Loading...
2007-05-16 - Plan Commission - Minutes Board or Commission: ❑ Plan Commission Document Type: ❑A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 05/16/2007 Type of Meeting: PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION May 16, 2007 Aptakisic Creek Corporate Park Annexation with zoning in the Industrial District and Approval of a Preliminary Plan for unincorporated and incorporated parcels South side of Aptakisic Road north and west of the Leider Greenhouses Chairman Ottenheimer called the hearing to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Village Council Chambers, Buffalo Grove Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Chairman Ottenheimer read the Notice of Public Hearing as published in the Buffalo Grove Daily Herald, explained the procedure to be followed for the public hearing, and swore in all persons who wished to give testimony. Commissioners present: Chairman Ottenheimer Ms. Bocek Ms. Kenski-Sroka Mr. Khan Mr. Stark Mr. Cohn Mr. Podber Commissioners absent: Mr. Smith Mr. Teplinsky Also present: Ms. Danielle Meltzer Cassel, DLA Piper Mr. Lawrence Dziurdzik, Allen Kracower& Assoc. Mr. Steven Poulos, Bridge Development Partners Mr. Michael Baumstark, Cornerstone Architects Mr. Mark De La Vergne, Land Strategies Mr. Jerremy Foss, Manhard Consulting Mr. Ronald Frain, Bridge Development partners Mr. Alan Zocher, Premier Design & Build Group Mr. William Brimm, Village Manager Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner The following exhibits were presented by the petitioner at the public hearing Exhibit A: Signage Character of Existing Site and Adjacent Properties Exhibit B: Preliminary Landscape Development Plan Exhibit C: Landscape Characters of Nearby Properties Exhibit D: Exterior Elevations, dated May 16, 2007 Exhibit E: Rendering of Proposed Building Exhibit F: Retention Pond Details Exhibit G: Landscape Design Details Exhibit H: Engineering Site Plan Exhibit I: Conceptual Site Plan, dated May 16, 2007 Exhibit J: Memo from Mr. Pfeil to the Plan Commission, dated May 11, 2007 Exhibit K: Traffic Study dated April 23, 2007 with supplemental information dated May 15, 2007 Exhibit L: Submittal Packet with Project Narrative dated April 25, 2007 Ms. Danielle Cassel reviewed an aerial photograph of the property pointing out its location noting the existing Peerless of America building on the southerly portion of the site. She stated Peerless of America and Bridge have negotiated a purchase contract and proposed development involves refurbishment in a variety of ways. The Peerless of America building has been vacant since 2001 and will be refurbished. In addition two new facilities for the undeveloped parcels to the north will also be added. The site is divided by a private easement called Asbury Drive which the Village would like renamed. On the easterly side of Asbury the property has already been annexed into the Village and was done so in conjunction with the Leider Horticultural site about 20 years ago. On the east side of Asbury both the existing Peerless building as well as the vacant northern parcel are both in unincorporated Lake County. The southerly neighbor, Terraco Inc., is the landholder and is also in unincorporated Lake County. Ms. Cassel stated the proposed development involves annexation of the unincorporated parcel. The incorporated piece is already zoned to the Industrial District. One of the aspects of zoning relief they are seeking is to rezone following annexation the unincorporated parcel to the Industrial District. She noted that this proposed annexation as well as the Industrial use is consistent with the boundary agreement between Buffalo Grove and Lincolnshire. She noted they also feel the rezoning is warranted given the character of the adjacent uses. She further noted their western boundary line between this parcel and the Lenzini and Ingram sites is also a private drive called Industrial Drive. South of the Terraco parcel is the Laidlaw bus facility which does not have access to Aptakisic Road via Asbury Drive. Ms. Cassel stated they are in continuing discussion with the Lake County Department of Transportation about how best to structure the connection between Asbury and Aptakisic and trying to adapt to their latest round of comments. Ms. Cassel reviewed the proposed development noting the existing Peerless building has some excellent potential for re-tenanting. She noted Bridge Development, the petitioner here, has a wonderful and established track record over the last 7-8 years and has developed and tenanted several million square feet of very similar developments in the Chicago marketplace. There will be renovations to the facade of the Peerless building. They will be retaining trees and transplanting to save trees at the direction of the Village Forester onto the site as well as more landscaping. The Village staff was interested in a walking path which has now been incorporated into a 1,200 linear foot path around what will be the enlarged detention pond. Ms. Cassel noted they have no easement rights over Industrial Drive but they have consulted some of the other property owners to see if they would accommodate an emergency vehicle only access at this point. Ms. Cassel further reviewed the proposal noting they made sure that the loading activities for facility #1 and #2 would be kept on the south sides shielded from Aptakisic Road. There will be a significant landscape buffer all along the entire Aptakisic frontage which will also have a combined biking/sidewalk path. Ms. Cassel noted there is a 50 foot landscape setback requirement on Aptakisic Road for Lake County Department of Transportation. If the current property line stayed where it was they would not need a variation. However, the Lake County Department of Transportation has asked for a 20 foot wide dedication which is going to skim off the northerly 20 feet of the entire site. Therefore, instead of their improvements being 50 feet away they are now going to be 30 feet away. She noted there is no way to safely or economically shift their facilities or to shrink them in size away from what will be the new property line. Essentially in the marketplace to serve what tenants need there are certain widths and heights and lengths of marketable tenant spaces which dictated the size of their buildings. The view of the property from Aptakisic is going to be very pleasing and will not be detrimental to any adjacent property owners. Mr. Michael Baumstark of Cornerstone Architects stated the park was created using Asbury Drive as a central feature. They are keeping the Peerless building footprint as is which is at 173,000 square feet and adding two new buildings to each side of Asbury Drive. One will be on the west side with 188,000 square feet and the one on the east side will be 146,000 square feet. He stated they are trying to stay consistent along Aptakisic Road with the properties to the east and west. Office parking will be up front and trucks will come down Asbury Drive and go to the docks in the rear or the south. The Peerless building will stay the same with the docks facing north. Their office is currently facing the east side and they will enhance that building by cleaning it up, repainting it, adding new landscape and a new fire protection system inside as well as improved ADA requirements. Mr. Baumstark stated the two new buildings will be designed for multi-tenant use so the dimensions of these buildings are critical. He reviewed the exterior elevations of the new buildings. He stated the buildings are load bearing precast with glass entry corners, glass center feature and clear story glass lights that come into the warehouse. They have added blue canopies on the entry corners with the same element at the center of the building to give an undulating up and down look. They have also done the same thing with the facade to bring it out. They have used three different kinds of colors, two grays and the blue highlight. Mr. Lawrence Dziurdzik of Allen Kracower & Associates stated they did a site analysis of the surrounding properties to see how they treated stormwater detention and streetscapes. They have been successful in integrating this property with a streetscape design that is similar in character to the surrounding properties. What they saw was open lawn areas scattered with larger caliper shade trees, evergreen trees, and deciduous shrubs for a very pastoral feeling and setting along Aptakisic. They have retained this character for their proposed landscape plan. Mr. Dziurdzik noted the buffer along Aptakisic Road which is a variety of plant material. They are providing 4 inch caliper trees at the entrance ways as well as in front of the office components for the two facilities. They have worked with the Village Forester in determining what trees can be transplanted on the property. There are 72 trees on the property and 18 of these will be transplanted and 15 will be saved. The entrance way along Asbury Drive will be landscaped with shade trees. Two important components to the plan are the wetland detention ponds located south of facility #2 and at the southwest corner west of the existing Peerless building. The plants for that will be a wetland detention basin which means there will be 6-12 inches of water in the bottom of the basin and they propose to plan naturalized native plantings in the bottom of the basins. Mr. Dziurdzik stated they incorporated a walking path at the Village's request around the pond that connects to the west side of the multi-use trail along Aptakisic. There will be a 5 foot sidewalk that will circumnavigate around the pond area. He reviewed the pond area noting there are two terraced walls which are important for stormwater volume holding capacity as well as to structurally support the sidewalk and to allow a level gradient to get the sidewalk into the slope. There will be an aluminum railing around the entire perimeter of the pond adjacent to the retaining wall along with plantings. There will be a small retaining wall required on the far east side of the pond which is a nice amenity for a small seat wall. Mr. Dziurdzik stated they are planting 188 shade trees consisting of maples, flowering pear trees, and honey locusts. The flowering ornamental trees consist of Prairie Fire crabapple, lilacs and other smaller shrubs. At the entrances there is assorted perennial massing and lilac shrub massing. They are also proposing an upright chanticleer pear tree up against the foundation of the buildings. Mr. Jerremy Foss of Manhard Consulting stated the existing drainage pattern is going from the northwest corner to the east. The existing Peerless building has a berm where some of the drainage comes into the parking lot area. There is an existing stormsewer that takes a lot of the drainage from the parking area of the building and goes into the existing pond. The proposed drainage plan is trying to mimic the same drainage patterns. It is basically broken up into two separate areas. The west portion which includes the existing Peerless building will have an expanded pond to create the wetland detention pond on the west side. The proposed sanitary sewer comes up to their site through an easement and will give service to all proposed buildings. The Village has asked that the sanitary sewer be extended to the west property line and the south property line for future consideration and development. He further noted there is an existing water main along Aptakisic Road which is 16 inches and they are proposing a 10 inch water main to loop the buildings for fire suppression and supply hydrants at the required distances. Mr. Mark De La Vergne of Land Strategies stated they have made some modifications to the plan based on the Village Traffic consultant and the Lake County Division of Transportation. They are now proposing to put a traffic signal at the intersection of Aptakisic Road and Asbury Drive. They are also proposing to move the access drives further to the south on both the left turn lane storage and the left turn lane taper. They updated their traffic study to account for the Leider traffic. They first did projections based on meetings they had and went out last week to do traffic counts at the intersection and these counts confirmed their projections. Mr. De La Vergne stated the improvements they are doing at the intersection include a traffic signal, installation of an eastbound right turn lane and a lengthening of the size of the existing westbound left turn lane to meet Lake County requirements. They are also running a three lane cross section on Asbury Drive. The northbound left turn lane will provide 150 feet of storage which is in excess of the queue they are projecting for the total traffic at the intersection. They still need to submit an intersection design study to the Lake County Department of Transportation but at this point they seem very receptive to the idea of a traffic signal at this intersection. Ms. Cassel stated she stated they are still hoping they will get some financial assistance particularly relating to the sizeable infrastructure investments they are being asked to make for the benefit of several other property owners to the south and west. She stated she hopes that in the wording of the recommendation to the Village Board the concept of this entry drive and boulevard system may be modified as it is taken forward in the final planning stage because they do have this last piece of dialogue to resolve with Lake County on whether they will find this access point appropriate. In summary the one aspect of the site plan they view as still being somewhat in flux due to their dialogue with Lake County is how these boulevards will be configured. Mr. Foss stated one of the necessary variations has to do with the high water level in the parking areas. He noted they have raised the portion of the parking lot area in facility #2 so that now all of the parking for passenger vehicles is way above the high water level. The only place that ponding may occur is within the dock area in facility #2 for about one foot which would basically affect the wheel wells of the trailers. That would be at a foot depth of water for approximately 3-6 hours. Mr. Foss stated another variance has to do with the detention pond design. The ordinance states it requires sloped sides down to the bottom and they are looking to provide a wetland detention bottom to bring the bottom up and give it some more vegetation along with the retaining walls to accommodate the volume they need. Commissioner Khan asked how the developer would accommodate a straight lane going north to any future development at Asbury Drive. Mr. De La Vergne stated that unless there was a significant amount of through traffic he would simply restripe the lane configuration as a through right. Commissioner Khan asked if there was enough right of way or easement to build the through lane and asked if a section of the building pad could be cut down to ensure enough lane is set aside so that if the lane is required to go through there will be enough room. Mr. De La Vergne stated they can definitely take a look at that. Commissioner Khan noted that southbound traffic on Asbury would have a very sharp turn into building #2 parking. He suggested flipping the parking to the other side and not starting the parking so close to the entrance of the building. Mr. De La Vergne acknowledged that this turning movement should be evaluated to determine if other options would be better. He said that additional analysis with"Auto Turn" software will be done to evaluate modifications to make the turning movement less tight. Commissioner Khan asked about some of the comments from the Lake County Department of Transportation. Mr. De La Vergne stated they have made one official submittal on February 19, 2007 which was essentially the traffic study. The Village resubmitted their study with the traffic signal as well. They requested an IDS with the first submittal. They also sent a second set of comments back on April 28th discussing the concept plan previously shown to the Village. In that letter they told them they could not have the internal access drive where it was on the plan. That letter was essentially the day after they submitted the plan here now. They have since met with them on May 11, 2007 to find out exactly what they want to see design wise. An IDS is being submitted in the next week or two as well as a resubmittal of the traffic study to respond to their comments. Commissioner Khan asked if there were any discussions with Lake County about interconnection of the traffic signal to the east and west of Asbury. Mr. De La Vergne stated he did not discuss that but assumes it will be interconnected. Commissioner Khan stated he would like to see the three signals interconnected. Commissioner Khan asked if there is any benefit of making the road next to building #1 southbound only. Mr. Le La Vergne stated if they are permitted the right turn access in by Lake County they can see making it southbound only and making it essentially a one way flow for the site. Commissioner Stark asked if the detention basin on the west side of the existing facility will affect the total water storage in that basin and if not why ask for a variation there. Mr. Foss stated no. He stated the variation is on the configuration of the pond. Commissioner Podber asked about the 7 foot drop on basin B. Mr. Foss stated that was correct together with a modular block retaining wall. Ms. Cassel stated there will be a fence about the wall. Also, there really should be no pedestrian activity there as it is adjacent to the loading area only. Mr. Foss noted there is also about 7-10 feet of space between the curb and where the wall actually is. Commissioner Podber noted his concern with someone getting into the area and not being able to get out. Mr. Dziurdzik noted one of the concerns could be alleviated by transitioning the wall out to allow someone to essentially walk out. Commissioner Podber asked if there was a reason for the Plan Commission to be concerned. Mr. Raysa stated the Plan Commission can be concerned whether it meets code or not but any questions leaning toward any possible Village liability for approving of a variation of the detention pond do not appear to be present. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka asked if there has been an issue with other detention ponds within the Village and people getting stuck and not being able to exit them. Mr. Brimm stated he is not aware of any situations over the last 30 years where anyone has been in a detention pond and not been able to get out on their own. Commissioner Khan stated he would be more comfortable if the 7 foot wall is broken down into two sections with a safety ledge between them. Mr. Dziurdzik stated what they have is an 8 foot section from where the curb stopped to where the retaining wall would start. He noted they might be able to take the space from the edge of curb to where the start of the wall is and make it 5 feet and tier it down as a flat 3 foot section and get what is needed without modifying the site plan. Commissioner Khan noted there are requests for variations within the development ordinance and asked for comments on that. Mr. Foss stated the first variation is for a wetland bottom basin. The majority of the basins in Buffalo Grove have a depth below the water level of about 6 feet. They are proposing to make that only 6 inches to 12 inches. The second variation is talking about the same configuration as the wetland detention basin. A wetland detention basin requires a deeper section below what the water level will be at the inlet and outlet locations of the stormsewer because of potential sediment coming in. With the third variation he noted that there is a 2:1 slope between the normal water level and the high water level in the code. They are only requesting to do 4:1 where needed within the basin between the normal and the high. Lastly, the retaining walls are the fourth variation as they are not mentioned in the ordinance at all. Commissioner Cohn asked how frequent of a flood would submerge the truck wheels for 3-6 hours. Mr. Foss stated that would be only in a 100 year event. Commissioner Khan asked if the developer is proposing connection between Industrial Drive to Asbury in the May 15th report. Mr. De La Vergne stated there is no connection proposed except for emergency vehicles. Commissioner Khan asked how the traffic would be controlled to keep traffic from coming through. Mr. De La Vergne stated he believes it will be an emergency crash gate. Mr. Jim Leider, 511 Cambridge, Lake Bluff, Illinois, stated he has a concern for the setback variance because if Aptakisic Road is widened at some point these building will be right on Aptakisic Road and will be a visionary block because of their size. He noted some further concern with the layout and ingress and egress on Asbury Drive. He stated he feels it should be closer to the truck docks because of the loading which causes a lot of problems with traffic coming in and out. He stated the detail of this traffic plan is critical and his company will have to live with that. Because there are so many trucks, it only takes a couple of trucks lined up to create traffic all along Aptakisic Road. Ms. Cassel stated if you look at the position of the buildings relative to the improvements to the east and west, they are essentially set back in a manner that is very consistent with the south side of Aptakisic and also even if Lake County does someday improve Aptakisic with the additional 20 feet they still have 30 feet of landscape, two rows of parking, the interim drive aisle and another 8-10 foot landscape area before you get to the building facade. So it does not appear the building facades will appear oppressively close to Aptakisic. Ms. Cassel noted the Leider family sold this northerly site to Peerless and it is zoned Industrial. What you essentially see is a modern, functional, marketable industrial building with north south widths that are necessary for functionality. Chairman Ottenheimer noted there are still some unresolved issues and if the commission makes its motion subject to these issues, would it be staff s preference that petitioner come back again for final approval or can it be approved subject to staff review and approval of those two issues. Mr. Pfeil noted the Plan Commission's recommendation can always be conditional, and it is the Commission's decision whether the hearing should be continued to a future date. Chairman Ottenheimer suspended the public hearing at 9:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair Board or Commission: ❑ Plan Commission Document Type: 0 A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 05/16/2007 Type of Meeting: PUBLIC HEARING (continued from April 18, 2007) BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION May 16, 2007 Update of Village Comprehensive Plan Chairman Ottenheimer called the hearing to order at 9:41 p.m. in the Village Council Chambers, Buffalo Grove Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Chairman Ottenheimer read the Notice of Public Hearing as published in the Buffalo Grove Daily Herald, explained the procedure to be followed for the public hearing, and swore in all persons who wished to give testimony. Commissioner present: Chairman Ottenheimer Ms. Bocek Ms. Kenski-Sroka Mr. Khan Mr. Stark Mr. Cohn Mr. Podber Commissioners absent: Mr. Smith Mr. Teplinsky Also present: Mr. William Brimm, Village Manager Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner Mr. Pfeil said he is presenting information concerning the Prairie View area to address comments by the Plan Commission during discussion on March 21, 2007 about proposed land uses for certain properties. He presented the Prairie View Sub-Area Future Land Use maps labeled as Concept 1 dated 1/9/2007 Concept 2 dated 5/10/2007. The differences in the concept maps are that Concept Map 1 designates the southeast corner of Route 22 and Prairie Road, and the northeast corner of Route 22 and Prairie Road for planned residential development at 6 units per acre, while Concept 2 designates the southeast site for commercial and the northeast site for multiple family residential development. Mr. Pfeil noted that at the March 21 hearing and discussion, the overall intensity of proposed uses was an issue. Commissioner Smith specifically noted concern with the southeast corner of Prairie and Route 22, where the Plan recommendation is for residential rather than commercial use. He noted that he thinks commercial use is more appropriate for this site based on the location along Route 22. Mr. Pfeil commented that in his opinion it is unlikely that commercial development will occur at the southeast corner of Prairie and Route 22. He noted that a number of proposals have been presented to the Village, but none of these commercial plans have advanced. Recent inquiries from developers have been focusing on residential development, which is consistent with the recommendation of the Transit Station Areas Study accepted by the Village Board in January 2007. Chairman Ottenheimer asked what possible impact the widening of Route 22 will have on the traffic situation there. He asked if there would be more traffic generated by a commercial or residential development. Mr. Pfeil replied that commercial development would probably have more traffic movements over the course of a typical day than a residential development. The residential traffic would tend to be more concentrated in the morning and evening peaks. However, access to the site will only be available on Prairie Road, which is a constraint for commercial development. Commissioner Cohn asked what other commercial enterprises had shown interest on that property. Mr. Pfeil stated the most recent one was for a shopping center, but no specific uses were identified. Before that there was a plan that involved relocation of Buffalo Grove Gymnastics to a building on the south end of the site, an office building in the middle, and a commercial use on the north. Commissioner Cohn asked how much retail space can actually fit on this piece of land. Mr. Pfeil stated it is probably about 3.5 acres of developable real estate and that assumes stormwater management has been accomplished in some economic way. On a site of 3 acres, a fairly substantial commercial center could be built. Chairman Ottenheimer suspended the public hearing at 9:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair Board or Commission: ❑ Plan Commission Document Type: 0 A e g nda 0 Minutes Meeting ate: 05/16/2007 Type of Meeting: ❑ Regular Meeting REGULAR MEETING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION May 16, 2007 Aptakisic Creek Corporate Park,Aptakisic Road (south side)west And north of Leider Greenhouses—Annexation of west parcel and Approval of a Preliminary Plan and appearance package for the overall site,zoned in the industrial district Proposed Berenesa Plaza (Ventrella property), Northwest and southwest Corners of Deerfield Parkway and Milwaukee Avenue, Review of a Preliminary Plan and Business Planned Unit Development (PUD) in the B-3 Planned Business Center District and Office & Research District Workshop #3 University of Phoenix, 1500 Lake Cook Road (Angus Chemical building) Special use for an education facility in the Office and Research District Workshop #1 Discussion of Village Comprehensive Plan update Chairman Ottenheimer called the meeting to order at 9:06 p.m. in the Village Council Chambers, Buffalo Grove Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Commissioners present: Chairman Ottenheimer Ms. Bocek Ms. Kenski-Sroka Mr. Khan Mr. Stark Mr. Cohn Mr. Podber Commissioners absent: Mr. Smith Mr. Teplinsky Also present: Ms. Danielle Meltzer Cassel, DLA Piper Mr. Lawrence Dziurdzik, Allen Kracower& Assoc. Mr. Steven Poulos, Bridge Development Partners Mr. Michael Baumstark, Cornerstone Architects Mr. Mark De La Vergne, Land Strategies Mr. Jerremy Foss, Manhard Consulting Mr. Ronald Frain, Bridge Development Partners Mr. Alan Zocher, Premier Design & Build Group Mr. Ken Kuchler, Single Site Solutions Mr. Michael Caldwell, Marchris Engineering Mr. Peter Uliasz, OKW Architects Mr. George Arnold, Hamilton Partners Mr. William Brimm, Village Manager Mr. William Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Richard Kuenkler, Village Engineer Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Kenski-Sroka, seconded by Commissioner Khan to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of April 4, 2007. All Commissioners were in favor of the motion and the motion passed unanimously with Commissioners Cohn and Podber abstaining. Moved by Commissioner Kenski-Sroka, seconded by Commissioner Stark to approve the minutes of the public hearing and regular meeting of April 18, 2007. All Commissioners were in favor of the motion and the motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Podber abstaining. COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS—None APTAKISIC CREEK CORPORATE PARK, APTAKISIC ROAD (SOUTH SIDE) WEST AND NORTH OF LEIDER GREENHOUSES — ANNEXATION OF WEST PARCEL AND APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAN AND APPEARANCE PACKAGE FOR THE OVERALL SITE, ZONED IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT Moved by Commissioner Khan, seconded by Commissioner Kenski-Sroka to recommend approval to the Village Board of the petition for annexation with zoning in the Industrial District for the unincorporated tract as described in the legal description and approval of a Preliminary Plan for the entire property including the unincorporated tract (approximately 19 acres) and incorporated tract (approximately 9.8 acres) as described in the legal description with the following variations pursuant to the proposed Preliminary Plan: ZONING ORDINANCE — Section 17/48/020.F.5.a — To allow a thirty-foot (30) landscaped setback, including a 10-foot wide public bike path, from the future Aptakisic Road right-of-way, instead of fifty-feet. The proposed Preliminary Plan provides a dedication of twenty (20) feet of right-of-way along the south side of Aptakisic Road as requested by the Lake County Department of Transportation; DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE — Section 16.50.040.C.4 (Stormwater Detention Facilities) — To allow wetland bottom detention basins with (I) native wetland plantings (ii) water that is approximately six inches deep, with deeper sections at the locations of inlet and outlet pipes for the pond; (iii) side slopes of 4:1 between the Normal Water Level ("NWL") and the High Water Level ("HWL"); (iv) retaining walls, between the N VL and the HWL to accommodate the required detention amounts; and (v) decorative safety fences around the entire perimeter to prevent pedestrian access; Section 16.50.040.13 — To allow the truck docks associated with Facility #2 to be one foot below the high water line of Detention Basin B, instead of one foot above the high water line. Ponding will occur in the 100-year storm event and only affect the wheel well area of the trailers, subject to: 1. The May 15, 2007 revised site plan and traffic report being approved by Village Staff and consulting traffic engineer. 2. The retention pond design being modified concerning the addition of tiering, with the design subject to approval by Village staff 3. Asbury Drive access easement issues to be clarified by the petitioner and reviewed by Village. 4. The recommendation of the Appearance Review Team (ART) is included in the Plan Commission's recommendation to the Village Board. Chairman Ottenheimer called for a vote on the motion and the vote was as follows: AYES: Bocek, Kenski-Sroka, Khan, Stark, Cohn, Podber, Ottenheimer NAYS:None ABSENT: Smith, Teplinsky ABSTAIN: None The motion passed 7 to 0. Chairman Ottenheimer closed the public hearing at 9:14 p.m. Chairman Ottenheimer re-opened the regular meeting at 9:17 p.m. PROPOSED BERENESA PLAZA (VENTRELLA PROPERTY), NORTHWEST AND SOUTHWEST CORNERS OF DEERFIELD PARKWAY AND MILWAUKEE AVENUE, REVIEW OF A PRELIMINARY PLAN AND BUSINESS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) IN THE B-3 PLANNED BUSINESS CENTER DISTRICT AND OFFICE & RESEARCH DISTRICT—WORKSHOP#3 Mr. Kuchler stated they have made some substantial changes to the site plan and hope they are getting more in step with the Plan Commission and what they hope to see. Mr. Michael Caldwell stated one of the things they have done is to change the direction of the parking. Before trees in this area had north/south parking trees and with this change it brings things closer together rather than putting barriers up between the different aspects of the development it now allows flow through for the pedestrian walkway. One of the other things they had discussed was trying to bring overall pedestrian atmosphere to the development. The connectivity that goes on throughout the development is now much more defined. Mr. Caldwell stated the bank on the south side has acquiesced and they have now moved the drive thrus toward the rear. He further noted the plaza area is larger and has been moved further on the site to allow more visibility into the site. In addition Retail A rather than facing Milwaukee and the back of restaurant A now actually faces Deerfield and gets a better site line off of Deerfield. Also the office building has been moved closer to Deerfield Parkway to provide more of an urban structure to the development and Restaurant D has been moved closer to Deerfield as well as breaking up Retail C and D. Mr. Uliasz stated they have made an alignment with the buildings so that the corner elements can line up and anchor the two sides. They have tried to create the street frontage on Deerfield Parkway and bring some new life to Deerfield. They will retain the street edge along Milwaukee and hopefully focus toward their anchor tenant which will be in the center of the project. That will be architecturally a 360 degree building. All four sides will be designed with similar materials and articulation and detail. Further they will create some landscaped islands that will help to reiterate the focus of the project into the center Chairman Ottenheimer stated he really appreciates the reconfiguration. Commissioner Bocek stated this plan works much better. She asked for clarification on the green spaces. Mr. Uliasz stated the two major landscape features are the one on the west nearest the pond with a trellis over the seating area with some landscaping behind it and pavers on the ground. It is necessary to have fire truck access behind the hotel so they will have a paver system here that allows grass to grow. The major plaza area near Milwaukee is between the two restaurants. The outdoor seating areas will face into the plaza area with the water feature in the center. They will also have some trellises with bench seating facing inward. Commissioner Bocek stated it seems everything has great visibility except for Retail A. She asked if they can connect it with Retail B or perhaps reconsider placement of that building. Commissioner Bocek stated the uses on the south side of Deerfield Parkway have great visibility and would hope to see some really creative uses there. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka noted the Fire Marshall's concern with the location of the garbage area at the north corner where he does not want trucks backing up. Mr. Caldwell noted it will be moved. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka noted some concern with the turning radii for the office building area. Mr. Caldwell stated the Fire Chief has offered the dimensions of all of their equipment and they will run an auto turn there using the Village's equipment specifications to make sure that all will function properly. Commissioner Kenski-Sroka noted she, too, likes the revised plan. Commissioner Cohn echoed Commissioner Bocek's comment about Retail A seeming to be on its own and has doubts about it succeeding. If that can be brought into the other areas of the site closer to Retail B, C or D it would do better. Commissioner Podber asked if the existing detention has been sized to include this development. Mr. Caldwell stated yes. He noted they had previously done an analysis on the pervious/impervious ratio that is proposed on the site versus what is designed as part of the detention ponds constructed in the early 90's. He noted they meet the requirements called for in the report and the design calculations of those detention facilities. Mr. Pfeil asked for a review of the parking for the north parcel and understands the surplus of parking spaces on the north. Mr. Caldwell stated the plan shows 40 extra spaces. Mr. Pfeil asked if that presents any opportunities for more green area. Retail D and B area could use another green element in the walkway system between the west and east plaza area. Mr. Caldwell stated they will certainly look at that. He stated one of the things they want to take into consideration as part of their overall site planning is the potential uses that may be allowed on the site. They are still in negotiation about the overall uses and there is potential that if by chance one of those retail C or D was a restaurant use, then they would not have excess parking. He stated they were looking at the 40 spaces as a positive and would certainly have to meet all the Village requirements with regard to landscaping. Commissioner Khan asked if there is any way to break up the parking stalls and provide an island with some shade trees as there is a surplus of parking here anyway. Mr. Caldwell stated he believes they can accommodate that. Mr. Uliasz stated they have more time until the next workshop and they will be able to do more work such as a conceptual landscape plan and some other additional pieces of information that will help portray the project more accurately. UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX, 1500 LAKE COOK ROAD (ANGUS CHEMICAL BUILDING) SPECIAL USE FOR AN EDUCATION FACILITY IN THE OFFICE & RESEARCH DISTRICT—WORKSHOP 91 Mr. George Arnold from Hamilton Partners stated they have been working on getting a zoning text amendment to allow the University of Phoenix to operate in the Angus Chemical Building. The building is 62, 201 square feet on two stories. The University of Phoenix is looking to occupy 12, 201 feet on the first floor for a college evening and weekend campus. He stated they feel the uses between Angus Chemical's 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. usage and the after hour usage of the university are compatible. He stated they have spoken to Angus and are in agreement with the use being in the building. Commissioner Khan asked what courses will be offered here. Mr. Arnold stated it is a general college typically for older adults and working people who travel and come in after work to get their degrees. Chairman Ottenheimer noted Mr. Pfeil's memo asked for a review of the parking standard which is 1 parking space for every 2 employees plus 1 space per 4 students for a college. He asked what the parking demand is for Angus at peak hours. Mr. Arnold stated Angus Chemical's use has shifted more to a laboratory use on the first floor area. He would have to come back with more information on that. Chairman Ottenheimer noted they would like for the next workshop to have an analysis of the parking demand for Angus as it relates to the hours of operation for the university. Mr. Arnold stated Angus has basically stated there would be no more than 3-4 people there ever during the 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. hour. That is why this use makes sense. Chairman Ottenheimer noted they do need to reconsider the zoning ordinance for parking on this and it seems it can be done at the public hearing. Chairman Ottenheimer suspended the regular meeting at 9:41 p.m. Chairman Ottenheimer re-opened the meeting at 9:50 p.m. DISCUSSION OF VILLAGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Commissioner Bocek asked if a choice needed to be made between the Prairie View Sub-Area Future Land Use maps Concept 1 or Concept 2. Mr. Pfeil stated that when the Plan Commission is ready to make a final recommendation concerning the Comprehensive Plan Update, a specific map should be cited. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT—None FUTURE AGENDA SCHEDULE Mr. Pfeil said that the next meeting will be held on June 6, 2007. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS—None STAFF REPORT—None NEW BUSINESS—None ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Kenski-Sroka, seconded by Commissioner Stark and carried unanimously to adjourn. Chairman Ottenheimer adjourned the meeting at 9:52 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair