HomeMy Public PortalAbout2006-04-18 PC Minutes Village of Plainfield Planning Commission Record of Minutes Date: April 18, 2006 Location: Village Hall Chairman Sobkoviak called the meeting to order at 7:04. Roll Call Present: Commissioners Kachel, Renzi , Fazio, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak, Ed O’Ro urke, Park District, Fire District Absent: Commissioner Henry, David Murawski, School District, Library District, Police Department Minutes The minutes from April 4, 2006 meeting were accepted as presented. Development Report Michael Garrigan read the Staff report: - The proposed Final Plat for the McDonalds was approved as was the Special Use and Site Plan Review. - The Village Board directed the attorney to proceed with drafting the ordinance and Final Plat for Fairfield Ridge. - The Final Plat for Unit 5 A of Creekside was approved. Chairman Sobkoviak said that three cases would be continued (T -Mobile, BTD Rezoning, and Sign Ordinance). New Business CASE: 1237 -031006.V T -MOBILE/PLAINIELD HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 202 (Continued to 4/20/06) Request: Ante nna Height Variance: Section 9 -11 (Public Hearing) Location: 500 W. Fort Beggs Road Applicant: T -Mobile/Plainfield School District 202 Time: 7:07pm At 7:07pm, Commissioner Renzi moved to continue Case 1237 -031006.V to April 20. Commissioner Kachel seco nded the motion.
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 2 Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, Kachel, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0:0. CASE: 1228 -011106.RZ BTD REZONING & SITE PLAN REVIEW Request: Rezoning from R -1 to BTD, varia nce to landscape (Continued to 4/20/06) Buffer for BRD and site plan review (Public Hearing) Location: 15349, 15411 & 15415 S. Route 59 Applicant: Steve Martin (Lighthouse Management Group) Time: 7:08pm At 7:08pm, Commissioner Renzi moved to continue Case 1228 -011106.RZ to April 20. Commissioner Lucenko seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, Kachel, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0:0. CASE: 1236 -031006.TA SIGN ORDINANC E TEXT AMENDMENT Request: Text Amendment to the Sign Ordinance (Continued to 4/20/06) to add language (Public Hearing) Location: Village Wide Applicant: Village of Plainfield Time: 7:09pm At 7:09pm, Commissioner McKay moved to continue Case 1236 -0310 06.TA to April 20. Commissioner Lucenko seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, Kachel, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0:0. Mr. O’Rourke asked how the meetings ended up on Thursdays; he thought this was going to be on Tuesdays. Mr. Garrigan said that, after discussion with the attorneys, there were some schedule conflicts. They scheduled the meeting based on the current caseload and open dates. 2
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 3 CASE: 1234 -030306.AA/PP.SU NORMANTOWN PRAIRIE Request: Annexation (Public Hearing) Special Use for PUD (Public Hearing) Preliminary Plat Location: 127 th Street, west of Route 30 and east of Heggs Road Applicant: Alexander &I Astor, LLC Time: 7:11pm Mr. Garrigan announced tha t this was a public hearing being held in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations of the Village of Plainfield and the State of Illinois. He read the staff report. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if there were any engineering issues. The Village E ngineer said that there were no obvious problems. The main problem was the issue regarding the private roads, and the applicant was willing to replace that with a public right of way. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in the group of petitioners. Rene Martens, t he legal counsel and director of construction and development for Alexander Homes, said that Normantown Prairie would be the second development in the Village of Plainfield. He gave some background and goals of Alexander Homes and some of the conservation designs that the developer planned to use. He went over who Alexander Homes is, where they build, and what they build. He went over the location of Normantown Prairie and the site plan. Regarding the site plan, he reviewed the land use. He introduce d David Rasmussen (principle of Alexander Homes). Mr. Rasmussen went over the site data. He showed the calculation of open space and the proposed density bonuses (using neighborhood design approaches, land planning design amenities, and architectural des ign amenities). He showed the proposed density bonuses based on the calculation of base density and the calculation of non -dominant garage doors. He also went over numerous residential design standards that the developer would be using. He showed numero us specifications of the townhome area as well. He also showed the proposed townhome facades and computer renderings. He went over the single -family area next and showed examples of the single -family homes (nontraditional and traditional architecture). He also showed what features were included in the homes. He went over the landscape treatment and general landscape guidelines – as well as the townhomes landscape design. He showed what the architectural committee did and said that the committee would f ocus on residential design guidelines. He showed Astor Place in Naperville as well as several single -family home examples. Commissioner Kachel asked if the unsheared plants were in the greenspace. Mr. Rasmussen said that closer to the buildings would be landscaped, and the open areas between the townhomes and in the greenway area would be maintained by the Park 3
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 4 District. The Park District would maintain specified plants. Commissioner Renzi confirmed that this was the 20 acres of greenway. Commissioner Renzi said that the packet represented 51% open space, and the developer was saying 46%. Mr. Garrigan said that it was 51%, and Mr. Rasmussen said that a couple of things had changed before submission. Commissioner Renzi asked if it was standard for sta ff to help provide the architecture review committee, and Mr. Garrigan said that it was with the new design guidelines. Regarding the greenway, Commissioner Renzi said that Route 30 would come and touch the north piece of the property. He confirmed that a substantial part of this was going to the park district. Cameron Bettin , of the Plainfield Park District, said that the park district had talked with the developer and staff. It did loop back to the northwest, and eventually it should tie into a propos ed development to come in on the northwest corner of this development with the school park site. The Village did a study to see what could be done regarding crossing Route 30 and EJ&E, but the developer was not sure what became of that yet. Commissioner Renzi confirmed that this would be more passive; there would be no swing sets and would be similar to Norman Greenway. Commissioner Renzi said that there was a reference in the report to moving a school site. Mr. Bettin said that this was actually in the Oswego School District, and the Park District sat down with this developer and the developer in the northwest corner to work out a configuration for a school park site. Mr. Bettin confirmed the location of this on the map as well as the other park site. Commissioner Renzi confirmed that everyone was okay with this. Regarding the greenways, Commissioner Renzi asked if the 20 acres would be maintained and what steps were going to made to preserve this during development. Mr. Rasmussen said that the green way is currently farmland under cultivation, so the developer would be turning it into a greenway. Commissioner Renzi confirmed that the Park District was okay with this, and Mr. Bettin said that the Park District would have input on this being built. Co mmissioner Kachel asked if the maintenance of plants was going to be done early on, and Mr. Bettin said that this was his understanding. Mr. Rasmussen said that he planed to do so as it added to the marketing of the project. Commissioner Renzi wanted to avoid run -off with the greenway to the south, and Mr. Bettin said that they were working with King’s Bridge. Commissioner Renzi asked if this was a donation or if there would also be cash in lieu, and Mr. Bettin said that it would be both. Commissioner R enzi said that there was no school site on this and asked if there would be a contribution. Mr. Garrigan said that there was a general agreement on this. Commissioner Renzi asked what type of bridge would be going over the Normantown Drain, and Mr. Rasmu ssen said that this would be a series of arches (smaller on the outside and bigger in the middle faced with stone and guardrails). Commissioner Renzi said that this sounded like one they saw a few weeks ago, and Mr. Garrigan said that the 4
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 5 one in King’s Br idge sounded similar. Commissioner Kachel confirmed that this was a road and for pedestrians, and Commissioner Renzi wanted to make sure of this. Commissioner Renzi also asked if the reference to the cul -de -sac had been resolved. Mr. Garrigan said that Staff was working with the developer to include greenspace, and they were working on this. He noted that this would have a slight impact on lot size, but Chairman Sobkoviak said that the commission would see this back at Final Plat. With 127 th Street, Co mmissioner Renzi said that there was an entry into the subdivision and confirmed that this was directly across from the park. For traffic issues, Commissioner Renzi said that the Village would have problems with the entry to subdivisions to the east and w est. Mr. Garrigan said that the traffic engineer had looked at this. Commissioner Kachel asked if there would be a crossing light. Mr. Garrigan said that there were no immediate plans to do this, but it may be looked at in the future. Commissioner Kach el thought that this should be done, and Commissioner Renzi said the Village did something similar on 135 th Street. Chairman Sobkoviak confirmed that, in Staff report, Staff had asked the applicant to align the stub street and this was addressed. Commiss ioner Kachel asked if Staff had a rough idea where the street would be put in for a commercial district. Mr. Garrigan said that Staff was looking at this now and had suggested a few reconfigurations. Commissioner Kachel asked if there would be parking on one side of the street in the townhomes area, and Mr. Garrigan said that if the right -of -way remained, the Village had some challenges with parking. The applicant had agreed to parking spaces and was working on utility issues. Commissioner Renzi said th at, with the boulevards, there were a lot of parks that divided the streets, and the Village might want parking lined up along this area. Mr. Garrigan said that he could look at this. Mr. Rasmussen said that the garages were designed to allow for one vis itor. Commissioner Kachel asked if there was going to be a designated crosswalk in the island park, and Mr. Garrigan said that the applicant had agreed to look into this. Mr. O’Rourke asked if it was strange to have neighborhood parks in traffic. Mr. Ga rrigan thought that it represented traditional planning and was consistent with the Village’s PUD and Residential Design guidelines. A discussion ensued regarding this. Mr. Bettin said that those particular areas go to the Homeowners Association. The Par k District did not disagree with the intent and design, but the site did not meet the Park District’s needs. Mr. Garrigan said that King’s Bridge had a similar design, but Mr. O’Rourke was not sure about this particular location with the traffic calming d evice. Mr. Rasmussen said that this was a traffic calming device and visually appealing. The site offered a place to play, but Mr. Rasmussen noted that all parks were close to a street. Mr. O’Rourke said that part of this was a visual for neighborhoods and asked if the same thing could be accomplished by decreasing this area and moving the park elsewhere. 5
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 6 Mr. Rasmussen reiterated the promotion of traffic calming and visual appeal; these were generally perceived to be a good thing and slowed traffic. Mr . Garrigan said that the emphasis was on landscape, but the site had passive greenspace. Mr. O’Rourke said that part of this was traffic calming and confirmed that the Village would like these more on main streets. Commissioner Kachel asked if, when the Homeowners Association took over the greenspace, they would put in seating. Mr. Rasmussen thought that would be wise, and the developer would put this in. Chairman Sobkoviak opened up the floor for public comment. There was no response. Commissioner Lu cenko confirmed that there was an existing gas easement. Commissioner Lucenko noted that the townhomes looked like they would abut the easement and asked if the homeowners would have any rights to go on this. Mr. Rasmussen said that this area will have t urf and grass; the developer just could not build anything on it. Commissioner Kachel noted that there would be no vinyl siding and asked if it was stucco. Mr. Rasmussen said that this would be a type of panel, and Commissioner Kachel confirmed that it w ould be cedar battens . Commissioner McKay asked if there was something in the works to speak with a conservation design specialist. Mr. Rasmussen did not think a specialist would be brought in, but the greenways would be under the control of the Park Dis trict and what they tell them to put in it. The developer should have a landscape plan for Site Plan Review with more details in the greenway area. Commissioner Kachel asked if, in the Normantown Drain area, they had seen any areas that had taken good ho ld. Mr. Bettin said that the area in Shenandoah was going on its fourth year, and it would be similar. He said that it was coming along nicely but took time. Mr. O’Rourke asked what happened for the pipeline owner if the developer raised the grade. Mr. Garrigan said that the pipeline was buried at a specific depth, so the Village did not anticipate any grade change. He said that he would have to review the language of the easement, and Chairman Sobkoviak said that this would be a water management issue if the grade were raised. At 8:11pm, Commissioner Renzi moved to make a favorable recommendation to the Village Board that the proposed Normantown Prairie development would be a logical extension of the Village’s municipal boundaries. Commissioner Lucen ko seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, Kachel, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak 6
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 7 Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0:0. At 8:12pm, Commissioner Lucenko moved to make a favorable recommendation to the Villag e Board that the applicant has complied with the required findings of fact necessary for a Special Use 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 Kachel seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, Kachel, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0:0. At 8:13pm, Commissioner McKay moved to make a f avorable recommendation to the Village Board relating the Preliminary Plat for the Normantown Prairie project subject to the following stipulations: 1. Compliance with the requirements of the Village Engineer. 2. Compliance with the requirements of the Plainfiel d Fire Protection District. 3. The incorporation of a stub street to the east of the subject site. 4. Increasing the right -of -way in the townhome neighborhoods to comply with the requirements of the Village Engineer. 5. Incorporation of a sidewalk along 127 th Stree t. 6. Submittal of a preliminary landscape plan prior to the Village Board. 7. Introduction of some paved crosswalks at the entrance into this development and along certain sections of the boulevard. Commissioner Lucenko seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, Kachel, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0:0. This will go forward once the Annexation Agreement was addressed, probably some time in May. At 8:15pm, the commission took a 10 minute break. The meeting reconvened at 8:26pm. Old Business CASE: 1224 -122005.AA/SU GRANDE PARK SOUTH 7
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 8 Request: Annexation Agreement (Public Hearing) Special Use (Public Hearing) Concept Plan Location: South of Cherry Road, North of Wheeler and west of Ridge Road Applicant: MPI Partnership Time: 8:26pm Chairman Sobkoviak said that for future meetings, the commission would be putting a time limit on proceedings – it would be flexibly 11:00pm. At some points, the commission may elect not to c ontinue after 10:45pm or wrap up as close to 11:00pm as possible. Mike Martin started by saying that a lot of people had been saying that people should go out and walk the property. Mr. Martin wanted to warn that this is private property. Before going o n the property, he reiterated that consent was needed. The developer said that they were happy to escort people onto the property. He invited interested parties to call Moser (630 -420 -3000) or Mike Martin (815 -726 -7311). He had one witness, Eric Russell from the Transportation Consulting Firm, KLOA. He prepared a traffic impact study, and Mr. Martin gave his background. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Eric Russell who introduced himself and walked them through the study and improvements. He first showed t he study area and gave the overview of road features. He explained how the firm studied the traffic and how they anticipated growth for the current area in 10 years. He went over the regional roadway improvements, like the two extensions of 143 rd Street. The long -range plan was to create a continuous major arterial to I -55. He said that the WIKADUKE Trail was also developed. These improvements addressed three key items (improved access to I -55, decreased non -local traffic through the downtown core, and diverted truck traffic around the downtown core). He said that the Comprehensive Plan showed the alignment of 143 rd Street with Route 126 to the West of the WIKADUKE, and the plan accommodated that need. He went over specific improvements: - Route 126 r e -routed onto 143 rd Street and the existing section of Route 126 just becoming Lockport Street. - Route 126 is classified as a truck route, and that would re -classify 143 rd Street as the truck route to I -55. He went over the phases of relocation of Route 12 6: 1) Within one year, the road would run down to the clubhouse, built as a boulevard with a variable width median like Ridge road at 127 th Street. Initially this would be one lane in each direction with left turn lanes. The 120 -foot right -of -way is for a l ong -term plan for five lanes. The existing Johnson Road will be realigned and built as a three -lane roadway. 8
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 9 2) Route 126 would be extended to connect with the existing section of Route 126. The existing section of Lockport Street will “T” into this connect ion. Lockport Street will be built as three -lane roadway. 3) Within eight years, the expansion of relocated Route 126 would change to five lanes. Other streets to be improved will be: - Wheeler Road (to a three -lane roadway with left turn lanes) within one ye ar of Final Plat of Neighborhood 11. - Cherry Road will be reconstructed as an improved two -lane roadway (one year after Final Plat for Neighborhoods 1, 2, and 3). - Future WIKADUKE – the right -of -way would be dedicated to the improvement and fair share contri butions would be made. Traffic signals would be installed when warranted by state. Mr. Russell anticipated five signals – Route 126 and Plainfield Road, Route 126 and Johnson Road, Route 126 and Lockport Road, Route 126 and the future high school site, a nd at Wheeler and Ridge. He said that several other access points would be made as per IDOT standards, at neighborhoods 4, 3 and 4, 8, 7 and 9, 12and the school site, 9 and 10, 2and 3, 1, 5 and 6, 11, and several off of Ridge for Neighborhood 11 that woul d eventually extend to the WIKADUKE. There were two commercial pods (at Route 126 and Plainfield as well as at Ridge and Wheeler); Mr. Russell said that these might be right -in/right -out depending on the location of access. The firm studied the access dr ives and intersections and came up with needed lane designs. Commissioner Fazio asked about Section 11 of the book and who paid for the development of the road. Eric Gallt, the Village Traffic Engineer, said that the developer had agreed to construct the improvements. The exact payment had not been determined in full, but this was being expected of the developer. Mr. Garrigan said that the terms were at the Village Board; discussions were ongoing. He also said that Exhibit C did not reflect the current stage of negotiations, and Mr. Martin reiterated that the developer was exceeding the requirements of the Village. Commissioner Fazio said that in Section 7 of the book (pages 4 and 5), on the characteristics of the area roadway system, he totaled up the pages of all the major roadways and calculated approximately 15,375 cars per day. On Figure 4, during peak traffic, he added up the numbers of cars at the intersections, and it came to 15,145 cars. He asked if he was missing something regarding the appr oximate use and the peak times. Mr. Russell clarified where the numbers came from and said that typically peak hours would be 10% of the total. Commissioner Fazio calculated the predicted amount of cars and asked if this included the developments going u p in the area. Mr. Russell felt that this was part of the estimated growth, but he gave the exact calculation. 9
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 10 Commissioner Fazio said, regarding Route 126, the report (on page 10) stated that IDOT had issued a letter of understanding that they would not approve this until the extensions were completed. He knew this was the Village’s goal and wanted to know if there was any part where this could be dropped. Mr. Gallt said that the Village has had ongoing discussions with the state for a little over two years, and this was one component of the re -route. The state had approved of the concept, but there was always a chance they would say no. It was unlikely, though, based on the jurisdictional transfer of Route 30 this summer and other “pieces” that were being put into place. Commissioner Kachel asked if something did fall through if 119 th Street in Bolingbrook was considered a truck route. Mr. Gallt said that it was a strategic regional arterial with truck designation. Commissioner Kachel said that it might take care of northerly traffic if this did not go through, and Mr. Gallt agreed that it would take a portion of it. Commissioner Kachel confirmed that WIKADUKE to I -80 would help as well. Further discussion ensued regarding if this did not go throu gh. Mr. Gallt said that certain road improvements would be required, and a discussion ensued regarding the western boundary of the traffic study. It was determined that the Grande Park South study went as far west as Schlapp. Mr. Gallt said that it was recognized that this road would be required to be five lanes in the long -term. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if Mr. Gallt found any issues with any of the conclusions. Mr. Gallt said that any conclusions that were addressed in the report, the developer was pr oviding above and beyond what was required. A brief discussion ensued regarding where Lockport T’s into re -routed Route 126. Commissioner Renzi noted that Mr. Russell said that it was hard to anticipate who would be traveling on this road. Commissioner Renzi confirmed that part of the study included the likely locations of commercial nodes. With the seven to ten transits per day per household, he asked what impact it would have on Route 126 if the commercial area was moved further south. Mr. Russell sa id that it was assumed that the significant east -west flow would use rerouted 126. He also expected existing traffic to be drawn to the commercial center, so it would be used no matter where it was located. Chairman Sobkoviak noted that there would be a commercial node on every section. Commissioner Renzi clarified that traffic flow would be improved if commercial was moved, and a discussion ensued regarding the WIKADUKE commercial proposed. Commissioner Renzi said that the road seemed to have exponenti al traffic, and he wanted to try and keep localized commercial off of this major node. Mr. Garrigan said that Staff was looking at this further and outlining where commercial was viable. Another discussion ensued regarding mixed use density and other pos sibilities. Mr. Garrigan said that Staff did have concerns regarding the commercial areas but continued to work with the applicant on this. The commercial expert was anticipated to come in during May to give his perspective. Chairman Sobkoviak wanted th is to come forward as soon as possible. There was some further discussion regarding neighborhood 10
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 11 commercial. Mr. Gallt said that the two five -lane roadways would go in before the traffic problems like at Caton Farm Road and Route 59 occurred. Commission er McKay had concerns regarding future homeowners and wanted to know how homeowners would be protected from Route 126. Mr. Gallt said that there would be minimal trucks on Route 126 due to other roadways going in. There were a lot of trucks on there now due to construction. He did not anticipate a lot of heavy 18 -wheelers, and the developer had planned for extensive landscaping and berms. Commissioner McKay said that it was being advertised as re -routing truck traffic. Mr. Gallt said that this had to b e done per the state’s request, but it was not a major truck route. He said that there would be a higher percentage of trucks when WIKADUKE came in, but the main truck re -route would be affected by Route 59 and 30. He said that this road plan was require d for the rest. Commissioner McKay said that there were a lot of problems recently regarding disclosing information to the homeowner and wanted to be sure that this would be disclosed to the potential residents. Mr. Gallt said that they had transportatio n open houses, and Mr. Martin had no objection to disclosing this. He suggested having a disclosure form for residences as part of purchase. He noted that when people see the plan, they would see the Route 126 going through. Mr. O’Rourke asked how long Mr. Russell had been doing this type of work, and Mr. Russell said 20 years. Mr. O’Rourke asked, based upon the model used, if he had had an opportunity to do post -analysis. Mr. Russell said that he did not as the firm did not have that luxury typically. He said that, sometimes, they re -evaluated a situation after new development came in to incorporate it into the report. Mr. O’Rourke said that this is observed throughout the Chicago area. Mr. Martin confirmed that Mr. Russell also worked with municipa lities and counties. Mr. O’Rourke said that part of the plan was to install traffic signals when warranted; he asked when this was normally warranted. Mr. Russell said that major warrants were usually volume -warranted on major and minor streets. He said that both had to be at certain thresholds at different times of the day. Usually, a jurisdiction liked to see more than one warrant met before they install a light. Mr. O’Rourke asked if, based on the analysis and locations identified, he had any projec tions as to when those warrants might exist. Mr. Russell said that, in looking at a full build -out, the intersections would meet the warrants at peak hours. However, he felt it was likely that those warrants would be made. He did not do a stage analysis but did a full build -out analysis. Mr. O’Rourke confirmed that, based on this analysis, the lights would be warranted at full build -out. Mr. O’Rourke asked what the plan was for other traffic controls. Mr. Russell said that stop signs would be put in a t all of these locations (with turn lane improvements) on a case -by -case basis. He did not specifically identify interim traffic improvements; however, he said that stop signs were typically put in. Mr. O’Rourke said that, on Figure 12, Mr. Russell talke d about traffic control signals; Mr. O’Rourke asked if that figure had changed. Mr. Russell noted that a signal would be there. Mr. O’Rourke asked if he had looked at analysis of stub streets, but Mr. Martin said that it was a question for Mike Schoppe. 11
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 12 Commissioner Kachel wanted to know if they could curve the Route 126 and Lockport Street sharper by the pond. Mr. Gallt said that there were two issues: the curve was made within the creek to try to conserve it, and it was also curved based on speeds. Carl Buck addressed the commission (representing a group of homeowners next to Neighborhood 10). He looked at the maps in the book and saw a picture (Figure 7) of the site. He did not know if they were using a different Site Plan Review because the traf fic figures indicated neighborhood 10 as Neighborhood 11, and the house counts were different. Mr. Russell said that, at the time of the study, this was updated; however, the number of units should not impact the study. Mr. Buck noted that Mr. Russell sa id traffic was a function of three things – with respect to size and type of land use, he asked Mr. Russell to define what he meant. Mr. Russell said that he used trip generation equations and rates, and this was based on the square footage and dwelling u nit basis (as used by traffic engineers). He said that the density of the land use was applied against the equations to determine a traffic estimate. Mr. Buck said that if the density goes down, the traffic volume goes down. On page 4, Mr. Buck said tha t Mr. Russell talked about the existing number of vehicles that travel along Route 126, but he did not see any analysis of increased truck traffic. Mr. Russell said that the number came from IDOT. Mr. Buck asked if IDOT anticipated the truck traffic incr easing. Mr. Russell did not know, but he said that the total future estimates included truck traffic. Mr. Buck confirmed that there was a 10% increase historically and asked if this applied to trucks. Mr. Russell said that this was hard to say as it was dependant on how industrial uses grow. Mr. Buck said that one of the things recognized was two schools and asked if the report took into consideration traffic from the schools. Mr. Russell said that the report did not specifically include this because t he bulk of traffic for school would be internal and would not access the arterial system Mr. Buck asked about the adjacent developments (on page11) and said that he totaled a different number. Mr. Russell said that he basically doubled the amount of traf fic before including the traffic generated from Grande Park South. Mr. Buck said that a conclusion was made on page 18 that residential and commercial distribution would be similar; he asked for clarification on this. Mr. Russell said that traffic would come in and depart this area in a similar fashion based on studies. Mr. Buck said that on page 20 Mr. Russell had an explanation of two factors that reduced the total traffic vehicle trips. The first was the residential and retail uses in the developmen t, which constituted a 10% retail trip reduction. The second was the commercial pass -by reduction, which constituted a 25% trip generation reduction. He confirmed that the total number of trips was reduced by 35%. He also confirmed that the first was ba sed on the premise that residents would walk or bike, and Mr. Russell added that they might also drive using internal roadways without accessing arterial streets. Mr. Buck confirmed that that would limit new trips on external roadways. Mr. Buck verified 12
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 13 that the commercial was three percent of the total development. Mr. Russell said that pass -by traffic was already on the roadway and bypassed retail development ; pass -by traffic would shop at the development and continue on. Mr. Buck said that on page 23 , under recommendations and conclusions, he confirmed that it was still Mr. Russell’s opinion that external roadway improvements would be needed to accommodate this. Mr. Russell had identified 12 external roadway improvements needed to operate at a satisf actory rate. Mr. Buck asked for clarification on who would pay for this cost. Mr. Gallt said that deve lopers, private funding, and Village funding would pay for it, and there were pieces of this in place already. Mr. Buck asked about a timeline. Mr. Ga llt said that part of the pieces was based on certain developments being constructed in the area; he gave the timeline for existing 143 rd improvements. Regarding Figure 9, Mr. Buck said that the new site generated traffic volumes. By Neighborhood 10, Mr. Buck noted the numbers 105 and 90 in the upper left corner of the box and asked what these were. Mr. Russell said that 105 represented trips on Route 126 in the morning, and 90 represented trips on Route 126 in the afternoon. Mr. Buck confirmed that the numbers 20(10) and 55(30) represented the morning and afternoon exit. Mr. Buck said that this was where they intended to have the high school and asked if the location would alter these numbers. Mr. Russell said that there would be a third driveway for the school site that was not shown. Mr. Buck confirmed that they did not know the number of cars that would be going into the high school. Mr. Russell said that he was recommending a westbound left -turn lane into the neighborhood as well as the school at this location. Mr. Buck said that one of the areas of particular interest was Figure 5 (the planned roadway system). It showed what would become Lockport Street ’s cul -de -sac on the west end. It showed the future WIKADUKE Trail, and there was some dis cussion regarding the cul -de -sac on Ridge Road. Mr. Russell said that this was a Village decision. Mr. Buck asked about paying for signalization and if the agreement included payment for the signal once it was warranted. Mr. Russell said that some devel opers were being required to pay in full, some in part. Mr. Martin asked if the improvements justified by the study were the improvements the client was making. He noted that the generation and volume of traffic did not justify the client’s agreement to improve Route 126. Mr. Russell agreed that they were building to the Village Staff’s recommendation. Biff George (already sworn in) lived off of Cherry Road. He asked who commissioned and paid for the study, and it was confirmed that the developer did. He asked where Mr. Russell lived and if he had had an opportunity to drive this area. Mr. Russell said that he lived in Lake Zurich and traveled this area a lot. Mr. George said that the WIKADUKE trail was mentioned 20 times, but on page 43, Mr. Russell stated that the recommendation took into account the future WIKADUKE. 13
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 14 Mr. Russell said that his recommendation for improvements needed take into account what the ultimate state design was for the WIKADUKE Trail as it was intended to be five -lane roadway. He also said that when the intersection was built out, it would be consistent with the ultimate plan. Mr. George asked if Mr. Russell referenced the 2007 -2012 IDOT Improvement study as the WIKADUKE was not mentioned in this study. Mr. Russell said that Kendall County was taking the lead on this, and Chairman Sobkoviak said that the WIKADUKE committee had met continuously for a year. Mr. George asked if anyone knew when it will be built, and Chairman Sobkoviak said that: no one owned the property yet. Mr. George asked if, in regards to Route 126, the developer would be paying for all five lanes, but Mr. Martin said that it had not been decided yet as part of the annexation agreement. When the hearing went to the board level, it would be finalized as Mr . George also confirmed that there was an error in stating that the schools would serve Plainfield District 202. Mr. George asked if Mr. Russell was aware of the grade elevations on Johnson Road, but Mr. Martin said that this was a question for the engine er. Mr. George said that a lot of traffic was planned for there, and it seemed to be in a valley. Mr. George asked if, on one of the maps, Existing Traffic Volumes, it included the developments being built. Mr. Russell said that it did in July of 2005 when the study was initiated. Mr. George said that Mr. Russell’s report stated that several roadway improvements would offer significant improvements and asked when 143 rd Street, WIKADUKE, and County Line would be completed. Mr. Russell said that County Line would be development driven (based on the development north of County Line); however, these were in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. George said that on page 11, as of December 2005, this was 10% built and occupied; and in March 2005, this was 30% built and occupied. Mr. Russell said that the information was obtained from development that came in from July 2005. Mr. George said that on page 14, Mr. Russell cited a 10% growth rate. At the Mayor’s breakfast, Mr. Gallt mentioned that at Route 126 and Coun ty Line Road, there were 11,000 cars per day – while Mr. Russell’s report said 3,800 cars per day. Mr. Russell said that there were 7,800 cars per day figure from IDOT. Mr. George said that, on page 6, the study discussed traffic volumes and counts, but the dates were July 19 and July 20. He asked how Mr. Russell characterized this in July versus March, but Mr. Russell said that he did not always have the luxury of controlling this. Their firm tried to do this on Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday, and not on holidays. On any given day, the figures could be off 5% one way or another. Mr. George confirmed that it was a fair assumption that July did not include school and vacation times; although Mr. Russell said that these figures might be similar. Mr. George said that on page 20, the report stated that residents would walk or bike; however, the developer stated that if people tend to drive when going beyond three or four houses. Mr. 14
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 15 Russell did not think this was the case, but he said the roads would b e interconnected within the development for people to drive internally. Mr. George confirmed that Mr. Russell had personally observed traffic at Plainfield Road and Route 126. He entered into public record a picture of Route 126 and Plainfield Road durin g typical traffic times. Mr. George said that on 143 rd Street west of Route 59 to Steiner, there were two newer subdivisions. He asked if the plan was for 143 rd Street to be a truck route, why a two -lane road was currently being developed. Mr. Gallt sai d that the agreement of that portion was in the late 90’s prior to the Village’s concept, so the Village had the developer do this. He noted that the Village would have to go back to pay for these, possibly using traffic impact fees. Mr. George asked if the homeowners in Dayfield and other subdivisions knew that this was about to be a truck route. Mr. Gallt said that they had informed any residents who had called; however, he did not know that everyone knew that. Mr. George asked how the developer was d oing this. Mr. Gallt said that the concept had been public knowledge for two years, and the topics were in the newspaper as well as transportation open houses. As development occurred, the Village would ask the developers to ask them. Mr. George questio ned the report as to the time of year, and also showed the increase in police calls in the Village of Plainfield. William Page (previously sworn in) addressed the commission; he lived in Oswego Plains. He said that everyone kept talking about the WIKADUK E Trail (Will Kane DuPage Kendall), and he was on Kendall County board years ago and asked if there was any funding available for construction. Mr. Gallt said that there were portions already constructed, and the developers were responsible. He noted tha t a full build out was being done south of Caton Farm Road. The Village adjusted Grande Park North to address this, and the idea was that development assisted construction. Mr. Page asked if there was any plan in place to acquire the property Wheeler Roa d and south, and Mr. Gallt said that there was no funding in place to acquire it. Mr. Page asked if this was feasible in the next 10 years, and Mr. Gallt believed that it was feasible and was dependant on growth. He said that as developers came in and de veloped to the east, they expected it to fall into place. Based on the surrounding development, he felt it was reasonable. Mr. Page asked if the entire area would be filled with rooftops to do this, and Mr. Gallt said that there would be some type of d evelopment. Mr. Garrigan said that this was planned to be medium and low density residential development. Some discussion ensued regarding the road in the Grande Park South plan. Mr. Russell said that this road was not assumed in the plan, and Mr. Page asked if existing Ridge Road would be used and its intersection with Lockport Street. A discussion ensued regarding Ridge Road intersecting with Lockport Street. 15
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 16 Mr. Page said that when going northbound on Ridge, a car can turn right or left on Lockport. Mr. Russell said that turning right would go to Plainfield Road. Mr. Page asked if this had been planned, and Mr. Russell said that they had suggested improvements to Ridge and Lockport, like turn lanes. Mr. Russell indicated a traffic signal was warra nted at Route 126 and Plainfield Road. Mr. Page asked a question regarding traveling east on Route 126 and going to the new Route 126. He said that if 143 rd Street was not completed, a car could go back to Route 126 to go south. He wanted to know how a car would go north and questioned the condition of Ridge Road north of 135 th Street and 127 th Street. Mr. Page said that the portion of Ridge Road between 135 th and 127 th was originally presented as a six -lane road, and it was a one -lane road currently. A brief discussion ensued regarding the length of time to build this road. Mr. Page said that, in making growth projections, Mr. Russell took a 10% growth rate. He asked if he took into account that Kendall County was the second fastest growing county in the nation. Mr. Russell said that he took into account the past years’ growth. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Robert Soho (1995 Johnson Road in Oswego) who said that the surrounding properties were all deeded 10 -acre parcels, so it would always be a coun try area. He said that a lot of people were going to take Johnson Road. Mr. Russell said that they were projecting 100 to 150 vehicles per hour in rush hour, or two cars per minute. Mr. Russell projected that most people would most likely be going to Ro ute 126, but there would be some on Johnson Road. Mr. Soho asked if the road could be rerouted to the north. He also noted that, in Minooka, on both sides of WIKADUKE, any parcel that went to the Village had to donate money to the WIKADUKE. They took a per -acre amount for future development. Mr. Gallt said that the current standard for developments along the WIKADUKE included building interior lanes first, and then building exterior lanes. As this was developed, it would be completed for five lanes. G eorge Patterson addressed the commission; he lived on Ridge Road adjacent to Neighborhood 10. He asked how people would get to Yorkville. Mr. Russell said that people would turn left, the same as today. Mr. Patterson wanted to know what would stop peopl e from cutting through, and Mr. Russell said that it depended on where they were going. Pete Pesterais (from 1998 Johnson Road, already sworn in) said that his attention was caught with the project of two cars per minute, as it is two cars per hour now. As it related to traffic signals, he asked if there should be a traffic signal at Route 126 and Plainfield Road. Mr. Gallt said that, currently, this was a combination of county and state jurisdiction. The Village had had discussions with both parties ev en though it was not within a mile of the Village’s boundaries. Mr. Pesterais asked if any studies were done on the accidents at this intersection. Mr. Gallt said that a study was not done, but the Village had data since they had been pursuing signals. 16
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 17 Mr. Pesterais said, as it related to Johnson and Plainfield Roads, his concern was that now it was not uncommon to sit at the intersection because of the hills on either side. He waited a minute now and was worried about how long it would take after devel opment. He felt that a traffic signal should go in early. Mr. Russell said that traffic signals may go in earlier, and Mr. Pesterais envisioned a lot of people avoiding going east by going west and then going back. Jim Hug o ni n asked Mr. Russell how many hours he spent driving the area. Mr. Russell said that he observed traffic du ring high volume days. Mr. Hugo n i n asked if it was typical to do projects this large, and Mr. Russell said that he was hire d by municipalities. Mr. Hugo ni n asked how many muni cipalities he worked with versus developers. Mr. Russell said that he worked for approximately 20% municipalities and 80% developers. Mr. Hug o ni n said that the focus was usually on the development. Mr. Russell said that he looked at this but took into a ccou nt other subdivisions. Mr. Hugoni n asked if it would be safe for this development to go forward before Plainfield Road and Route 126. Mr. Russell said this had been a concern for some time, and if a light could be put in today, it would be ideal. Ho wever, he did not feel that this development should be stopped from going further. Mr. Hugo n i n asked, possibly four years out, where the construction traffic and new developments would go. Mr. Russell said that this would go through Plainfield Road, Ridg e Road, and Route 126. Mr. Hugoni n said that, until the 143 rd Street corridor was built, 15% of traffic would go north and 15% would go south. Mr. Russell said that it was docum ented that this was warranted today, and some of this traffic would go thr oug h this area. Mr. Hugo n i n asked if it was typical that accidents were not in the reports. Mr. Russell said that this was not always in the report. He was not arguing that this was not warranted; they just did not have control. Mr. Hug o n i n said that with the impact coming to the area, this area should be brought up for safety concerns. Mr. Hug o n i n asked if it was typical to divert commercial routes through residential neighborhoods, and Mr. Russell said that this was not typical. Mr. Hug o n i n said that t his was a non -typical move and would be smarter to put through a commercial area. Mr. Russell said that the WIKADUKE was running through several residential developments. Mr. Hug o n i n asked why this was not put in as a commercial road before. Mr. Gallt s aid that the agreement for Grande Park North was executed before the WIKADUKE was brought out. He said the WIKADUKE plan was adopted after an agreement was entered into with the developer. Mr. Page said that as long ago as 1990, what is now known as Ridg e Road or Stewart Road was part of the WIKADUKE Trail Concept. There were parts of this that were required to be built as if it would be put in. He said that this should have conformed to the WIKADUKE Concept. Mr. Hugo n i n said that the two -lane road see med to be more practical. He asked if Mr. Russell would suggest grid roads for municipalities. Mr. Russell said that grid systems were ideal, but it depend ed on the environment. Mr. Hugo n i n asked him about the Grande Park North study, and Mr. Martin obj ected that Grande Park North was not part of this development. 17
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 18 Mr. Hugo n i n said that the same problem was here and wanted to know if getting away from grid roads was a good idea. Mr. Russell said that he is overlooking the ultimate plan of the Village to extend Route 126 to bypass the Village. Mr. Hug o n i n said that having a north -south road was a good idea but not a bypass highway. Mr. Russell said that the relocation of Route 126 was not intended to be a highway as it would be a slower speed than it is now. Mr. Hugo n i n asked if, taking that context, Mr. Russell would lobby more to have Route 126 two lanes. Mr. Russell said that he would not recommend it. Mr. Hug o n i n confirmed that an overall study of where trucks were going within the area was not do ne; he felt that trucks would be going south. Jim Konawalick addressed the commission and said that he had been living in the area for 30 years. He was comfortable with traffic and was just trying to avoid traffic blunders; because if this was not handle d correctly, he predicted that people would end up shopping in Oswego. He wanted the Village to look at alternatives, like an alternate truck Route that did not touch a subdivision at all. Mr. Martin noted that no bonuses had been given for re -routing Ro ute 126. Mr. Konawalick asked if, at the various locations, the developer had any truck routes going through commercial, and Mr. Russell said that the truck route bypassed the downtown. Mr. Konawalick said that no matter what is done, the downtown would always be a difficult intersection and asked if anyone had been in Plainfield during any parades. Mr. Russell said that this is a wonderful area with a need for a re -route. Mr. Konawalick asked if a grid pattern seemed detrimental, but Mr. Russell said n o that it achieved the overall goal of the Village. Lu Barone addressed the commission and confirmed, in Mr. Russell’s study, that the peak hours in the morning were considered 6:30am to 7:30am. Ms. Barone worked in La Grange and said that she left earli er. Mr. Russell said that the earliest peak hours were out in this area, and closer to the city was 7:00am. Ms. Barone said that at 5:30am on I -55, traffic was bad, so she felt that peak hours needed to be reviewed. She asked why were not weekends revie wed, and Mr. Russell said that mid -day Saturday was reviewed around retail centers. Ms. Barone asked about the growth in Plainfield in the last 20 years. She moved to the area in 1984, and at that time, when she crossed Route 53, she was the only vehicle on I -55. She asked if this was looked at. Mr. Russell said that, of the reports he had done, the studies started earlier based on highest traffic times. Ms. Barone asked, when re -routing 126, where all the trucks would go. Mr. Russell said that the tr uck route would not be re -designated unless this went all the way to I -55. Ms. Barone asked what would happen if the trucks ended up on Route 59, if the Route 126 re -route was not allowed. Mr. Russell said that trucks travel that way today. Ms. Barone said, in his study, she would like him to consider the amount of traffic that would travel Johnson Road down to Schlapp. She also wanted him to consider road intersections at hills and asked why the road was re -routing here instead of further east. Mr. R ussell said that the Comprehensive Plan required it, so he was sure a lot of thought was put into it. 18
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 19 Chairman Sobkoviak closed the time for public comment. Mr. Martin said that the developer was building roads to the specifications of the Village which were higher standards than the study. Regarding peak hours, Commissioner Renzi asked what level of capacity would generate an acceptable level of transportation. Mr. Russell said that 25,000 to 35,000 would be an acceptable level. Commissioner Renzi con firmed that the road would five lanes in anticipation of 36K. Commissioner Renzi said that there was a lot of talk regarding intersections and looking at Table 6 (Capacity Analysis), there was an “F” for intersection. Mr. Russell said that it was not unc ommon for a small street to intersect a larger one. However, he said that it was the best it could be at this point, and he briefly elaborated on this. Commissioner Renzi said that one part of the 143 rd Street extension was Updike Road and asked for a ti me projection on this. Mr. Gallt said that this was immediately east of Plainfield Road and was already addressed in an agreement with a developer. The Village was waiting for the developer to proceed and was working with them. The project was expected to move forward in the next five years, and this road should move forward ahead of it. Mr. O’Rourke said, regarding the timing of study, that many years ago, he did some private traffic studies and some numbers could be adjusted for seasonality. Mr. Russ ell said that he made some commercial adjustments for the holiday season, but he did not typically make residential adjustments. Mr. O’Rourke asked if the staff comfortable with this, and Mr. Gallt confirmed they were. Commissioner McKay said that, as lo oking at the re -routing of Route 126, the objective was to move people off of Lockport Street. She asked if it was true that if the property was able to be acquired that it would lead the Village back to what it had now. Mr. Gallt said that the Village w ould be left with the condition it had now, but the goal was to re -route traffic off of Lockport. It was not solely to get out of the downtown area; however, this was an important consideration. Commissioner McKay thought it was important to note that th is was a means to an end, and the most important thing was the timeframe. Mr. Gallt said that it was not nailed down, but the project had not been approved. There were approximately four pieces that needed to come together for this traffic project to mov e forward, and this was one of them. He said that the Village was committed to improving this in a timely fashion. He knew how long this could take, and the improvements were trying to be provided before development. Chairman Sobkoviak asked about a con tinuation, and Mr. Martin said that he would not have any witnesses on May 2. Mr. Buck would be bringing in witnesses on May 16, and he was not sure if Mr. Davidson would provide witnesses. The case would again continue to June. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if this coincided with Staff’s plans, and Mr. Garrigan said that continuing to May 16 would coincide. 19
PLAN COMMISSION 4/18/06 MINUTES PAGE 20 At 11:17pm, Commissioner Renzi moved to continue case 1224 -122005.AA/SU to May 16. Commissioner McKay seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called f or a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, Kachel, McKay, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 5:0:0. Chairman Sobkoviak adjourned the meeting at 11:18 p.m. __________________ Respectfully submitted, Laura Griffith -Recording Secretary Karick & Ass ociates, Inc. 20