HomeMy Public PortalAbout1993-11-16 ZBA minutesPLAINFIELD ZONING COMMITTEE
DATE: November 16, 1993
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
AT: Plainfield Library
Chairman Sobkoviak
W. Manning L. Kachel
M. Krippel W. Schempf
D. Norris
ALSO PRESENT:
P. Waldock, Village Planner
S. Hart, Secretary
Chairman Sobkoviak called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Sobkoviak led
the pledge to the flag. Roll call was taken, A. Consols was absent.
CASE NO. 237-101789.20 COMPREHENSIVE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT
Planner Waldock summarized his report as follows: State statute requires that when a
Comprehensive Amendment of the Zoning Code is being made, that a Zoning Committee
be appointed by the Mayor, and that that committee hold Public Hearings on the
rewritten Ordinance, and that the committee then make a finding and write a report, back
to the Village Board, for action on the new ordinance. The Plan Commission has been
appointed as the Zoning Committee by the Village President.
We are in the process of updating the Village's Comprehensive Plan, and that new Plan
may change this Ordinance, in terms of the bulk requirements. The most effective way
to carry out the Comprehensive Plan, is through Zoning Codes and regulations. If there
are substantial changes that the Comprehensive Plan proposes, and those changes are
accepted by the Village, we will see Text Amendments to this code at that time. The
new Comprehensive Plan should be ready within a year. The Village Board is
concerned about this issue, and may table the Zoning Ordinance until the Comprehensive
Plan is done. The Plan Commission has recommended that the Village Board adopt this
Zoning Ordinance, because this Ordinance in its present form is much better than the
1948 Code and the Amendments, that we are using today. The issue of smaller lot sizes
was not resolved at the workshop. The question was raised regarding, the new
Comprehensive Plan came up, and how would it effect the Plan if we adopt different lot
areas? The Zoning Ordinance will not effect the Plan, the Plan should establish the
goals of the Village, and the Zoning Ordinance carries out the goals of the
Comprehensive Plan.
After discussion, the consensus of the Plan Commission was that the new Zoning
Ordinance would be easier for the consultant working on the Comprehensive Plan to
work with than the old Zoning Ordinance. The secretary was asked to add the Article
number to the Heading on each page.
Article 1. Definitions.
Change: The definition of Basement to read: That portion of a building or
structure which has more than 50 % of its wall height below grade.
ZONING COMMITTEE MINUTES
November 16, 1993
Page 2
Artacle 2.
Section 9-13 HOME OCCUPATION REGULATIONS
1. (last sentence) The standards for home occupations are intended to insure
compatibility with other permitted uses and the residential character of the neighborhood
and to maintain the sub-ordinate and incidental status of the home occupation.
Section 9-17 Make changes to reflect the new Front Yard Fence Ordinance.
FENCES
1. a. Front yard fences shall be permitted on Single-Family and Two-family
Residential lots within the Central Core area of the Village of Plainfield along
streets as follows: Main street between Lockport Street and Eastern Avenue; Oak
Street; Evans St; Amboy Street; Lockport Street between the DuPage River and
Miles Street; Chicago Street between Fox River and Dillman Street; Ottawa
Street; Commercial Street; James Street; Fox River Street; Des Plaines Street;
Illinois Street; Arnold Street; Division Street between Main Street and Fort Beggs
Drive; Dillman Street; Bartlett Avenue; Center Street; Eastern Avenue; Corbin
Street; Joliet Road from Division Street to Massey Avenue as if extended; and,
Union Street between Division Street and Corbin Street. Subdivisions Platted
after January 1, 1960 are excluded from the provisions of this ordinance.
Front yard fences of wrought iron, wood, or masonry are permitted for properties
within the above described area. Steel woven wire fences shall be prohibited.
Front yard fences shall not exceed 48" in height at corners, columns, posts and
gates. Average fence height shall not exceed 42" overall. Front yard fences shall
be an open design providing no less than 50% opacity. Solid fences may be
permitted up to 24" in height between the posts or column. A One ft. setback
from the public walk shall be required. In no event shall front yard fences block
sight lines for traffic at street intersections or driveways. Front yard fences as
regulated herein shall be permitted upon approval by the Village Board of
Trustees with recommendation from the Plan Commission.
d. remove.
2.
a. Change to reflect the new Front Yard Fence Ordinance.
d. remove
4. c. period after "field." remove "shall not exceed a height of twelve feet
(12')".
~_ ZONING COMMITTEE MINUTES
November 16, 1993
Page 3
Article 3.
Section 9-27 VARIANCES
2. Standards for ...
c. replace "return", with "use", remove "to be used".
5. Remove last sentence. "If the Zoning Board....favorable vote of three members
of the .....shall be necessary to pass such an ordinance."
Section 9-29 AMENDMENTS
2. Standards for...
c. Replace "return" with "use", remove "to be used".
5. (Check with Mr. Harvey, regarding State statute).
Section 9-30 SPECIAL USES
5. Remove the last sentence. "If the Village Board does not concur with the
recommendation of the Plan.... an ordinance granting the special use. "
Article 4, Planned Unit Development.
Discussion regarding the Planned Unit Development included the following: The
Chairman said he knows that there is some resistance to having a Planned Unit
Development section, in the Zoning Ordinance. There are a lot of tracts of land that
12,000 sq. ft. bulk requirement will not be realistic, where there is unbuildable property,
that could be utilized by neighboring houses. The beauty of a PUD, is we can always
say no.
Planner Waldock stated, one of the Board members problem with the PUD Ordinance,
is that it encourages developers to vary from the Code, to use a Planned Unit
Development to get relief from the Code. There is concern there will be no standard
subdivisions, because everyone will use the PUD. But that is not the case in cities that
use this type of regulations. It is more expensive to through the PUD Ordinance. It is
not like reading a code and following it. Not only is the developer asking for something
from the Village, but the Village in return asks for special amenities. In a standard
subdivision, the developer is not opening the door of opportunity for the Village to be
asking for extra amenities.
Article 5, Agricultural......: .
There was a short discussion regarding the ritinimum area in the AG District at 40 acres.
ZONING COMMITTEE MINUTES
November 16, 1993
~\ Page 4
Article 6, It-1.
There was a long discussion regarding Lot sizes. The consensus was that if there is a
PUD, there will be no flexibility on lot sizes for standard subdivisions at the Plan
Commission level.
Article 10, B-1.
John Lomar questioned Planner Waldock, regarding Plainfield Plaza's zoning. Along
discussion followed, covering a variety of topics. (J & S Tap Liquor License, and the
removal by the Village Board, of Meat Markets from the Permitted Use section and
moved to the Special Use section). Mr. Lomar was informed that tonights discussion
pertains to the text only and that no selection of actual district location has as yet been
approved.
Article 11, B-2.
#37. add "and Reloading" after Ammunition Manufacturing.
John Lomar, suggested to the Plan Commission that "they" no longer have a B-1 as we
know it now, B-1 is suppose to be a buffer between Business and Residential, such as
for Plainfield Plaza. Planner Waldock, said that Trustee Kelly had suggested Plainfield
Plaza be down zoned from present B-3 to B-1, with a PUD that establishes all permitted
uses that are allowed by covenant. J. Lomar said there is no longer a B-1, it is now
B-2. Planner Waldock said there are some provisions now in B-2 that were previously
in B-1, and some provisions now in B-3 that were previously in B-2. After discussion,
Chairman Sobkoviak suggested a comparison between the present B-1 and the proposed
B-1. The present B-1 has 16 permitted uses, and the proposed has 18. John Lomar
read excerpts from the minutes of March 1985, regarding buffer areas, and expressed
concerns about Plainfield Plaza and the surrounding residential area. Planner Waldock
cautioned the Commission about designing an Ordinance that is enforced Village Wide,
but only works in one place.
Article 12, B-3.
The Plan Commission preferred leaving the Business Districts as they are presently, in
a pyramid style, allowing all uses in the previous district in each new district of a higher
class as in the residential districts.
Section 9-98
Add a new #1. "Any permitted use in the B-2 District." Change all numbers after.
#64 remove "B-2" from text.
Article 13, B-4.
Section 9-106
#1 Change B-2 to B-3.
Z®NING COMMITTEE MINUTES
November 16, 1993
r___ Page 5
Plan Commission decided to continue this case until December 7, 1993, and to think
about the Buiness Districts, and take up the discussion at B-2.
M. Krippel made a motion to continue the case until December 7, 1993, seconded by D.
Norris. Roll call vote: L. Kachel, yes; M. Krippel, yes; D. Norris, yes; W.
Schempf, yes; W. Manning, yes; Chairman Sobkoviak, yes. Motion carried 6 yes 0 no.
Adjourn: 10:30
Sharon Hart