HomeMy Public PortalAbout2008-02-19 PC Minutes VILLAGE OF PLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION MEETING RECORD OF MINUTES AMENDED DATE : FEBRUARY 19, 2008 LOCATION: Village Hall Chairman Sobkoviak cal led the m eeting of the Plan Commission to order at 7:05 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Kachel , McKay, Renzi, O’Rourke, Bonuchi, and Sanders ; Chairman Sobkoviak; the Representative from the Plainfield Fire Protection District ; and Plainfield Park District Absent: Ex -Officio Commissioner Cox, Plainfield School District , Library District, and Plainfie ld Police Department Also Present: Mike Schwarz – Planner II Village of Plainfield, Sara Leach – Planner Village of Plainfield, Carol Millan – Secretary Village of Plainfield, and Neal Eickholtz – Baxter and Woodman MINUTES: The minutes from the Plan Comm ission meeting of January 15, 2008 were accepted as presented . DEVELOPMENT REPORT Mike Schwarz presented the development report. He summarized the results of the Village Board meeting of February 4, 2008. OLD BUSINESS: CASE: 1374 -110207.TA TEXT AMENDMENT SIGN CODE Request: Amendment to Village’s Sign Code Location: Village -wide Applicant: Village of Plainfield TIME: 7:10 p.m. Planner Sara Leach summarized the staff report. She stated this is a public hearing that was published in accordance with the Village Ordinance. She stated this is an addition to Article XI – Signs, of the Village Zoning Ordinance. It is staff’s intention to increase the amount of signage businesses in the Central Sign District are allowed by permitting them to install signage on the rear of their buildings, and alleyways. She stated the reasons for this. A suggestion for the proposed amendment could be: a. Alleyway signs shall only be allowable in the Central Sign District; b. Alleyway signs shall comply with all ot her sign ordinance requirements; c. Alleyway signs must get special sign approval in accordance with all other signs in the Central Sign District.
Village of Plainfield Pla n Commission Minutes February 19, 2008 Page 2 of 12 Staff believes this amendment will help the Village reaffirm and reinforce its philosophy of creating a co mmunity that is pleasant, safe, and uncluttered by preventing excess ive signage while bringing life and atmosphere to the rear of store s in the Village’s pedestrian -oriented downtown. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if there was anyone in the audience that cared to ask a question or make a comment. There was no response. Commissioner Kachel had a question about new construction. He asked if staff foresaw any problems, as far as new construction people wanting to have more signage to the back of buildings also. Planner Sara Leach responded that this might come up more, but staff differentiates those areas from the downtown because the downtown is pedestrian -oriented and there is much more attention to detail. She further stated this subject will be going to a future COW Workshop. Chairman Sobkoviak stated the downtown area, The Central Sign District, has always been treated as a special area. He further stated the signage regulations in the Central Sign District are a little bit more restrictive than for the newer areas. Commissioner Renzi philosophically was not opposed to the text amendment, but he did not like the language . He referenced the Panera location where an entryway had to be created , the door had to open the correct way and be visible so that people didn’t step out into traffic. He stated as he reads the amendment, someone could just simply comply with signage. He was not sure that would liven up the alleyway. He suggested this should be linked to some act other than signage and that there s hould be a safety component that complies with it. He suggested a façade improvement for the backs of buildings also. Commissioner Kachel stated there should be a requirement if they have rear signage they should , at a minimum , also have adequate lightin g, at least by the doorway entrance. Commissioner Renzi also stated there should be some sort of demarcation. He had concerns that companies making deliveries to the rear of buildings through the alleyways know that this is an ingress/egress door and no t just a delivery door. Commissioner Sanders agreed with Commissioner Renzi. He felt the rear entrance should complement the front façade and didn’t see the language in the amendment to accomplish that. Planner Sara Leach stated that staff would be will ing to add a 4 th item to include the stipulations that were incorporated for the approval of Panera and Verizon Wireless. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if the Commission was comfortable with approving the amendment with the understanding that staff will incorp orate the Commission’s suggestions into the amendment. Commisioner O’Rourke asked why it was just limited to the downtown district. He stated it is sometimes more beneficial to have rear signage in certain strip malls. He asked if the amendment is a rea ction to the upcoming downtown streetscape construction and maybe it is more of a temporary situation rather than a permanent situation. Planner Sara Leach stated staff is trying to be more proactive because many of the successful downtown districts allow extra signage, public art displays in the alleyways, etc. She further stated according to studies, signage is most important in pedestrian -oriented places. Commissioner Renzi referenced the pedestrian friendly developments coming in. Planner Sara Leach stated those developments can be incorporated into the future discussion at the COW meeting.
Village of Plainfield Pla n Commission Minutes February 19, 2008 Page 3 of 12 Chairman Sobkoviak again asked the Commission if they were comfortable in making a recommendation based on the evidence as presented and allowing staff to move forward with incorporating the Commission’s suggestions into the ordinance. Commissioner McKay stated she was in favor of this. She did ask though if the development coming through at Rt. 126 and Van Dyke , which would be adjacent to a neighborhood, would be considered pedestrian friendly and could they also be considered part of the downtown. She felt the verbage, the historic part, is an important element. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if the development at Rt. 126 and Van Dyke Road would be part of the Cen tral Sign District. Planner Sara Leach stated it is not part of the Central Sign District. Commissioner McKay also had a concern that with adding other stipulations they need to take into consideration the state of the downtown area and the fact that it is unique and different than a strip center. She is in favor of the amendment as is without adding stipulations. Commissioner Sanders stated the Committee of the Whole needs to look at what are the ripple affects to other things, such as the façade progr am. He felt the ordinance itself is fine, but felt it is interconnected and related to the whole rear view of a given block . He wondered whether or not the Façade Program could also be used on the rear of buildings. Chairman Sobkoviak stated it appears the Commission agrees with the text amendment as presented, but generally feels that additional treatments should be given to the rear of the buildings , perhaps even incorporating the front façade. The Commission would like to see additional lighting, ad ditional treatments, such as awnings to dress up the rear area to incorporate the philosophy of pedestrian friendliness . At 7:30 p.m. Commissioner O’Rourke made a motion that the Plan Commission recommend approval of the proposed text amendment to Artic le XI, Sec. 9 -100, § 3 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit businesses located in the Central Sign District to erect signage on the rear of their building, facing alleyways, as highlighted in staff’s report , along with the suggestions and recommendations of t he Plan Commission. Commissioner Renzi seconded the motion. Aye: McKay, Renzi, O’Rourke, Bonuchi, Sanders, Kachel, Chairman Sobkoviak Nay: 0 The motion is carried 7:0 . NEW BUSINESS: CASE: 1380 -122007.AA.RZ.PP.SPR.FP PLAINFIELD MED. CNTR. R equest: Annexation, Rezoning (Public Hearing) Preliminary Plat, Site Plan Review, & Final Plat Location: 12357 S. 248 th St. Applicant: Tandem Development Group, LLC Pierre Cowart
Village of Plainfield Pla n Commission Minutes February 19, 2008 Page 4 of 12 At 7:32 p.m. Commissioner Kachel made a motion that the Plan Commission continue this case to the March 4, 2008 meeting. Commissioner Sanders seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, O’Rourke, Bonuchi, Sanders, Kachel, McKay, Chairman Sobkoviak Nay: 0 The motion is carried 7:0 CASE: 1387 -010708.FP CHATHAM SQUARE, PHASE 5 Request: Final Plat of Subdivision Location: Northwest corner of 127 th St. & Heggs Rd. Applicant: Gladstone Builders & Developers TIME: 7:33 p.m. Planner Sara Leach summarized the staff report. Phase 5 will include 66 single family units, Outlot G and construction of several roads to provide access to the home sites. She reviewed the history of this development for the Plan Commission. Phase 5 will plat home sites according to home buyer prefer ence. Each lot in Phase 5 meets the minimum 8,000 square feet lot size. Lots 62, 67, 68, 81 and 84 will be designated as key lots. There will be no designated through lots. The applicant has agreed to provide one parkway tree for each interior lot an d three parkway trees for each corner lot. Prior to the issuance and recording of Phase 5 for Chatham Square, additional bonds and/or a letter of credit will be needed for the additional public improvements that will need to be installed. The applicant h as agreed to work with the Village Enginee r to make sure this requirement is met. Staff recommends approval of the final plat subject to the noted stipulations in the staff report. Planner Sara Leach stated stipulation #3, regarding the letter of credit, in the staff report can be incorporated into stipulation #1 , regarding requirements of the Village Engineer , in the staff report . Chairman Sobkoviak asked Village Engineer, Neal Eickholtz, if he has identified any problems. He stated there are no proble ms since this is part of a subdivision that has been previously engineered and approved and it follows those approved plans. He did not see any major concerns. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in the petitioner, Adam Dontz. He stated this is very straight forwa rd. They have worked very diligently with staff Chairman Sobkoviak asked if there was anyone in the audience who care d to ask a question or make a comment. There was no response. Commissioner Renzi asked the petitioner if he had any objection to the bo nd stipulation. Adam Dontz stated there was no objection on the part of the petitioner. Commissioner Renzi then asked the petitioner if there should have been designated through lots. Adam Dontz responded those were originally agreed upon
Village of Plainfield Pla n Commission Minutes February 19, 2008 Page 5 of 12 in the anne xation agreement and that document governs which lots are key lots and through lots. Tonight’s plat is consistent with that document. Commissioner O’Rourke questioned the utility easement on the east side of some of the lots which goes from 10’ to 25’ or 29’. He stated it was actually a pre -recorded easement that shows up on the plat. Adam Dontz stated he did not have the engineering plans before him, but he stated the plan has been reviewed by both their engineer and the Village engineer and the easeme nts are consistent with the approved plans. Commissioner O’Rourke was just curious why it flanged out for certain lots as opposed to others. Adam Dontz stated he could provide an answer to that question at a later time. At 7:41 p.m. Commissioner Kachel made a motion t hat the Plan Commission approve the Chatham Square Phase 5, Final Plat of Subdivision, subject to the following three stipulations as noted in the planner’s report. (Planner Sara Leach had previously stated Stipulation #3, Issuance of bond a nd/or a Letter of Credit for additional public improvements being installed via Phase 5 of Chatham Square, prior to the release of the final plat, could be incorporated into Stipulation #1.) 1. Compliance with the requirements of the Village Engineer; 2. C ompliance with the requirements of the Plainfield and Oswego Fire Protection Districts. Commissioner McKay seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: O’Rourke, Bonuchi, Sanders, Kachel, McKay, Renzi, Chairman Sobkoviak Nay: 0 The motion is carried 7:0 CASE: 1336 -061907.PP LEGENDS OF PLAINFIELD UNITS 1 -3 Request: Preliminary Development Plan/Preliminary Plat of Subdivision Location: South of 135 th St., west of Heggs Rd., and east of County Line Rd. Applic ant: The Macom Corporation TIME: 7:42 p.m. Planner II Mike Schwarz summarized the staff report. He stated this is a preliminary development plan/preliminary plat of subdivision for the Legends of Plainfield Units 1 -3. This is 151.47 acres of an overal l 672.8 development known as McMiken Assemblage. A special use for a planned unit development is authorized through the annexation agreement (Ordinance No. 2392) for the larger land area that was annexed into the Village of Plainfield on October 18, 2004 (Ordinance #2429) by the name McMicken Assemblage. The ordinance actually granting the special use was never adopted. Staff considers this a “housekeeping” issue given that the annexation agreement authorized the special use and a public hearing was prev iously held in 2004. Staff intends to prepare a memorandum requesting the Village Board to direct the Village Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance approving the special use for a planned development at an upcoming Village Board meeting.
Village of Plainfield Pla n Commission Minutes February 19, 2008 Page 6 of 12 Planner Mi ke Schwarz stated the staff report indicates that a drainage swale runs east/westerly through the property. He wanted to make a clarification that this is actually an underground drainage pipe. There are several mature trees on the property. The adopted School Plan Map within the Comprehensive Plan depicts a proposed elementary school site within the area. Staff has been working with the applicant and the Plainfield School District to identify school site s in another area of the overall development. A school land donation is not proposed as part of Units 1 -3. The developer intends to cont inue working with the Village and the Plainfield School District, as well as the Plainfield Park District and Library District on a potential school/park/library campu s on the eastern portion of the McMicken Assemblage, which would be adjacent to the Prairie Knoll Subdivision. That is a slight departure from the concept plan, which was attached to the Annexation Agreement. The concept plan only reflects an elementary school site on the eastern portion of the development. The estimated school land requirement under the Subdivision Ordinance for Units 1 -3 would be approximately 15.06 acres based on the “worst case” scenario of 100% of the units being 5 bedroom units. T he annexation agreement provides that the school land/cash donation requirement shall be met by cash payment with the issuance of each building permit. The estimated requirement for the park site contribution under the Subdivision Ordinance is approxima tely 15 acres based on a “worst case” conservative estimate of 100% of the lots being 5 bedroom units. The re is a proposed 10.89 acre park/stormwater management area. Of the 10.89 acres, approximately 6.74 acres would make up the park donation with the b alance of the requirement to be made as a cash -in -lieu contribution at the time of issuance of each building permit for Units 1 -3. Planner Mike Schwarz identified several departures from the concept development plan. • 320 lots are actually depicted on th e concept plan instead of 268. The annexation agreement does account for 320 lots in Pod 7 (Units 1 -3). He corrected the staff report which stated there was a net increase of 51 lots , and stated with the 319 lots there is actually a net decrease of 1 lot . • Court W cul -de -sac is slightly different than concept plan. • Cul -de -sac serving Lots 107 -111 is a new cul -de -sac and is not depicted on concept plan. • Stormwater management areas have been modified. • Court Z is a new cul -de -sac at the southeast corner of th e development. Staff does not have any significant concerns about the changes that have been made. Primary access is provided via main entrances on 135 th Street and Heggs Road. Secondary access is provided via local roadway connections to the south and w est, which will connect to the Playa Vista Subdivision. Staff is requesting that the eastern boundary of U nits 1 -3 be expanded to include all of Heggs Road right -of -way from 135 th Street south to the south line of the subject phase. The planned Heggs Roa d improvements may be constructed as part of this phase of the overall development. Pedestrian connectivity is provided via public sidewalks that will be adjacent to all local streets. Staff is requesting that the proposed bike and/or future pedestrian/b icycle paths as depicted on the Open Space Plan of the Village be constructed as part of this phase of development. Staff is looking for paved paths to be located within the public right -of -way along the south side of 135 th Street, within the public right -of -way along the west side of Heggs Road, and along the south side of Street K. Staff is looking for additional pedestrian connections to the park site from the outer parts of the development. Staff is looking for two minimum 30 -foot wide corridors bet ween house lots to provide more direct access to the park site from the outer row of house lots along Street V. Staff is requesting that the engineering be revised to reflect two separate mid -block pedestrian crossings between house lots located along Str eet V. Staff would like to
Village of Plainfield Pla n Commission Minutes February 19, 2008 Page 7 of 12 work with the applicant on the location of these two corridors by either making adjustments to the lot configurations or possibly losing a few lots to make the pedestrian access to the park site. Per the Annexation Agreement, the developer is allowed up to a 5% increase in the total unit count of any type of residential unit. There is a cap on the residential units of the overall development of 1,340 units. The Annexation Agreement does provide relief from the Village’s mini mum R -1 lot area and lot width requirements. A number of lots are 75 feet in width as opposed to the standard 85 feet lot width. The average lot size is 12,272 sq. ft. The density for Units 1 -3 is 2.19 units/acre, which is slightly above the base densit y of 2.0 units/acre per the Comprehensive Plan . Staff believes the gross density for Units 1 -3 will be reduced due to the removal of several lots to address staff’s review comments. The Annexation Agreement provides for a minimum of 1,118 detached single -family lots, and 252 attached townhome units for the overall McMicken Assemblage. Any increase above the base density may be offset with lower density on other future units. Ultimately, the gross density of the overall development is pre -determined by t he maximum number of units allowed under the terms of the Annexation Agreement. Planner Mike Schwarz stated staff’s review comments. • Staff is requesting the drawing title be revised to be a Preliminary Development Plan/Preliminary Plat of Subdivision to i ndicate the intent to subdivide the property. • Staff is requesting that all key lots, through lots, and key through lots be noted on the plan using cross -hatching. • Staff is requesting that the eastern boundary of Units 1 -3 be expanded to include all of the Heggs Road right -of -way from 135 th Street to the south line of the subject phase so the Heggs Road improvements may be constructed. • Staff is requesting drawing be revised to provide proper maintenance access for 0.61 acre stormwater management area. • Staff is requesting that the proposed bike and/or pedestrian/bicycle paths be incorporated into the preliminary engineering plans. • Staff is requesting the plan be revised to reflect two separate mid -block pedestrian crossings between house lots located along Str eet V. • The side lot lines along Lots 1 -11 should be adjusted so that Lot 11 may comply with the minimum 75 -foot lot width requirement per the Annexation Agreement. At the time the project was annexed, the Village had not yet adopted Residential Design Gui delines for Planned Unit Developments, so there is no pattern book. However, there is language in the annexation agreement that includes minimum requirements for siding materials and roofing materials. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Develop ment Plan/Preliminary Plat of Subdivision for Units 1 -3, the Legends of Plainfield. Planner Mike Schwarz pointed out that under the Annexation Agreement there was a date certain timeline for the improvements to Heggs Road, which were to be completed on or before December 1, 2005. However, the language in the Annexation Agreement is predicated on the property to the South, the Rousonelos Property . Therefore, that was a factor in the improvement not being completed on or before December 1, 2005. Chairman Sobkoviak asked the Village Engineer, Neal Eickholtz, if there are any problems. Neal responded in their research of the existing contours of the area, they identified a major drainage divide where Street K is located and the edge of the commercial lot, a bout a 50 acre area. The watershed shows that area to be draining to the northwest . T here have been no detention ponds identified in that area,
Village of Plainfield Pla n Commission Minutes February 19, 2008 Page 8 of 12 which would imply that the applicant is planning on diverting that stormwater to another drainage watershed, w hich would be to the southeast. Based on Illinois State Law , you are not allowed to change those drainage divides. The applicant would need to look at that and it may impact the plans as they may need to take out some lots and add a few detention ponds i n the northwest corner. He also had a recommendation that the applicant align Streets C C, & V at Street X . He also echoed Planner Mike Schwarz’ comment to improve Heggs Road all the way from 135 th Street to the south limits of the property. Chairman S obkoviak asked Cameron Bettin, Plainfield Park District, if he had any comments. Cameron Bettin stated the Park District was good to go, but he did want to make clear that the park site and the stormwater management facility are designed separately becaus e the Park District does not want to take the pond. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if that should be added as a stipulation. Planner Mike Schwarz wanted to clarify the preliminary engineering plans that were submitted reflect that the park is actually located on the south and the stormwater management area is located on the north. Staff agrees that the area should be delineated with a separate lot. Commissioner Kachel asked what the area of the site was . Planner Mike Schwarz stated the park and stormwater management area combined are 10.89 acres. 6.74 or 6.47 acres are the park. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in the developer. Paul Lehman, President of Macom, spoke. He stated they agree with staff’s suggestions. They do have a concern over the pedestrian acc ess points which were not addressed in the concept plan or the Annexation Agreement. They are willing to work with staff on the pedestrian accessways by asking for a consideration of a decrease in side yard setbacks from the typical 10 feet down to 9 feet and that would generate enough on both sides to put at least a 30 foot walkway going through both sections. Chairman Sobkoviak asked how staff would react to that suggestion. Planner Mike Schwarz stated the relief was already spelled out in the terms of the Annexation Agreement . He did not know if legally they were able to negotiate any additional relief since the public hearing was held several years ago. Chairman Sobkoviak stated this request would be better made through the Village Board than throug h the Plan Commission. Planner Mike Schwarz was not even sure if the Board could act on it. Planner Mike Schwarz stated the plat shows two rather long blocks that exceed the Village’s maximum 1,500 ft. block length. One is approximately 2,500 ft. long and the other one is approximately 2,250 ft. long. Relief was not called out for that under the Annexation Agreement. Staff is looking for middle ground and is saying a road is not required to go through to make those blocks conform to the maximum block length, but is looking for a 30 foot pedestrian corridor to break up those two blocks and provide more direct access to the park site. It is a long walk from the far corners of the project to the park site. Staff is looking to make that connection so th at the two resulting blocks would then comply with the m aximum 1,500 ft. block length. Staff realizes some of the lot frontages might need to be adjusted to no less than 75 feet. He stated since it appears most of the lots in this area are already at 75 feet, there would be an adjustment to the total lot count if those mid -block pedestrian corridors were provided. Chairman Sobkoviak reiterated that this area would be better addressed at the Village Board than at the Plan Commission. Paul Lehman stated a s part of the Annexation Agreement there was an exhibit of the concept plan. His suggestion was solely to get the feel of the Plan Commission so the Village Board would have an idea of the Plan Commission’s feelings. He stated to put in a pedestrian path ; there is a loss of 4 lots, which
Village of Plainfield Pla n Commission Minutes February 19, 2008 Page 9 of 12 would be two lots on each side. There was a discussion about possible ways to incorporate the pedestrian access ways. Commissioner Kachel suggested putting in a southerly access point. Planner Mike Schwarz reiterated that the two blocks in question exceed the Subdivision Ordinance maximum block length. Staff is looking for a way to make the applicant compliant with the ordinance by providing the pedestrian break mid -block in those long blocks. Commissioner Kachel st ated if the break could not be accomplished maybe there could be some type of southerly access. Planner Schwarz asked if the Plan Commission would prefer to stipulate that as opposed to mid -block. It would provide access to the stormwater pond most likel y , and then there would have to be a connection around the pond to get up to the park. Commissioner O’Rourke agreed with staff that the two long blocks should be shortened. Chairman Sobkoviak asked the Commission if they wanted to direct staff to wor k with the developer to achieve a break -through to get to the park. Would the Commission then accept the narrowing of some lot lines to achieve this break -through. Commissioner Renzi and O’Rourke preferred to l ose a lot to narrowing some lot lines. Chai rman Sobkoviak wanted to add a 5 th stipulation that staff work with the developer to achieve the pedestrian access. Commissioner O’Rourke asked that it be defined to two pedestrian accesses. Planner Mike Schwarz referred the Commission to Page 5 and 6 of the staff report to a bullet point that addressed the two mid -block pedestrian crossings between house lots located along Street V. He stated staff will work with the developer on that, but was not sure it could be provided without an impact on the unit count. Chairman Sobkoviak stated after the Plan Commission meeting, staff will know the Commission’s feelings and can take that to the Village Board. Commissioner Sanders stated there should be good pedestrian access to amenities. Paul Lehman wanted t o point out that typically houses are rectangular in shape and because the lots in the area in question are on curves, you would only be talking about a point where it is only a back corner or possibly a front corner that would be narrowed. Chairman Sob koviak referred to the 7 bullet points in staff’s report. He stated Mr. Lehman has indicated they are in agreement with all but the one regarding the mid -block pedestrian access points. Paul Lehman stated that was correct and that they were willing to wo rk with staff on that. Planner Schwarz stated staff is flexible regarding the 30 foot width of the pathway. Staff does not want it to be too narrow because then it is just a walking path. Staff’s preference is to see if it can work with 30 feet. There was a discussion about the lot widths in the area. Staff is not looking to lose any lots because the developer is one lot less than what was labeled on the concept plan for Pod 7 (Units 1 -3). Chairman Sobkoviak asked if there were any other issues besi des the pedestrian accessways. Commissioner Sanders had a question for staff on the connectivity between Legends and Playa Vista. He asked if there was anything in the agreements which state at what point that connectivity will be completed so the Villag e does not end up with two stub streets. Planner Mike Schwarz stated he was not familiar with the Playa Vista Annexation Agreement. He did state that the development is commencing in terms of utilities and rough grading for the street layout. He was not aware of anything that would prohibit the immediate connection between the two developments.
Village of Plainfield Pla n Commission Minutes February 19, 2008 Page 10 of 12 Commissioner Renzi stated he noticed Street K in this development was named Barsello in Playa Vista. He asked that the road be named the same thing in both de velopments. Planner Mike Schwarz stated that was something they most definitely would look at during the final plat stage. He stated that was a good comment. Commissioner Renzi stated if he understood the Village Engineer, Neal Eickholtz, correctly, if the water needs to be detained in the northwest corner everything will be shifted and all of the streets might have to be redesigned. Planner Mike Schwarz answered yes. He stated there will be some impact on the number of lots. He stated any approval re commendation tonight would be subject to engineering review. Commissioner Renzi asked the applicant if he concurred with staff that the development calls for a re -flowing of the water . I nstead of having it flow to the northwest, it would be flowing to th e southeast. Paul Lehman stated they would have to have a civil engineer look at it. He stated the civil engineer for Playa Vista is also the civil engineer for this project. He stated whatever they have to do to comply with engineering they will do. C ommissioner Renzi asked if the Commission should just continue the case waiting for the engineering to be completed to see how the development changes. Planner Mike Schwarz stated staff is comfortable moving it forward. He stated if the Commission prefer s to see it as the engineering is refined and to see how many lots might be lost as a result of the stormwater needs , that is the Commission’s prerogative. He stated if there is a desire on the Commission’s part to see this in two weeks, that is possible. He stated Baxter and Woodman just recently received the additional information that they needed from Intech, the design engineer. Chairman Sobkoviak asked the Village Engineer, Neal Eickholtz, if he saw anything that is a “show stopper.” Neal Eickholt z res p onded that the developer just has not addressed as of yet how they are going to handle the drainage in that quadrant. He stated staff could decide once the plans come back if this needs to go back to the Plan Commission. Commissioner O’Rourke sta ted Commissioner Renzi brought up a good point. If there are modifications that need to be made is it just a question of eliminating some of the lots, which is one issue; or is it a question of reconfiguring the whole subdivision to accommodate the lose o f those lots. Paul Lehman stated if they need to do a reconfiguration of any substance , they would be more than willing to bring it back to the Commission. Planner Mike Schwarz asked if it would be the desire of the Commission to keep the stipulations as suggested in the report, but then add an additional 5 th stipulation. Chairman Sobkoviak stated the Commission can add a stipulation that if there is a significant change to roadway layout s or reconfiguration of the lots, that it be brought back to the Pl an Commission for review. There was a discussion among the commissioners as to what would be considered significant changes. Chairman Sobkoviak stated with the Commission’s approval a 5 th stipulation will be added stating that if the roadway s are chang ed or the blocks of residences are reconfigured due to stormwater re -engineering, this preliminary plat will be brought back to the Plan Commission for review. The commissioners agreed. At 8:45 p.m. Commissioner Renzi made a motion that the Plan Commissi on recommend approval of the Preliminary Development Plan/Preliminary Plat of Subdivision for Legends of Plainfield Units 1 -3, located on the south side of 135 th Street, west of Heggs Road, subject to the following stipulations:
Village of Plainfield Pla n Commission Minutes February 19, 2008 Page 11 of 12 1. Subject to the requireme nts of the Village Engineer; 2. Subject to the requirements of the Plainfield Fire Protection District, 3. Subject to staff’s technical review and approval prior to Village Board consideration, based on staff’s review comments as outlined in this staff rep ort; 4. Subject to the Preliminary Engineering Plans being revised to include the planned improvements to Heggs Road, from Street K south to the south line of Unit 3, 5. If the roadway s are changed or the blocks of residences are reconfigured due to storm water re -engineering, this preliminary plat will be brought back to the Plan Commission for review. Commissioner O’Rourke seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Bonuchi, Sanders, Kachel, McKay, Renzi, O’Rourke, Chai rman Sobkoviak Nay: 0 Planner Mike Schwarz clarified that this will not be scheduled with the Village Board until after the engineering is reviewed so staff knows the impacts and if it needs to come back to this body first. The motion is carried 7:0 DISCUSSION: Commissioner Kachel asked Cameron Bettin from the Plainfield Park District if they are considering incorporating more rest areas, places to sit. He stated Yorkville and also Will County are looking at this. Cameron stated they are st arting to take a look at that. Planner Mike Schwarz wanted to commend the developer on the last project. He stated the Annexation Agreement stipulates the size of the school site and the developer has been willing to work with staff and the Park District , Library District. He stated the parcels to the east of this get a little trickier because of all of the different interests that are involved. The developer is only obligated under the Annexation Agreement to donate some of the school acres . T he Schoo l District has taken a closer look at the project , and now has determined that they do need some additional land. Commissioner Bonuchi mentioned she and Commissioner Sanders had attended a planning workshop wit h Mike Schwarz and Sara Javorono k in Lincol nwood. She commended staff because the ideas coming forward from other communities are already in place in Plainfield. Commissioner Sanders stated Plainfield is ahead of Winnetka, Wilmette, and Lincolnwood. He stated staff has done a tremendous job in c reating a Comprehensive Plan, Design Guidelines, and other planning documents that the Commission can work with. Commissioner Renzi had a comment that when he visited China, all of their parks have exercise equipment. It is almost like you are at an outd oor gym. You would see all ages. He referenced some articles in his mail packet . He stated the Hitchcock Group had received an award for some sort of an educational park that they had put in Northbrook. He stated that maybe for the Village’s Bonus Syst em, if a developer does a health care garden and park in terms of multi -dimensional park that could become a bonus for the developer. He also stated he read an article where you can use drainage swales and hedgerows and how they can be used for greenways because that becomes important for migration for
Village of Plainfield Pla n Commission Minutes February 19, 2008 Page 12 of 12 birds and animals, as well as water flow. He felt that could also be used when subdivisions are being designed not only looking at water flow , but looking at what types of animal is indigenous to that. An educational park might be incorporated into the river plan and then it could connect to the gazebos and benches, etc. to have a more pedestrian friendly design. He stated bio -diversity is something that should be considered . Commissioner Kachel ment ioned there are park play areas throughout the U.S. where they are using sculpture type pieces of play equipment rather than just the ordinary play equipment . This could stimulate imagination on the part of the kids. Since there was no further business b efore the Plan Commission, Chairman Sobkoviak adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m. _________________________________________ R espectfully Submitted Carol Millan – Planning Secretary Village of Plainfield