HomeMy Public PortalAbout03-20-2000 Public Hearing (2)Plainfield Village Board of Trustees
March 20, 2000
9
PLAINFIELD VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
PUBLIC HEARING
DATE:
MARCH 20, 2000
AT: VILLAGE HALL
BOARD PRESENT:
R. ROCK, R. SMOLICH, J. CHERRY, M. COLLINS,
S. RATHBUN. TRUSTEE O'CONNELL AND
CALABRESE WERE ABSENT.
OTHERS PRESENT:
D. BENNETT, CHIEF OF POLICE
T. L. BURGHARD, ADMINISTRATOR
J. REGIS, ENGINEER
S. JANIK, CLERK
C. MINICK, FINANCE DIRECTOR
J. DURBIN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
J. HARVEY, ATTORNEY
A. PERSONS, PUBLIC WORKS
L. VAUPEL, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
J. TESTIN, VILLAGE PLANNER
PULTE.
The Public Hearing was opened at 8:00 p.m. Planner Testin stated that the subject site is
located at the northwest and southwest corners of 127th Street and Route 59. The
applicant has requested annexation, special use permit for a Planned Unit Development,
preliminary plat approval, and site plan review of the townhomes. The property consists
of 189.32 acres. The applicant has proposed single family, townhome, and commercial
area on the plan.
The site is located in the Estate district in the Comprehensive Plan, which suggests
residential zoning in the range of 1.11 to 1.75 dwelling units per acre. The minimum lot
size proposed is 9,200 square feet and the proposed density is 2.41 DU/Acre.
The applicant proposes the following variances from Village Code: Side yard setbacks of
7 feet, total of 15 feet; Minimum lot sizes of 9,200 square feet; ROWs of 60 feet;
Pavement widths of 28 feet; and 25 foot front yard setbacks for the townhomes. Staff
does not support the current annexation agreement which includes the variances
identified above, locks in-sewer fees, guarantees capacity, allows the developer to make
plat modifications, and does not allow for the completion of Van Dyke in the short term.
Staff recommends approval of the zoning but does not support the plat or the site plan
due to concerns outlined in their staff report and ask that the case be remanded back to
the Plan Commission to allow for modifications.
A letter from Riviera Estates Homeowners Association dated March 15, 2000 from Mr.
Paul J. Seiler; President of the Association has been entered into the record and made a
part hereof. _The letter represents 25 owners of parcels of property in Riviera Estates who
have concerns regarding the proposal by the Pulte Company regarding street traffic and
the value of the homes they will be building.
Plainfield Village Board of Trustees
March 20, 2000
10
Trustee Cherry discussed the small lot sizes and questioned why they were that size if
they are in the Estate district in the Comprehensive Plan. Trustee Smolich who was part
of the discussion with the Concept Committee and he told the developers at that time and
he made it clear that there was nothing in the proposal that he could support. Trustee
Rathbun would not find this acceptable, the property is in the Estate area, and he will
only support 12,000 sq. ft. lots.
Mr. Jack Weber, Pulte Home Corporation talked about their Concept plans and various
changes: the additional full access off Rt. 59 through the commercial area to the
townhomes; additional overflow parking in the landscape pods through the townhome
community; an increase in the landscape buffer by Riviera Estates Lot 15; added detail in
the recreation area and he also described their provisions for anti-monotony. They
increased their lot sizes throughout the development, they now have a minimum average
of 10,200 sq. ft. The right-of-ways are proposed to be 60 ft. in width. Open space has
been increased fi.om 39.19 acres in the concept plan to 46.85 acres, which includes park
space and stormwater facilities. This represents 28.4% of the residential area. We have
three different product series; neighborhood 1 & 4 has an anticipated sales price of
$200,000 plus; we also have in neighborhood 2 & 3 a little larger product and we
anticipate sales prices there to be about $240-$250,000. Our townhome component will
have an anticipated sales price to be about $170,000.
Attorney Richard Selfridge who represents Pulte addressed the issue regarding the fact
that this property did not add anything unique to the Village. Two letters, one written by
Director Waldock and one by President John Peterson were presented to the Board and
made a part of the record in which both talk about the value these properties bring to the
Village.
Mr. Selfridge requested that they be given 24 months for improving Van Dyke Road.
Administrator Burghard stated that they would not be willing to wait 24 months. Staff
has requested that Van Dyke be completed as part of the first unit regardless of location.
Another issued raised was ROW width on Van Dyke Road at 50' and that is something
that is realistic. One concern in getting the project up and running is the ability to get in
the ground early with foundations before the final plat/final engineering is in place. We
had suggested that upon submittal of our final plat that we be given the opportunity to
place foundations in those lots that would be used as models. We would be prepared that
once we have mass grading approved and submittal of final plat then they could
selectively choose several lots for the models to get foundation permits on. We would be
willing to specify and identify a handful of lots for foundations to place models on. The
commercial component is important both for Plainfield and to make this project work.
There were other issues of importance, but mainly that this is a PUD that we are looking
at tonight.
Mike Collins stated that he hopes to support the Estate District with the larger lots. With
regard to Mr. Selfridge's wish list, he is not in favor of most of the items. Mayor Rock
suggested that we would be able to go over the agreement at least a week or 10 days
Plainfield Village Board of Trustees
March 20, 2000
11
before this comes back to our desks. Trustee Smolich has no real objection to the lot
sizes, but the project does not meet the Estate zoning looking at it from a density level. I
need to look at this in more depth. I have concerns on the commercial development
along Rt. 59.
Jay Darnell, 23762 Douglas Drive, talked about the density at the Ponds Development,
which is also an Estate District. The Ponds has a density of 2.1 and we looked at it as a
whole sector. The Mary Kelley property was also in that same sector and it has a lot of
floodway, which is unbuildable land, so the Ponds got a 2.1 density which would in mm
give the same thing to Mary Kelley and wouldn't impose anything on her property, and in
that sector the density would be 1.7. That fits into the Estate District. Angelo built the
neighborhood with pavers and also placed 18,000 sq. ft. lots. The market is there for the
bigger lots, for estate style and it fits right into where are estate is recommended by the
Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Paul Seiler, President of the Riviera Estates Homeowners Association, speaking as a
representative of all of the owners of the Riviera Estate Homeowners Association. We
have concerns regarding the proposal by the Pulte Company in regard to street traffic and
we also have fears concerning the value of these homes, which are adjacent to ours.
E. J. Hunts, resident, requested what the protocol for the density of townhome
developments was? Planner Testin stated that there is no specific policy to just the
townhomes.
Ruth Hanson, resident, stated that the Ordinances say 12,000 sq. ft., it is not something to
barter with.
Dennis Link, resident, is getting tired of hearing about the Board making the lots smaller.
He wants to see the lots stay large.
The record states that there are no other public comments.
The meeting was closed at 8:40 p.m.
S(JSAN JANIK, V~LAGE CLERK