Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

GOOD EVENING. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR JULY 15, 2026 TO ORDER. BUT FIRST, I WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME OUR NEW COMMISSIONER, MCGOWAN. WELCOME. HAPPY TO HAVE YOU HERE. THANK YOU. ABSOLUTELY. SECRETARY WRIGHT, PLEASE CONDUCT A ROLL CALL.

ABU BEGGAR. PRESENT. BONZO.

HERE.

CASTIGNOLI.

HERE.

LANGENBAU.

HERE.

MCDANIEL. HERE. MCGOWAN.

HERE.

ROBINS.

HERE. THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS TONIGHT IS THE PUBLIC FORUM. DURING THE PUBLIC FORUM, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON ISSUES WHICH ARE NOT PART OF TONIGHT'S AGENDA. PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. ALSO, FOR THE SAKE OF ALL THOSE IN ATTENDANCE, PLEASE REFRAIN FROM CLAPPING OR SHOUTING OUT IN RESPONSE TO COMMENTS MADE BY ANY SPEAKER. SECRETARY WRIGHT, DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP UNDER PUBLIC FORUM?

NO ONE THIS EVENING.

ALL RIGHT, GREAT. OUR NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS. WE HAVE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS SCHEDULED FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING. FOR EACH HEARING, WE'LL BEGIN WITH THE STAFF PRESENTATION OR INTRODUCTION FOLLOWED BY THE PETITIONER'S PRESENTATION. WE WILL THEN TAKE PUBLIC TESTIMONY TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR FROM EACH PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK. PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS SPECIFIC TO THE REQUEST UNDER CONSIDERATION AND TRY TO AVOID REPETITIVE COMMENTS. ALSO, FOR THE SAKE OF ALL THOSE IN ATTENDANCE, PLEASE REFRAIN FROM CLAPPING OR SHOUTING OUT IN RESPONSE TO COMMENTS MADE BY ANY SPEAKER. Following all public testimony, the petitioner will provide closing remarks just prior to the closure of the public hearing. No further public testimony will be taken after the petitioner begins. Their closing remarks are during the Planning and Zoning Commission deliberations. I will now swear in any member of the public wishing to speak. Those who wish to provide public testimony, please stand up. Please raise your right hand and respond, I do, I swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth. All right, thank you. The first case on tonight's agenda is DEV-0033-2026. The public hearing is now open. Teresa Egner from staff will present the case.

THANK YOU, AND GOOD EVENING. THERESE EGNER, PLANNING SERVICES TEAM. DEV-0033-2026 IS A REQUEST FOR A MAJOR CHANGE TO THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PUBLIC SERVICE UTILITY TO GRANT A VARIANCE FOR AN 8-FOOT FENCE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WITH A COMMON ADDRESS OF 1800 SOUTH WASHINGTON STREET IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF WASHINGTON STREET, SOUTH OF 75th STREET. SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS GRANTED A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDING IN 1961. The approximately 14 acre property is improved with a wastewater pump station operations facility for the city of Naperville's Department of Public Utilities water and is zoned R1A low density single family residence district. Per the municipal code, open style fences four feet tall and height or less are permitted in the required front yard, closer to the front lot line than the principal building. THE PETITIONER, THE CITY OF NAPERVILLE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT AN EIGHT FOOT TALL PRIVACY FENCE STYLE FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD TO SCREEN A NEW GENERATOR FOR THE UTILITY FACILITIES. THE PETITIONER REQUESTS A VARIANCE TO LOCATE THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD AND IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE REQUEST IS REQUIRED TO AMEND THE EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE. PER THE PETITIONER, THE PROPOSED VARIANCE ALLOWS THE FACILITY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SCREENING AND SECURITY FOR CRITICAL EQUIPMENT. UTILITY FACILITIES ARE REQUIRED TO BE SCREENED WITH A FENCE OR LANDSCAPING WITH 75% OPACITY. THE PROPOSED FENCE COMPLIES WITH THIS REQUIREMENT. STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE REQUEST AS THE FENCE PROVIDES APPROPRIATE SCREENING AND SECURITY FOR THE GENERATOR. Staff from the Naperville's Department of Public Utilities Water is here to answer any questions. Staff now request you conduct the public hearing, and I will also be available for questions.

Great, thank you. Will the petitioner please approach the podium?

Hi, my name is Kellen Powers, and I'm a civil and environmental engineer with the Department of Public Utilities Water.

They do not have a presentation for tonight, but are available for any questions that you may have.

Okay, great. Thank you. All right. I'd like to hear from any of the members of the public present tonight to speak on this case. Secretary Wright, please call the first speaker.

No one signed up.

All right. Are there any other members of the public that would like to speak on this case that did not sign up? All right, I will start with any of the commissioners have any questions for staff or the petitioner or members of the public on this case? Oh, Commissioner Lonnie.

Thank you, Chair. I was just wondering if there were any renderings of where exactly the fence was going to be. I honestly couldn't figure it out from the agenda, like exactly where it was. I was down there. There's a chain link fence around one portion. I wasn't sure if that's where this fence was going to be or if it was more on the southern end of the entrance where there's an existing fence. So I was just wondering if there's any drawings of where it would be.

There are currently drawings. I don't have one with me at the moment, but we do have drawings by our consultant engineer who did the work. It would be basically pretty much in the center of the entranceway. The fence is just surrounding the generator itself and not really beyond that.

So there's a chain link fence right now. It looks like there might be other construction going on. Is that where it will be or is it? More or less that's where it would be, yes. Okay, great. Thank you.

All right. Any other commissioners?

Yes. So following up on Commissioner Loganbaugh's question, the planned fence will not fully replace all of the chain link fence that is on the frontage of Washington Street. Is that correct?

I'm not sure about the chain link fence that's currently there. I believe it might be there for construction that's currently happening. The privacy fence that will be put up will, I think, be the only fence that's there.

AND THEN FOLLOW-UP QUESTION ON THAT PRIVACY FENCE. THE NATURE OF THE FENCE, THE HEIGHT, MATERIALS AND OPACITY, DOES THAT CREATE ANY ISSUES CREATING SAY LIKE A BLIND DRIVEWAY OR IMPACTING TRAFFIC SITE LINES?

It shouldn't. There's only one driveway into the facility, and the fence is pretty far back from where the entrance to that driveway is, in my opinion. And it's far enough away from the traffic on Washington Street to really be an issue, in my opinion.

And I can also follow up on that. Our engineering team did review the proposal and did not have any comments on that.

Thank you. Any other commissioners? All right. Do you have any other closing remarks?

We at the Water Department just believe that it's important to have this privacy fence for maintaining good quality of water and wastewater within the system and think that it would be helpful for privacy and security purposes.

Thank you. All right. I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing for DEV-0033-2026.

So moved.

Can I have a second?

Second.

All right. All in favor, say aye. Aye. All right. Motion carries. Do any of the commissioners have any additional comments on this case before we move to close? All right. Commissioner Castagnoli, please read the motion.

I'd like to make a motion to adopt the findings of fact as presented by the petitioner. AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF DEV-0033-2026, A MAJOR CHANGE TO THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PUBLIC SERVICE UTILITY TO GRANT A VARIANCE FOR A FENCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18 SOUTH WASHINGTON, WASHINGTON STREET. THANK YOU.

GREAT. CAN I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL RIGHT. SECRETARY WRIGHT, PLEASE CONDUCT A ROLL CALL.

ABU-BAKER? I AGREE. BONZO? I AGREE. KOSTYG-NOLI?

I AGREE.

LANGENBACH? AGREE. McDaniel. I agree. McGowan.

I agree.

Robbins.

I agree.

And Wright, I agree with the motion. Motion passed.

Congratulations. The next case on tonight's agenda is DEV-0029-2026. The public hearing is now open. Anna Frank from staff will present the case.

Thank you and good evening. Anna Franco with the city's planning services team presenting on behalf of Sarah Kopinski. The subject property for DEV-0029-2026 consists of two lots located at the northwest corner of Main Street and Aurora Avenue and totals approximately 23,000 square feet in size. It is currently improved with two vacant buildings, which have most recently operated as a group home and a dental clinic. John Green Enterprises Inc. is the petitioner seeking to demolish the existing buildings and redevelop the site with an approximately 24,800 square foot office building with 25 parking spaces. TO DO SO, THEY REQUEST APPROVAL OF REZONING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO THE R2 SINGLE FAMILY AND LOW DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT FROM R2 TO TU, TRANSITIONAL USE DISTRICT, AND VARIANCES TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHTS, ALLOW A BUILDING THAT IS NOT RESIDENTIALLY STYLED, and reduce the parking lot setback along the alley. The petitioner also requests city council approval of a preliminary final plat of subdivision and to utilize the parking fee and lieu provision set forth in the code. The petitioner seeks to rezone the property to TU upon lot consolidation. The TU district is intended to serve as a mixed use transitional area between low density residential neighborhoods and more intensive uses such as the adjacent downtown core. The downtown 2030 plan recommends the future land use of the property to be transitional use, which accommodates office development. The proposed TU district and subsequent development of an office building is anticipated to support the surrounding area by bringing additional commerce to the downtown and improving a vacant site. Three variances are requested as part of this development. The petitioner seeks approval of a variance to increase the maximum building height from 35 feet to 43 feet, eight inches. In support of this request, the proposed building design incorporates architectural features that are compatible with surrounding developments and a recessed third story to minimize perceived building bulk. Staff finds the design provides a gradual transition from the residential areas located south of Aurora Avenue TO THE TALLER BUILDINGS LOCATED ALONG WATER STREET AND NOTES THAT THE PROPOSED HEIGHT IS GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE 40-FOOT HEIGHT RECOMMENDATION FOR TRANSITIONAL AREAS IN THE DOWNTOWN 2030 PLAN. THE PETITIONER ALSO SEEKS APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE TO PERMIT A BUILDING THAT IS NOT RESIDENTIALLY STYLED IN THE TU ZONING DISTRICT. THE PETITIONER HAS DESIGNED THE BUILDING TO FIT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE SURROUNDING AREA, INCLUDING INCORPORATING COLORS AND MATERIAL TYPES THAT REFERENCE THE WATER STREET DISTRICT AND OTHER DOWNTOWN BUILDINGS. STAFF NOTES THAT THE REQUIREMENT FOR BUILDINGS TO BE RESIDENTIALLY STYLED IN THE TU ZONING DISTRICT IS APPLICABLE TO ALL PROPERTY ZONE TU IN THE CITY. However, the downtown design guidelines recommend new buildings offer compatible interpretations of traditional building styles existing within the downtown area, particularly those along the same block. Staff finds it appropriate for the proposed building design to reference design components of surrounding commercial uses instead of residential buildings. Finally, the petitioner seeks approval of a variance to allow parking facilities to be located approximately three feet seven inches from the public alley in the rear of the property, rather than the required five feet. The proposed setback is an improvement over existing conditions and exceeds existing setbacks on other properties adjacent to this alley. Staff recognizes the benefits of adequate parking being provided downtown and also notes that the reduced setback does not bring the parking lot closer to any residential properties. Accordingly, staff is supportive of this request. Multiple letters of support have been received for the John Green Commercial Development, including letters from the Downtown Naperville Alliance and the Naperville Development Partnership. Tonight, staff recommends you conduct the public hearing and will remain available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Good evening, petitioner. Good evening.

Good evening, commissioners. I'm Vince Rosanova with the law firm of Rosanova and Whitaker on behalf of the petitioner, which is John Green, realtor. Also here this evening and available for any questions, we have Wendy Yaksich as well as Christine Noren with John Green. Also, we have both of our civil engineers, Madeline Larman and Stephanie Toms with Mackie Consultants. And the gentleman right here, Rob Costello, our architect with Torch Architecture. By way of background, Is this advancing here?

You have a magic touch.

Thank you. Outstanding. By way of background, I believe everyone here is familiar with John Green, an award-winning, locally-owned brokerage that's been serving Naperville since 1976. I know the entire John Green team is proud to have been part of the community since their inception, and this year they're celebrating their 50th anniversary. Currently, John Green's main corporate office is located right on 59. This serves as their hub for South Naperville, as well as their offices. for the folks they serve throughout Plainfield, Oswego, Aurora, and beyond. So the intention for this evening is the building that we'll discuss is additive and not a replacement of the Route 59 building. The intention is that building will continue to serve South Naperville, and this will be an opportunity for John Green Brokers to have a space in the downtown. So looking at the subject property, it's comprised of two separate lots, which comprise 23,000 square feet. The first property, located to the west, is 115 Aurora Avenue. In the past, this was used for residential purposes. It's now vacant. The building is past its useful life. The other building, which is on the corner of Main Street and Aurora Avenue, used to be used as a dental clinic, and at this point, that's also vacant. The two properties together really provide an opportunity for a significant investment in the downtown and the opportunity to really PROVIDE A BUILDING THAT SERVES AN AESTHETIC IMPACT AND COMPLEMENTS THE DOWNTOWN ECONOMY. WITH RESPECT TO THE SURROUNDING AREA, A LOT OF POSITIVE THINGS HAVE HAPPENED IN THE LAST 10 TO 15 YEARS, REALLY CHANGING THE CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. WORTH NOTING IS WE HAVE THE WATER STREET DISTRICT TO THE NORTH, A DESTINATION, SOMETHING WE'RE ALL VERY PROUD OF. B4 DOWNTOWN CORE ZONING, WHICH IS THE HIGHEST INTENSITY YOU CAN GET IN THE DOWNTOWN. WE HAVE SHOPS, WE HAVE RESTAURANTS, first-class hotel, as well as a 520-space municipal parking deck. To the east is the Walgreens site, J.C. Licht AT&T, also zoned B4, also the highest-intensity downtown core zoning. Then to the south of Aurora Avenue, we've seen a lot of positive progress. We have Dr. Joe's dental office right across the street. Then we have a single-family home. And then Charleston Row, the Row homes have been complementing the south side of Aurora Avenue, really setting that residential edge and providing for attractive French country architecture. To the west, as we transition, it's important to point out that the petitioner owns the lot immediately to the west, which is not part of this proposal. Then we have an attractive financial planning firm, Raymond James, all the way down to the corner, which is a surface lot for Water Street and then City Hall here. So the point of this is it's certainly a, TRANSITIONAL AREA, AN AREA THAT HAS BEEN GREATLY IMPROVED OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS, AND SOME OF THE CONSTRAINTS THAT IT FACED 10, 15 YEARS AGO HAVE CHANGED. WITH REGARD TO THE CITY'S FORWARD PLANNING DOCUMENTS, BOTH THE 2030 DOWNTOWN PLAN AND THE 22 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IDENTIFY THIS PROPERTY AS TRANSITIONAL, AS IT BRIDGES FROM THE SOUTH, FROM THE RESIDENTIAL AND THE OFFICE TO THE HIGH INTENSITY OF THE DOWNTOWN CORE. And both plans also note that this is a very appropriate location for office. So accordingly, John Green is requesting a rezoning to TU consistent with those guiding documents. Next slide here is one I put together just to show how this site, the building orientation, fits within the context of the surrounding area. This site plan overlay shows that. First, I'd like to point out how the building is oriented towards Aurora Avenue. with the parking in the rear of the building. Then you have the best positive aesthetic impact with the building, the streetscape, the architecture visible from Aurora Avenue, which matches the case all on the north side and south side of Aurora Avenue, where the parking is all in the rear of the building. In our case, adjacent to the 520 parking space municipal deck, which is really optimal. Zooming into the site plan, as Anna pointed out, approaching 25,000 square feet, the office building, that actually generates a low floor area ratio of only about 1.1. We have a 25,000 square foot office building on approximately 23,000 square feet. To put it in context, the adjacent Mosier building, home to Busey Bank, is an FAR more than double at 2.28. Also, we have 25 spaces on site to serve the building. Primary access will be from the parking lot on the north side of the building, but we've also incorporated in pedestrian access from the front of the building along Aurora Avenue to really enhance connectivity. I'll talk a little bit here in a minute about streetscapes and landscaping, but I'll also point out that we meet and exceed all TU setback requirements. In fact, to the south, You can see the significant distances between the single-family home, the dental office, as well as Charleston Row 1 and 2, which range from about 120 to about 145 feet, mitigating any impact of this building on the surrounding area. Right now, these properties have a view of the back of the Water Street parking deck. Architecture was certainly very important, a consideration early on, really a few different objectives here. to blend into the surrounding area, complement the surrounding area, stay consistent to the forms and the trend of development, but also complement the John Green brand. Torch did a wonderful job of that, achieving all those objectives. If you look at the lower left on the screen here, you can see that the building from Aurora Avenue is actually two stories with a rooftop terrace. That's because there's significant grade change between Aurora Avenue To the south of the property, it falls off about seven or eight feet. So then from the view from the Water Street parking deck up to the back of the building, it appears to be three stories with a rooftop terrace. Here's some perspectives, which are very helpful. Here's a perspective if you were going to be standing in the alley looking towards the rear of the building. Certainly you could see the quality materials, over 60% masonry, large windows, vertical columns to match the Water Street forms. the setback rooftop terrace, very attractive as well. And then here's a perspective if you were gonna be standing on Main Street and Aurora Avenue, where you could see the two stories, you could see the same masonry materials, large window openings, glass rooftop terrace, very attractive as it transitions from Aurora Avenue into the downtown. Height is certainly always an important consideration. So from Aurora Avenue, the top rendering here, TO THE TOP OF THE SECOND STORY IS APPROXIMATELY 28 FEET. TO THE VERY TOP OF THE ROOFTOP TERRACE IS ABOUT 43 FEET. FROM THE ALLEY, IT'S ABOUT 35 FEET TO THE TOP OF THE THIRD STORY AND ABOUT 47 FEET TO THE TOP OF THE ROOFTOP TERRACE. WE PUT THIS SLIDE TOGETHER SO WE CAN LOOK AT EVERYTHING IN CONTEXT. is approaching 44 feet. Immediately to the north is Water Street, 65 feet, 20 feet taller. Mosier Building, occupied by Busey Bank, about 48 feet, so once again, taller. Walgreens to the east before zoning, if that were to redevelop, that would be permitted 60 feet by right. Immediately to the west is a property that's owned OCI that's permitted 43 feet by right. And then on the south side of Aurora Avenue, The property, the single-family home in the dental office, zoned R2, 40 feet by right, and then the Charleston rows are 44 feet and 46 feet, respectively. So ultimately, as you see here, we're very much consistent, and in many, many cases, lower than the surrounding properties. Also helping the situation is the fact that there's a topographical change from south to north. The dental office across the street sits at a 685 elevation, whereas we sit at 682. So not only are we consistent with the height, but we sit at a lower elevation. Landscaping certainly is going to go a long way to complement the overall aesthetic. You could see the foundation plantings, the planter beds, as well as the heavy landscaping around the parking lot, as well as landscape islands in the parking lot to break up the pavement. which don't exist today, very nice feature. We're also very excited about the streetscape. Right now, the streetscape on Aurora Avenue, Main Street is nondescript, we'll call it. With this development, there'll be along Aurora Avenue, a soldier course, brick from the back of curb, then some sidewalk, then some beautiful planters at the front facade. And then all the way down Main Street is going to be soldier course, planter beds, as well as an eight foot sidewalk from the planter bed to the facade. Very similar to what you would see as you head further north down Main Street, keeping consistent with the city's vision for a complimentary unified streetscape. Access is from the alley where it should be, where it serves this development and also serves the Water Street parking deck. We designed two access points that circulate very well. 26-foot-wide drive aisles inside. We ran all the engineering auto turns to make sure that all truck, car, suburban ambulance equipment can function and get in and out of the site. So that circulates very well. It was always the intention that this building be served from the public alley, just like every other home in Water Street to the north. There's just a fantastic synergy with the parking. Certainly providing 25 spaces on site is excellent, but also the Water Street parking deck with 520 spaces is adjacent. The synergy there is fantastic. Typically, we see that the parking decks in our downtown are at the highest capacity nights, weekends, lowest capacity during the working day. Our office workers are typically on site from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., 5.30 or 6 p.m. GO HOME AND THEN YOU TYPICALLY SEE THE INFLUX OF PATRONS TO THE RESTAURANTS AND THE RETAILERS AFTER THAT. SO THE SYNERGY IS EXCELLENT. ALSO ALL THE WATER STREET PARKING DATA IS AVAILABLE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE. WATER STREET IS ONE OF THE MORE OUR DECKS ARE VERY WELL UTILIZED BUT WATER STREET IS ONE OF THE LEAST UTILIZED DECKS OVERALL. SO WORKING TOWARDS THE END HERE WE KNOW THAT THIS BUILDING really creates a significant aesthetic improvement. It really fires on all cylinders, brings a lot of great benefits to the community, certainly enhances the real estate tax base. Property taxes creates local spending. But one thing that's very important to the DNA is bringing spenders, consumers, down into the downtown during the day to support the restaurants, retailers, at generally off-peak times during the working day, lunchtime. So that's very important. That's always been an objective. John Green, being in the community for 50 years, they intended this from day one to be a collaborative process, which it has been. They met with all their adjacent neighbors. They had a public open house, met with the Naperville settlement. They also met with stakeholders as well as the DNA and the NDP. Certainly very thankful for the support we've received to date. We also appreciate your time this evening, and we're available for questions.

Thank you. I appreciate it. I would like to hear from any members of the public present tonight to speak on this case. Secretary Wright, please call the first speaker.

Toby Hager.

A lot of light I'll be saving on my electric bill. Of course, where I live, of course, I'm not going to like this project. Every time there's a change in the area, my quality of life is negatively impacted. I'm either inconvenienced or intruded upon. The petitioner is looking for several exceptions to the zoning, and I'll let you decide how close you want to stick to the zoning that applies to this building. What I'm here to talk about is the alley access. When they do the redevelopment, they will be narrowing the driveway to the alley at Main Street. Keep in mind, this is a very busy alley, has a lot of activity, and it sits onto a busy street. When 405 Main Street came in to be rezoned from R2 to R2G, home to office, there was a lot of discussion at the time about the parking lot and the alley access. In fact, Peg Price, mayor at the time, was very adamant that they remove one parking space. And that's exactly what they did. And if you go and look at it, you can see what they did. I recommend that when you make the motion to approve this rezoning, that you include in the motion that the configuration of the alley Remain as it is at present. Thank you. Is there any questions?

No, thank you so much. All right. Are there any other members of the public that would like to speak on this case?

No one else signed up.

All right. Let's move to the commissioners. I will start with Commissioner McGowan. Do you have any questions? All right. Castaneda?

No, I just want to say it's a beautiful project. I THINK IT WOULD BE A GREAT ADDITION TO OUR DOWNTOWN.

I GUESS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR MAYBE EVEN THE PETITIONER. THE SPEAKER A MOMENT AGO HAD MENTIONED CONCERNS SURROUNDING THE ALLEY. IS THAT SOMETHING YOU COULD SPEAK TO?

KATIE RUBUSH WITH ENGINEERING. EVALUATING THAT CONCERN DURING THE DESIGN, WE ASKED THE PETITIONER TO MAKE SURE THAT NOT ONLY COULD EMERGENCY ACCESS PROPERLY ACCESS THE ALLEY, BUT ALSO THAT AN SUV COULD TURN BOTH IN AND OUT WITHOUT ENCROACHING INTO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ALLEY. SO IF A CAR IS WAITING TO EXIT THE ALLEY, A CAR CAN SAFELY ENTER THE ALLEY AND VICE VERSA.

Okay, I understand. Do you mind if I ask you a question? So you live over there, right? I'll wait for you. What is your concern specifically surrounding the width of the...

I'm sorry?

What is your concern specifically surrounding the narrowing of the alleyway?

I meant to say when I was speaking before that, of course, What's being proposed meets the standards, but narrowing it makes the access a little more difficult. I mean, it's still doable, but as I said, it's a very busy street with a lot of activity. The other day when I was walking downtown, there were three cars that went into the alley, two from the south, one from the north, and a city pickup truck was parked in the alley. So that extra space was a... very usable in order to handle what was going on at that particular moment. And I think they made a wise decision when they redeveloped that corner property that they made it wider because there's a lot of traffic that was going through it then. And now there will be even more considering you got the parking deck. And I think this would be only empirical that people go out the Main Street end rather than the Webster Street. When I go through the alley, I find exiting on Webster a little difficult. Visibility's not as good. So I just think it's important to maintain that extra space. If you look across the street at Walgreens, their driveway into the property is even wider. So there is an argument for that. And you could compare it with some of the other alley entrances, like the one north of Jefferson on Main. Thank you very much.

Thank you. All right.

Okay. Commissioner Longenbaugh.

Thank you.

Thank you for the presentations and happy birthday, Mr. Rossanova. Just following up with this, can you show on the map where this parking configuration issue is? I just want to see like where that's.

Absolutely. I'll give this another. All right. So, and here's our civil engineer, Madeline Larman. So if you could see my cursor here, right here, we're proposing 20 feet width. And as you travel further to the west, it's approximately the same 20 feet. At this location here, a couple things that we could point out, and Madeline will go into much better detailed analysis, but to Toby's point, we could certainly look at maybe softening this radius here to give a little more room for that right turn, certainly always wanting to be collaborative. Katie was very accurate as far as to engineering and staff's input early on. So one of the things that they wanted to see day one was an auto turn. How do these turning movements look? Do they meet our standards? Is there going to be a conflict? Could you pull a suburban, a delivery truck? So Madeline and her team ran these auto turns. And they meet those standards. But that's not to say we can't look and see if we could soften that radius to give a little more room. Fun fact, this alley at 20 foot generally width serves the 520 space parking deck very well. And then even here at City Hall, your main drive aisle serving your parking deck here on the second floor I measured it today, 19.8. So maybe my Apple phone was a little off, so we'll call it 20, but very similar.

Okay, thank you.

Hi, I'm Madeline Larman with Mackie Consultants. I think Vince did summarize it well. What you see up here is the fire truck auto turn, which is kind of the gold standard because no one's going to be turning more cumbersomely than than a fire truck, which we do show that it does work with the current radius and the current 20 foot width. It does open up to 22 feet just past the radius for the majority of the alley. because we had that flexibility. And there just is a pinch caused by Busey Bank right at the entrance. But we moved our infrastructure as far south as possible and are dedicating that easement. Vince is correct that we could keep the same amount of parking and soften that radius as necessary. What Toby was referring to as an existing condition, It might feel like it is the alley right now, but that's all on private property. And it is a very wide sweeping curve, which actually tends to be sometimes a little unsafe if people are feeling like they can really turn quickly or turn around someone, for example, versus having to stop at the alley, at the crosswalk. And that's why sometimes they do actually advise you to keep the radiuses a little tighter. So we're kind of talking about two different topics there, congestion versus safety.

OK, THANK YOU. YEAH, I'M HAPPY WITH THE DUE DILIGENCE THAT YOU'VE DONE ON THIS. SO THANK YOU FOR THE EXPLANATION AND SHOWING IT ON THE SCREEN. MY SECOND QUESTION IS FOR STAFF. BASICALLY, I'M JUST KIND OF TRYING TO SQUARE THE CIRCLE BETWEEN YOU KNOW, THE LANGUAGE IN THE AGENDA, THE DOWNTOWN 2030 PLAN, AND THEN JUST CODE. AND SO MY ONE QUESTION IS THAT YOU SUPPORT TU AS BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE DOWNTOWN 2030 PLAN, Given that they're asking for two variances, which go totally against the plan, I'm just wondering if you could just give us a brief explanation of how that variance process works, especially for the TU design standards, and that against the broader code, just so that we kind of have a better understanding for that.

Absolutely. So the TU zoning district uniquely requires new buildings or building additions be residentially styled, compatible with the character of the adjacent residential neighborhood, and comply with the design standards for transitional use areas in the downtown design guidelines. For those TU properties where the residential styling may be less appropriate, such as the current request, THE CODE DOES PROVIDE THE PETITIONER WITH THE ABILITY TO SEEK A VARIANCE FROM THIS REQUIREMENT FROM THE PCC OR CITY COUNCIL. THE BENEFIT TO THE VARIANCE PROCESS IS THAT WE CAN, THE PCC CAN REVIEW IT ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE SPECIFICS OF THE REQUEST UNDER THE CONSIDERATION INCLUDING SURROUNDING USES and the design. So like other variances that would be requested in other zones, a TU zone, like setbacks, heights, the variance is reviewed by the PZC. The PZC provides a recommendation to the city council and the city council approves or denies the request. Does that answer your question?

It does. Thank you so much. Thanks.

All right. Commissioner Abubaker.

Thank you once again for the wonderful presentation. I've got a question. It's a 25,000 square feet building, and depending very much on the public parking spaces as well for parking. So as the city has continued to redouble up, how confident do you feel that the parking you have, which I believe is 25 parking spots, right, is going to be sufficient without overburdening the neighborhood or spilling into the neighborhood?

This is something that we took a very hard look at. Most of the time when you see a redevelopment in the downtown, especially adjacent to the B4 downtown core, you actually see no parking spaces provided. So in this case, to provide 25 spaces on site, that's going to go to solve the lion's share of the need. But then when our brokers are here, our visitors are here, that's typically during the workday. and that's when Water Street Deck is at its least utilized. So that synergy really, in our estimation, is optimal, and all that data is also on the city's website, which they publish. Certainly, if we were going to be bringing in these additional patrons at 8 o'clock on a Friday night, I wouldn't be sitting here saying this, or a Saturday at 4, but it's much different when you look at the hours of operation.

Thank you. Thank you.

All right, Commissioner Bansal.

Just a comment. Redeveloping a vacant property is always a great idea, and I think this is a very well-positioned property. So thank you for the presentation, and happy birthday.

Thank you.

COMMISSIONER WRIGHT. DON'T GO TOO FAR, VINCE. GREAT PRESENTATION. YOU ANSWERED ALL TEN OF MY QUESTIONS, SO I APPRECIATE THAT. ONE THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND MAYBE FOR ALL THE COMMISSIONERS, COULD YOU TALK ABOUT OR MAYBE THE JOHN GREEN REP COULD TALK ABOUT HOW THIS BUILDING IS GOING TO BE USED? HOW MANY OFFICES ARE THERE IN THERE? DURING THE DAY, IS IT 25 OFFICE AND STAFF? WILL IT BE 50? JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THE VOLUME IN THE BUILDING.

ABSOLUTELY. John Green's vice president of operation Good evening.

Yeah, I can answer that for you We at this point anticipate that John Green realtor and John Green commercial will be the anchor tenants of the building John Green realtor right now is intended as we're looking at it everything is preliminary at this point we're looking at John Green realtor being in the lower level and In that space, we anticipate there would be drop-in facilities for our brokers, as well as some flex space, some client meeting space, and then two to three staff members that would work out of that specific location. John Green Commercial would be on the upper floors, either the second floor or the roof deck. That would be, again, some flex space, some client meeting space, and then room for about eight to 10. people who would be either executive offices or brokers who would be working out of that space. The balance really is, the way we operate is a little bit different than a traditional office. We have about 180 independent contractors who are brokers who work across all of our offices in Naperville, Oswego, Plainfield, and North Aurora. So this would be a drop-in space if they happen to be working in this area, but very few of them would work on a daily basis in the office.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I THINK THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT POINT TO NOTE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S MORE OF A TRANSITION SPACE. YOU DON'T ANTICIPATE CARS STAYING THERE EIGHT HOURS A DAY. IT'LL BE A LOT OF TRANSITIONING IN AND OUT. SO I APPRECIATE THAT EXPLANATION. THANK YOU. SURE.

ALRIGHT. ALSO, I WANTED TO ASK OUR STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS TONIGHT? NO QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. And Commissioner McDaniel, you had one more?

One last question, sir. As we all know, downtown Naperville always has a need for parking. I guess my question is, what are your plans with this space after business hours? Do you plan to maybe lease it out? Do you plan to block it off for people trying to park there, like me?

Absolutely. And we see that all throughout the downtown. For instance, my former office was a couple doors down on Aurora Avenue. And one very viable solution, which I think helps everybody, which I think John Green will look at, I looked at it, is allowing the valet to use the parking lot. after hours because it serves two purposes. One, it helps the valet alleviate the parking burden in the downtown. But having, I'll say his name, Jimmy, who has all the valet, having him supervise a lot at night also addresses public safety. So that's something that I'm sure we'll be looking at.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Great. Any other commissioners? Any additional questions? Comments? I THINK EVERYTHING I HAD TO ASK HAS BEEN ADDRESSED, SO I APPRECIATE THAT. I WILL SAY I REALLY APPRECIATE THE DUE DILIGENCE ON THE ENTIRE PROJECT. I KNOW THIS IS NOT THE FIRST GO AROUND WITH THIS, SO I DO APPRECIATE YOU LISTENING TO STAFF AND THE SUGGESTIONS AND MAKING THOSE CHANGES. That goes a long way. On top of it, the letters of recommendation, those mean a lot to all of us. It screams that the community is welcoming this, and I think that it's a beautiful project, and I think it goes well with everything else that has gone on over there. So I appreciate that tonight. Thank you. Would you like to make any closing remarks? All right. I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing for DEV-0029-2026. So moved. Can I have a second? Second. All right. Motion carries. Do any of the commissioners have any comments on the case before we go to reading the motion? Commissioner Longenbaugh.

Thank you. Just wanna say the reason why I asked my question earlier was because this building is literally in the downtown 2030 plan as the poster child for what a transitional use residentially styled building is. And we're now being asked, they're going to be tearing it down. So that was the reason why I asked that. And so I appreciate, you know, staff, your deliberate approach to this and looking at it at a case-by-case basis. So I just think that was important to be said, how you are just protecting the transitional nature of this corridor. So that said, I am in favor of this and I will be voting in support. So thank you.

All right. Commissioner Abu-Baker. Or wait, does anyone else? We're quick.

Very excited. Fantastic building. I think it's going to be a great addition. John Green has been in Naperville for 50 years, so it's going to be a wonderful new addition.

Anyone else? All right. Commissioner Abu-Baker, please read the motion.

Thank you. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE FINDINGS OF FACT AS PRESENTED BY THE PETITIONER AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF DEV-0029-2026, REZONING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM R2 TO TU AND VARIANCES TO THE NAPAVILLE MUNICIPAL COURT'S HEIGHT, BUILDING DESIGN AND PARKING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 115 AURORA AVENUE AND 405 SOUTH MAIN STREET FOR JOHN GREEN COMMERCIAL.

Can I have a second? Second. All right. Secretary Wright, please conduct a roll call.

Abu Becker. I agree. Bonzo. I agree. Castagnoli.

I agree.

Langenbaugh. I agree. McDaniel.

I agree.

McGowan.

I agree.

Robbins.

I agree.

And Wright. I agree. Motion passes 8-0. All right.

Congratulations. Thank you. All right, next is the approval of the minutes of June 17th, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Do we have any corrections to the minutes? We do not. I would like to entertain a motion to approve the minutes of June 17th, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.

So moved.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE.

MOTION CARRIES. THERE'S NO OLD BUSINESS. AND ON THE NEW BUSINESS, I WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT OUR STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE WITH A CERTIFICATE FOR HER TIME, ZARA. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY, OF ALL THE COMMISSIONS AND ALL THE TIMES I'VE SPENT WITH INTERNS, BOTH OF YOU HAVE BEEN PHENOMENAL. I REALLY APPRECIATED THE QUESTIONS AND THE TIME. SO THANK YOU. AND I WILL HAND YOU THIS. I will hand this over if you could pass that to Zahra. All right. So now I will entertain a motion to adjourn the meeting.

So moved.

Second. All right. All in favor say aye. Aye. Meeting adjourned. Thank you.