Loading...
1976-08-25 - Plan Commission - Minutes WORKSHOP SESSION BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION Zale Development August 25, 1976 Chairman Carl Genrich called the meeting to order at 8:05 p.m. in the Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard. Commissioners Present: Chairman Genrich Mr. Keister Mr. Shields Mr. Goldspiel Mr. Kandel Commissioners Absent: Mr. Mendenhall Mr. Harris Mr. Jacobs Mr. Kuenz Also Present: Mr. Ed Zale, Zale Construction Co. Mr. John Mays, Hoffman Group, Inca Mr. Robert Cowhey, Engineer, Cowhey Associates Mr. Charles Bencic, Engineer, Hoffman Group, Inc. Mr. Bruce Johnston, Architect, Johnston Associates Mr. Jon Nelson, Architect, Johnston Associates Mr. Harold Roggendorf, District 102 Mr. Stan Crosland, Park District Mr. John Marienthal, Trustee Mr. Charles McCoy, Director of Public Works Mr. Carl Rapp, Assistant Village Engineer Mr. William Whited, Administrative Assistant Mr. Zale stated that since their last meeting with the Plan Commission they have met with the Park District, Village Engineer and Public Works. He then introduced Mr. Bruce Johnston and asked him to discuss the revised plan. Mr. Johnston stated that instead of making a full presentation, he would explain just the revised plan. The property is bounded oa the north by Busch Road, on the east by Weiland Road and near the small extension oa the southwest is Paulina with an intersection at Route 83. In their petition for annexation, Mr. Johnston stated, they are requesting single-family detached lots With a minimum size of 6500 square feet and an average size of 8000 square feet, 7.5 acres of multi-family and 5 acres of commercial. Mr. Johnston stated that the major road system is intact. They still have the Major collector street and the minor collector street. Plan Commission Page 2 August 25, 1976 They have eliminated the rear yard green belt scheme which they referred to as a bike path. It is now out on the street. Mr. Johnston stated that one question that has been raised is the mixed land use. At present, the market will support only the single-family. At this stage they can't develop the multi-family or commercial. However, they may be able to develop the commercial after the single-family is-in. The revised plan increases the average lot size. In order to do this they have come in with more cul-de-sac streets. Some of the lots are in excess of 12000. square feet. Mr. Johnston put an overlay on the revised plan which showed just the parks and proposed pedestrian and bicycle path system. The sidewalks are 4' wide and the bicycle path is 5' wide. They have tied the bicycle path into the property on the south and on the west as requested in the Master Plan. At their meeting with the Park District they were asked to break up the park area on the south end. As a result, they now have two smaller parks. The park on the west side is part of the adjoining developments open space. All but one of the parks has access on two sides. This one has a very large frontage so there is good access to all the park sites. Mr. Johnston stated that the number of lots that front on the major collector street has been minimized to about 20 which is a reduction of about 1/3. Mr. Nelson gave the following figures in comparing the revised with the original plan: Present Previous Commercial 5-- acres 4.5 acres Multi-family 120 units 124 units 16 units per acre 15.5 units per acre 7.5 acres 8 acres Duplex dropped 132 lots Single-family 674 586 Total Units 794 842 Gross Site Density 3.79 4.02 Total Open Space 24.37 acres 27.11 acres Mr. Rapp stated that he has written his response regarding this development but feels there is something the Plan Commission should be made aware of. In his opinion, the 8000 square foot lot average is misleading. A high Plan Commission Page 3 August 25, 1976 percentage, possibly 80%, are 6300 square feet rather then 8000 square feet. The large periphery lots on the cul-de-sacs brings about the 8000 square foot average. Mr. Zale stated that he would dispute the 80% figure. It is more like 50%. He added that they would Obtain an exact figure on this. Mr. Whited stated that he does not feel the new bike path system will be adequate by the national standards for a bike path system. The recommended width is 8 feet. In addition, he does not think there Will be room for cars and bikes on the streets. Mr. Whited further stated that the previous plan was a much better distribution of open space than this one. The idea behind a green-way system is to connect shopping, parks, etc. , with a system not necessarily running together with the road system. This system is all on the streets. The previous system ties the parks together much better. In response to a question from Commissioner Goldspiel, Mr. Johnston stated that the bicycle path would be in the position of a sidewalk but would be a little wider. Crossing areas on the street would be delineated and the curb would be eased where it meets the street. Once the path hits a park or open space it will go into it. Mr. Whited stated that this property is coming in as a PUD. In a PUD the Village agrees to be flexible in administering their zoning restrictions if they get something in return. In his opinion, the Village is not getting anything in return in this instance. Commissioner Shields stated that the bicycle path in the pretest play would be much easier to obtain. However, it changes the concept is his mind. Mr. Johnston stated that if it were in the back it wouldn't carry pedestrians as well as bikes in both directions. He added that most people don't want to live in an area where there.,is. an access to the back of their .property. They weighed all the facts and considered the fact that the Plan Commission,_ had said they would rather have;,larger "lots .and decided to a1.ter'.;the scheme and get rid of the greenbelts, Commissioner Goldspiel stated that he felt it was not a good idea to call something that is also a sidewalk a bike path. There is a Village ordinance saying you cannot ride a bike on the sidewalk. There will be a- conflict between the bikes and the young child pedestrian. Commissioner Goldspiel asked how deep the creek is. Mr. Cowhey-stated that it is 7' deep. The depth of the water varies throughout the -year. Regarding further questions concerning the creek asked by Commissioner ' Goldspiel, Mr. Cowhey stated that they would have to wait for more detailed engineering work to be done. It is much to early to give an exact answer. Commissioner Goldspiel stated that he thinks it is essential to have the street widths called for in the ordinance. Also, he is in total agreement with Mr. Whited's comment. He does not see what is gained by zoning the property as a PUD. \ I Plan Commission Page 4 August 25, 1976 Commissioner Goldspiel asked if the figures were based on all three-bedroom units. Mr. Johnston stated that they are but they are not saying that there will not be any two or four-bedroom units. If there are, however, the figures will be adjusted accordingly. Chairman Genrich asked Mr. Roggendor'f for the school district's reaction to this development at this point. Mr. Roggendorf stated that the School Board feels the developer has been very eager to work with them and meet the Village resolution. They have met the 8 acre donation and agree to give the equivalent in money. Regarding industry, this is what Aptakisic-Tripp needs. The Board would be eager to see industry come into the area. However, they have not taken a stand against the Zale development. They are looking more at acreage behind the school for industry. Commissioner Kandel asked why they wanted to be zoned PUD. Mr. Zale stated that the Village requested the PUD so they would have better control over the entire development. It doesn't matter to him if they go PUD or not. Commissioner Keister stated that he does not see any particular advantage to the Village in the revised plan. There are still a great number of Ii small lots with no amenities. Regarding the bike path in the present plan, he does not regard it as suitable or usable for a bike path. He would rather see the bike paths behind the single-family homes. Mr. Johnston had stated earlier that the Park District had stated that the bike paths behind the homes would be hard to maintain but Commissioner Keister thought they should try it. They have not had the experience of maintaining bike paths. The bike paths behind the single-family homes would overshadow the size of the lots. Commissioner Keister f thei stated that the Village's experience with minimum lot size homes has been somewhat tragic in that in trying to take care of drainage problems they end up with deep trench ditches behind single*family homes which is more appalling than having bike paths behind them. The Village is currently considering a change in the PUB ordinance which would require a developer to draft up a drainage site plan before approval. He encourages the developer to do this so it will not be of so much concern. Chairman Genrich stated that he had asked Commissioner Kuenz to look into the problem of greenway paths. Commissioner Kuenz was not at the meeting but he asked Mr. Whited if he could report on their findings since he had worked with Mr. Kuenz regarding this. lam. Whited stated that they had come up with three alternatives: 1. Eliminate the bike path system. 2. The Village could maintain it. 3. Have the Park District maintain it. Plan 'Commission Page 5 August 25, 1976 Possible solutions to help pay for maintaining it might be bikeathons=or a licensing fee on bikes. Mr. Whited stated that it comes down to a question of values. Commissioner Kuenz does not feel they are worth the effort and Mr. Whited thinks they are. He added that it is a value judgement that should be decided on by the Board of Trustees. Chairman Genrich asked Mr. Crosland for the Park Districts reaction to the greenbelt system. Mr. Crosland stated that the design is indicative of the concept that educational and recreational bodies combine forces inaharing facilities and trying to find centralized locations. As a plan, Mr. Crosland stated that the revised plan has some of the recommendations on it that the Park District offered. He cannot speak of the bike paths because they are dealing with a Village ordinance and he cannot speak of that. Mr. Zale stated that they could go either way on the bike paths. If the Plan Commission feels that the other concept can be:maintained and work and if they prefer it, he has no objection. Regarding the backyard drainage, Mr. Zale stated that he looked at the area of the Village which is having problems with drainage on the minimum size lots and feels that this is something they will have to be careful of. They will not get into that situation. Chairman Genrich asked for the Commission's feelings regarding the bike paths on the plan. Should they go with the present concept or go back basically to the original plan. Mr. Zale stated that he wished to express his feelings regarding the bike path system. He does not feel that the bike patjts behind the single-family homes will work. Commissioner Keister stated that the new layout has some advatages over the first but he would like to go with the bike paths. Commissioner Kandel stated that he agrees with Mr. Zale. He does not think they should be eliminated but should be out front where they can. be maintained economically. They do not necessarily have to be in conjunction with the sidewalk. Commissioner Shields stated that he feels the bike paths are an excellent idea but in a practical sense he doesn't think the narrow strips behind the houses will work out. Commissioner aoldspiel stated that regarding the bike paths he could go either way. However, he likes the street pattern in the new plan better than the original. Chairman Genrich stated that the bike path system behind the single,-family homes is something he had hoped could be done and finally there is a developer that is willing to work with the Village on this. He asked if it would be acceptable if they tried the bike path in one area to see if it works. The Plan Commission was in agreement that one small east-west stretch near the center of the property be tried to see if it will work. Plan Commission Page 6 August 25, 1976 Mr. McCoy stated that the bike paths will not work with private maintenance. However, he does not see them as a maintenance headache for the Village. Ni', McCoy proposed that some of the cul-de-sacs be eliminated. The Village would have to buy extra equipment just to maintain these. Mr. Sale stated that this is a problem that they cannot solve because they are looking at it from a planner's standpoint. They can eliminate some of:the cul-de- sacs but prefer not to because it is a much nicer plan with them. They I cannot come back with a revised plan eliminating the cul-de-sacs and give the Plan Commission something they will like. He added that they will try to effect a compromise in this area. Chairman Genrich asked Mr. McCoy if there are any major problems with the plan which should be discussed tonight. Mr. McCoy stated there are two: 1. The development is bounded by Busch and Weiland Road and he sees no mention of the developer making improvements on the right-of-ways. 2. The collector streets are inadequate in width in both right-of-way and pavement. Commissioner Goldspiel stated that he felt it was essential that they put sidewalks on Busch and Weiland Road. Mr. Johnston stated that on both Busch and Weiland they have brought the bicycle system out to the street. With these, they do not feel that sidewalks are necessary. Commissioner Keister stated that he feels the plan is acceptable as it is. without the sidewalks. Mr. Zale stated that there are sidewalks on both sides of the major collector street and on one side of the ether streets. Mr. Zale informed the Commission that he would talk about sidewalks but as far as the other improvements (street lights, trees, etc.), they absolutely will not do it. Chairman Genrich read from the June 30 minutes which statedtbat Mr. Seaberg could not accept the 27' collector streets but was not asking for anymore right-of-way. Chairman Genrich then asked for Mr. McCoy's broad reaction to this. Mr. McCoy stated that he would like as much right-of way as he could get. However, if more right-of-way would make the plan not usable he would be amenable to toning it down. He added that he didn't think he would object to the 4' sidewalks but the federal guidelines for a bike path call foran 8 foot width. He could possibly accept 7' but not 5'. Two bikes could not pass on 5'. Chairman Genrich stated that he will go over with Mr. Larson, the Staff and the developer what appear to be key issues that have not been resolved and they will reach an accommodation prior to the next meeting. A Public Hearing can be scheduled at the next meeting. He asked if the Plan Commission :had any objections to this. There were none. . Plan Commission Page 7 August 25, 1976 f Chairman Genrich asked Mr. Zale to add the following to the points listed in the June 30 minutes: 1. Show the east-west network of bike paths on the revised plan. 2. Consider the drainage problem on minimum size lots. 3. Try to effect a compromise on the cul-de-sacs. Future Agenda Chairman Genrich stated that Mr. Frank would like to meet with the Plan Commission to discuss his single-family plans. The-Plan Commission agreed to schedule a Public Hearing for this developer. Chairman Genrich stated that at the next meeting the Plan Commission will discuss as a *ajor item some Staff recommendations for changes in the commercial sections of the zoning ordinance. Commissioner Goldspiel stated that comments had been made by the Lake County Planning Commission regarding the growth and planning of Buffalo Grove. These comments were published in the Herald. He wanted the Plan Commission's opinion on responding to them and asking them to meet with the Plan Commission. After discussion regarding this, no action was taken. The meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, L da Tsonhar Recording Secretary CL1 c (/, V