Loading...
1970-03-25 - Plan Commission - Minutes _ Village of Buffalo Grove Plan Commission - Public Hearing - 3/25/70 - Minutes -t Attendence: W. E. Berth, Ch. , S. Haarr, H. Mendenhall, D. Zitzewits, L. Gamm, R. Heinrich, C. Genrich, M. Hoyt. Absent: J. Guidotti The meeting was called to order by the Chairman, Mr. W. E. Berth, at 8:10p.m. Chairman read the Public Notice regarding the Gerschefski property which included Exhibit A = request for B-2 with special use for gas station, and Exhibit B request for R-9 multiple dwe]Ling. Mailing was made to owners or occupants of all property within 500 feet of the described property. \./ Roll call by Commission Secretary, Mr. M. Hoyt.*All present with the exception of Mr. J. Guidotti. (Note: Also at the hearing were Mr. Fabish, and Mr. Cimaglio; plus Mr. Thorud and Ar. G. Armstrong...all Village Trustees). Mr. R. H. Decker, Village Mgr. was also present. Petitioner - Mr. Mark Beaubetn(sp) - sworn in by Chairman. Mr. Beaubirepresents the owners of the property described. They are requesting Annexation to Buffalo (rove. Exhibit A and Exhibit B presented. He indicated the land was at the Eastern boundry of Buffalo *rove, contiguous with the church property and with Route 83. The shape of the property lends itself to the request for B-2 and R-9 zoning. Currently zoned commercial in the County. Request to annex to the village 3.+ acres commercial and 5.16 acres multiple family. The shape of the property justifies the split zoning request. It would be a natural buffer to the commercial property on the West. Lake Cook Road proposal would make it difficult to get to the "A" portion of the parcel. Believe this is reasonable land use because of Lake Cook Road. They pledge to come back to tke Village Plan Commission and the Board of Trustees with detailed plans which can be approved or disapproved before construction actually begins. They will not do any constructing until after Lake Cook road in in. They feel this annexation would give Buffalo Grove a new Eastern boundry and would open the area for further annexation. Question by Chairman to Mr. beaubi - According to the newspaper article in today's Paddock Buffalo Grove herald, it states that previously at other hearings before the Plan Commission and Village Board you promised to give the Village $100 per unit. Is this correct? Answer by Mr. Beaubiin - Yes, this is what the Board requested. Question by Chairman - The article also states you do not plan to have more than 50% of the multiple dwellings as 2 bedroom apartments. Is this correct? Answer by kir. beaub et - That is correct. Question by Chairman - From the previous minutes of the Commission. There will be no living quarters above the businesses. Is that correct? Answer - That is correct. Question by Mr. Heinrich - to Mr. Beaubine - Do you know what the specific design of the apartment buildings are? Answer by Mr. B. - No. The owners will wait until Lake Cook road is developed...that may be three years. At that time they will submit to the Plan Commission whatever designs are in keeping with the trend at that time. Question by Mr. Heinrich to Mr. B. - Would you make a park dedication land available? -2- Mtg. 3/25/70 Answer by Mr. B. - This was discussed at previous hearings. The property `./ involved is only 8.8 acres. It was not felt that the size of the property would lend itself to a 10% land dedication. It was suggested that $100 per unit be given to the village, instead. Question by Mr. Heinrich - The 16 units per acre mentioned...does that take in the total 8.8 acres 2 . Answer by Mr. Beaubine - No. The 16 units per acre is based on just the �./ parcel of land in Exhibit B, however the owners would prefer this be changed to a total of 94 units. Question by Mr. neinrich to mr. B. - How many buildings do you plan to put up? Answer by i"jr. B - We do not know. That will depend on the trend at the time of construction. Question by Mr. neinrich to Mr. B. - Why did you request R-9 instead of R-7 thr R-8 zoning? Answer by mr. Beaubine - Believe it was because this is the most flexible zoning and would allow the most number of units. Question by Mr. `leinrich - Would you be willing to go to a more restrictive zoning? Answer by Mr. B. - If the same units per acre is available it might be possible but would have to go back to the owners. How ever, the initial and final plans will be brought to the commission before construction starts. Question by Mr. Heinrich - regarding the commercial property...do you have any idea of just what is planned for that area? Answer by rir. Beaubine - No. This is still up in the air until Lake Cook Road is put in. Believe the 3/4 acre which will be split on the one end of Exhibit A will be used for a service station. The owners are local people, who live here, and would not want to bring anything trakhy into the Village. Question by Mr. Genrich to Mr. B. - Are the owners aware of the current feeling in Buffalo Grove about the lack of popularity of apartments? Answer by Mr. B. - Yes. However they feel that the Commission and the Board have to look at each parcel of land as it lies. it would be unreasonable for them to make a flat decision on all land coming into the village until they see the best use for that land. This is currently zoned commercial on the county maps, but they would prefer not to go totally commercial. Question by Mr. Genrich to Mr. B. - Have any efforts been made to talk to adjacent property owners to see about the possibility of combining and making this a larger development. Answer by Mr. B. - No. They do not feel this would work. Legal problems, ownership and responsibility problems, etc. Question by mr. Hoyt to Mr. B. - Is there any height limit in the annexation agreement? Answer by Mr. B. - No but we would come back in 3 or 4 years to the Village y -3— Mtg. 3/25/70 with our detailed plans. It might be that at that time the trend would be toward taller buildings leaving more green space. This is unknown. However, will discuss this with the owners. It might be possible that it would be agreeable with them to have a height limit of 351 on the buildings. Question by Mr. Hoyt - Is there any reason why you are requesting B-2 instead of B-3 zoning? Answer - Not that I know of. \„/ Question by "r. reinrich to Mr. B. - Would you be willing to make this a Planned Development? Answer from 1°jr. B. - No, I dontt believe so, but cant be sure until I talk to the owners. Would there be any need for it to be a Planned Development? Answer by Mr. Heinrich - If totally planned unit development the village would have more control over the whole situation. Question to Mr. Hoyt by Mr. Heinrich - Do we require a detailed plan now if this annexation agreement comes in as a Planned Unit Development? Answer by "jr. Hoyt - No. Answer by Mr. Cimaglio - No. If it comes in as a planned unit development you have more control than in an open development. The plans are presented for approval before construction begins. There is a greater control. Question by Mr. Hoyt to Mr. B. - Would you be willing to consider giving land for a park instead of money? Answer by Mr. B. - The money suggested by the Board would be $8400. This parcel has only 8.8 acres. It does not seem to be enough for a park of 8/10ths of an acre. However, maybe the owners would be willing to give one acre of land is they could develop 84 units. A builder could not give both land and money and not get something in return. Question by Mr. Heinrich to Mr. B. - If a give and take situation occurred on a planned development, could we possibly arrange a donation of land instead of the money? Answer from Mr. B. - It is possible. Question by Mr. Gamin to Mr. B. - At the November 12th hearing you said you submit another platt. Answer by Chairman - Our Village Attorney, Mr. xaysa, said this would not be necessary in a pre-annexation agreement. Question by Mr. Gamin to Chairman - The $100 donation per unit...was that set up by the Board? Answer by Chairman - Yes. That was set up by the Village Board. Question by Mr. Gamin - Could we ask the petitioner to give half of this $100 to the Village and 1/2 to the school district? Answer by Chairman - Believe this was discussed by the Board in November. 3 -4� Mtg. 3/25/70 Chairman Question to Subcommittee Chairman Mr. Hoyt - Has your committee had an opportunity to look over this property and if so would you like to report on your feelings at this time? Answer by a"ar. Hoyt - No. Would prefer not to present at this time. Will give report at next weeks's meeting. However, I do feel we need a park in this area. Chairman to Mr. Hoytt - Do you believe a park would be necessary for this particular site? Answer by Mr. Hoyt - Yes. Even if only a half acre. We need parks. Chairman question to lar. Hoyt ? - What children would be using this park? Would they have to cross the roads to get to the park? Answer by Mr. Hoyt - Even if they do have to cross busy roads we still need parks. Chairman 4o Mr. Hoyt - I believe that the representatives of the Park District should speak on this. Are there any representatives here tonight? none present. Chairman to Mr. Hoyt - Would you ask the Park District to send a representative to the next meeting at the Plan Commission here next week? Mr. Hoytt - I will ask them to be here. Question by Mr. Cimaglio to Mr. Beaubine - Where the Lake Cook Road disects your property...how much land will be cut off? Answer by Mr. B. - We figure about 3/4 of an acre on the corner but are not sure until the Lake Cook road survey is complete. Comment by Mr. Fabish - The survey is complete on the Road. You might want to check it. I believe a copy is on file here at the Village Hall. You could get it from the Village Clerk. Answer by Nor. B. - Thank you. I will. Question by Mr. Mendenhall 4o Mr. H©yt - If we approve this as an R-9 zoned development have we waived the height agreement? Answer by tar. Hoyt - Our ordinance has no height limit on R-9. We would \./ be trusting to the future and leaving the height requirement to chance. Would not like to do this. Question by Mr. Mendenhall to Mr. B. - Do I understand there will be no residential dwellings on second floor of commercial buildings? Answer by Mr. B. - Could put this in the agreement if necessary. If you feel R-9 zoning has no control, we could have it stated in the pre annexation agreement that we would come back with plans before construction. If a planned unit development would be preferred we would be willing to discuss with the owners...they might be willing. They are interested in putting up 84 units. If the Village agrees to this, they might be willing to dedicate one acre of land for a park. -5- Mtg. $/25/70 Question to Mr. B. by fir. Fabish? - If you develop this apartment area would the people owning the roads maintain them? Answer by Mr. B. - We have not given this any thought so far. Statement by Mr. Fabish - At present, the builders coming in are agreeing to maintain these roads. This is a savings to the Village on maintenance. Answer by Mr. B. - This might be possible. The owners could be flexible. \./ Question by Mr. Hoyt - Have your people considered condominiums instead of apartments? Answer by Mr. B. - Yes, they have thought of it but may feel the acreage would not be feasible for this type development. Of course it would all depend on the trend at the time of building in 3 or 4 years when the land is developed. Question of Mr. B. by Mr. Mendenhall- In your consideration of a land donation in lieu of money, would you consider donating land in the far north section of Exhibit B? Answer from Mr. B. - Yes. As a matter of fact, that would be a good location from their standpoint. Statement from kr. Mendenhall - The reason I asked was that if you donated 8/10th of an acre there and the adjoining petitioner donated 10,E of his land adjoining this area, it would i& make at least an acre or more for a park. Question to Mr. Fabish from Mr. Mendenhall - If they don',t maintain the streets and roads in the developments what is our action? Answer by Mr. Fabish - The Village notifies them to make repairs, etc. If they do not, then the Village maintains the roads and bills the owners for the work. Chairman - Are there any further questions from the members of the Commission? None. Chairman - Are there any questions from the audience? Question from Mr. Allen Rose - A figure of $8400 has been offered to the Village by the developer. Is there any control over just what that would be used for? Answer by Mr. Fabish - In the past some monies have been specified in the agreements to be used for the purchase of a fire truck, for the Village, some for the school districts, etc. Statement by Mr. B. - we would be willing to set it up any way it was agreeable with the commission. Statement by Chairman - As in the past, we might request a land donation but the Board might request a money donation. Chairman - Is there any testimony from the audience? Any additional questions? None. Public Hearing Adjourned 9pm. Pre Annexation Agreement will be c -6- Mtg. 3/25/70 • �.J decided on by the Plan Commission at their next regular meeting, Wed. April 1, 1970. Plan Commission adjourned to Ordinance workshop meeting. Respectfully submitted, Dorothy C. b th, for the secretary and Plan Co ssion. 3/25/70 J (Qcx:t