HomeMy Public PortalAbout2007-12-18 PC Minutes VILLAGE OF PLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION MEETING RECORD OF MINUTES AMENDED DATE : December 18 , 2007 LOCATION: Village Hall Chairman Sobkoviak cal led the m eeting of the Plan Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Ka chel, McKa y, Renzi, O’Rourke, Bonuchi, and Sanders; Ex Officio Commissioner Cox; Chairman Sobkoviak; and the Representative from the Plainfield Fire Protection District Absent: Plainfield Park District, Plainfield School District , Library District, and Pla infield Police Department Also Present: Michael Garrigan – Village Planner Village of Plainfield, Jonathan Proulx – Planner I I Village of Plainfield, 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 Commission meeting of December 4, 2007 were accepted as presented. DEVELOPMENT REPORT Michael Garrigan gave the development report. The Vil lage Board considered the following cases: 1. Heron Point - Adopted ordinance for approval of the requested Major Change to the PUD. 2. Hope Buffet – Approved Site Plan Review and Major Change to the PUD and requested Village attorney to draft ordinance. 3. Verizon Wireless – Approved variance and requested Village attorney to draft ordinance. 4. Binny’s Consolidation – Approved preliminary and final plat of subdivision (consolidation). Chairman Sobkoviak reminded all of the commissioners to speak into th e microphones and make sure the microphone is turned on. Chairman Sobkoviak asked , with the commissioners’ approval , to move Fifth Third Bank up to the second case. There was no objection.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 2 of 24 OLD BUSINESS: CASE: 1372 -110107.SU VAN DYKE ROAD V ENTURE Request: Major Change to a PUD (Public Hearing) Special Use for an Assisted Living Facility (Public Hearing) Site Plan Review for an Assisted Living Facility Site Plan Review for a Daycare Facility Location: Northwest Corner of Prairie Grove and Van Dyke Rd. Applicant: Scott Hagge with Hagge Construction TIME: 7:05 p.m. Sara Leach summarized the staff report. She stated this is a public hearing and all notices have been posted and published. The area is currently zoned B -1 (Business Conveni ence District) and the comprehensive plan identifies the site as part of the Village’s Medical District. Sara stated 9 of the 9 findings of fact for the major change to the Planned Development are favorable. She went through the findings of fact. She we nt on to state the 2 findings of fact for the special use for an Assisted Living/Alzheimer Care Facility in a B -1 Zoning District. She stated 2 of the 2 findings are favorable. Sara went over some of the high points of the Site Plan Review for the Assist ed Living/Alzheimer Care Facility . Staff has requested the applicant to provide parkway trees to be installed 40’ apart on the boulevard to aid in the Village’s Beautification Plan. The applicant has agreed to give cash in lieu to the Village for future Van Dyke improvements as well. The applicant has indicated a total of 75 parking spaces for the facility, with 3 of them being for handicapped users. This exceeds the requirements of the Village’s off -street parking schedule. The Village Zoning ordina nce requires that exterior building facades be constructed with predominantly masonry or quality materials, and the applicant is proposing a structure consistent with this requirement. To provide visual interest, dormers and gables, projections and recess ions, varying rooflines, and varying architectural materials are being used on the building. Staff feels this fulfills the Village’s 360 degree architecture design guideline. The applicant has exceeded the Village’s landscape ordinance by including lands caped areas in 2 center courtyards. At staff’s request, the applicant has agreed to install 3 additional landscaped parking islands to break up the long parking stall sections. Staff would recommend that the Village require an irrigation system to be i nstalled o n front and corner side yards and has requested the landscape architect mention the locations of the irrigation systems on a revised plan. The trash enclosure will be constructed out of masonry to match the main building structure with cedar gat es to comply with the 100% screening requirement. The applicant has submitted a photometric plan consistent with the Village’s Site Plan Review Ordinance. Staff has requested the applicant consider incorporating pedestrian scale, decorative lighting fixt ures near the entrances to the building, and the applicant has agreed to this stipulation. Prior to installation, staff requests the applicant submit a cut sheet of the final choice of lighting fixtures.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 3 of 24 Sara Leach stated for the Daycare Facility, th e applicant has submitted 2 alternative site plans, one with the trash enclosure on the north side of the property, and one with the trash enclosure on the south side of the property. Staff prefers the site plan with the enclosure on the north side of the property. She commented on this preferred plan. The applicant has indicated 54 parking spaces for this facility with 3 being for handicapped users. The drive aisle directly in front of the building is 24’, which is wider than required, to allow parents /guardians to drop off and pick up their children safely. She stated the design of the building is consistent with ordinance and with other buildings within the PD. The current landscape plan is consistent with the requirements of the Landscape Ordinance . The applicant has agreed to provide for trees on the boulevard along Prairie Grove Road. The applicant also exceeds the number of required units for foundation plantings. The applicant will be constructing a detention area on the northwest corner of Van Dyke Road and Prairie Grove Road which will be used strictly for stormwater management. This stormwater detention will be evaluated in more detail by the Village Engineer. Staff has requested the trash enclosure be included on the northern part of th e parking lot. It will be constructed of masonry to match the building with a cedar gate painted to match the white fence around the children’s playground. There also will be large shrubs planted at the base. The photometric plan appears to be consisten t with the Site Plan Review Ordinance. Staff also suggests for this building that the applicant consider incorporating pedestrian scale, decorative lighting fixtures near the entrances to the building. The applicant has agreed to this stipulation. There will be a wide sidewalk area near the entrance, along with a sidewalk extending around the perimeter of the building. Should the applicant decide to incorporate a share parking agreement between the daycare and assisted living facilities, he has agreed t o install a sidewalk through the landscape area separating the two sections. Staff is generally comfortable with the proposal subject to several stipulations in the staff report and recommends approval of the four items requested by the applicant. Chairm an Sobkoviak asked Nea l if there were any issues. Neal Eickholtz stated they have reviewed the engineering plans for the subdivision and the site plan for the daycare facility. Unfortunately, Lot 1 which is the assisted living facility, was not included as part of the engineering submittal . As it relates to the subdivision, his most significant comment was addressing the offsite drainage area tributary to this project. He was confident this would be designed for, but was not addressed in this submittal. Chairman Sobkoviak asked Neal if he saw anything that would hold up the project. Neal stated he did not. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in the petitioner’s staff. Scott Hagge spoke first. He stated he is a partner in the Van Dyke Road, LLC. He stated o riginally the project was approved for up to 7 different buildings. Now, there will only be 2 buildings. He stated he feels the surrounding neighborhood is benefited by the daycare, which would support the hospit al facility. He also stated it is benefi cial for the Alzheimer residents to look outside and see the p l ay park where children will be playing. The Church also felt it would be nice to have a facility like this where they can have some of their people interact with the people in the Alzheimer an d Assisted Living Facility. Commissioner O’Rourke asked if the major change increased the square footage from 120,000 sq. ft. to 135,000 sq. ft. Scott Hagge stated that was the case. He said what actually happened is the daycare is 11,000, the Alzheim er is 100,000 and there is parking and an office building, which will go on Lot 3. They had to come in for the extra 15,000 sq. ft. for the office building. They are anticipating a 2 to 3 story office building/retail complex. They are looking at havi ng up to 3 stories with a footprint that could go as high as
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 4 of 24 25,000 sq. ft. It has to meet the parking regulations and everything else. He stated they are entitled to go up to 4 stories on this property from the original plan that was submitted. The y want to make it functional for the different uses that are coming in. There was a discussion among Commissioner O’Rourke and Scott Hagge regarding the old plan and what is now being proposed. Chuck Hall spoke next. He stated there wi ll be 110 units a nd up to 136 beds. It could potential ly house up to 136 people. Commissioner O’Rourke asked if there was any change in parking. He stated Scott Hagge had mentioned it is not parking intensive. Scott Hagge stated they have put almost 30 to 40% extra parking in the assisted living/Alzheimer facility. He stated whatever building is built on Lot 3 will still have to meet all of the parking codes. They will be restricted to how many square feet they can build by how many parking spaces can be provided. Their feeling is to go up a floor. They are not sure they will end up using all of the square footage, but they do not want to preclude themselves from being able to build the facility on Lot 3. Commissioner Kachel asked if all of the buildings have op en courtyards. Chuck Hall responded that they have built a similar facility 4 or 5 different times. This is a new prototype of their old facility. It used to be a very long building, and they condensed it into a more consolidated footprint. The interna l courtyards provide a place for the residents to go outside and be protected from the wind and weather. It also facilitates a secured area. Commissioner Kachel stated he has seen facilities like this with courtyards that have been enclosed with a skyl ight over it so in the winter months people can go out. He asked if the petitioner had thought about doing that to this building. Chuck Hall responded they do have internal areas that will have natural light, not necessarily from a skylight, but from win dows. Both of the courtyards have screened in porches. 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 Sanders had questions for staff. He asked if Prai rie Grove is a dedicated street in the plan for this area. He asked if it is going to be extended all the way to 248 th . Sara responded the applicant will only be installing the road up to the main internal drive aisle in front of the daycare facility . O nce the development builds out, it will go to the eastern bou ndary. The developer stated the adjacent parcel would then pick it up from that point and take it out towards 248 th St. Commissioner Sanders asked if the parcels to the west are annexed at thi s time. Sara stated they were not. Commissioner Sanders asked if that was part of the recently approved Medical District. He stated the Prairie Grove extension would facilitate further development with a major drug store, restaurant, etc. that would ser vice the area also. Sara stated that was correct. Commissioner Sanders asked if Edwards was running a north/south road that would go through this area. Michael Garrigan stated there is no proposed stub from Edwards to the north to the future street con nection as of this time. Chairman Sobkoviak asked the petitioner if they had a problem with the stipulation for the assisted living/Alzheimer care building (submi ttal of revised landscape plan and lighting cut sheets). The petitioner said there was no problem. Chairman Sobkoviak also asked the petitioner if they had a problem with the stipulation for the daycare facility (submittal of lighting cut sheets ). The petitioner said there was no problem.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 5 of 24 Commissioner O’Rourke had a question for staff a bout the access points. He wondered if the access points were all necessary for the size of the parcel. Sara referred to the Village Planner. Michael Garrigan stated the original access management plan, which was attached to the original annexation agr eement, showed the full access point at Prairie Grove, and one additional full access, and one right -in, right -out. This was reviewed and approved by the Village Board. Commissioner O’Rourke asked if this was influenced by the previous plan. Michael G arrigan stated there was some flexibility in the actual uses in the annexation agreement. The access points for this project were previously solidified. There was a discussion among the commissioners and Michael Garrigan regarding these access points. Michael Garrigan stated this was approved by the traffic engineer, Eric Gallt. Commissioner Sanders asked if the middle access point could be eliminated. Michael Garrrigan stated it could be eliminated, but that would not be consistent with the previous ly approved annexation agreement and what the applicant is entitled to via the annexation agreement. He stated he would defer to the applicant to hear his concerns. Chairman Sobkoviak weighed in that the annexation agreement is a controlling document. He stated both sides have to agree to change the annexation agreement. Scott Hagge explained the site plan and would like to stay with the orientation of the plan if at all possible . Commissioner Kachel asked the petitioner if there was thought to havi ng an adult daycare center along with the child daycare. Scott Hagge stated the developer has only worked with children and has not worked with adults, but that does not preclude that use coming in on one of the adjacent properties. Scott Hagge agreed th at was a great idea. At 7:40 p.m. Commissioner Kachel made a motion that the Plan Commission adopt staff’s findings of fact as the findings of fact of the Plan Commission and recommend approval of the major change to the planned development for Van Dyke R oad Venture 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 Renzi seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak cal led for a vote by roll call. Aye: McKay, Renzi, O’Rourke, Bonuchi, Sanders, Kachel, Chairman Sobkoviak Nay: 0 The motion is carried 7:0 At 7:41 p.m. Commissioner McKay made a motion that the Plan Commission adopt staff’s findings of fact as the findings of fact of the Plan Commission and recommend approval of the special use for an assisted living/Alzheimer care facility for Van Dyke Road Venture, Lot 1 in the B -1 zoning district 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 Sanders seconded the motion.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 6 of 24 Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, O’Rourke, Bonuchi, Sanders, Kachel, Mc Kay, Chairman Sobkoviak Nay: 0 The motion is carried 7:0 At 7:42 p.m. Commissioner Bonuchi made a motion that the Plan Commission recommend approval of the site plan for the assisted living/Alzheimer care facility on Lot 1 of the Van Dyke Venture PD, su bject to the following stipulations: 1. Compliance with the requirements of the Village Engineer; 2. Compliance with the requirements of the Plainfield Fire Protection District; 3. Submittal of a revised landscape plan illustrating the landscaping that wil l be installed on the parking lot islands, as well as the location of the irrigation systems; 4. Submittal of lighting cut sheets displaying the pedestrian scale lighting fixtures to be installed on the property. Commissioner Renzi seconded the motion. C hairman 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 At 7:43 p.m. Commissioner McKay made a motion that the Plan Commission recommend approval of t he site plan for the daycare facility on Lot 2 of the Van Dyke Venture PD, 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; 3 . Submittal of lighting cut sheets displaying the pedestrian scale lighting fixtures to be installed on the property. Commissioner Kachel seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Bonuchi, Sanders, Kachel, McKay, Renz i, O’Rourke, Chairman Sobkoviak Nay: 0 The motion is carried 7:0 Chairman Sobkoviak acknowledged that there was a group of students present from Plainfield Central High School observing the meeting for their government class.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 7 of 24 NEW BUS INESS CASE: 1375 -111607.SPR.SU FIFTH THIRD BANK Request: Special Use for a Planned Development (Public Hearing) Location: Southeast corner of IL Rt. 59 & 135 th St., Outlot F (3) Applicant: Fifth Third Bank (Peter Theodore, Architect) TIME: 7:44 p.m. Sara Leach summarized the staff report. She stated this is a public hearing and the case has been posted and published. The case came before the Plan Commission conceptually in late September. Both the Plan Commission and Village Board supported the con cept of a second bank in the Meijer Development. There was one concern over the entrance points, but the applicant has worked closely with staff and the Village Engineer to adjust this entrance and eliminate the concern. The site is currently zoned B -3 and the Village’s comprehensive plan identifies the site for general commercial purposes. The outlot is not located on the hard corner, but is the second outlot south of 135 th St. Significant changes that have taken place since the last time the Plan Co mmission heard this case include some architectural changes and a shift in the main entrance point. Staff suggested incorporating a soldier course accent band on the north façade and converting EIFS above the main entrance to limestone or face brick. T he applicant had no opposition to these suggestions. Access onto the site would be via a curb cut on one of the PD’s internal drive aisles. This is consistent with the requirements of the PD. The applicant has shifted the entrance point slightly so that the entrance aligns with one of the parking aisles for the Meijer store. The drive aisles are 24’ wide and circulation would be counter clockwise around the building. The landscaping plan exceeds the Village’s landscaping requirements in terms of plant units and plant species variety. All lawn and planting beds shall be irrigated as well. The trash enclosure will be constructed out of brick masonry with cedar wood gates to comply with the 100% screening requirement. Staff has requested and the applica nt has agreed to install decorative pedestrian scale lighting fixtures near the building entrance in addition to parking lot lights. The photometric plans appear to be consistent with the Village’s Site Plan Review Ordinance. Sara went through the findin gs of fact for the special use for the drive through for the bank. Two of the 2 findings are favorable. Staff supports the site plan review and special use request for this site and recommends approval. There are no remaining issues which staff feels sh ould be addressed. Chairman Sobkoviak asked Neal Eickholtz if there are any engineering issues. Neal responded they have reviewed the engineering plans and have no significant concerns. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in the petitioners. Richard J. Scrods wit h the law firm of Richard J. Scrods, Goldstone, Scrods, Russian, Name and Hoff, Ltd. was the first to speak. He is the attorney representing the petitioner. He thanked staff for the complete report and being moved up on the agenda . He stated Elizabeth Lovable , Real Estate Mgr. Fifth Third Bank; Peter Theodore, the Project Architect and planner, Don Dixon, Project Engineer; and Bonnie Flock , as the Traffic Engineer, and a landscape p lanner were present. They have worked with staff since the original co ncept meeting and have made revisions to the plan in accordance with staff’s recommendations.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 8 of 24 Chairman Sobkoviak called the petitioner’s attention to stipulation #3 (applicant shall incorporate pedestrian scale/decorative lighting fixtures near the entran ce of the building to be consistent with the other lots in the Meijer PD) in the staff report for approval of the site plan and asked if the petitioner had any problem with the stipulation. The petitioner replied they did not have any problem with the sti pulation. Commissioner Renzi asked staff about the north elevation of the building. He felt it was rather plain and needed some kind of architectural feature. Sara replied the square footage is about 1/3 of the Office Max building and there will be dens e landscaping in front of the building. This is the back of the drive through. Commissioner Renzi was satisfied with the answer. Commissioner Kachel asked if there would be any smoking area. Michael Garrigan stated staff encourages pedestrian areas for all future commercial, but not specifically designed for smokers. Commissioner Renzi had a concern that people leaving the bank site would have to right turn their way out of the site. He did not feel they would be able to go across into the Meijer lo t. Chairman Sobkoviak stated there had previously been discussion about this topic and the present plan shows the results of that discussion. Commissioner R enzi stated he must have been out and missed the discussion. Commissioner Sanders asked if the mechanicals on the roof would be screened. Peter Theodore replied that the mechanicals would be fully screened. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if there was anyone in the audience who cared to ask a question or make a comment. There was no response. Commissio ner O’Rourke stated the PUD was designed to have the drive through in the rear and ended up with the elevation that Commissioner Renzi had concerns about. Commissioner O’Rourke asked if that was consistent with Village design and plan. Michael Garrigan stated that was correct. Commissioner O’Rourke asked the applicant what changes were made and how it will flow. Peter Theodore stated they, per Plan Commission’s recommendation, shifted the whole thing to the north and allowed for additional stacking. He also stated the entrance is kind of offset and is more of a calming device for traffic. Pushing the building to the north really allowed for greater stacking. He referred to the north elevation that Commissioner Renzi had previously pointed out and stated there are layers of landscaping. He stated the challenge in the whole site plan was to facilitate movement through the drive through and provide adequate parking. Commissioner O’Rourke referred to the slide showing the drive through. He wanted t o know how many windows there are per lane. Peter Theodore replied there is only one window per lane. At 8:05 p.m. Commissioner Kachel made a motion to recommend approval of the site plan for Fifth Third Bank on Outlot F (3) of the Meijer PD, 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; 3. Applicant shall incorporate pedestrian scale/decorative lighting fixtures near the e ntrance of the building to be consistent with the other lots in the Meijer PD. Commissioner O’Rourke seconded the motion.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 9 of 24 Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Sanders, Kachel, McKay, Renzi, O’Rourke, Bonuchi, Chairman Sobkoviak Nay: 0 The motion is carried 7:0 At 8:06 p.m. Commissioner Bonuchi made a motion that Plan Commission adopt staff’s findings of fact as the findings of fact of the Plan Commission and recommend approval of the special use for a bank with a drive through for Fifth Third Bank, on Outlot F (3) of the Meijer PD in the B -3 zoning district subject to the following stipulations: 1. Compliance with the requirements of the Village Engineer; 2. Compliance with the requirements of the Plainfield Fire Protection Distric t. Commissioner Sanders seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Kachel, McKay, Renzi, O’Rourke, Bonuchi, Sanders, Chairman Sobkoviak Nay: 0 The motion is carried 7:0 Chairman Sobkoviak called for the Plan Commission to take a 10 minute break at 8:09 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:19 p.m. OLD BUSINESS: CASE: 1335 -061507.PP.SU PLAINFIELD VILLAGE CENTER Request: Special Use for a Planned Development (Public Hearing) Preliminary Development P lan Preliminary Plat of Subdivision Location: Southwest corner of Lockport Street and Van Dyke Rd. Applicant: Plainfield Commercial Partners TIME: 8:19 p.m. Staff summarized the staff report. Michael Garrigan was the first to speak. He stated this is a continuation of the public hearing. He also stated that Mike Hoffman from Teska Associates is present to answer any questions from the commissioners or the public. The applicant is requesting a special use and a preliminary plat for approximately 76 a cres along Lockport Street. The applicant is proposing approximately 168,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space in addition to 825 residential units. The Village Comprehensive Plan does identify the site as mixed use . As staff has outlined in the staff report, staff does believe that this proposed project will be one of the major anchors of the TENG Plan. The TENG Plan is a mixed use, town center type project. This project is generally consistent with the spirit of the TENG Plan.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 10 of 24 Michael Garrigan went over the findings of fact for the special use. He stated the 2 findings of fact are favorable. Staff has worked with the developer over the past several months to ensure that there is no negative impact on any adjacent property owners, specifically the single family homes along Ottawa Street. The proposed plan is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. It is also consistent with the TENG Plan. It was envisioned that this property would have a higher density. The developer has made an eff ort to feather the densities throughout the project. Staff believes the duplexes along Ottawa Street have been designed in a manner which is generally consistent with the quality of the type of single family homes within the Wallin Woods Subdivision . T he applicant has made extensive efforts to basically mitigate any type of impact on property values. This project is basically consistent with the long term vision of the Village’s Comprehensive Plan as it relates to a mixed use project and as it relates to the extension of the Village’s Town Center. Michael Garrigan briefly went through the 7 standards that the applicant must conform to for a Planned Development. Staff believes the applicant has complied with the 7 standards for a Planned Development. He turned it over to Jonathan Proulx to discuss the road network and transportation improvements. Chairman Sobkoviak complemented staff on the completeness of the staff report. Jonathan Proulx summarized the transportation network and transportation impr ovements. • There will be a full access point on Lockport Street. • T here will be 2 limited right -in, right -out access points evenly spaced between the full access and the adjacent intersections of Wallin Drive to the west and Van Dyke Road to the east. • Village Center Drive will be extended through the project • In addition to the south, the project would extend Hamlin Drive and Dan Patch Drive north from Ottawa Street. • Phase I improvements would be constructed with the initial residential phase of co nstruction and would include the widening of Van Dyke Road from Lockport Street to a little south of Village Center Drive and would provide two full northbound lanes, one would be a dedicated left turn lane and the other would be a shared right turn lane. • There would also be a protected left turn lane for northbound Van Dyke Road traffic at the signal at Van Dyke Road, so there would be a green left turn arrow for traffic wishing to go west on Lockport Street. If traffic is heading south on Van Dyke Roa d, there would be a protected left turn green to go east on Lockport Street. • Van Dyke Road would be re -stripped as it extends north of Lockport Street. • T he Phase II improvements include an additional southbound left turn lane on U.S. Rt. 30 at Lockport Street. • Phase II also calls for the addition of a dedicated southbound right turn lane on Van Dyke Road. In the initial report staff had identified 9 recommendations relative to traffic. Since that time, staff has met with the developer and the deve loper has agreed to 6 of the 9 recommendations. Staff has agreed to defer to the developer the other 3, so staff would submit that there are no outstanding recommendations relative to traffic improvements . Jonathan ended his portion of the report and tur ned it over to Mike Schwarz.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 11 of 24 Mike Schwarz summarized his section of the staff report. In the previous staff report there were 8 bullet points. The majority of those points have been addressed after the December 11 th meeting between staff and the d eveloper. Mike summarized those points. • Applicant has agreed to consider the possibility that there would be incorporation of ground floor retail or restaurant at the southeast corner of the mixed use building noted as Building C at the corner of Village Center Dr. and Van Dyke. Staff would suggest a stipulation to address this agreement or revision to the plan noting the change. • Applicant has indicated willingness to submit building elevations that reflect strong corner elements, including but not limit ed to windows, doors , and awnings to create a visual interest and a strong architectural presence at the northwest and northeast building corners. Staff suggests a stipulation or a revision to the plan to reflect the change. • Staff feels a central green or gathering space should be provided. Applicant indicated they concur and have agreed to revise the plan to expand and enhance this area with a water feature with revisions to provide one way circulation and eliminate parking along the central green. • App licant does not agree with TENG Plan. They have indicated that they would consider adding paver brick crosswalk accents and other hardscape to better define the east/west pedestrian linkages. Staff suggests a stipulation or a revision to the plan to refl ect the change. • Applicant indicated that the three mixed use buildings provide for an internal pedestrian link from each side of the buildings running behind the storefront. These may be accentuated by adding a high arch, adding brick pavers or special pa vement treatments, special signage and lighting. Staff suggests a stipulation or a revision to the plan to reflect the change. • Applicant generally agreed to provide pedestrian amenities, such as benches, planter boxes, lighted bollards for evening walks, garbage receptacles, bicycle racks, and a central bus stop canopy for future PACE bus service, as part of the final design. Staff suggests a stipulation or a revision to the plan to reflect the change. • Applicant has agreed to modify the plan to provide a stripped right -of -way dedication along Lockport Street near Van Dyke Road. Staff suggests a stipulation or a revision to the plan to reflect the change. • Applicant has agreed to modify the plan to shift Building C back from the right -of -way to provide a consistent building setback for all three mixed use buildings so that the northwest corner of the building does not block the continuation of the public sidewalk. Commissioner Renzi asked if staff was still comfortable with the 4 story buildings. Mike Sc hwarz stated that was an issue that remains to be determined by the Village Board, as far as policy and character of the downtown. He went on to say staff does have some concerns about the height of the building. There are 2 issues; the general character of Plainfield in this area and also the expectation of this being approved on the south side of the street staff would anticipate that there would be something comparable on the north side to complement both sides of the street as you would generally see in the historic downtown. The other issue is the impact of shadow during key times of the year on, not only the public right -of -way, but private properties offsite across the street and kiddy corner. The applicant’s shadow study does indicate there woul d be some impacts based on the current height. The building is actually 73’ to the highest point. This is a correction to the staff report. Mike went on to say that issue has not been addressed, but generally staff does not want that issue to define the overall support for the project. Generally, the project is consistent with the spirit of the TENG Plan.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 12 of 24 Commissioner Kachel asked if that should not be considered some where along the line because it is going to change the character of the buildin g. Chairman Sobkoviak asked that this discussion be continued later and wanted to move on through the staff report. Mike Schwarz wanted to briefly mention one last item. T he TENG Plan had a curvilinear sort of plaza area, an enhanced plaza as the gatewa y to the downtown. Without having exact details, the applicant has agreed verbally that they would work with staff on a similar plaza at the hard corner of Lockport St. and Wallin Dr. Staff would anticipate to have the same type of thing when redevelopm ent occurs on the north side of the street. The details ar e not firmed up at this point. Mike finished his summation of his portion of the staff report. Sara Leach summarized the southern portion of the development consisting of the townhomes and duple xes. She stated staff feels the overall layout of the townhomes and duplexes is generally good, but feels that the concerns of the residents raised previously during the public hearing need to be addressed regarding buffering provisions between the develo pment and the residential sub division to the south, Wallin Woods. During the public hearing there were repeated concerns regarding the incorporation of townhomes instead of duplexes on Ottawa Street despite the efforts of the developer to minimize the tow nhome presence by incorporating ranch style end units. The developer is working on a variety of possible alternatives so that the concerns of the residents will be addressed. Both staff and the developer agree that if townhomes are erected in this locati on, the massing and setbacks should be changed so that the townhomes are set back further and reduced to 2 stories in height. Staff previously had raised a concern about the lack of green space throughout the southern component. The developer has agree d to look at ways to reorient the townhomes so that approximately 4 pocket parks can be added to this portion of the plan. Staff is content with the applicant’s proposal for architecture. The applicant is proposing townhomes and duplex units that are c onstructed predominantly of masonry and quality materials and have attractive variations from unit to unit. Staff feels the proposed variations between the housing units will increase the aesthetic appeal and add diversity to the site. Staff and the de veloper are in agreement about staff’s previous landscaping concerns. The applicant is willing to incorporate heavier landscaping on the southern border of the site to aid in buffering the development from the residents of Wallin Woods. In the middle of the development there are three mid -rise condo buildings. There is one smaller mid -rise building with 3 stories in the northwest corner, which has a total of 27 units and 2 larger mid -rise buildings that are also 3 stories with a partially buried parking garage. There is a greenway separating these two larger buildings for north/south pedestrian connection throughout the site. Staff believes the architecture for these buildings is consistent with the Village’s Site Plan Review Ordinance. The only poten tial issue is the parking garage. The Village requires 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit for multi -family dwellings. The small condo building meets this requirement, but the two larger buildings are only 1.17 spaces per dwelling unit. The applicant is workin g on ways to remedy this.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 13 of 24 Jonathan Proulx did an analysis of the landscape and hardscape design. Staff is pl acing a strong emphasis on the landscape and hardscape design as this will be the expanded downtown, pedestrian -oriented, active, mixed use development as suggested in the TENG Plan. He summarized staff recommendations. • Staff will be looking for some plaza type areas as gateway elements at the northeast and northwest corners of the development. The applicant has expressed willingness to do t hat and indicate they will provide some revised or enhanced conceptual plans. Staff h as indicated that some subdivision monument signage could be incorporated at the southeast corner at Ottawa Street and Van Dyke and the southwest corner at Ottawa and W allin Woods as a way to integrate the project with Wallin Woods . This was one of the comments staff heard during the public hearing. • Staff recommends that the proposed streetscape design for Lockport Street in the present downtown area be incorporated i nto this project. It should not necessarily replicate the design completely, but staff suggests that comparable materials and street furnishings be incorporated and also a similar sidewalk design be implemented. • Staff has provided recommendations for addi tional pedestrian amenities , such as benches, lighted bollards, and other aspects. The applicant has offered to provide a concept plan that could be attached to the conceptual landscaping at this stage that will act as guiding documents again for the fina l engineering on the final landscape plan of the development. Staff had previously identified 5 recommendations and the developer has agreed to 3 of them. The other 2 recommendations regarding landscape and hardscape are related to the boulevard proposa l for Ottawa Street, which has been withdrawn. There are no outstanding recommendations at this time. Jonathan Proulx stated there was a Fiscal Impact Analysis and Economic Feasibility Analysis prepared by the developer. He stated for all of the taxing districts there would be a net annual surplus, in terms of municipal revenue, of $4.6 million after project buildout. He went through the breakdown of the surplus to the taxing districts. Bridget Lane from BDI did the Economic Feasibility Analysis. The proposed project would add approximately $15.7 million in spending potential to the downtown. Rental housing is recommended over leased retail space. BDI recommends that significant flexibility be included in the project design to allow for the changes in market forces and specific tenant requirements. Michael Garrigan concluded the report. He stated staff is making a favorable recommendation for the proposed special use for the Planned Development with 3 stipulations and also making a favorable recomm endation for the Preliminary Plat with 3 stipulations. He concluded the staff report. Commissioner O’Rourke stated when Eric Gallt, the Traffic Engineer, was present at the last meeting he had a concern that some of the traffic study should be looked at again. He asked if that was completed. Jonathon Proulx stated staff has had some internal discussions about traffic, but the short answer is no. He did not believe the developer made any update to the traffic study. The internal questions have been rel ative to whether that new information would indicate or call for additional traffic improvements. The answer is not necessarily. It would indicate the level of service or just document, for decision making purpose, the level of congestion. Eric felt tha t perhaps revising the traffic study would not necessarily say we need an additional dual left turn here, etc. It would tell us that instead of stacking being 4 or 5 deep, maybe it would be 7 or 8 deep. Commissioner Kachel asked since the Lockport Stre etscape will be done on the east side of the River, will the streetscape be done to the west side of the River in the interim or will that be done at a later date when the front of this project is developed. Jonathan stated it was staff’s current anticipa tion that the road improvements on Lockport Street, including the streetscape component, in all likelihood will not be constructed at this time. It will be concurrent with the Phase II development to avoid sidewalk damage,
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 14 of 24 grade changes, etc. He stated the developer can speak to whether there could be interim lighting, sidewalks, etc. That is a topic that has not been fully explored at staff level. Commissioner Sanders asked on the Preliminary Plat if a 4 th stipulation could be added to include the covenants and bylaws for the various homeowner associations, as well as for the major buildings Michael Garrigan stated staff has not discussed drafting the covenants. He felt it was a reasonable request. He stated the timing of the submittal of the covenants and bylaws is an open question and he deferred to the applicant. Commisioner McKay had a question regarding the traffic study. She asked if when the traffic study was conducted was the extension of Van Dyke Road taken into consideration or was the traffic count completed with present traffic. Jonathan replied that the traffic study looks at the year 2017 buildout. It assumes that Van Dyke Road will be open to the south. In terms of trip distribution, 10% of the residential traffic , 1 5% o f the office or non -retail portion of the commercial development , and 20% of the retail traffic would be assigned to Van Dyke Road going to the south. The subdivisions to the south, Creekside and Springbank, could use Van Dyke Road to come in and come to the retail in this development or the downtown retail. The Village’s Comprehensive Plan and the Transportation Plan really looks to Drauden Road to be the north/south alternative. The existing counts do not reflect Van Dyke Road being open. It does i nclude an escalator for growth to arrive at the 2017 traffic count numbers. Commissioner McKay stated right now it appears that traffic will be taken from Lockport Street right down through a neighborhood that probably sees only residential traffic. She stated she sees this as a concern for existing residents who didn’t really plan on that when they bought their homes in Wallin Woods being that the TENG Plan did not show it that way. She wanted to see if there was an alternative to that plan. Commissi oner O’Rourke asked about the surpluses and revenues in the financial part of the staff report. He asked if the figures were based upon the whole buildout of the project. Jonathan stated he believed there was no phasing analysis to the Fiscal Impact Stu dy. It looks at the project at buildout. The developer might be able to speak to whether an interim or phase d Fiscal Impact Study would be available. The Fiscal Impact Study does include both the property tax and sales tax aspect of the retail. He sta ted he believes the property taxes would provide a positive impact. The property taxes would exceed the cost of services for the higher density residential types. There is a potential for a positive fiscal impact not dependent on the commercial sales ta x revenue. Commissioner Renzi stated he would like to see that. His concern was that basically the bulk of Phase I is residential and Phase II is commercial. It could take years before the commercial is built. He had a concern that even with the fees that the Village has enacted; there could be an initial shortfall to the schools. He stated this is a very serious consideration and something that the Commission needs to look at when they are looking at something that is clearly divided into phases in t erms of residential and commercial. Commissioner Kachel agreed with Commissioner Renzi. Commissioner Kachel asked since it would be a while before the commercial is built, what would be in the space in the meantime. He wanted the developer to think a bout this and let the Commission know. He stated it would be nice to see at least a green space there instead of just an open field. Michael Garrigan stated before the meeting was turned over to public comment, it would be appropriate for the developer t o outline what changes they have made since there have been some conceptual changes.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 15 of 24 Commissioner Renzi stated the facts as he understands them: • T here is an absolute need to reroute Rt. 126 ; and if it is not rerouted , the adverse impact on traffic is no t known because the traffic study did not really consider that. • The footprints have density, but it is being altered due to some unit loss and re configuration by the developer. • T he specifics of what townhouses and duplexes are being altered the Commissi on does not know yet. • The development is population based to make it vi able and a lot of reduction of residential units would have an adverse impact on the ability to develop it . • T he loss of the 4 th and 5 th story above the retail could have an adverse effe ct on the population base. He asked if that pretty much summed up the issues. Michael Garrigan stated obviously without the configuration of Rt. 126 or the realignment of it, the commercial phasing is questionable. The Lockport Streetscape improvements, the angle parking, etc. is all contingent on Rt. 126 moving to the north. He stated generally staff supports the overall approach as far as density. He stated most of the propositions that Commissioner Renzi outlined are generally consistent with staff’s position. Paul Mitchell, representing the petitioner, spoke. He was sworn in at a previous meeting. He stated the covenants would be submitted. They will be submitted prior to Final Plat approval. He stated the Fiscal Impact Study only looked at the buildout, but they did try to extrapolate at the end of Phase I residential what the result would be. They were in the neighborhood of a $2 Million positive impact. Commissioner Renzi asked if that would generally be all taxing bodies. Paul Mitchell st ated that was correct. He stated they had a very long meeting with staff and reached an agreement on a substantial number of details. He stated the Commission has a substantial amount of detail regarding the Phase I residential. The problem is the comme rcial development needs to be flexible as it could be somewhere between 5 and 7 years from now and they will not know what the market will demand at that time and what the end tenants or users will be demanding. They have reached agreement on a lot of the design guidelines that would be inserted to any amendment to the annexation agreement. He also stated that they do have to come before the Commission with a Final PUD Plat and Site Plan. He wanted to emphasize that the developer is not asking for any su bsidies, which a lot of Villages are giving for redevelopment of their downtown areas. He stated they do need the density they are requesting and they need the building heights to help achieve that density. Stephen Bus spoke second. Chairman Sobkoviak s wore him in. He stated they had a meeting with staff on December 11 th and have made a lot of revisions. He stated staff does not have the updated drawings at this time, but they will get them to staff. He touched on the major revisions. • The middle of th e project – one way traffic circulation around the center island instead of the initial parallel park on each side of the center island. • Lockport Street Improvements – Not proposing to construct or initiate the front commercial buildings until the on -stree t parking arrangement can be accomplished, which requires the jurisdictional turnover of Lockport Street. • Phase I will be to install a center focal point and access point to Lockport Street as it will serve as a marketing window and connect Village Center Drive to Lockport Street. • Traffic Calming Measures – They incorporated at Van Dyke Road and Ottawa Street a raised intersection with paver bricks. They also incorporated accents to delineate the east/west pedestrian corridor. • Right -of -Way Dedication – The re is a continuous 60’ right -of -way.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 16 of 24 • Mixed Use Bldg. C – Staff wanted to look at the addition of extending the commercial all the way down to the corner . They agreed to extend it down to the corner with some kind of overlook or rooftop patio incorporated . • Western gateway – Developer had a special detail for this gateway. Staff wants to create a plaza at the corner of Lockport Street and Wallin Drive and make it to pedestrian scale. Greg Sagen spoke next for the petitioner. He stated per staff’s recomme ndation to create some type of central gathering point or gateway plaza, which could be replicated on the other corner and across Lockport Street, the y looked at developing a main access area that would collect all of the pedestrian circulation points that currently funnel through this. Staff has discussed the opportunities to use the continuation of the streetscape elements that are being developed on the other side of the river. He stated the developer is fully in agreement to try and incorporate that, not maybe mirror it, but honor the consistency of that. Currently this plan is suggesting a 6x6 scored concrete pattern, a dyed concrete perhaps with a 24” triple soldier cross brick edge, which will be consistent with the other side of the river, carryin g that plaza and that grid framework into this central gathering point. He stated the central feature of this are a would be a raised seat wall. The signage identification column would be put at that gateway and then repeated at the 6 main primary corners within the development. He stated the column has been modified to accommodate a secondary sign panel. The secondary panel could identify the Wallin Woods Subdivision, Settler’s Park, YMCA, etc. Stephen Bus went over some of the architectural slides a nd explained features. He showed vehicular access to the parking garage with the retail wrapping around the garage at the ground floor. He stated the pedestrian entrance to the garage was somewhat hidden when you looked at it from the side elevation of t he building. They are going to look at incorporating some type of archway element, etc. to very clearly delineate that as a pedestrian through access and they would also consider widening out that access way . They agree to make revisions to the annexation agreement with design guidelines, cut sheets for lighting, fences, etc. He stated they revised the buildings along Ottawa Street from being 3 story , 6 unit buildings to being 2 story 5 unit buildings. These buildings look more like the duplexes. The y want to have a very strong north/south access. He stated one of the complications of adding a boulevard is that you have 8 or 9 driveways that would get cut off by a boulevard . A boulevard cuts apart too many points and it is not that effective. The y added pocket parks. Greg Sagen spoke again. They have a total of 5 pocket parks. He stated a s far as pocket parks, Staff was looking for, and we agree with, little sitting areas, benches, etc. He showed slides of landscaping for the pocket parks. This creates private spaces within the development. Stephen Bus talked about the parking on the mid -rise building. He showed where they had added additional parking for the mid -rise condominium buildings. There are 1.5 parking spaces per unit. Chair man Sobkoviak opened up the meeting for public comment. He asked if there were any comments from people who have not yet addressed the Commission. Diane Rousonelos was swore in. She stated she was in favor of the project. She does have some serious con cerns : too dense, too high, should be single family homes on Ottawa, traffic. She worries for the commercial if Rt. 126 is not rerouted. The Van Dyke extension has been a long time passion of hers. She stated all of the streets in Wallin Woods run to Va n Dyke Rd. It will not be safe with additional traffic on Van Dyke. She felt Drauden should be extended north to Heggs Rd and also County Line Road needs to be continued north. She did not think this project was consistent with the downtown.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 17 of 24 Richard Sm olen spoke again. He had previously been sworn in by Chairman Sobkoviak at a previous meeting. He is the President of the Homeowners Association for Wallin Woods. He had some email comments from people that could not be present. He stated he felt this is heading in the right direction. He appreciated staff working with the developers to incorporate a lot of the public comments, but still not quite there. He read the email from Tracy Rutherford – 15246 Eyre Circle, Wallin Woods. She is concerned abou t 825 residences going on a 37 acre parcel of land. She stated it appears there are no plans for a park or playground, walking path or even open land. It appears to be all buildings and parking spaces. She was concerned how the develo pment would affect their home values . It needs open land. She was also concerned that the price point would be consistent with prices of homes in Wallin Woods. Richard Smolen did not agree with the finding that this project would not have an adverse effect to adjacent pro perty owners. He asked what their recourse would be if there was an adverse effect. Chairman Sobkoviak stated none to his knowledge. Michael Garrigan stated he did not feel there would be any negative impact on the property values to adjacent properti es because of the qual ity of the materials being used. Richard Smolen asked if there was anyway they could get copies of the presentation to pass out to their homeowners. Michael Garrigan stated the file is public record. Commissioner Kachel asked if bulletin boards could be put up out in the lobby so people can review. Paul Mitchell agreed to send the presentation to anyone interested. Stephen Bus addressed the issue of units adjacent to a higher density project. He stated t he Urban Land Instit ute did a study stating the claim that property adjacent to higher density developments suffers a decrease in value is not substantiated. He could provide copies of that to anyone interested. He stated he felt there is a lot of negative connotation beca use of how density was done in the 50’s and 60’s. There is a way to do density right and getting design details built in. Richard Smolen stated they would be interested in that study also and would distribute it along to interested homeowners in Walli n Woods . Since there was no further comment, Chairman Sobkoviak closed the public hearing. Commissioner McKay expressed her traffic concerns. She was wondering if any thought was given to not aligning the streets in the development with the Wallin Woo ds subdivision streets. Jonathan Proulx addressed Commissioner McKay’s concerns. He stated the traffic study did identify the possibility for making restricted out movements to right out to preclude the ability for traffic to move directly south. The traffic study did acknowledge that as a potential if it was identified as a concern on the part of the public or on the part of the Commission. It is a revision that can easily be incorporated into the plan. It would be staff’s recommendation to maintain the street network as closely as possible. There are minimum spacing requirements for off set intersections to have a safe intersection. Commissioner McKay asked why there has to be cut s to the south . Jonathan Proulx stated the traffic study does anti cipate approximately 5% of the retail traffic would be generated from within Wallin Woods so it is a convenience for the residents of Wallin Woods to go to the retail, restaurants, etc. within the project. He deferred to the petitioner if they were comfor table eliminating those access points. Chairman Sobkoviak talked about the problems created when there is commercial along an arterial and there is no back entrance for the residential
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 18 of 24 units that are behind it. He stated this forces the vehicles out o nto the arterial, which greatly adds to the congestion and accidents. Commissioner Renzi stated he believed that was what the Commission fought for regarding the development on Ridge and 135 th . The Commission made a site change requirement to put such a side street in to keep the adjacent residential off of Ridge and 135 th . Chairman Sobkoviak stated this is almost a requirement of commercial development along the WIKADUKE Trail. He stated that was something that every Village had to buy into. He stated it is a principal that should be applied everywhere, along Rt. 59, Van Dyke Road, Lockport Street, etc. Jonathan Proulx stated that the Village’s Transportation Plan and also the 5 year Capital Improvement Plan identifies the vacation of Indian Bou ndary Road at Rt. 126 and the wrapping of Indian Boundary. He stated that would also potentially relieve the convenience factor of the cut through and make it much more convenient to go west of the YMCA at the extension of Village Center Drive, as oppose d to traveling all the way through Wallin Woods, Indian Oaks, and out through Creekside. Commissioner McKay stated there could still be some cut through traffic. Chairman Sobkoviak stated there will always be some cut through traffic and you cannot sto p that. Commissioner McKay stated she did not have any problem with building roads. Her concern was the developer is asking for an increase in density, a commercial component, and it is completely adjacent to an existing neighborhood. She referred to a previous case where there was one homeowner next to a PD development . T he Commission went to lengths to accommodate that homeowner. She stated in this case there is a whole neighborhood. She stated some sensitivity needs to happen for the neighborho od that is behind this development (Wallin Woods). Chairman Sobkoviak stated when Wallin Woods was originally platted; the developer was not sure what he wanted to do with this property in the front. He had visions of all commercial, all townhouses or m ulti -family, large beautiful homes on the rear portion of the parcel, etc. When the annexation agreement was drawn up, the developer stipulated he had the option to have either all multi -family, all commercial, or any mix of the two. The Village Board a t the time agreed with the developer. Commissioner O’Rourke agreed with that statement, but added that now there are residents. He stated the Commission should listen to the input of the residents and possibly make adjustments where they can that mi gh t make sense to the Village, the residents, and the developer. He stated he felt that was all that Commissioner McKay was asking the Commission to do. Stephen Bus stated people cut through places where they can see the cut through . This road was design ed the way it is so that people do not have a clear shot so they can use it as a north/south cut through point. Commissioner Kachel felt it was safer to have the roads align. He stated when you align the roads and have a crosswalk, adults and kids know where the intersection is. When you have one road one way and another road another way, people cross all over the place. He stated when he was young he was hit crossing the right -of -way mainly because the roads did not align at that point. Commission er Cox had a concern about the price points for the residential. He stated it was stated the best absorption would be in the price range of $0 to $300,000. Stephen Bus responded that was a generalization. Stephen Bus stated they expect this to be built in 2009 and they expect that the housing market will recuperate by then. Commissioner Cox asked if he was expecting the housing market to recuperate within a
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 19 of 24 year to 18 months. Stephen Bus responded, yes he was. Commissioner Cox stated that was wher e his concern comes in. He stated that during Phase I if the market does not bear this particular price point, what would stop the developer to continue to depreciate the value of those units along Ottawa Street until the developer starts to reach the abs orption level they are looking for. Stephen Bus stated they have submitte d to the Commission and to staff the type of product, the materials, etc. I f they cannot sell the product for that price point , they cannot se ll them for that; b ut the quality is s till there. He stated they believe the price points will be there also . Commissioner Cox stated the concern is not what the developer will be able to sell the property for, but the impact it will have on the existing property. Stephen Bus stated there will be quality materials, type of units, landscaping, buffering. Commissioner Renzi stated he also was confused as to what was selling where for what. Stephen Bus stated the price points were detailed in the Fiscal Impact Study by phase, and unit type. Jonathan Proulx stated the Fiscal Impact Study was based on an assumed sales price for the duplex es of $375,000, single townhomes $305,000, mid -rise condo – the two in the central area and the third in the northwest corner $310,000 per unit, for the mid -rise in the mixed use buildings for the 1,050 sq. ft. an average of $2 25,000 per unit and the larger $1,250 sq. ft. $265,000 per unit. Chairman Sobkoviak asked staff if there were any unresolved issues. Michael Garrigan stated there is some question in regards to height. He stated that is one fundamental question that is a policy issue that needs to be addressed by the Commission and the Village Board. He stated there still is an open question regarding the product along Ottawa Street. He thinks the a pplicant has outlined an alternative, the two story townhome. Staff thinks this is an open question whether that is consistent with what the residents are looking for and whether the Commission supports that. He stated other than those two issues; staff is generally comfortable in supporting this project. Stephen Bus stated they were waiting to get some written informal comments from the Traffic Engineer, Eric Gallt. Commissioner O’Rourke stated he felt Eric Gallt had made his comments pretty public at the last meeting. Commissioner O’Rourke’s basic concern was whether the traffic report had been updated because he felt Eric was stating that the traffic report should be updated. Stephen Bus stated it will be updated, they just have not seen a comment letter at this point. Commissioner Cox had a question about the change to the units along Ottawa Street. He stated the original plan with the 3 story row houses had the end unit as a ranch style facing Ottawa Street. He asked by going to the two stori es , has the end unit now changed to not face Ottawa Street. Stephen Bus stated the end unit will face internally, but they also added a bay window, a front porch, and the majority brick façade to the end unit. Commissioner Cox asked if there was any arc hitectural reason why the end unit could not be turned. Dan O’Mally spoke to that question. He stated ideally no. He stated in the last plan, just the entry was facing Ottawa Street. The unit was typically oriented more east/west at the time, as is th is unit. The two differences are the front door of this alternate unit now faces internally and the footprint size has come down. This is a different product type. This is a two story townhome type versus the three stories which was presented last time. This change was driven by the comments they heard from the residents at the previous meeting, but it is also a change that brings the entire building into scale with more of a two story conditi on relative to what is seen in single family homes. Everyt hing is consistent with the traditional single family scale structure. Commissioner Kachel asked the developer if they ever thought of a wrap -around front porch on the corners. Dan O’Mally stated they possibly could do it; they would just want to ver ify that they have the footprint.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 20 of 24 Chairman Sobkoviak asked the commissioners if they were satisfied with the change the applicant has offered. Commissioner Cox just wanted further verification. He stated the concern coming from the residents with reg ards to the previous building structure was that despite the fact that the end unit was a ranch style townhome that faced forward toward Ottawa Street, they still have the impact of the 3 story building being directly behind it. Dan O’Mally stated that w as exactly the point and that was the basis for the thinking to re -shift it. The new proposal does in fact present 2 story massing the length of the building. Commissioner Cox stated the height was reduced, but now the building is turned the other direct ion instead of having the end unit facing Ottawa Street. Dan O’Malley stated the positioning of the front door is now more street oriented, more oriented to the east and west. He stated the intent is to bring, if possible, the porch wrap around the corne r which will still introduce that entry condition and bring focus to the unit entry. Commissioner Renzi asked about the footprint for the two story . He asked the developer if they lost a unit from the 3 story, as there is one less unit going in. The de veloper agreed. He liked the idea of the loss of one of the units and Commissioner Kachel’s idea of the wrap around porch. He stated this works for him. Commissioner O’Rourke asked why the homes along Ottawa cannot be single family residents as opposed to duplex or row homes. Stephen Bus stated they wanted to feather out the density. Commissioner O’Rourke asked why the feathering could not be accomplished within the development instead of between the development and Wallin Woods. He stated if there w ere single family along Ottawa and then duplexes or row homes behind, any potential change in value to the single family would be impacted within this development as opposed to within Wallin Woods. Stephen Bus stated Wallin Woods was part of their develop ment. Commissioner O’Rourke talked about the density of the project and the concerns of the residents in this regard. He stated the commercial proposed in the northwest part of the project is not pedestrian friendly. There are inconsistencies. He th inks the density is very high for this size of a project. Paul Mitchell stated the developer is not arguing the density is high and believes the density is necessary. He stated he can go back to the annexation agreement and show language that says this e ntire area could be commercial, no feathering at all. It could all be B -5 development and not to exceed 8 flats right on Ottawa Street in accordance with the annexation agreement. They are not proposing that. He mentioned the parcel on the northwest co rner as being a grocery store and that needs to have a rear access. They agreed with staff to have a front door, windows, etc., but no grocery store would move in there if the access was off of Lockport Street with the parking in the rear and a person wou ld have to walk around to the front to enter the building. Commissioner O’Rourke stated he feels this development will create a lot of traffic. Chairman Sobkoviak asked the commissioners how they feel about the height of the commercial buildings, specifi cally the 5 story building.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 21 of 24 Commissioner McKay asked staff about the height of the Village Hall, Staples, Menards, the Grain Elevator, etc. to get a reference of what the height would look like in relation to the proposed 5 story building. She s tated in many cases, those retailers were given higher buildings because they are franchised and that is the height nationwide. She stated the buildings on Rt. 59 back up to no households. She stated that needs to be thought about and brought into pers pective when looking at the height of these buildings. Stephen Bus stated they did not want to develop this as another Rt. 59 strip mall type of development. He stated he did not believe anyone present wants the Rt. 59 heavy, power center type commerc ial in this location. Commissioner McKay wanted to go on record as saying all of the products and drawings are wonderful. Chairman Sobkoviak asked the commissioners if they were against a 5 story building. Commissioner Kachel agreed there are great architectural renderings, but he is concerned about the height of the buildings. He referenced the height of buildings in Naperville’s downtown. He stated he did not see anything more than 4 stories. Stephen Bus stated the City of Naperville put in a 5 story parking deck in the downtown. He stated that was kind of a backwards way of planning the project. One of the things incorporated into the developer’s project is structured parking, built within the building. The TENG Plan would build out a c onsiderable amount of commercial; and then in the back end to accommodate that commercial, the TENG Plan would end up with a 5 story parking deck. That is the situation the developer wants to avoid. Stephen Bus stated they have not come in asking for i ncentives or subsidies. Commissioner Renzi understands it will be 50% higher than anything else. He asked if the parking garage will be 2, 3, 4, or 5 stories. Stephen Bus stated the parking garage will be internal and will go all the way up. Commissi oner Renzi asked what would happen if one story would be lost. Stephen Bus stated the commercial parking ratio gets blown out of whack . Commissioner Renzi asked how badly. Stephen Bus replied they would not be able to accommodate restaurant uses. He w ent on to say when you are trying to attract major tenants to the hard corners; they want to have large vaulted spaces. Commissioner Sanders stated he would support the 5 story concept because that would provide the parking which would make the commer cial viable. Stephen Bus stated there has to be a certain dimensionality that has to be maintained with making a parking garage work with the building being wrapped around it. Commissioner Cox asked if the possibility existed to do sub -level parking. Stephen Bus replied it has been done, but it is expensive. They have not identified it as being necessary on this site. Commissioner Cox stated he thought it had been proposed for some of the condo buildings. Stephen Bus pointed out two buildings on a s lide and stated it was proposed to mitigate the height impact of those buildings to sink them about ½ level. Commissioner Renzi asked what mitigation was being done for shadows. Stephen Bus showed some slides showing the impact of shadows. He stated pre tty much every building is generating a shadow. Michael Schwarz stated staff feels there is a broader policy decision that the Plan Commission and Village Board need to weigh in on. It is a character issue. The shadow is obviously a secondary impact. He stated he feels shadow should not be the main focus. The main focus should be what should be the long term character of Lockport Street and what can be anticipated as the mirror image on the north side of the street.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 22 of 24 He stated as far as details, b enches, bollards, bike racks, etc., those are important. Staff would like to see those details and the developer has indicated the willingness to work with staff. There are bigger issues right now that staff and the developer need to work on. Staff wou ld like to see some details on hardscape and different elements and then that would be attached to the PUD Agreement. Those features would have to be finalized at time of final plat approval. Michael Schwarz went on to say there is nothing that can be d one with bike racks, benches, bollards, etc. to mitigate the height issue. Commissioner Renzi stated as he understands the developer’s testimony if height is taken away from the building, there will be parking restrictions and they will lose the ability t o put restaurants in the commercial. He asked if that was a fair characterization. Michael Schwarz stated there will be some impact if you drop off a floor. He referred to the staff report and the table that lists the different uses . B ased upon the cod e and the uses presented on the drawing staff has indicated a requirement of the code of having 1,373 spaces. The applicant is providing 1,498 spaces. There is a net surplus of 125 parking spaces. Obviously, you don’t know for sure until you know what u ses there will be what the required parking spaces will be. He stated if ¼ of the non -residential area would be used for restaurants; there would be a slight deficiency of parking of 155 spaces. It is hard to give exact figures until the end users and t enants are known . Commissioner Kachel stated that the Riverwalk will need some parking. Possibly in the future, the Village could be putting up a parking deck to take care of that demand. There was a discussion about future downtown parking. Stephe n Bus stated if they removed a floor from the parking garage, they would not meet their densities. There was a discussion with the commissioners and the developer about how much parking would be lost if the height of the building was reduced. Paul Mitche ll talked about density. He stated there needs to be density to support a vibrant downtown. He stated to have density; you have to have building height. Commissioner McKay talked about concerns from the last meeting regarding the commercial and the re sidential and basically the commitment of the commercial. She stated it seems everyone is agreeable to the fact that we need commercial. She asked if there was any way to start half of the commercial. Stephen Bus stated they are seeking approval of the preliminary plat, which is a general document, and they will attach the design guidelines and the PUD plan. Commissioner Renzi asked if it would be conceivably possible if the Commission could do some sort of approval for buildings fronting Lockport Str eet at something like 4 stor i es, not to exceed 5 stories, and then require the petitioner to come ba ck at a later date to plat them. Commissioner O’Rourke stated the Commission makes their recommendation and the Board makes the decision. Stephen Bus stat ed the developer has spent a considerable amount of money to present elevations to give the Commission an idea of what this will look like. They are working with staff on design guidelines to be implemented. Commi ssioner O’Rourke felt the buildings are too tall. He would not lean towards approving a 5 story building just to get restaurant uses. He feels a variance could be approved for parking if it was felt restaurants were important in this location.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 23 of 24 Stephen Bus stated it is not the variance. It is not enough parking for the tenants. If the tenants do not come, they do not have a project. Commissioner O’Rourke stated if the density of the residential was cut down, there would be enough parking. Stephen Bus stated they would not have the rev enue to support building a parking garage. Commissioner Sanders asked staff if a lot of these determinations will be made at the Village Board level. Michael Garrigan stated that was correct. He stated the biggest issue is the height issue. That is a p olicy decision, which will have to be approved at the Village Board level. Staff has outlined their concerns. Michael Garrigan went on to say he has heard concerns from the commissioners this evening. Paul Mitchell stated they are requesting 5 stories, but they are also requesting approval of this project. As usual, the Commission could attach some stipulations and the Village Board will make that ultimate determination. Chairman Sobkoviak asked the commissioners what they wanted to do. He stated th e Commission can send this forward with a stipulation that it not exceed 4 stories. Commissioner O’Rourke asked if 4 was the number. Chairman Sobkoviak responded it could be whatever number the Commission wanted. Chairman Sobkoviak asked the commissione rs how they feel about the project. Commissioner Bonuchi stated she feels it is a beautiful project. She was not sure if it should be 4 or 5 stories. She stated she can understand the concerns of the residents. She told the developer if they had som e kind of 3 -D CAD drawing to present on -line, it could maybe resolve some of the height issues . She feels this is a style that is coming forward with buildings in many ways. She loves what she sees. She also stated when you look at the streets going thr ough the development that probably will be a concern with the residents. Chairman Sobkoviak stated they could add a stipulation regarding height if it would help the commissioners’ vote. He did not want the commissioners to vote against it just because they do not like the height. Chairman Sobkoviak went through the open issues – duplexes or townhomes on Ottawa Street, and the height of the commercial buildings. He stated staff will point out the consideration of height in their staff report to the Village Board. His recommendation was if the Commission feels positive about this project, they should move it along to the Village Board and let them make the final decision on the height. At 11:12 p.m. Commissioner Sanders stated as the Plainfield Vill age Center represents a significant implementation of the Comprehensive Plan and the expanding downtown core, he moved that the Plan Commission recommend approval of the special use for a Planned Development subject to the following stipulations: 1. Compli ance with the requirements of the Village Engineer; 2. Compliance with the requirements of the Plainfield Fire Protection District; 3. That the applicant modify the concept plan for this Planned Development as outlined by the four Village Planners who were present. Commisisoner O’Rourke asked if it should be added to update the traffic study.
Village of Plainfield Plan Commission Minutes December 18, 2007 Page 24 of 24 Chairman Sobkoviak stated the Commission can direct staff to ensure that the traffic study is updated. Commissioner Kachel asked if that was if the rerouting of Rt . 126 did not go through. Commissioner O’Rourke stated Eric Gallt had made a number of comments. Commissioner Renzi stated Eric Gallt’s comments did not concern Phase I and that was what they are approving. Jonathan Proulx stated staff is prepared to p rovide the traffic engineer’s comments to the development team so they can revise the traffic study accordingly , and it will be submitted consistent with Commissioner O’Rourke’s suggestion. That will be presented to the Village Board concurrently with the case. Commissioner Renzi seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: McKay, Renzi, Bonuchi, Sanders, Kachel, Chairman Sobkoviak Nay: O’Rourke The motion is carried 6:1 At 11:16 p.m. Commissioner Renzi made a motion th at the Plan Commission recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat 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 3. That the applicant modify the Preliminary Plat as outlined in staff’s report. Commissioner Kachel seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Bonuchi, Sanders, Kachel, Chairman Sobkoviak Nay: O’Rourke, McKay The motion i s carried 5:2 Chairman Sobkoviak wished everyone a happy yuletide and a happy, healthy, and prosperous New Year. Since there was no further business before the Plan Commission, Chairman Sobkoviak adjourned the meeting at 11:17 p.m. _________________________________________ R espectfully Submitted Carol Millan Planning Secretary – Village of Plainfield