Loading...
1980-11-05 - Plan Commission - Minutes REGULAR MEETING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION Cedar View Buffalo Grove Business Park Northwood Grove Unit II - Final Plat of Subdivision November 5, 1980 Chairman Shields called the Regular Meeting to order in the Municipal Building, `./ 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove at 7:36 P.M. Commissioners Present: Chairman Shields Mr. Goldspiel Mrs. Sheldon Mr. Davis Mr. Shifrin - arrived at 8:10 P.M. Mr. Glover Mrs. Reid - left at 10:30 P.M. Mrs. Kaszubowski - arrived at 8:00 P.M. Commissioners Absent: Mr. Button Also Present: Mr. D. Haller, Developer, Cedar View Mr. G. Wiss, Engineer, Cedar View Rev. Dahl, Kingswood United Methodist Church, Cedar View Mr. D. Adams, Northgate Civic Association, Cedar View Mr. D. Laskey, Northgate Civic Association, Cedar View Mr. R. Lunt, Developer, Buffalo Grove Business Park Ms. P. Mell, Associate, Buffalo Grove Business Park Mr. C. Fiorito, Developer, Buffalo Grove Business Park Mr. J. De Grazia, Developer, Northwood Grove Unit II Mr. D. Kuenkler, Engineer, Buffalo Grove - arrived 7:55 P.M. Mrs. I. Park, Administrative Assistant, Buffalo Grove Mr. J. Truesdell, Village Planner, Buffalo Grove APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Glover moved approval of the minutes of the October 15, 1980 Regular Meeting subject to correction. Commissioner Davis seconded the motion. Page 2, paragraph 4 change isle to aisle AYES: Commissioners Davis, Glover, Reid NAYES: None ABSTAIN: Commissioners Goldspiel, Sheldon ABSENT: Commissioners Shifrin, Kaszubowski COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Davis was liaison at the Village Board meeting and stated that the Board went in to executive session and Commissioner Davis left. Commissioner Sheldon stated that the Plat for Grove Terrace was denied because it was not in compliance with the engineering and water for fire protection. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 1980 - 2 - Mr. Truesdell - In order to meet the fire flow commitments the builder needed to connect a water main that he refused to connect. CEDAR VIEW Office Portion Mr. Truesdell - Mr. Haller has prepared a new plan which has changed the single family units to duplex units. Mr. Truesdell then briefly reviewed his memo to the Plan Commission dated October 31, 1980 titled Cedar View. He also reviewed Mr. Balling's letter to Mr. Richard Golterman dated October 29, 1980 titled Three States Boulevard Wheeling Township. Mr. Haller - Regarding Mr. Balling's letter to Mr. Golterman, Mr. Wiss met with various people of the highway department and they will send Mr. Balling a letter stating that they have no objections to the annexation and no objections to the road being placed there. Mr. Haller then briefly reviewed his new plan stating that they have shown the church parking lot, with their set back from the road and his set back of the first building. There is approximately a drop off of twenty-five to fourty feet from the church parking lot to the line of his property. This creates a substantial distance between the property and he has discussed creating a landscape barrier. Mr. Haller plans to meet with the church board of trustees on November 16, 1980 to discuss this. He further stated that there is a nine foot access drive from the office building's parking to the church parking. Regarding the height of the buildings he did look at the possibility of making the office buildings three stories. In trying to work out the visual impact, he felt a two story building would fit in that setting better. The first building is ninety-five feet from the right- of-way. The parking is eighty feet. Commissioner Goldspiel - Is this a change from the first plan? Mr. Haller - No. Commissioner Davis - What did you do with the ten lots in the back? Mr. Haller - I am trying to blend the look of the condominiums in with the multiple buildings. We are striving for the look you see at the Oak Creek Condominium development. Commissioner Goldspiel - You show eight feet around the buildings. The fire department wants ten feet. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 1980 • - 3 - Mr. Truesdell - On the Trammel Crow Development the fire department said they needed six feet for their ladder and they needed an additional four feet for room to move around in. Commissioner Goldspiel - In the past we have had fire lanes required and I do not see these on this plan. Chairman Shields - Previously we have been talking about stores rather than about offices. Commissioner Goldspiel - The question of getting around these buildings seems • to be a problem. Can the fire department get around them. Maybe the fire department should take a look at this again. Commissioner Davis - My main objection is the row of parking along Dundee Road. It will look like another car dealership. Mr. Haller - I am talking about the distance from the right-of-way of the road itself. We are substantially set back. Commissioner Sheldon - I would like the fire and police departments to look at this again. Mr. Truesdell - I will take it back to them. Commissioner Goldspiel - I see we still have the five feet between the church and parking lot in back. Mr. Haller - I have pointed out that we have approximately twenty-five to fourty feet that is not in use and I am assuming will not be used. Commissioner Sheldon - How much engineering are you going to have to do there so that you do not have water on your road? Mr. Wiss - There is a storm sewer planned for that road. Commissioner Goldspiel - I do not understand how you solve the ordinance problem of the office beingtoo close to th e church bysaying there is extra land behind the church. g Mr. Haller - Basically the Commission change the ordinance to allow this. Mr. Truesdell - I did discuss this with Mr. Raysa and the possibility of B1 zoning restricted to office use. Mr. Raysa felt it was legal to do it but he did not feel that it was good planning. Commissioner Glover - Regarding the Bl restricted to office use, do we have any examples of this? Mr. Truesdell - As far as use,there is the Toyota dealership which was the Dodge dealership. It was restricted to a car dealership. It was a deed restriction. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 1980 - 4 - Mr. Haller - Generally in other communities when the PUD is enacted, what they do is zone a special use for the site. The church is not residential. Commissioner Glover - Circumventing the ordinance bothers me. I think we should require berming and landscaping along Dundee Road. Also I do not think we need that large detention (to the east of Three States Boulevard). Who will maintain it? Mr. Truesdell - It will become a Village right-of-way and be maintained by the Village. Commissioner Glover - We are talking about two hundred feet plus. That is a big area to maintain. Mr. Haller - At the moment that is very heavily wooded. Commissioner Glover - I would like a tree survey of that area. Commissioner Davis - Regarding the piece of property next to the church, I assume you have worked out something with the church to handle the drain- age to use the parking lot in your condominium area? Mr. Haller - I will handle the drainage for that. I do not see that as a big problem. Commissioner Davis - With your picking up the drainage, you are actually improving that area for the church. Mr. Wiss - Yes. Commissioner Sheldon - Are the parking requirements just at a minimum for this Mr. Haller - It just meets it. Commissioner Reid - I am still concerned about the twenty-five foot set back of the office building near the church. The ordinance says fifty feet which can be varied to forty feet. Mr. Truesdell - Our original recommendation was to let it go to forty feet. I personally do not like to circumvent the ordinance. Commissioner Sheldon - What is the distance between the office buildings? Mr. Wiss - That distance is approximately forty feet. Commissioner Davis - Is the church concerned with that parking? Reverend Dahl - Our trade was for a playground. That issue will be decided by the board of trustees at the November 16, 1980 meeting. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 1980 - 5 - Commissioner Davis - I think we should wait until we hear from the church board. Mrs. Reid - Do you intend to connect your road completely with Dun-Lo Avenue? Mr. Haller - I cannot speak for that because the area is the end of the right- of-way that Buffalo Grove was given by Lake County. Mr. Wiss - That road ends about ninety feet back from the rear line of these lots at Dun-Lo Highlands. It is unimproved. Condominium Portion of the Plan Mr. Haller - The buildings are laied out so that they are overlooking land- scaped areas. We have added a cul-de-sac for a turn around. We are showing two locations for ingress and egress. There are twenty units with fourteen two bedroom and six one bedroom units per building. We are proposing to make the duplexes condominiums also. They would be a part of the same association as the multiple buildings. Commissioner Goldspiel - Why would you want to make them part of the same association? Mr. Haller - To make sure they are maintained. I want to make these two bedroom units desirable to the empty nester market. Commissioner Goldspiel - Have you had any discussions with the adjacent home owners? Mr. Haller - I have talked to some but have not talked to all of the home owners. Mr. Adams - We have had not had time to talk to the seventeen home owners yet. Commissioner Sheldon - What price range would the duplex units be in? Mr. Haller - Ninety Thousand Dollars. Mrs. Reid - How do you plan to maintain your emergency access easement? Mr. Haller - We have had a couple of suggestions, one was to make it a bike path, another approach would be to make it concrete and put sod on top of it. That would be up to your engineering department. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 1980 - 6 - Commissioner Gbldspiel - How many parking spaces do you have for the twenty unit buildings? Mr. Wiss - The requirement is two hundred four and we have two hundred thirty. Commissioner Goldspiel - If the home owners in Arlington Heights are opposed to the duplex proposal and want single family, I would not favor duplexes. Was there why discussion about park donations? Mr. Haller - When I had my original proposal the park district gave me a number for a cash donation but I cannot remember what it was. I think it was forty thousand dollars. Commissioner Goldspiel - We still have the unrelieved row and we still have the unbroken line of parking in the back. Mr. Haller - We tried to rearrange the buildings so that there was no parking in front of or in back of them. We put the buildings in so that you do not have a straight view from end to end. Commissioner Goldspiel - Why did you split the parking this way? Mr. Haller - To try to give more of a boulevard effect. It would be a wider area, you could still break it up and plant it. Commissioner Goldspiel - What if you broke up the parking by alternating it? Mr. Wiss - This is a narrow piece of land. There would not be much visual benefit and it would subtract substantially from ease of getting vehicles in and out. Commissioner Goldspiel - You are loosing twenty-four point five feet for the people to back out of the south side parking spaces. If they were backed up with the parking on the other side you would then gain that twenty- four point five feet. Mr. Haller - You mean going back to the original concept which was objection- able? Commissioner Glover - We have your road on the north and you have parking on one side that is twelve hundred feet long. This is undesirable from a safety standpoint. We have a strip plan. I prefer what you have now. Unless we can solve the problem with the road on the north side of the residential I have a problem with the plan. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 1980 - 7 - Mr. bliss - It is irrelevant how many cars you have in a row from a safety standpoint. You still have the same possibility for an accident in any it parking area. Commissioner Glover - I would like staff to have the police department • review this. Mr. Haller - Would you prefer a townhouse development there? Commissioner Glover - At the September 17, 1980 meeting we brought up the comments regarding the single family homes. We talked about land use. We brought up the irregular shaped football field. Commissioner Goldspiel - I do not see a big difference between duplexes and single family. Commissioner Davis - Other than the twenty-five foot set back in the office center is there any other objection? Then the big problem is with the condominiums and the length of the parking? Commissioner Goldspiel - There is also the problem of the five foot buffer between the condominiums, church parking and the fire station area. Commissioner Shifrin - Could you eliminate one of the commercial buildings and go up three stories or go out with more ground space and only two buildings? Mr. Haller - This does conform to the B1 zoning. Commissioner Davis - The feeling of the majority of the Commission would be not to build it under Bl zoning. Commissioner Davis moved that a public hearing be scheduled taking into consideration the Plan Commission's comments. AYES: Commissioners Goldspiel, Sheldon, Davis, Shifrin, Glover, Reid, Kaszubowski NAYES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSTEN: Commissioner Button The motion passed 7 - 0 BUFFALO GROVE BUSINESS PARK Mr. Truesdell - You received the concept plan in your packet. This is being proposed by two developers. Mr. Truesdell then briefly reviewed his memo to the Plan Commission dated October 31, 1980 titled Staff Review-Buffalo Grove Business Park. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 1980 - 8 - • Mrs. Park, Mr. Kuenkler and myself met with the developers last Friday. At that time the developers said that they would try to prepare a new plan taking into consideration the recommendations in my memo. Mr. Lunt - The request has been made to increase the B2 to 5.74 acres and the R9 would go to 24 acres. Based on our meeting last Friday, we have come up with a new plan tonight. The major concern when we looked at this was circulation and access. There is an access to the office buildings and the parking across from Timberhill Road. There is also an access point from the office buildings across from the bank. We created another access, which will be a main access for the office, and it will be a private road. We are still at the same count. We tried to comply with the private service road requirements. We have a right in and right out in two locations. The nature of a shopping center is determined b5 the size. It is not a heavy truck access. I am trying to build a building similar to the type built at Route 83 and Thorndale Road in Bensenville. The problem I had with two access points was that there are two separate developments here. We are using an acre and a half of land at Lake Cook Road and Arlington Heights Road. There is a field of thirty feet for retention. We can set the building in question, along Lake Cook Road, back but I did suggest that it would be better to see a building rather than parking at that location. We can do some berming and that would soften it a bit. If you are requiring a stockade fense and then thirty feet, I do not understand the relationship. Commissioner Glover - We might not want a stockade fense by the golf course. Chairman Shields - I am concerned that the people across the street on Timberhill Road who own homes might object to a three story office building being there. Commissioner Glover - Regarding the property to the south and then to the east of this development, who controls that now? Mr. Truesdell - Nothing has happened to that. That was approved multiple family. That is also R9 P'JD zoning. Mr. Lunt - The reversion to R9 is a restriction of the owner. It gives him the right at the end of seven years to go back to R9. I think that is one of the considerations that the Village gave to him. Commissioner Davis - Do you have a development schedule? Mr. Lunt - I plan to break ground next summer with two buildings. Commissioner Goldspiel - How is it that you have two three story buildings and five one story buildings? Can you mass the one story buildings into three story buildings? Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 1980 - 9 - Mr. Lunt - It fits in better with the surrounding developments. I think the one story is getting worn out. I will have something in the marketplace that others do not have. Commissioner Goldspiel - I prefer to see the three story buildings closer to the road. Mr. Fiorito - Mr. Lunt and I will be entering into an agreement to coordinate the esthetics. The parcel of ground that I am ending up with is about six acres. It is smaller than the typical community shopping centers that I usually deal with and it is larger than the typical convenient centers. I envision a center like the type on Waukegan Road and Take Cook Road The zoning is not defined. The commercial is very difficult to spec without a specific user in mind. We have to design according to the use the tenant has in mind. This represents a permissible use area. The uses will conform to B2 zoning, as far as parking, landscaping and so forth. This present plan was changed because of the staff's recommendations of last Friday. We changed the access points bringing the traffic in from Lake Cook Road. On Arlington Heights Road we eliminated, in total,a full access. What we propose is a right turn in and a right turn out. Somewhere in this develop- ment we are going to put in a high quality restaurant similar to El Torrito, T.G. I.F or Houlihans. Commissioner Goldspiel - The area across Arlington Heights Road is forest preserve and I think the area across the street on Lake Cook Road is very attractive. I am concerned with the "L" shaped center and with the multiple one and three story buildings. It is not a very attractive shopping center. Mr. Fiorito - I have talked about putting in office space over the commercial. Mr. Lunt - The problem is the required parking spaces. Commissioner Glover - I think another parking lot on a corner is a concern. Another concern is a strip type shopping center. Mr. Fiorito - I do not envision a strip shopping center. Commissioner Reid - Do you have to get permission from the County for those curb cuts? Mr. Fiorito - Yes. Commissioner Sheldon - When the curb cuts were made on the south side of the street, they were made with the thinking that the north side would be developed and those curb cuts would be lined up. However, one side is Cook County and one side is Lake County. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 1980 - 10 - Mr. Truesdell - Regarding the two service drives, I still strongly feel that we could get around the two cuts for the service drive. The other point was that the remaining curb cuts seem to follow the general points we talked about. The revision of the plan has its limits to arterial roads. That is what we will need to look at. Is there as much parking on this plan as there was on the original plan? Mr. Lunt - I think I have lost a little bit of square footage in this plan. It is really not too much. Mr. Truesdell - Do you plan to maintain the thirty foot set back around the perimeter? Mr. Lunt - Right now I have cut it down. That is something we will have to discuss. It was determined that another workshop would be scheduled to further review the plan. Mr. Lunt - In my agreement with the land owner I have until March 31, 1981 for a deadline on my zoning. Chairman Shields - Do we have a problem with Village elections on this? Mr. Truesdell - I will check on that. Commissioner Kaszubowski - Only annexations cause a problem with elections not a zoning change. NORTHWOOD GRIVE UNIT II - FINAL PLAT OF SUBDIVISION Mr. Truesdell - What we have here basically is 1) an approval of final site plan and 2) approval of a final plat of subdivision. During the final engineering of this plan problems came up with the detention. The main area that was changed was at the north/east corner. The total detention is con- tained in the north/east corner for this site. It caused some shifting of buildings. Chairman Shields - Does the staff have any problems with the changes? Mr. Truesdell - I do not feel that this plan is basically any different than `./ the other plan. Chairman Shields - Is that dry or wet detention? Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 1980 L__ - 11 - Mr. De Grazia - It is dry detention. Basically the old plan met the PUD ordinance as does the new plan. The problem was that the original wet detention was located in several areas. In refining the plan with the Village engineer the result was a better plan. Now we have the detention in one area and it has a larger area for more active uses. We have lost about ten units with this new plan. The final plat has been refined and refined again and the result is this plan. We want to get in the ground this fall so that we can be ready for some activity in the spring. I respectfully request you view this plan in a positive manner. Commissioner Davis moved the Plan Commission recommend to the Village Board for approval the revised stie plan for the Northwood Grove Unit II Subdivision. Commissioner Sheldon seconded the motion. AYES: Commissioners Sheldon, Davis, Shifrin, Glover NAYES: Commissioner Goldspiel ABSTAIN: Commissioner Kaszubowski ABSENT: Commissioners Button, Reid The motion passed 4 - 1 Commissioner Sheldon moved the Plan Commission recommend to the Village Board for approval the Final Plat of Subdivision for the Northwood Grove Unit II subject to addition of the date and set back line dimensions. Commission- er Davis seconded the motion. AYES: Commissioners Goldspiel, Sheldon, Davis, Shifrin, Glover NAYES: None ABSTAIN: Commissioner Kaszubowski ABSENT: Commissioners Button, Reid The motion passed 5 - 0 Commissioner Shifrin moved adjournment. Commissioner Sheldon seconded the motion. Chairman Shields adjourned the meeting at 10:50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Ka hleen Comer, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: -2L7- Patrick Shields, Chairman Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 1980