Loading...
2002-10-16 - Plan Commission - Minutes Board or Commission: ❑ Plan Commission Document Type: 0 A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 10/16/2002 Type of Meeting: ❑ Regular Meeting REGULAR MEETING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION October 16, 2002 Riverwalk North, east of Milwaukee Avenue north of Riverwalk Drive Amendment of a Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) and Preliminary Plan in the B-3 District Riverwalk North, proposed restaurant, 931 Milwaukee Avenue Annexation with B-3 zoning and approval of a Preliminary Plan Village Zoning Ordinance—Proposed amendment establishing a Planned Development Mixed Use District Chairman Ottenheimer called the meeting to order at 9:28 p.m. in the Village Council Chambers, Buffalo Grove Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Commissioners present: Mr. Ottenheimer Mr. Samuels Mr. Smith Ms. Bocek Ms. Kenski-Sroka Mr. Khan Mr. Billiter Commissioners absent: Mr. Teplinsky Also present: Mr. Timothy Beechick, Hamilton Partners Mr. Michael Werthmann, KLOA Mr. Hubert Loftus, Cowhey Gudmundson Leder Mr. Mark Morley, The Jenkins Group Mr. Richard Mallory, The Brickman Group Mr. John Geary, Hilton Hotels Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer Mr. Charles Johnson, Village Trustee Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner Mr. Greg Summers, Associate Village Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Kenski-Sroka, seconded by Commissioner Khan to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of August 21, 2002. Commissioner Bocek noted an incorrect name on page 7, first paragraph. All Commissioners were in favor of the amended motion and the motion passed unanimously. COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS Commissioner Kenski-Sroka attended the Village Board meeting of October 7, 2002 and reported there was nothing referred to the Plan Commission. Commissioner Samuels suggested consideration of item C on the agenda first, which was accepted by the Commission. VILLAGE ZONING ORDINANCE — PROPOSED AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT MIXED USE DISTRICT Moved by Commissioner Samuels, seconded by Commissioner Smith for a favorable recommendation to the Village Board of the petition for an Amendment to the Buffalo Grove Zoning Ordinance, Title 17 of the Municipal Code to add a "Planned Development Mixed Use District" pursuant to the application of the Village of Buffalo Grove, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois 60089 and pursuant to the testimony produced at the public hearing and the documents introduced in support thereof. Commissioner Samuels stated this matter has been treated thoroughly in workshops and staff has done a very good job of being thorough in their analysis of the needs and the appropriate uses in this district and he would recommend its adoption and approval. Chairman Ottenheimer called for a vote on the motion and the vote was as follows: AYES: Samuels, Smith, Bocek, Kenski-Sroka, Khan, Billiter, Ottenheimer NAPES: None ABSENT: Teplinsky ABSTAIN: None The motion passed 7 to 0. RIVERWALK NORTH, EAST OF MILWAUKEE AVENUE NORTH OF RIVERWALK DRIVE — AMENDMENT OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (P.U.D.) AND PRELIMINARY PLAN IN THE B-3 DISTRICT RIVERWALK NORTH, PROPOSED RESTAURANT, 931 MILWAUKEE AVENUE — ANNEXATION WITH B-3 ZONING AND APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAN Moved by Commissioner Samuels, seconded by Commissioner Smith to recommend a favorable recommendation to the Village Board with regard to a petition for an amendment of the Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plan in the B-3 Planned Business Center District with the following variations: ZONING ORDINANCE — Section 17.36.030.F.1. (to allow parking stall dimensions in parking structures and within buildings to be 8.5 feet in width by 18 feet in length with 24-foot wide aisles, instead of stall dimensions of 9 feet in width by 18.5 feet in length with 26-foot wide aisles); Section 17.44.040.D.4. (to allow a building or structure setback of 25 feet from the Riverwalk Drive right-of-way and the proposed north-south right-of-way ("North Riverwalk Drive") with not less than 15 feet of the setback to be landscaped); DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE — Section 17.20.060.A.2 (to allow a conceptual grading plan at the time of Preliminary Plan approval with detailed grading plans to be provided at the time of individual building permit applications); Sections 16.30.030.F. and 16.50.080.A.1. (to allow a sidewalk on only one side of the street, one-foot from the property line;) Section 16.50.040.C.3. (to allow a natural "wetland type" stormwater detention facility with no cross slope or underdrains;) Section 16.50.070.D.2. (to allow a back-to-back street pavement width of 40 feet and a right-of-way width of 66 feet;) Section 16.50.100.D.2. (to allow a customized light pole meeting Village performance standards;) Section 16.50.120.I.1.e. (to allow parkway trees to be clustered instead of being spaced at 40-foot intervals), for the petitioner to construct an office building of 8 stories, 158,000 square feet, a parking structure of 5 stories, 213,500 square feet, a multi-family residential building of 90 dwelling units in 6 stories over parking and a hotel of 6 stories, 160 suites, regarding the property commonly known as the approximately 15-acre tract east of Milwaukee Avenue and north of Riverwalk Drive, pursuant to the Notice of Public Hearing, the testimony produced at the public hearing and the exhibits introduced in support thereof. Additionally, he moved for a favorable recommendation to the Village Board with regard to the subject petition for annexation with zoning in the B-3 Planned Business Center District and approval of a Preliminary Plan with the following variation: ZONING ORDINANCE— Section 17.16.060 (to allow an area of 1.88 acres for a B-3 District instead of five (5) acres), so that the petitioner can construct the proposed restaurant of approximately 8,600 square feet concerning the subject property commonly described as the 1.88 acre tract at the northeast corner of Milwaukee Avenue/East Chevy Chase Drive, pursuant to the testimony produced at the public hearing and the documents introduced in evidence in support thereof. Commissioner Samuels stated this project presents some interesting challenges, as it is a unique site. The mix of uses is interesting and Hamilton Partners has certainly been one of the best developers in the Village in terms of consistently high quality products. He noted he has had difficulties early on with the parking stall variations, which he still does not think are a good idea. He also has issues with regard to traffic. The fact is that this development is considerably more dense than what had been approved for this project and the roads cannot continue to be burdened with additional density. The fact that some of the traffic is counter to the major now does not effect his decision, as it is all still traffic. Counter flow traffic still presents an impediment and delay to the traffic that is going in the predominant direction because those people all make turns and that takes time. As a planner he does not feel it is right to put this additional density in this property at this time and cannot therefore recommend favorable consideration to this project. Commissioner Bocek stated she also wants to compliment the developer on the amount of compromise and effort that went into meeting all of the Commission's different requests. She stated she feels the hotel and restaurant are very complimentary but has an issue with the multi-family on this site. She stated she does not feel it fits in and therefore cannot recommend a positive recommendation. Commissioner Billiter stated he would not recommend a favorable recommendation for this project as he has a problem with the hotel and the multi-family aspect of this project. He stated they seem disjointed in this community at this particular location. Also, he noted the economics of having the wetlands as a major part of the green space area but with that in mind and when you subtract that area out it would be interesting to see what the FAR and the density is with that number taken out of the equation. He also has issues with density parking and some of the other things that is making a big effort to squeeze more onto the site than can be handled. Commissioner Smith noted he has stated many times that he loves the mixed use element here and feels it will be a great compliment to Buffalo Grove to have this project here and he will vote favorably for it. Chairman Ottenheimer called for a vote on the motion and the vote was as follows: AYES: Smith NAPES: Samuels, Bocek, Kenski-Sroka, Khan, Billiter, Ottenheimer ABSENT: Teplinsky ABSTAIN: None The motion failed 6 to 1. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT Chairman Ottenheimer stated he is pleased to announce that there will be a full slate of commissioners by the next meeting. He noted they have interviewed a number of candidates and they have selected one who should be on board soon. FUTURE AGENDA SCHEDULE Mr. Pfeil noted the next regularly scheduled meeting would be November 6, 2002. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS—None STAFF REPORT—None NEW BUSINESS—None ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Kenski-Sroka, seconded by Commissioner Bocek and carried unanimously to adjourn. Chairman Ottenheimer adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair Board or Commission: ❑ Plan Commission Document Type: ❑A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 10/16/2002 Type of Meeting: PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION October 16, 2002 Village Zoning Ordinance—proposed amendment establishing A Planned Development Mixed Use District Chairman Ottenheimer called the hearing to order at 9:30 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 for the hearing and swore in all persons who wished to give testimony. Commissioners present: Mr. Ottenheimer Mr. Samuels Mr. Smith Ms. Bocek Ms. Kenski-Sroka Mr. Khan Mr. Billiter Commissioners absent: Mr. Teplinsky Also present: Mr. Timothy Beechick, Hamilton Partners Mr. Michael Werthmann, KLOA Mr. Hubert Loftus, Cowhey Gudmundson Leder Mr. Mark Morley, The Jenkins Group Mr. Richar Mallory, The Brickman Group Mr. John Geary, Hilton Hotels Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer Mr. Charles Johnson, Village Trustee Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner Mr. Greg Summers, Associate Village Planner The following exhibits were presented by the petitioner at the public hearing: Exhibit A: Memo dated October 11, 2002 from Robert Pfeil to the Plan Commission stating the Village is contemplating adding a district to the zoning ordinance, Chapter 1750 entitled Planned Development—Mixed Use District Mr. Pfeil stated the proposed amendment for a Mixed Use district would accommodate the residential use currently being reviewed for Riverwalk North. The district could be applied to other properties, at least in theory. The district contemplates a planned development with at least three land uses on a tract with proximity and access to a strategic regional arterial road as defined by the Illinois Department of Transportation. The district is structured to tie into the Village's special use and P.U.D. sections of the Zoning Ordinance. There are number of permitted and special uses that are allowed in the district. A minimum tract area of 10 acres is required for a Mixed Use district, and within that tract, individual zoning lots are required to have a minimum area of 3 acres. The maximum height for residential structures is 100 feet, and for other uses in the district, the maximum height is 130 feet. The maximum F.A.R. (floor area ratio) is 1.0, and for residential uses a maximum density of 15 dwelling units per acre is allowed. The setbacks are similar to the B-3 District and Office and Research District. The basic building setback is 25 feet, and that would increase adjacent to rights-of-way correlating to building height above 30 feet. There being no further comments or questions from anyone else present, Chairman Ottenheimer closed the public hearing at 9:27 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair Board or Commission: ❑ Plan Commission Document Type: ❑A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 10/16/2002 Type of Meeting: PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION October 16, 2002 Riverwalk North, east of Milwaukee Avenue north of Riverwalk Drive Amendment of a Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) and Preliminary Plan in the B-3 District Riverwalk North, proposed restaurant, 931 Milwaukee Avenue Annexation with B-3 zoning and approval of a Preliminary Plan 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 for the hearing and swore in those giving testimony. Commissioners present: Mr. Ottenheimer Mr. Samuels Mr. Smith Ms. Bocek Ms. Kenski-Sroka Mr. Khan Mr. Billiter Commissioners absent: Mr. Teplinsky Also present: Mr. Timothy Beechick, Hamilton Partners Mr. Michael Werthmann, KLOA Mr. Hubert Loftus, Cowhey Gudmundson Leder Mr. Mark Morley, The Jenkins Group Mr. Richard Mallory, The Brickman Group Mr. John Geary, Hilton Hotels Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer Mr. Charles Johnson, Village Trustee Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner Mr. Greg Summers, Associate Village Planner The following exhibits were presented by the petitioner at the public hearing: Exhibit A: Aerial Photograph Exhibit B: Preliminary Site Plan dated October 10, 2002 Exhibit C: Riverwalk North Comparison to Phase I and II, no date Exhibit D: Green Space for Riverwalk North dated October 10, 2002 Exhibit E: Preliminary Landscape Plan dated October 16, 2002 Exhibit F: Meadow Concept dated October 16, 2002 Exhibit G: Views of Proposed Site dated October 16, 2002 Exhibit H: Views of Proposed Site dated October 16, 2002 Exhibit I: Preliminary Engineering Plan dated October 14, 2002 Exhibit J: Hilton Brochure Exhibit K: Breakdown of units in Residential Proposal Exhibit L: Riverwalk North Commercial Property Preliminary Tax Revenue Projection Exhibit M: District 102 Memo dated October 16, 2002 Exhibit N: District 125 Memo dated October 9, 2002 Mr. Beechick of Hamilton Partners stated this parcel of property has unique characteristics. The backdrop to the property is the huge Lake County Forest Preserve with over 20 miles of trails systems. Secondly, it is not bordered by any major thoroughfare. It is cut and nestled behind existing development along the Milwaukee Avenue corridor, which hopefully calls for some flexibility. Third, the property already is bordered by mixed-use characteristics. Lastly, this parcel of property is not adjacent to any major residential development. As a result of that it has uniqueness in what can be done here. Mr. Mark Morley of the Jenkins Group reviewed some of the revisions since the last workshop meeting. The change at North Riverwalk Drive and Riverwalk Drive has been configured so that it lines up and has a 90-degree intersection at that point. Riverwalk Drive as it leads out to Milwaukee Avenue has been revised to include an additional lane going out towards the west. They have also reconfigured the bicycle path along the north edge of the hotel site so that it is on the same plateau as the hotel site. They have reconfigured the property line that is adjacent to the office building and multi-family building so that it does not include the future parking area for the multi-family. They have the required number of parking spaces required for the multi-family. There are areas where they can provide additional parking. Also there was some confusion on a line item in the site analysis block. They have therefore rectified the problem by providing a note that states it is the approximate area of each floor area for the office building. The same goes for the multi-family parcel. They had said it was the approximate size of each floor for that particular structure. The hotel parcel is depicting the approximate area of the first floor. He stated they have also made a change to the overall site section. They have depicted that the land area for Riverwalk Phase I and II will be 12.03 acres. Mr. Morley stated Riverwalk North has a total gross site area of 16.91 acres with a total building area of all the parcels on the sites at 388,500 square feet for an FAR which includes the right of way at North Riverwalk Drive of .54. He has provided another line item below that for clarification. By subtracting the right of way at North Riverwalk Drive that number becomes 15.24 acres for an FAR of.60. The new number just presented at Riverwalk Phase I and II has a total gross site area of 19.4 acres. The total building area of that is 524,209 square feet for an FAR of.62. The Plan Commission and the Village Board approved all that. Mr. Morley next discussed the designated areas of green space for Riverwalk North. The line item is designating as 12.03 acres. The reduction of that number is because of the off ramp coming off of Lake Cook Road and also the right of way that meanders through the site. That gives you an FAR of.99 for that portion of the project. Mr. Beechick noted in summary that the whole concept of Riverwalk and Riverwalk North was to have the heavier density at the corner of Milwaukee Avenue and Lake Cook Road with a gradual reduction in density. They have demonstrated the spirit of what was the intention years ago when it was look at its entirety. Obviously, at the time Riverwalk I and II were zoned, there was land that was included in the total land area but always with the reservation that it would be taken and condemned by the Cook County Highway Department for the overpass at Milwaukee and Lake Cook Road. Mr. Mallory reviewed the landscape plan noting they want this plan to be similar to what is already seen at Riverwalk I and 11 and how the plans work together. Grouping plants randomly instead of straight lines does this. This is also one of the variations they are asking for. They would also vary the size slightly, which enhances the naturalistic look. He noted they have been in contact with the Village Forester in an effort to make sure they get the right direction in how to deal with existing trees. He noted they would be preparing a plan that will illustrate where trees are and which ones are significant. Mr. Mallory stated they have identified the area in the stormwater management area as a meadow. This will be a dry basin and they feel they can introduce various types of species such as grasses, flowering perennial materials and primarily native materials that are able to tolerate this condition. When they can assess the conductivity of moisture to the soil more accurately they will then identify precisely the species of plants that they would recommend. Mr. Hubert Loftus of Cowhey Gudmundson Leder, Ltd. reviewed the Preliminary Engineering Plan noting the Riverwalk North property was set up for service in conjunction with Phase I. Water main was brought through the right of way of Riverwalk Drive and a sanitary sewer was brought up along the north edge of Riverwalk Drive to service this area back in the Phase I development. Sanitary sewer flows by gravity to a manhole provided and the water main just provides an internal loop connecting to the existing 12" water main. The stormwater was set up to the south to drain a small portion of Riverwalk North into the existing pond on Phase I of Riverwalk. The north half of in conjunction with Riverwalk Phase II was mass graded. Compensatory and detention storage was provided at the north half of the site about 1997. Subsequent to that FEMA revised the flood plain maps and their mapping in their study was based on old pre —development topography. Therefore their study shows the flood plain and flood way cutting diagonally through the site. That is also what the current map shows. In order to correct the map they have submitted a letter of map revision and required material to the State of Illinois, Department of Natural Resources. They have been reviewing it for a couple of months and they are nearing the end of their review. In about one month it will go on to FEMA for the letter map revisions. Mr. Loftus stated they have received comments from the Village Traffic consultant regarding the access points and specifically the right in and right out along Milwaukee Avenue. They have requested an island to direct the traffic better. They have now installed that. The Village Traffic consultant recommended Riverwalk Drive be widened to the extent it can be between Milwaukee Avenue and the proposed right of way going north. They were able to accomplish that basically from Milwaukee to the proposed road going north which has a full five-lane section. That provides additional storage for left turn movements coming out onto Milwaukee Avenue and also provides enough room so that if someone wants to make a left and go north, they are not blocking anyone coming along side of them. Mr. Beechick noted the restaurant parcel also feeds into the overall stormwater system. Mr. Michael Werthmann, of KLOA, stated the site was originally approved for 150,000 square foot office building. He noted they are proposing a 150,000 square foot building and in addition they are proposing a new hotel, the apartment complex and a restaurant. He stated they have done their traffic impact analysis and looked at what the impact would be of this additional uses on the site. Significant roadway improvements have occurred in the area since this was originally approved which provide significant additional capacity to the area. These include the interchange at Lake-Cook Road and Milwaukee, Lake Cook Road was widened to 6 lanes, a full interchange has been added at Lake Cook Road and I-94, the current widening of the Lake Cook bridge just west of the site, the removal of the tollbooths on I-94 and the improvements at Dundee and Milwaukee Road. All of these improvements help to reduce and mitigate the overall effects by traffic on this site. The first reason is the captive market effect that will occur between the various uses on the site including the original Riverwalk. Many of the people who are staying at the hotel will be working at the office and not be leaving the site. Likewise many of the office employees or residents of the apartments will eat at the restaurant. Many of the apartment residents will also be working in the office. This reduces the volume of traffic that will be generated by the site. In addition, another factor reducing the impact is the fact that the proposed additional uses generate a reverse flow than that of the office. In the morning all traffic is entering the site for the office whereas the majority of the traffic for the other uses are exiting the site. Likewise in the evening peak hour when the office is emptying out of the site, the people in the apartments and the hotel and restaurant are entering the site. The capacity of the roadway is spread out without all the traffic coming in or out at one time. Mr. Werthmann stated the site would generate approximately 200 additional trips than that which was originally proposed in the morning peak hour and about 250 more trips in the evening peak hour. That averages to about 4 trips per minute and it is a type of reverse flow. Based on trip generation and directional distribution they assigned the new traffic to the roadway system and added it to the existing volumes and added some background growth and looked at the impact this development would have on the intersections. The two main intersections looked at were the main intersection serving the site, which is Riverwalk Drive and Milwaukee. Per the request of the Village they also looked at Milwaukee and Deerfield Road. Riverwalk and Milwaukee are designed as a high volume urbanized intersection. It has three through lanes on Milwaukee Avenue, it has separate left turn lanes on all the approaches, and dual left coming out on Milwaukee and it has separate right turn lanes. As a result the intersection is operating at a very acceptable level of service now and will continue to operate at the same level of service given the reserve capacity at this intersection. In addition to this main drive there is an inbound entrance to Riverwalk Drive from the Milwaukee ramp and they are also proposing the right in, right out access drive. One concern of this intersection is that in the evening peak hour, the backups from Deerfield Road sometimes extend through this intersection and hampers the overall operation. Eventually these problems will be resolved. Mr. Werthmann stated the next intersection is the Milwaukee and Deerfield Road intersection. During peak hours this intersection is operating at an unacceptable level of service. This is an existing regional problem due to several facts. It has a very long signal cycle, which take three minutes to go through all the phases. The longer the phase, the longer the backup and the less efficient it is. Also contributing to the operation of this intersection is the fact that there is a very high volume of southbound Milwaukee to eastbound Deerfield Road left turns. One of the major problems is that Deerfield Road is still a 2-lane road east of Milwaukee Avenue. IDOT has studied this problem and conducted an SRA report for all of Milwaukee Avenue including that intersection and they do have plans to provide significant improvements there. There are no plans for any immediate physical improvements. However, they have just led a signal system improvement plan for Milwaukee Avenue, which will extend from Riverwalk Drive north to Busch Parkway. They are planning on interconnecting all of the signals between there into one system. This system would be part of the existing system of Riverwalk Drive, the interchange and Wolf Road. When they are done they will have one signal system all the way from Wolf Road, past the site, up to Busch Parkway to Deerfield Road. In addition, they will be retiming the signals. This will help mitigate some of the concerns here. There will be a much better progression of traffic through the intersection. Secondly, they will re-time all of the signals so the 3-minute cycle at Deerfield at Milwaukee will become a more efficient signal and be able to handle more capacity. Lastly, based on the existing counts on Riverwalk Drive it has been estimated that 75% of the traffic entering the site is originated south or east of the site. Only 25% are traveling north of the site or through the Deerfield Road/Milwaukee Avenue intersection. The traffic generated by the site will only account for 2% of that traffic. More importantly, the additional traffic generated over what was previously approved will only increase the traffic at the intersection by 1%. Mr. Werthmann noted the main access to the site is Riverwalk Drive. They are also proposing a right in, right-out off of Milwaukee Avenue. Riverwalk Drive North will extend in a north/south direction and will end as a stub at the end of the site and hopefully extend further north to provide a potential for a frontage road, which will extend further up. He noted they have now put in a pork chop median per the comments of the Village traffic consultant, which is something IDOT will require. To provide some additional capacity along Riverwalk Drive they have widened it out and providing additional stacking for the dual left. They are also providing a second lane so that when the dual left lanes stack up in the evening peak hour, there will be a lane where right turns can get by to get out of the site. Mr. John Geary of the Hilton Hotel stated he is the owner/operator of the hotel in Oak Lawn. He stated the product they are considering for the proposed hotel is a 160 room Hilton Garden Inn. Parking is probably the most important thing for a hotel and Hilton's guidelines for parking are 1.1 space per room. With the layout as indicated, 179 slots are indicated which surpasses Hilton requirements. The number of employees will be 20 maximum at any one time. Many will take public transportation and in addition there is available shuttle service for all guests. There is a minimum amount of meeting room space and will be primarily used by hotel guests. The restaurant will be a full service restaurant but is used primarily by guests. Mr. Beechick stated they had a marketing analysis done by Tracey Cross and Associates to make sure there were no drastic changes in the market that would call for reconsideration of the residential development here. The report came in very favorably. Of the 28 well known projects in the northwest suburban area, the vacancy increased by only 2/10's of a percentage point. However, that is negligible when you consider some other market places in the Chicagoland area. Of the high-end rental market, the actual monthly rents did increase slightly and there was very little change, if any, in the total vacancy in the high-end rental market for this particular location. The report highly recommended this location as a multi-family residential site for upscale apartments. It is something that can be undertaken right away and will more than likely be the leading element in the total development process for this particular project. Mr. Beechick noted the breakdown of the units in the residential proposal with an average monthly rent of $1,822.00. Twenty percent of the units will be one bedroom with 750 square feet, another twenty percent will have 850 square feet, another twenty percent will have 950 square feet with one bedroom plus a den and 11/2 baths and another twenty percent at 1150 square feet with two bedrooms, two baths and twenty percent with two bedrooms, two baths and a larger floor plan of 1300 square feet. He further noted there would be a fitness area, underground parking, some type of common area space and a pool and recreational equipment. Mr. Beechick reviewed the anticipated real estate tax and sales tax generation from the project. The total revenue benefit in real estate tax that the project would generate if it were to be built in its current approval status of 150,000 square feet for $337,500. In addition to that the plan shows $425,000 coming from the hotel development which is a combination of room tax as well as real estate revenue and food and beverage. In addition to that is the restaurant site which would also bring sales tax revenue and real estate taxes of $43,000 to the project. The total combined effort on just the commercial components of this proposal is $806,000 in tax revenue that will be coming to the Village. That in comparison to the $337,000 which the current plan would generate is a huge increase for the benefit of the community and various taxing districts. In addition to the $806,000 is the residential complex component of real estate taxes which would add another $195,000 worth of real estate tax revenue. Mr. Beechick noted that of the five high-end multi-family apartment unit projects that were surveyed, roughly 7% was multi-family in nature. Applied to the proposed 90-unit project you would have roughly six units that would have children. He stated they have contacted both school districts that have sent their comments containing no objections to this project. Mr. Beechick stated there are four elements of what is known as a mixed-use project. He stated it is very important for them and the community to see another high-end multi-level office building project within this area within close proximity of Riverwalk. The second piece is the hotel site, which is a very strong amenity in preserving the sub-market control that they see with the Riverwalk project. In order to have an edge and be competitive in today's marketplace it is necessary to align with as many amenities as possible and have this type of package available to the marketplace. This is a very strong component to the plan. There could be definite integration between the guests staying at the hotel that are prospective tenants and guests of tenants and so on. Therefore, the establishment of a hotel site is extremely critical for the plan and for the long-term longevity of Riverwalk Phases I and II along with the proposed 8-story building they have as part of the Riverwalk North plan. Thirdly, the restaurant site is extremely important because it connects everything to another access point to Milwaukee Avenue. Bringing that in provides additional control to Buffalo Grove of what is taking place along the Milwaukee Avenue thoroughfare. He noted the location is key and they have had people call unsolicited and it will be a natural given the area, density and population. Lastly is the multi-family residential plan, which statistics show will be successful at this location. All of these pieces feed off of each other. The multi-family building is strategic to them because it helps drive the train in getting this package complete. It offers a very unique location to provide this type of development with the backdrop of the Des Plaines River and the Lake County Forest preserves. It offers some relief from a traffic flow standpoint; it is at the very northeast corner so it is tucked away from any type of major visual exposure that one might have. It is also critical in having all the pieces work from a price break standpoint on the transaction of this property and from the ability to see something take place right away. Commissioner Samuels stated he recalls the proposed FAR at the last workshop was approximately 1.06 and the proposal for the Village ordinance was 1.0. Mr. Pfeil noted that specifically referred to the office parcel of the proposed development, and the size of this parcel has been increased on the revised plan. Mr. Morley stated this was basically the clarification because people were confused because of a number that was based in the site analysis column. They had a plus or minus 19,800 square feet which has since been defined as the approximate area for each floor. Sometimes people would add that into the 158,000 square feet plus creating an FAR of over 1. This has now been clarified and they are set for a 158,000 square foot office building on this site. Commissioner Samuels asked if there are now any discrepancies between proposed plan and the standards of the proposed Mixed Use district. Mr. Pfeil stated the only discrepancies are the two setback dimensions for the office building and the parking structure relative to the circulation road. Those variations would also be needed if the property remained in the B-3 District. The buildings are angled so that the variation only occurs where the corner of the building is proximate to the right-of-way. Mr. Beechick reiterated the fact that they had started with thirteen variations and are now down to eight variations of which three are really related to aesthetic issues: the upgraded street light poles, the natural prairie or meadow type planting for the base of the detention facility and the cluster landscape planting in the parkway. One variation relates to the timing of final engineering drawings. It does not make sense to totally final engineer this project for full development, knowing they will come back to the commission for each and every phase for final approval. Mr. Beechick noted they are therefore down to four variations, which are critical for the development and are as follows: 1. Sidewalks on one side of the right-of-way rather than both sides due to the integral bike trail system along with the fact that they would like to see more room for landscaping along Riverwalk Drive 2. The width of the right-of-way which the ordinance calls for 47 feet back to back. They have decreased that down to 40 feet but do not have any parking on the street. This allows for more landscaping in the parkway areas. 3. Without the setback component this plan will not work. This variation really relates to corners of buildings so that it can fit. 4. The parking stall variation calls for a slight reduction in width and he noted they have never had a problem before in Phase I or II. Commissioner Khan asked for examples of other wetland vegetation areas within the Village and asked if any residents had complained about the appearance. Mr. Kuenkler noted those kinds of comments are common. Mr. Mallory stated in their opinion this is not a wetland planting but more of a naturalized meadow planting. The wetland term refers to a collection of plants that would grow in a wet environment that stays wet most of the time. This basin will be fairly dry but subject to inundation and drying out. There being no further comments or questions from anyone else present, Chairman Ottenheimer closed the public hearing at 9:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair