Loading...
1971-02-03 - Plan Commission - Minutes Tr14_,JA, 434 MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PLAN COMMISSION OF THE VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE HELD ON FEBRUARY 3 , 1971 . The following are minutes of a public hearing held on February 3, 1971 which is an adjourned public hearing from January 20 , 1971 reference an application for special use planned development for property already zoned R-9 . Chairman Berth called the meeting to order at approximately 8 : 07 F.M. The following commissioners were present : Chairman Berth; Mr. Guidotti , Mr. Genrich, Mr. Haarr, Mr. Gamm, Mr. Fader and Mr. Yost . Absent were : Mr. Heinrich, Mrs . Spence , Mr. Hoyt and Mr . Mendenhall . Also present were Mr. Edward Fabish, Trustee, and Mr. Richard Raysa, Village Attorney. Chairman Berth stated that when the hearing was adjourned, Mr. Hoyt had the floor and he asked whether Mr. Hoyt wished to add anything further. Mr. Hoyt presented Chairman Berth with a petition signed by 253 residents opposing the apartment project . Chairman Berth read the petition which asked that the land be condemned and purchased for a park site . Mr. Hoyt stated he had nothing further at this time . Chairman Berth then recognized Mr. Kiddie , President of the Park District who stated they are a third party in the proceedings and under the Qregg Builders Agreement the land reserved for the park site is to be ee e to the Village . He stated he would hope that the Village and Petitioner will settle their affairs in haste so that the park district will receive the land. He stated the attorney for the district has read the Gregg Builders agreement and sees no reason for a delay in the conveyance . Mr. Kiddie stated they would not start developing the site until they had the deed. Further , Mr. Kiddie expressed concern relative the retention pond shown in the exhibits near the park site . He suggested the pond be relocated iri the residential portion of the project . He further asked that the engineer will see to it that the lines of easement are rigidly enforced. Mr. John Walker of 272 Anthony was then sworn as a witness . Mr. Walker stated he is represented the Buffalo Grove Women' s Club at the request of the President of the Club and would like to read a letter from the Club reference the proposed development . The letter was read -by Mr. Walker and is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Doc. #PC-6 . • t - 2 Mr. John Barger, Assistant School Superintendent of District #21 was then sworn as a witness . Mr. Barger stated he is not here to either oppose or approve the project but simply as a representative to find out items that they consider important . He stated there does not seem to be adequate traffic patterns to the school for the children to walk to school and asked that this point be given consideration when the Commissioners make their decisions concerning the project or recommendations for changes . Chairman Berth asked Mr. Barger whether he wished to comment on the influx of children from the development to the school . Mr . Barger stated that every development presents problems to schools , however, the property was zoned multi-family at the time the school was built so it was anticipated that it would be developed eventually. He stated in order to serve the area, attendance boundary shifts will have to be made since they desire to keep all schools walking schools . He stated it is not an impossible situation and questioned further by Mr. Berth concerning split shifts , Mr. Barger stated he did not think it would require split shifts to serve the development . Mr. Haupt , attorney for the petitioner , questioned Mr , Barger as to whether he had examined the statistical data presented to the Plan Commission concerning the number of children projected and the tax revenue . Mr. Barger stated the report is accurate as to projected number of children, however , the financial figures are outdated by a year due to rise in cost . Mr. Hoyt , attorney for the citizens opposing the project , questioned Mr . Barger concerning the affect of the day care center attracting families with young children and stbsequent impact upon the school . Mr. Barger stated the amount of children are based on certain norms which are difficult to standardize . He stated it could be a factor, however, he did not know. Questioned by Mr. Hoyt concerning the traffic pattern effect on the school , Mr. Barger stated it wouldcbpend on the adequacy of walkways which should be provided. There being no further testimony from Spokesmen from Groups , Chairman Berth stated he would now hear testimony from individuals . Mr. John Walker stated he wished to give testimony on behalf of himself concerning the project and adequacy of water. He then read a letter which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Doc . #PC- 7 . J There was no further testimony from individuals . Chairman Berth then called for questions or comments from the audience . There were no questions or comments . Chairman Berth then asked the Commissioners whether they had any questions . - 3 - U Mr. Guidotti questioned whether the developer was in a position to present any data regarding the water supply and sanitary and storm sewer drainage systems . Mr. Haupt stated their engineer, Mr. `„/ Patzer was present and stated that the plans are in the possession of the Village Engineer to check and verify, however, he has been advised that there is adequate water to service the area. Mr . . Guidotti further questioned whether the MSD policy concerning storm water retention factilities would be followed. Mr. Haupt stated they have not shown any provisions for storm water retention because they were not aware whether the sanitary district would make the requirement . He stated they felt the natural flow through the property was adequate to handle the run-off flow. Mr . Haupt stated they would agree that the development should be checked for adequate drainage and asked that Mr. Patzer of Applied Engineering be sworn as a witness so that he could answer the questions directly. Mr . Roger Patzer was sworn as a witness and stated that preliminary studies have indicated that there is an adequate culvert to handle the drainage . The property drains through the Arlington Country Club in an open swale . Mr . Guidotti questioned whether consideration could be given to a closed storm sewer with inlets rather than an open ditch to prevent breeding of mosquitos as well as eliminate the danger of an open ditch . Mr. Patzer stated they have not designed the final engineering, however , they would consider a storm sewer. Mr . Haupt stated the owners did not object to such a requirement. Mr. Guidotti questioned whether a traffic survey had been made and Mr . Haupt stated Mr. Katzenberg ' s firm did conduct one . Mr . Guidotti stated that in the plan , the development is being treated as three separate areas rather than having inter- connected streets . He stated he felt from the Police and Fire standpoint , he would prefer to have interconnecting roadways . Mr. Rodeck stated the entire picture was considered in terms of traffic and pedestrian access with connections being made to the three separate areas by pedestrian rather than vehicular roadways . He further stated the property is not that big, however , they felt the pedestrians would prefer to get from place to place within , the property. There would be paved areas of sidewalk width. Mr. Haarr stated he considered the buildings as being basically designed in a "I" shape and questioned whether the four story / was the same size as the three story. Mr. Rodeck stated that \./ they are not truly "I" shape , however, the basic design was combined in various ways to get the best use of the area. Mr. Haarr questioned the floor area of the "I" shape . Mr. Rodeck stated the floor area was approximately 9 ,000 sq . feet. Mr . Haarr questioned the floor area of the 3 pool buildings . Mr. Rodeck stated they have not been designed as far as sq. ft . area as yet , however, he would guess approximately 2500 sq. ft. Li Mr. Haarr questioned whether there is a floor plan available and Mr. Rodeck stated there was not . Mr. Rodeck stated the ground , coverage ratio is under that allowable by ordinance . Mr. Haarr questioned the proposed nursery area reference the age group - 4 - which will be involved. Mr. Rodeck stated it is based on an estimate of 189 pre-school children. He stated present plans call for the developer to be the owner and operator. Mr. Haarr stated in reading the ordinance , he cannot find authority to operate a nursery school in a residential area. Mr. Haupt stated he felt the Planned Development Section would authorize a variation. Discussion followed concerning the operation of the nursery under the ordinances . Mr. Raysa felt it could be allowable under a Planned Development since the purpose of the Planned Development is to allow variations , however, he stated he would review the section and submit an opinion . Mr. Haarr further questioned the difference in the figures concerning the traffic survey as to number of cars that will be generated during peak times . Mr . Hoyt stated the figures submitted at the meeting were prepared by the land planner and were prefaced with the remark that they were preliminary at the time and the final figures would be available after study. Mr. Genrich questioned whether they would submit a preliminary plan before moving ahead with the development . Mr. Haupt stated it is his interpretation that a Planned Development is a special use and they would follow the proce ures necessary or approva o t e special use . He stated should the project receive approval , the ordinance \iiii approving and authorizing the special use would contain the condition that all other applicable ordinances would be complied with in the cbvelopment of the project. Mr. Genrich questioned whether the petitioners would be amenable to minor changes in the plan . Mr. Haupt stated the would be and Mr. Genrich stated he would suggest these at the proper time . Mr. Yost stated that in a Planned Development the maximum height of buildings is 55 feet and questioned what the heights of the 4 story buildings would be . Mr. Rodeck stated in talking with the architect and analyzing the structures , they can specify a 45 foot height limitation to the buildings . Mr. Yost asked whether Mr. Rodeck would be more specific concerning the day care center . Mr. Rodeck stated it would be only for pre-school children of the residents of .the development and would be owned and maintained by the owners . Mr. Yost asked whether consideration had been given to the fee for this service and Mr. Rodeck stated at the present time that has not been established. Mr. Yost then questioned the storm water ditch shown on the site plan . Mr. Rodeck stated it was on shopping center property and not on the development itself. Mr. Yost asked Mr . Patzer what volume of flow could be anticipated j from the area. Mr. Patzer stated there would be 86 cfs from the 76 acre area surrounding, 52 cfs from the multi-family area or a total of 138 cfs leaving the project , based on a 10 year rainfall . Mr. 4, 9 Yost questioned the sidewalks in the development . Mr . Rodeck stated they would be comparable to the walkways within the Village. .... Mr. Yost asked why the walkways were not shown on the exhibit . p,` Mr. Rodeck stated that the reason for the various exhibits �", each accenting different areas, was to prevent confusion by the "clutter" that would be generated if all the requirements were put on exhibit. i - 5 - Mr . Gamm questioned the drainage in the area of the park site . Mr. Ibdeck stated there is an existing drainage pipe running through the park site and part of the concept of the drainage in that area of Unit 7 was a depressed area in the park site to allow for the overflow. Mr. Gamm further questioned Mr. Rodeck as to why the 4 story building could not be moved to the South. Mr. Rodeck stated it was placed there in order to meet necessary requirements regarding access to buildings and number of parking spaces . He further stated the planner felt it would be better to cluster the 4 story buildings into one area because they are elevator buildings and would attract older tennants and, therefore , did not think they should be spread all over the area. Mr. Rodeck stated, however , they are cpen for comments . Mr. Gamm asked whether the name of the architect was known and could be revealed. Mr . Rodeck stated the architect was Mr . Raccuglia . Questioned as to the outside masonry, Mr. Rodeck stated the design will be worked on by the architect , land planner and engineer to make an attractive and not monotonous project . Mr . Fader questioned what type of maturity the shrubs and trees to be planted would have . He stated the drawings indicate matured greenery with high screening value . Mr. Rodeck stated that they will hire experts in landscaping in order tottilize trees and shrubs in the best possible manner to create an immediate effect since the marketability of the project will also be affected by the landscaping . Mr. Fader questioned what kind of criteria was given the land planner when he was retained to develop a plan for the area. Mr. Rodeck stated the planners were given the acreage , the existing zoning , a copy of the ordinances and were told they wish to develop in terms of garden apartments . He stated the planners then did a market analysis of the immediate area and presented the plan which they felt would be the highest and best use based on the information they gained. Mr. Fader questioned whether it was considered in discussion that this is a departure from the general trend in building in the Village and from the densities presently being planned and constructed and what the impact would be on the Village . Mr. Rodeck again reiterated that the type of units they discussed were garden apartments and the planner developed the plan as being , in his opinion, the highest and best use of the , area. He stated it would seem logical to put the highest density near main roads and shopping centers rather than somewhere else . t Chairman Berth declared a recess at 9 : 30 P .M. The hearing was reconvened at 9 : 55 P .M. Mr. Fader then stated he wished to know, since he was fairly new to the Commission and the area, whether the R-9 zoning was in the original incorporation of the Village . Mr. Rodeck stated it was not done at the time of the incorporation, however , the area was zoned at the time of its annexation and was called Unit 7 . Mr . Fader asked who the owners were at the time of the annexation . Mr. Haupt stated the owner is a land trust of which there are four `0 ,; �er3 ,p, x .`.,.. ., :._ . . � " - ' ...,<., _..«_.w.....�..a...,_.... .....�____ _._,mow..,... -. - •,,.0 ., Qs�_".' - 6 - I beneficiaries , namely , Albert Frank, Herbert Dorner , Ernest Dorner, and Luba Friedman . Mr. Berth asked Mr. Fader what his line of questioning was leading to since he did not feel the owners of the property had bearing on the R-9 zoning . Mr. Fader stated his trying to determine for himself and for the record, how the R-9 zoning was established and why. Mr . Berth stated that as far as the Plan Commission is concerned the zoning is there , it is on the official map and he felt Mr. Fader was heading into an area that did not involve the Commission. Mr. Fader asked whether Mr. Frank would be willing to answer the questions . Mr . Frank stated he would and was sworn as a witness . Upon questioning by Mr. Fader , Mr. Frank stated he was an elected Trustee of the Village at the time of the zoning of that parcel of land. He stated he was elected in 1959 , re-elected in 1961 and served until he resigned in 1965 . He further stated he did not remember whether he voted in favor of the zoning or whether he abstained, but that it was a matter of record. He further stated he felt it was the best use for the land at that time and still does at the present time . Mr. Frank stated he felt that high density should surround a commercial area since it could be destroyed if there is not enough support to it . He stated presently presently Arlington Heights is changing zoning from single family to high rise . He stated they thought of going high rise around the shopping center S11, since R-9 zoning has no restrictions , however, they were advised against it because of market conditions . He stated they have restricted themselves to one and two bedroom apartments and feel they have demonstrated that they do have a feeling for the welfare - of the Village . Vr. Frank further stated he felt even higher density would be desirable and could be worked into a very beautiful plan. Mr. Frank further added that the owners of the proposed development are also wners of the shopping center . He stated the Village has considered the area for 900 units for a long time and the engineering studies and studies for the water and sewer bond issue were based on 900 units and it should not come as a shock to anyone , including the people who bought homes in the area. Mr. Haarr questioned Mr . Frank as to whether at the time of the zoning there was a plan or exhibit . Mr. Frank stated it was merely zoned and there was no agreement reference annexation. Mr . Guidotti questioned whether they are aware of the fact that the zoning ordinance was recently changed requiring 1 . 7 parking spaces per unit and the space was increased in area. Mr. Haupt stated that when they come back with their final plans , all ordinances will have to be complied with . Mr. Guidotti questioned who will maintain the open spaces . Mr. Rodeck stated that all maintenance an open spaces , roads , sidewalks , etc. , will be done by the owners and developers . Questioned as to whether the State Highway Department ' '; has approved the proposed access on Dundee Road, Mr. Rodeck stated the Highway Department suggested the location of the access and 1 / 7 - 1 LI stated that possibly a left turn lane will be provided at the time of widening the road. If not , it can be done at a later date . Mr. Guidotti questioned Mr. Raysa concerning his opinion reference maximum allowable density . Mr. Raysa stated he would rather discuss that at a later time , he stated the Commission is a fact- `/ finding body and should determine what the developers propose to do . He stated he would reserve his opinion at this time . Mr. Gamm stated that in his research he has found that Gregg Builders is an Illinois Corporation. Mr. Frank stated the corporation was dissolved in December and changed to a partnership . Discussion followed concerning floor area of the apartment units . Mr. Yost felt they were in violation. Mr. Raysa stated he would check into the interpretation of the various sections concerning floor area. Mr. Yost questioned drainage from the development and further whether it would affect the problems in the Cambridge area. Mr . Patzer stated nothing South of Dundee Road would be affected. The area will be drained northeasterly across the Arlington Golf Course to the Buffalo Creek . Mr. Kiddie questioned Mr . Rodeck concerning the drainage on the park site . Mr. Rodeck stated that when the area was annexed and zoned it was also engineered . The single family area was developed and through engineering, the drainage is through the park past the multi-family area. He stated the system was designed for the entire area and further , the depressed area in the park has never 1 flooded. Mr. Kiddie questioned Mr. Berth as to whether the developer will be required to build a retention pond on the development . Mr . Berth stated that if the Village engineer deems it necessary , it will have to be done , however, he cannot say at this time . Mr. Patzer stated that any plan they develop will have to be submitted to the MSD and the Village engineers for review and approval as to adequacy. He further stated that the MSD is having second thoughts concerning retention and have not adopted that portion of the policy manual as yet . Every project may be examined for its own merits rather than a standard require- ment . Mr. Kiddie questioned the slope of the buildings reference drainage to the park, since there are baseball diamonds in the area. Mr. Rodeck stated that the park area is 10 feet higher than Buffalo Grove Road, therefore , the drainage will be away from the Park . Mr. Kiddie further stated he wished to reiterate point 2 in Li their letter and request and urge that territorial integrity be maintained. There were no further questions from the Commission at the present t time , therefore , Mr. Berth questioned whether Mr. Hoyt would care to summarize his presentation. Mr. Hoyt stated he wouldcesire to summarize at the time the Plan Commission will be reaching their decision so that the facts may be clear in their mind. { r 8 - Mr. Haarr stated since there are discrepancies in figures , he would wish to see a preliminary floor plan of the buildings before the conclusion of the hearings and further would like to talk to the planner concerning the traffic patterns . Mr. Haarr moved to continue the hearing to the 10th to clarify certain facts and also storm water drainage . Mr. Gamm seconded the motion . Mr. Frank stated he would hope the Plan Commission would not decide on the project on the merits of a floor plan . He stated they will have to go to the Building Commissioner and comply with the code and he did not feel this was the Plan Commission ' s responsibility. He stated he has seen meetings get bogged down because of the color of the buildings or the size of bathrooms which should have no bearing on thetotal project . Mr. Berth stated that if the Commission feels they have not heard enough testimony to make a recommendation to the Village Board, it will have to be adjourned to another date , at which time a date will be set for placement on the agenda of a regular plan commission meeting for final consideration. Mr. Genrich stated he felt the hearing should not be continued and further felt that questions could be answered at a regular meeting of the Plan Commission. He stated he would recommend the public hearing be closed. Mr. Haupt requested that should any member have specific questions or suggested changes , it would be helpful if they conveyed them to the petitioners at this time to give them time to work on it . Chairman Berth called for a vote on the motion and the vote was as follows : AYES ; Mr. Guidotti , Mr . Haarr , Mr. Gamm, Mr. Fader, Mr . Yost NAYS : Mr . Genrich , Chairman Berth Chairman Berth declared the hearing continued until February 10th, 1971 at 8 : 00 P .M. Time : Approximately 10 : 50 P .M. Respectfully submitted, /4 d-edt7: Recording Secr tary rr�3'ss..:•.� f;: , ---- �._._ - ,. .ram _ -�--- / r 914 ,,ilP , "'s 1412 A °Y )1J //1Y0d°j \\\6,14' cul") ,) MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLAN COMMISSION - FEBRUARY RU ARY 3, The Chairman called the regular meeting to order at approximate) 11 : 05 P.M. following a public hearing. Chairman Berth stated y because of the hour the agenda would be varied. `J COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Berth read a letter from Mr. Ken Gill of District #2 reference the school site in Mill Creek 1 information to the plan C0�1 He stated it was 11SSion, REPORTS OF COMMITTEES -t�. Pc_ ketk (I.. .s...w.� i,,,_..7 Chairman Berth requested Mr . Genrich give a report to he Commission reference the Village Board meeting . Mr. Genrich stated the Village Board approved a request from the Plan commission to/rezonOoland in Cambridge currently zoned R-9 and R-7 a+ being built R-5 . Further, the Village Board denied the reappointment of Richard Heinrich to the Plan Commission. He stated the Village Board is essentially in agreement concerning the approval of Villa Verde with the 5 story office building because they feel it is a good plan for that area. He stated they have suggested the Plan Commission take steps to hold a public hearing to amend the ordinance removing the height triction. Further , a request from Wheeling Trust f Savings Bank requesting rezoning of the property commonly referred to as eb seh the Gerschefske property to M-1 . The Board also expressed the wish that the Plan Commission accelerate their work on the PUD Ordinance . Mr. Berth stated he would exercise his usual perogative and set the�, public hearing dates as soon as possible within the limits of the /,Q, law. vr, OLD BUSINESS Mr.W a rence , Planner for the Villa Verde property, approached the Plan Commission stating that they are wit)out council tonight , but he has been authorized to state that the owners of the land would proceed with a 3 story building to keep within the limits of the ,(, ordinance so that the project may proceed since they have made certain commitments . He stated should the Village decide to amend the Ordinance affecting the height , they could then come back at a later date and ask for a change . , • _ 2 _ Mr. Guidotti moved that the minutes of the Public Hearing on January 27 , 1971 affecting the Villa Verde property be approved. Mr. Haarr seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Mr. Haarr moved that the Plan Commission recommend to the Village Board, approval of the development known as Villa Verde with the stipulation that the 5 story building be limited to 3 stories or 45 feet to comply with the ordinance . Mr. Gamm seconded the motion. Mr. Genrich stated he would like the motion to include that 7 the de eloper will (ubmit a preliminary plan to the Plan Commission on the�engineering,O andscape and planting, an5detail plans on r th.ant,ing:_ d the service station prior to seeking final approval . Mr. Haarr and Mr. Gamm so amended their motion and second. Chairman Berth called for a vote on the motion and the ,-"' motion carried unanimously by the seven Commissioners present . ri '1 ',, Chairman Berth stated the next regular Plan Commission meeting is February 17th at which time hopefully the Commission will make a • recommendation to the Village Board concerning the Ranch Mart property . He further stated that should the public hearing adjourn at a reasonable time on the 10th, the work shop session of the Plan Commission will consider further work on the PUD Ordinance . Mr. Haarr moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Gamm seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Chairman Berth stated he wished to extend a public thank you to Rosalie Kaszubowski for volunteering to record the minutes of the public hearings . Respectfully submitted, . , Leet--tted-a; / a Recording Secre ry i . i