Loading...
2000-03-15 - Plan Commission - Minutes REGULAR MEETING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION March 15,2000 Belmont Village,Proposed senior citizen assisted living facility, Buffalo Grove Town Center,4.51-acre site north of Town Place, adjacent to Buffalo Grove Road and IL Route 83,Amendment of a Planned Unit Development(P.U.D.)And Preliminary Plan and change of B-5 sub-district designation from Commercial to Residential—Workshop#3 Village Zoning Map—Annual Review Zoning Ordinance,proposed amendments to Section 17.36.040 concerning parking requirements and Chapter 17.44-Business Districts,B-1 through B-4—Workshop#2 Chairman Goldspiel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Village Council Chambers, Buffalo Grove Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove,Illinois. Commissioners present: Chairman Goldspiel Mr. Trilling Mr. Ottenheimer Ms. Dunn Mr. Feldgreber Mr.Johnson Mr. Smith Commissioners absent: Mr. Samuels Mr. Panitch Also present: Mr. Paul Shadle, Piper, Marbury, Rudnick& Wolfe Ms. Kathy Farr, Belmont Corp Mr. Stephen Brollier, Belmont Corp Mr. Ed Freeman �./ Mr. Tom Daley, Belmont Corp Mr. Tim Nelson,Allen Kracower&Associates Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner Buffalo Grove Plan Commission-Regular Meeting-March 15,2000-Page 1 1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Trilling,seconded by Commissioner Johnson to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of February 2,2000. Chairman Goldspiel noted the addition of a necessary word to page 10,paragraph 6. Commissioner Johnson noted the second paragraph on page 7 required a change in wording. All Commissioners were in favor of the amended motion and the motion passed unanimously. COMMI Fl EE AND LIAISON REPORTS Commissioner Ottenheimer attended the Village board meeting on March 6,2000. He noted Resolution 2000-12 was passed which reaffirmed the Village's position to support the IL Route 53 corridor tollway improvement alternative for Lake County Transportation improvements projects. BELMONT VILLAGE,PROPOSED SENIOR CITIZEN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY, BUFFALO GROVE TOWN CENTER,4.51-ACRE SITE NORTH OF TOWN PLACE, ADJACENT TO BUFFALO GROVE ROAD AND IL ROUTE 83,AMENDMENT OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT(P.U.D.)AND PRELIMINARY PLAN AND CHANGE OF B-5 SUB-DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL-- WORKSHOP#3 Mr. Paul Shadle stated this is their third workshop and noted several comments and additional information was requested by the Plan Commission regarding the architectural design of the project and proposed uses of the outlot. He noted they will describe the design in more detail and explain how the outlot might be used. He stated their objective is to receive and respond to any comments on the architecture and outlot issue and to move the project forward to a public hearing. Mr. Brollier noted there have been some architectural questions regarding more detail. The project is a low rise,residential style architecture which provides excellent transition between the neighboring residential areas and the condominium projects that surround the existing site and the Town Center retail. The exterior building materials is a combination of brick, siding, columns, crown molding, composition shingle and colonial lantern fixtures. Mr. Brollier presented an aerial photograph of both a front and back perspective of their Houston facility,noting that both front and back and identical and intricately planned. He further noted the site plan has been revised to reflect sidewalks now down Route 83 which continue on through the proposed site to the existing sidewalks at Town Center. They have now also shown new fence lines. There had been a question about where the fencing would actually be. Mr. Daley noted the obvious intent is a very definite residential bent in the architecture. They are trying very hard to break down the mass of the building into different elements and reduce the Buffalo Grove Plan Commission-Regular Meeting-March 15,2000-Page 2 scale through various materials. Commissioner Feldgreber asked about wet/dry detention for the project. Mr. Tim Nelson stated the plan does fulfill the requirements of the SMC. He noted that the SMC would really prefer a wet bottom pond which has wet mesa-prairie at the bottom which can be infiltrated with water and filter out any pollutants prior to it going downstream. He stated they are showing the detention basins as dry but they would be the wet mesa-prairie at the bottom. Chairman Goldspiel asked why the developer is going with a black roof which does not go well with a colonial motif. Mr. Daley noted they could lighten it up a little if that would be preferred. Chairman Goldspiel noted he would personally prefer gray to black. Commissioner Trilling stated he is not satisfied with the building design and appearance. He said that he appreciates the attempt to relieve a large 3-story building by breaking it up into components. However,the Town Center buildings are entirely brick as are the Town Place condos. He said that there are ways of utilizing an all brick building and still providing the relief needed to break up the mass. He noted the Belmont building looks too institutional and is not consistent with the architecture of the other buildings in Town Center. He noted he thinks that the Belmont building should maintain the architectural"flavor"of the Town Center by using similar building materials and colors. Mr. Daley noted they can look into shutters as suggested and the idea of a lighter roof color can easily be worked into the design. They can also look into the facades. He noted they wanted to be a part of Town Center but not to mimic it. Mr. Brollier stated the idea was for this to be a transition from your residential areas that surround three of the four sides of the property. The residential areas are very similar to the proposed development in materials. The condos are all brick with a little bit of stone block at the bottom. However, if everything in the whole area is in a brick finish,it loses the residential feel of the facility that is important for the residents who live in the building. However,they can consider other items and more detail to the building. Commissioner Trilling noted he is not opposed to other types of material besides brick. Mr. Brollier pointed out they are willing to do a coining pattern at all the corners of the building which might add some architectural interest to the building. Chairman Goldspiel noted he supports Commissioner Trilling's comments. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission-Regular Meeting-March 15,2000-Page 3 Chairman Goldspiel noted some issues in Mr. Pfeil's memo which need to be addressed. Mr. Brollier noted the driveway on Route 83 across from Cherbourg must be addressed formally at the time of a public hearing. As far as the handicapped parking,they plan to be in full compliance. The spacing of the stalls is in compliance with the ordinance. Mr.Nelson stated the stalls comply with the ordinance and they would not be seeking any kind of variance on any of the parking. Mr. Brollier noted with regard to the mass of the building that the building is intended to be a transitional aspect in relation to the residential areas that surround it. Chairman Goldspiel asked for a profile that shows the heights of the different aspects. Ms. Kathy Farr summarized the progress on the outlot development,noting they have now contacted over 100 restaurants by phone,letter and follow up letters and phone calls. They have also followed up on all the referrals from Village staff. To date,there has been no interest expressed because of the lack of drive by traffic,the fact that there is no real identity for them at the site as far as being part of a retail or commercial hub,and no lunch business. Ms. Farr noted there has been some interest and letters of intent from a 7-11 user for a 4,000 square foot building. It is a use that would generate sales tax for the Village,however,they would prefer not to have a 7-11 as a neighbor. In addition there has been interest expressed from a dentist who is interested in about a 3,000 square foot building for about five dentists and orthodontists. This would generate only minimal real estate taxes for the Village and the school district. This would also be a very compatible use for the proposed development. There has also been interest expressed by a day care center for a 10,000-12,000 square foot facility. Their parking requirements could be accommodated on the site. Ms. Farr noted they are under contract to purchase this land and they have been under contract to purchase for over a year now. If they cannot find some way to move this forward,they will not be able to stay under contract forever. With that in mind,they have been trying to come up with other things to address the situation. The following ideas have been proposed: 1. They propose a performance guarantee. They do not want anyone to think that in order to get what they want,they will not follow through with plans for the outlot. That is not the intent at all and the only thing they could think of to address that concern was some sort of financial guarantee or performance guarantee to show good faith in the pursuit of an outlot user. 2. Donation of the land to the Village for some sort of public use, be it a public park, senior center, etc. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission-Regular Meeting-March 15,2000-Page 4 Commissioner Ottenheimer noted he hoped this process of finding a user for the outlot continues as this is what would mean a lot for the project. He asked who arrived at the$500,000 figure and if it is representative of something. Ms. Farr stated it is only a proposal at this time. Commissioner Ottenheimer asked if the figure is subject to negotiation. Ms. Farr stated it would be subject to negotiation within reason. Commissioner Ottenheimer asked if restaurant brokers had been contacted. Ms. Farr stated they had contacted 43 brokers and they have a primary broker working for them. They have had feedback from all of these brokers. Chairman Goldspiel noted his agreement that the 7-11 would not be a desirable situation, particularly as they would be expecting gas pumps. Ms. Farr noted that for them gas pumps are a must and therefore they probably would not be interested in the site either. Commissioner Trilling noted the actual negotiation for any other alternatives to a restaurant would not be under the purview of this Commission and would instead be under the Village Board's purview. Commissioner Ottenheimer noted it is true this Commission is not involved in the negotiations, but the function of this Commission is to look closely at the use. Chairman Goldspiel stated he feels the Commission certainly has the ability to make recommendations in terms of the uses. He also agrees that negotiating the cash parts is something the Commission does not do. Ms. Farr noted her appreciation for the feedback on the 7-11. She stated part of what they are trying to present are the opportunities that are presenting themselves. The 7-11 was something that came to them and they felt they would at least share it with the Commission. Commissioner Smith asked if any of the responses from restaurant users related to the size of their portion of the property. Ms. Farr stated no. Commissioner Johnson stated the criteria for the Plan Commission in approving a P.U.D. for this area includes a finding that the effect on the community with the plan development would not be Buffalo Grove Plan Commission-Regular Meeting-March 15,2000-Page 5 significantly or materially detrimental to the general welfare of the community,including physical development and tax based on the economic well being of the Village. To a certain extent the concept of a fee in lieu of is within the purview of the Plan Commission. However, this is not to his personal satisfaction. Ms. Farr stated she is viewing this the same as a performance bond. Commissioner Johnson stated the one thing he has a problem with regarding the guarantee deposit itself is that the Village accrues the interest on the deposit over five years but thereafter Belmont Corp would have the right to establish other permitted and special non-sales tax generating uses. Ms. Farr stated the use which would ultimately go there would still need to be approved by the Plan Commission. Commissioner Trilling stated a dentist office is complementary in the area. A day care center might be complementary also in some fashion. However,the park donation as a use may not be of any true use at this location. There is a large park immediately north of this site which already serves the needs of the surrounding area. Chairman Goldspiel noted there is also the Village Green on the west side of this property. Chairman Goldspiel asked if any of this has any impact on the TIF and are there any issues to be concerned about as the various alternatives are looked at. Mr. Pfeil said that he would ask the Village Finance Director to explain the details of the TIF District and whether development of the Belmont site has any impact on the TIF. He noted that the TIF will expire in a few years. In addition,the TIF has been modified over the years to make cash payments to various taxing bodies, including the school districts.He said the impact of development on the Belmont site may be very limited in terms of the affect on the TIF District. Mr. Pfeil further noted that when the TIF was set up,the Belmont Assisted Living site was an office area which would have had no sales tax implications for the TIF. The Belmont facility would carry a fairly significant assessed valuation probably comparable to an office development and it may therefore not be materially different than if it had been developed for office. Commissioner Johnson asked what the apparent easement on the restaurant site was. Mr. Nelson stated it is an underground utility easement across the site which could have a parking field over it. The building itself would be oriented to the north. Chairman Goldspiel asked if anyone has a concern that a restaurant might not be an appropriate use for the smaller parcel. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission-Regular Meeting-March 15,2000-Page 6 Commissioner Johnson noted he had previously expressed concern about a restaurant per se because of some of the issues discussed here. He noted all of the other commercial uses are clustered at the south to the central end of the Town Center parcel. To attempt to locate one single commercial use at the far north end is not a good planning concept in his opinion. Commissioner Dunn noted that a restaurant concept is the best concept given the other alternatives presented today. At the bottom of her list would be a park as this would be an awful location to have a public park just based on the streets that run through there and the fact that there is a very large park just down the road. Ms. Farr stated she would have concerns with a restaurant at this location. She noted in talking to as many restaurants as she has, they all noted a very consistent concern with this location. Therefore she would be concerned with the ability of any restaurant going in to succeed and noted that the Belmont Corp wants anything going in there to be successful. Commissioner Ottenheimer asked what about some type of retail establishment that also generates sales tax use. Ms. Farr stated they have spent the bulk of their time trying to find a restaurant user. She noted that one retail user looked at the property for a small multi-use development,but decided that a location on Lake Cook Road was preferable. She noted that it will be difficult to find a free- standing retail user, since these types of businesses generally want to locate along Lake Cook Road if there are trying to serve this portion of Buffalo Grove. Commissioner Ottenheimer asked what the feeling was amongst the Commission for increasing efforts to find other retail uses there. Commissioner Johnson stated he is very interested in having a user on this site that generates sales tax. He stated he would support intensifying the search for a retail user. He noted that unless there is an actual user, he is very opposed to approving the project and he is not thrilled with the performance bond concept. Chairman Goldspiel stated he feels the Belmont Corp proposal is wrong for this property because it is making the other piece impossible to develop and it is not meeting the goals for the Village Town Center. He noted it would be a much better idea to think in terms of office or residential. Commissioner Johnson noted the area is currently zoned commercial and as such he disagrees with an office or residential use and feel it should remain commercial and be devoted to retail use to continue to generate as much sales tax as possible. Chairman Goldspiel noted that would be a good thing if it could be done. However,there have been several consultant' reports suggesting that this is not viable. If it were viable,more space than just the outlot would be needed for a commercial development. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission-Regular Meeting-March 15,2000-Page 7 Commissioner Trilling stated Town Center has a lot to offer and is still not full. Therefore, whether Belmont Corp is allowed to expand to occupy the remaining portion of the site makes no difference. Town Center is not today what it was planned for originally. In some ways the proposed development is complementary to the adjoining uses and can be a viable use. The question is what to do with the additional 1.6 acres and how you handle it. Chairman Goldspiel asked if the suggestion is to integrate the 1.6 acres into the site. Commissioner Trilling stated the site can be expanded differently and this could very easily be a single user site. Commissioner Smith stated he does not feel the petitioner should be responsible for the 1.6 acres. This development must stand on its own and the only question is if this plan is the proper use for this site. He noted his agreement with Chairman Goldspiel that the 1.6 acres is probably not sufficient for commercial development. There may indeed be something in the future that would be better for this property. Chairman Goldspiel noted the complication of the Board's strong direction for another use along with this plan. Commissioner Johnson noted that if the entire parcel could be put to some better use,he is all for it. However, if this is the best use for the property,then he is resigned to it. But,the whole thing has to be taken as one large use as part of the Planned Unit Development that is the Town Center. Despite the direction received from the Village Board,if this additional commercial use is not going to work then the whole thing is not going to work. Mr. Shadle noted that Mr. Francke's comments at the last meeting had noted that there had been a variety of uses proposed for this site since the early 1980's. Belmont Village has come forward with something that both fits well within the overall community and is a feasible project. Mr. Shadle noted Belmont Village has tried to do everything it can to address the Village's concerns with respect to both the architecture and the outlot. At this point he noted they are seeking the Commission's formal response to the application and are requesting that the workshop process be concluded.. Commissioner Trilling stated he feels the architecture needs to be resolved before he can move forward. Chairman Goldspiel called for a polling of the Commission as to whether to move forward to public hearing. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission-Regular Meeting-March 15,2000-Page 8 Yes for public hearing: Ottenheimer, Dunn,Feldgreber, Johnson, Smith, Goldspiel No for public hearing:Trilling The polling was 6 to 1 in favor of going to public hearing. Mr. Gary Kahn, president of the 351 and 451 Town Center Condominium Association noted he is here in support of the Belmont Village plan. Chairman Goldspiel noted his yes for a public hearing is due to the fact that he agrees with Commissioner Trilling's comments on the architecture but does not feel the architecture will change his view on this plan. VILLAGE ZONING MAP -- ANNUAL REVIEW Mr. Pfeil reviewed the Village Zoning Map noting that the list includes only projects that required a revision to the Zoning Map within the last year. Chairman Goldspiel asked about the Aisle 3 Special Use on Lake Cook Road at Hastings Drive. Mr. Pfeil noted that the special use symbol should probably be removed from the map since the business will close in the near future. The Village Board would need to consider action to repeal the special ordinance. Moved by Commissioner Feldgreber, seconded by Commissioner Ottenheimer to approve the Village Zoning Map. Chairman Goldspiel called for a vote on the motion and the vote was as follows: AYES:Trilling, Ottenheimer, Dunn, Feldgreber,Johnson, Smith, Goldspiel NAYES: None ABSENT: Samuels, Panitch ABSTAIN: None ZONING ORDINANCE,PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 17.36.040 CONCERNING PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND CHAPTER 17.44-BUSINESS DISTRICT, B-1 THROUGH B-4-- WORKSHOP#2 Chairman Goldspiel said that this discussion would be continued to a future meeting. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT-None FUTURE AGENDA SCHEDULE Buffalo Grove Plan Commission-Regular Meeting-March 15, 2000-Page 9 FUTURE AGENDA SCHEDULE The next meeting will be the March 22 workshop focusing on sign regulations. The Zoning Board of Appeals has primary responsibility for the sign regulations,but the Plan Commission is strongly encouraged to participate. The next regular meeting would be on April 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS -None STAFF REPORT-None NEW BUSINESS -None ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Trilling and carried unanimously to adjourn. Chairman Goldspiel adjourned the meeting at 9:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin,Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: STEPHEN GOLDSPIEL, Chair Buffalo Grove Plan Commission-Regular Meeting-March 15,2000-Page 10