetings for which planning, uh, was
there um, and we had about 8 Community meetings. Um, the I
I had the handed to the community they negotiated on a lot
of amenities for the neighborhood, uh in reference to this.
Uh, I don't know if you all remember this was supposed to
be a life science building years ago, uh after Co it didn't
happen. Uh, what happened now is several, uh,
Several contractors got together in the developer. Uh, some
of them are minority contractors put in the money together
and came up with this project. I think this is a great
design, uh, the majority of people in the meeting
supported. Of course, there's always some folks who don't
support it, uh as for the committee support, thank you.
Thank you vice mayor, uh all of them in the spat.
Thank you so much chair. Uh, if I had a better arm, I
couldn't in fact throw a stone and hit the First Ward, uh
hit this development from the First Ward and so always
feels worth being thoughtfully engaged in it particularly
as a member of the plane commission and I will say
more than just comes across in these renderings again for
interested committee members worth going back to the full
presentation available on the plane commission's website
because it tells you a lot about this development when we
talk a lot about publicly accessible green space, but
there's a real utility in the green space in The Pedestrian
features of this development. I know people brought up
Fire department firefighting concerns with this site folks
who are concerned should know that the fire department
didn't in fact write off on this that the infrastructure is
designed so that you can effectively fight a fire from this
space. There's concerns with how it intersects.
from a pedestrian level, but there's a lot of
there as well in terms of the design in terms of the
commercial species here, and I know there's concern about
what happens when you bring.
more intensity of use from a transportation perspective
See that's a partner on that kloa is a partner on that. Yes,
there's the transportation fund that's mentioned. But also,
hey, we're in a TIF district. So if it does come down to
that, we need more intensive traffic reorientation there.
The funding is there to do that work based off of that
based off of hearing from my residents the presentation at
the plan commission. Um, that's what makes me feel
me feel comfortable with even such an intensive development
across the street from the First Ward. Thank you chair
great. Great. Thank you all man. Any other questions by
committee members
Uh saying none other than khitan moves to pass as revised
all in favor. Say I
on a post say
the opinion of the chair of the eyes have it.
And we'll report it out next week or tomorrow. Excuse me.
Uh middle of page 5 is docket number 22359 in the 27th Ward
ordinance referred as 2 1524 common address is 3601 3625
West Chicago Avenue 751 to 757 North Montello Avenue and
740 to 756 North Central Park Avenue change request is b32
community shopping district to be 33 Community shopping
district.
Uh, we have Brian's go and Rich cloud.
Thank you.
I'm joined by uh as a as as you mentioned. My name is
Mariah Dro with de Piper. I'm joined by Rich cloud or my
colleague. We represent the AV swlc which is a joint
venture between kmw communities and preservation of
affordable housing. Uh, also known as POA.
I'm joined today by Julie de Graaff, uh of Poa and Bill
Williams of kmw, uh, and I believe
okay, this matter seeks to Res the property from the b32
community shopping district to the b33 community shopping
district to facilitate development of a mixed use
development containing 52 affordable housing units and
ground floor commercial retail and community space.
specifically the ground floor will include the West Side
headquarters for Neighborhood Housing Services, a
long-standing community institution that offers lending
education and housing preservation Services. The this
property is currently owned by NHS and the City of Chicago.
The project was selected for funding and support under the
city's invest Southwest initiative.
On May 8th, the transportation committee recommended
approval of right-of-way adjustments to relocate an ally
for the project and on May 13th, the finance committee
recommended approval of the issuance of multi family
housing bonds. Also in support of the project.
The proposed rezoning will promote development of a
pedestrian-oriented affordable housing development that
will Revitalize an important Corridor on Chicago's West
Side.
Alderman Bernett has submitted a letter of support and I
think I saw him earlier as well. Uh, if you wanted to
speak, uh as well, uh, we respectfully request your
approval, uh, and are here to answer any questions. Thank
you. Great. Thank you so much Mr. Go, uh, vice mayor
brunette anything else you wanted to add?
So, uh, Miss Sharon, this is actually 1 of the invest
Southwest projects that was initiated a couple of years
ago. Uh, this is a partnership between poor and and some
African-American, uh developers. Uh, there are several
African-American, uh developers involved, uh, the
community. This is really, uh been worked on with the
neighborhood, uh, you know, all the way from the ground up
the community supports at 100%
Percent I supported 100% I appreciate the committee support.
Thank you. Thank you vice mayor. Um sergeant-at-arms.
There's an individual who's who's shouting out pretty
regularly and I'd ask that person to remain quiet at all
times.
uh any other questions by committee members
seeing none other than Mosley moves due pass, uh all in
favor, please say I
Any opposed say nay?
The opinion of the chair of the eyes have it and it will
report it out at tomorrow's meeting. Thank you. Thank you.
All right, we're going to finish up with the LA Piper and
then we're going to go back to text amendments that is
posture with my committee members.
Yes, great bottom of page 5 document number 22408 in the
42nd Ward ordinance referred 41724. The change request is
business plan development number 1472 to dx5 downtown
mixed-use district. Uh, this request is also incorporating
variations. Yes. Thank you very much much Mr. Chairman, uh,
the applicant in this matter is RPO 225 West Chicago LLC.
The site is located at the southeast corner of Chicago and
Franklin. Um, this project involved a a PD that was
approved in 2020 to allow for the construction of an office
building which never moved forward given today's market
conditions. Our request here is simply to Sunset the PD
back to the former dx5 District so that the site can be
marketed for sale and developed in accordance with that
District's regulations project team did discuss this
request with Alderman Reilly who has submitted a letter
confirming that he is
Not object to this request, of course any future
development of the site will be discussed with his office
per the typical protocol in the 42nd Ward. We'd ask for
your favorable consideration.
Great. Thank you Mr. Cloud. Almond Riley.
Um, thank you chairman. Just as was stated by Council. I I
support the amendment would appreciate my colleague support
as well.
All right. Thank you any questions by committee members.
Seeing none vice mayor Bernett moves due pass all in favor.
Say I
I'll post say nay.
The chair the eyes have it and this will be reported out
tomorrow. Thank you very much. Thank you Mitch Mariah same
day. All right.
Now we're gonna go back to page 1 um document number that
we had previously read in and held um is the third item
document number 0 2024 Dash 0000000 8393 and it is from the
34th Ward with the second word.
on 32024 an amendment of the municipal code title 17
But it's an 8390.
8398
did I read it wrong? All right document number. Oh 2024
00000 8398
in the 34th board, um
modifying various sections regarding permit specification
and location restrictions for cannabis business
establishments.
almond Conway or Hopkins
adopt my remarks from earlier and then also mentioned that
um, you know, as I said, it's going to allow us some uh,
real flexibility for the uh for dispensaries downtown where
we have unique unique issues and will will bring that from
the zba to to here in zoning committee. I would also add uh
that I have worked with. Um,
Not only Alders Riley Hopkins Riley and Bernett on this and
getting this but also also with the black caucus to come to
this, uh, uh compromise legislation. Thank you. All right.
Thank you Alderman Alderman Hopkins.
Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm in full support of this
ordinance. I commend my colleague from the 34th Ward for uh
his leadership on this issue as he mentioned. Uh, this will
provide much-needed flexibility. Uh, I would suggest that
there's no place other than the downtown district where
flexibility is, uh needed is significantly as it is right
now when it comes to the sighting decisions for cannabis
dispensaries, uh it it's literally a black by black basis
what might be appropriate on 1 corner is inappropriate on
another corner.
Um and no 1 is uh in a better position to make such
determinations, uh than the alderman with full community
review as this ordinance also calls for so I'm in full
support of it. Uh, it's the right thing to do to have both
that flexibility and that oversight. Um, that's necessary
to uh be the steward of what is inherently a controversial
public process. Uh, they're they're never a unanimous
there's always support and opposition, uh for licensed
dispensaries in the downtown district. Um, and we as
Alderman need all the help we can get trying to navigate
those sometimes choppy Waters, so I'm in full support of
this and I urge and I vote
Right. Thank you. Thank you Alderman. Vice. Mayor Bernett.
Yeah. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I concur with my
colleague. Uh, I commend Alderman Conway for this
ordinance. I think is uh is long overdue that the alderman,
uh have more input in this, uh downtown is a unique area.
We have a lot of um, social Equity, uh, folks getting
licenses now and they've always wanted the opportunity to
be downtown also, so I support this 100% and uh as for the
committee Support also. All right, thank you vice mayor, uh
all on the spot followed by Ken. Thank you. Chad. Not not
that it impacts the First Ward because it it doesn't
completely by the impacted Wards, but just
Because I want to understand what I'm voting on.
It it reads that moving forward the only essentially of
right Zoning for dispensary downtown or these various
cannabis businesses would be a PD. Otherwise you would need
a type 1 zoning change. Is that accurate?
I would defer to the sponsors on that are zoning
administrator has stepped out.
They're all in Conway. Yeah. Yeah. No, so right now it is
it is um, uh not as bright it have to be a type 1 to to go
forward on this.
Well, I I feel like I must be really so it seems like we're
saying.
They must be reviewed and approved in accordance with the
type 1 zoning map Amendment procedures instead of the
special use procedure. So
I just want to understand are we moving from special use to
type 1 or from type 1 to special use. Can you clarify?
Yeah, we're going from special use to type 1 right in the
downtown area. The process would be either type 1 or in a
plan development process just for that specific Geography.
Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Uh Jen alson. Thank you
chair. Um, and I'll just circle back. I'll I'll have a few
points of um question for Alderman Conway, but first, I
just want to frame at least for the record and argument
that we can achieve the policy goal here while not cutting
Out the independent board piece of the zoning board of
appeals. Um, so first point on that. Um, I I strongly agree
that the 500 feet rule in the downtown area, um is
arbitrary compared to how it impacts communities with less
density. Um, the zba has seen situations where 500 feet um
dispensaries can't move in within 500 feet, but it covers
just a lot of people and could be a huge business help to
get more in there.
And I'll also second that on a zba point that um, I'm you
know, I I with this argument, I promise I'm Pro dispensary.
I'm actually 1 of the few people in the city with a record
of approving many dispensaries as as chair of the zoning
board of appeals. I don't think during my tenure we
actually ever turned a single single 1 down. Um, so that
gets me to the point that removing zba from this process
indirectly leads to a slippery slope towards aldermanic
prerogative. Um, when these dispensary applications come to
the zoning board of appeals, there's far more pressure on
the applicants to engage with the community more than
what's required by the law and that Community engagement
leads to really thorough plans of operation thorough in the
sense that um, you know, when the community shows up every
step of the way including at zba which there's a pattern of
them showing up far more at than this Comm committee on
zoning. Um, it leads to healthier development.
Um, you nip issues in the butt ahead of time because you've
had the community at the table the whole time. So, um to go
to that and I'll say, you know, this the way zba weighs
these issues. It's a 5 person independent board. We saw 1
Point te come in front of us today.
He's a member of the community but he's also an expert. Um,
and it's quasi judicial. They make a decision at the end
and I want to point out that Alderman can be involved and
and have to be involved throughout that process. Um, so on
that just a couple of questions so that we can um, just get
some of the the greater intent out of here. I'll direct
them to Alderman Conway. Um, why not keep these
dispensaries a special uses within zba while allowing them
to be built within 500 feet in downtown areas.
well
1 thing about the uniqueness of downtown is that this this
will allow us to consider factors beyond beyond the zba and
I I would also know that frankly. I think that that I think
I know my word better than the zba does and in these uh,
and I think aldermanic control of this of this specifically
sensitive process is is important especially in a very
dense Ward. I have small sport in the city. Um, if it's not
and I believe Alderman Hopkins has the second smallest
board in the city and as a result of that I think that's
why um, that's shows the unique issues that that we face
and similarly the the community process here is not going
to be to be disrupted. I mean that is in the that is in the
statute and we'll certainly certainly um, uh continue
Okay, so as a secondary question on that because I want to
pick up something that you know, you know your ward better
than the zba does I wouldn't argue against that but I would
say that statement turns the clock back on aldermanic
prerogative to where we were a decade ago. Can you address
um in in light of this how you feel about aldermanic
prerogative?
I'm I'm not sure that's the right question here. Okay. Let
me speak to that phrase. I mean we're this is I saw no
applause I judicial process right? But right on the merits
on the ordinance if you could okay, I'll rephrase it. Um
In light of this ordinance, which takes a piece of a
special use out of an independent quasi judicial board. Can
you not foresee a situation where this is a slippery slope
and we spot Zone things out of the zba because this strong
precedent has been set.
Not having the light really gets me. Uh, you know, it it I
I would simply say to that that I would Point again to the
unique factors of of downtown, but also note that that as
Alders
um, we we are uniquely responsive to our constituents and
the fact that um that that the cannabis dispensaries are
such a sensitive process and it really can change block by
block. I think allows us specially in the in these very
dense Wards, uh means that we should have this additional
involvement in the process.
Anything else other than kson?
I would say, you know, I agree that um Alderman do know
their their rewards best and that is why um Alderman
presented zba pretty consistently. Um, I would argue and
give the experience that as chair of the zba. We heard of
many special use situations that come up in different warts
that it's not dispensing its hair salons. There's wards
where special uses like nails and hair salons are an issue
and Alderman show up every single meeting to discuss them
but not once has there been an ordinance proposed to take
pairs hair salons and nail salons out of special use and
put it into the hands of the alderman. I find that the
balance between uh, a a real compromise ordinance that
would allow these to be built within 500 feet of each
other. Um, well going to zba is the perfect balance between
keeping the community front and center while promoting
business. Um use for dispensaries.
Um, so with that, you know, I'll end it. This is my my
really pitch for independent boards in our city. Um, I
think they're very important. Like I said, we just saw a
great app or a great appointee and Adrien Stow who is a
resume that really understands development and by no means
does zba take all influence away from Alderman. It's
another check and balance that again leads to better
operating businesses when they come in. So, thank you.
Thank you. Uh Alderman CEO Lopez
Thank you, uh chairman. I got a clarifying question in
terms of the um, the process um,
Will will this new ordinance also have a mandatory public
meeting for cannabis. I know that as I share some of the
concerns by Alder MN in terms of the process. So just a
clarifying question around making sure that we have a
mandatory public meeting. Yes. Um, yes. Yes that that is
true. All right, and then um
I am just glad that you know, we know that making sure that
we have a zoning board of appeals that is fully staffed.
Right? I think that's 1 of the um 1 of the things I'm glad
that we fulfilling that um.
And I just want to make sure that you know, I know based on
the ordinance here the the the words are affected are the
second word Firth 2728 34 and 42 word. Um, so for the
record that all Alderman seem to be in support of the
ordinance, correct the affected area
I I would let them speak for themselves, but certainly
those present, uh
Would have indicated support yes.
Okay.
Yeah, those are all my questions. Just want to make sure
for the record that they people. Thank you, Alvin Riley.
Um, thank you chairman. This is not an ordinance. I'm a
sponsor of but after
listening to the debate between my 2 colleagues from the
43rd and 344th W. I wanted to just share a
a little bit of perspective as someone who's had um a
number of
Canada's dispensaries proposed in in my ward the 42nd Ward,
um, you know, when it comes to to vetting these things
properly and administering the required Community process
and you know, negotiating a responsible plan of operation
If it is the will of the community to to have a cannabis
dispensary in their neighborhood. I I think any older
person who is doing his or her job properly is going to
make sure that that Community process is is well executed,
um that we hear from all stakeholders and that a plan is
developed that reflects the feedback we received from our
constituents. Um, I'm not concerned about um that being to
the disadvantage of the community 1 bit.
Um, however, um my experience on the council here over the
last 17 years.
Is that while it while it may be well intended, um the zba
board often.
Gets it wrong and makes decisions that are completely out
of whack.
with the sentiment of the local community whom all of us
are duly elected to represent and give voice to
And so I'm not suggesting we do away with the zba. I agree
with my colleague Alderman Ken that there's an important
role for it, um for all sorts of matters, um, but with this
particular issue, um, I don't believe that it should fall
within their jurisdiction and I'll remind my colleagues
that the zerb zba jurisdiction has always been um
determined by this body the elected Chicago city council.
And so as someone who's seen the zba get it wrong with
cannabis applications in the 42nd Ward.
Um and having been bit by that process a couple of times.
Um,
Although I'm not passionate about this ordinance. Um, I'll
be voting in favor of it. Um so that we can make sure that
these decisions are more accountable to the folks, um who
live in vote in our words. So, uh, thank you chairman.
Thank you almond Rosa.
Uh, thank you so much. Uh, you know, I I think that in my 9
years now as Alder person, I've seen many times, uh, that
residents do not understand the zoning board of appeals. We
explain it over and over again, but there's a perception in
the city of Chicago that we as Alderman have full control
over everything that happens in our Ward and obviously I
see some of my colleagues are laughing we know that that is
not the case. Um, there are many things that do not involve
our offices that we do not have authority over but when it
comes to cannabis, I believe that our residents do believe
that we should have a real say, um over uh, whether or not
these businesses will be opening up in
In our community, you know, generally when there is
something that requires a special use permit. I do not host
a community meeting because ultimately it is up to the zba
to make that determination, but when cannabis dispensaries
have come forward I have hosted a community meeting because
I know that my residents expect for my office and for
myself as their elected representative to be very much
involved in that decision-making process. So I want to
thank my colleague and my seatmate Alderman, uh Conway for
bringing Ford this uh text amendment. I think that it makes
a lot of sense, uh, and I hope that we can support this
today in committee and support it as a council. Um, so that
we can ensure that our community's interests are
represented when it comes to uh, permitting these types of
businesses in our neighborhoods. Thank you. Thank you Alden
all the women Cruise.
Sorry chairman. I I was I was a little late because I was
in another committee, but I have a just general question
and I think this was explained. So again, pardon me because
that was in another um committee but I just want to know
the reasoning why changing it from um, a special use, um
procedure to a type 1 zoning and taking that, you know,
taking sort of that responsibility away from um, a special
use and just you know, making an automatic um decision, so
I just want to hear from my colleague
Yeah, I'm happy. Yeah, please have some respect here Mr.
Chairman. Um, no, I I I I would simply say that this will
allow us. Um, uh,
Downtown is unique animal because it is so it is so dense
and 1 of the issues that we've often faced is that we can't
put a dispensary within 500 feet of a school in.
90% of Chicago that makes a lot of sense. You don't want to
dispense free right by the elementary school playground,
but in in in my war and a lot of these the schools tend to
be like on Floors 4 through 7 of a building. So this will
allow for that for that flexibility, um for dispensary for
dispensaries to happen and will allow us to be able to
consider factors beyond that beyond that of the zba will
not disrupt in the community process.
Thank you. Great. Thank you any other questions or anything
else by committee members?
Uh seeing then can I get a motion do pass?
Alvin Conway moves, uh all in favor, please. Say I
any opposed say nay?
The opinion of the chair of the eyes have it. Uh, we
recorded out at Tomorrow's World, uh council meeting you
want to be recorded as know come see staff.
All right. Now we are going to take the 2 MLA amendments
that we had previously deferred. Um, I'm going to read them
both in what I'm going to do is I'm going to ask our zoning
administrator to give us a brief overview then I'm going to
turn it over to the 2.
1724 and the municipal code section 17-4 d404 modifying
limitation on minimum lot area reduction to exclude
buildings in lawful existence for 20 years in District with
-6 designation 16 design designations and granted no
previous floor area bonus zoning administrator Patrick
Murphy Enlighten us a bit. Good afternoon. Thank you, uh,
Patrick Murphy from the Department of Planning and
Development when the current bonus system was created in
2016. There were a series of bonus calculations related to
additional floor area that were applied to the various
downtown zoning districts in the dash 16 zoning District an
uncapped ability to provide bonus floor area.
was allowed there was no, uh, corresponding uncapped ability
related to minimum lot area or density, uh at the time
there were uh, no projects that had sought that degree of
uh floor. I'm sorry MLA increase and since that time there
have only been 2, uh, non-residential, uh, the Bank of
America and uh, uh BMO office buildings that have sought -6
-6 with uh, uh the to to utilize the uncapped floor area.
Uh fast forward to the 2 proposed that are before you today
today. The difference is that in new buildings, uh or
existing there would be an ability to have a commensurate
reduction in your density. Allow. I'm sorry your MLA so
increasing your density to correspond to the floor area
increase, uh, all of our other discussions related to MLA
calculations and floor area in the other bonus districts.
Were to provide an opportunity for additional floor area to
be utilized in a building and for that space to be filled
with additional dwelling units as opposed to just larger
units. That's what the 1 Ordnance does the second ordinance
the 1 from Alderman Reilly takes that same approach and
applies it only to existing buildings that have not
previously taken advantage of uh, a density bonus program.
So those are the 2 distinctions?
Right. Thank you zoning administrator. I I do want to allow
the 2 spawns, uh a moment if they so choose almond
Robinson.
Thank you, uh chairman for allow me this opportunity. Uh,
this ordinance was drafted by dpd specifically a Deputy
Commissioner Patrick Murphy who we just heard from and is
supported by the mayor to truly get it 1 of our largest
issues, which is affordable housing.
And I believe to create a an opportunity that's
life-changing for our constituents to be able to live in
the best parts of the city of Chicago.
Today colleagues I'm asking for you to support.
I'm asking for your support about a change. I'm proposing
on zoning rules right now a developer can increase the
amount of building space floor area ratio, which is then
which is um, also abbreviated the f r and reduced the
minimum lot area MLA needed for each unit. But only up to
30%
This means fewer homes can be built on a piece of land
which limits the number of affordable homes in downtown
district developments.
My proposal would allow the developers to reduce the MLA
even more but only in special Dash 16 districts, which are
rare and won't cause too much.
crowding
here's why this is good for the city.
More homes and jobs by allowing more units to be built on a
piece of land. This change can make some projects possible
that otherwise wouldn't be
I believe personally, uh that we unfortunately have to pass
up many development opportunities because they don't pencil
out.
This means more homes more construction jobs, which is
needed and more real estate taxes for our city.
number 2 more affordable quality housing
and great areas in the city of Chicago which are our
downtown districts.
Any new construction using this rule will have to follow
affordable housing requirements and involve local leaders
and the community in planning. This means we'll get more
affordable housing.
Wherever the projects happen and more Community
involvement.
In simple terms. This change helps us build more homes,
including affordable ones without making our city to
crowded.
In addition again to creating much-needed jobs, Mr.
Chairman. Thank you for the opportunity. Thank you. Almond
almond Riley. Did you want to add?
Yes chairman. Thank you. Um and I would I'd like to kind of
explain a couple of the key differences between my
colleagues proposal and mine. Um, they're both frankly
aimed at attracting more investment to the central business
district and with that affordable housing units. Um, but
there is a very key distinction. I think it's 1 that my
colleagues need a very strongly consider, um before passing
1 or the other of these ordinances, um in the downtown the
D districts, uh, we have we already allow for a tremendous
amount of of density and development rights. In fact, if
you look in the zoning code, um, there is no limit on the
amount of f are you can purchase to add to the highest
zoning classification the city of dx6.
And when you do that that money is deposited into the
neighborhood opportunity fund which historically has been
used to invest in good projects that can help transform
communities predominantly on the South and West sides.
Um, but I want to make it really clear, um that that any new
development any new PD in the central business district in
a d District, um will already be required to provide 20%
Aro that's per the existing zoning code. So my colleagues
proposal is not required to promote that activity.
Um, but I want to talk about the folks who've made very
significant and risky at times investment in the downtown
core over the last many years and who owned or developed
existing buildings that are here today.
And I can tell you that the Johnson Administration like The
Lightfoot Administration and the Emanuel Administration
before them.
Understands that we are having uh an issue a transformation
of the central business district from what was once a
vibrant and healthy office Market.
to large buildings existing buildings with massive
mortgages many of them underwater
that are sorely underutilized and are suffering from record
vacancy rates.
and
It's such a priority for this Administration to address that
need the need of existing buildings.
That we are pressing forward with the LA South Street
reimagined project to transform many of these obsolete
Commercial Bank buildings into affordable units for Working
Families to occupy downtown.
and so by offering up what is essentially a regulatory
handout to prospective real estate developers who might
consider a project in the central business district.
I think it's more important that we protect the existing
office buildings that are currently struggling today. There
are plenty of other incentives that exist for wealthy
developers to come downtown and develop affordable units in
the central business district, but to to allow for my
colleagues orders to move forward is to do so at the
detriment of the many hundreds of buildings downtown that
are already struggling with tenancy.
So instead we have a a compromise measure before you that
some several of my colleagues have proposed that would
apply this benefit only to existing buildings. And so
really that is truly the choice between these 2 ordinances.
Um, I applaud my colleague for wanting to promote Economic
Development and real estate growth downtown. That's been my
mission for 17 years as alderman.
Um, but I think it's important for my colleagues to know
that there is not broad consensus among the aldermen who
represent these D districts in the central business
district, including chairwoman, Dal myself and Alderman
Conway.
And so I would ask that we consider holding this in
committee to allow for further dialogue to see if there's
some reasonable compromise to be achieved.
But if we are to proceed with Alderman Robinson's ordinance
and approve that today.
We're blowing a big hole in the zoning code. Um as it
applies to the central business district, and that will
have an impact on future development and on the future of
existing buildings in Chicago as we know it and so I also
just wanted to mention that we heard earlier during public
comment from preservation Chicago the city's leading, um,
preservation and landmark Advocate, uh that they support um
my proposal, um to provide relief for existing buildings
and historic buildings. Um, and we also heard from members
of the development community that agree. Um, and although
he had
To be in called during public comment. Um, I was given a
statement from uh, Richard clowder who is a partner at De
Piper, uh notable zoning firm here in town that we all see
in this committee on the regular basis. I'm not going to
read it into committee, but I would like to um submit this
uh chairman as an exhibit the bottom line, um, is that he
he describes a property that exists in the city now and
existing building, um, that would benefit from the change.
I've proposed and allow, um for a purposeful Redevelopment
from commercial to residential
Um, meaning more units more affordable units and more
people traversing downtown streets morning noon and night.
Uh, he says this ordinance promotes investment in the
downtown. I am aware of many developers waiting to jump in
and convert and repurpose buildings like these as soon as
this ordinance is approved I urge this committee to do so,
so I just want to make sure that what we've received here
today in public comment, uh, and in written comment has all
been in support of uh, the proposal. I've I've put forward
as an alternative. Um, thank you chairman.
Thank you, Alvin Riley. I know you mentioned holding you're
not making any motions at this time at this time, but I
would like I would like the opportunity to close sure sure.
Um, I know I so all in brunette and laspada.
Well in that order any others.
All of them are not sure uh, thank you, uh, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, I think both of these ordinances are great.
Um,
And and both of them, of course, you know touch on getting
more affordable housing. Um,
And and being able to convert, uh buildings, uh in the
downtown area to uh, residential from commercial. Uh, but
also I think Lamont says talking about uh, being able to do
something with a do something with bacon properties and new
developments also, so I just wanted to ask, uh, Mr.
Chairman and maybe this is to Patrick how many uh, 16
teams. Do we have uh, in in this in this in these
boundaries and are the boundaries the same but both
ordinances
I would ask our zoning administrator to take that.
So I I'll take the Patrick Murphy with the Department of
planning. The second question first. The boundaries
impacted are the same it would just be the downtown zoning
districts, which are defined in the zoning code, uh, both
the original and the expanded Street designation. So those
the the applicability of this calculation you would only be
to the same geographies as far as the quantity of parcels
that are zoned -6 today. Uh, I don't have that exact
but I can prepare a map that highlights it with the
impacted Wards and get that back to the uh, uh V.
chairman
Okay, and then uh, I know Alderman Reilly mentioned about
the existing buildings, um and and having this new and I I
didn't get an opportunity to read read his Ordinance do it
automatically trigger for those buildings that they're
converted to uh with this new ordinance to to have
affordable housing.
Do it automatically get triggered to have affordable
housing, uh as part of it.
Like it would a zoning change.
Alvin Riley
or
I know I'm sorry Alderman. I was trying to make
arrangements to get question would would would Alderman
Riley's ordinance automatically, once this ordinance go in
do it automatically trigger all of those existing buildings
if they convert to residential to have to do 20%
affordable.
Yes, but it would do so because in order to take advantage
of either ordinance, it would require the establishment of
a plan development and then the establishment of a plan
development automatically requires compliance with Aro.
Okay, so it'd be a zoning change. So it will all of them
would be zoning changes. All of them would be plan
developments. All of them would be Aro compliant or Aero
mandated. So I just want to say that any any project we're
talking about is all all of its Zone and change all of the
plan development. All of its 20% Aro. Okay. Got it. Both
ordinances so ordinance so so 1 more question, so
An impact, you know, and I appreciate your professionalism.
Um
And and and in your zoning, uh, jargon, right, uh, if you
can lay it out in layman's term a little bit more. Um,
so so
this kind of been broken down to me like okay you get more
if you you allow for smaller units.
in the FAA are
in the minimum lot area and you get more units and because
you get more units you get more affordable housing too. Can
you can you explain that with the with the new buildings?
How does this uh minimal lot area explain it in layman's
term had a minimum lot area, uh would be changed because of
this.
Okay, so when the current bonus system was created an
ability to add additional floor area was granted and as
Alderman Reilly said it was in an uncapped, uh capacity in
-6 districts.
1 of the calculations we did to uh, um balance that
additional floor area is to allow for minimum lot area
reductions meaning you could provide more bulk in your
building, but you would also have the ability to fill it
with additional units. So as opposed to adding thousands of
square feet and only being able to provide 2 3 and 4
bedroom units, you could provide a higher quantity of
smaller units. So there is an ability in uh, the the in
either ordinance to add additional square footage or
legalized where footage that exists and then fill it with a
higher quantity of dwelling units and they can be smaller
units, uh, they could still be larger units, but you have
the ability to add smaller, uh 1 of the features of the Aro
ordinance today that's different than the previous version
prior to 2021 is an ability to take into account the
quantity of square footage being made for affordable
person.
Affordable purposes as opposed to just a unit count. So
there can be avenues that someone could provide uh more
square footage.
Less dwelling units, but still calculate the same under Aro
from a quantity of square footage allowed and bedrooms
allowed for affordability purposes. So basically the the
current minimum lot area
allow for the the the minimum loss to be larger, right you
have larger units and then what he's proposing is that
allow for smaller units to get more units not necessarily
smaller. It just can allow for more of that.
So
As you calculate floor area. There is an inverse
calculation done of minimum lot area the larger volume you
have you then would need minimum lot area, uh a relief in
order to fill that with a with a higher quantity of units.
So if someone simply wanted to provide,
3,000 square foot 5-bedroom units they would probably not
run into this issue regardless of their zoning District.
They may have other issues, but they wouldn't have this
issue.
This becomes more into play in either ordinance.
Because you're taking a high degree of volume and you want
to fill it with more smaller units. So you need an MLA
reduction a a lesser degree of restriction.
On your unit quantity in order to get a larger volume of a
larger quantity of units and and in each of these
situations just like with with both of of these uh
developments, uh, the alderman has the prerogative whether
to let it go or not, right if Alderman don't like it. He
don't have to or the community. You don't like it. It
doesn't have to pass right both of these ordinances mandate
the establishment of a plan development and both of them
are subject to
Local review and committee Authority, uh, as well as a
review before the plane. So yes, there is no difference in
aldermanic involvement.
On either of these ordinances or compared to any of the
authorities that exist today for residential plan
developments.
All right, so if the community don't want more.
smaller units in a building they can say they don't want
right and automate can say they don't want the alderman
would still have their same Authority today. And if the
community is okay with it, it is cool. Then it goes
same way we are now but we're just allowing for folks to
utilize more square footage for more apartments in a
building basically. All right, and and Alderman rallies is
allowing for it to be Apartments Alderman. Robertson is
allowing it to be built as as Apartments.
Alderman rallies allowing it to be converted to Apartments
Alderman Robinson is allowing it to be built as apartments
with more units in it. Correct Alderman Robinson. This is
for new construction. Alderman. Riley's is for existing
that haven't previously utilized the bonus. But just so
it's clear. We do not regulate whether it's a condominium
or an apartment. So it just have to be residential. It
doesn't residential. Okay strike the apartment, uh
residential. Okay. All right. I think I got it. So both of
them to me sound good both of them to me. Sounds good.
Thank you. Thank you vice mayor. Uh, I have Alderman
laspada followed by Conway and then Hopkins
Thank you so much chair again. Like I feel like I'm playing
in somebody else's sandbox because there will never be a
day that I have 16 zoning.
And never say never is the vice mayor good morning after
the next redistricting is suppose. Um, haha. Um,
but like to to speak in
To speak into this. So I just want just a couple clarifying
points to either either 1 of the sponsors its strikes me
that
Alderman Robinson, your your ordinance provides the benefit
being discussed to both existing buildings and new
construction.
Alderman Reilly and Conway and so forth ordinance
specifically and only to um existing buildings. Is that a
correct understanding?
like can I get a
Yes there is there Patrick Department planning. There is a
that is the uh, 1 of the 2 distinct is new versus existing
and if its existing it cannot have taken advantage of a
previous bonus.
Uh a floor area bonus. Okay question number 2 there. There's
nothing in Alderman Robinson's ordinance that would then
Exclude the benefits described in Alderman Riley's
ordinance that also accurate Alderman Robinson's ordinance
could be applied to existing buildings and it uh, it does
not have it does not have the stipulation related to a
previous bonus having been utilized understood and question
number 3 this only
Makes these benefits permissible rather than mandatory as
vice mayor Bernett shared the ottoman can always say this
is not what I want in or his community or their Community
could say these are not benefits that they prefer to see in
this development is that also accurate Community
participation Authority involvement Remains the Same under
both ordinances as it is today under all plan developments.
Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you chair. Thank you, uh,
Alderman Conway.
Be brief, uh, uh, Mr. Chairman, um, my ward would be
heavily affected by this by this ordinance. Um, not only
because of the effect on on buildings in the loop that
Alderman Reilly spoke of but also the the additional
traffic, uh, that would be created by newly upzone dx6
buildings that are that are just outside my ward
potentially in the in the Fulton lake Lake Street area
where we've uh approved over a thousand units already here
here today.
So as a result of that as someone who has award that's
heavily affected by this. I I would say I I want to put on
record that I oppose the broad MLA reduction, but I am for
uh, I am for the compromise ordinance of allowing, uh of
allowing the reduction on existing dx6. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. Thank you Alderman Alderman Hopkins followed by
Rosa.
Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I do have some uh dx6 in
my ward as well. Not not a lot. But uh, in any case, I I
really can't Envision, uh, any likely scenario in the near
future where either these 2 proposals would be brought to
bear for uh for a project in my ward. Um, but my question
for the zoning administrator is um,
would yeah would there be uh, is is there any inherent
conflict or would there be anything that couldn't be
reconciled with the language of these 2 proposals that are
amending the same section of code if we were to pass both
of them today and have it, you know be applicable to new
construction as well as existing.
I would be
I I could not say what council may want to do to
strike a compromise between the 2 from a language
standpoint, uh that would if if both ordinances were to
pass in the form they are now that would be discussion with
the law Department to decide how to merge or treat the the
Dual ordinances.
Yeah, I mean just looking at the language. There's you
know, nothing to stop the uh new language from being fused
into the existing underscore. It would still read, you
know, like as a as a complete sentence. So how would the if
we were to do that? What would the application of that look
like? Regardless of how you tweak the order of the words?
so if there is a path forward to combine the 2 ordinances
then
it would it would have to uh, well.
There it would be there would there would need to be an
ability to uh, the the the alderman Reilly ordinance is the
more restrictive of the 2 orders it limits it to the types
of buildings that can be allowed and it puts a limitation
on the
Uh previous use or presence of bonus floor area.
The ottoman Robinson ordinances more permissive and so if
Council were to approve both their stipulations already in
the zoning ordinance about a more restrictive ordinance
controlling. So what that merge language would look like I
couldn't say for certain but
Of the 2 Ordnance. The more restrictive would be the 1 that
takes effect. Am I misreading the intent though that the
more permissive language applies only to new construction.
Yes, the the correct the distinct. Yes. There is no speak
of no, there's no speaking of new construction in elderman
Riley's or and so yes, the more permissive 1 Alderman
Robinson's does apply equally to both types of bills. So
then in the case of new construction there wouldn't be an
obvious conflict. That would need to be reconciled.
If the degree to which the ordinances are calm are combined
exclude is decided to exclude the new new construction
because the more restrictive ordinance would exclude the
new construction. So if they're both approved if they're to
be merged then, you know save for any other uh, uh actions
by Council host committee, then the more restrictive
ordinance would take control if both are to be. Okay.
Thanks that it's a little confusing but I think I I
understand now, thank you. Uh, uh, Mr. Murphy
Great. Thank you Alderaan. Uh Alderaan Ramirez Rosa.
You so much, you know, we're in a housing crisis. Um, and
that housing crisis is being felt across the city of
Chicago and many different ways.
Um in my community that housing crisis has led to
displacement as longtime residents cannot keep up with uh
Rising rents. And so I know that every single unit that is
built in the central business district every single unit
that is built in the West Loop in River North in the South
Loop downtown in Fulton Market those units help alleviate
that housing crisis in the city of Chicago and they provide
new residents moving to the city more affluent residents
residents who have some of those uh, very coveted and
well-paying jobs and provides them with an option where
they want to live and it alleviates the pressure that's
being felt in other communities across the city, um and
allows, uh us to mitigate the displacement that's happening
in many, uh, neighborhoods. Um, so I have been proud to
support every single, uh, zoning change that has come
forward, uh, every single plan development that has come
forward, uh, that leads to new housing being built, uh
downtown and in the central business district,
Um, so I want to really commend my colleague Alderman Lamont
Robinson for bringing forward, uh, his ordinance. Uh, I've
uh asked my staff to sign me on as a co-sponsor. I hope
that uh, Mr. Robinson will have me uh, as a co-sponsor
because I think this is a really great piece of
legislation. Um, I know this question has been asked a
number of different ways already of our zoning
administrator, um, but I'm gonna ask it again because I
believe that it Bears, um understanding and and it helps me
understand exactly what we are doing right now and I think
it helps the public understand so between the 2 ordinances
that are before us right now, um, which 1 would allow for
more housing, uh to be built, uh in the central business
district.
If new construction were undertaken.
Then Alderman Robinson's ordinance would be available to
those projects.
So I could not project which 1 might result in more units.
But there is an equal ability to utilize it for existing
structures in existing -6 Zone districts.
Got it. So, um
So in in theory because Alderman Robinson's ordinance is
more permissible. It could lead to more housing being added
to existing.
structures downtown
No, existing structures are equally uh treated under
existing structures can be equally calculated under both
ordinances saved for the uh, the prior floor area bonus
caveat, uh, the only distinction would be for ex, uh new
construction, whether it's unimproved land today or a
building that is demolished and something is built new in
its place. So Alderman Robinson's text Amendment would
allow for new construction to tap into uh more housing.
Yes, it does. Okay, and um,
I I guess the the question is
um
if these um ordinances right as as you've already discussed
and as you've already laid out in both instances any
development, whether it's an existing development seeking
to tap into this to add new housing or whether it's a new
development seeking to add additional housing if Alderman
Robinson's ordinances on the books, um, they would still
have to go through the plan commission process. They would
still have to go through the zoning process every project
that utilizes either new bonus floor area or utilizes MLA
calculations that are done pursuant to bonus floor area
that may already exist have an existing building is already
a 24 f are in a -6 District if the applicant seeks to use
MLA calculations that take advantage of that that are only
made available because of the bonus floor area then a plan
development is automatically triggered.
Plan commission review is required Aro is triggered and
committee on zoning in city council are also involved. So
the local Alder person through the normal means that are
already available to them would have an opportunity to
weigh in and to decide whether or not assuming Alderman
Robinson's ordinances on the books that local Alder person
would still have the ability to weigh in uh, and and to
sort of, you know have a a say in terms of what that
development looks like and whether or not they're able to
take advantage of the ordinance, uh that Alderman Robinson
is proposing. They would have equal Authority under both
ordinances. Yes, sir. Okay. So so then my question then is
um for Alderman Reilly what then is if if
If Alderman Robinson's ordinances on the books and you will
still have a say as the local Alder person, uh as that
development goes through, uh, the plan commission and goes
through uh, the zoning committee what then is is the
intention with with your language. Why do you want to
disallow new construction from tapping into this, uh
benefit to add uh more housing
thank you for
The thank you for the question, um to be clear. I'm not
looking to disallow this for new construction. The code
currently already does that um, but this isn't really about
whether or not we're giving up control over local
development in our respective Wards. It's not um, as as Mr.
Murphy has stated whether it's new construction or
Redevelopment of an existing building we would have to go
through our plan development process in the central
business district. Um, that's not what this issue here.
It's a policy decision.
And the reason why we heard from historic preservation
Advocates and other developers in support of my proposed
compromise is that um our existing building stock in the
central business district our class B and C buildings. So
not these brand new shiny towers, but the the skyscrapers
of old, um, they're suffering from historic vacancy rates
right now.
so much so that that Mayor Johnson has been working with
ottoman Conway myself on LaSalle Street reimagined in the
loop to convert these old historic Bank buildings into
mixed use with a substantial portion of affordable units in
them.
Um, if we're going to be extending the same economic benefit
by relaxing these regulations on new construction for
for prospective real estate developers who haven't decided
whether or not they want to make an investment downtown.
We are then disadvantaging existing buildings, which are
already built in in most cases built for a different
purpose.
And so if you're extending this benefit to both new and old
it really does come at the expense of the older buildings,
which is where we have the the greatest concern in the
central business district today. Um, we can't afford to
allow our our most our most difficult buildings to
repurpose and redevelop and uh, frankly rejuvenate and put
to better use. Um, if we're at the same time giving the
exact same benefit to folks who could build a glass box to
the specs of their prospective tenant. And so that's the
issue. It's there's a limited there's a limited amount of
ways we can help um, our challenged older buildings down
here and by limiting this benefit to those we can do the
most good is what I'm arguing but this is not a um a debate
over which 1 de delivers more affordable units alter
Ultimately Robinson's are mine as as Patrick Murphy has
stated on the record. It depends on the building depends on
the lot.
It depends on a lot of different factors and there could be
circumstances where?
The older building Redevelopment can provide more
affordable units at a cheaper cost than new and so that's
the thing. I'm asking you all to consider here. I don't
have it in for new development. We we we promote that
downtown every day all of the Ottoman who represent
downtown. Um, so that's really what this question is about.
Um, can we can we really focus on the older buildings that
need to be saved first.
While there are plenty of other tools and incentives to
promote new development throughout the city. Thank you
chairman.
So would it be fair then to characterize your position that
by disallowing new construction from tapping into this
additional density and only allowing it for existing
structures that you believe it will incentivize developers
to go in and Rehab those existing structures and uh, turn
them into additional housing units for the city of Chicago.
Is that fair? Yes, that's absolutely correct. And and
that's really the purpose of of of of my more limited
ordinance is to Spur that well. I I I can certainly be
sympathetic to that, uh Viewpoint and I I hear what you're
saying and I will also add that I think that through your
local land use and Zoning policy for your ward if Alderman
Robinson's ordinance were to be in effect and yours were
not you could still accomplish that outcome because you
could say hey, I know this ordinance is on the books and I
know you can tap into that but
When it comes to the 42nd Ward, I'm only going to allow it
for existing buildings that have been up for 20 years. And
I think that would be a totally fair position for you to
take I think that the other aldermen impacted, uh by this
policy in their Wards could also take that same position.
But if Alderman Robinson wants to be able to uh, give this
density, uh bonus, um or this, uh, you know additional
density to new construction in his Ward. I think that's a
good thing and I think that it adds to uh, the uh housing
that we need here in the city of Chicago and I think it
leads to additional housing overall. So, um, I I do
appreciate your uh position Alderman Reilly but uh based
upon the conversation that we've had here today. I feel as
if you're able to still accomplish that compromise, um
without having to pass this ordinance, um, because
ultimately the local aldermen and the local community will
still have their say in terms of uh, the total number of
units, uh, and what that development looks like. So thank
you. Thank you Allan Ramirez Rosa. Um, I have all their
canoes on.
Followed by haul. I think I had Harris then Bernette. Do you
have your hand up? No, you just stretching all the Knutson.
Thank you Vice chair, um in all of a question for the
zoning administrator, but um, you know, I I think like
several of us of us too. There's good themes in both of
these because we're all just trying to figure out the best
way to boost and increase development. Um, so for Patrick
Murphy, I've just got a question about the buildings that
already are built but might not conform and it's it's just
a 1-off question, but I appreciate the way you've been
breaking things down without uh, jargon like Alderman
Bernett said so, um, if there's an old building built in a
16
Um that's already built to a 24 f r and they don't need the
change under Alderman Riley's ordinance.
Do they still need a plan development if they want to go
residential?
So there's a couple answers to that. So if you have an
existing building, that's a 24 so it's non-conforming from
a floor area standpoint. So it's not a plan development.
There's no, you know, it's the building. It just it just is
Uh, there are MLA calculus that you can utilize which allow
you to get a certain quantity of units by right. There's a
table in the zoning code and provided you use those
calculations just up to beneath the threshold that triggers
a plan development. Then you can proceed by right. Uh, this
is how some of the calculations for renovations on the
South Street focused buildings were viewed. Uh, this is how
we've looked at all older buildings that have
non-conformity from a floor area standpoint. So if you have
an existing building non-conforming from floor area, you
can get to a calculation of residential units that does not
trigger a PD so that they can proceed by right, uh,
Hunt on the other hand if you were to seek to utilize any
type of MLA relief, whether either of these ordinances pass
or not.
To fill existing non-conforming floor area space. So I have
an enormous amount of additional floor area beyond what my
zoning District would allow by right today if I use any of
the calculations on the bonus system.
Even if I'm not adding floor area, you're still triggering
a plan development. And so these 2 ordinances provide a
path.
For people to use additional MLA relief that is only
available through a planned development.
So regardless of which 1
Uh, uh, if you are regardless of whether either are
approved, they will both have the same effect from a
legislative process for any project that seeks to utilize
it. Okay. So in that situation where I can do the project
by right, um, I I wouldn't need to do affordable, right?
You would not be hitting a zoning related trigger for
affordability. Okay, your project may be utilizing
financial resources from the city. So you'd have a tiff
obligation. You may have other uh, triggers within the Aro
ordinance, but you would not have a zoning trigger in the
arrow orders. Okay.
Okay. Okay. Great Point made. Thank you.
Thank you Alderman. Um Alderman Hall.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I have a quick question. I don't
know who would answer you or ottoman rally, but how many um
potential new units will come with the uh, the pending the
sales Street project.
Oh, oh, um, I could I can get you so there are there are 4
projects that the department is currently pursuing with the
administration to utilize the uh, you know City incentives
for redevelopment along the South Street. I can get you the
full unit count number. I'll get it back through the chair.
They're not solely in the 42nd Ward, but I will get you the
I'll get you the count. You wanted a ballpark those 4
projects. Um, Alvin Conway. Yeah, in fact 3 of the 4
projects are actually in my ward. It's about a thousand new
units and 300 of them are affordable. Got you say that
again a thousand new unit a thousand new units with 300 of
them. There are affordable with the 4 projects that have
been announced. It was it's it is worth noting. It was
heavily teased.
In the press conference the 2 more the 2 more would will be
announced uh as well and those ones actually have a higher
percentage of affordable than the existing gotcha. Yeah. So
the second question is, um, it was mentioned, uh in passing
the amount of vacancies, um that were you know already
present downtown in the concern that it would increase
what's the percentage of vacancies now that you made
reference to?
Who who can answer you were?
Well from a I I could not I would not want to speak for the
exact percentage of units or buildings that are existing
vacant. I know there are uh reports related to commercial
vacancy rates, uh, not all of those buildings can be either
economically or physically converted for residential use so
I couldn't guess how many could become new residential
units
Uh, I I would I would not be able to guess for you that
number. Okay, I'll I'll tell you all the the figure is
there was 16 Willis Towers full of vacant space in our
downtown area that that that figure has been around a lot.
You got it. So I'm just trying to understand it and so I
can go ahead know just being but but just that does not
necessarily mean that all of that is able to be converted
either physically or financially regardless of the presence
of the of either of these ordinances or uh, you know
incentives that the city may offer. Yeah. So what I what I
heard in correct me if I'm wrong that the concern is
currently that this project would essentially uh become a
little bit difficult or
Or it would be hard to sell New Opportunities because of
what we haven't gotten right or we haven't gotten started
in the conversion and what have you like make it make
sense?
That was mentioned by you, correct?
You you mentioned. Well, you made you made mention of the
fact that the uh, new newer developments housing that is
would not be as appealing to developers or potential
partners because of the yeah make reference. That's why I
need a point of information. I was confused. I think the
comment that was made was that if the bonus is given to
both new and old, uh, existing buildings would be less
attractive if that is
a good summary 1 more time so I can hear so if the bonus
applies to both existing and new construction that the
interest in existing building conversions would be lesser
because you could get the same bonus on a new building as
well. I think this is the point that was made just
go ahead Alvin Riley. Yes, just to directly answer the
question what the chairman is saying is essentially true,
um that if you if developers can choose between buying a a
site for new construction versus rehabilitating an existing
building.
The inclination will be to go with a new development.
And so the idea here is the buildings that really need the
help and and the incentives to have Redevelopment and reuse
are the existing ones that are typically more difficult to
construct for a new use. That's that's the purpose got you.
So if I'm just following along that
Alderman Robinson's piece of legislation opens the door for
more people to have access to
opportunities in newer developments as well as it pertains
to housing as well as older mixed incorrect. Like there's a
Gateway. I mean the pathway rather for more
affordable housing to be done and new like make it make
sense if you can.
It it could allow for an opportunity for.
uh unimproved properties
to be uh to to take advantage of the MLA reduction. Yes,
uh, you know, I I could not say an absolute terms whether
it will always result in additional affordable units
because as Alderman Reilly was saying there might be
different pressures for or against Renovations or new
construction that are more financially related. So
New construction may not necessarily always be additive to
units that come about through Renovations. There may be
Renovations that do not take place for other reasons. So
there's an opportunity to utilize uh, new buildings under
almond Robinson's ordinance. That doesn't necessarily
always mean it will be an absolute increase in the overall
quantity of affordable units.
But it be the opportunity or the there could be yes there.
There's a possibility. Okay.
Got you. So in in if we merge the 2 could you explain 1
more time? Exactly the uh, the the different like what
would happen if the merger takes place? What would be
excluded in Alderman Robinsons?
The alderman Riley's ordinance is the more restrictive of
the 2 ordinary were they both to be approved and passed and
move ahead simultaneously, the more restrictive elements
would take authority or supersede the more more lacks
ordinances or terms under all Robin Robinson's now that
presumes that there's no additional discussion by Council
as far as
how to potentially merge those 2 ordinances before the
committee worked to approve them
So there's there is still an opportunity for the council to
do that.
But taken on its face value if both are approved
simultaneously the more restrictive of the 2 ordinary.
Is uh would uh would would take effect.
absence other absent changes by Council got you just as I'm
going through the questions that were asked to me, um with
Alderman Robinson's piece of legislation the opens up again
more opportunities and then, you know includes more people
to have access to
New opportunities to live downtown, right?
It creates the opportunity for more land to be redeveloped
under a -6 for additional units it that it creates the
opportunity for it. Gotcha. Okay. Thank you. That's all I
want to thank you Alderman vice mayor Bernett anyone else
then? Yeah, so so thank you very much. Um, and again, I
think both of these are good ordinances. Um, and I
understand what Alderman Reilly saying about
these new developments may not make the older developments
the or the existing developments look as attractive. And
that's the argument that we had that can that can expand
across the city, right? Everybody could say you shouldn't
do no development downtown because it won't be any
development going to the west side of the South Side, you
know, um,
I think even with the existing developments even right now
with the re-imagined L street, we had to use public
incentives in order to make these things work because
there's a lot of other variables that go into dealing with
these buildings outside of the bonus part, uh, because of
you know finance and all of those other things the taxes
whatever the case may be, uh in in those communities, maybe
maybe maybe in in in I look at like I look at my area, um,
you know, and some of these developments we just voted on a
lot of neighborhood opportunity bonuses are going into
A TIF money all that stuff and a lot of that will be used
potentially to help with some of these other things that
that may go on and hopefully they can help these other
developments downtown or whatever.
Could that same thought be in place with the new potential
developments that may get this bonus with the 16s that some
of that money that come from those bonuses can go to help
the existing buildings that need help. Can we cut the baby
in half and and and and let it be a win-win situation for
all of downtown. I mean, none of us want downtown to be
vacant. None of us, you know, all of us want our our
downtown to be healthy. I mean, even with the Central Area
plan right now in the Central Area plan that we're planning
right now.
We're literally planting the Central Area plan right now
the Central Area plan calls for a more density in the
Central Area because not only do the Central Area. Um, you
know, the Central Area fees the rest of the city the rest
of the city feeds off of the central area and in order to
to get money, we need to Central Area to be healthy to do
well so we can get the tax dollars off of it and it can
help with everything else as far as Transportation schools
housing all of the above. So I don't I I just got a problem
with
Killing killing projects to save a project right? I think we
should figure out a way of being able to save and help all
of these projects. I understand downtown matter of fact,
um, you know, I was in some of those meetings when they
came up with the idea about reimagining downtown and and I
was the 1 I was 1 of the ones who encouraged that we should
put affordable housing in them to help sustain these
properties because they did it in the 80s, right? That's
how they saved the lot of buildings in the 80s with with uh
money from the federal government presidential Tower was
was saved because of that, you know, so I think there ha I
think
I think both of these ordinances are good. I think but we I
I really think that if we're really concerned about the
existing buildings downtown we have to really, you know
have a downtown meeting about I mean, I'm not downtown like
that but those guys downtown really need to have a downtown
meeting and see it if there's a way that they can benefit
from these things happening if more if more people get
incentivized to build because of the m m ml whatever it's
called the minimum lot area is
Then you know stopping if more people have are incentivized
to build we all benefit from it. We should all benefit from
it that that's what I'm saying and whether it's a old
building or a new building.
Great. Thank you. Vice mayor. Um, I see Alvin Conway. I'd
like to speak since we're on round 2 with speakers. I'll
ask you to be brief and then I'll ask the sponsors if they
want to close and then 1 or 10 some motions.
Yeah, first I would say it it is worth noting that both of
these ordinance will expand density. Both of them are
expanding what we currently have. It's the question of
whether we want to start with existing Properties or we
want to go into all the all the new additional as well. And
you know, the 34th Ward is roughly half. You know, it's
about 60% in the West Loop and 40% uh, and the and the loop
side and
on the West Loop side. We have a lot of new development and
the Fulton and Lake Street areas in the 27th board and
that's that's great. But that doesn't quite have the
transit infrastructure that you see downtown and because of
that we feel significant significant traffic impacts, um
down on Washington and Madison and Monroe Etc. Well on the
loop side, we have all of the train lines come down to the
loop and as a result of that it makes much more sense for
us to proceed with this additional density.
In existing DX 16 DX 16 buildings. And therefore I'd ask my
my colleagues to support the existing building compromise
as opposed to the um broad broad increase that uh was
otherwise proposed.
Thank you. Thank you Alderman. I'm going to close the
comments on that and offer the 2 spawns and opportunity to
close if they choose.
Who would like to go first?
neither
Alvin Robinson, yes.
I want to thank my colleagues for the spirited, uh
conversation. Um
To um, my colleague, um, and my all of my colleagues that
um are representatives of the downtown districts.
Again, I look forward to working with all of them, uh to
figure out a way for us to be able to create opportunities
for quality affordable housing downtown as as our vice
mayor mentioned. Um, it'll be a great thing for the city of
Chicago. Um,
ottoman Rosa also mentioned creating opportunities for
everyone to be able to live in environment vibrant area in
our downtown districts whether that be an existing
buildings or new buildings. Um, we have a great
opportunity.
and this Council and the City of Chicago to do something
great and that is again to be able to not just provide
folks or affordable housing but quality of affordable
housing and a vibrant area to get more folks downtown and
our business districts the other challenge that we're
facing.
Is the businesses that are downtown that are struggling
this ordinance will also help.
Those businesses that are struggling and also to be able to
bring more businesses down town. And so I asked my
colleagues.
To allow me the opportunity to create.
opportunities in in our downtown business districts
with new housing that's affordable and quality for all.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Alvin Riley.
Um, thank you chairman. I'll I'll be brief. We've had a
pretty extensive conversation about this. Um, but to be
clear this is about um, promoting residential development.
This is not about assisting downtown businesses. It's about
it's really a question of whether we want to prioritize.
Um, more challenging existing building stock again, only in
the central business district. This is not in the
neighborhoods. This is in the central business district the
districts d-6 to be very specific.
Um, and so again, I I would encourage us to um to
prioritize those buildings. There are no 1 I think is maybe
maybe walderman brunette, but but it's pretty close No 1 is
has approved more new construction in the city than I have.
On this Council, I think that's a fair.
Uh statement to make although Walter's right there.
Um, I would just say that um as was stated by Patrick
Murphy with the Department.
Um, this does preserve older manic discretion over plan
developments and so as was stated earlier, if a particular
element doesn't want to use these tools. Um, they can
reject the proposal. Um, but I think as a matter of policy,
you know, and as Council that has been talking more and
more about adaptive reuse as a good Environmental Policy as
a city we tear down older buildings to replace them with
new ones. There's a massive environmental impact that comes
with that.
and the greenest way
to promote development in the city is adaptive reuse.
And I can tell you we have a lot of landmarked properties
in the city that say that sit vacant that are located here
in the central business district, whether it's in my ward
or ultimate dowels or all of in conways. Um, and those are
the ones we should be worried about first.
And so for that reason chairman, I would move due pass on
item 02024 d 0008948, uh that I introduced on April 17th
24, um by a uh, a Voice vote,
Okay, um Alder and Riley has made a motion, uh due pass the
ordinance. He has introduced document number 0 2024 000000
8948, um introduce 41724 by a Voice vote.
A roll call haven't been called for I will read the role.
uh all in the spot
Well, the spot is no Alvin Hopkins.
over in dal
It's not here Alvin Hall.
Alvin Harris, Allan Harris, sorry
No.
automobile
all the 1 RZR
all in more
all the Mosley
Lopez
alter person Fuentes almond
Okay.
all the person cuentas
all member net.
all the woman Crews
all in Conway
almond Ramirez Rosa
almond viegas
on Riley
Alvin Mosley
as Sher Lawson votes. Yes.
No, I got you 1 1 moment.
All right, the the motion fails we have 4 years 13 days, um
motion fails on the spot.
ottoman laspada, which moved to pass on 02023 D 0000000
6208 fire roll call vote. Thank you a motion being made, uh
do pass on 02023 0000000 6208. Um introduced by fourth word
all the men Lamont Robinson In fairness. Uh, why don't we
do a roll call?
On that as well. All right, um, although the spa.
other Hopkins
Uh, all the Dal is not here all their Hall.
all the woman Harris
almond filled
a woman Ramirez
of a woman or Alderman Moore
Alder Mosley
over Lopez
all the person Fuentes
all member bet
all of them Crews
all them Conway
almond Ramirez Rosa
all the vehicles
almond Riley
almond cluden
all the women clay
Vice chair Lawson votes I
uh, I just have it by vote of 142 to 2, uh, that item will
be reported out at tomorrow's council meeting.
Thank you all uh for a good discussion and spirited debate
about density. I'm going to ask that we take a brief recess
and we will reconvene at 1:15 p.m.
Thank you.
All right, folks. Uh, it's a little after 1:15.
I got asked folks to take your seats. We'll knock out these
map amendments.
All right, folks, I'm gonna call the meeting back to order
please everyone take your seats members. Please return to
the chamber.
So I can ask committee members to please return to your
seats so we can continue.
All right. We're starting at the top of Page 6.
Great, uh, I'm gonna read into the record commit committee
is reconvened document number 22436 T1 in the fourth ward
ordinance referred 41724 common address is 4023 to 27 South
Vincennes Avenue. The change request is an rt4 residential
2 flat townhouse multi-unit District to an rm5 residential
multi-unit District. We have a attorney Paul CPAC.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman members of the committee. My
name is Paul copac with me. I have the applicant.
Excuse Me Miss Jeremy Madre and his right? I'm gonna just
real quick. Everyone will come to order in the gallery,
please.
continue
and to his right is uh, Mr. Kareem musawir.
As you mentioned we were requesting a uh zoning change from
from rt4 to RM for 4 point rm5 in order to divide the 50
Foot lot and to in order to construct a new 3 story
dwelling unit building on the vacant property is currently
a 50 by 1 130 lot, uh on particle number 12 is a 3-unit
building in order to divide the lot we must put that
building into
Conformity uh that building is over the existing, uh rt4 far
far as well as it is built lot line and lot line. So our
request was to um,
Have that building resand to an rm5 so that it could
complies with the f r and also to have variations to the
side yards to put it into compliance. If that is granted.
Then we intend on building a a 3-unit building on the
vacant lot.
I I did speak to Miss Parker. She was here earlier. Um, she
really didn't understand the fact that she thought we were
dividing the 25 by 1 130 lot into 2 Lots. Uh, we on our
side yard on the existing on the proposed new construction.
We will have h 2 feet of side yard, uh from our building to
her lot line and her building is right on the line.
We've not we believe we have yeah, thank you, Mr. Call
back. We do have a letter of support from Alvin Robinson.
Um anything else to add sorry. I had any questions by
committee members.
Seeing none all over the cruise moves due pass all in favor.
Say I
I'll post say you were great eyes have it and we'll be
reported out at tomorrow's meeting. Thank you.
Uh, next up document number 22411 and the 31st Ward
ordinance referred 41724 common address 4, I'm sorry. 4335
West Fullerton Avenue change request is b11 neighborhood
shopping district to see 1 1 neighborhood commercial
District. Once again, Paul call back. Good afternoon, Mr.
Chairman members of the committee. My name is Paul copc. I
to my right is Mr. K musawir. The property currently is an
existing building that has 4 dwelling units and a uh
storefront.
our proposal is to um change the zoning to allow a t 2
parlor on the first floor and retaining the 4 units as uh,
legal non-conforming units because they were there prior to
the zoning change.
Uh, we met with all different Cardon. I believe there's a
letter of support.
Right. Thank you. We do have the letter on file from
Alderman Cardona any questions by committee members seeing
none all the woman Ramirez moves to pass all in favor. Say
I
Opposite of the ice have it and we brought it out tomorrow.
Thank you very much. Thank you for everybody. Be healthy.
Thank you. Thank you bottom of page 6 document number 22407
in the ninth ward ordinance referred 41724 common address
is 10950 South Wentworth Avenue. Uh, we are all their woman
Cruise makes a motion to defer this previously read item.
all in favor say I
all post say nay
and the chair the eyes have it. The item is deferred. Thank
you. All right top of page 7
document number 22415 in the 11th ward ordinance referred
41724 common address is 3200 South Wallace Street change
request is an RS3 residential single unit district to a C11
neighborhood commercial District. We have attorney Nicholas
fattest. Thank you chairman for the record again, Nick
fatik on behalf of the applicant. Um, in this case, it's
Southside Premier Properties LLC the applicant seeking a
zoning change to the C1 zoning District in order to
reestablish a ground floor Tavern use at the subject
property. Uh, the tavern had operated for over 40 years, uh
a lapse in license after coid, uh left non-conforming
status. We have worked with uh, Alderman Lee's office, uh,
hosted 2 meetings and agreed to a plan of operation for the
proposed Tavern. I believe we have the alderman support, uh
to proceed at this time.
We are lucky to have all the women they live with us. Would
you like to add a little I would love to thank you
chairman. Um, I I did provide a letter support. I want to
comment that. Um, I was uh, very pleased with the owners of
the building, uh, being amenable to having not just 1 but 2
Community meetings, uh where and and that did take some
time. This was not something that happened overnight. Um,
but Mr. Fatigue is his clients were very amenable to making
sure that the the community surrounding the area whereas
comfortable as possible with this tavern that had been in
the neighborhood for so long reopening. Um, I want to note
that there was a public comment earlier from 1 constituent
who unfortunately wasn't able to make the the second
meeting that we had. But um, we we have a plan of
operations that has a Tavern a neighborhood Tavern closing
during the week at 11:00 and at midnight on the weekends.
Um, I think this is more than um, more than accommodating
to the neighbors and I have every confidence that the the
owners the new proprietor.
Are going to um be great for the community, uh, and that
they will be a great addition. So I'm in full support of
this. Thank you chairman. Thank you all the woman. It
sounds like a Gen X type of Tavern should maybe I'll meet
you because we're all home by then. Anyway. Alright, come
on over. All right, that's a great, uh, compromise any
questions by committee members seeing none. Uh, all the
woman Ramirez moves to pass all in favor. Say I
All supposed to say the eyes have it and we'll be reported
out tomorrow.
Um, just take a motion. All right document number 2241621
and the 32nd Ward ordinance referred 417204. Common address
is 1934 through 36 West North Avenue.
Alderwoman Cruise makes a motion to defer the previously
read item all in favor. Say I
on favor say I
post say nay depending on the chair the eyes have it and
the item is deferred.
Get a little thin next next up, uh bottom of page 7
document number 2243121 in the 33rd Ward ordinance for
41724 cuming address is 3448 through 62 West Lawrence 48807
through 11 North St. Louis the change request the B12
neighborhood shopping district to be 1 13 neighborhood
shopping district, and we have attorney Nicholas fetus.
Thank you chairman again for the record Nick fatik from the
law offices of Sam Banks. I'm here on behalf of the
applicant and Property Owners St. Louis and Lawrence LLC,
uh, the subject property is currently improved with 2
separate buildings that are actually joined by Common Water
Service in the basement the uh, 3-story building that runs
along the uh, St. Louis property Frontage of the property
is improved with an existing, uh, 9 unit Residential
Building the zoning change that's being so
God is to permit the uh, second floor of the portion of the
building of fronts on Lawrence, uh with 8 new residential
units. So a total of 17 residential units over retail on
the uh, on the West Lawrence side of the property, uh, the
footprint of the buildings will remain the same. Uh, this
is the type 1 zoning change. Uh, we are seeking A
variation, uh, pursuant to the expanded type 1 ordinance to
uh, wave the loading birth requirement. We're also seeking
administrative adjustment on the parking to reduce the
parking to 0. Um, we did work with the uh, Alderman's
office. Uh, Alderman Rosana Rodriguez Sanchez and a letter
of support should be on file already.
Thank you, Mr. For take us we do have a letter of support
from all the women Rodriguez Sanchez any questions by
committee members?
Uh sign on almond Mosley Ms. Do pass all in favor. Say I
I opposed say nay the eyes have it be reported out at
tomorrow's meeting.
Top of page 8 is document number 2243121 and the 34th Ward
ordinance was referred for 1724 common address is 1227 West
Jackson Boulevard change requests is dx3 downtown mixed-use
district to dr3 downtown residential district. Once again,
we have Nick fatik. Thank you cheer again for the record
Nick fatic. I'm here on the applicant and property owner.
1227 West Jackson Condominiums LLC. Um, the applicant is
proposing.
Closing to develop currently vacant property with a new uh,
4 story 3-unit residential building. This is a type 1
zoning change, uh, previously the property had been resand
to dx3. Um, we are seeking dr3 to permit our all
residential design. There is an administrative adjustment
to um, increase the number of parking spaces, uh from 50%
to 100% So there will be 3 parking spaces. We're also
seeking companion variations to reduce the front step back
and rear step back the rear open space on site. Um, and
also to not comply with the building facade standards and
door entrance standards as well as a driveway access all on
uh, pedestrian streets that are designated by the Todd
ordinance. So it was an extensive ask at this 1 but we did
work with Alderman Conway's office, I believe Mr. Lindsay.
I don't want to put them on the spot, but I believe Mr.
Lindsay ano, uh can confirm the alderman support. Sure.
Thank you Mr. Fatigas Mr. Valenciano.
Steve valenciano with Alderman Conway's office and yes, the
alderman supports the uh ordinance to the dr3.
Great. Thank you. Any questions by committee members hearing
none. All the woman Ramirez moves to pass all in favor. Say
I
any opposed say nay?
The chair the eyes have it will be reported out tomorrow at
Council. All right, we're going to the top of page 9
document number 22418 in the 39th Ward ordinance referred
41724 common address is 5137 North Elston Avenue change
requests an RS3 residential single unit district to b11
Neighborhood shopping district and we have Nick fatigas
who's got quite a few today, uh chairman again for the
record Nick fatigue. Uh, the applicant in this case is
seeking to purchase the subject property, which is
currently vacant. It's an irregularly shaped lot
containing, uh, just over uh, 33,000 square feet of total
lot area. The intent is to develop the property with a new
uh, Dunkin Donuts restaurant with a drive-through facility
in order to permit the use we are seeking a b11 zoning
district and then this uh project would also require
special use approval from the zoning board of appeals. We
did work with Alderman NES on the Nuance office on this
request and a letter of no objection had
previously been submitted to staff
Becky we do have a a letter from all the woman nent. Um any
questions by committee members
seeing none all a person Fuentes moves due pass all in
favor. Say I
I opposed say nay.
Share the eyes have it and report it out. It's tomorrow's
meeting.
Document number 224341 in the 43rd Ward ordinance referred
41722 common address is 1055 West diversity Parkway change
requests is an rt4 residential 2 flat townhouse and
multi-unit District to be 23 neighborhood mixed-use
districts and Nick fatigas cheer. Again, Nick fatigue is
for the record. Um, in this case, I'm going to try and just
kind of shorten the uh presentations. Uh, the applicant in
this case is proposing to develop the subject property
which contains uh, 7,164 square square square feet of lot
area with a new 6-story 24 unit Residential Building the
um, the project is a Transit serve location. We are seeking
uh to reduce the parking requirement, uh, as well as the
off Street bicycle parking space requirement 1 vehicle
parking space and 7 bicycle parking spaces will be
provided. Um, there are companion administrative adjustment
and variations.
to reduce the rear setback for floors containing residential
units and also a waiver of the loading birth, um in some
uh, we did work with Alderman kutson office on this
project. We participated in a community meeting and we
believe we have support to proceed. Uh today great. Thank
you, Mr. Patikas. Uh, we do have uh, the support of
aldermen kson on this this address is across the street
from the 44th Ward. So I appreciate uh, his engagement with
me and my residents on that side as well. Um, and he has my
support any other questions my community members.
uh, seeing none all the woman Ramirez moves to pass all in
favor say I I'll post say
the chair of the eyes have it. I'll be reported out at
tomorrow's meeting bottom of page 9 is document number
224331 and the 43rd Ward ordinance referred 41724. Common
address is 2411 North Lincoln Avenue change requests v33
Community shopping district to b35 community shopping
district. We have Nick fatik German. Again. Nick fatigue is
for the record on behalf of the owner and applicant 2420
holstead land owner LLC. The owner is Seeking a zoning
change to permit a uh, 2700 square foot first floor
addition to the retail buildings, uh, first floor the
existing 5-story masonry building which contains 36 total
residential units all above grade will remain without
change. The subject property is a Transit serve location
and we are maintaining a 50% parking ratio. Again, the
purpose of the zoning change is to permit, uh, 0.11
additional floor area to accommodate the expanded retail
footprint on the first floor only no other
Changes proposed to the building again. We did work with
Alderman kutson. I understand that there was also uh a
meeting with the Wrightwood neighbors Association and at
this point we're uh, we believe we have support to proceed
with the zoning change request.
Thank you. Uh, Mr. Fattest. Uh, we do have the support of
Alan any questions by committee members.
Seeing none vice mayor B. Oh all do you want to add
anything on this 1?
You're good. We've got our letter thank you. Um
other person point test makes a motion to pass all in
favor. Say I any opposed say nay thinking that chair the
eyes have it and the item is passed.
uh top of page 10
We're going to read these 2 together and then we're going
to let Mr. Pikas go 1 more 1 on.
40
yeah, but then 1 more. All right. So here we go top of age
10 document number 224
29 and the 45th Ward ordinance referred 41724 common
address is 5410 to 12 West Foster Avenue change request is
RS3 residential single unit district to be 211 neighborhood
mixed use District. We will also hear it together and take
1 motion, uh document number 22428 in the 45th Ward
ordinance referred 41724 common address 5430 West Foster
Avenue change request is an RS3 residential single unit
district to be 211 neighborhood mixed-use District Mr.
Patikas. I'm the 2 thank you. So I'm going to do them in
reverse order. Uh, 5430 West Foster is actually a uh,
37,000 square foot irregularly shaped lot with a vacant, uh
church building. My client is coming in.
To purchase the property and convert the existing building
to an indoor, uh Sport and wreck. Use the the uh proposed
B2 district is the lowest District that allows that type of
specific use the neighboring property at 5410 through 12.
West Foster is approximately 30 feet away. And it's a
surface parking space that is also part of the purchase, uh
by my client. So the zoning change, uh would permit the use
and essentially maintain existing conditions. We did work
with Alderman Gardner's office and I believe a letter
supports already on file.
Right. Thank you. We do have a letter of support, uh from
Alderman Gardner on both items any questions by committee
members.
Uh, seeing none all the woman Ramirez moves due pass.
all in favor say I
any opposed say nay you pin the chair of the eyes have it
and we reported out at tomorrow's meeting.
All right, because you've got another case on page 20.
We're going to jump there real quick. I'm going to ask
everybody in the gallery to have a seat, uh as per The
Rules of Order. Um,
Top of page 20 document number 224300 in the 47th Ward
ordinance referred 41724 common address is 2019 West Irving
Park Road change request b11 neighborhood shopping district
to b31 community shopping district. We have Nick fatika
sitting in for Fred Augustine. Thank you chairman again for
the record. Nick fatigue is um, I am here on behalf of the
applicant who is a proposed tenant at the subject property
the requested zoning change to be
3-1 would allow the establishment of a veterinary clinic
within the existing structure the uh, Veterinary Clinic
will occupy approximately 5100 square feet of tenant space
no changes to the existing 2-story, uh, multi-unit or mixed
use, uh, uh commercial building. There are 5 parking spaces
that will remain we did work with the 47th Ward zoning
advisory committee and a letter of support was issued by
Matt Martin Alderman Matt Martin, uh back in late April,
which I believe your office already has a copy of no other
changes proposed. It's a use space zoning change, right? We
do have the letter from Allen Martin any questions by
committee members seeing none all the minimalist bottom
moves do pass all in favor. Say I I
The eyes have it and Report out tomorrow. Thank you m.
all right, returning back to the regular agenda on the
bottom of page 10, uh document number 22402 when the 11th
ward ordinance referred 41724 common address 310 West 27th
Street change requests RS3 residential single unit district
to rt4 residential 2 flat townhouse and multi-unit
District. We have uh,
Mr. Parkeri good afternoon, Mr. Chairman members of the
committee. I am Tom paresky of the law firm of Gordon and
paresky on behalf of the applicant. Yin. Yin, Chong Xiao.
But before you seeking an amendment of the city of Chicago
zoning a map from the exit current be RS3 to that of an rt4
for the property commonly known as 310 West 27th Street.
subject is currently vacant and measures approximately 24
by 109 ft the site had historically been used as a 2 unit
Residential Building the applicant seeks to improve the
site with a new 2-unit residential building. We have
reviewed our plans with Alderman Lee and appeared before an
extensive Community process. No objections have been voiced
to the pro proposed amendment and Alderman Lee has issued
her support in the form of a letter previously presented to
the chair. Therefore we ask the committee for its vote to
recommend recommend passage of the application at the full
City Council.
Thank you, Mr. Barsky. Um, we do have the letter from
alderwoman Lee and I think she stepped out any questions by
committee members.
Uh, seeing none all in the spos do pass.
uh all in favor say I
Opposed say nay we need to share the eyes have it and we'll
report out tomorrow. Thank you, uh top of page 11 a
document number 22419 on the 11th ward ordinance referred
41724 common address is 3020 South Union Avenue change
requests RS3 residential single unit district to rt4
residential 2 flat townhouse and multi-unit District.
Uh again Tom paresky, good afternoon. I am still Tom
paresky of the law from of Gordon in paresky on behalf of
the applicant, Tony Chow.
Where before you seeking him Amendment of the city of
Chicago zoning map from the current RS3 to rt4 for the
property commonly known as 3020 South Union Avenue.
So the subject is currently vacant measuring approximately
25 by 122 feet. The site had historically been used as a
single family home. However, the character of the 3,000
Block of South Union is multi-family.
The applicant seeks to improve the site with a new 3-unit
residential building.
We have reviewed our plans with Alderman lean appeared
before an extensive Community process and no objections
have been voiced to the proposal in Alderman. Lee has
issued her support in the form of the letter previously
presented to the chair.
Therefore we ask the committee to vote its recommendation of
uh to pay for passage of this to the full City Council.
Thank you. We do have the letter of support from all the
women lie. Uh, do we have any questions by committee
members sitting down vice mayor Burnet moves due pass all
in favor. Say I
any opposed say nay the chair of the eyes have it? We'll
report it out of council tomorrow. Thank you.
uh middle of the page 11 is document number 22380 in the
12th Ward ordinance referred 320 24 common address 3787
through 89 South Archer Avenue change requests to C12 motor
vehicle related commercial District to see 22 motor vehicle
related commercial District. We have John fritzie. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman, uh members of the committee, uh for
clarification. I'm appearing today on behalf of omro
Tristan who had to unexpectedly leave town. Uh, as you
said, this is a change from a C12 to a c22 motor vehicle
related commercial District, uh to allow for outdoor dog
activities for existing, uh, groomer and Animal Facility.
Uh, we have a letter support from the alderman we know of
no objections.
Great. Um, we do have other woman Julie Ramirez here as
well if you want to say a word or 2.
Yeah, I just want to say yes, super supportive really
appreciative of the vet. Um, and I'm glad that we can move
this forward Alderman. I apologize and it's you over no, no
worries.
I thank you very much. Any other questions by committee
members?
Uh hearing none, uh, all the person Fuentes moves to pass
all in favor. Say I all post say the chair of the eyes have
it. We'll be reported out tomorrow.
All right, we're going to stick with John fritzie and go to
page 13.
Middle of the page, uh document number 22412 in the 20th
Ward ordinance referred 41724 common address is 634 East
61st Street change requests is B21 neighborhood mixed-use
districts to be 222 neighborhood mixed-use District.
Oh, we have John fade.
No slides. Yeah, I told you John. Thank you chairman member
of the committee for the record John fee on behalf of
Dustin from clean maintenance company. Uh, this is actually
it's a good story but it's a mother and son business who is
taking off and done very well done in the 20th Ward. Uh,
they are actually seeking to build a new property there as
a headquarters for their company and for residential units
above, uh that they're hoping going to be able to rent out
to their employees from the community. Uh, we know of no
objections to this Alderman Taylor, I believe is submitted
a letter to the uh, committee indicating her support and
I'd
Requested favorable vote. Uh, yes, I actually I spoke to all
the women Taylor yesterday, um on this and she is
supportive any questions by committee committee members
seeing none all the spam moves do pass all in favor. Say I
I opposed say nay.
The eyes have it and we reported out tomorrow Council.
Thank you chairman. Thank you, Mr. Fritzi. Uh, we're trying
to the bottom of page 11.
Document number 22438 dt1 and the 15th Ward ordinance
referred 41724 common address is 6410 South Honore Street
change requests RS3 residential single unit districts to
B21 neighborhood mixed-use District. We have Timothy
Parton.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.
My name is Timothy Martin with the firm of Thomas our
Reigns Attorney Law LLC.
Um the applicant, uh for this is for this rezoning is
Metropolitan Family Services.
Uh, they're trying to establish a community center for
neighborhood teens. This rezoning is necessary to allow the
renovation and conversion.
Of a 2 of a bacon 2 flat dwelling for the center's
operations as well as construction of a 1 and 2 story rear
addition. Uh, the center will include a computer lab a
library Production Studio.
And art Workshop. It will occupy the entire building. There
will be no residential use.
Um, the applicant is a type 1 application relief.
for an administrative adjustment to reduce the required
number of automobiles, uh automobile parking from 1 space
to zero for properties located at Transit served locations.
Uh, this site is less than a half mile from the 63rd Street
Green Line and as the black and a half from the number 63
bus stop at 63rd in Walcott.
Uh, there will be 4 bike parking spaces on the property.
Um, I believe you have a letter or some an indic indication
from the alderman Alderman Lopez that uh, he supports this.
Yes, we do have a communication for Alderman Lopez
indicating his support. Um any questions by committee? I'm
sorry. Uh, we do have a substitute narrative and plans on
this. Uh, all the Fuentes moves to accept the substitute
narrative plans for the type. 1 application all in favor.
Say I
I'll post say that putting the chair of the eyes have it and
the substitute narrative plans are accepted. Uh any
questions by committee members.
Um, I actually have a quick 1 um, because it's a community
center. Do you still have to go to the zba for special?
Use? Are you roping that into the type 1 this is just to
get the adequate f r got it. Got it. Okay. All right all
them in the spot moves do pass all in favor. Say I
I'll oppose say name the eyes have it. The item is passed
with the substitute narrative and plans.
All right the next item we're going to defer the type of
page 12, uh document number 2243921 and the 34th Ward
ordinance referred 41724 cuming address is 112 South
Sangamon Street. Um all Alderman, uh,
Bernette moves makes a motion to further the previously
read item all in favor. Say I
any opposed say nay I need to show the eyes have it and the
item is deferred middle of the page 12 as document number
22423 in the 17th Ward ordinance referred for 1724. Common
address is 632 to 658 West 79th Street 78. I'm sorry 7851
to 59 South Union Avenue and 78.50 to 7858 South Lowe
Avenue change requests B12 neighborhood shopping district
to C12 neighborhood commercial District. We have Richard
tough.
Good afternoon, uh to you to members of the zoning
committee, uh, the properties and entire block along 79th
Street with an area of approximately 26700 square feet.
Site has 3 1 story commercial buildings that will remain
properties Transit served. It's a family-owned company the
applicant they purchased the property made a considerable
investment to completely rehabilitate the site which
occurred during coid despite the risk of investment.
The applicant sister company to Jamaica Jerk Villa also
family-owned will be the primary tenant at the property
restaurant was founded 20 years ago and Auburn Gresham with
only a stove and a grill. It's developed a great following.
Well, it's relocated and expanded over the years. The new
site will be the new location and a new era for the
restaurant, uh, which is already providing takeout services
at the property. The zoning change will allow licensing for
General restaurant. Use catering services Tavern public
place of amusement licenses will also be pursued the intent
is is to have some live music at the restaurant such as
reggae bands and other Jamaican musical genres, uh
accompanying. This is a would be a variation to have the
public place of amusement within 125 feet of an RS district
and to keep the parking at the current 12 spaces.
Uh because of that we're filing this as a type 1 zoning
application. Uh, there are no amended project narratives or
project drawings The Originals were based on the original
approved building permits. This is all as built. Uh, it's
all complete. We look forward to just having full
operations for the restaurant and other businesses at the
site. We've received no, uh, unsupportive calls or
objectors, uh company manager Edwin Castillo is with me
today balderman David Morris familiar with the operators
was kind enough to provide a letter of support. I think if
that you have it, but I have copies if not, otherwise we
request your favorable recommendation.
Right. Thank you. We do have a letter from Alvin more
indicating his support any questions by committee members.
Uh, seeing none all the person Fuentes moves to pass all in
favor. Say I I'll post say nay any the chair eyes have it.
The item is passed best of luck to you with this location.
Uh bottom of page 12 document number 22426 in the 18th Ward
ordinance referred 41724 common address to 7503. So 7525
South Cicero Avenue change requests the b32 community
shopping district to see 1 to Neighborhood commercial
District. Once again, we have Richard tough, good afternoon
again, Mr. Chairperson and members of the committee, uh,
the properties that uh, 1703 to 1725 South Cicero. Uh, I
should initially mentioned that we submitted a
Substitute ordinance to the Department of Planning and
Development. The only change are some technical surveyor
refinements to the boundary description in the ordinance
that the department itself requested in which the
department has reviewed and approved.
So all all their laspata makes a motion to accept the
substitute ordinance all in favor. Say I
Opposed say the eyes have it substitute as before us
proceed. Uh, thank you. I've got the um client
Representative Sam Yousef and project architect Chris kesky
with me the properties and Outlet Outlaw of Ford City Mall
along Cicero Avenue, uh, the sites used for a parking lot
currently but is otherwise vacant, uh is intended to be
developed as a jet Brite Car Wash, which is an affiliate of
the applicant JB development jetbrite has been in business
for about 25 years and is a very experienced Car Wash
operator. It's established 12 Car Wash businesses,
including 2 successful sites in Chicago 1 on 54th Street,
uh and 1 on Grand Avenue, uh other jetbrite locations are
in many surrounding suburbs. Um, we've not received any
phone calls regarding the application to our knowledge. No
1's objecting Boulder person. Derek Curtis is familiar with
the application and was kind enough to provide a letter of
support which I've submitted to the committee, but I have a
copy if that would be
Helpful, we do have the letter from Alderman Curtis, uh any
questions by committee members all them with Spa.
Thank you very much.
Sounds like a great project. I'm just curious the the 57
parking lot spaces do people drop off their cars or these
for the workers. What's what is the state so much parking
introduce yourself? Well, and please, uh step to the mic
itself. Yeah. My name is Sammy Yousef. I'm 1 of the
operating Partners, uh, 57 vacum spots are part. Uh,
there's about 8 spots for employees. And the rest of them
are vacuum spots where people do their own vacuums.
There we go. Near the head to be a reason shows how many
times I I watch my car. Um, thank you, sir. Thank you, too.
Let me ask sort of to that is is this part of the Ford City
Mall Complex or adjacent to it as an out out building part
of the larger Ford City Mall property. So there's probably
hundreds and hundreds of parking places in there. Yes. Yes.
All right, any questions by committee members hearing none
all the woman Ramirez? Um moves due pass on favor. Say I
I'll post say the eyes have it and this is past we'll be
reporting out tomorrow. Thank you Mr. Chairperson. Thank
you. All right, we're going to go to top of page 13. There
we go, guys, um got number 224 37-21 in the 20th Ward
ordinance referred 41724 common address is 1635 to 43 West
47th Street change requests is B1.
3 neighborhood shopping district to see 1 3 commercial
neighborhood District. I'm sorry B13 neighborhood shopping
district and C13 neighborhood commercial District to be 23
neighborhood mixed use District. We have Amy Carson, good
morning, Mr. Chairman members of the committee and the
zoning administrator and staff of you're all doing well
this morning. Thank you. It's been a long day. So I will be
I will be very very brief. Um, the matter before you today
is part of the invest Southwest initiative. It's part of a
multi-block Redevelopment. It's very well known to the
aldermen and to the community. There have been 5 Community
meetings about the project overall. In this case. We're
rezoning um these properties to the B3 to allow first floor
floor residential. So the properties will be oriented to
47th Street will be constructing 6 units all of which will
be 100% affordable the um adjacent property will be
maintained as a parking lot for a senior living facility,
which is across the street at least for the foreseeable
future. It's convenient for us to rezone it so should Park
Park parking be accommodated somewhere else in the future.
This would be ready to go with first floor residential same
as the adjacent.
Great. I understand. We have a substitute narrative and
plans on this as well. Yes, sir. Yes. So, uh all the person
point says moves to accept the substitute narrative and
plans for the type. 1 application all in favor. Say I
opposed say nay the chair of the eyes have it and the
substitute a narrative plans are accepted any questions by
committee members. I spoke to all the women Taylor on this
yesterday. It's an exciting project and she has uh, given
her support, um with no questions Alderman laspata moves
due pass on favor. Say I
Any opposed say nay the chair of the eyes have it? Thank
you everyone. Thank you Amy this Castro now we have a
bottom of 13 documentary number 22422 dt1 the 25th Ward
ordinance referred 41724 common address is 2434 South
Albany Avenue change requests. It's an RM 4.5 residential
multi-unit District to b23. I'm sorry, B25 neighborhood
mixed use District. We have ha Castro.
Uh, good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee my name uh for the record. My name is Kim Castro.
I am a zoning Attorney At A Costa Edgar
Here today for several matters, uh, the first 1 as you
correctly mentioned for the property located at 2434 South
Albany.
Before I begin, I'd like to ask if the substitute narrative
be incorporated, uh into the into the record, please yes,
vice mayor brunette moves to accept the substitute
narrative and plans for the type. 1 application all in
favor. Say I
all opposed say nay for the chair of the eyes have it in
the substitute narrative and plans are accepted. Thank you
very much.
Uh, the property is an RM 4.5 property an ETO, uh located
property as well that is improved with the 2 story building
that includes 5 dwelling units 0 parking as a building as
long line to lot line.
Uh, we're looking to rezone it to a B25 to allow for a
third floor to be constructed.
Uh to allow 3 additional units for a total of 8 units on
the property 8 byng spaces would be provided and zero
parking, uh would be provided as the building is on line to
lot line. In addition to uh, the resoning requests. We are
also asking for administrative relief to reduce 2 parking
spots to zero as well as variation relief to reduce the
front yard the north side setback the Southside setback and
the rear yard setback, uh, as well.
we have had conversations and uh zoning meeting with the
aldermen and uh his zoning committee and I believe they
issued a letter of support that the committee has and I
would like to ask, uh the committee and Zoning members for
favorable consideration.
Please thank you very much. Uh Miss Castro. We do have Ruben
Franco if there's any questions from the 25th Ward, but uh
vice mayor Bernett. Do you have a question?
Okay question by Alderman Espana. It's such an easy
question. This sounds like a like a genuinely fascinating
content kudos to you in the 25th. Thank you. Have you been
forwarding on the renderings to me? I'm like really
genuinely curious about third floor Edition. Yep. Thank
you. Thank you chair. Okay, thank you, uh vice mayor
Bernett moves to pass all in favor. Say I
Any opposed say nay the eyes have it we'll report out at
tomorrow's council meeting. Thank you. All right, ha you
are going to be
Our star witness, I think today you're going to be here a
while. So get comfy top of page 14 is Zachary number 22424
dt1 in the 25th word ordinance referred 41724. Common
address is 1145 West 17th Street change requests and rt4,
residential 2 flat townhouse on multi-unit District to
rm4.5 residential multi-unit District human Castro. Thank
you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee
again for the record. My name is Humana Castro is zoning
attorney at cost esgar for the property located at 11:45
West 17th Street. Uh, the property is a substandard sized
Lot 24 by 1:24. It is a rt4 zone property EOD to the metro
and Hallstead and is uh, it is improved with a 2-story
building with 2 dwelling units and 2.
Parking spaces, uh surface parking spaces and Carolina and
Evans as you can notice in the LLC. They're very excited
about this property. Uh, they are looking to resolve the
property to an rm4.5 for a new 4 story building with 3
dwelling units a 2-car garage. They will be living in the
building with their family and we are seeking
administrative adjustment relief for the Westside setback
the East Side setback and the combined sides set back, uh
to reduce all of those to fit the property. Uh, we also
have had extensive communication with the neighbors, uh in
person on the phone via email and uh, we currently have a
letter of no objection from the Alderman and we will be
continuing conversations, uh, as is reflected in the letter
of no objection with uh, 1 of The Neighbors, uh next door,
To make sure that all the construction is satisfactory. We
love the conversation. Thank you for mentioning that um on
the spot.
For a motion, I'll just say we love folks whose dream house
is a 3 flat. That is that's some Chicago business there I
true and there and there are pills and family. So they um,
they wanted to to build their own roots and with their own
nuclear family and they well the multi-generational let's
do it. Thank you cheer happy to make the motion. Thank you
all of them on the spot on most to pass all in favor. Say I
I suppose to say no to the show the eyes have it. We'll
report it out of council tomorrow.
Lot of the 14 is document number 224171 and the 25th board
ordinance referred 41724 common address is 2127 South
Marshall Boulevard in 2866 through 80 West 21st, Place, uh
change request is B25 neighborhood mixed use districts to
be 25 neighborhood mixed use District. Once again, ha
Castro. Thank you very much Mr. Chairman of the record.
Again. My name is Human Castro zoning attorney at Costa
Edgar for the property located at 2127 South Marshall and
the the rest of the address on 21st Place. Uh, it's a
corner lot. Uh, the property is uh, oh before I continue
I'd like to ask for the substitute narrative to be
incorporate Incorporated, please into the records. Yes, all
the person moves to accept the substitute narrative and
plans for the type. 1 application all in favor. Say I
the chair of the eyes have it and the substitute narrative
and plans are accepted. Thank you very much. The property
is owned by 255. It is an ET Tod, uh property to the pink
line and it is 1 Xing lot improved with 2 buildings as is
typical for this particular pocket of the city, uh with the
front building, uh, being a 2-story building containing 6
dwelling units and the rear building also being a 2-story
building containing 2 dwelling units. There is your parking
as is, uh, the the current structures, uh, do not allow for
parking. We're looking to rezone it to a B25 to allow a
third floor.
Audition for both buildings, the front building will contain
12 units. The rear building will contain 4 dwelling units
for a total of 16 dwelling units 6 barking 6 bike spaces
will be provided zero parking, uh, as I explained and we're
also seeking administrative adjustment relief to reduce 8
parking spaces to zero and reduce the front the side
setbacks and the rear setback as well. Uh, we have engaged,
uh, Rhino Ruben from the ultimates Offices here. We've been
engaged with his office.
Uh, and we have the letter of support. Thank you. The
Almond has indicated his support any questions by committee
members.
I'm seeing none all the woman. Uh, Ramirez moves do pass
all in favor. Say I
all post say
the eyes have the item is passed. Thank you.
Um 2246 we're deferring the following. All right. So, uh
document number 2240621 on the 25th word ordinance referred
41724 common address is 2315 West 24th Space Place, uh all
in the spot and moves to defer this item. Yes, uh all in
favor, please say I
I'll post it in.
I'm pretty sure the eyes have it and this item is deferred
and just for the record. We just want to make sure that the
the neighbors for that matter. Are we continue
conversations with them? We appreciate that? Yeah.
Middle of page 15 is document number 224131 in the 25th
Ward ordinance referred 41724 common address is 2863 West
21st Street change request rt4, residential 2 flat
townhouse and multi-unit District to be 23 neighborhood
mixed juice District. We have a sub on this as well.
Could be incorporate that into the record, please. Yes.
Thank you all Al Al to accept the substitute and plans for
the type. 1 application all in favor. Say I
I'll post say name and share the eyes have it and the
substitute narrative plans are accepted. Great. Thank you.
Uh again for the record, my name is Kim Castro zoning
attorney at Costa Edgar for the property located at 2863
West 21st Street. Uh, this property is owned rt4. It's e to
the pink line. It is a vacant lot and we're looking to
rezone it to a b23 to allow a 3-story building with 9
dwelling units by parking spaces, uh, 0 automobile parking,
uh, and we're also speaking administrative relief to reduce
fee parking spaces to zero and variation relief to reduce
the front combined, uh side setbacks East and West I
setbacks in the rear side setbacks and I would like to add
for this part.
particular building if it's possible to go to the front,
uh, the front elevation, uh,
my client purchased this property, uh, and he didn't
realize that the uh, the building that existed there before
was demolished. And uh, he actually, uh, the 25th Ward is
uh loves to retain a lot of the character and a lot of the
the beautiful buildings that exist and they like to either
encourage people to rehabilitate or to build buildings that
look like they belong my client has decided to build a
building out of brick and to replicate the existing facade
of what was demolished. So that built that block will
retain that building that was demolished and we're very
happy about that.
And uh, like we have uh, a letter of no objection from the
alderman as well. We do have that letter any questions by
committee members seeing none all there will be uh, Ramirez
most
Do pass with the substitute narrative and plans on favor.
Say I?
The eyes have it and this item will be reported out of
tomorrow's meeting.
Bottom of page 15 document number 223451 the 25th word
ordinance referred 12424 common address 2308 West 18th
Place change request the rt4 residential 2 flat townhouse
and multi-unit District to be 25 neighborhood mixed use
districts the men Castro. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh for
the record, my name is Human a Castro. I'm a zoning
attorney at Costa asgar for the matter, uh located at 2308
West 18th Place before I continue can we please incorporate
the substitute narrative and plans to the record, please?
Yes, uh, although the spot I'm uh moves to accept the sorry
substitute narrative and plans the type 1 application all
in favor say I I I'll post say substitute narrative and
plans are before us thank you. The property is in rt4 zone
property. It's Ito D to the Metro Western stop to the CTA
me, uh Western stop and to the bus the the Western chord,
uh Western corridor
It is improved, uh with 2 buildings. This is typical for
this area. Uh, the front building is a 2-story building
with 2 dwelling units. The rear building is a 2-story
building with 4 dwelling units, and there's currently zero
parking.
Due to the location of the of the of the buildings we're
looking to Res this property to a B25 to convert the 2
buildings into 1 building, uh with the middle Edition and a
third floor addition to combine both buildings into 1.
Uh, the buildings will be 42 feet in height and there would
be 2 additional dwelling units. So 8 dwelling units in
total. So we're adding 2, uh, 2 baking spaces will be
provided zero parking due to the extensive Ito D location.
Uh, and there were uh, we also seeking administrative
adjustment relief to reduce 2 parking spaces to zero and to
reduce, uh, the side setbacks and uh the front setback as
well and the rear setback.
Great. Thank you. Any questions by committee members, uh,
seeing none all the person from Fuentes moves to pass with
the substitute narrative in plans all in favor. Say I
Any opposed say nay in the trailer the eyes have it. This
will be reported out tomorrow at Council.
Top of page 16 your final I believe. Yes.
Um document number 22405 and the 28th word ordinance
referred 41724 common address is 2421 West Lexington Street
change requests is RT 3.5 residential 2 flat townhouse on
multi-unit District to RM 4.5 residential multi-unit
District. We have him in a Castro.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman for the last time for today. Uh, my
name is ha Castro zoning attorney at Costa Edgar, uh here
for the matter located at 2421 West Lexington. Uh, the
property is a substandard size law 25 by 124.66. It is
zoned RT 3.5. It is improved with the 2 story building with
3 dwelling units and 3 parking spaces and we are seeking to
rezone it to an RM 4.5 to allow a fourth uh unit guarding
unit and there will be no additional parking we met with
the community and we have the alderman support and I
believe that the committee has uh, Alderman Irvings
support. Yes, uh, we will see you in the email from
Alderman Ervin, uh,
Today, um and uh, we have that on file any questions by
committee members all in the spa.
Thank you chair him. Are we doing the zoning change here?
Because it's outside of the Adu pilot areas or do they need
the additional f r as well? Yes.
Which which 1 or is it both? Uh, so they need additional
additional F. Yeah.
Got it thought so thank you. Thank you cheer great. Thank
you. Any other questions by committee members. We're done
all of them in the spot of most due pass all in favor. Say
I
On the post say named the chair of the eyes have it
reported on the council tomorrow. Thank you. Thank you.
Um this next item in the middle of page 16. I want to see
if we have any Witnesses. Um, it's the common address is
yes, great. I'll read it in document number 22404 dt1 in
the 25th Ward ordinance referred 41724 common address is
1857 West 16th Street change request is an M22 Light
Industry District to see 32 commercial manufacturing and
employment District.
Uh
1 in have a seat right here and introduce yourself for the
record.
Sorry, I don't have a a name on this 1 unusual.
Great, Mr. Ter go ahead and give your name and title again
for the record and proceed. Sure. My name is Jordan ter.
I'm the manager of Apple log LLC. Um
We're putting in a change request for uh, 1857 West 16th
Street from M22 Light Industry District to C32 commercial,
uh manufacturing and employment District. Um, we're
basically looking to establish a limited manufacturing and
production facility, which we can produce food and
beverages at um, and the secondary use would be allow allow
us to operate a small to medium, uh venue space with the
maximum capacity of 200 people. Um, this will allow us to
have an
Accessory restaurant and tasting room. Um, we have 6 parking
space, uh currently on site. Um, and we are seeking a
parking relief, um through the TSL to reduce the the
parking requirements from the 20 parking spaces, uh by 100%
great.
Any questions by committee members?
But I know 25th word is in support all the persons wantas
to pass all in favor. Say I I post say the item passes be
reported out tomorrow. Thank you all busy day in the 25th
Ward. Thanks guys.
Good day in the city here today. All right. We're we're
we're in the home stretch. I swear document number 22403
dt1 in the 27th Ward ordinance referred 41724 common
address is 2405 West Grand Avenue change request C13
neighborhood commercial District to see 1 3 neighborhood
commercial districts. We have Ed cuss.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman members of the committee for
the record. My name is Ed cuss and attorney with the Taft
Law Firm. We are here on of the applicant 2 405 West Grand
LLC and I am joined today by Mr. Jim Panella who is the
managing, um member of the applicant entity. Uh, we're here
to request a technical amendment to a previously approved
type 1 zoning map Amendment for the property to allow the
construction of a 5 story mixed use multi family building
measuring approximately 60 feet.
Height and containing 36 dwelling units 11 parking spaces 36
36 bicycle parking spaces and 1 loading dock with some
ground floor commercial space.
In July 2022 the city council approved the type 1 map
Amendment for this property from M12 to C13 commercial
District.
The subject property is irregular in shape. It's like a
trapezoid and contains approximately 11200 square feet of
sight area. The site right now is substantially vacant and
unimproved.
The current amendment is necessary. First of all to extend
and renew the 2022 type 1 zoning map Amendment, which
otherwise would expire this summer and pursuant to the
modified type 1 procedures. We would like to get a
variation for a reduction in the rear setback for floors
containing dwelling units from the 30 feet to 0 feet. And
again that is because of the irregular shape of the lot and
to authorize and administrative adjustment or a to location
for parking reduction to reduce the minimum number of
parking spaces from 36 to 11. The property is a Transit
served location, uh directly along Western Avenue CTA bus
line Corridor and within about 400 feet of the Western
Avenue Metro Rail Station entrance.
Uh reduction of the dwelling unit count is proposed from 40
to 36, which was previously approved. Uh, no changes are
proposed with respect to the f r or off street parking, uh
with that Mr. Chairman. We respectfully request your
approval and we are available for any questions.
Great. Thank you. Any questions by committee members. I'm
seeing any all the person Fuentes so moves all in favor.
Say I
Both say name and ensure the eyes have it and we reported
out a council tomorrow. Thank you. Thank you. Um now we're
on the middle of page 17
Uh, which is document number 22373.
The 29th Ward ordinance referred 32024 common address is
5730 to 5736 West Roosevelt Road.
change request M22 Light Industry District, uh and
institutional plan development 933 to institutional plan
development 933 as amended. We have Anthony lotta
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is that a quick correction? My my
name is Brayden Lord. I my colleague Anthony Licata and I
collectively represent the applicant. I thought that was
you but proceed either that or Anthony licad I got some
good lotion. Um, thank you. Uh, my my name again for the
record is Brayden Lord. I'm an attorney with the law firm
of tax titinius and Hollister LLP located at 111 East
Wacker Drive in Chicago. I'm joined today by 2 members of
the project team. Uh, Trudy Bueller is Vice President of
Mackie Consultants.
Our project engineer and Erica Hawkins is the group
Director of Human Resources for the applicant UHS of
harcrow Inc.
The applicant is requesting a plan development amendment to
uh, first rezone the UHS owned property at 5730 to 32 West
Roosevelt Road. I'll refer to that as the UHS parcel.
From institutional plan development number 933 to the c22
motor vehicle related commercial district and then to
institutional development number 933 as amended and then
second to rezone the city-owned property at 5736 West
Roosevelt Road, which will refer to as the city parcel from
the M22 Light Industry District the c22 motor vehicle
related commercial district and then to PD 933 as amended.
The requested change is needed to authorized the
construction of a 2-part addition to the existing hospital
at the UHS parcel. Uh first on the city parcel a
single-story Hospital Edition containing approximately
18367 square feet of floor area 48 new patient beds and 21
new vehicular parking spaces.
Yes.
Just plan, uh the plan. Yes. Sorry. Thank you. Well, I was
tracking it. I appreciate it in case we forgot uh, and then
on the UHS parcel a single story Hospital Edition
containing approximately 4,410 square feet of floor area 16
new bikes parking spaces and 129 new vehicular, uh, bicycle
spaces as Alderman laspata helpfully have just remembered
the change request was considered and recommended for
approval by the plan commission. It is April 18th meeting.
Um, we request that the transcript and record of the plan
commission be incorporated today. Thank you. The item was
hurting passed by this call plan commission, uh, which No,
1 loves more than Alderman laspada who makes the motion to
incorporate all records and findings from that hearing all
in favor, please say I I I post say the eyes have it. The
records are Incorporated. Thank you chairman. Thank you
Alderman laspada, the proposed Hospital expansion will
result in the addition of severely needed capacity for
inpatient Behavioral Health Services in the Chicago land
area.
the remediation of environmental contamination at the long
vacant city parcel and the reactivation of the city parcel
with a property tax paying use, uh, briefly. The overall
site is bound by West Filmore Avenue to the north South
Waller Avenue to the East West Roosevelt Road to the South
and a commercial Self Storage development to the West as
mentioned. The city parcel is currently vacant and the UHS
parcel is improved with the existing Hospital.
The proposed expansion will allow UHS to serve approximately
65 more patients per day and significantly improve the
hospital's operations. That's a great uh Improvement for a
Improvement for a hospital that is operated at or above a
full capacity as defined by state law every year since
2020.
The expansion will also provide numerous landscape and
pedestrian improvements including the additional the
addition of a second row of perimeter trees along Roosevelt
Road in Ada accessible pedestrian path connecting Roosevelt
Road to the existing Hospital entrance the and the addition
of uh, a substantial number of new trees and shrubs slides
4 and 5 as you've shown show the proposed elevations, which
were designed to seamlessly match and correspond with the
first floor of the existing Hospital.
the applicant anticipates that the proposed expansion will
generate approximately 19.7 million dollars of investment
and approximately 120 permanent jobs and 60 to 80
construction jobs as a plan development hiring for the
construction jobs. Will Target 26% MBE 6% wbe 50% City
resident hiring and 10% 29th Ward hiring and finally the
applicant has worked and communicated closely with Alderman
Talya Ferro in support of the proposed, uh, expansion
including meeting with the alderman, um in November of last
year to discuss the proposed expansion in detail the
alderman submitted a letter of support in advance of the
plan commission hearing.
We submit that the proposal satisfies the approval criteria
for plan development projects and that no public interest
would be served by its denial and we respectfully request
that the committee's favorable recommendation and are
available to answer any and all questions the committee may
have
Thank you, Mr. Lord. We do have a letter uh support from
Alderman Talia faroh any questions by committee members.
I actually have a quick 1. Um, I know this is a healthcare
expansion have you gone through the certificate of need
process yet? Or is that is that going to be required here?
It's it's time. Yes, and we're preparing that now right? Um
best of luck with all the work then uh, all the person
Fuentes moves to pass all in favor. Say I
I'll post say the eyes have it. We'll be reported out
tomorrow Council. Thank you all very very much. That's the
clock. Thank you for doing this work, too.
All right bottom of 17 document number 22374 on the 27th
word.
We're going to incorporate records, right and this 1. All
right.
Ordinance refer to 3024 common address 303 West Division
Street, 1140 Northwest Street and 202 West Hills Street
change request plan development 136 as amended to plan
development 136 as amended.
We have attorney as Ed cuss. Thanks again.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and good afternoon and members of
the committee. Um, I am at C with the Taft law firm and I'm
here this morning on behalf of this afternoon. I should say
on behalf of ani Atrium development number 1 limited
partnership. I did have a representative of the applicant
here, but he had another con he had to run to so I
apologize for not having him here.
Anyway this um plan commission approved this matter at its
meeting on April 18th 2024, and we would ask that the
record of proceedings from that meeting be incorporated
into today's record.
Yes, Albert, Ramirez makes the motion to incorporate all
records and findings from the plan commission hearing all
in favor. Say I I opposed the eyes have it all records are
Incorporated. Hey, thank you. The subject property is
generally located at the southwest corner of West Division
in Northwest Street and is commonly known as Old Town Park.
Uh, this development was approved many years ago and is
currently fully built out with 4 residential buildings. We
are speaking a technical amendment to pd1 136 specifically
to sub area a the amendment would allow 2 additional uses
to the permitted use statement 1 is a medical service, uh
to accommodate a dental office and the second is animal
services to accommodate a veterinarian office, um with
buggy daycare, I guess, uh, there will be no new
construction or other physical changes to the existing
buildings accordingly. We would ask for favorable
recommendation from this committee.
Great any questions by committee members? I got to tell you.
Dental and Veterinary seems to be a growth industry in a
lot of neighborhoods. So no no surprise there, um with no
comments, uh beyond that Alderman was bottom moves to pass
all in favor. Say I
I'll close say no in the opinion chair. The eyes have it,
and it's will be reported out tomorrow. Thank you. Thank
you, Mr. Cuss.
top of page 18 waiting patiently document number 22378 of
the 27th Ward ordinance referred 32024 common address 734
North Milwaukee Avenue 736 North Milwaukee Avenue 700 North
Carpenter Street, 1040 West Huron Street change request is
residential business plan development 1396 to residential
business plan development 1396 as amended. Thank you for
the patience of our friend Katrina Maguire.
Pleasure to be here today, and I've I know it's been long
but as a certified zoning nerd, it was actually super
interesting today. Uh, it is my pleasure to be here on
behalf of 7:30 North Milwaukee LLC the applicant here. Um,
this is a project that was heard at plan Commission in
April and we would ask that the record be incorporated here
in yes, uh, all the references makes a motion to
incorporate all records and findings from the plan
commission hearing all in favor. Say I
I'll post it now and show you the eyes have it. The records
are Incorporated. Thank you and just very briefly. This is
a project that was initially approved back in early 2018
with 226 units 196 of which were ultimately constructed the
brick building which is a portion of the uh, existing PD
was always an office building. It's an old loft building as
you can see and what we are seeking here is to um change
that office use to residential. Um, as with many Office
Buildings, uh vacancy issues have plagued this building and
so sort of the highest and best use here is to convert it
to residential we're seeing to add 32 units to this
existing plan development that's going to generate 6.4 our
units. So 6 units that will be on site and then uh about an
eighty thousand dollar, um, you know, proportionate payment
to um of in Luffy's
Um, we do enjoy the support of the neighbors of of River
West as well as of aldermen Bernett who I believe conveyed
that to you before he had to leave today. Yes. We do have
all of them in bernat's support. Thank you. And with that
we'd ask for the committee support as well. Thank you any
questions by committee members.
Hearing none Alberto asbat moves due pass.
all in favor say I
own post say name and share of the eyes have it and that
will be reported out at tomorrow's Council. Thank you.
Thank you committee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
All right middle of page 18 document number 22238 dt1 and
the 27th Ward ordinance referred 71923 common address is
1153 West Grand Avenue change request M22 Light Industry
District to be 23 neighborhood mixed use District. We have
attorney Mark kupc Mr. Chairman members of the committee.
Um, my name is Mark kupc. I represent the applicant. This
is 41153 West Grand Avenue procedurally first, uh, I do
have a substitute narrative and revised plans that we'd
like to proceed on that's all the Ramirez moves to accept
the substitute narrative and plans for the type. 1
application all in favor. Say I
I'll post say the eyes have it and the substitute narrative
and plans are accepted a subject property is improved by 2
or more old buildings. The assessor says more than 100
years old buildings are built lot line the lot line.
There's no parking currently when the applicant bought the
property there were 7 7 7 Apartments when we filed the
application the zoning change request was to rehab the
building for 7 apartments and it's an old building in need
of repair and Alderman Bernett requested we visited with
the River West neighbors actually had 2 appearances there 1
with mailed notice a river West was clear the front the
original front building was a mixed use building with a
storefront on the ground floor on Grand Avenue, and their
preference was
Is to preserve that storefront and continue it because they
have hopes of Grand Avenue coming back. So we did revise
the plan and the revised plans that we filed do keep the
storefront on the first floor front and remodel it with
only 6 dwelling units. Um, we have um, and we have a
companion request number 1 adjustment as to parking. Um,
this is a Transit serve location. There's a CTA train
station at Grand and Hallstead an older 1. And also is it
now a CTA train station at Morgan and Lake both of which
make this a Transit serve location. And in addition there's
a bus on Grand Avenue and a bus stop right in front of the
subject property. So we're asking to to reduce the parking
requirement. The plan does show we are adding 1 parking
space in the middle of the building. So we're looking to
reduce that parking to 1 space in addition the original
No, we do. Oh, I'm sorry opinion. You can say good good and
the uh, uh, the original building there was a a 3-story 3
flat building at the rear of the property according to the
old Sanborn map, which of course is still there and does
not preserve the 30 foot rear setback because of the age of
the building there was no permit record. We're trying to
establish the primary record. So technically we're asking
for a variation for that rear building for the 30 foot rear
setback.
And River West did send a letter of support to Alderman
Bernett that I believe Alderman Bernett expressed his yes.
We all Bernard has expressed his report, uh questions all
of them in the spot.
Thank you Jared. It's a really great project. I really love
the Adaptive reuse. I'm so curious because if you if you
pull it up it's like a smaller building in the front. Yes
larger building in the back. Yes single story. I don't know
what it is connecting them. What are you all going to do
with that middle space? Well, he going to rehab it and
bring it up to code or there's existing apartments in that
middle space. So he's going to rehab those apartments and
in 1 portion of it. He's going to add 1 parking space
because the building is right on the Alley that's
fascinating. It's a very long building. It's a lot line a
lot line and we don't even know historically how many
buildings I think originally it was a front building and a
rear building and maybe you got filled in but at this point
need of repair he's going to bring it up to code and uh
preserve that storefront which was a special request of the
community group.
That's the right request. Thank you so much. Great project.
Thank you cheer. Thank you. Any other questions, uh, seeing
none all the foreigners moves to pass all in favor. Say I
Opposed say Nay put in the chair. The items has it. This is
passed with the substitute narrative and plans will report
it out tomorrow. Thank you. Thank you. All right, Sarah for
the home stretch. Here we go.
Document number 22427 - T1 in the 44th Ward or ordinance
referred 41724 common address is 3731 to 3733 North
Sheffield Avenue. The change request is an rm5 residential
multi-unit districts to rm6 residential multi-unit district
and we have Sarah Barnes bringing up the Caboose.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Seemed remaining a member.
Staying here. Um, um, we are I'm happy to be here this
afternoon on behalf of the applicant Wrigley Flats LLC, um,
believe it or not. We were here just over a year ago. Um,
same property owner same applicant for a type 1 zoning map
amendment to make some improvements to the existing orange
rated building. Um, uh that comprises 1 of these sites.
since that time the plans actually haven't changed but we
just needed to come back to accommodate for the additional
height with the um vertical addition to the existing
building the heights still consistent with all of the other
buildings on the Block. Um, we just needed the extra boost
from the rm5 to the rm6 in order to allow for that since
the ex.
Existing building is um again historically significant. So
it had higher floor to ceiling um ratios which made it a
little bit taller. We're following the for the addition.
Um, we are following the existing lines of the historic
building straight up and straight to the side laterally.
So, um with the proposed zoning map Amendment, we are also
seeking an administrative adjustment for the setback relief
to bring the existing non-conforming setbacks into
compliance under the current zoning ordinance. Um,
Talk about something kind of unique is the existing
building 3 store building actually has 7 dwelling units in
it right now. They're just very small and disjointed. So
with the lateral Edition, um, it allows for us. We're not
increasing the density, um, but for 1 additional unit for a
total of 8 units, but it allows for bigger family oriented
rental units in that neighborhood. Um, and this is
literally a right behind. Um, Wrigley Field. So there's a
need for it. Um, it is a Transit serve location. So there
will be on-site parking for 6 vehicles. Um,
With that there's no substitutes or anything. So I just
respectfully request the favorable consideration of this
committee. Thank you, Miss Barnes, uh being in the 44th
Ward, I'll just say real quick. Uh, this is a legacy
project that has been in the progress for a while. Um, I
know 1 of our public commenters may have referred the wrong
address, but this is definitely a rehab and a reuse of an
existing Greystone. That is about 200 feet away from the
Wrigley Field bleacher gate. So I'm thinking maybe more
renters than roommates than families right there. But
nonetheless, um, an area that we know is uh has a lot of
interest is well served by transit and has the support of
the community. Um, and so I would uh, take a motion or
answer any questions if any of my colleagues have any
And we did I'm sorry. I forgot I should have said this we
did meet with East Lake DNA walk and they they reviewed it
and endorsed it. So.
Great for what's that? That's worth. No other questions all
the Fuentes moves to pass all in favor. Say I
all opposed say nay we need to share the eyes have it and
we reported out tomorrow. Thank you top of page 19. Uh,
we're going to defer so it's not going to be number 22328
in the 45th Ward ordinance referred 1 24/24 common address
3955 North Kilpatrick and 3865 North Milwaukee Avenue
change request is RS3 residential single unit detached
house district to be 33 Community shopping district, and
then to residential business plan development, although the
spot. It makes a motion to refer to defer.
The previously read item all in favor. Say I
all post say nay the chair of the eyes have it and we'll be
deferred.
Middle of 19 is document number 2242121 and the 47th Ward
ordinance referred 41724 common address is 2035 to 2043
West Irving Park Road change request is b11 neighborhood
shopping district to be 33 Community shopping district. We
have attorney Sarah Barnes. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman
and esteemed members of the committee. Um, I'm happy to be
here still this afternoon on behalf of the aan 2035 West
Irving Acquisitions LLC. This is another Legacy project.
Um, so to speak in the 47th Ward, um Alderman Martens not
here today. He has offered a letter of support for the
project, but I would commend him for his extraordinary. Um
Community Driven review process for all of these projects.
We worked with the community for
Almost 3 years on this project. Um, it was a true
collaborative effort towards that end. Um,
Oh, I should have began with the fact that we do have a
substitute narrative and a substitute plan. That's all
their franchise moves to accept the substitute narrative
plans for the type. 1 application all in favor. Say I
I I'll post say nay. Can you ensure the eyes have it the
substitute narrative and plans are accepted continue. Thank
you. And the substitute is a result of that
community-driven, um process there were some.
Minutes weeks to the plans. Um, but towards that end we met
with the 47th award zoning advisory Council the North
Center neighborhood association and the North Center of
Ravenswood Chamber of Commerce, all of whom have endorsed
the project, um with that the project calls for the
development of a new 5 story mixed use building at the
subject site, which will contain a total of 37 dwelling
units with commercial space on the first floor. And as well
as 15 on site parking spaces. This is a Transit serve
location. It's close to the 6 Corners CTA station. Um, and
traffic was a concern for the community. So we wanted to
mitigate that by providing less on-site parking. Um, and
also doing lease restrictions so that um tenants in the
building will not have a car. Um,
Towards that end. We are also offering 7 affordable units
which will be provided on site within the building and
that'll be a mix of 3 bedroom 2 bedroom and 1 bedroom
units.
um
in order to permit The Proposal
in addition to the underlying zoning change, um to the b33.
We are also seeking a couple of administrative adjustments.
1 is to reduce the parking just a little over that 50% um
maximum reduction from 37 to 15 spaces, which is just about
a 60% reduction as well as eliminating the required on-site
loading birth. There is room however for loading and
unloading within the first floor garage. Um, we're also
seeing to reduce the required rear yard setback for
residential floors from 30 feet to 2 feet. And this was in
order to provide some larger units within the
floor plate for the building 3-bedroom and 2 bedroom units
were specifically requested by the community. Um, and as
well,
1 last administrative adjustment and that is to for a
reduction in the required transparent window standard on
not the Irving Park front facade, but actually on the side
facade which is sunny side because this is located within
2,640 ft of the CTA train station, both of those. Um Street
frontages are treated as pedestrian streets. Um, but
unfortunately the Sunny Side the side does contain part of
the garage for the building so we didn't want to put
Windows um in the garage in order to screen the parking.
Um with that happy to answer a question. All right, uh no
questions from Committee Member all the Ramirez was due
pass all I've ever say I
Post today, thank you show the eyes haven't reported out
tomorrow Sarah short and sweet our document number of
Alderman's the spot is potential question.
I know he doesn't have any anymore today. He's actually
done with questions. Okay, then deal them you're getting
the edited version number 224 35-21 on the 47th award
ordinance referred 4724 coming address 44564 Avenue change
request C12 neighborhood commercial District to be 32
neighborhood mixed juice District. Uh, all the laspada
moves to accept the substitute narrative and plans for the
type. 1 application all in favor. Say I I I opposed say nay
I was having the substitute narrative and plans are accepted
Sarah substitute ordinance.
Oh.
All right, all those bottom moves to accept the substitute
ordinance for the 51 application all in favor. Say I
opposed thank you and for the last item
um again, Sarah Barnes happy to be here on behalf of the
applicant 4454 Northwestern Incorporated The Substitute
ordinance was um instead of a b23 we're going to take it to
a b33 which is consistent with the Western Corridor study
as well. The plans have changed to now incorporate
commercial space on the ground floor, whereas it was
originally submitted as a fully Residential Building.
Um with that the proposal calls for a new 5 story 8 unit
mixed-use building which again will have commercial space
on the ground floor. Um and 8 dwelling units above these
units will be condominium units. Um, there will be on-site
parking there for um for a total of 8.
Um vehicles and that's 1 to 1 ratio for the Condominiums.
So in order to permit The Proposal in addition to the type 1
underlying zoning classification change, we do need an
administrative adjustment to reduce the minimum ground
floor commercial area from 19 or by about 19% which is
under the 20% allowance and to increase the parking for a
Transit serve location to 100% And also to reduce the rear
setback from 30 feet to 24 just about 24 and a half feet
and then as well to once again reduce, um, the required
transparent window standard on the side elevation, which is
Cle Street, um again to accommodate for that garage.
With no further Ado. I'm happy to answer any questions.
Thank you. Miss Barnes any questions by committee members
seeing none all the canoes and moves to pass all in favor.
Say I I'll post say nay make sure the eyes have it and
we'll report it out at tomorrow's Council. Thank you all
for your patience there being no further business before
the body all the Ramirez moves. We adjourn all in favor.
Say I
say
we are a jour.