Loading...
1977-12-07 - Plan Commission - Minutes REGULAR MEETING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION Holzrichter/Taggart, Anden/Hawthorne December 7, 1977 Chairman Carl Genrich called the meeting to order at 8:10 P.M. in the Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard. Commissioners Present: Chairman Genrich Mr. Harris Mr. Shields Mr. Goldspiel Mr. Kandel Mrs. Force Mrs. Sheldon Commissioners Absent: Mr. Capital Also Present: Mr. Ed Holzrichter, Developer Mr. J. V. Raccuglia, Architect, Holzrichter Mr. Jerry DeGrazia, Anden Corp. Mr. James Mikes, Attorney, Anden Corp. Mr. Perry Snyderman, Attorney, Anden Corp. Mr. Stan Crosland, Park District Mr. John Marienthal, Trustee Mr. Bart Delaney, Planning Coordinator Mr. Tom Fennell, Director of Community Development and Planning Approval of Minutes Commissioner Shields moved to approve the minutes of November 16. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Force. Upon voice vote the motion carried. Commissioner Kandel abstained. Commissioner Goldspielmoved to approve the minutes of the Public Hearing of November 30. Commissioner Force seconded the motion. Upon voice vote the motion carried. Commissioner Kandel abstained. Commissioner Goldspiel moved to approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of November 30. Commissioner Force seconded the motion. Upon voice vote the motion carried that the minutes be approved subject to the following correction: On page 5, paragraph 5, line 2, Village Manager should be Village President. Commissioner Kandel abstained. Communications Chairman Genrich reported that he had received a letter dated November 23 from President Fabish asking that when the Plan Commission approves a Plan Commission R.M. 12/7/77 -2- final plat they make sure that everything is complete on it and he would also like them to sign it before passing it on to the Board. Holzrichter/Taggart Mr. Delaney reported that there were a couple comments made by the Police and Fire Departments concerning access for emergency vehicles. They would like to see a sidewalk, or something similar, that could be used for pedestrian use and also emergency vehicles between the buildings and golf course. He added that they were also concerned about the one access point into the condominiums and how it lines up with other streets. He does not see how �•/ it can be lined up with any other street than Cambridge Drive. Regarding the question of sidewalks along the right-of-way, this is some- thing that needs to be addressed.•by the engineering staff. Normally, when a right-of-way is developed it is developed with sidewalks, curbs, etc. He thinks there will be a public sidewalk along Dundee Road. Regarding detention requirements, the golf course itself is a major detention area in the MSD system. With the abundance of open space, some retention can be provided, if necessary. Mr. Fennell does not view this as a major problem. In response to Chairman Genrich's inquiry regarding a park donation, Mr. Holzrichter stated that Mr. Crosland and the Park Board indicated that the construction of the tennis courts would suffice. Mr. Crosland stated that it was stated at the Park Board meeting that the construction costs would not meet the resolution and they have since asked for an explanation of that particular point. The question that remains is: Does the development of private recreation facilities meet the resolution based on what the Village defines. Mr. Holzrichter offered construction cost for the tennis courts in lieu of either land or meeting a cash donation. The Park District's contention is that a cash dedication for construction purposes does not meet a land donation. However, it has to be determined by the Village Board whether these construction costs would go towards a cash contribution. Mr. Crosland went on to state that the summation of the meeting is that the Park Board receive from the Village Board their interpretation of how this private donation fer submission of lands meets the resolution. He also wondered if it could be included in the annexation agreement that the land be annexed to the park and library as well as the Village. Regarding the dedication of utilities, Commissioner Harris asked if the Village should take these mains over since there are two buildings under single ownership which possible someday could be under two different ownerships. Mr. Fennell replied that he would suspect that the connections would be directly into the Village water and sewer, each building separately. In response to Commissioner Harris, Mr. Holzrichter stated that the water is directly across the street (south of Dundee Road) and there is a sewer to the east. Commissioner Kandel asked if there would be signals at the intersection of Cambridge and Dundee Road. Mr. Fennell replied that there would not be. Plan Commission RM. 12/7/77 -3- Commissioner Kandel stated that there are problems now in being able to get out of Cambridge-Oh-The-Lake. He felt this should be looked into because it will be worse once this project is developed. Mr. Fennell stated that he didn't think there would be a problem getting a left-hand turn lane off of Dundee into this development. Commissioner Kandel felt the sidewalks and their placement should be considered. On the south side of Dundee they are right next to the curb and he felt this should be prevented on the north side. Commissioner Sheldon questioned the adequacy of the parking. Mr. Fennell stated that it was more than enough. Mr. Holzrichter informed the Commission that he had cut the parking spaces from 60 out and 60 in to 50 out and 50 in. The plan shown is different from the one the commissioners have. In response to Commissioner Kandel, Mr. Holzrichter stated that there will be fencing along the golf course. He added that he also would like to have the sidewalk on Dundee off of the street. Commissioner Goldspiel felt that Cambridge Drive should be extended north to the property line of this development in the event that the golf course is developed. It should also be a dedicated street. It would be an access to Dundee Road. Commissioner Harris felt that whatever is developed on the golf course should have their main entrance onto Buffalo Grove Road. In response to Commissioner Force, Mr. Holzrichter stated that the open areas of the development would be private. Commissioner Force asked him if he would entertain the idea of not having the tennis courts and just have open space. Mr. Holzrichter stated that he would. Commissioner Sheldon suggested that the developer put the parking in the rear so it would not be visible from Dundee Road. Mr. Holzrichter stated that there will be very few cars in the lot and it would be heavily land- scaped. Regarding the busing situation, Mr. Delaney stated he was unable to reach District 21 due to a recent tragedy. He was also unable to contact District 214. Commissioner Goldspiel asked if there is a sidewalk needed either to the east or west along the rest of the property in order to save money in regard to busing. Mr• Fennell stated that he would get a report on this. Regarding tennis courts, Chairman Genrich stated that if the developer could give the people living in the apartments some amenities, it would be a plus. Mr. Holzrichter stated that he felt this way, too, and if the Board insists on having them there, he will. It was the general consensus of the Plan Commission that they- assume the tennis courts will be there and ask the Village Board and Park District to make a recommendation to the. Regarding the placement of the tennis courts, Mr. Fennell suggested that something be done, like splitting them up, to open up the view of the golf course. Plan Commission R.M. 12/7/77 -4- Mr. Raccuglia stated that they would like to see the buildings brought in from the property line. Right now they are 30, from the lot line. Mr. Fennell agreed with this. Commissioner Harris stated that according to the ordinance, they have to be brought in further. Mr. Fennell suggested violating the front yard setback and angle the buildings. However, the architect wanted to violate as few requirements as possible. Chairman Genrich stated that this is a long strip of land and it seems to almost dictate something parallel with the street in terms of logic. Mr. Holzrichter stated that he doesn't want to tilt the buildings because then the view would be of the single-family homes. Commissioner Harris stated that he, too, would like to see the parking in the back. Mr. Raccuglia replied that they would berm it along Dundee and the parking would not be visible. Chairman Genrich summarized with the following points: 1. The plan on which the Public Hearing will be held is the plan presented tonight with a change in the eastern and western building setbacks to conform with the R-9 zoning and PUD zoning requirements. 2. The Plan Commission will proceed on the basis that the tennis courts will be there: a. Mr. Fennell is going to give some consideration to putting them in a different place if he feels it would be a better esthetic treatment. b. The Plan Commission will ask the Park District Staff and Village Staff to recommend to the Plan Commission, assuming that the tennis courts will be built, what kind of dollar contribution will be adequate to fulfill the requirements of 72-35. Also, give the figures of what it would cost without the tennis courts. 3. The Plan Commission has to know where the storm water will go. They should receive a statement that it will go on the golf course or if it is on the property, it has to be shown on the plan. (Staff recommendation) 4. The Public Hearing will be held on January 18 and the things that the developer needs to do and the Staff needs to do should be written up and available by January 11. 5. Chairman Genrich would like the Staff to consider the points made about where the parking lot is and how it looks and if they have further suggestions, advance them. 6. The developer should have a planting scheme showing the treatment of berms, and/or landscaping around the parking lot by January 11. 7. Commissioner Harris should review the annexation agreement by January 11 and if he has comments, forward them to Bart. In the annexation agreement should be the number of units and the bedroom count. Plan Commission R.M. 12/7/77 -5- 1 8. The developer should show the following on the revised plan and have it available by January 11: a. Setback lines b. The interior street widths c. If the storm water detention/retention is on site, show the limits. d. Sidewalks e. In some way, show the fire truck access plan that is worked out with the Staff. f. Show structures 9. The Staff should review this plan and specifically check all the conditions of R-9 and PUD and if there are exceptions, identify what they are. 10. The Village Staff should resolve how the kids get to school. 11. A list of surrounding residents for advertising the Public Hearing should be given to Bart within the next week. Anden/Hawthorne Mr. Mikes stated that he had provided a letter stating what they wanted as requested. Basically, they are asking for a change in plan. Tonight they are asking for the Plan Commission's assistance in making a decision between now and December 15 on whether to go ahead with the purchase of the property. Mr. DeGrazia stated that they tried to take the advice of the Commission and take a look at doing something different than entirely single-family. As a result, they are considering multi-family for the area north of Lake Cook Road and south of Armstrong extended. There are 123 lots in the single-family and the multi-family is approximately 10 acres. They have done three different alternative plans as to what might work in this location. They are looking at between 10 and 15 units per acre and this would be about 120-1?5 units on the southern portion. Mr. DeGrazia went on to state that they already have the product for the single-family. Regarding the multi-family, the company is willing to proceed with a multi-family if they can proceed reasonably fast to the north so they can move ahead and be in business in 1978 on the north section. They will work with the Plan Commission in developing something with more imagination and something different for the southern section. In summation, their proposal is that they would agree to go between 10 and 15 units per acre and go through the process in terms of amending the plan if they can be considered for single-family to the north and get it moving and get the cash flow going so they can take some time on the multi-family. Commissioner Harris stated that the developer is partially helping the economic impact but going ahead with the single-family first does not Plan Commission R.M. 12/7/77 -6- help it, the mutli-family does. He would like them to build the multi- family first and not rush into this. Mr. DeGrazia replied that they can't do that because they can't wait. He understands the concern about the school system but asks that the Commission understand their concern about the viability of a development. They are willing to work with the Village on this. Commissioner Goldspiel stated that he agrees with Commissioner Harris concerning doing the single-family now and multi-family later. Mr. DeGrazia replied that they will do the multi-family as fast as the Village can act and they can act on developing a plan. The point is, they have the buildings for the single-family units now and they know they will work. He added that the plan is an R-9 PUD but the single-family is basically an R-5 with 7200 square foot lots. Commissioner Goldspiel stated that he would like to see the impact figures before making a determination. He thinks there should be some kind of phasing so everything gets built as planned. Mr. Snyderman stated that he would like to have a serious study of the land use for the multiple family. He has to have a readying from the Commission as to whether or not they want this development. He added that they will tie into a reasonable development time schedule for the multi-family. Commissioner Goldspiel stated that when he was talking about phasing, he was actually talking about starting work on the multi-family before the single-family is finished. Mr. Snyderman replied that they can start the development of the multi-family prior to the final plat approval of whatever phase of the single-family is tied into. Commissioner Force stated that she cannot live with this plan. She feels there is already a large amount of single-family in the Village which is basically the same type of home. She is very hesitant about commiting to this amount of single-family at this time. Commissioner Shields stated that he supports the plan. In response to Commissioner Kandel, Chairman Genrich stated that a letter had been received by the Plan Commission from District 102 stating that they are opposed to this development. However, this developer has indicated that he would consider this as a new development and will meet the requirements of the school district. The school district was considering the entire Hawthorne project, so they are actually coming out ahead on this. Commissioner Kandel stated that his concern was with the school district and whether they had a problem with the timing of the plan. He can live with the plan. Mr. Marienthal stated that whether this site is developed or not, District 102 is "behind the eight ball" already. They should have started construction the a new school by now. At this point in time, it doesn't make any difference what goes on here with this development. Plan Commission R.M. 12/7/77 -7- Commissioner Harris asked why the problem should be compounded. The problems they have now were brought on by the Village allowing these developments to be built. Why make the problem worse than it already is? Commissioner Sheldon stated that she cannot live with the plan because if the Village is ever going to do anything to help their tax base they have got to stop and consider how much single-family they presently have under approval. They need to develop the town center and bring in some light industry. Chairman Genrich stated that the Village needs some variety. They need higher density in the right place and this would be the place. : If the developer makes the decision that even though he is receiving some negative reaction from the Plan Commission, he feels the Village Board will look favorable on this development, the Plan Commission will work with him. Mr. Snyderman stated that he would advise his client to go ahead with the development. Chairman Genrich stated that as they move ahead they should be aware that the park designation on the plan may or may not be a park and the Village require adherence to Resolution 72-35 and it would require some engineering study. Perhaps they could show storm water detention/retention and also show the limits of a 100-year flood and possibly the lesser one so we can determine what the requirements will be. Mr. DeGrazia stated that they have talked with the Park District and they will recontour, regrade, seed a0provide a low-flow bypass in the detention/ retention basin so it will be usable 80%cor 90% of the time. They indicated that in accordance with the original plan all dedications already have been made and they are to receive some type of confirmation from the Staff or Village prior to the Public Hearing and they will abide by the decision that is made. Commissioner Harris stated that he wanted to clarify his statement regarding this plan. He does not want any single-family in this development. Zoning Ordinance Changes The Public Hearing on the changes in the Zoning Ordinance will be held on January 18. Chairman Genrich asked that the single-family developers be notified of this hearing. Adjournment Commissioner Shields moved to adjourn and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Force. The meeting adjourned at 11:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, APPROVED: Linda Isonhart Recording Secretary Carl Genrich, Chairman Plan Commission R.M. 12/7/77