1980-04-03 - Village Board Committee of the Whole - Minutes SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE OF THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES
OF THE VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE, ILLINOIS, HELD THURSDAY, APRIL 3, 1980,
AT THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 50 RAUPP BOULEVARD, BUFFALO GROVE, ILLINOIS.
President Clayton called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M.
Roll call indicated the following present: President Clayton; Trustees Marienthal ,
Stone, O'Reilly, Hartstein, Kavitt , Gerschefske. Also present were William
Balling, Village Manager; William Sommer, Assistant Village Manager; James
Truesdell , Village Planner; Mary Jo Reid, Plan Commissioner.
FIORE
Mr. Balling stated that, in response to the suggestion that there be phased
annexation or exclude the Port Clinton Road area, it has been represented that
Mr. Asher is not prepared to partially annex his property. President Clayton
stated that the purpose of this meeting is to clarify the goals and objectives
for this property.
Mr. Balling went over the planning statement drafted for the Plan Commission.
Basically, the planning philosophy recognized as identified is the South Zone,
the Central Zone, and the North Zone. The South Zone is basically the limits of
our current platted plan, and containing a variety of densities and land uses.
The Central Zone is identified as an area of uncertainty because it is out of
our planned area; the two strongest planning objectives here would be low density
housing and office and research. Regarding the North Zone, which lies north of
Port Clinton Road, staff was unable to identify any densities which would compliment
existing goals and objectives, except for the statement of the quality suburban
community. Mr. Balling reported that Mr. Friedman has stated that he is prepared
to proceed with the planning concept which reflects substantially the March 24th
plan; or proceed with his property only on a totally different planning concept,
which would run the industrial property south of Route 22 and hold in abeyance
any consideration of the Pegelow or the Asher property; or, if the Board fails to
reach a consensus, it would be his intent , rather than to receive a negative vote,
to withdraw his petition.
Trustee Stone stated that he thinks the Village has the opportunity to do some-
thing unique in this instance, and he thinks the Board should decide what the
boundaries are going to be, and then start from scratch and develop a plan.
Discussion took place on the facilities and manpower needed to service the
northernmost area of the proposed property. Trustee Hartstein discussed some
of his concerns regarding the property. He stated that he had talked with the
developer, who has agreed to take the portion of 41 .7 acres of 2.5 dwelling
units per acre and add an additional 7.7 acres and reduce the density on the
49.4 acres to 2 dwelling units per acre. The developer would also be willing
to reduce the 33 acres in the center to 6 dwelling units per acre, rather than
6.5 . These two changes would make a population difference of a little over 250.
President Clayton stated that she would like the discussion to focus on exactly
why the Village would be interested in annexing this parcel .
Trustee Marienthal 's reasons for annexation would be:
1 . Different housing types than the Village now has , i .e. larger lots and
cluster housing;
2. Possibly 50 ' rather than 25' setbacks; possibly streets that are not
curbed and guttered.
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
APRIL 3, 1980
PAGE TWO
Trustee Stone's reasons for annexation would be:
1 . Positive impact on school districts;
2. Industrial base;
3. Estate-type lots.
Trustee Hartstein 's reasons for annexation would be:
1 . Provide people an opportunity to upgrade their houses and still remain
in Buffalo Grove, thereby stablilizing the community.
2. It is a large parcel and gives the Village the opportunity to do
something unique.
The question was raised as to when we could realistically expect this project
to be built out. With the market being what it currently is, it could be many
years down the line, and therefore, be changed substantially from what would
now be approved. Mr. Balling stated that we would have the basic commitment
on planning from which we base all of our utility systems.
Mr. Sommer pointed out the reasons so far given in favor of annexation:
1 . Positive fiscal impact - school and Village
2. Industrial Development
3. Estate housing - 1/2 acre, 1/3 acre, 1 acre
4. Cluster housing
5. Move from starter home in Buffalo Grove up into different type of housing -
helpstabilize the community.
6. Create a unique setting
7. Move away from R-5 and R-6
8. Service property on an economical basis - develop a viable plan for
utility and transportation networks.
Lengthy discussion took place regarding the goals and objectives to be obtained
by annexing this property.
Mr. Balling stated that Mr. Mikes had indicated today that there would be a legal
problem without the district's consent in securing disconnection. Lengthy
discussion then took place regarding the disadvantages to annexation of this
property.
UNDESIRABLE FACTORS
1 . Lawsuit?
2. Negative village, park district and school district capital and service costs.
3. Water consumption.
4. Percentage of attached housing much greater than we now have.
5. Overdevelopment of commercial .
Mr. Truesdell stated that, presently in the Village, 75% of the dwelling units
are single family, and 25% are multi-family. In the plan most recently submitted
by the developer, 75% of the dwelling units are multi-family or attached (1800) ,
and 25% are single family units (600) .
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
APRIL 3, 1980
PAGE THREE
There was also discussion on what effect this annexation would have on the
Town Center.
President Clayton polled the Board on whether to consider the Friedman property
alone, or the Asher/Friedman property as a whole:
Marienthal Asher/Friedman
Stone Asher/Friedman
O'Reilly Asher/Friedman
Hartstein Asher/Friedman
Kavitt Asher/Friedman
Gerschefske Asher/Friedman
President Clayton again polled the Board: "Yes" indicates favor of seriously
pursuing the annexation with additional meetings such as this; "No" would
indicate opposition:
YES : Marienthal , Stone, Hartstein, Kavitt, Gerschefske
NO: O' Reilly
President Clayton stated that the discussions have evolved to something quite
different than what most of the Board members had indicated at the very beginning,
and what Mrs. Clayton has been reporting to the VAGA meetings , that being that
we are talking a fairly high ( in VAGA's estimation) suburban environment, and
she asked what changed the minds of the Trustees .
Trustee Hartstein stated that he doesn 't feel that there is that much difference
from what was originally projected. He said that we wanted a portion of estate
type lots, but not necessarily the entire plan. He said that everyone did want
substantially less density than the original plan, but a ceiling was not put on
that number. President Clayton said that some Trustees stated that they did
want the entire parcel to be one-acre estate-type lots. Trustee Kavitt stated
that, as he recalls, the Board did not want multi-family; they wanted single
acre and two acre sites. Trustee Stone stated that he feels the thinking
changed when we started talking about fiscal impacts. He still feels that the
Village has the opportunity to create its own plan in this instance, rather
than going with a plan brought in by a developer. Trustee Marienthal stated
that what has evolved is a co-mingling of all ideas expressed. It was the
consensus of the Board that the population should be in the range of 5,000 to
6,000.
Discussion then took place on the land use distribution by percent of the
project. The proposed plan shows 75% multiple family dwelling units, and
25% single family units, with an acreage distribution of approximately 50-50.
The acreage distribution presently in the Village is approximately 2/3 single
family and 1/3 multi-family. President Clayton stated that she is very concerned
about the large number of multi-family dwelling units proposed.
Mr. Truesdell stated that a specific goal in the Goals and Policies adopted by
the Board was that the Village maintain its single-family character.
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
APRIL 3, 1980
PAGE FOUR
VILLAGE BOARD SPECIFIC GOALS/STATEMENTS
1 . Estate is not rural .
2. Industrial development in Buffalo Grove (southern Lake County) will not
negatively impact the Waukegan corridor.
3. A traffic impact exists and should be focused on Route 22 and already
exists regionally.
4. Positive fiscal impact: stabilize taxes and expand services .
5. Eastern development will not meet our unique goals. Eastern
development should be viewed as "balancing" existing Buffalo Grove.
6. The Fiore/Hilltown property is prime development property to meet
Buffalo Grove goals.
PROJECT CONSTRAINTS
1 . Village and public agency capital and service costs.
2. 5,000 to 6,000 population.
3. Multi-single family unit mix.
It was decided that the Board would continue this type of workshop after the
Executive Session at Monday's Board meeting. Mr. Balling stated that the
focus would be on the definition of the parameters of the development, and
some of the land use distributions.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 P.M.
Janet . Sirabian, Vil ge t Perk
TO: FILE
FROM: CAROL HENNENFENT, DEPUTY CLERK
DATE: APRIL 2, 1980
SUBJ : WORKSHOP SESSION APRIL 3, 1980
The following newspapers were called this date to notify
them of the Workshop Session of the Village Board on Thursday
evening April 3, 1980, reference Village Board Planning Goals,
7:30 P.M. - 10:00 P.M. Notice posted on Bulletin Board.
Countryside Reminder
Paddock Publications
The Suburban Trib
Independent Register
Lerner Newspapers
Vernon Town Crier
Journal/Topics Newspapers
4M-6-e
Carol Hennenfent, Dep Clerk