1980-06-18 - Plan Commission - Minutes REGULAR MATING
BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION
Mueller Farm (Cedar View)
The Orchards
Buffalo Grove Fire Station
June 18, 1980
Chairman Sheldon called the Regular Meeting to order in the Municipal Building,
50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove at 7.35 P.M.
Commissioners Present: Chairperson Sheldon
Mr. Goldspiel
Mr. Button
Mr. Davis
Mrs. Reid
Mr. Glover
Mrs. Kaszubowski
Commissioners Absent: Mr. Shields
Mr. Shifrin
Also Present: Mr. A. Mansukhani, Developer, Orchards
Mr. R. Jessen, Architect, Orchards
Mr. F. Angelotti, Orchards, Engineer
Mr. R. Knoeppel, Architect, Buffalo Grove Fire Station
Mrs. B. O 'Reilly, Trustee, Buffalo Grove
Mr. W. Sommer, Assistant Village Manager
Mr. R. Gustafson, Engineer
Mr. J . Truesdell, Village Planner
Mr. J. Marienthal, Trustee
COMMUNICATIONS
Commissioner Goldspiel - Regarding the vote on the Fiore Property, I have taken
advantage of a course that was suggested to me and have prepared a dissenting
report. If anyone is interested they can read it before it is submitted to the
Village Board.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
None
MUELLER FARM
Mr. Truesdell - The Mueller Farm is a seventeen (17) acre site located south of Dundee
Road across from Golf View Terrace. The developer approached the Village with a plan
six (6) months ago. He had a problem with detention and parking in that he had lo-
cated it within a public right-of-way. We felt that he had to change the plan or buy
the right-of-way from the county. He did work out a deal. He thought he had firmed
it up. Apparently when it went to the County Board for approval it ran into problems
regarding price. The deal was not closed. He called informing us he would have to
wail until the problem was resolved. He felt he should have this solved after
July 7, 1980.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Regular Meeting
June 18, 1980
- 2 -
THE ORCHARDS
Mr. Mansukhani - Previously we presented a plan to this Commission to which you
recommended certain changes. The changes we have made are:
1. Reduced the tight radius of the S curve at the entrance to the development.
2. Regarding a common detention area, we have relocated the building and we
now have a common detention area which is sufficient for the site.
3. Garages at the west side of the property were moved to allow visability
of the bike path. The garages are relocated near the buildings.
4. The exhibit to properly show the garage elevations has not been prepared yet.
5. The handicapped parking is now provided on the plan.
6. Regarding the alternate plan showing four story buildings, we went to the banks
and were informed that the cost would be prohibitive. We kept the same general
condition but the buildings were moved. We have a modified scheme.
Mr. Jessen - We hope to get our second plan approved tonight. The trees that are
on the property will stay and are shown on this plan. They are located on the
north side of the property, there are two (2) rows on the north running south.
We have a driveway that is surrounded by pines on one side. It has natural beauty.
We have a building facing the detention area which is open space and forms a natural
yard for this building. The design of the garages will complement the design of
the buildings. I can submit their elevation for your review at any time.
Mr. Truesdell-rbgarding my memo dated June 9, 1980 to the Plan Commission titled
The Orchards Condominium Development my comments on the following points are:
Point 1 - Distance Between Buildings
What we have normally done with the PUD is attempt to meet the building spearation
requirements that are in the R9 section of the zoning ordinance. In section 9.6
(d)1 of the Village ordinance - "Where there are no windows in either of the oppos-
ing faces, the distance between the walls shall be not less than nine (9) feet."
These buildings have one window on the side but more towards the front of the
building. The concern is the distance to the garages. With a scale it looks to be
about ten (10) feet. It appears that this plan now meets those requirements.
Point 2 - Setback
The PUD ordinance requires setbacks should be two (2) times the height of the
building. In this case I feel we could go with a setback of one (1) times the
height of the building. In our Master Plan, to the north and south of the project
it is all planned to be multi-family. So it would be reasonable to require it to
be one (1) times the height. The height of the buildings would determine the set-
back on this plan.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Regular Meeting
June 18, 1980
- 3 -
Point 3 - Building Height
The height has been shown on the prepared plan showing the elevations of the
buildings but not the garages.
Point 4 - Chart Reflecting Density
We would like to have a sheet in final form of how the density here meets the den-
sity in the ordinance.
Point 5 - Landscape Plan
By the public hearing, as required by the PUD Ordinance, a landscaping plan needs
to be submitted showing trees that remain, additional landscaping and berming.
Point 6 - Parking Stalls
Nine (9) by nineteen (19) is the typical size of the parking stalls and should be
shown.
Point 7 - Driveways
The possibility of aligning the driveways in the mid portion of the site should
be addressed.
Point 8 - Building Relocation
Moving the parking area west of the detention facility to the opposite side of
the eighteen (18) eighteen unit building so that parking is hidden from the
street and the building can take advantage of the aesthetics of the detention
area was a consideration the staff thought should be addressed.
Mr. Truesdell then went over Mr. Kuenkler's memo to him dated June 16, 1980 titled
Preliminary Plan Review, The Orchards, Weiland Road North of Lake-Cook. He noted
that Point 4 - Lake County Soil Conservation Service Resource Opinion has been
received and that Point 5-Trees proposed to be preserved be accurately located for
review, would be taken care of by the landscaping plan.
Mr. Mansukhani - When we submitted the tree survey we tried to locate the buildings
around the trees so that we could save as many trees as possible.
Mr. Truesdell - The first plan presented tonight is not favorable because the S
curve is taken out. We feel the second plan should be considered because the S
curve is present but modified.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Regular Meeting
June 18, 1980
- 4 -
Commissioner Button - I would be more willing to ask for a variance of setback
requirements in the areas where there is extensive screening. I think we should
consider the adjacent development to be R9 zoning. I feel that the location of
building eight (8) provides a nice little vista. I prefer the plan with the S
curve because of the curve as well as the fact that it preserves the pines.
Mr. Jessen - The architectural treatment of the garages will match the buildings.
The garages will have eight (8) foot ceilings. I am providing a ten (10) foot
landscaping buffer around the property.
Commissioner Davis - I do not like the idea of outside garages. I have seen
garages underneath the buildings. They provide security and more open space.
You would be elevating the height of the building slightly.
Chairman Sheldon - It is a good safety measure and insurance companies are
looking favorably on this. It appears to me there are too many buildings. What
if you were to eliminate one building?
Mr. Jessen - If we add to the elevation you are going to loose the look of a French
Chateau.
Commissioner Goldspiel - You would loose the back yard with a driveway going to
the garages.
Commissioner Glover - What you are talking about is a coach house design and
you are changing the whole development.
Commissioner Davis - You will still have enough buildings on the property to
look like barsdcks.
Commissioner Goldspiel - Will the main street be dedicated or a private street?
Mr. Truesdell - It is more of a private entrance to the development than a
public road.
Commissioner Goldspiel - How would this serve the area to the south?
Mr. Truesdell - We are talking about a kind of development that would be
similar. We are looking for some easements so that they could be used as a
connection for the development to the south. We would end up with more of a
parking lot area than with a public street.
Commissioner Goldspiel - If this were to be a dedicated street we would have
to have a parkway. Without the parkway, are we going to have trouble getting
to the utilities?
Mr. Truesdell - The public works would prefer to set it as a private street.
There would be a problem with the Village vehicles going through.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Regular Meeting
June 18, 1980
- 5 -
Commissioner Goldspiel - Where do the utilities go?
Mr. Truesdell - They could be easily provided. I am not sure how this would
be done. In some cases we have had a blanket easement.
Mr. Angelotti - The utilities are shown on the engineering plan which was in
your packet. Mr. Angelotti then demonstrated on the engineering plan where
the utilities would be located. He further stated that the detention would
feetmc s e Vpthe time. It is at an elevation of 81 feet at the bottom to 85
Mr. Jessen in response to a question from Commissioner Goldspiel stated that
residents of the buildings will have to walk up four (4) or five (5) steps
above grade to the entrance lobby and then down to the first apartment. The
height of the building will be thirty-seven (37) feet.
Commissioner Goldspiel - The development has 13.95 dwelling units per acre.
What else in this Village is that density?
Mr. Truesdell - There is Steepleview which comes out to about nineteen (19)
dwelling units per acre, Cambridge, when it is all built out, will be
nineteen (19) to twenty (20) units per acre and Oak Creek is about fifteen (15)
to sixteen (16) units per acre.
Commissioner Goldspiel - I lived in a building with underground and detached
parking. It was my opinion that the under building garages were undesirable
because when someone was having trouble starting their car in the morning it
was disturbing. You have the noise of car doors slamming also.
Commissioner Davis - I propose having garages under the building with a door
at either end of the building, eliminating the outside garages but keeping the
parking spaces. Looking at plan two,there is enough room for doors on either
end of the building.
Commissioner Kaszubowski - I have a problem with the private roadway. I agree
with the comments that have been made so far.
Commissioner Glover - I think the private road is a major concern. We end up
land locking both sides of this development. We limit the type of development
we can put on either side. We cannot drive onto the adjacent land. What would
we have to do to bring this up to Village standards?
Mr. Truesdell - We require a sixth (60) foot right-cf-way with side walks.
Commissioner Glover - I think we are going to end up with a condominium
association coming back wanting the streets to be dedicated. The distance
between the garages with doors facing south seems to be a minimum land standard.
It looks like we have about thirty (30) feet between the garages.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Regular Meeting
June 18, 1980
- 6 -
Mr. Jessen - The measurement is twenty-five (25) feet. Where there is a slight
angle we are going to have twenty (25) to thirty (30) feet.
Mr. Truesdell - It is basically the same as the distance between those types
of garages on the Happ Farm and they meet the ordinance regarding distance.
Commissioner Glover - I feel we need a dedicated road so that we will have access
to the property to the south. If we make that roadway, with those garages
twenty-seven (27) feet apart, we have a problem.
Commissioner Reid - I share Garry's concern about the roads. I would like to
see some way to have another emergency fire lane access. When we first looked
at this plan we expressed our opinion that there are not enough open space
areas. We are still looking at the same open space.
Mr. Jessen - We are occupying about ninteen (19) percent of the land. That
gives you plenty of open space.
Chairman Sheldon - Ourr suggestion was four (4) story buildings to accomplish
more open space.
Mr. Jessen - You are talking about four (4) to five (5) story buildings that
are not economically possible to put together this year.
Commissioner Button - It is extremely difficult to vote for a project with a
private road.
Commissioner Goldspiel - I am trying to determine if you will abut the right-
of-way on Checker Road extended. If this is abutting Checker Drive, we have
to be concerned if we would still want a road from Route 83 west to Weiland
Road.
Mr. Truesdell - I do not see the need for it.
Commissioner Goldspiel - Assuming this is built the way it is now, would the
fire engine be able to turn around and get out?
Mr. Truesdell - It would have to turn around in one of the parking areas.
Commissioner Goldspiel - What we really need is a turn around for the fire
department.
Mr. Truesdell - There is no second access.
Commissioner Glover - I feel the whole proposal should be sent back to the
drawing boards. We need the private road made into a dedicated street. We
are trying to develop a very small parcel of land with a large density. We
have to consider the land to the south.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Regular Meeting
g
June 18, 1980
J
- 7 -
Commissioner Goldspiel - You would suggest a U shapped road then?
Commissioner Glover - Yes, I think we have to look at land planning and into
the future.
Commissioner Goldspiel - I think you can put a dedicated street in which could
hook up with the parcel to the south. It could serve this parcel and the parcel
to the south to be developed. The parcel to the south is a little narrower
than this one. We have to consider if it is practical for that road to come
out and hook it to Checker Road and then a loop off of it. It might do the
same thing and serve both parcels.
Chairman Sheldon - We are setting the street patterns for this whole part
of town.
Mr. Truesdell - Checker Road would run along the north of the property immediate-
ly adjacent to it. Being that this is a conceptual plan, there is always some
possibility of moving it one way or another.
Commissioner Davis - I would like to see a plan with the garages underneath
the building.
Commissioner Button - This plan should be developed with some broader consider-
ation for the future development. There should be a road with access to both
pieces, this one and the piece to the south. This is a pretty crowded plan.
It is very difficult to plan this piece. I am not sure what approach I would
take.
Chairperson Sheldon established the fact that the density did not bother anyone.
Commissioner Button - I would still go for a higher structure. I would really
like to see a four story structure.
Commissioner Goldspiel - I do not feel it is essential to have four stories or
underground garages if there is a way to make it work.
Mr. Mansukhani - Several weeks ago we came to you with another plan. The
Commission made many recommendations which we have complied with to the best
of our ability.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
Mr. Knoeppel - The site is on Busch Road at Highland Grove Drive. The Village
Board thought it was advisable to have the plan reviewed by the Plan Commission.
The object was to keep as much of the open space as possible. The homes backing
upto the site have their rear yards facing the station. The distance from
their houses to the station is about 160 feet. The homes facing the open space
are from 360 feet to 4.00 feet from their front yards to the station. The fire
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Regular Meeting
June 18, 1980
- 8 -
station is a very low profile. It is one story on the first half and no higher
than two stories on the other half. We will screen the back of the site between
the rear yards and the station. We propose to have an access off of Busch Road.
The other road is for the volunteers. There are about twenty (20) parking
stalls. The station is very attractive. If a fire station is well maintained
it is quite beautiful.
Commissioner Button - Why would you not want to offset the back of the site
another thirty (30) feet to the right.
Mr. Knoeppel - It could be moved but then we would take up the clear open space.
This station does not get a great deal of use. Along with some landscaping
you will hardly notice it. There is very little activity in the back. The
distance of the open space is about one hundred fifty (150) feet to the property
line and two hundred twenty four (224) feet on Busch Road.
Commissioner Button - I would have a tendency to move the whole back area
another thirty (30) feet to the right.
Mr. Knoeppel - We are going to be providing the berming. The Village is going
to provide the landscaping with another contractor. I am sure we are going to
have enough space so that if you want to build the whole back we will be able
to.
Commissioner Glover - Has any thought been given to expansion of this station?
Mr. Knoeppel - After discussion with our people the only expansion we would have
is one bay attached to the apparatus room. Chief Winters could not see any
possibility of expansion. There would be another station built before there
is a need for expansion. This is a substation not a main station.
Commissioner Davis - Is there going to be a hook and ladder?
Mr. Sommer - No, the stations are manned according to the needs of the area.
There is no problem. This is a second response area. The station in our build-
ing will be closed when the new station on Busch Road is built.
Commissioner Davis - My concern is, if Fiore comes in, we will need a hook and
ladder.
Mr. Sommer - This station is located at a 1.5 mile radius from the commercial
and industrial area. It is 2.5 miles from the residential area. You can easily
get down to Cambridge-On-The-Lake from here.
Commissioner Goldspiel - Why is that a better location than the one further
west?
Mr. Sommer - There seems to be a conflict between our planners and our Fire
Department. The Fire Department feels that a site away from an intersection
was better for them. We may be talking, in the future, about the Santucci
Property. The total property we are talking about now just makes it. If we
moved it further west it would not be within the 1.5 mile area.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Regular Meeting
June 18, 1980
- 9 -
In response to a question from Commissioner Button regarding moving the station
twenty-five (25) feet to the west, Mr. Sommer stated that he thought it could
be dealt with by berming. The only other traffic to this back area is if there
would be a volunteer call. The use of this road is going to be very minimal.
Mr. Knoeppel responding to a question from Chairperson Sheldon stated that
we cannot turn the parking lot because the fire trucks have to back out
straight. This does not happen too often, but the option has to be there.
Mr. Sommer - Here we have an advantage. The station is going to be built before
the homes are in. Before a lot is purchased the buyer will see a fully operation-
al fire station.
Commissioner Davis made a motion to submit to the Village Board for approval
the Preliminary Plan of the Buffalo Grove Fire Station dated June 9, 1980 with
particular attention paid to berming on the eastern boarder where the site adjoins
single family lots with the understanding that the Village requirements for
sidewalks be included. Commissioner Button seconded the motion.
AYES: Commissioners Goldspiel, Button, Davis, Reid, Glover, Kaszubowski
NAYES: None
The motion passed 6 - 0
Commissioners absent were Mr. Shields and Mr. Shifrin.
Commissioner Davis - We agreed to meet on the first and third Wednesdays of the
month. It seems that we are being pushed into meetings on the other Wednesdays
of the month on a very regular basis. Last week a meeting was held. I called
our Chairman and was told that there would not be a vote on the Fiore Property.
It was called for a vote and it passed 4 - 2. I believe that if Mr. Button and
I would have been there we would have voted no and the Chairman has told me that
he would have voted no. Fiore would have been turned down. It is very difficult
for some of us to be here for every meeting.
Mr. Sommer - I believe we have tried to adhere to this. We have no control over
who will be available for a meeting.
Commissioner Button - It is my understanding that we were going to hold the meeting
together with the staff and the developer to firm our information
Commissioner Glover - We did talk about a workshop around a table.
Commissioner Davis - We are piling up the items for a meeting to a point that
we are not getting the information in our packets. By the rules it should
not be on the agenda if we do not have all the information.
Chairperson Sheldon - I request that the first and third be made regular meet-
ings and those that are scheduled on other Wednesdays be set as workshops.
If the packet is given out and everything is not in the packet the Chairman
can remove it from the agenda.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Regular Meeting
June 18, 1980
- 10 -
Mr. Truesdell - I contact the Chairman and inform him of what is on the agenda.
If it is acceptable it goes out. Regarding the second and fourth Wednesdays
I check with him and if he says schedule a meeting, I schedule it.
Chairperson Sheldon - I suggest that we all think about this and discuss it at
our next workshop meeting. We can set down some guidelines.
FUTURE AGENDA
�•/ It was determined to cancel the June 25, 1980 meeting on Fiore and reschedule
the subject for the July 2, 1980 meeting. The Comprehensive Plan for Buffalo
Grove will be discussed on July 16, 1980.
Commissioner Davis - It was my understanding that the June 11, 1980 meeting was
a workshop. It turned into a Special Regular Meeting and a vote was taken.
I am sure this group could have gotten the answers that we wanted from the
staff on those points that have now become moot because the vote was taken.
It seems to me tonight we shot down a plan because we did not like the roads.
If we can do that with this plan why not Fiore? I am not sure we have finished
what we had to do.
Commissioner Button - I am disturbed that a vote was taken and I was not
present.
Commissioner Reid - I am under the impression that it doesn't matter what our
recommendations are we have done it. It is out of our hands.
Commissioner Goldspiel - We made a vote and it goes to the Village Board. We
have a lot to be attached to it. But they do not have to follow that.
Commissioner Kaszubowski - I want to know what my responsibilities are here.
I do not think that because I say yes that the Board has to say yes. I do not
feel that I am supposed to redesign a plan. If I do not like it, I say so and
why. If I like the plan and certain things should be changed, we put them on
our list. Then it goes to the board. We cannot make the developer go back
and do it. It is up to that level of authority.
Commissioner Goldspiel - The Plan Commission is created under state statute.
We have certain responsibilities. One is custody of the Master Plan and the
streets. There is a level of responsibility. I think we are more than advisory.
I think there are certain instances where how we vote effects the Village Board's
vote.
Mrs. O'Reilly - I takes two-thirds of the Board to turn down your negative vote.
On an annexation it takes two-thirds of the Board also.
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Regular Meeting
June 18, 1980
- 11 -
Sheldon moved that the Plan Commission reconsider their vote on the
Citrust/Hilltown Property Preliminary Plan on July 2, 1980. Commissioner
Kaszubowski seconded the motion.
AYES: Commissioners Goldspiel, Button, Davis, Reid,
Glover, Kaszubowski
NAYES: None
The motion passed 6 - 0
Commissioners absent - Mr. Shields and Mr. Shifrin
Chairman Sheldon asked if there were any additional comments concerning
Fiore.
Mrs. O'Reilly - The thing that concerned me about the vote last week was saying
yes but, no but. When you complete your list you may change your vote. I
think that it is a much better procedure to follow to get that list going first.
Commissioner Goldspiel - Regarding Arlington Heights Road construction opposite
Villa Verde I have been watching there development. Their curb cuts are in
a terrible location. One is right on the curve where you would be coming around
a blind curve and the other one is offset from the entrance to Villa Verde. Is
there anything that we can do to get that changed?
Mr. Truesdell - I will investigate it. I am not sure what we can do about it
now. I was at a meeting and expressed my concern. I was told that the road
right-of-way was there before we built and if that is a problem it is our
fault not theirs. They were not aware of the problem with their alignment.
Commissioner Button made a motion for adjournment. Commissioner Davis seconded
the motion. Chairperson Sheldon adjourned the meeting at 10:00 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
rf
APPROVED BY: Kathleen Comer, Recording Secretary
Patrick Shields, chairman
Buffalo Grove Plan Commission
Regular Meeting
June 18, 1980
1