Loading...
1979-01-17 - Plan Commission - Minutes REGULAR MEETING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION Town Center Neighborhood Arlington Country Club Condominiums/Holzrichter JANUARY 17, 1979 Chairman Genrich called the meeting to order at 7:50 PM in the Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard. Commissioners Present: Chairman Genrich Mr. Shields Mr. Goldspiel Mrs. Sheldon Mr. Button Mr. Davis Mr. Kelly Also Present: Mr. E. L. Holzrichter, Arlington Country Club Condos Mr. Zorach Rabin, Architect, Arlington Mr. Joseph Lake, Engineer, Arlington Mr. Jerry Weiss , Bernard Katz & Co . , Arlington Mr. Harold Roggendorf, Superintendent, District 102 Mr. William Hitzeman, Superintendent, District 96 Mr. Robert Bogart, Trustee Mr. Bart Delaney, Planning Coordinator Mr. Jim Truesdell, Staff Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Button moved approval of the minutes of the December 20, 1978 Regular Meeting, subject to corrections . Commissioner Sheldon seconded the motion. Corrections are as follows : Pageva: #2 - The phrase "than shown on Exhibit #11 . " should be added at the end of the paragraph. Page 7 : #1 , Mid-page - The word "patrolled" at the end of the para- graph should be "controlled. " Upon voice vote, the motion carried unanimously. COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Genrich informed the Commission that, because of time commit- ments, Mr. Craig Gilbert and Mr. Chris Palmer have asked to be removed 1 from consideration as Plan Commissioners. COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS 1 Commissioner Sheldon stated that her committee had met with the Park District regarding the Dearborn Development, and that major changes had been made in the parking, and traffic patterns. She indicated that the Park District will be accepting Dearborn's plan. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting January 17, 1979 - 2 - She felt that it was very beneficial to the Plan Commission to be in on the Park District meetings. In this case, Dearborn would be willing to do something to help with the maintenance costs . The Plan Commission will ask Mr. Sommer to research, prior to next week's meeting, whether there are precedents to developers donating funds to public agencies for maintenance. Chairman Genrich stated that Mr. Balling does not think this is a precedent. Commissioner Goldspiel reported on the TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION. He stated that there is a group doing a study for transportation planning L/ of this area. It is called the TDP Committee, and they asked the Transportation Commission to make up a "wish" list for them. The Transportation Commission presented 5 ideas to the TDP Committee. 1 . To keep in mind the idea of eventual commuter service on the Soo Line. 2. To use shopping center and theater lots for commuter parking during the day. 3. To institute a route from Buffalo Grove to the Deerfield Station on the Milwaukee Road. 4. To institute service from Buffalo Grove to Hawthorn Shopping Center. 5. To institute a route which would run, roughly, from unincorporated Palatine through Wheeling through Northbrook. Commissioner Button gave a report from the Committee set up to study the ETHICS ORDINANCE, and stated that the Committee reached concurrence on a recommendation to the staff. He stated that the key point of this recommendation was that the Committee felt that no individual should be denied the right to serve, regardless of background, but that disclosure was important. TOWN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD Chairman Genrich gave a brief background of this project, and asked Mr. Truesdell to give a more detailed report. Mr. Truesdell explained the proposed changes displayed on the map, and also explained the fiscal impact for each parcel, as described in the CHANGES IN COST PER $100 OF ASSESSED VALUE BASED ON PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE CURRENT LAND USE PLAN table, which is attached to the original copy of these minutes. Mr. Truesdell also commented on the overall fiscal impacts on each school district, as described in his memo to the Plan Commission of January 12, 1979 , also attached to the original copy of these minutes. Chairman Genrich stated that his understanding is that the general policy of the majority of the Plan Commission and the Village Board is that "essentially, in order to move the Village Center along, we primarily need to increase the residential density surrounding the Village Center area, and should take action to change from commercial designations. " Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting January 17, 1979 - 3 - Commissioner Goldspiel stated that he has come to the conclusion that the Village Center is not going to be what we thought it was going to be. He does not like the idea of building up density around something that is yet speculative. He feels that the high density is a certainty anyway, and he does not see any point to hastening a process which is already a probability. Chairman Genrich said to Mr. Goldspiel that, in general, there seems to be a lot of feeling that we should do what we can to improve the tax situation, and asked if we are not assisting in doing that by indicating higher density housing. Mr. Goldspiel agreed that higher density yields better impact to school districts, but he does not know if that will continue. He would prefer to see a plan that was more varied. He feels that the area between Buffalo Grove Road and Milwaukee Avenue will become very heavily developed, and he does not think that is a good plan. He thinks there should be different housing types, and he feels that, in this situation, it would be well to hold the zoning in the single- family class for a while. Commissioner Sheldon stated that the Village has all single-family housing now, and these changes are being made to bring in multi-family housing and vary the community. Chairman Genrich asked if all people that were at the Public Hearing were notified of tonight's meeting, and Mr. Delaney answered that they were. Commissioner Davis asked if these changes couldn't be held until after it is seen if the Town Center is, in fact, developed. Mr. Truesdell stated that the Village should be looking forward. He said that, if the Village Center were all set, there would be no need to make these changes because it would be a certainty without any change, but these changes are being made to encourage development of the Village Center. Commissioner Button said that he does not think we should go back to single-family zoning, as the Village is on its way to becoming almost all single family homes . He thinks we have the chance to help the school districts as well as make some varied development in the community. Commissioner Davis said that he thinks it would be a good idea for someone who has attended the Town Center meetings to give the Commission a re-cap. Mr. Bogart stated that there is a minimum of 5 acres in one location for a municipal site. It is estimated that between 50 and 58 acres are buildable now for the Town Center. The plan is to have entertain- ment services in one area, and commercial services in another area. Mr. Bogart said that the Town Center is not that far away, and that the open space concept is still there. The intent is to bring two contracts for starting the Center to the Board on February 5. The developer must have 50 acres under contract before zoning is granted and before he is allowed to build. Mr. Bogart said that the concept Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting January 17, 1979 - 4 - of the Town Center is workable and viable ; he also said that the al- ternative would be "strip" zoning. In answer to a question regarding Parcel C , Mr. Truesdell said that, in the original plan, the whole piece was open space with the intent to preserve the flood plain. However, the flood plain does not ac- tually seem to be there , and soil tests show the land to be buildable. At this point, Chairman Genrich polled the Commission to see if they were in favor of the changes being made. These results are as follows : Li Parcels A and B - All in favor except Mr. Goldspiel. Parcel C - All in favor. Parcels D and E - All in favor. Parcel F - The Commons - zoning designation has already been changed. Parcels G, H and I - All in favor. Parcels J and K - All in favor. Parcel L - No change being made. Parcel M - All in favor except Mr. Goldspiel. Parcels N and 0 - No change being made. Parcels P and Q - All in favor. Parcels R and S - All in favor. Mr. Bill Hitzeman said he wish to state that the Commission deserved a "Laurel" for bringing up philosophical discussions regarding what kind of life-style we want for the Village. However, he felt the Commission deserved a "Dart" for taking commercial property away from School District 96. Mr. Hitzeman asked Mr. Truesdell why the overall impact is only shown as $.02, when in terms of the methodology of arriving at the +'s and - 's, there is a total of $9.32 negative impact. Mr. Truesdell said that is because of the differences in the acreage. The figures show the total assessed value, while the chart is a unit figure. Mr. Hitzeman again said he thinks the Commission should be commended for the philosophical discussions, but he strongly objects to the commercial property being taken out of District 96. Commissioner Sheldon stated that, although she is sorry to detract from District 96, she feels very strongly that these changes need to be made not only to make the Town Center viable, but also for the overall good of the Village. Commissioner Shields moved that the Comprehensive Plan be modified to include the changes in land use indicated as Parcels A through S on the attached map, schedule, and Exhibit. Commissioner Button seconded the motion. Clarice Rech said that she is concerned about the Town Center. She said that the majorities of the Plan Commission and the Village Board support the Town Center. She stated that there is no assurance that all of this re-zoning is going to make the Town Center a reality. She does not think that re-zoning will have any effect on the Town Center progress. Mrs. Rech believes in the Town Center, but she does not think the Village should give up other things for it. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting January 17► 1979 \...1 ...i - 5 - Commissioner Button stated that, whether or not the Town Center is attractive to a developer as a planning idea is only Part 1 . Part 2 is the putting together of the entire package. He said that any developer would agree that planning for a greater population base around the Town Center would make it much more attractive. Mr. Button thinks that the zoning changes are a good step forward. Mr. Bogart said that the Town Center is a viable concept. He said that the Village will not know for 6 months whether or not Callaghan will put the Town Center together, but the Center will go either this year or next year. He said that the alternative is strip shopping centers, or higher density multi-family housing. Commissioners voted on the motion as follows : Shields, Sheldon, Button, Davis, Kelly - Yes Goldspiel - No The motion carried 5 to 1 in favor. At 9 :15, Chairman Genrich declared a short break. ARLINGTON COUNTRY CLUB CONDOMINIUMS/HOLZRICHTER Chairman Genrich stated that the plan to be considered at this meeting is different from the one received in the Commission packets . He said that the plan the Commission approves is the one that goes to the Board, without any changes. He stated that the Commissioners should have the plan to be considered in their packets, and said he would like to have the changes explained. Mr. Delaney explained that there was a request for a change in the interior floor plan, and a request for a change in the height of the building. Mr. Zorach Rabin clarified the changes being requested. He stated that the parking has been changed, and also that, instead of having two entrances into the garage, they now have only one entrance. He said the outside dimensions are identical to the originally proposed building. Mr. Rabin said that they have made modifications on the layouts of the apartments, but have not changed the count (there are still 51 apartments per building) . They have changed the number of 1-bedroom apartments to 11 , and the number of 2-bedroom apartments to 40. Mr. Holzrichter told the Commission that this is still basically the same apartment as on the original plan. Mr. Rabin said that they had maintained the same character of the outside of the building. Commissioner Sheldon asked Mr. Rabin for explanation of the change in height that they are asking for. Mr. Rabin said that they felt that the sidewalk elevation presently established on the engineering draw- ings establishes the sidewalk at a level of 100.0. In accordance with the zoning ordinance, they are allowed to have a building 45' in height. He then read the height definition from the zoning ordinance. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting January 17► 1979 - 6 - The orginal height of the building shown was 43 ' from the sidewalk elevation to the top of the mansard roof. They are now asking to be allowed to use the full 45' elevation. The main reason for doing this is so that the degree of the ramp leading to the garage can be lessened. Mr. Rabin said that they have soil reports on the property, and said that the reports are complicated. He said that 5 borings were taken on the site, and that the water levels go up and down. Mr. Rabin stated that the report indicates that there could be some soil problems. He said that this is the other reason they wish to raise the height of the building. Commissioner Sheldon asked what stage the engineering is now at. Mr. Rabin said the engineering drawings will be changed regarding detention, etc . Mr. Joseph Lake said that they now have final engineering plans approved through the Village as far as the MSD and the IDOT. The changes being requested will not affect the sanitary system. The water services for the building would not change in any way. However, if a swimming pool were to be put in, they would have to apply for another MSD permit. Mr. Lake said the detention will be dry, and located between the buildings . Commissioner Goldspiel asked if the wall of the building that faced Wheeling was blank in the original plan, and Mr. Rabin answered that it was not. Mr. Goldspiel asked where storage for the residents ' use would be located. Mr. Rabin said that each apartment has its own laundry facilities, as well as a storage area. Mr. Goldspiel asked if it is necessary to re-do computations on dona- tions as a result of the change in the number of units . Mr. Delaney said that there would be a $741 increase to District 21 , and a $288 increase to District 214, and that this would be worked into the Annexation Agreement. Mr. Goldspiel commented on the aesthetics, and said that he thinks the new plan is much less attractive than the old plan. Mr. Rabin said that he feels the character in the new plan is much the same as the old plan, and just as attractive. Commissioner Davis is concerned about the underground parking without a sprinkler system. Mr. Rabin stated that he thinks the zoning requires sprinklers. He stated that they would comply completely with at least Lnd the minimum zoning regulations, and probably would have more than the minimum requirements. They will be in compliance with all codes. Mr. Delaney stated that the old plan shows a right-turn deceleration lane on Dundee Road, but that IDOT deleted it from their approval. Commissioner Sheldon made a motion to approve Plan #7838, Exhibit #1026-10, as revised 1-12-79 for the Arlington Country Club Condo- miniums, Holzrichter developer. Commissioner Button seconded the motion. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting January 17, 1979 - 7 - Commissioner Goldspiel asked if this plan must go before the Appearance Commission. He was told that it goes before the Appearance Commission, and then the Board of Trustees . Mr. Goldspiel feels that the Plan Commission should pay particular attention to the appearance , just in case the Appearance Commission does not review the Plan. Mr. Goldspiel stated that he feels that the appearance of the plan has changed so much for the worse, that he must oppose the motion. Commissioners voted as follows : Shields, Sheldon, Button, Kelly - Yes L Goldspiel - No Davis - Abstain The motion carried 4 to 1 in favor, with 1 abstention. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT Chairman Genrich reported that there will be a VAGA meeting regarding areas which are not included in any Village 's Comprehensive Plan. He feels that the Commission should urge the Lake County staff and Board to maintain the areas on the map which are green as prime agricultural areas, that the areas on the map which are gray should be purchased as forest preserve . LIBRARY Commissioner Sheldon reported that there is a meeting of the Indian Trails Library Board scheduled for January 24, 1979. She is asking the Plan Commission to authorize a statement, and take a position regarding Buffalo Grove having its own library. Commissioner Sheldon made a motion that the Plan Commission support the concept of a library site within the Village of Buffalo Grove. Commissioner Davis seconded the motion. Commissioner Goldspiel thinks a town of 20,000 residents should be able to support its own library. He also stated that he would be happier with the proposed building which Indian Trails is presenting if it were more accessible to Buffalo Grove. The vote was then taken, which was unanimously in favor of the motion. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Goldspiel made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Commissioner Davis, which was unanimously approved by voice vote. The meeting was adjourned at 10 :45 PM. Respectfully submitted, APPROVED: Janet Sirabian Recording Secretary Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Carl Genrich, Chairman Regular Meeting January 17, 1979 • • • TO: Plan Commission FROM: Jim Truesdell DATE: January 12, 1979 SUBJECT: Fiscal Impact of Proposed Land Use Changes on Buffalo Grove School Districts • Enclosed you will find a table entitled "Changes in Cost per $100 of Assessed Value Based on Proposed Changes in the Current Land Use Plan. " In this table; I have identified the fiscal , . impact of changing our land use plan on a parcel-by-parcel basis. Following the lines defining the letter_ of the parcel and the school districts which serve it, you will find three columns. The first column reflects the cost of that parcel per $100 of assessed value as identified in our existing land use plan. Column #2 identifies the cost per $100 of assessed value of the parcel if it is changed as proposed. The third column shows the difference between columns one and two. If the number has de- creased, the parcel reflects a positive fiscal impact because costs have been reduced. If the number has increased, the re- sult is a negative fiscal impact. because the cost has increased. The following table reflects the impact of these changes on the overall district: Cost per $100 Cost per $100 of Assessed Value of Assessed Value District (Current Plan) j oposed Plan) Net Charcre #21 $2.61 $2.50 -.11 #96 4.40 4.42 +.02 #102 3.56 3.6o +.04 #125 - 2.59 2.58 -.01 #214 2.96 2.75 -.21 You will notice that Districts 21 , 125, and 214 will experience a cost reduction, while Districts 96 and 102 will see an increase in costs. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me. Smu gn0 Jim Truesdell JT:jms t CHANGES IN COST PER $100 OF ASSESSED VALUE BASED ON PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE CURRENT LAND USE PLAN . Cost per Cost per $100 of $100 of Net Change in Assessed Value Assessed Value Cost per $100 Parcel District (Current Plan) (Proposed Plan) Assessed Value A 96 5.29 4.55 - .74 125 4.37 2.55 -1 .82 B 96 5.29 4.55 - .74 125 4.37 2.55 -1 .82 C 96 0 5.29 +5.29 125 0 4.37 +4.37 D 102 . 0 4. 84 +4.84 125 _ 0 2:55 +2.55 E 96 • 0 4.55 +4.55 125 0 2.55 +2.55 G 96 0 1 .70 +1 .70 • 125 0 .53 + .53 H 102 0 1 .81 +1 .81 125 0 .53 + •53 I 102 0 1 .81 +1 .81 125 0 .53 + .53 J 21 -- 1 .41 -- 214 • -- .67 -- K 21 -- 1 .41 -- 214 -- .67 -- L -- -- - -- -- M 102 4.84 4.84 o 125 . 2.55 2.55 0 N -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- P 96 0 4.55 +4.55 125 0 2.55 +2.55 Q 96 5.29 0 -5.29 125 4.37 0 -4.37 R 102 4.84 4.84 0 125 2..55 2.55 0 • S 102 4.84 0 -4.84 125 2.55 0 -2.55 1/12/79 • GREATER NEIGIIBORHOOD STUDY LAND USE CHANGES • Parcel Acres From To A 41. 8 Single family Planned dev.- 6 B 8. 5 Single family Planned dev.- 10 C 4 . 8 Open space Single family D 10. 8 Commercial Planned dev.- 10 1' 1. 4 Commercial Planned dev.- 10 G 26. 2 Commercial Multi-family • • H 2. 3 Commercial Multi-family T 15. 8 Commercial Multi-family J 23. 2 -- Multi-family K 45. 2 -- Multi-family L -- -- -- • M 6. 2 Planned dev.- 6 Planned dev.- 10 O -- -- -- P 4 . 6 Commercial Planned dev.- 6 Q 4. 6 Single family • Commercial • R 23. 4 Planned dev.- 10 Planned dev.- 6 S 17. 4 Planned dev.- 6 Open space NET ACREAGE CHANGES Single Family Planned Dev.-6 Planned Dev.-10 Multi-Family Commercial 1 +46. 2 +3. 5 +112. 7 -56.5 1 :open Space 1 +12. 6 • i ... ..• - 1--- . \ . ...iii:..... ?. .• _p_... : . 1 i ., --, ,... • . ( V i - ,a 1 1 1 1 . .. ___. ._.......___ _' t 4 P , . . • 1 . • iv, .. c . . 7::// . . ____ _ •. '4 4111 0 '''' ^ 7.i WIlibm' / i V Sk-� • • _IL i I.t i i t 1 I f iY rip i ■/ V_ • r... f i l l 111 i MIN islaI 1 m� • �► ... ..4.1 pet% : ._.__i I \ 5 - -- lip*. '.N . B ....)--,Atfre° 41 , . 6_ ‹...,.\ :, i ill ovi ft 0 a•-!-3; ' .'‘ 0 , lY . Law:K.13i .l ''t, ,:) , -E ‘.„... ,';* '' sif z�N� `' 110 •• • : r R ., a j . 7 il =El i I . Flu ii 7^•. rin . - _ am _ „:, L-7 ).„, i.• cr.. _- _-- ( I _ + �� ,tee t > -\.-::..l0:. Mil le -7,-.-:r',V•••••--..-.cc-4:--:--_:.-:-\-\.-...-,\\- lI- I,',\\(\ 40, c 4 . - __ 1•_:_::: ,.'--- :''' K •i:;:..;:o.g.:ii:ii.i.ii::.5t:.i;;::: , .. .. • /...:,•:•;::•::::.,:.:•.::..f:• . ::•'•,:::::'i,i'i';':::'::::•IN.,:li:.::.:::':1:!-:•:::' .: - • :.:_.:: „.:.::: ::....:i....... 3 - +i / (/ �"' .-_- _ter— / _ ; -� .., . • ••....... •. , i.! .... , t„,_ .1 •::.::• ::-..-:-...:„ . . ::::.:::•.:•...,..:..:, . ; " . . . •••• ••" ... . . . .. . • •• • • • . • . 1