Village of Lombard Legistar System

William Heniff, Senior Planner, stated that as this is a text amendment request from a

petitioner, as opposed to being one proposed by the Village, the petitioner will present

the petition. However, staff will supplement the presentation and will discuss the

proposed text amendment as it relates to established Village Code.

Matthew Klein, 322 West Burlington Avenue, attorney for the petitioner, Cleaner's

Deport, presented the petition. He introduced Bill Paul, 625 Plainfield Road, Suite 424,

Willowbrook, IL for Cleaner's Depot and Steve Languilli, President of Columbia Dry

Cleaning, 231 Edison Av., West Babylon, NY, the company that provides dry cleaning

equipment and can provide expert testimony relative to the federal and state regulations

as well as the equipment itself.

Mr. Klein stated that his client has negotiated a lease at 415 East Roosevelt Road,

within the High Point Shopping Center, and on a site that was previously occupied by a

dry cleaner that had a plant on premises. The storefront is now vacant. While drop-off

facilities are listed as permitted uses, on-site processing requires a code amendment.

The propose of the amendment is to allow state of art dry-cleaning equipment to be

operated in the stores.

Mr. Paul noted that his firm represents Cleaner's Depot and their role is to do market

studies and analysis and negotiate purchase contracts, which they have done for this

site. Cleaner's Depot is a new concept in dry-cleaning in that they take large volumes

and establish one set price for dry-cleaning. He described the proposed equipment and

dry-cleaning system.

Mr. Languilli described the dry cleaning system. Their equipment is certified to exceed

EPA regulations. He described the closed loop system and described the waste

removal processes.

Mr. Klein noted the equipment is the newest equipment for dry cleaning. Solvents come

in packaged drums connected to the dry cleaning machine and the solvents are

returned to drums. This process ensures that the chemicals never have opportunity to

escape into environment or working area.

Chairperson Ryan then requested the staff report. No one spoke for or against the

petition.

Mr. Heniff then supplemented the petitioner's testimony with the staff report. He stated

that processing of garments is only permitted in the I Limited Industrial District. He

noted that although the request is for a cleaners establishment at 415 East Roosevelt

Road, text amendments are be applicable to all properties in the same zoning district.

Currently the Zoning Ordinance permits dry-cleaning drop off stations within the B1, and

hence all other Business Districts, provided that processing of the garments is done

elsewhere. As Section 155.103(C)(8) restricts variations from definitions and uses

between zoning districts, the petitioner is seeking to change the text of the Ordinance to

allow for on-site processing of dry cleaning items. The Code has been written in this

matter since the 1970s.

He stated that technological advances in the dry-cleaning industry have improved the

operations and functions of dry cleaning establishments. Furthermore, as with gas

stations, the regulation of these facilities are monitored and controlled by the Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency. Each establishment is required to meet transporting

and operational regulations to account for all chemicals associated with the business

operations.

Mr. Heniff noted that the petitioner argues that retail cleaners with on-site processing

reduces the overall amount of vehicular traffic to a site, since truck transporting of

garments to off-site locations is not needed. Moreover, as the drop-off facilities are

already permitted within all business districts, the incorporation of on-site processing

should not significantly change the traffic impacts of the business use.

Mr. Heniff then discussed the history of the 415 E. Roosevelt Road Site. The tenant

space on the subject property was occupied by "One-Hour Cleaners", a dry cleaning

establishment from 1990 to 2000. The Certificate of Occupancy noted that

perchlorethylene was used on the site, which means that an on-site dry cleaning was

being performed on the site. The petitioner is looking to occupy the premises where the

previous use was located and in a similar fashion as the previous use. Staff believes

that although a Certificate of Occupancy was issued, the function of the business was

inconsistent with the Zoning Ordinance as it is currently written. Moreover, as the

storefront has been vacant for two years, any non-conforming provisions would no

longer be applicable.

Mr. Heniff then discussed the applicability to the Village as a whole should the

amendment be adopted. There are eleven establishments currently operating in the

Village, of which seven have on-site plants. Staff also surveyed a number of other

municipalities in the County to see how they regulate on-site dry cleaning activities

within their business districts. The majority of communities do allow for on-site

processing in at least one of their business/commercial districts. Several municipalities

allow the activity subject to further references or conditions. These caveats tend to

either cross reference with other code regulations or restrict the overall size or functions

of the establishment.

Should the amendment be considered, staff feels that placing additional restrictions on

the operations of the dry-cleaning activity would be beneficial to the Village. Moreover,

by placing this activity as a permitted use but adding defined limitations, the Ordinance

will also provide additional guidance to the property owner or tenant as they establish

their business.

Staff believes that there is little difference in the functional aspects between dry-cleaning

facilities with or without on-premises plants. Both frequently locate in neighborhood

convenience centers and are intended to serve the local consumer/shopping needs of

the public. Therefore, this amendment is consistent with the intent of the underlying

zoning district and the Comprehensive Plan commercial designations.

Staff put together draft language for a text amendment. He then mentioned follow-up

discussions with Village Counsel and referred to a memo he wrote. He submitted

modified language to the proposed amendment that clarifies the regulations. Staff

recommends approval of the text amendment as modified.

Chairperson Ryan then opened the meeting for discussion among the Commissioners.

Commissioner Sweetser referenced the proposed conditions and asked why the Fire

Department review and approval condition is necessary as the IEPA already would do a

review. Mr. Heniff

Noted that there are a number of different chemicals associated with the dry cleaning

process and he wanted the Fire Department to have latitude and be a check and

balance in addition to the IEPA regulations.

Commissioner Olbrysh asked about the proposed signage. Mr. Paul noted that the unit

is at the westerly most portion of the building. They will have signage similar in nature to

Panda Express.

Commissioner Sweetser asked about the anticipated volume of the business and asked

if the petitioner was looking to do a drive-through facility as well. Mr. Paul stated that

they would like to do that but they have not looked at it in this particular case. He stated

that sometimes the site does not lend itself to it.

After due consideration of the petition and the testimony presented, the Plan

Commission found that the proposed amendment complies with the standards of the

Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, the Plan Commission, by a roll call vote of 5 to 0,

recommended to the Corporate Authorities, approval of the petition associated with PC

02-19, as amended as follows:

Sec. 155.412 B1 LIMITED NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING DISTRICT

REQUIREMENTS:

(14) Dry cleaning establishments for the cleaning and pressing of dry goods, as follows:

a) Receiving stations, processing to be done elsewhere.

b) Dry cleaning establishments, including processing, provided that all of the following

requirements are met:

1) That the dry cleaning use shall be a service retail use and shall not consist of the

processing of garments from other dry cleaning establishments.

2) That no more than one (1) dry cleaning machine is permitted.

3) That the dry cleaning process shall only use solvents approved by the Fire

Department.

4) That all activities associated with the dry cleaning establishment shall be operated per

the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency regulations.

It was moved by Commissioner Olbrysh, seconded by Commissioner Sweetser,

that this matter be recommended to the Corporate Authorities for approval. The

motion carried by the following vote:

Flint, Olbrysh, Sweetser, Zorn and Burke

Enactment No: Ordinance 5179 Text

Laura Sawicki, Equiva Services/Shell Oil, 904 South Roselle Road #342, Schaumburg,

IL presented the petition. She noted that Shell opened their station at the corner of

Routes 53 and 64 in April, 2002. She noted their request for conditional use approval

for outdoor sales of retail merchandise on the subject property. Ms. Sawicki described

the proposed outdoor sales layout, noting that there are five pump islands on site and

would like to alternate the proposed windshield washer rack and oil rack at each pump.

Shell is looking to make these products readily available for customer convenience. She

then noted the location of the soda racks at the end of the island and the propane

storage rack near the building that would be locked. In front of the store, two locked

cases for washer fluid or soda are proposed. Lastly, in the southeast corner of the lot, a

pallet area for mulch or firewood is proposed.

Jeb Bennett, Equiva Services/Shell Oil, sales consultant for the site reiterated the plan

and offered to answer any questions.

Chairperson Ryan then opened the meeting for public comment. No one to speak in

favor or against the petition.

William Heniff, Senior Planner, then presented the staff report. He noted the request

and the development history of the site. He noted that the proposed conditional use is

consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He noted that the site is surrounded by a wide

variety of non-residential uses and noted that Menard's also received conditional use

approval for outdoor sales.

He noted that the staff recommends approval of the petition, subject to conditions and

read them into the record. He did call out one condition relative to a light pole and utility

line conflict on the property. While this pertains to the original development, staff

thought it was appropriate to tie this issue to the proposed conditional use, as the

relocation of the light poles in the parking lot could impact the location of the outdoor

sales items.

Chairperson Ryan then opened the meeting for discussion among the Plan

Commissioners.

Commissioner Sweetser asked if the racks would be anchored, especially the propane

rack.

Mr. Bennett responded by stating that the propane rack is a heavy steel rack that is

against the side of building. He noted that when you have 16 to 20 full or empty tanks in

the rack, it is quite heavy. Chairperson Ryan asked if the other racks will be bolted to

ground. Mr. Bennett responded that they have not seen a need for that either in the

past, but they will bolt them if needed.

Commissioner Sweetser inquired about the outdoor display and the Village's ability to

monitor the outdoor sales as proposed. In response, Mr. Heniff noted that the

conditional use would be tied to the proposed plan. Any significant modification or

expansion of the outdoor sales would require an amendment to the approved conditional

use.

Commissioner Burke inquired about the portable skids proposed at the southeast corner

of the site and noted that the plans do not define the size. Mr. Bennett noted that mulch

or firewood would be stored on the pallets. He noted that up to eleven pallets could be

placed there, but they would make sure that it will not impede traffic.

Commissioner Burke stated that he was concerned about safety and aesthetics of

storage in front of building. Mr. Bennett stated that they could reduce the height and

they will not line the whole front of the store; they will find other places to put it. Upon

further discussion, the Commissioners suggested an amendment to the conditions to

make the review of the storage subject to the Director of Community Development.

1. That the outdoor sales and display of merchandise shall be in accordance with the

plans submitted as part of this request and shall adhere to the following provisions, and

shall be subject to the review of the Director of Community Development:

a. At least four feet of walkway should be maintained in front of the convenience store

building at all times.

b. Sales and display areas must not impact vehicular traffic. This includes automobiles,

tanker trucks and Fire Department apparatus.

c. Clear line of sight areas must be maintained.

d. Outdoor sales and display of merchandise must remain ancillary to the principal land

use of the establishment.

2. That the propane tanks be designed and located per Lombard Fire Department

regulations.

3. That the petitioner shall relocate the parking lot lighting conflict with the existing

watermain on the premises.