Loading...
1976-12-08 - Plan Commission - Minutes SPECIAL MEETING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION Zale Development, Prudential/White Hen Evert/Welbel December 8, 1976 Chairman Carl Genrich called the meeting to offer at 8:10 P.M. in the Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard. Commissioners Present: Chairman Genrich Mr. Harris Mr. Keister Mr. Shields Mr. Goldspiel Mr. Jacobs Mr. Kandel Commissioners Absent: Mr. Mendenhall Also Present: Mr. Ed Zale, Developer Mr. John Mays, Attorney, Zale Development Mr. William Griffin, Hoffman Mr. Bruce Johnston, Architect, Zale & Evert/Welbel Mr. Tom Conrardy, Prudential Mr. Joe Meyer, Prudential/White Hen Mr. Ted Gaines, Attorney, Prudential/White Hen Mr. Ed Fus, White Hen Mr. Arvid Olson, Early Learning Center Mr. Robert Brandwein, Evert/Welbel Mr. Stan Crosland, Park District Mr. John Marienthal, Trustee Mr. Carl Rapp, Director of Community Development Plan Commission Appointment Commissioner Kandel made a motion that Mrs. Donna Force be appointed to the Plan Commission. Commissioner Goldspiel seconded the motion and upon vote it carried unanimously. Zale Development Mr. Johnston presented a plan dated November 18, 1976, which had been distributed earlier to the Plan Commission. The only difference on this plan was the relocation of two lots from the park in the south to the south end of the detention area. This was at the Park District's request. As requested, the developer presented the Plan Commission with a draft of the revised annexation agreement dated December 1. At the December 1 meeting of the Plan Commission the developer was given a list of changes to make in the agreement. u Plan Commission Page 2 December 8, 1976 Chairman Genrich asked Mr. Johnston to respond to the Plan Commission's request to identify lots where they could not meet a 30' rear setback. Mr. Johnston stated that there is no way to pinpoint this on a lot-by-lot basis. There will be some units in the mix that will be deep enough to require the 25' rear yard set back. At this time , they don't know what that mix will be. Any lot of 100' might need a 25' rear setback. If it is 105' or more, they will not have a problem. About 75% of the lots are 100' deep. Mr. Whited had been asked at the December 1 meeting to respond to three points: 1. Missing terminology on page 15. 2. Clarify what "substantial conformance" means 3. Check the amenities and change, if necessary He did this in his memo of December 8. After discussion, it was the general feeling of the Commission to leave "substantial conformance" as is and Mr. Zale agreed to this. Commissioner Goldspiel stated that he felt the annexation agreement dated December 1, plan dated November 18 (Exhibit #630-10) and the statistical sheet (Exhibit #630-9) should be included in the motion. Commissioner Keister moved that the Plan Commission recommend approval of the development plan and the annexation agreement of the Zale Development. Commissioner Kandel seconded the motion. Commissioner Goldspiel stated that at the December 1 meeting Mr. Kiddle had said that they were considering swapping asingle-family lot for cash and he wondered what plans had been made in this regard. Mr. Crosland stated that they were considering doing this and the additional lot will go next to lot 1 in block 6. However, the Park Board at the present time has taken no official action not having been presented with any official documents with regard to the proposed changes that are being discussed. Chairman Genrich asked if he was saying that while the Park District wants to see this in written form, they are desirous of doing this. Mr. Crosland replied that this is what he was saying and he added that the Park District feels it is important to have something done so when the potential buyers enter the premises to look at land they see a finished park site. Commissioner Kandel stated that if the Park District is going to make a change on the plan, they should do it before the Plan Commission approves it. Commissioner Keister 1 even with the lot addedi�may not be what the Park District wants because 61-il/ they have not acted on ,it. Commissioner Harris was concerned about not including in the motion items mentioned in a memo from Chairman Genrich as points that may be considered in the recommendation. Plan Commission I Page 3 December 8, 1976 Commissioner Keister stated that he would retract his motion and Commissioner Kandel agreed to retract his second of the motion. Commissioner Harris moved that the Plan Commission recommend to the Village Board the approval of the Zale Development Plan dated November 18, 1976, (marked Exhibit #630-10) together with the Annexation Agreement dated December 1, 1976, subject to the following additions: 1. That the developer agree to specify the mix in the multi-family housing with regard to the number of bedrooms in each unit. 2. In the single-family area the maximum number of bedrooms per house would be four. 3. That the developer be required to comply with the current building codes. Specifically, that the language in paragraph ]4 regarding use of PVC pipe and trench footings be eliminated. Commissioner Jacobs seconded the motion. There was a short discussion concerning the waiver of annexation fees on Parcel E in exchange for donating this land to the Village. Mr. Whited stated that he was under the impression that the Village is buying the site. It has never been considered a donated site per se. Mr. Zale added that this was something he specifically negotiated with the Village. Commissioner Harris stated he would not include this in his motion because he considers it a perogative of the Board. Upon vote, the motion carried unanimously. Prudential/White Hen Mr. Conrardy reviewed for the Plan Commission what has previously been proposed for this site. It was originally purchased by Jewel in 1970. The site plan that Jewel contemplated building at that time showed a building approximately 31,000 square feet. It faced Arlington Heights Road and had two entrances coming from Route 83 and Arlington Heights Road. The site proved to be too small for Jewel to put their type of store on. The site was originally 4.9 acres but after widening the intersection it has decreased in size to 4 acres. Jewel sold the property to White Hen and they have asked Prudential to develop the site with a White Hen and the balance in commercial. Mr. Conrardy went on to state that they are asking for a zoning change from B-3 to B-2. They are asking for subdivision whereby the parcel in the rear can go to the Early Learning Center. They are also asking for subdivision on the corner and would come back at a later date for the use for that site. The most likely use would be a restaurant. They are asking for approval of everything but the corner site. Plan Commission Page 4 December 8, 1976 Mr. Conrardy presented a site plan (Exhibit #407-5) stating that because of the dimensions of the site, it does not lend itself to ordinary commercial development. In the rear of the property is a 7,000 square foot building for the day care center. There is sufficient room for a play area and parking. This will be landscaped. They would like to have two free-standing buildings divided into stores. One group would be along Arlington Heights Road and would be 11,900 square feet. The other would be along Route 83 and would be a little deeper. The total is 13,600 square feet. They have definite users for the property. Some are small and some are bigger and that is why there is a difference in depth. There are 238 parking spaces which is more then enough according to the zoning ordinance. Mr. Conrardy stated that most of the merchants they have received inquiries from are already located in the Village and know there is a market in this section of the Village. He added that people that live around the site have been asking when the site will be developed and what the stores will be. There is a strong demand for stores at that end of the Village. A discussion followed regarding the zoning of the property. It was the feeling of the Commission that the zoning should be left as B-3 and Mr. Conrardy agreed to this. In response to a question from Commissioner Goldspiel, Mr. Conrardy stated that the restaurant would not be a drive-in type. Commissioner Keister raised a question concerning the signage of the day care center. Mr. Conrardy stated that they will have to tie this into the sign ordinance and they will work this out. Commissioner Jacobs stated that he would like to establish some precedent regarding signage along Route 83. The Village should be seriously thinking about keeping the signage down to an extreme minimum. Chairman Genrich replied that the Plan Commission can make a statementAn this regard at a future date. Commissioner Kandel questioned White Hen facing Arlington Heights Road. He thought at previous meetings the Plan Commission was opposed to this. Commissioner Keister stated that this was because only White Hen was facing Arlington Heights Road and that was all you could see. In the present plan, there are other stores facing this direction also. Commissioner Kandel asked if they had any thoughts about what the exterior of the building; would be like. Mr. Meyer stated that they would probably be colonial or slightly contemporary. They haven' t worked this out yet. It was suggested by Commissioner Jacobs that they blend in with the architecture of the commercial which is to go in across Arlington Heights Road. Plan Commission Page 5 December 8, 1976 Commissioner Harris expressed his concern regarding curb cuts and Mr. Whited replied that this can be worked out. Commissioner Keister added that pedestrian traffic and internal flow should be looked into also. Mr. Conrardy stated that they will discuss this with engineering. Commissioner Goldspiel also was concerned about these points. Mr. Whited stated that there may be an objection from the Police Department regarding the fact that there is no access to the rear of the day care center and it would be difficult to patrol. Mr. Olson stated that they are in a similar situation where they are now located in Buffalo Grove and it has worked out well. Commissioner Goldspiel asked Mr. Olson about the age of the children in the day care center. Mr. Olson stated that they would be f rom3 to 6. They are licensed for 2i to 20. A short discussion followed regarding the licensing of the day care center. In response to Commissioner Goldspiel, Mr. Olson stated there is about 10,000 square feet of outdoor play area and this will be fenced. Commissioner Goldspiel stated that he does not think the plan has a very good traffic pattern and has the feeling it could create a lot of problems. Commissioner Shields asked if they had considered opening up the green space between the restaurant and White Hen. Mr. Conrardy replied that this depends on what the Village wants. Commissioner Harris informed the developer that according to the ordinance they have to have 50' from the property line to the building and the day care center will have to be moved up a little. Chairman Genrich summarized with the following points: 1. The developer should resolve with Mr. Whited whether or not a Public Hearing is required. The Plan Commission will meet again with them in mid-January. He suggested that the developer sit down with the Staff and get their input before drawing up anything further. 2. The developer should meet with the Staff and refine the plan according to the points that have been identified: (a) See if some pedestrian access can be included (b) Curb cuts (c) Internal traffic pattern (d) Ordinance requirements (e) The setbacks and buffers that are required (f) Sidewalks \-.1 • Plan Commission Page 6 December 8, 1976 Evert/Weibel Mr. Brandwein stated that he is representing Mr. Alan Welbel and Mr. Lee Sherwood who are now owners and developers of the property located at the southeast corner of Route 83 and the proposed extension of Pauline Avenue. The Zale Development is adjacent to this piece of property. They propose to annex to the Village and are requesting R-8 zoning. This would be consistent with the Master Plan and provide multiple uses which would balance with the single-family now being developed in the area. Legally, they will have continuity to the Village through the Brunswick tract (Zale). Mr. Johnston presented an aerial photograph on which they placed the subject property in red. It consists of 22.87 acres. As it exists, it is not contiguous to the Village. The contiguity will be gained through the Zale property in the north. This photograph also showed the boundary lines of the Village. It indicated the M-1 parcel to the north of Route 83 which is very close but not contiguous. An overlay to the above plan showed the surrounding zoning classifications that are existing at the present time. It also showed the proposed Master Plan business district to the west and south of the site. Mr. Johnston presented a map showing all the natural features that now exist. The majority of the property flows east. A small portion on the west flows south and north and a portion on the north flows to the north. There is a small area of trees on the east end of the site. Mr. Johnston showed Discussion Plan A (Exhibit #128-1). This had been previously distributed to the Plan Commission members. This plan showed the potential development utilizing the access to the site by virtue of Pauline Avenue. The concept is one of developing a flowing green belt system with a simple loop road system that ties back into Pauline Avenue. Mr. Johnston stated that the units are generally two-bedroom with some three-bedroom units. The building is one they have developed before but have yet to complete. It is essentially a four-flat building. There is a common entranceway with a secondary stairway in the back. There is an occasional two-story townhouse. The units are all two-story and will range in square footage from 1,000 to 1250. This will generate 282 units which gives a gross density of 12.33 units per acre with a 2:1 parking ratio. Mr. Johnston stated that they propose a continuation of the bike path system and have shown the retention areas. He added that these will probably be detention areas. Mr. Johnston referred to Plan B which was essentially the same building with a garage. There was also a 2:1 parking ratio in this plan. He added that these plans are simply demonstrative. 'II Plan Commission Page 7 December 8, 1976 Commissioner Kandel stated that he does not like to offer zoning on a parcel unless he sees what will actually be built there. He would like to see what the developer has in mind and asked what type of building would go in there. Mr. Johnston replied that they have no specific building in mind. The simplest way to develop the road system is to extend to the east Pauline Avenue. He added that the buildable areas generally fall in the middle of the site and the development will have to be planned with these facts in mind. At such time as a plan is developed it would come through for plan approval. They would be willing to put this in the annexation agreement. Commissioner Keister stated that he would also like to tie the annexation down to some sort of preliminary plan. Commissioner Harris stated that they show ownership into Route 83 but are now showing ownership into the proposed intersection. Mr. Johnston replied that the intersection is owned by Zale. Commissioner Harris asked who would build Pauline Avenue east to Weiland. Mr. Johnston stated that they don' t know yet. The center of the roadway is on their northerly property line. In response to Commissioner Harris, Mr. Brandwein stated that they would be willing to consider developing their side of the road. Commissioner Harris stated that he does not care for straight zoning. Commissioner Goldspiel stated that he has no objection to straight zoning and asked if the developer would be able to delineate what areas would be donated. Mr. Johnston replied that it is impossible to specify donations without a plan. At such time they have a plan with the number of units, they would know what the donations would be and those would be made at that time according to the ordinance. Commissioner Goldspiel asked if there was any possibility of convincing the developer that there might be some taller units and thereby allow more green area, particularly on the side near the proposed Village Center site on Route 83. Mr. Johnston stated that they are amenable to this. They showed two-story on the discussion plan just to show the greatest coverage. Chairman Genrich restated the developers' request for straight R-8 zoning and annexation and his agreement to plan approval in the annexation agreement. He added that the Plan Commission would be more satisfied if they had a plan that is a part of the request, recognizing that the land may be sold or the owners may be developing this themselves. Mr. Brandwein stated that there are advantages to the Village in having this property. On the other hand, if the developers do the engineering and take another step into the marketing now and finalize plans which later turn out to be ones they don't want to proceed with, that is an enormous undertaking and expense for a parcel of this size. Chairman Genrich stated that he did not think it was necessary to go into a lot of market research and engineering studies. Plan Commission Page 8 December 8, 1976 Commissioner Harris stated that he does not think it would be an advantage to the Village to take in a piece of property that has no plan for development. The Village loses control if this property is annexed without a plan. Mr. Marienthal stated that when the Board referred this to the Plan Commission they expected a plan to come out of it. He added that he would like to see a plan. In summary, Chairman Genrich made the following points: 1. He asked the developer to consider what was said about the desirability of a plan from the standpoint of the Village Board and Plan Commission. 2. He asked the developer to put together a first draft of an annexation agreement. He added that the Plan Commission will meet with them early in January and at that time the Public Hearing date would be set. Adjournment Commissioner Shields made a motion that the meeting be adjourned. Commissioner Goldspiel seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, _ U2,Z)ef )4i-A-i-1 Linda Isonhart Recording Secretary APPROVED: d4e 4 Carl Genrich, Chairman