Loading...
1980-06-04 - Plan Commission - Minutes PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION Continuation of Citrust/Hilltown Public Hearing of May 28, 1980 June 4, 1980 Chairman Shields called the Public Hearing to order in the Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove at 9:20 P.M. Commissioners Present: Chairman Shields Mr. Goldspiel Mr. Button Mrs. Reid Mr. Shifrin Mr. Glover Mrs. Kaszubowski Commissioners Absent: Mss. Sheldon Mr. Davis Also Present: Mr. D. Asher, President, Citrust Mr. R. Friedman, President, Hilltown Mr. J. Mikes, Attorney, Citrust/Hilltown Mrs. B. IaPiana, District 103 Mr. B. Rebechini, President, Riverwoods Mr. J. Balen, Lake County Board, District 2 Mr. R. Potenz, President, Lincolnshire Mr. R. Coffin, President, Long Grove Mr. J. Orloff, Resident, Buffalo Grove Mr. W. O'Reilly, Park District, Buffalo Grove Mr. W. Balling, Village Manager, Buffalo Grove Mr. W. Sommer, Assistant Village Manager Mr. W. Raysa, Village Attorney Mr, D, Kuenkler, Village Engineer J. Truesdell, Village Planner . J. Marien a , Trustee CITRUST/HILLTOWN PROPERTIES Ms. LaPiana read a statement prepared by the Board of Education for School District 103. The statement referred to the fact that they are opposed to any disannexation of properties currently under the taxing jurisdiction of School District 103. District 103 encourages the Planning Commission to request the developer to present other alternatives on land usage as a means of establishing a fair and equitable distribution of tax revenues and student population to the three elementary school districts which will be affected by the Citrust/Hilltown development. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing June 4, 1980 - 2 - Mr. Rebochini - Our village is against signing the agreement furnished to us at the last VAGA meeting because of the density as it exists in this property. It is not acceptable with those of Riverwoods. We have invited Mr. Sommer to come to our Plan Commission meeting on June 12, 1980 to discuss the Santucci Property. The Village of Buffalo Grove is not taking into consideration the impact statement as provided by the County. I think the densities as shown by the County are the proper ones for that area. Mr. Balen read a statement which basically outlined his views. My position is not to be pro or con for the annexation. County funds will be involved with this project sooner or later. My purpose is to give you advance notice that a question not considered by the developer is to provide for minority, lower income and moderate income housing. I feel it would be difficult as a County Board Member to support any use of County funding or use of its facilities - sewerlines, Lake Michigan Water Allocation, road construction and other amenities as long as this issue is not considered. I had already, before this issue of annexation arose, brought to the attention of the Attorney General of the United States, discriminatory housing practices in Lake County by Cities and Villages of said County. I present a copy of this correspondence (letter to Mr. B. Civiletti dated October 11, 1979 from Mr. J. Balen). I have not received any response yet. Commissioner Goldspiel - How did you arrive at the 8 figure. Mr. Balen - The total minority population versus the total population in the County. Commissioner Goldspiel - Much of the debate we have is on large lot single family homes and on the other hand a combination of single family homes, part townhomes, and part multi-family. Do you have any feeling as to what would be less discriminatory? Mr. Balen - You are going to have to provide for these people to live here some place. People are going to work in the industrial property. They are going to have to drive to work. If they are going to work here they should be able to enhance their living opportunity by being able to live here. Commissioner Goldspiel - Would you apply this same proposal when Long Grove, Riverwoods, or Lincolnshire were developing industrial property? Mr. Balen - Yes, I would. Commissioner Button - What is the percentage of minority population in Lake County? Mr. Balen - Almost 20;*; Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing June 1., 1980 - 3 - Commissioner Button - If it were not 20;, would you recommend shutting off all funding to the County? Mr. Balen - I have done so in this letter. Mr. Potenz - My remarks represent the complete unanimity of our board and I believe I speak for the vast majority of our village. I believe any of us can get whatever we want to out of a set of figures. I am addressing my remarks to a different point. I believe the point is one that isn't really touched by dollars and cents. The basic reason for families moving into this area is the open space. In Lincolnshire our residents are willing to spend more money for their open space. In all the correspondence that I have read in your minutes two points come across again and again. 1) You want to bring a different type of housing style to your residents. 2) You want to enhance, to maintain and provide additional tax basis for your residents. Your community must do what you feel is best. I have to carry this a step further in determining what is best as I perceive and our village perceives it. It is evident that it is a fair assumption to make that what we do as communities impact a great deal more than our village boundries. The only people who have not spoken are the people of Buffalo Grove. I think the Fiore project is so far removed from your residents, at this time, they are not interested. I believe that there exists within Vernon Township, for Buffalo Grove to develop and provide the additional type of housing styles you want to build in Fiore. I believe there is additional land in the township for industrial development. Money is not going to solve a life style problem. We have created within Vernon Township VAGA that will allow us to plan within the township. There must be compromise. There must be a willingness for us to work together. I am pleading with you to give VAGAa chance. Fiore is either going to make or break VAGA. Chairman Shields - I would like to respond to one of your comments. Of the twenty-one people that signed up on the list to speak, nine were Village residents. Mr. O'Reilly - As a Park Board Member I would like to state that on May 22, 1980 a preliminary plan was presented by the developer. Seventeen percent of the total acreage is open space, that is only the residential acreage. There is actually twelve point eight percent (12. 8,) of the total land area. Many questions followed this presentation. To provide the developer and the Plan Commission tonight with some preliminary indication of the Park Board's feeling toward this development a consensus was asked the Board Members. The choices were the following two options. 1) To accept the developers donation of land and/or cash on the basis of :',35,000 budget per park acre 2) To require the developer to provide 100') of the necessary capital development, relative to land area and facilities per the National Recreation of Park Association Specifications. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing June 4, 1980 - 4 - Option one received zero votes, option two received two votes, three members did not express an opinion but made objections to option one and requested more details on option two. Thus more discussion is necessary. As an individual I have some observations to make regarding this development. Consideration has to be given to the fact that this development separates this Village by County. This development will further separate us into three areas. It will establish a large community which has a separate identity. I feel this development is not in the best interest of Buffalo Grove. The land area will consist of several water surface areas. Why meet the high degree of land standards now? This development will take all future possible acquisitions. Regarding capital development - full capital development is a must as far as I am concerned. If it is not done at the time of development it will never get voter approval. I believe it is within the realm of possibility that if adequate recreational facilities are not met that the final acquisition for the land into the Park District may not take place. What the developer has done to date has been at his own risk. This Village is under no obligation to proceed with this development. The only solution is to recommend no further consideration be given to this development as it is presented. Commissioner Goldspiel - I do not understand the point about the two alternatives? Which is the way we do business now? Mr. O'Reilly - It is done on the basis of 5. 5 acres of active use per 1,000 resi- dents or $35,000 per active use acreage. The 5.5 acres falls very short of federal standards. With the development of this entire section there will never be any more land for active use. Commissioner Goldspiel - You refer to a policy regarding open water area. I did not understand the Park District to have a policy opposed to lakes. Mr. O'Reilly - We do not have a policy for open water. We have experienced an open opposition to open water space basically because of the cost of mainten- ance and the general consensus of the Village is opposition of open water for safety reasons. Commissioner Goldspiel - When we went over the list of things that should be addressed, one of them was thequestion of low income housing. I wonder if a 1 g anything had become of that? It is something I think we should consider. Mr. Orlaff - I feel the Fiore issue is one of the most important ones to come up before the Plan Commission. Most of my neighbors were not concerned about the issue. I think this apathy is common throughout the Village I feel Buffalo Grove Industrial Park Public Hearing June 4, 1980 - 5 - this is our Village. It is like a family. I object to a letter sent out from another Village. They have their right to do so, but the forum is here. There are many factors which the Plan Commission must consider. Nine percent (90) of my taxes go to the Village of Buffalo Grove. Fifty-eight (58A of my taxes go for the two school districts. I would like to hear their input regarding this development. In any development there is a tremendous demand for services. The demand for services comes from day one. The problem is the tax revenues do not come in for two or three years down the road. One of the biggest problems we are going to see is water. What is the cost of water going to be? Are we going to have enough water? Should something of this magnitude be left up to the Plan Commission? Should the residents be able to vote on it? I think this plan is ill conceived and it should be dropped. Commissioner Button - We have heard a lot of comments during the past two meetings and prior to that in a couple of workshops. The Village is not the petitioner in this case. The Village is considering a petition. The primary concern is to the Village wholeness and its vitality. Our primary concern must be the Village of Buffalo Grove. A lot of confusion has been raised in my mind. I find the testimony I have heard to be very much at odds. I and the Commission will continue addressing these issues. Commissioner Shifrin addressing Mr. Potenz - If this particular parcel were to be subdivided and presented to the various surrounding villages and presuming that this parcel's eastern portion, which is located directly within District 103, were to petition for annexation within the village of Lincolnshire, can you state that you would not consider development of that office research parcel? Mr. Potenz - That is correct. Commissioner Shifrin - I direct the same question to Mr. Coffin. Presuming that this same hypothetical case were true, and the western portion would come to the village of Long Grove, are you in a position to answer as to whether, under current single family on one or two acre lots,that the village of Long Grove would not consider it? Mr. Coffin - About two thirds of this property lies within the Long Grove "sphere of interest". Last August we annexed the western half of the Hilltown property. That land was annexed to Long Grove on a two acre average basis. I don't know that I can categorically say that we would not annex that land, that there are no circumstances under which we might annex the land. We, probably, left to our own devices before this ever came up, would have gone on to our southern area boundries. I think, I can say categorically, we in no way want to entertain this project except through VAGA. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing June 1., 1980 - 6 - Commissioner Shifrin - However, I would still repeat my question, if the western boundary were to approach the Village of Long Grove for annexation would Long Grove annex it? Mr. Coffin - I think I addressed that and said that I think that I can categoric- ally say there are no circumstances that we would annex that property. Commissioner Shifrin Mr. Potenz, would you agree with Mr. Coffin? Mr. Potenz - Yes Commissioner Shifrin addressing Mr. Coffin - Did you submit the DeMucci property to VAGA for approval? Mr. Coffin - No because that was not located in Vernon Township. Commissioner Shifrin - On that basis and on the basis of what Mr. Coffin said, did the Village of Lincolnshire submit the Chicagoland property to VAGA for consideration? Mr. Potenz - No, but I submit that the Chicagoland property has been in Lincolnshire for some twenty years. I might say that any property that is outside of Lincolnshire would be brought to VAGA. Commissioner Shifrin - Are you then saying that there is a discrepancy in that or a distinction between property that is located within Village bound- aries and that which is coming in for annexation? Mr. Potenz - I think so. Commissioner Shifrin - Mr. Rebechini, did I detect that the Village of River- woods was considering a parcel of the Santucci property at present? Mr. Rebechini - No Riverwoods has never had an expansion policy. We presented you with a comprehensive plan of what Riverwoods had in mind for the Santucci property and we would like to see it developed along those lines. If there is no other alternative we may have to consider it. Commissioner Shifrin - Would you base your final determination on VAGA's findings? Mr. Rebechini - Yes. Mr. Kendig - The County's Planning, Building and Zoning Committee has several resolutions on its agenda for its meeting on Monday. One of these is the rejection of the proposal which is before you. Regarding President Clayton's proposal, after a meeting on the 28th, we came to the conclusion that there does exist an agreeable plan for possible annexation. We recommend that VAGA is the vehicle to do so. It really is a shame we have reached this point without VAGA. Commissioner Goldspiel - It seems to me that we, as a Plan Commission, are required to review the plan that is in front of us. I do not think that we - 7 - are entitled to stop our deliberations on this plan because something may be developed in the future. Mr. Kendig - I will agree that you have to proceed. However, until someone in authority directs the Plan Commission to sit down at the table and have face to face discussions, the possibility of another agreement will never have a chance to come about. Mr. Balling - The Village President and the Village Board gave direct guidance to the VAGA members about a week prior to the May VAGA meeting. We did articulate the position of the Village of Buffalo Grove as expressed in President Clayton's memo. Chairman Shields closed the Public Hearing at 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Vg117_, t) 6-7-2!-V-1 at leen Comer Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: Patrick Shields Chairman f 1 i REGULAR MEETING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION Buffalo Grove Industrial Park Citrust/Hilltown Properties Crossings Road Dedication Plat June 4, 1980 Chairman Shields called the Regular Meeting to order in the Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove at 10:40 P.M. Commissioners Present: Chairman Shields Mr. Goldspiel Mr. Button Mrs. Reid Mr. Shifrin Mr. Glover Mrs. Kaszubowski Commissioners Absent: Mrs. Sheldon Mr. Davis Also Present: Mr. W. Sommer, Assistant Village Manager Mr. Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. Truesdell, Village Planner Mr. John Marienthal, Village Trustee APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Reid moved that the minutes of the May 7, 1980 Public Hearing be approved. Commissioner Kaszubowski seconded the motion. AYES: Commissioners Button, Reid, Shifrin, Kaszubowski NAYES: None ABSTAIN: Commissioners Goldspiel, Glover Commissioner Kaszubowski moved that the minutes of the May 7, 1980 Regular Meeting be approved. Commissioner Button seconded the motion. AYES: Commissioners Button, Reid, Shifrin, Kaszubowski NAYES: None ABSTAIN: Commissioners Goldspiel, Glover COMMITTEE AND LIAISON REPORTS There were no committee or liaison reports. Commissioner Shifrin moved that the Buffalo Grove Industrial Park be tabled until the meeting of June 11, 1980. Commissioner Button seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting June 4, 1980 - 2 - Commissioner Shifrin moved that the Citrust/Hilltown Properties be tabled until the meeting of June 11, 1980. Commissioner Button seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. CORSSINGS ROAD DEDICATION PLAT Commissioner Goldspiel - Fairfax Court and Gelding Court do not look like the streets that we ordinarily approve. Was part of the agreement to include those two streets? Mr. Truesdell - I believe everything on the plat was to be part of the agreement. Commissioner Button - The setback is the same. Commissioner Goldspiel - Do those meet--the-planning criteria? Mr. Truesdell - Dick Kuenkler has signed off the plat and stated that it meets the Village standards as far as the pavement is concerned. Commissioner Kaszubowski - Jim, do the Streets come up to the standards for MFD funds? Mr. Truesdell - They would be maintained by Village funds. My understanding is that all of the improvements that the Village required have been made. The Village Engineer has signed off that they have been taken care of. Commissioner Goldspiel - Has the plat been checked for accuracy? Mr. Truesdell - It has been checked by the engineer. Commissioner Goldspiel - What is the status of the balance of Fremont Way? Mr. Sommer - Fremont Way is already dedicated by the Village. Commissioner Button moved that the Plan Commission forward to the Village Board for approval the Plat for Dedication for Public Streets for the Crossings Subdividion, Block One, Order Number 80-139. Commissioner Reid seconded the motion. AYES: Commissioners Button, Reid, Shifrin, Glover NAYES: None ABSTAIN: Commissioner Goldspiel, Commissioner Kaszubowski Li The motion passed Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Regular Meeting June 4, 1980 - 3 - Commissioner Button moved that the meeting be closed. Commissioner Kaszubowski seconded. The vote was unanimous. Chairman Shields closed the meeting at 10:55 P.M. Respectfully submitted, hleen Comer Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: Patrick Shields Chairman PUBLIC HEARING BUFFALO GROVE PLAN COMMISSION Buffalo Grove Industrial Park June 4, 1980 Chairman. Shields called the Public Hearing to order in the Municipal Building, 50 Raupp Boulevard, Buffalo Grove .at 7:40 P.M. Commissioners Present: Chairman Shields Mr Goldspiel - arrived at 8:15 P.M. Mr. Button Mrs. Reid Mr. Shifrin Mr. Glover Mrs. Kaszubowski Commissioners Absent: Mrs. Sheldon Mr. Davis Also Present: Mr. L. Freedmani, Attorney, Buffalo Grove Industrial Park Mr. P. Bianchini, Developer, Lexington Development Corp. Mr. J. Nelson, Planner, Buffalo Grove Industrial Park Mr. H. Roggendorf, Superintendent, District No. 102 Mr. J. Badalamenti, Resident, Prarie View Mr. T. Costopoulos, Property Owner within 250 feet Mr. W. Peterson, Resident Buffalo Grove Mr. W. Stank, Resident Buffalo Grove Mr. A. 0lsansky, Resident Buffalo Grove Mr. L. Meyer, Resident Buffalo Grove Mr. Harris, Resident Buffalo Grove Mr. Capka, Resident Buffalo Grove Mr. D. Shea, Resident Buffalo Grove Mrs. Davisdon, Resident Buffalo Grove Mr. J. Marienthal, Village Trustee, Buffalo Grove Mr. W. Balling, Village Manager Mr. W. Raysa, Village Attorney Mr. D. Kuenkler, Village Engineer Mr. G. Boysen, Public Works Director Mr. J. Truesdell, Village Planner BUFFALO GROVE INDUSTRIAL PARK Chairman Shields opened the hearing by reading the notice of the Public Hearing that was published in the newspapers. He then swore in Messers Freedman, Bianchini and Nelson. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing June 4, 1980 - 2 - Mr. Freedman - I would like to file with the secretary copies of the Report of Notification of mailing and the receipts. Mr. Nelson explained an exhibit which was an overlay of the proposed property. The subject property is zoned Ml. It is surrounded by several existing sub- divisions, on the north is Candlewood Creek zoned R5, north and west is Horatio Gardens, which is in Lake County, west is Buffalo Grove zoned R8, north one half of Armstrong Drive is single family plus the south west corner proposed multi- family under construction. Everything south of Lake Cook Road is in Cook County. South of Lake Cook Road in Wheeling there are three subdivisions, Cedar Run, Lexington Commons, south east is Whippletree Farms and east but unimproved is platted Columbia Gardens. Mr. Nelson then referred to the preliminary plat. The proposal is to develop the property and get preliminary approval for this site which is zoned M1 and being changed, through your ordinance, to I District. The plan has three points of access that have been predetermined. They are the south west corner which is an existing road access point-Industrial Drive and will run through to Pauline Avenue. Additionally in the western point of the property there is Armstrong Drive which has been anticipated to extend from its terminus at our west property line into the development, to continue east to service this development and also a portion of the future development. Originally Armstrong Drive was to allow access from Northwood Grove and Ridgewood subdivisions immediately west of subject property to Industrial Drive and out to Lake Cook Road. The plan has been devised to conform to the new ordinance. The pedestrian system is basically not required in an industrial park, however, due to the pro- posed transportation system for the area what we have done is pick up a sidewalk on one side of all the minor streets as shown. This plan has a slight modifica- tion as shown and that was to incorporate several changes that your Engineering Department recommended. One is the entry detail, we changed it to 450" center line radius. In addition, we have changed the sidewalk to the west side of the road and picked up the two sidewalks existing along Armstrong Drive which allows residents to walk without crossing the street down the west side of Industrial Drive to Lake Cook Road. That sidewalk system extends all the way up to Pauline Avenue and west to the sidewalk under construction at the north west corner of our property. The total area is approximately 49 acres. We are proposing approximately 41 lots from a minimum of 20,000 square feet to a maximum lot of 7. 5 acres plus the frontage at Lake Cook Road. Mr. Truesdell - The Village would like to see the inclusion of the small out lot adjacent to Pauline Avenue which is behind Lot 28. The sidewalks shown on the plan are four feet rather than five feet which is required by the sub- division regulations. In Mr. Kuenkler's memo to me dated May 30, 1980 it is recommended that the bike path should be relocated within the Lake Cook right- of-way so that it can connect the bike path which would be provided to the Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing June 4, 1980 - 3 - Northwood's unit. Recommendation of acceptance of the proposed street width of 36' back to back, offset within a 60' right-of-way in conjunction with a no parking provision on all streets. It was recommended to eliminate the two cul-de-sacs. Extend the streets to the east terminating at the east property line for future extension. Chairman Shields - Were there some traffic comments? Mr. Truesdell - Barton/Ashman did a study regarding total daily trips result- ing in A.M. , peak hours, inbound of 455 and outbound of 165. Regarding P.M. , inbound, peak hours 200 and outbound 550. The basic reason for the connection of Industrial Drive to Pauline Avenue and Armstrong Drive is as follows. Armstrong Drive was connected to provide additional access to that entire area. At one time Horatio Boulevard was planned to be extended southerly from Lake Cook Road to Armstrong Drive. It was to connect up with a street in Wheeling which would also connect with Lake Cook Road. That street never was put through. Therefore, the County would not issue another permit for another road to be extended from Buffalo Grove. The Village's alternative was to provide Armstrong Drive connection to Industrial Drive. The reason that Pauline Avenue was left was because of the necessity of a secondary route to be available for a fire exit should it become necessary. Mr. Bianchini - The property you referred to - the outlot adjacent to Pauline Avenue-is owned by Candelwood Creek. We have made an offer to purchase it. There has been some negotiations on our offer, it has not been completed. If we do acquire the land, we would include it as part of our subdivision. Mr. Truesdell - The second point was the four foot sidewalks. Mr. Nelson - We will make them conform to the ordinance. Mr. Truesdell - The next point was the bike path. Mr. Freedman - We are prepared to move the bike path once the strip within Wheeling Township is resolved. Mr. Truesdell - The final major point is the elimination of the cul-de-sacs. Mr. Bianchini - We did a proposed land use for the property to the east of our property. On January 9, 1980 I submitted a sketch to the staff for poten- tial land use which shows why we feel the cul-de-sacs are necessary. Mr. Nelson - At the workshop sessions this was discussed. Regarding the pro- posed cul-de-sacs at that stage, the primary concern was in the size of the turn around and to show that the 50' radius was able to handle truck turn arounds. Since then I have submitted documentation on recommended turning radius for both semi trailers and straight bed trucks. I believe the cul-de-sacs are adequate to accommodate trucks as shown. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing June 4, 1980 - 4 - There was a comment that asked how might a road system be developed for the balance of the property east of the subject property which extends to the Commonwealth Edison right-of-way. Currently, the plan devised for the ex- tension of Armstrong Drive, there is an existing curb cut for proposed access off of Lake Cook Road, approximately 200' or so, east of our south east property line, that generates the second access point. Additionally we are providing a connection at our north extremity,where the property extends out, We are providing three access points. We feel it will more than be adequate to service the property east of us. Not knowing what the anticipated type of industrial property would be, to extend two additional cul-de-sacs would make their design capability more difficult. It is not necessary to have additional access points. We could, in fact, be creating a hardship for future development. Mr. Bianchini - We have no assurance that the property to the east of us is going to be developed with in any timetable. From a sales point we would prefer to have the cul-de-sacs remain in the plan. 1 Mr. Peterson - I wish to voice serious concern about traffic flow through Horatio Gardens. The people going down Weiland Road will soon learn that they can come in Pope Boulevard, cut through Florence or William, or one of the other side streets and down Industrial Drive. When this is developed we feel it is going to cause a vast increase of traffic into that area. We do not want a hazardous traffic pattern through the subdivision. Mr. Roggendorf - We will have many students walking to the school that will have to cross Pauline and then walk down Horatio Boulevard. We are very supportive of the development. We are very concerned about the traffic flow. Mr. Bianchini - We have no objection, from a design standpoint, to eliminate the connection to Pauline Avenue. Mr. Truesdell - When this proposal was reviewed by staff, the reason that it was left in was for a fire access. However, there is no reason it could not be annexed for emergency access as we have done in other developments. Chairman Shields - If they are in agreement and we are in agreement why don't we just simply do it that way. I � Mr. Starck - I have been in contact with over 100 residents in the Northwood's subdivision and Ridgewood subdivisions. I have submitted to Mr. Shields a written protest to the extension of Armstrong Drive into Industrial Drive. I have been given written permission to speak by 98 residents and we would like to see this connection eliminated. Mr. Truesdell - The reason it was put through was to connect with the develop- ment per our Official Map. This would provide additional access to the entire area back there. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission { Public Hearing June 4, 198o - 5 - Mr. Boysen - The engineering section is interested in the development of collector street systems. We are not concerned about residential traffic in the area. From an engineering standpoint in establishing some very stringent weight restrictions that would not permit truck traffic on residential streets. Mr. Starck - It is the traffic other than trucks that we are concerned about. Access on Armstrong Drive will eliminate three stop lights along Lake Cook Road. It is better than taking Lake Cook Road. Armstrong is going to be an attractive shortcut that will draw cars into that area. Commissioner Goldspiel - It would be a much slower route because it will be at 30 miles per hour rather than 4+5 miles per hour. Mr. Starck - That is one of the problems - people will not go 30 miles per hour. Commissioner Shifrin - On your initial plan that was modified by the staff, did you show Armstrong to be developed but not as a through street? Mr. Bianchini - We showed none. Mr. Nelson - The road system is not too different from what you have. Commissioner Button - How long ago was Armstrong Drive platted on the Master Plan? Mr. Truesdell - It has been on the Official Map for two and a half to three years. It was not the first choice. Horatio extending down to Lake Cook Road was the desired choice. Because that was not feasible we had to go to the second choice and that was Armstrong Drive. Commissioner Button - What is the feasibility of having a counter rush hour signing excluding traffic between six and nine. Mr. Truesdell - I will have to look into that. Mr. Balling - We do not have any area like that but it could be done. Commissioner Button - Jim, in your memo to the Commission, the sections referred to as 2. 5, 2. 6-5, 2. 6-6C and 2.6-7 to be varied. Mr, Truesdell - Those relate, as you recall in the I Ordinance, it is required that there be a 40,000 square foot lot around the perimeter with other various descriptions if it abuts a residential district. In the ordinance there was a provision put in that if the perimeter of the lot abutted areas that were shown in our Comprehensive Plan as compatible non-residential land use, those could be waived. That if the area adjacent to the property, as in this case, is adjacent to industrial they could be allowed to put smaller perimeter lots, they would not be required to put in the fencing. However, it is something directly jBuffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing June 6, 1980 - 6 - related to existing or planned existing residential areas, they would provide the full setback and buffer requirements. Commissioner Button - Is it the staff's opinion, with emergency access at Pauline Avenue only, normal traffic and truck traffic entering and exiting via Lake Cook Road, that this would provide adequate traffic flow and con- trol? Mr. Truesdell - The access at Lake Cook Road would be adequate for industrial traffic. Armstrong was basically extended for residential purposes. Commissioner Glover - Are there any existing or proposed bus routes in the residential area? Commissioner Goldspiel - Route 234 is shown running along Armstrong Drive and down Lexington Drive back out to Route 83. There is some discussion whether it would be Route 234 or a new Route 235. Commissioner Glover - With the only access to the industrial area from In- dustrial Drive, would it be possible to put bus service in? Commissioner Goldspiel - It would not be possible. It would not only service the industrial area, it would service the Ridgewood area, that whole area, as a matter of fact all along Armstrong Drive from Weiland Road to the extension of Lexington Drive. Mr. Olsansky - Did you say the traffic on Pauline would be restricted to emergency traffic only? Mr. Truesdell - Yes. Commissioner Shifrin - There would be a strip for fire access only, that would be it. Mr. Badaimmenti-You have residential property 200 yards from this park. The water service for all of this housing can be affected by a major chemical spill. The reason that there are no basements in our area is because of flooding. You have no water retention in the park. Where is the water going to go? I advocate that you study it a little deeper. I think you should consider water, air and environmental quality that would be affected by this park. Commissioner Button - We do have the Lake County Soil and Water Conservation District study. The study contains some caveats but it does not recommend that it be scrapped. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing June 4, 1980 - 7 - Mr. Meyer voiced his opposition to the extension of Armstrong Drive. In response to a question from Mr. Meyer, Mr. Truesdell stated that Industrial Drive is a two lane road. Mr. Meyer asked if Industrial Drive could be made into a four lane road and then closing Armstrong Drive. Commissioner Kaszubowski - If Armstrong Drive is closed, there is no need to widen Industrial Drive to four lanes. Mr. Meyer - What about parking? Chairman Shields - Each lot will provide for parking. There is no parking on the streets. Mr. Meyer - What type of industry is going into the area? Mr. Bianchini - Within the industrial zoning district there are permitted uses the Village has established. As a developer we are a multi-facited type operation. We will have land for sale, buildings for sale and buildings for lease. At this point it is impossible to be specific but what we build will be according to what we are allowed to. Mr. Roggendorf - I feel you will have to close Armstrong Drive also or it will not stop the traffic through the area. Mr. Harris - Does the County require a second point of ingress into this park? Chairman Shields - The requirement was for the fire access. Mr. Harris - Is there a requirement that more than one point of ingress be established into the park. Mr. Truesdell - The only permit needed for access is from Lake Cook Road. Mr. Harris - The point was made that you want an additional point of ingress for the proposed multi-family being developed. Could Armstrong Drive be made a one way street and go along the section line through Northwood Grove to Lake Cook Road? Commissioner Goldspiel - You could not get the traffic around the point. Mr. Truesdell - The point is well taken. I do not know that we can move the road over to the property line. There is the possibility that there could be a sign at the property line for one way traffic. Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing June 4, 1980 - 8 - I Mr. Meyer - I would also suggest that the fence be 8' , weather-treated and set in cement The soil is very porous in that area. It is clay with severe ponding. I suggest that the developer put in an ornamental tree so that we do not have to look at the building. Commissioner Goldspiel - Is there much through traffic between Pauline, Armstrong and Lilac now? Mr. Meyer - I couldn't really say as I have only lived there three weeks. Mr. Capca - Why does Armstrong Drive have to be connected to Industrial Drive at all? Mr. Truesdell - The actual intent was to provide access from the residential area to Lake Cook Road. We will take into consideration what you have requested as far as signing to make the street a one way. Mr. Shea - Do we have the assurance of the Village that all residential out- lining the area around the industrial park will be left without any industrial traffic going into our area. Chairman Shields - Our intention is to make it as pleasant as possible for you. After this Public Hearing we will have a meeting and go over the issues with the staff and make further recommendations. Then the Village Board will have another public meeting and you will have a chance to express your views. Mr. Starck - I don't understand why the developer says he doesn't want to put Armstrong through, the residents do not want to see Armstrong put through and yet the Village says it has to go through to appease the residents. Chairman Shields - I think you can believe that we are going to discuss that issue. Mrs. Davidson - My husband is with Barton/Ashman. He called Mr. Truesdell and offered to sit with him on this issue. You are going to create a CO2 hot spot with all of this traffic leaving the development via Industrial Drive and Lake Cook Road. Commissioner Shifrin - Could you explain what a CO2 hot spot is? Mrs. Davidson - A CO2 hot spot is developed when cars have to stop and wait for a light. The air quality is very bad. I would like to know about the buffers. Commissioner Goldspiel - The fact that it has been in the zoning ordinance since 1973 says that under law this is industrial property. The point that we are at now is not whether it should be industrial but how that industrial should Buffalo Grove Plan Commission Public Hearing June 4+, 1980 - 9 - be handled in terms of streets and the other matters that we were discussing. Mr. Roggendorf - This site will add approximately $13,000,000 of assessed valuation to School District 102. Our School District will be very appreciative of that additional revenue. Chairman Shields - What are the environmental regulations. Mr. Truesdell - There are EPA regulations that have to be followed. Mr. Costopoulos - Is the developer going to put in Wheeling Road? Is Wheeling Road a dedicated strip? Chairman Shields - It is platted but unimproved and it is not the property of the developer. Mr. Nelson - That property does not extend with access to Lake Cook Road. Chairman Shields closed the Public Hearing at 9:05 P.M. Respectfully submitted, .•716-97.eZ athleen Comer Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: '..J Patrick Shields Chairman