Loading...
2006-05-17 - Plan Commission - Minutes Board or Commission: ❑ Plan commission Document Type: ❑A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 05/17/2006 Type of Meeting: PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION May 17, 2006 Child day care home in the R-6A District, 619 Cobblestone Lane Chairman Ottenheimer called the hearing to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Village Council Chambers, Buffalo Grove Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Chairman Ottenheimer read the Notice of Public Hearing as published in the Buffalo Grove Daily Herald, explained the procedure to be followed for the public hearing and swore in all persons who wished to give testimony. Commissioners present: Chairman Ottenheimer Mr. Khan Mr. Stark Mr. Cohn Mr. Podber Commissioners absent: Mr. Smith Ms. Bocek Ms. Kenski-Sroka Mr. Teplinsky Also present: Ms. Marina Meltser Mr. Vladimir Meltser Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner The following exhibits were presented by the petitioner at the public hearing: Exhibit 1: Memorandum from Mr. Pfeil to the Plan Commission dated May 12, 2006 Ms. Marina Meltser stated she has resided in her home for 12 years. She stated she has a degree in special education in pre-school and early school education from her country as well as an Associates Degree from Truman College. She stated she is an experienced teacher who has worked with children for over 30 years. She noted her children have now moved out of her home and she finds she has the space in her home for day care. Ms. Meltser stated she has had an inspection from the Village and there are a few things to be done around the house and yard. She stated there is a small part of a fence that needs to be added to her yard and an additional alarm. She noted everything listed by the Village has been completed now and the fence will be finished next week. Ms. Meltser stated she plans to have no more than five children in the day care center. Operating hours will be from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. As parents drop off the kids they can park in her driveway. Children will have homemade food and programs will include reading, math, dancing, and singing to prepare them for school. Mr. Meltser stated his wife currently has a day care center with a license in Ingleside. She now wants to transfer this license to Buffalo Grove. Ms. Meltser stated she has had special education classes from DCSF on how to take care of kids which also includes children with special needs. She further noted she also has had classes from the Buffalo Grove Fire Department in CPR. Chairman Ottenheimer reviewed the Special Use criteria required to be met. Ms. Meltser stated the children will not be outside earlier than about 11:00 a.m. to noon and then 3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. She noted parking in her driveway will be available for drop-offs. 1. Ms. Meltser stated they will not disturb anyone when quiet is required. There will be no screaming from the kids or disturbance to the neighbors. 2. Ms. Meltser noted they have friends who live around the area so they would not disturb or cross anyone else's property. 3. Ms. Meltser stated they will not destroy anything and the children will only be in her yard where they have set up a nice playground. She also noted there will be no changes to the house. 4. Ms. Meltser stated she plans to use only the inside of the house on the first floor and when they are outside in the yard they will be only in the fenced portion of the back. 5. Ms. Meltser stated she is using all existing facilities in her structure. 6. Ms. Meltser stated she will use only her driveway parking. Chairman Ottenheimer asked if all children arrive at the same time. Ms. Meltser stated children arrive at various times between 8:00 to 8:30 or 9:00 a.m. She noted that was her experience at her day care in Ingleside. She noted the parents never dropped off or picked up at the same time. Chairman Ottenheimer asked if Ms. Meltser was currently operating a day care. Ms. Meltser stated she now has three children. Chairman Ottenheimer asked about the DCFS license. Ms. Meltser stated she has the license from Lake County. Chairman Ottenheimer noted nine items to be taken care of per the health officer's inspection. Ms. Meltser stated all items have been done except for the fence which will be finished next week. Commissioner Stark stated he was confused about the Ingleside day care location. Ms. Meltser stated she operated the day care in Ingleside for two years and is now closing it. Commissioner Stark asked if she was currently provided day care for any children out of her Buffalo Grove residence now. Ms. Meltser stated no. Commissioner Stark asked if the neighbors had been consulted. Ms. Meltser stated she has not spoken to any of her neighbors. Commissioner Stark asked if she would refuse to have more than five children. Mr. Pfeil noted the DCFS license has a maximum of eight or less. Whatever the license has will be what the Buffalo Grove ordinance will stipulate. Commissioner Stark asked about traffic on Cobblestone during the morning and evening rush hours. Ms. Meltser stated she has never seen a problem. Commissioner Podber asked if there will be someone helping to watch the children in the house. Ms. Meltser stated yes. She stated there will be a lady who worked with her at Ingleside who is also approved by DCFS and is a professional teacher. Commissioner Podber asked where this person will park her car. Ms. Meltser stated she will park in the garage. Commissioner Podber asked about Ms. Meltser's special education degree. Ms. Meltser stated she has a Bachelor's Degree in early child development and pre-school and early school development from Russia. In addition she has 62 credit hours from Truman College. In addition she takes 16 hours every year for her license in child development, food preparation, etc. Commissioner Podber asked how long she plans on keeping the center in her home. Ms. Meltser stated she plans to it for at least 5-10 years. Commissioner Podber asked about the necessary fencing for the back yard. Ms. Meltser stated she has three sides of fencing already and only two small pieces are needed between the fence and her house. One small piece is needed on each side of the house. Mr. Mark Ross, 613 Cobblestone Ln., stated there are some objects on the side of the house that should be removed for the safety of the children and cleanliness of the neighborhood. He noted they have seen for a number of years a toilet bowl, stainless steel sink and a street sign. Chairman Ottenheimer stated those items were not on the inspection list as an item to be taken care of However, staff will make a note of this and pass it along to the health officer. Mr. Meltser noted that the items are there temporarily and there is no way any child could get to where the items are lodged. He stated he needs these items for his business. However, he will be removing these items within 10 days. Commissioner Khan asked how long the items have been on the side of the house. Mr. Ross stated approximately 10 years. Mr. Meltser stated he will remove the items tomorrow if it is bothering people. Commissioner Khan stated that 10 years is way too long and he will ask that the recommendation to the Board stated these items are to be removed within 30 days. Ms. Amy Handmaker, 610 Cobblestone Ln., stated she has seen children being dropped of at the residence this last week. Mr. Meltser stated his wife had stated they now have three kids which is the limit in the Village without a license. Commissioner Stark stated he was under the impression that the three kids were still at the Ingleside location. Chairman Ottenheimer stated he thought they were in Buffalo Grove. He noted the Ingleside location was brought up to show her experience. Mr. John Welker, 630 Cobblestone Ln., stated his concern with traffic now on the street. He stated there is a significant amount of traffic and there is no stop sign at the corner of Cobblestone and Fox Hill. Even though people drive decently, there is still a lot of traffic there and it should be addressed. Ms. Meltser stated that they will get rid of the items on the side of the yard. The children will be taught to be quiet and have respect for the neighbors. If there are any problems now or in the future anyone can always come to see her. There being no further comments or questions from anyone else present, Chairman Ottenheimer closed the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair Board or Commission: ❑ Plan Commission Document Type: 0 A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 05/17/2006 Type of Meeting: ❑ Regular Meeting REGULAR MEETING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION May 17, 2006 Child day care home in the R-6A District, 619 Cobblestone Lane Discussion of Village Comprehensive Plan—RTAP/TOD project Review of conceptual plans Chairman Ottenheimer called the meeting to order at 8:15 p.m. in the Village Council Chambers, Buffalo Grove Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Commissioners present: Chairman Ottenheimer Mr. Khan Mr. Stark Mr. Cohn Mr. Podber Commissioners absent: Mr. Smith Ms. Bocek Ms. Kenski-Sroka Mr. Teplinsky Also present: Ms. Marina Meltser Mr. Vladimir Meltser Mr. Barry Gore, Camiros Mr. William Brimm, Village Manager Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Cohn, seconded by Commissioner Khan to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of April 19, 2007. All Commissioners were in favor of the motion and motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Podber abstaining. COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS Commissioner Stark stated he attended the Village Board meeting on May 15, 2006 and stated the following items were discussed: 1. The public hearing on the annexation agreement of the Ward property and Prairie Road and Brockman. This item was continued until June 5, 2006. 2. Referral to the Plan Commission of a petition from the Buffalo Grove Park District for expansion of the Special Use in the Residential Estate District for the Buffalo Grove Health and Fitness facility in Busch Grove Community Park. CHILD DAY CARE HOME IN R-6A DISTRICT, 619 COBBLESTONE LANE Moved by Commissioner Cohn, seconded by Commission Khan to recommend approval to the Village Board of a special use to operate a child day care home at 619 Cobblestone Lane, a single-family detached home zoned in the R-6A Single Family Dwelling District, subject to: 1. Removal of items on the side of the house, and 2. Satisfying all conditions of the letter dated April 26, 2006 from Brian Sheehan, Village Health Officer Commissioner Podber asked what happens if the neighbor who appears to own the fence at the rear of the house were to remove the fence. He asked if the Meltsers would then be required to have a fence on their property. Mr. Raysa stated the fence does not have to be on the property and it is his opinion that if that fence was removed then the special use permitee would be required to put that fence up. Commissioner Podber asked if is necessary to make approval conditional upon the existence of a fence. Mr. Raysa noted the motion was made subject to Brian Sheehan's letter which says the yard has to be completely fenced which would part of the motion and approval. Mr. Pfeil stated it is one of the stated conditions of approval for any day care home. In the day care provisions under 17.28060.b.5.d it states, said area shall be enclosed by a fence at least four feet in height. Therefore, it is an explicit requirement of the day care operator to have a fenced rear yard. It is an affirmative obligation of the day care operator to keep a fence and protect the children. If that is not done for some reason the Village would address as soon as the Village became aware of the situation. Commissioner Podber stated he feels that the petitioner's desire to work with children is not be a part of the special use criteria. If someone love children and wants to facilitate their development there are plenty of places to do that. It does not mean that they need to do it in the neighborhood where other people live at their home. An individual desire to accomplish something or to fulfill their life does not fit into any one of the six categories. I find that whole part of the argument to be irrelevant. In terms of serving the public convenience, that would be a criteria that has not been shown. Commissioner Khan asked if the fence needs to be a solid fence or any kind of fence as it appears this fence is a chain link fence. Mr. Pfeil stated the ordinance addresses screening. If it is a chain link fence they will probably need to provide screening with landscape materials. Commissioner Khan noted that young children quite often climb chain link fences. Mr. Pfeil stated the Village does not mandate the type of fence. If it is a climbable fence the operator will need to be very diligent to protect the children. Children in the back yard need adult supervision at all times and that is part of the DCFS license as well as the Village's special use. Screening is required, but the intent is more to buffer the adjacent property than to protect the children. Commissioner Khan noted that he would like to add to the condition regarding the outside stored items. He stated he would like to make the condition more specific and moved that the material stored outside the house should be removed within 30 days within Village Board approval. Commissioner Cohn seconded the motion. Commissioner Cohn stated he feels that the petitioner has met the six criteria. He noted there are thousands of children in Buffalo Grove and people have all kinds of different options for day care. He stated they are meeting a public convenience by providing that to the community. They do not have a situation here where there are neighbors who are screaming about this and seem to have a nice relationship so that they would be able to work with them. The traffic issue is manageable and they have met all of the criteria. As far as the desire to work with children and love of children, which may not be a criteria but is nice. Chairman Ottenheimer called for a vote on the motion and the vote was as follows: AYES: Khan, Stark, Cohn, Podber, Ottenheimer NAPES: None ABSENT: Smith, Bocek, Kenski-Sroka, Teplinsky ABSTAIN: None The motion passed 5-0. DISCUSSION OF VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN—RTAP/TOD PROJECT—REVIEW OF CONCEPTUAL PLANS Mr. William Brimm stated they have had additional steering committee meetings since the last time Mr. Gore presented plans at which comments of staff and the Plan Commission were presented and worked into tonight's concept plans. He stated they would like to get additional comments and direction from the Plan Commission tonight to continue on with the work. Mr. Gore stated they have created two concept plans for each of the station areas being looked at in the study. Last time we went through the existing conditions which we have taken and reviewed especially with regards to the opportunities and restraints. Mr. Gore reviewed the Buffalo Grove station noting there is a pattern that develops along the south side of Deerfield Parkway. The concrete erector site is a prime opportunity for redevelopment and indeed is for sale now. He stated they are looking at that site as an opportunity to create multi-family residential. The transit area development is all about getting as many people as possible within walking distance of the train station which is the most important aspect of transit oriented development. The other big part is to improve the pedestrian environment. During their discussion with the property owners, the Commerce Court Center is something that they must keep trying to lease and they are just looking for the highest and most profitable use of the land. This is a good opportunity to redevelop into multi-family. This does not have to happen right away or they may like the idea and consider the plan. Mr. Gore noted point #4 on concept A is a plan for direct pedestrian access from residential areas. He reviewed the areas they feel would be the best points where people could access the train station. The owner is amenable to this idea. He further noted that in talking about pedestrian enhancements they are including not just a sidewalk but lighting and things of that sort. Mr. Gore stated point #6 on concept A is to redevelop MI Group property to a retail shopping center. The MI Group has potential to be redeveloped. None of these buildings have anything special about them. Mr. Gore stated in concept B they are doing something different with the retail on the west of the tracks. The big problem is the Com Ed power line and will take careful design. However, there are already some residential units adjacent to the power lines. Mr. Gore stated that on concept A they are looking at leaving the PACE facility where it is but on concept B the idea of moving the transit center to the east side of the tracks came up. He noted they have PACE representatives on the steering committee and they are very interested in this idea. Mr. Gore stated in concept A they looked at developing convenience retail right next to the railroad tracks, although they would have to get rid or the parking lot. Seeing as how Com Ed is already letting us park underneath their wires, they think more parking can be fit in to the north and the south of the power substation and more than make up for the loss of parking spaces if retail is developed. Mr. Gore stated east of the tracks they are just looking to completing the business park as it has developed over the last 20 years. They looked at getting access to the east side of the tracks and are working with the railroad on that. This concept is really promoting transit oriented development west of the tracks as much as they can. But east of the tracks it is pretty much just finishing off the business park. Mr. Gore noted the biggest constraint to doing anything else on the east side is the covenant on the business park. Mr. Gore stated concept B is more complicated. Point #6 states "move PACE facility to new transit center on the east side of the tracks." That is currently Siemen's parking lot and what they would like to do is more the PACE facility to the east side of the tracks, have a bus dropoff station next to the train station and then have some way to get a stairwell with a lift that would bring you up to the level of the Metra platform and also potentially look at a tunnel underneath it. Putting a tunnel there is a possibility. That allows them to look at the whole property that is owned by PACE now as a redevelopment for a shopping center right next to the railroad tracks. The key to making the retail work is in keeping it as close as possible to the platform and the parking lot. Mr. Gore noted that parcel H on plan B includes the building that is currently vacant as potential for redevelopment and parcel G which is vacant now could be mixed use complex that would include office, some residential, some retail and perhaps an entertainment component. Knowing that we have retail already on the west side of the track we must be aware of what the market is and how much retail can actually be filled. Mr. Gore reviewed some slides of redevelopment units being constructed in other communities and the possibilities of redevelopment here along those lines. Commissioner Stark noted that the very close in parking is always desirable and putting parking further away from the tracks may not be desirable. Mr. Gore stated it is a tradeoff because we would like the retail as close as possible to the tracks. This really goes to the heart of transit oriented development because it is a question of whether you want to make a place or just have a parking lot. Commissioner Cohn states he would rather have a place and walk an extra 100 feet. He feels that most people would give up their parking space right next to the track to have some better stuff at the train station. He noted there are certain parking demands for people who have a physical need to be close and they need to be accommodated. But for those who are able to walk it is fine to park 100 feet away. Commissioner Stark noted that commuters would not be able to park at the retail shopping center because it is just for patrons of the retail. He feels that would alienate people by saying why people not using the train get to park closer. Mr. Gore stated they need to give that some more thought. [Chairman Ottenheimer left the meeting at 9:00 p.m. ] Mr. Gore further reviewed the site plan and discussed various street connections and traffic signals. Commissioner Khan asked where Siemens picks up and drops off at the station. Mr. Brimm stated there is a drop off right at the station. Mr. Gore stated it will be a tough sell for Siemens to allow public access onto their property. However, comments at the steering committee they are not necessarily going to be against that. One of the advantages is that they would have direct access and they could stop running that shuttle. Mr. Brimm stated they have started some correspondence with the Canadian National Railway about allowing us to have a stairway or ramp from the east side of the embankment. He noted he believes that the concept of an underground tunnel will be very problematic because there are some severe utility conflicts there and there is also a major fuel pipeline that runs from Green Bay all the way down to O'Hare Airport. The grade on the east side is significantly different from the grade on the west side and the tunnel would have to go pretty deep to address the weight issue. Commissioner Cohn brought up the issue that when the north central line was developed and expanded service they produced a schedule that did not accommodate people well. What has happened is that many people who were excited about Metra expanding service became disappointed and stopped using the north central line. Metra is currently working on developing a new schedule. This is very relevant because the concept of transit oriented development requires that there be a lot of people using the train. One of the things that is necessary to do that is to have a schedule that gets a lot of people on the train and use of the station. It is a very important issue and he is confident Metra will address this issue with the politicians who spoke to them about it. Commissioner Cohn stated he would rather have more retail and residential development close to the tracks and have the parking a bit further away as has been discussed. He urged that we must have enough parking close to the development that is there so that people who want to drive to the retail establishments during the day are not relying on the Metra parking lot. The concept of having additional access points besides Commerce Court is a good one and he feels people will absolutely use that and signals will probably be necessary. Commissioner Cohn asked what the proposed retail area here will do to the retail areas of Creekside Commons and Highland Oaks which have had some vacancies for years. He stated he would hate to see businesses at these retail areas suffer from what is being done here. He stated he would rather see businesses there actually have more opportunity because of the development here. Mr. Gore stated they have heard from staff that they are trying to develop retail on Milwaukee Avenue. He stated he is very aware that they need to keep the amount of retail here really focused. He stated they will be talking to US Equities who will go through this plan again and look at the market. As far as competition goes retail comes and goes but he thinks the older retail is pretty solid just because of their location. Commissioner Cohn stated the covenant issues seems like a real problem and seems like it is the collective will of the community and its wants versus the business owners and their covenant. He stated he does not know to solve the problem but it also seems to be a problem along Milwaukee Avenue and we have to find a way to solve that because otherwise we will have 42,000 people not getting what they want by covenant. Commissioner Cohn stated he likes concept B because it makes a lot of sense. It presents a lot of challenges but it is a great concept and should see that in a bigger picture. [Commissioner Podber left the meeting at 9:30 p.m. ] Mr. Gore discussed the Prairie View plans noting the big choice is where the plant nursery, recycling center and toilet distribution center are all located. Concept A is a form of a suburban highway commercial corridor retail or office use which could be extended down as basically a single land use or would we want to go to more of a mixed use development. This area is big enough so they can create some kind of interior spaces and it could have some kind of plaza in the middle with store fronts and condos up above. The other thing they are looking at is extending the road for access from both sides. Commissioner Cohn stated he likes plan B with the mixed use development which maximizes residential and retail development in and around this station. This is a nice opportunity to take an area that has some character to it and accent it with a nice residential/retail/transit development. Concept plan B seems to accomplish that goal. Mr. Gore noted that the other difference here between plan A and B is that A is more of a Long Grove type of development where there would be individual Village type retail whereas on plan B they are looking at realigning First Street and having smaller store fronts and 2-3 stories above being residential. The difference between the two concepts is a density or dwelling concept. Plan A is very focused on townhouses or single family attached units and plan B goes a bit higher and looks at multi-family. Plan B also includes property along the east side of the tracks on Prairie. Plan A just leaves that area alone. Commissioner Stark asked if the multi-family residential along Prairie means condos or townhomes. Mr. Gore stated it could actually be a mix. Commissioner Stark asked if plan B along Prairie Road was part of the agreement between Lincolnshire and Buffalo Grove. Mr. Pfeil stated yes. Commissioner Stark what if the agreement was for 2 units per acre density. Mr. Brimm stated that really applies to parcel J, known as the Stancliff property, on the concept plans for Prairie View. He noted that if density is proposed to be increased to greater than 2 dwelling units per acre on this parcel, it would involve some discussion with the Village of Lincolnshire. Mr. Pfeil noted that for parcel I the Concept Plan B proposes multi-family, while the boundary agreement designates this area for single family residential. Commissioner Stark noted that the relationship between Buffalo Grove and Lincolnshire at times have been strained. Mr. Brimm stated historically there have been some strained relationships. We have come a long way with the boundary agreement and resolved a lot of the issues. He noted he believes Lincolnshire sees the larger parcel as really a significant transition area between their community boundary and Buffalo Grove and it would be some tough negotiating there. However, he believes we have a very good opportunity along Prairie Road to introduce some multi-family especially in conjunction with the transit oriented development project. This makes him more confident in zone I becoming condo like the Noah's Landing project. Mr. Gore noted the steering committee had mentioned an issue with school capacity. Mr. Brimm stated that might be an issue with District 103 in terms of a denser detached single family subdivision. Mr. Gore stated they were looking at a kind of gradient of densities. Closer to the station they could put a condo type unit and as they get further away they could lower the density and increase the lot sizes. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT—None FUTURE AGENDA SCHEDULE Mr. Pfeil noted that he has sent out schedules for the various planning meetings in June, including the regular meeting on June 7, 2006. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS—None STAFF REPORT Mr. Pfeil reminded the Commissioners that the local ethics and financial disclosure statements were handed out and need to be returned to the Village Clerk by May 26th. NEW BUSINESS—None ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Cohn, seconded by Commissioner Khan and carried unanimously to adjourn. Commissioner Stark adjourned the meeting at 9:46 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair