HomeMy Public PortalAbout2007-01-16 PC Minutes VILLAGE OF PLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION RECORD OF MINUTES DATE: January 16 , 2007 LOCATION: Village Hall Chairman Sobkoviak cal led the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Kachel, McKay, Renzi, O’Rourke, and Chairman Sobk oviak . The Fire District came after the start of the meeting. Absent: Commissioner s Murawski and Henry, Park District, School District, Library District, and Police Department Also Present: Jonathan Proulx – Planner II Village of Plainfield, Carol M illan – Secretary Village of Plainfield, and Neil Eicholtz – Baxter and Woodman Chairman Sobkoviak made an announcement that the Rt. 30 and 143 rd project for the Plainfield School District Bus Transportation Center will be heard at the February 6, 2007 Pl an Commission Meeting. MINUTES: The minutes from the January 2, 2007 meeting were accepted as presented . DEVELOPMENT REPORT Jonathan Proulx read the Development Report: 1. Grande Park South continues to go before the Committee of the Whole Workshops. 2 . The Village Board adopted the ordinance approving a special use for the LifeSpring Community Church at their January 8, 2007 meeting. 3 . The Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment was approved by the Village Board with changes as suggested by the Village Board at their January 8, 2007 meeting. The Village Attorney was directed to draft the ordinance. 4 . The Comprehensive Plan Amendment was approved by the Village Board at their January 8, 2007 meeting. The Village Attorney was directed to draft the ordinance. 5 . Site Plan Review procedures were discussed at the 1/8/07 Village Board Meeting. Practices and procedures were explored to ensure that commercial developments are constructed per the Site Plan Review process. 6 . The Village Board approved a request for a Partial Special Census at their January 8, 2007 meeting.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes January 16, 2007 Page 2 of 5 C ommissioner O’Rourke commented on Item 5 of the development report. He feels that another layer of staff to review the building construction is as approved during the Site Plan Review process is unnecessary or not the preferred method to address this issue . He feels ultimately it is the developer’s responsibility to make sure the building being constructed is per the approved plans. Chairman Sobkoviak stated a fine for failure to perform wou ld probably not be a deterrent since the fine would probably be figured into the cost of the development. He felt there should be some kind of consequence like possibly ripping out the unapproved components and constructing per the approved plans. He wen t on to say this has been done in the past. The Village has gone to Court and the offending structure was corrected . He said most developers build per the approved plans. Commission Kachel felt if there were major changes the case should come back to th e Plan Commission for public review . Commissioner O’Rourke agreed with Commissioner Kachel. Chairman Sobkoviak said something should be done so that this does not happen again in the future. Commissioner Renzi felt that a public hearing forum should not be created since that might give the developer an out if the public liked his new design. He felt maybe a fine, attorney’s fees, court costs, etc. would deter this from happening. Jonathan said he had made note of the commissioners’ comments and would f orward them to Jim Testin and Michael Garrigan. He said one thing staff is considering is to have the developer sign an affidavit at the time of building permit application that his plans comply with the approved Site Plan Review plans. Jonathan went on to say that nearly 1 million sq. ft. of commercial has been built in the last 5 years without problems. Commissioner McKay suggested that since a developer goes through the Site Plan Review process the Village has a legal leg to stand on in Court to have the developer comply with the approved plans. Jonathan said the present remedy is to stop the issuance of an occupancy permit and stop future building permits. Commissioner Renzi also mentioned the Village holding the Bonds, but Jonathan commented that B onds are not for building construction, but for site and public improvements. NEW BUSINESS CASE: 1294 -010907.CP OFFICE MAX/RETAIL DEVELOPMENT Request: Concept Plan Review Location: Meijer Outlot, East of Illinois Route 59, South of 135 th Street Applicant: Gries Architectural Group Jay Johnson, Agent for Developer Jonathan Proulx reviewed his staff report. Chairman Sobkoviak asked Neil Eicholtz, Baxter and Woodman , if there were any engineering problems. Ne i l replied that they did n ot anticipate any engineering problems.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes January 16, 2007 Page 3 of 5 There was no one present from the petitioner , who is located out of state and was unable to attend this concept plan review. Chairman Sobkoviak asked about windows on the walls to add architectural detail. He as ked if they could be faux windows and not functioning windows. Jonathan Proulx said staff is working with the petitioner on this matter. Chairman Sobkoviak mentioned that sometimes there can be a security issue regarding windows. He stated that if the w indows were just for architectural purposes, maybe something made out of brick could be used. Commissioner Kachel said with adjacent property owners to the rear it might not be good to have light coming through the windows. Chairman Sobkoviak said he di dn’t think the Commission needed to be overly concerned with that since there would be visual barriers between the development and adjacent property owners. Commissioner Kachel also liked the idea of faux windows on the rear . He felt the faux windows cou ld add architectural interest. Chairman Sobkoviak stated a remedy for the impervious surface issue could be any combination of things that staff and the petitioner can agree on . He felt inverted islands have some advantages as does the paving brick or p aving material that allows water to seep through it. He said either of those things or a combination of the two would be fine. Commissioner Renzi talked about dry bottom detention with a combination of rock and plants so that if the water did back up, it wouldn’t matter it would drain through and there would be a higher water table. Commissioner Renzi mentioned that maybe on the north and south of the building the area could be pushed out and instead of 5 ft. there would be 5 ½ ft. This would give a 10% increase in the pervious surface right next to the impervious surface. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if there was a storm water management area on the northeast corner of the building. Jonathan Proulx said that was correct. Jonathan Proulx said the conce rn was not that there was too much drainage generated. Detention ponds can be designed to handle 100 percent impervious surface areas, such as in the Downtown area; but staff wants to promote some rain water working its way back down into the ground water table. The reasoning for this is partly environmental and partly aesthetic. Commissioner Kachel asked where porous pavers were to be placed. Jonathan Proulx said along the north property line in an area that staff assumes will be employee parking space s, or the last spaces to be filled up. Commissioner Kachel inquired if pavers could be in the corner by the dumpsters. Chairman Sobkoviak stated there will be a combination of inverted islands and pavers. He further stated the more islands, the less pav ers and vice versa. He also felt that sometimes parking lots are not totally used and some parking spaces could be given up to open space. Commissioner O’Rourke a greed with Chairman Sobkoviak. When you reduce parking spaces, you can have more open space for landscaping, etc. Chairman Sobkoviak stated the Commission shouldn’t be so rigid in parking standards . If 4 parking spaces are lost because of an inverted island it would be okay. Commission McKay agreed that it would not be a problem to eliminate 4 or 5 parking spaces.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes January 16, 2007 Page 4 of 5 Commissioner O’Rourke stated that eliminating some access point s could also open up some space for additional islands . Commissioner O’Rourke asked if staff had been working with the petitioner regarding elevations. Jonathan Prou lx stated staff had been working with the petitioner regarding elevations. Commissioner O’Rourke stated that staff should continue to work with the petitioner. He also asked if the dumpster on the south could be moved closer to the corner of the building . Commissioner O’Rourke also mentioned he noticed a cut that goes in front of the property and asked if it would make sense to extend it to go to the property to the south. Jonathan Proulx said that was a great point and had already asked the petitioner to consider. He also said on the final site plan review that will be a future access point. Chairman Sobkoviak commented that the Traffic Committee should restudy the access points before coming back to the Plan Commission. Commissioner Renzi asked abou t the signage for Office Max. Jonathan Proulx stated it was s taff’s preference to have open letters over the brick and not EIFS material. He said a recommendation was to step the height of the building . Commission Renzi said that would be his preference rather than bringing out the wall. Jonathan Proulx said staff is satisfied with the front elevation and feels the petitioner did a good job. Commissioner O’Rourke asked what a building banner was. Jonathan Proulx said it would be some sort of a pri nted banner. Commissioner O’Rourke commented he would be against a building banner. Regarding c oncerns raised by Plan Commissioners about discouraging new business with strict sign requirements, Jonathan Proulx stated staff is very sensitive to the impac t the Village’s design guidelines have on commercial properties, but he is not aware of that deterring any commercial developers from coming to the Village of Plainfield. Providing good developments that distinguish Plainfield from other communities is a good thing. Staff believes there are opportunities to regulate signage. Commissioner Renzi said national developers are ready to move into the Plainfield area . H e believes more national chains will be anchoring and there will be more conversation about national signage. Commissioner O’Rourke said the Commission do es not need to discount the value of what Plainfield has to offer , and the Commission does have the ability to regulate signage and design.. Jonathan Proulx asked the commissioners if they we re comfortable not having a sidewalk on the north side of the project. Commissioner O’Rourke stated he supports the sidewalk. Commissioner Renzi stated he did not feel there was a particular need for a sidewalk north of the building if there could be mor e landscaping. Commission Kachel agreed that if there was more landscaping in front there would not be a need for a sidewalk. Chairman Sobkoviak agreed with having more landscaping and no sidewalk. Commissioner McKay stated she would like to see a sidew alk. She also stated she was glad to see more commercial as the Village needs more sales tax generated. She complimented staff on the good job they are doing bringing in the commercial and said she likes this concept plan with a few tweaks. At 8:15 p.m. a motion was made by Commissioner Kachel to recommend approval of the concept plan for the proposed OfficeMax/Open Retail development on Outlot 8 of the Meijer of Plainfield Subdivision.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes January 16, 2007 Page 5 of 5 Commissioner Renzi seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye : McKay, Renzi, O’Rourke, Kachel, Sobkoviak Nay : None The motion is carried: 5:0 DISCUSSION: Commissioner Kachel stated the Plan Commission should consider talk about Smoking Bans . He suggested having smoking stations for commercial users. He felt it should be surveyed what other towns and cities have proposed . Commissioner Renzi felt that if a sidewalk was run perhaps that could be an area for smokers. Commissioner Kachel suggested possibly an area with pavers for smo kers. He asked for feedback from staff on this matter. Commissioner O’Rourke inquired about the status of the Walgreens development on Route 59. Jonathan stated staff had requested the petitioner stay on top of the situation. Jonathan Proulx pointed ou t there is to be a joint meeting of the Village Board and the Plan Commission on February 26, 2007 with more information to follow. Chairman Sobkoviak stated his preference would be a separate mailing to the commissioners regarding this meeting. Commissi oner Kachel suggested a phone call reminder to the commissioners a few days prior to the meeting would be appropriate. The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. _________________________________ Respectfully Submitted Carol Millan Planning Secretary – Vi llage of Plainfield