HomeMy Public PortalAbout2011-04-05 PC minutes VILLAGE OF PLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION RECORD OF MINUTES DATE: April 5, 2011 Chairman Sobkoviak called the meeting of the Plan Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. and led the pledge to the flag. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Seggebruch, O’Rourke, Re nzi, Sanders, Kiefer and Chairman Sobkoviak; and Fire District were present. Commissioner Heinen; Park, School, and Library Districts were absent. Also present were Michael S. Garrigan; Village Planner and Merrilee Trotz, Recording Secretary Approval of Minutes: The February 15, 2011 minutes were amended with the a ddition of the word “over” in the last sentence in paragraph 4 on page 16 to read “… expanding it to over 112 acres…”. The minutes were then approved as amended. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Chairman Sobkoviak asked for public comments for items not on the agenda. There was no response. OLD BUSINESS: There was no old business. NEW BUSINESS: Chairman Sobkoviak indicated two cases on th e agenda were to be continued. Case No. 1542-030711.Z 24322 W 143 rd STREET Commissioner Kiefer made a motion to continue th is case to the next scheduled planning meeting. Commissioner Sanders seconded the motion. Vote by roll call: Commissioner Seggebruch, yes; Commissioner O’Rourke, yes; Commissioner Renzi, yes; Commissioner Sanders, yes; Commissioner Kiefer, yes; Chairman Sobkoviak, yes. Motion carried 6-0. Case No. 1541-022411.SU LITTLE SCHOLARS ACADEMY Commissioner Renzi asked staff to provide informati on with regard to the increased traffic on Route 30 and ask how close this increased traffic would put us to getting a traffic signal at Plainfield Small Business Park at the next meeting. Commissioner Renzi made a motion to continue case no. 1541-022411.SU to the next scheduled plan commission meeting. Commissioner Seggebruch seconded the motion. Vote by roll call: Commissioner Kiefer, yes; Commissioner Sanders, yes; Commissioner O’Rourke, yes; Commissioner Seggebruch, yes; Commissioner Renzi, yes; Chairman Sobkoviak, yes. Motion carried 6-0. Michael P. Collins VILLAGE PRESIDENT Michelle Gibas VILLAGE CLERK TRUSTEES Margie Bonuchi Paul Fay Larry Kachel Bill Lamb Garrett M. Peck James Racich
Plan Commission Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 2 of 8 Case No. 1540-021711.Z.SU.PP EQUITY GROWTH SECTION Mr. Garrigan stated this is a public hearing being h eard pursuant to public notice in accordance with state statute and all applicable ordinances. Mr. Garriga n presented a revised staff report indicating the only modification reflects a stipulation for preliminary plat approval. The applicant is requesting a rezoning, special use for a Planned Development, and preliminar y plat approval. This case is being brought by the Village itself. The applicant is proposing to develop a senior afford able housing project on 5.4 acres. A few years ago the Village purchased 58 acres for a fu ture Transit Oriented Development (TOD). The Village has been working with the RTA and Metra fo r a future train station adjacent to the Canadian National line; and working with the applicant for a number of months on the potential development of a senior affordable housing apartment complex. The Vill age has entered into an option agreement with the applicant to purchase 5.4 acres of property is located on Wood Farm Road just south of Gymquest and east of Patriot Square development. The applicant is proposing an 80 unit department deve lopment. The property is currently zoned R-1, Single-family residential. The applicant is ask ing the property be rezoned to R-4 (Multi-family residential) Planned Development. Staff must dem onstrate certain findings of fact as outlined in the zoning ordinance before the Plan Commission can support a rezoning. The first finding of fact is: a. The amendment promotes the public health, safet y, comfort, convenience and general welfare, and complies with the policies and official plans of the Village. Based on staff’s analysis the Village’s Comprehensiv e Plan has identified this area as Mixed Use which incorporates multi-family, apartments, condos, and offi ces. The TOD Plan adopted by the Village Board as formal policy identifies the first phase of the 58 acre site would be apartments. Therefore this proposed development is consistent with bot h the Comprehensive Plan and the TOD Plan. The next finding of fact is: b. The trend of development in the area of the subject property is consistent with the requested amendment. Consistent with the Village’s Comp rehensive Plan and the TOD Plan that R-4 zoning for multi-family units would be appropriate. The next finding of fact is: c. The requested zoning classification permits uses which are more suitable than the uses permitted under the existing zoning classification. The current zoning of R-1 is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan or the TOD. A higher density is called for under the TOD Plan. Staff believes the proposed zoning of R-4 is consistent with the Village’s adopted plans. The next finding of fact is: d. The property cannot yield a reasonable use if pe rmitted only under the conditions allowed under the existing zoning classification. The property is not appropriate for low density single -family detached lots based on the Village’s adopted plans.
Plan Commission Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 3 of 8 The last finding of fact is: e. The amendment, if granted will not alter the ess ential character of the neighborhood and will not be a substantial detriment to adjacent property. The applicant’s proposed multi-family development is consistent with the development that has already occurred between the Van Dyke and Wood Farm Road corridors. Patriot Square is a multi-family development which incorporates a density of approximate ly 5.5 to 6 units an acre and is located west of this property. There are 700 units or apartments a pproved as part of the Cedarlake development and also we approved the Heritage Woods project. The proposed use of this development is consistent with the character and trend of development along both of these corridors. Therefore Staff is supporting the proposed rezoning of the property based on the fact that the applicant has complied with all the findings of fact. The applicant is asking for a special use for a planne d unit development and must demonstrate they have complied with the findings of fact. These findings of fact are as follows: a) The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate area for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish property values within the neighborhood; and b) The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvements of the adjacent properties for u ses permitted in the subject zoning district. Staff believes the proposed use of the property fo r apartments will have no negative impact on the adjacent parcels or the continued development around the subject site as this site is adjacent to multi-family development. The applicant is proposing to construct a four story structure that will contain 80 units of senior housing on this parcel. The applicant is not seeking a formal site plan review now but will be required to proceed with site plan once they are approved by the Illinois Housing Authority for their Section 42 tax credit funding. The applicant is asking for relief from the height limitati on of 48 feet to construct a four story structure; from the maximum number of dwelling units in a single -building from 24 units in the R-4 district to 80 units; and relief from the school and park donation requ irements consistent with Cedarlake and Heritage Woods. The floor plan incorporates an H plan which provid es a motor court, the main entrance and a landscaped court facing to the east. The building would be cons tructed with a fiber-cement board and brick on the first floor. The PD incorporates one access point on Wood Farm Road which aligns with the existing curb cut at Patriot Square. The applicant proposes a fi re lane around the subject s ite which is consistent with the Fire Department’s requirements and proposes a future stub connection to th e north of this site. The applicant is proposing 80 indoor parking spaces plus an additional 40 outdoor parking spaces. The Village’s zoning ordinance requires 1.5 spaces per dwe lling unit for a total of 120 spaces, therefore the applicant has complied with the parking requirement. On site detention is also proposed. Staff would like to work with the applicant on the possibility for regional detention as it relates to stormwater management. The massing of this structure is si milar to that of Cedarlake development.
Plan Commission Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 4 of 8 The applicant has submitted a landscap e plan that complies with the re quirements of the Village’s site plan review ordinance and has also submitted a prelimin ary plat reflecting the 5.4 acre site that adheres to the requirements of the Village’s Subdivision Code. Chairman Sobkoviak asked for comments from the audience. There were none. Chairman Sobkoviak sworn in David Smith, President of Equity Growth and Jennifer Smith, attorney for the project. Mr. Smith further described other facilities they have developed. About 4 years ago they opened a 145 unit senior housing facility called Thomas Place in Gle nview, Illinois. This year they opened a 100 unit facility in Fox Lake, Illinois. In the last year they have opened two other facilities – one in Bettendorf and another in Waukee, Iowa each with 116 units. Th ey are under construction on another 80 unit facility in North Liberty. All of these are Section 42 Tax Credit projects. Mr. Smith indicated there are Federal Income Tax Credits to each state based upon populati on. Each state then creates their own methodology to award these credits and the State of Illinois th rough the Illinois Housi ng Development Authority creates districts. Mr. Smith indicated they have only done senior housing projects and have been very successful. Their prototype can range from 80 units to 150 or 160 units depending upon the configuration. Of the 80 proposed units 72 would be a ffordable while 8 would be market rate. Mr. Smith stated they have been successful with this prototype because of all the amenities it provides. Some of the amenities offered are: computer lab, library room, ha ir salon, craft rooms, game room, and an exercise facility including large TVs; they usually try to provide areas on the site for garden plots, walking paths. The H design of the building provides walking areas during inclement weather; and they also provide shopping carts in the underground parking to assist the seniors in unloading their vehicles and getting their purchases to their apartment. Mr. Smith provided slides showing some of their other facilities. When they are in the area of floodplains or areas that have the potential to flood, the garage is located on the main level along with the common areas. They try to keep things as level as possible for tenants. The facility in Glenview has a rather steep driveway and has proved to be difficult to keep free of ice and snow. Mr. Smith indicated these facilities generate very little traffic. The units have their own balcony; there are one or two bedroom units. The one bedroom unit runs about 850 sq. ft. and the two bedroom units run about 1030 sq. ft. There is approximately 10,000 square feet of common area. These are for people at the level of 60% of the medium income, generally people with income in th e high $30,000 can qualify. They have 24 hour on staff management and on site janitorial/maintenance people. Mr. Smith stated Batavia just passed the rez oning for a new facility off Randall Road. Chairman Sobkoviak asked Mr. Garrigan if engineering has been reviewed. Mr. Garrigan indicated there has been a preliminary review and indicated fina l engineering would be submitted with site plan. Commissioner Renzi stated he has no problem with the first two variances as requested but asked if there had been any contact with the Park District or School District to see if they had problems with this request. Mr. Garrigan indicated the applicant was working with both the School and Park Districts. Generally senior housing facilities have received re lief from the donation requirements.
Plan Commission Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 5 of 8 Commissioner Renzi said we could do a conditional vari ance, the Park and School Boards may not want to do it forever or they may figure the buildin g could be reformatted or reconfigured. Mr. Garrigan said it is senior affordable housing and is tied to that. Chairman Sobkoviak asked how this would be enforced to seniors only. Mr. Smith stated in other communities they have adopted covenants to run with the land that is age restricted; they have agreed to a 30 year affordable ability period minimum. Mr. Smit h said they will probably exceed the 30 year period with the State, and stated it is very hard to get out of the program once you are in it. Commissioner Sobkoviak stated the Pl an Commission has to plan for 100 years. At some point this corporation may be absolved by another corpor ation and we are trying to protect the Village. Mr. Smith said the facility is designed as it is so that later in time we may take on or consider a transition into some assisted living as well. Commissioner Renzi asked what percentage of the tena nts have vehicles. Mr. Smith responded that about 80% keep their vehicles and maybe 20% do not. Commissioner Renzi asked about staff. Mr. Smith indicated during the daytime there would be 4 staff members, custodian, manager, office staff person and maintenance person. Commissioner Renzi asked if th e parking computation included these numbers and suggested this be included when it goes to the Village Board. Mr. Smith stated the 1.5 is the general accepted principal for senior housing projects. Mr. Smith asked if there were marked parking spots along Wood Farm Road. Mr. Garrigan said if you remember when LifeSpring Church was approved that some on street parking was identified for the long term plans for Wood Farm Road. Commissioner Renzi hoped the retention would be handled like some of the pictures with the path around it. Mr. Garrigan indicated Staff would pref er to work on a regional retention facility. Commissioner Renzi stated he liked the idea of the garden plots; liked the idea of more affordable housing in the area; and liked the looks of facility as presented by the pictures. Mr. Smith said they looked at several other sites but liked this best as they could be the first player in and their residents would be close to the post office, city hall, downtown shopping and hopefully it will be a walkable community with the TOD. Commissioner Sanders asked if the residents would be picked up by family members during the holidays rather than the families coming to the resident. Mr. Smith agreed and further stated that about 50-60% of the people are from the city proper and another 25-30% are parents of people who live in the community who want to be closer to the senior resident. Mr. Smith indicated they have not encountered any type of parking issues in the facilities. Commissioner Sanders asked if on site storage was pr ovided. Mr. Smith indicated the fourth floor has locker areas for the tenants and there are also locker units on each floor i.e. for suitcases, Christmas trees, decorations, and things that are seasonal. Commissioner Kiefer asked the height of this facility. Mr. Smith said they requested 62 feet, we provided the elevations as every community measures differently, w ith the garage floor and main floor at grade, the total height of the building is approximately 59 ft. to the peak.
Plan Commission Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 6 of 8 Commissioner Seggebruch stated the ground floor is essentially a float on grade. The parking for the facility in Glenview must be underground as it appears to only be 3 stories. Mr. Smith agreed. Mr. Smith stated the 40 feet is to the truss height and the peak of the roof is another 16 feet above. Mr. Garrigan stated the Village measure is to the mean (average between the peak and the truss bearing.) Mr. Smith said this is the design so it will not be any taller than shown. Commissioner Seggebruch stated if the truss bearing is about 42 feet and the permitted height is 48 feet you may not really be that much over. Mr. Garrigan said they are slightly over. Mr. Smith stated they wanted to do the parking at grade if at all possible so they asked for the height variance. Commissioner Seggebruch asked about the difference between the two other facilities we (the Village) has with what is provided with this facility. Mr. Smith said under the program with IHDA, we would be restricted under covenant agreement for at least 15 year s to maintain it as independent affordable; then we have the option to re-up for another 15 years which is almost mandatory now so it would not be until after that time that any adjustments could be made. Mr. Sm ith indicated his rental rates for a one bedroom unit in this area will probably be in the $700 a month rang e with the two bedroom unit at about $820 with the market rate at about $950 for one bedroom unit a nd $1150-$1200 for the two bedroom unit for age 55 and older. Commissioner O’Rourke asked how this site compares with the other sized properties that you have built on. Mr. Smith stated the Glenview project was actually the same size parcel with 145 units; Bettendorf was about 6.5 acres which includes about 2 acres of regional pond area; Batavia is about 4.6 acres; Waukee was larger because a bank repossessed the propert y; for the most part 5 acres is about the usual size. Mr. Smith would also like to figure out a way to have a regional pond with the possibility of recapture down the road as other parcels develop. Chairman Sobkoviak indicated this is what the Villa ge likes to do with the parks in subdivisions as well to have one larger park rather than several smaller parks. Commissioner O’Rourke said the original TOD plan shows a roadway on the east edge of this property where the retention is planned. Mr. Garrigan said there is a possibility that that road could be shifted to the east, there is some flexibility to work with Sta ff to locate a regional location. Mr. Garrigan said we need more time. Mr. Smith stated they have to have the ability to ha ve the property under contro l and zoned appropriately for this size and use in letter form to be filed with the application to the State. The deadline of April 15 th is the same for everyone. Commissioner O’Rourke asked about the potential benef its the Village would receive other than the fact that it is senior housing for the variances as requested. Mr. Smith stated there are state requirements as to how the taxes are figured. The real estate taxes are based on income. Commissioner O’Rourke asked what the residents of the community would receive from this project. Mr. Smith stated we are providing needed affordable housing for seniors. Commissioner O’Rourke asked why the applicant was not willing to pay the Park and School fees. Mr. Smith indicated they cannot have any children living he re as it is restricted so there is no impact on the Schools. Mr. Smith said this is a city owned piece of property th at you want to develop in a TOD. We have looked at several other sites but really like the idea of be ing close to everything in the area. This area needs
Plan Commission Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 7 of 8 something so kick it off. These are independent people; we have our own garbage disposal, snow removal, and our own fire protection within the fac ility as it is a fully sprinkled building. These people are still consumers. Commissioner O’Rourke asked if we had approved this height previously . Mr. Garrigan stated Cedarlake is close to 50 feet with three stories; Heritage Woods was approved at 45 feet. Commissioner O’Rourke asked how many stories Cedarlake had. Mary Ludemann, representative of Plainfield Fire Di strict, stated Cedarlake is three stories with underground parking. Mr. Smith said they put the parking underground in Gl enview as they did not have the acreage for the additional service parking on the five acres which was a pi ece of land the City of Glenview gave to them. Mr. Smith indicated they are buying this property. Commissioner Seggebruch asked if any of the reside nts still worked. Mr. Smith said yes probably 30% still have part time jobs. Commissioner O’Rourke asked how the parking was distri buted to the residents. Mr. Smith replied it is one space per unit under the building. Mr. Smith stat ed they allow 1.5 parking spaces for the number of units and that number has worked very well. Commissioner O’Rourke asked how it is determined who gets which apartment. Mr. Smith said it is first come first serve, the tenant has to be qualified, we cannot take applications more than 60 days prior to the actual occupancy because we have to income certify every tenant to make sure they qualify under the program. Mr. Smith said we will take waiting lists but the tenants have to be recertified if it has been more than 60 days from the time they applied. In Glenview we have a 2-3 year waiting list; Bettendorf was built in November with 116 units and there are only 5 units remaining. Mr. Smith said they try to advertise in the local newspaper about 60 days in advance when they know there will be a vacancy. Commissioner O’Rourke agreed there are a lot of amenities for the cost. Commissioner Renzi asked if they needed to add a s tipulation regarding the conditionality of the waiver for the Park and School Districts. Mr. Garrigan sai d it was part of the record as they will have to negotiate that separately with the Park and School Di stricts. Commissioner Renzi asked about the traffic study for the Village Board and use of best practic es. Mr. Garrigan said compliance with the village engineer on these issues would be worked out, we just need more time. Commissioner O’Rourke asked if Staff was comfortable with the height. Mr. Garrigan said yes, it is consistent with the character along Van Dyke Road. Chairman Sobkoviak said part of the reason for the height limitation is for sight lines but this area is on the edge of floodplain, the railroad tracks, the river, he ight in this area is somewhat less importan; if this project was in the middle of town then the height sight line would more of a concern. Commissioner Renzi stated we have approved 5 stories across the street. Commissioner Renzi made a motion that the Plan Commission recommend approval to the Village Board of the requested R-4 zoning for the subject property. Commissioner Sanders seconded the motion.
Plan Commission Minutes April 5, 2011 Page 8 of 8 Vote by roll call: Commissioner Seggebruch, yes; Co mmissioner O’Rourke, yes; Commissioner Kiefer, yes; Commissioner Sanders, yes; Commissioner Renzi, yes; Chairman Sobkoviak, yes; Motion carried 6-0 Commissioner Renzi made a motion that the Plan Commission recommend approval of the Special use for Planned Development subject to the following stipulations: 1. Compliance with the requirements of the Village Engineer. 2. Compliance with the requirements of the Plainfield Fire Protection District. Commissioner Kiefer seconded the motion. Vote by roll call: Commissioner O’Rourke, yes; Co mmissioner Seggebruch, yes; Commissioner Sanders, yes; Commissioner Kiefer, yes; Commissioner Renzi, yes; Chairman Sobkoviak, yes; Motion carried 6-0 Commissioner Renzi made a motion that the Plan Commission recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat subject to the following stipula tions in the amended staff report: 1. Compliance with the requirements of the Village Engineer. 2. Compliance with the requirements of the Plainfield Fire Protection District. Commissioner Seggebruch seconded the motion. Vote by roll call: Commissioner O’Rourke, yes; Commi ssioner Sanders, yes; Commissioner Kiefer, yes; Commissioner Renzi, yes; Commissioner Seggebruch, yes; Chairman Sobkoviak, yes; Motion carried 6-0 DEVELOPMENT REPORT: Mr. Garrigan stated since the Plan Commission’s last meeting the Village Board approved the annexation, annexation agreement and special use for the Os wego High School; approved the rezoning and special use for the Witte Commercial Building (small engine repair shop); approved the amendment to the annexation agreement for the extension of 10 years fo r the Riverstone Subdivision; approved the special use for Three Ace Automotive located at the Multi-Pl ex facility on Route 30; approved the ordinance for the annexation of the Plainfield Supply property (1 4022 S Route 59); and approved the final plat for the Ingersoll and York Subdivision. DISCUSSION: Discussion was held regarding setting any limitation for the public comments for items not on the agenda. Commissioner Sanders asked if there was a standard in the Village currently. Chairman Sobkoviak asked how the Village Board deals with their public comment s. Mr. Garrigan said Village Board has a policy of 3 minutes for items not on the agenda. Consensus of Commissioners was to go with the 3 minutes; if it was longer than 3 minutes then they would need to be placed on the agenda. Adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted by _________________________ Merrilee Trotz Recording Secretary