Loading...
1980-01-02 - Plan Commission - Minutes PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION I & O/R ORDINANCE JANUARY 2, 1980 Chairman Shields called the Public Hearing to order at 7:43 P.M. in the Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Commissioners Present: Chairman Shields Mr. Goldspiel Mrs. Sheldon Mr. Button Mr. Davis Mrs. Reid Mr. Shifrin Mr. Glover Commissioners Absent: None Also Present: Mr. Don Asher, Fiore/Hilltown Properties Mr. Bill Sommer, Assistant Village Manager Mr. Greg Boysen, Public Works Director Mr. Dick Kuenkler, Village Engineer Mr. Jim Truesdell, Village Planner Mr. Truesdell explained that a new office and industrial section for the Zoning Ordinance was being prepared. The primary reason was that the current ordinance is outdated and needs revisions in order to be applicable to today's market. Mr. Truesdell presented a letter from Mr. Ronald Lunt of the Trammel Crow Corpor- ation which set forth specific comments on the content of the Ordinance. The main issues raised in the letter were: 1. The 45 foot additional setback requirement in the office and research district when adjacent to residential should be re- duced to 25 feet. 2. The height limitations should be changed from 45 feet to 50 in the office and research district. 3. Parking stall sizes should be reduced to allow for the increase in the use of compact cars. 4. A 3 to 1 slope on berms should be allowed rather than 4 to 1. 5. Tree planting requirements should encourage clustering rather than a spacing of one single tree every 30 feet. Mr. Truesdell then introduced Mr. Don Asher of Hilltown Associates, Inc. Mr. Asher made the following comments: Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980 -2- 1. Certain uses, such as freight terminals, should be excluded from the industrial district. 2. Make sure the ordinance is enforceable regarding the list of allow- able uses. 3. The restriction of outside storage within 150 feet of a residential district is too strict. Also, outside storage should be required to locate directly behind the building it serves and proper screen- ing should be required. 4. Individual office buildings should be allowed in the industrial district. 5. Office buildings should be allowed a height of 10 stories and the Floor Area Ratio should be increased. 6. The allowable accessary retail uses should be expanded, especially in the office district. Exterior signs for accessary retail uses should not be totally prohibited. General discussion ensued. Commissioner Goldspiel felt that 10 stories is too high. He also felt that ex- cessive setbacks were not desirable due to the fact that it creates long walks for public transportation users. Mr. Asher responded that several low buildings would still require some walk- ing distance. He also said that high buildings could be visually pleasing. Mr. Truesdell asked Mr. Asher to clarify his position on outside storage. Mr. Asher stated that he did not like it but it is probably necessary. Mr. Asher asked that provisions be added to provide for trash receptacle location and screening. Commissioner Davis liked 10 story buildings and he felt we should encourage major corporations. General discussion occurred regarding building heights. Commissioner Sheldon expressed concern over the location and screening of dumpsters. Commissioner Button felt that a 10 story height may be appropriate in certain areas. He also felt that clustering of trees is preferable to a single uni- form row. Commissioner Sheldon said that the requirement could be based on the size of the tree. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980 -3 Commissioner Button felt that the Commission should seriously consider Mr. Asher's comments. Commissioner Glover felt that a 10 story building was appropriate as a special use as allowed under the present ordinance. Commissioner Shifrin was concerned over possibly allowing smaller parking stalls. Mr. Asher felt that it was unacceptable to make a 10 story building a special use. It would basically take away the possibility of attracting such a use. Commissioner Goldspiel felt that the district size requirements were too high. With no further discussion, the Hearing was closed. Respectfully submitted, Astrid L. Hasley Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: Patrick Shields, Chairman Li Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980 PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION Thread Creek JANUARY 2, 1980 Chairman Shields called the Public Hearing to order in the Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Commissioners Present: Chairman Shields Mr. Goldspiel Mrs. Sheldon Mr. Button Mr. Davis Mrs. Reid Mr. Shifrin Mr. Glover Commissioners Absent: None Also Present: Mr. Larry Friedman, Thread Creek Mr. Bill Sommer, Assistant Village Manager Mr. Greg Boysen, Public Works Director Mr. Dick Kuenkler, Village Engineer Mr. Jim Truesdell, Village Planner Mrs. Rosalie Kaszubowski, Prospective Member Mr. Friedman outlined the property boundaries, and asked to annex under the M-1 classification. The subject industrial property consists of 12-1/2 acres. Mr. Friedman stated that if the property sells well, they would be willing to bring in the balance under Industrial zoning also, but they do not feel there is a sufficient market to bring it in at this time. He added that they would be willing to change their classification to "I" when the new ordinance is adopted. In response to a request made at the last meeting, Mr. Friedman said his client is prepared to make a wider dedication along Busch Road. Mr. Friedman stated they are not requesting a subdivision according to the lots shown on the plan at this time. It is their intent to let the purchasers present their imposed subdivision, which will give the Commission further control of the development of the pieces. In response to a question from Chairman Shields, Mr. Sommer said he met with Mr. Raysa this afternoon and he said to review this on its merits and recommend the "I" zoning. It may be possible to get the "I" Ordinance and Thread Creek on the Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980 -2- same Board Agenda and to have the "I" Ordinance passed before this project. He recommended the Commission deny the M-1 zoning and recommend it be brought in under the "I" zoning. Commissioner Goldspiel felt it wasn't right to turn them down under the existing ordinance under the speculation that the new ordinance will be done in time to use it with this project. Mr. Friedman explained that they are willing to have it written in the Annexa- tion Agreement that they would be amenable to having the property rezoned. He added that they are working on an extended time limit and if the ordinance were held up for any reason, they could lose the buyer. Mr. Sommer cautioned the Commission to look for the proper dedications, setbacks, buffers, provisions for creek stabilization. He also asked the Commission to address themselves to the bike path system and whether they want it to con- tinue through these industrial areas. The Plan Commission will consider those matters at the time of subdivision The differences and similarities of the two ordinances were discussed. After determining there were no questions from the audience, Chairman Shields closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Button moved that the Plan Commission recommend to the Village Board that the property be annexed to the Village pursuant to the M-1 zoning classifi- cation subject to the following conditions: 1. Owner petition for OR & I Zoning within 30 days of adoption of the proposed OR & I Ordinance. 2. Development of the subject property will be pursuant to all sub- division regulations, engineering manual of practice, subdivision improvement agreement, and all other applicable ordinances. 3. All necessary right-of-way must be dedicated upon subdivision approval. 4. The recommendation does not include endorsement or approval of the building concept plan presented to the Plan Commission. Commissioner Davis seconded the motion. Upon a roll call vote, the motion was unanimously approved (all Commissioners present) . Respectfully submitted, APPROVED BY: Astrid L. Hasleyording Secretary / t _ Patrick Shields, Chairman Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980 PUBLIC HEARING (CONTINUED) BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION Rapp Farm JANUARY 2, 1980 Chairman Shields called the meeting to order in the Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Commissioners Present: Chairman Shields Mr. Goldspiel Mrs. Sheldon Mr. Button Mr. Davis Mrs. Reid Mr. Shi frin Mr. Glover Commissioners Absent: None Also Present: Mr. John Mastandrea, Developer, Happ Farm Mr. James Mikes, Attorney, Hopp Farm Mr. Jerry Lindgren, Happ Farm Mr. Joe McBride, Happ Farm Ms. Susan Bartels, Happ Farm Mr. John Burke, Sapp Farm Mr. Bill Sommer, Assistant Village Manager Mr. Greg Boysen, Public Works Director Mr. Dick Kuenkler, Village Engineer Mr. Jim Truesdell, Village Planner Mr. Bill Kiddie, Park District Mr. Joe McBride - Engineering Plans Sanitary sewer capacity is available There is a manhole located near Arlington Heights Road. They will extend the trunk sewer to the east boundary of the pro- ject site according to a Village request. It will be oversized to accommodate future development. They will be connecting up to water mains at Dundee Road, White Pine Road and Weiland Road. The drainage will consist of handling three major flows. One is a major flow coming from south of Dundee Read crossing their west boundary to a culvert, there is an additional flow from the west that eaters at their northwest corner. This Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980 -2- comes from west of Arlington Heights Road. The Third flow is the runoff from the development itself. They all exit at the center of the north boundary, flowing into the area designated retention/park. This will be carried in a combination of an underfiow pipe and a ditch. There will be a temporary smile to handle this situation before construction. The park/detention site will consist of a bike path, a pond, play area and play equipment. The flows from the south and the west normally combine to form a total of 150 cfm. They are going to intercept the flow from the south and bring it along the east side of the pond and then to the creek, cutting the flow to the creek in half. There will be a play area next to the pond. Under that will be cross drains to dry it up as quickly as possible after a storm. This area will be 18" to 2' higher than the pond. To the south they will leave it high and above the 100 year storm level and will have park equipment there. The cross drains will be under the lower play,area with the berms to the north and the bike path on top of them. The northeast edge of the property is a natural drainage area they wish to leave undistrubed. Commissioner Davis asked if the house at the northeast corner will have storm water across his property line, which will cause erosion. Mr. McBride stated they will be reducing the flow by 50%. There is a piece of Village-owned property east of there where it will empty and then to the existing stream. The creek on Village property is the point where our sewer will connect to the creek and carry the water around the north of the house's property. At the point where the ditch makes a 90 degree turn,,we are reducing the flow by 50%; thereby reducing the erosion. Mr. Sommer stated that we feel dry detention is possible and preferable to wet detention. Mr. Kuenkler stated that the flow from the west will be handled with an under- drain pipe capable of carrying a three year storm and ultimately will have the capacity for all water flowing down that stream. That will not a-cur until all undeveloped properties upstream axe built up. The second drainage from the south will be capable of carrying a 100-year storm underground. This plan is based on analysis by their engineers as far as flow study eleva- tions - - they are not tke elevations that exist in our study today. Have forwarded this study to the Army Corp. One of my concerns about the detention is the elevation of detention basin at the high water level will be 6.89 which in some cases is higher than adjacent foundation. We don't like to see ponds. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980 - 3 Mr. McBride stated, regarding the pond, because of the requirement of carrying this 100-year storm and the requiremeats of design under MSD we will have, at low flows, fairly active backwater catering here. (6-8" of water) Because of the amount of times this will be active, there would be a maiateaaace problem trying to maintain a sod area is front of that inlet. The pond would be 150' across with a depth of about 4'. Because of the flow-through of water there will not be a stagaaat condition. If there is not a pond that area will be wet almost continuously during the spring and fall. With dry detention the Park District will always need some tough-up but it has bees our experience that there would be less cost involved in maiatainiag dry deteatioa than wet. Commissioner Sheldon stated that the report says there are rear yards one to three feet lower thaw the basin and at times the water will be higher than the top of the basin. Mr. McBride replied the areas dowastream can, be lower than the pond and will lot be affected by it. At the time the water would get that high, it would last for only about two hours. Aloag the property Use we will maiataia a drainage Swale that will only be active. That will provide back drainage from these other pro- perties. Soil borings should be completed by Saturday. Mr. McBride explained the coastructioa of the earth dam. Mr. McBride stated that the drainage from the high school site will coatect to our uaderflow system. Commissioner Glover asked how this will help the high school's problem. Mr. McBride stated we are only putting what used to run above ground, uadergrouad. Commissioner Glover asked why you terminated the underground pipe at the point you did. Mr. McBride answered, wherever possible I prefer to use the natural drainage. Commissioner Glover said,"I understood that this wk&.e ditch was going to be ea- closed. " Residents commented that there is no water there now, you are moving the ditch back farther. Mr. McBride Dually agreed they would be creating a ditch oa their property. Buffalo Grove Plaa Commissioa Public Heariag January 2, 1980 Resident asked whoa the drainage pipe would be put in. Mr. McBride stated it must be completed as the develpmeat is completed. If the Village Eagineer says that pipe is necessary at the beginning of develop- meat, it will be done at the beginning. Chairman Shields asked if the drainage problem is going to be worse at nay stage of construction than it is now? Mr. McBride answered, we feel it would not be. We are not aware of any drainage damage in the area now, but if there is, it should be lessened. Mr. Howard Mendenhall, 505 Weidner Road stated that I have flooded for years, se has Beechwood and Beechwood East Court and to say you do not know about it means the people got tired of telling the Village. That whole area is inundated with water at one time or aaother. Resideats stated that Beechwood Court East flooded on Christmas Eve. Mr. Ku.iikler replied, "I an mot personally aware of this. " It was meationed that the resideats always call in. Resident stated the current detention basin labelled ea your map is called "the driving range" and at the end of that is a 4' diameter pipe sod a 15" diameter pipe draining off into a 10" diameter pipe. I understand you are not going to change the diameter of the 10" pipe. Mr. McBride said yes. Resideat asked what happens to the 18" drain pipe that comes off of Beechwood Road into the existing ditch sad what happens to the people's sump pump pipes that are draining out into that ditch st various elevatioas. one f thereasons aotto disturbe the exist drain- Mr. McBride said that is n • existing ageway. Commissioner Skeldoa stated that a few years ago we had a similar iastance where we put is a commercial developmeat sad the abutting resideats' homes had the experience of flooding and we made certain requirements of the developer to try to elevate nay future problems and to put in the best possible devel•pmeat we could for the Village of Buffalo Grove. In working oa that problem we first evaluated why the flooding was occuring and then what could possibly happen with the develop- meat of this piece of property. It seems we are putting the cart before the horse. I would like to kaow why we have flooding in this area. Buffalo Grove Plea Commissioa Public Heariag January 2, 1980 - 5 - Mr. Kueakler said that he was act aware of nay flooding problems immediately adjacent to this development. This development will be building ever-sized sanitary sewers which will reduce back-up. The Village currently has a grant, with matching Village funds, for a study costing *150,000 to try to find the source of the infiltration inflow, but that is unrelated to this development. Resident asked if you go 1/2 block in either directioa of my house you can pep the manhole covers of both sanitary and storm sewers. Can you guarantee me that the 30 - 36" pipe running along my property line - - that the water in the creek will never get high enough to inundate it? Mr. McBride said it will aot get higher than that pipe. Mr. Mendenhall asked what type of ditch you are talklag .bciut putting in next to that condo? Mr. McBride stated about 4' wide with sharply sloping sides. One of the residents explained the path of the water. Mr. McBride said this would be enclosed in a 36" pipe. A resident asked if that would be big enough. Commissioner Glover stated that these people have sump pump pipes draining into that, which will be raised in elevatioa when you put the conduit through. The finished grading of that will be higher than it is mow. Mr. McBride stated we will maintain a swale, ever the pipe which is lower than their yards, so their yards can drain eats our property. Commissioner Glover wanted to know if an active lake would have fish in it or just detention. Mr. McBride explained that more depth is needed to maiataia fish. You will also have a coastaat flow-thru system. Mr. Kiddie stated the approval of the Park Board to accept this land is based upon the engineering drawings that we have received this eveaing. We go along with the homeowners and have deep concern about the possibility of fioodiag. We also have a deep concern with regards to ponds. It would pose a health, safety, maintenance liability to the Village. This is not the place we would like to have a "fishing hole". Our calculations show the basin as being 30' from top to bottom and to have that you would aced a 5-1 slope. The drawings show that L/ along the bike path there is a depression for a spillway. What is the average elevation of that bike path. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Searing Jaauary 2, 1980 - 6 - Mr. McBride answered approximately 18" to 24+" higher than the adjacent swale As we develop our drain plans, it could be possibly higher. The swale should carry all the drainage from the west. The bike path would be a higher elevation. One thing that has occurred since the plan you have is the emergency spillway. I have designed 13 or 14 of these spillways and have never heard of may of them being active. Mr. Kiddie asked if we do not use a pond, what would be the size of the wet area - 6d - 70' wide and 367" loag? Mr. McBride did not think it would be that big, but would not say what the size of the area would be. Mr. Kiddie stated, when you first came here witi your proposal, you stated the gross acreage of the park would be in excess of 5 acres. This has been decreased to 4.2 acres. According to a letter from Mr. Truesdell, for 840/ people, the acreage necessary would be 4.46. Have you given nay consideration, to enlarging this park area and, perhaps solving the drainage problems that you have? Mr. McBride answered that if there was, in my mind, the remotest possibility of any damage to the surrouadiag homes, I would not have presented this plea. Mr. Kiddie replied, the key word I wish to point out in Mr. Truesdell's letter is that the Park District is not interested in areas which do not have an active use. This should be given very deep consideration. The Park District has beea put in a lot of positions where we have had to take over basins. Mr. Mastu.< rea stated that their original plea did show 5.2 acres of park which you did sot want, so we changed the plan to satisfy the megineeriag requirements. I am willing to pay the cash contribution. Mr. Sommer said that the Village's position is that we need some active open space in this area and would not support the concept of just a donation. We are looking for access also to the White Pine strip. Commisbioner Shifria asked the staff if this development would have a positive affect ea the saiitary sewer system. Mr. Kueakler said it would not affect it one way or the other. Mr. McBride replied, we are willing to construct an extre • 50,000 worth of sewer line along Dundee Road which will eventually kook up to a system that will give relief to the people to the north. Commissioner Skifria stated that according to the pictures we saw tonight, there is ass ditch along the Borth, just flat land. Mr. McBride said, "As a draiaage.engiaeer, I see a.continuous ditch cutting across behind the high school and going along the aorta of the property. Buffalo Grove Plan Cow*issioa Public Heariag January 2, 1980 - 7 - It was established there will be some rerouting of the ditch. The swale will have a 5-1 slope, all oa our property. There is ae way, even during the most adverse storm conditions that it will back up. Mr. McBride stated they will Rot be adding additional rate of flow into the the creek. Based upon the presentation here tonight this area of White Pine Ditch will not increase the flow. In the park area, the play area equipment which lies south of the bike trail is above the 100-year storm completely. Mr. Kueakler stated that with respect to tie wet detention area, water quality msaitoriag would be done and we would probably want a bead for the aeration equipment to be installed. Commissioner Shifria wanted to knew if the property owner would be responsible for maintaining it. Is the dry detention going to be wet three fourths of the year. If so, it should be made vet detention so that we caa use it for something. Commissioner Goldspiel wanted to know if the property west of Arlington Heights Road is developed if there would be less flow, enough that it would go through 4he pipe rather than through the Swale. I do not uaderstand how you reach that conclusion because there is me village requirement that you reduce the flow over what the natural state is, it is only to prevent an increase ix flow. So I de not see where built under the best of conditions it should be built in the Village, the flow would be reduced. OR the other hand, there is a possibility that it would be built outside the Village where the same ordiaamces do aot apply and you would have hard ground and you would get am increased flow. Why do you assume there would be less of a flow after that property is built. Mr. McBride stated that today it is essentially *pea lead, the greater majority, of it. If wa get what we call a three year storm you are going to get so much water coming off it. If you get a five year storm you are going to get a little more and as the intensity of the storm increases we will get more and more water. Today if we would get a 100 year storm out there, we have ao provision to hold that water back. That whole 100 year storm would come back. There is some restriction at the culverts at Arlingtea Heights Road. We could stand today to get enough water to get those three culverts flowing full. The developer comes into that area and developes it, your ordinance says he cannot release what comes off today under the 100 year storm, he can only release what comes off under a three year storm. Therefore, *ace he developes it he is restricted sad allowed only the three year storm flow. Ceamissioxer Goldspiel asked if it was developed is Cook County, when would the MSD requirements start. Li Mr. McBride replied that he assumed that the entire parcel is in *me ownership, the moment they subdivide any piece of it, it must have storm water deteatioR. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980 _ 8 _ Commissioner Goldspiel stated that as he understood it, if you take away a flood plain in one location you have to put back a flood plain. Ix this development, what is the compensation for the flood plains that are being taken away? Mr. McBride replied that in our detention pond/park the storage area is large enough to include approximately 3-1/2 acres of compensatory storage. I am proposing a dry reservoir. Your flood plain ordinance allows that although the plan disputes the plans that have been adopted by the HUD study. One thing we would require is that the plan. would be reviewed by HUD. This would be a prerequisite to a final action on the subdivision plat. Commissioner Goldspiel asked that if something were to break down are we liable for water leakage or are we protected by sovereign impunity? Mr. McBride stated that our ordinance stated that the Village cannot be held liable for somebody following an ordinance. The person that damaged the wall is liable. Commissioner Goldspiel stated that the land municipally owned at the northeast corner would be used to pass water between the pond and pipes. What effect would that cause on the municipally owned piece other than the actual place where the pipes are flowing into one and other? On the drawings there is a notatian - drainage diverted to catch basin and state highway sewer, what does that mean? Mr. McBride said that in answer to your first question - the same. As to the second, the 54" sewer under Dundee Road put in by the State Department shown on your plan a 36" pipe at this time. Under the State requirements when Dundee Road was put through, the 36" pipe was retained in size. Much of this area was develop- ed afterward and the 36" pipe was not sufficient but it was left in. On the North side of the road the State says you cauot connect a cress drainage to the highway trunk sewer. But 10' away they will put a catch 'basis so the water in that pipe calm come out and spill out on the ground run over and go in their catch basin. Commissioner Goldspiel stated that this is basically preserving the present situation (with the 54" sewer). It was established the swale will be 40' across 24" depth. Mr. McBride said the buildings will be a minimum of 2' above the flood ;aid* Mrs. Diana Hooglekirk, 891 Beechwood welted to know what the elevation is of the homes directly to the back and to the south of her. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980 - 9 - Mr. McBride stated that they have not selected the drainage to the south or the actual elevations in there. Mrs. Hooglekirk asked if that wasn't important to the water flow and to the { Park District in knowing the elevation of the bike path in comparison? Also is the bike path higher than our property? Mr. McBride stated that it would be his design problem to assure that water on the bike path would not occur. The path is just about the same highth. It would be necessary to the final completion of my plan that the design would be such that the bike path would not flood. The 4.2 acres also comprises the strip of land that backs your property. The open area will have varing conditions throughout the 4.2 acres. There will not be a sloppy wet condition. We will have a continuous sloping area. The drainage pipe will also tend to take away some of the water and it will be drier. Mrs. Hooglekirk stated that the swale should not be considered as part of the park acreage. It is not useable land. Mr. McBride answered that they have not made calculations as to individual area. We have the bike path to be considered as a completely useable area as it must be buffered so we cannot put another activity adjacent to the bike path. That play area is for children. I cannot give you a specific answer per area. The liability of the pond was questioned by a resident. Mr. McBride explained that if the Park District were not going to assume the ownership, responsibility, liability of the pond the home owners association would. They would have the liability and they would have the liability coverage. Assuming there was a natural disaster, I designed for your ordinance for how much water would flow through it, you would not be liable because more water came along. In speaking of an accident of an individual, that is completely outside any ordinance. Traffic on the White Pine area was questioned by a resident. Mr. Lindgren stated that as far as accessibility to Lake Cook or the external system, we are only talking about two units who may desire to use White Pine in order to do that. The reverse is true and there would be more traffic desiring access to Dundee Road. I cannot give you a total number. It is designed to accommodate 3,000 on a daily basis. I would not expect more than a couple hundred. The existing homes would use White Pine to get to Dundee. This is a collector system, it is a part of your village system designed in order to accommodate that kind of movement. Mrs. Hooglekirk asked how this will effect the water supply as it is short in the summer. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980 - 10 Mr. McBride stated that it does not effect it now but we will be looking into an actual flow method within this area and how it connects to the other. Generally speaking what we will be doing, I have not looked at the entire Village, but a major transmission line along here will actually be short circuited and offer additional flow to the White Pine area. We have not studied that yet. We have made connections to the adjacent water supply and have completed loops. We will continue to complete loops for this development. Each time you complete a loop you increase the evening out of flow in an area. Resident stated that for seven years the White Pine area was a mud hole. Now the erosion of the White Pines Creek behind the homes is ten feet. Mr. McBride stated that the ordinances have changed since that time and that problem will not happen. A resident asked that if the Park District turns down this land will it still be landscaped and will the bike path be eliminated? Mr. Mastandrea stated that we will still have the landscaping, the bike path, etc. But by having the Park District accept it, you will be gaining seven acres of adjacent Village owned land into use. A resident stated that he lives on Sycamore and wanted to know what is going to happen to it when the digging starts. Mr. McBride responded that they will control all the water on the project. They will take it to the retention pond and disburse it there. Commissioner Sheldon stated that there is an ordinance in the Village now that states the builder has to provide engineering design features such as water retention in order to releave the water from building projects. If he does not comply or if he causes hardship on residents you will find that his project will be stopped. Mr. McBride stated that their storm sewer may improve your situation. I can say without a doubt we will reduce your problems. The Village has asked us to provide oversized storm sewers to alleviate the flooding in the existing areas. Commissioner Davis wanted to know if it would be possible to develop a retention area in the center of the development. Mr. McBride said that it would be rather difficult because of the faults coming across the development. As a matter of fact, in the center you are a couple of feet higher than you are here. You would then have the problem of all of this water draining free from our site and you would not be able to get this water back to our pond where our retention area is. It would be less expensive to put it in the center but this is the best place to manage water from that site. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980 - 11 - Mrs. Hooglekirk asked if they plan to change the width and depth of the White Pine Creek. The design of the creek is partially because of erosion. I am wondering about the increased amount of water. Mr. McBride stated that it is more water but it is over a longer period of time. A resident inquired about the phases of the project. Will phase two and three be dependent on the sale of phase one? If the houses do not sell will the project be abandonded and if so what will the Village do about it? It brings to mind the buildings put on 53 and torn down several years later. West of 1 Arlington Heights Road four buildings were put up and nothing happened. Chairman Shields didn't know how that question could be answered. There are certain bends required by the builder but that will not answer the question. Mr. Sommer stated that the Village will not get in between a purchaser and a condominum developer. We have a number of bonding and subdivision improvement agreements that they have to fulfill. All the public improvements are bonded. Our building codes would not allow a vacant building left there. Who ever ownes the buildings would either have to complete them or make them safe. We have very strict rules. The bond money is in escrow and if improvements are not completed within 24 months we will pull the bond money. Then the Village will complete the public improvements. A resident asked at what phase of the development is the detention and drainage put in? Mr. McBride responded that it is usually done as the development progresses, but because of the problem of flooding in this area, if the Village engineer feels it should be done first, it will be done first. Mr. Boysen said that the Annexation Agreement states it must be done before any Building Permits are issued. Mrs. Hooglekirk stated that there are natural trees in Beechwood and some of the other areas where they are going to be putting in their piping behind some of the houses on White Pine, are you planning to interfere with any of the natural tree growth in those areas? Mr. McBride stated that they have not identified the natural growth. What can be saved will be saved. Commissioner Sheldon stated that before an Occupancy Permit is issued the builder has to comply with the landscaping as presented to the Village. Chairman Shields closed the public hearing at this point. Further discussion took plaee as follows: Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980 - 12 - Commissioner Goldspiel asked Chairman Shields if at the next meeting there would be a check list as to how much of the donated park land is in compliance with the rules and regulations of the Village and how much is not. Commissioner Davis stated that where the bike path comes up to the top near the north, we would like to see that brought down so there is more additional park space. A number of the board would like to see that building removed if possible. I think we had asked you about that at the last Workshop. Ms. Bartels replied that they have done further work on the bike path and it can be used for other things. We have proposed a connection for this to go up through the White Pine strip and as you can see from the smaller scale, it comes from the high school along here and continues up through the White Pine streach and along with this we will include a fitness station that makes this an active pathway besides providing for an activity of people of all ages. We have pro- posed 18 fitness stations. It will connect the two areas no matter who owes them. Commissioner Davis stated that that does not bring the bike path away from the homes on the north end. It is too close and I am also looking to get some more useable land outside of this bike path. Mr. Sommers suggested that we bring back a check list we have all the issues now and there is no way we can structure it now for a recommendation. We have to talk to the Park District a little further and really try and qualify what is under the open space requirements. I think the best way to do that is to come back in the regular meeting January 16th and resolve it at the meeting. The staff will prepare the check list for you and we will be able to discuss each issue individually. We can take a vote on each issue. We can more this out of the Plan Commission on January 16th. We cannot do it on January 9th because it would not give the Park District enough time. Commissioner Goldspiel was concerned about the reservoir liability. Mr. Sommers stated that is normally handled with the person in the auto ticketed, our in- surance company will pay the claim and they in turn will reimburse us. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Sheldon made a motion the meeting be adjourned. Commissioner Davis seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 12:50 p.m. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980 - 13 - Respectfully submitted, Astrid Hanley Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: Patrick Shields, Chairman 1 Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing January 2, 1980