2001-12-05 - Plan Commission - Minutes Board or Commission: ❑ Plan Commission
Document Type: 0 A e
g nda 0 Minutes
Meeting ate: 12/05/2001
Type of Meeting: ❑ Regular Meeting
REGULAR MEETING
BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION
December 5, 2001
Jacobs Homes, proposed Noah's Landing townhome development,
North side of IL Route 22 and east side of Prairie Road, Rezoning
To the R-8 District and approval of a Preliminary Plan
Workshop #4
Village Development Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance—Review of
Standards concerning driveway width and driveway apron width
In residential districts —Workshop #1
Chairman Ottenheimer 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 Ottenheimer
Mr. Samuels
Mr. Trilling
Ms. Dunn
Mr. Feldgreber
Mr. Panitch
Mr. Smith
Ms. Bocek
Ms. Kenski-Sroka
Commissioners absent: None
Also present: Mr. Keith Jacobs, Jacobs Homes, Inc.
Mr. John Green, Groundwork, Ltd.
Mr. Richard Vane, Groundwork, Ltd.
Mr. Bruce Kahn, Village Trustee
Mr. Robert Pfeil, Village Planner
Mr. Greg Summers, Associate Village Planner
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Moved by Commissioner Dunn, seconded by Commissioner Smith to approve the minutes of the
regular meeting of October 17, 2001. All commissioners were in favor of the motion and the
motion passed unanimously.
Moved by Commissioner Kenski-Sroka, seconded by Commissioner Feldgreber to approve the
minutes of the public hearing and regular meeting of November 7, 2001. All commissioners
were in favor of the motion and the motion passed unanimously.
COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS
Commissioner Dunn attended the Village Board meeting on December 3, 2001 and noted the
potential referral of a proposed bank at Dundee Road and Golfview Terrace, which was not
accepted by the trustees.
Commissioner Smith attended the Village Board meeting of November 19, 2001 and stated the
following items were discussed:
1. Unanimous approval of the Public Works building addition
2. Discussion of residential driveway apron issues relative to safety issues and affect on
streetscape
3. Pre-application conference concerning a plan for single-family detached lots on land on
the north side of Parkview Terrace west of Golfview Terrace on Lot 2 of the Covington Office
Plaza
4. Discussion of an 800 square foot addition to the Teriyaki Box restaurant for a sushi bar
JACOBS HOMES, PROPOSED NOAH'S LANDING TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT,
NORTH SIDE OF IL ROUTE 22 AND EAST SIDE OF PRAIRIE ROAD, REZONING TO
THE R-8 DISTRICT AND APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAN—WORKSHOP#4
Mr. Green stated the revised plan shows 53 units instead of 55 units. There is a separation
between all buildings of 24 feet or more which has opened the plan considerably. They have
also been able to change the mix of the unit types somewhat. There are now 23 units that have a
master bedroom downstairs. There are no four-bedroom units and no plans for same. This
allowed them to open up some volume space in the 35-foot units on the ends. By opening up the
volume space on the widest of the units and putting that on the outside end, it allowed them to
take the end of the unit that would be on the end of the building and make it 1 '/2 stories high.
Mr. Green stated they are using a combination of materials; caststone masonry and vinyl siding.
Both will be in earth tones and he noted they will not change the materials but will change the
tonality of the trim tone.
Mr. Green stated they have worked to give the buildings variation and depth. They have
designed each of the units so when you put one unit next to another unit, you will always have a
stagger in the garage. There will not be two sets of garage doors that are in the same plane. The
units vary in depth by 2 '/z feet. They have also developed the variation where you wrap around
the side. They have also pushed some elements in on the second floor on the C and A units so
that there are 5-foot deep recesses in the building. They have turned the roof at those points so
there is no continuity of a large mass of roof. In addition, they have added to the elevations box
bay windows on the backs of the units that will come out about 8-12 inches.
Mr. Green noted they have put together preliminary engineering, which includes preliminary
detention calculations and design. This has been reviewed by the engineering department and
approved. In addition, by doing the preliminary engineering, they were able to focus more on
the detention, side slopes, grade transitions and safety ledges. All of these have now been
designed in as part of the landscaping package.
Mr. Green noted they have slightly altered the street structure, particularly the street that runs
parallel to Prairie Road. Someone was concerned with the road extending behind the property
on the southwest corner and how it would impact. They have now brought the road in so it
comes just to the end. That allowed them to increase the activity area, to extend the detention
area in and to adjust the location of a couple of buildings along the south side so that the space is
bigger while at the same time not impacting the ability to connect into the southwest portion.
They have created the right-of-way portion so that it will continue at that point and can still be
developable.
Mr. Green reviewed the landscape elements of the plan, noting they now have sidewalks on both
sides of the street and a parkway on both sides. They have a 52-foot right-of-way instead of a
60-foot right-of-way, but they have developed 6-'/2 foot parkway on each side of the sidewalk.
They have a 21-foot setback and are 21 feet from the right-of-way line. The sidewalk is a foot
away from that line so there is 22 feet at the minimum point to a garage door. He further noted
they always allow for some tolerance in the building envelopes. He also noted that the 6-7
parking spaces that used to be scattered around on the plan were no longer needed and they now
have place to put two cars between driveways where they only had room for one before.
Therefore, they have actually increased the number of on street parking opportunities.
Mr. Green stated they key feature for the overall development is the activity area and detention
area. A walk flows all the way through from one end to the other, from east to west. Along that
walk there are two gazebos and one of the gazebos overlooks the pond. They have created a
combination of wildflower planting and grass planting along and down to the detention area.
The fencing within the gazebo will follow around the west end of the detention area between the
activity area and the gazebo area. They have some interlocking stone terraces that step down
between 18-24 inches at certain points. They have meandered the walk through the activity area.
The swing set, which they feel is important to this type of development, is incorporated into the
plan as well as a senior activity area. They have looked at the fence around the perimeter of the
site, which will be a 5-foot fence. However, they have designed into it landscape niches which
allows for landscaping along the right-of-way side of the fence. They are proposing that the
existing hedge along Route 22 remains. They are dedicating the 10 feet as required along Route
22. There is a mature hedge in what would be part of that 10-foot strip. They propose to leave
the hedge there until Route 22 is widened. They also propose keeping a similar hedge along part
of Prairie Road.
Commissioner Trilling asked if the developer has considered striping in three spaces for parking
at the play area.
Mr. Green stated yes, they would do so.
Commissioner Trilling asked for a concept plan for how the corner lot will be developed for the
next meeting.
Commissioner Trilling asked what kind of landscaping the pond would have.
Mr. Green stated they are trying to achieve a combination lawn and flower color. They want it
to be perennial and solid ground cover, as well as indigenous to the area. That is what the flower
and grass seed mix will do.
Commissioner Trilling asked what the difference is between this pond and the one at Sterling
Creek.
Mr. Vane stated the Sterling Creek detention basin has a tributary area of 2.9 square miles.
Therefore that detention basin is subject to extreme fluctuations in flow. Therefore the plants
have a very rough time. The proposed detention pond is fairly normal and there are walls at
some of the lower levels that will allow them to put plantings several feet above the normal
water level so that those plants will not be inundated with water and will be able to flourish.
Commissioner Trilling asked if any kind of brick piers had been considered for fencing.
Mr. Green stated they looked at that but decided it was probably better to do the large offsets so
that they could the landscaping moving in and out.
Commissioner Trilling asked if the building commissioner had been contacted regarding
sideward and front yard spacing.
Mr. Green stated they do not have any yards, as they are envelopes. However, they have shifted
the south building further to the east so the north does not overlap with the building to the east.
Commissioner Bocek asked about material samples.
Mr. Green stated they are in the process of collecting the materials for the next meeting.
Commissioner Bocek stated she would like to see some of the masonry or stone carried around
the building to the rear.
Mr. Green stated they did not see a reason to carry the masonry or stone to the rear. They did
see the point of carrying the movement to the rear. They have eliminated almost anything that
backed up to anything else. There are three units that back up to Route 22 and eight units that
come up to Prairie Lane. They concentrated the back with relief by the step-ins and the box
spaces.
Commissioner Bocek stated the scale of the roof is so prominent that she would like to see a
nicer type of shingle.
Commissioner Samuels asked if some of this property is being designated as right-of-way where
the street is stubbed to the south.
Mr. Green stated yes.
Commissioner Trilling asked how deep the islands between the driveways are from the front of
the building.
Mr. Green stated they are about 5 feet.
Commissioner Panitch asked about discussions relative to access with IDOT.
Mr. Green stated the Village and IDOT are talking about Route 22. IDOT has indicated they
intend to continue a barrier. IDOT, the Village and several other Villages will be deciding what
will happen and we will all have to live with it. IDOT continues to say that the connection
opportunities are about 200 feet further east where Prairie Lane is.
Commissioner Panitch asked about Fire Department approval.
Mr. Green stated they have access, although the Fire Department would like access to the
community.
Commissioner Panitch asked what the Plan Commission should do regarding access problems
for the Fire Department with a new development.
Mr. Pfeil stated the most recent comment from the Fire Department is that the restricted access is
a big problem for them relative to response time and they are saying at this point that
sprinklering the townhomes is something they seriously want to push as an alternative based on
the limited access. That does not help the emergency ambulance response time, but it might be
somewhat easier for an ambulance to defeat some of the restricted accesses than large fire rigs.
Mr. Green stated he understands the Village is presently looking at what the time response would
be. He further noted they are opposed to sprinklering.
Mr. Panitch noted the fencing does not go all the way around the detention area.
Mr. Green stated that was correct and noted fencing does not go all the way around virtually any
detention facility in Buffalo Grove. Buffalo Grove has developed a very stringent set of
standards for safety ledges, safety design, safety conditions within the water in order to have wet
ponds be open features. Where the gazebo comes out and looks over the water, they have fenced
the area and it wraps around to where the water moves away and there are safety ledges.
Commissioner Samuels asked for an illustration using something like a Ford Exhibition in every
driveway so that he can see some scale.
Commissioner Samuels asked where snow would be put.
Mr. Green stated they have 6'/2 foot parkways abounding so that the snow can all be piled and
moved to.
Commissioner Feldgreber asked what variances are now being requested.
Mr. Green stated they would be looking for reduced right-of-way width because they are at 52
feet. They are again proposing to keep the hedge along both Route 22 and Prairie Road and
technically they are supposed to put a walk in a foot off the right of way. They are dedicating
the right of way. There is a walk along Route 22 and they are proposing a walk along Prairie
Road but they are looking for a variation to not put it a foot away from the right of way line. If
there is not a walk on the north side of the site, they will look for a variation for not putting a
walk along the north end of the property. It is up to the Plan Commission to determine if they
want a walk on the south piece and if not it would be a variation request for a walk on one side
of the right of way. Also, technically a 25 foot setback is required under R-8 zoning and they
are showing only a 21 foot setback which will require a variation.
Mr. Pfeil asked what the assumption is concerning the side to front building separation for the
two buildings at the southeast corner of the site.
Mr. Green stated he is not sure and will speak to staff about that.
Chairman Ottenheimer asked why the developer chose to build this project not to comply with
each and every Village ordinance concerning setbacks, right of ways and density.
Mr. Green stated the elements that relate to some of the variations are certainly also related to
the size and shape of any parcel of land which is one of the elements that is driving this. They
have developed right of way and parkway and they are asking for an 8-foot variation on the
standard right of way width and the front yard because of the overall depth of the property. With
regard to the 6 units per acre, the 6 units per acre are a PUD. The PUD also says that part of the
goal of a PUD is to get certain amenities and features in exchange for certain considerations in
order to make it a plan. They have been focusing on making that a very good plan and bringing
the amenities and features together.
Chairman Ottenheimer noted the density has been reduced from 55 to 53 and asked why they
could not accomplish the same plan by reducing the units from 53 to 50.
Mr. Green stated they are perfectly aware that if they had been able to come in at 50, they would
not be dealing with some of these questions. However, it must work economically also. In
addition, there were other ways to reduce some of the variations but they have been working on a
PUD which allows an entire community to be built and that is what they have been trying to do.
Without this the plan would not be as good as it is and the number of units does not really make
the big difference.
Chairman Ottenheimer stated what has been done up to this point is admirable. He asked what
the price range of these units would be.
Mr. Green stated marketing has determined the average price for similar projects is $301,000.
He noted they are actually looking at $325,000 average.
Chairman Ottenheimer stated there are two issues, which concern him greatly. The first is the
density. He noted he understands there are some economics involved. He noted he is also very
concerned with the ingress and egress and the limited access for this site which impacts the
safety of the residents who move in. He noted his concern that the developer has no interest in
putting in sprinklers.
Mr. Green stated he would reserve comment on the sprinkler issue as he noted it is one of the
questions still being studied.
Commissioner Smith asked staff if the Village or the Fire Marshall could somehow lobby IDOT
with their concerns.
Mr. Pfeil stated the Fire Chief and the Village manager both sent letters in the last several
months to IDOT and so far the written response has not been favorable. Basically the Village is
asking that the intersection at Prairie Road and Route 22 allow left turns for emergency vehicles
or to allow a median design making it feasible for emergency vehicles to get through. The Fire
Chief is also looking at the response times that he would predict for this development and one of
the alternatives is to use Route 22 to Prairie Lane to reach Prairie Road and then into the
townhome site. If the response time looks acceptable, it might make a difference the next set of
review comments for the Commission.
Commissioner Samuels noted that the Beaconsfield development in Lincolnshire has some
similarities to the Jacobs proposal, but appears to have a more attractive mix of building
materials. He commented that he considers an amenity to include aesthetics of the overall
development. The proposed overall presentation of the Jacobs proposal is very mundane. In a
multi-family environment such as this, masonry on the first floor should be workable within a
budget. He noted he would like to see some limestone sills instead of trim boards. He also
cannot get excited about vinyl siding. He noted he could better tolerate densely packed nice
looking units.
Commissioners Trilling noted that the developer could easily lose three units on the plan, not
change anything dramatically, and end up with the full 60-foot right-of-way.
Ms. Terry Moons of District 125, stated they were pleased to see the reduction from 55 to 53
units and that there are no more 4-bedroom units being proposed. She stated the Cherbourg
development, which was marketed to empty nesters currently, brings in 20 students. In the
Manchester apartments and townhouses there are 9 children. The Fiore townhouses on Willow
Parkway have 22 students enrolled. The Tenerife development brings 54 students and these
were marketed for families. She noted they would probably not have many students coming out
of 53 units, especially as there is no 4-bedroom option any longer.
Mr. Joseph Jaeger of District 103 stated the 1998 Comprehensive Plan shows this area as
unincorporated which, of course, projected 0 students. In 1999 they received some projection
numbers of what the multi-family housing units would be to help them prepare their report and at
that time there was also zero units projected. In checking their numbers from the various
developments they have found as Ms. Moons mentioned that those developments marketed as
empty nesters provide few students for the system, whereas those such as Tenerife provide many
students.
Chairman Ottenheimer noted the Commission appears to feel this project is ready for public
hearing and noted a few items that will need to be addressed at the public hearing:
1. Conceptual planning for the adjacent parcels at southeast corner of Prairie Road/Route
22;
2. More information concerning appearance issues, specifically the proposed building
materials, including sample boards;
3. Information illustrating the impact of the proposed bulk variations such as the 21-foot
front yard and the adequacy of the driveways for parking large vehicles.
VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE AND ZONING ORDINANCE — REVIEW OF
STANDARDS CONCERNING DRIVEWAY WIDTH AND DRIVEWAY APRON WIDTH IN
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS —WORKSHOP 91
Mr. Pfeil stated the Village Board recently looked at the issue of driveway apron width in
residential districts. An application has been filed with the ZBA for a cul-de-sac lot in the
Highlands requesting a wider than standard driveway and apron. The Village Board decided it
would not be appropriate to have the ZBA handle this type of variation based on the current
provisions of the Development Ordinance. The Village Board wants the Plan Commission to
look again at whether the standard for the width of an apron for two car driveways needs to be
re-evaluated and perhaps expanded beyond the current 18-foot limit and whether or not any
variation procedure is appropriate to exceed the width standard. Staff is reluctant to give people
standing to have variations of the apron in right-of-way since it is public property. If the width
standard can be modified to eliminate requests for variations, staff believes this would be a good
solution for property owners and the Village.
Commissioner Samuels stated the same rationale that would apply to two car garages would
apply to three car garages. If he builds a house that has three 9 foot single garage doors divided
by 2 or 2 '/z feet between each door, you end up with the same situation on the three car as you
have on the two car. Why then limit it to a two-car situation? If we are trying to encourage
people to have two single garage doors instead of one double, why not encourage them to have
three single doors instead of two.
Mr. Pfeil stated they are trying to address the situations that are actually coming to the Village.
The fact is that for three car and bigger garages, the Village is sticking with 27 feet at the
property line. You can do as much as you want in the front yard as long as you are within the 40
percent of coverage limit.
Commissioner Samuels noted the same thing applies to the two-car garage. He noted it does not
take you more than 18 feet at the curb to get onto a driveway. Why do you actually need
anything wider than 18 feet? He stated it could be wider at the house, but why is it necessary to
be wider at the sidewalk to access your two-car garage.
Mr. Pfeil stated if you have a three-car garage, you get 27 feet. If, however, the garage is larger
than the traditional 18-foot standard for a two-car garage, would there be harm in allowing an
apron width 20 or 21 feet at the property line? That is really the specific question that was asked
previously. Is it a bad thing to go from 18 feet to 20 feet at the property line?
Commissioner Samuels stated that his argument is why should it be tied to the width of the
spacing of the garage doors. If you are going to give someone with a two-car garage the right to
have a 20-foot wide driveway, then give everybody with a two-car garage the right to a 20-foot
driveway.
Commissioner Samuels stated he does not see the rationale for offering a wider apron as you can
taper to 18 feet without much trouble. He further noted that there are those communities that do
not allow the 27-foot cut handle their three car garages with an 18-foot cut. Buffalo Grove chose
to handle their three cars with a 27 foot cut, but he still does not see why that now means they
should vary to the two car cuts.
Commissioner Panitch stated he concurs with Commissioner Samuels.
Commissioner Samuels this is without getting into street parking issues. For every number of
houses on the block that widen their driveway by that two feet, you are losing a parking space
eventually after three or four houses do that.
Commissioner Samuels further noted that the application of this would be so limited because
there is very little new construction going on that has this element to deal with.
Mr. Pfeil stated he would review this with the Village Manager, the Village Engineer and the
Building Commissioner to see if there is any more information they can provide to the
Commission.
CHAIRMAN'S REPORT—None
FUTURE AGENDA SCHEDULE
Mr. Pfeil stated the next regular meeting would be held on December 19, 2001.
PUBLIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS—None
STAFF REPORT—None
NEW BUSINESS—None
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Commissioner Trilling, seconded by Commissioner Smith and carried unanimously to
adjourn. Chairman Ottenheimer adjourned the meeting at 9:27 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Fay Rubin, Recording Secretary
APPROVED BY:
LESTER OTTENHEIMER, Chair