HomeMy Public PortalAbout2006-04-20 PC MinutesVillage of Plainfield Planning Commission Record of Minutes Date: April 20, 2006 Location: Village Hall Chairman Sobkoviak called the meeting to order at 7:02. Roll Call Present: Commissioners Renzi , Fazio, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Absent: Commiss ioner Kachel, Henry, Ed O’Rourke, David Murawski, Park District, Fire District School District, Library District, Police Department New Business CASE: 1237 -031006.V T -MOBILE/PLAINIELD HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 202 Request: Antenna Height Variance: Secti on 9 -11 (Public Hearing) Location: 500 W. Fort Beggs Road Applicant: T -Mobile/Plainfield School District 202 Time: 7:04pm Kelly Runkle announced that this was a public hearing being held in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations of the Vil lage of Plainfield and the State of Illinois. She read the staff report. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in the group of petitioners. Mark Layne, the contract representative for T -Mobile, addressed the commission. He felt that this was a rare instance of a tr ue win -win situation as the district could accomplish their goals, and T -Mobile could accomplish the goals to help serve the area. Chairman Sobkoviak asked who would own this, and Mr. Layne said that T -Mobile would rent the tower and the space on the grou nd it needed. Commissioner Renzi said that when he was on the school board, he had thought this should be done. Chairman Sobkoviak opened up the floor for public comment. There was no response. Commissioner McKay asked if, financially speaking, there h ad been a breakdown of what money would benefit the school district and what money would benefit T -Mobile. Margie Bonuchi, representing the school district, said that the school district would get $13,200 per year for the rental. This was a benefit beca use the school would not have to construct the tower themselves. They would have the opportunity to rent the tower to
PLAN COMMISSION 4/20/06 MINUTES PAGE 2 other companies, and Ms. Bonuchi said that the contract was reviewable every 5 or 10 years – although it was a 30 -year lease. Commission er McKay said that, as the space was being rented, she knew of a case in Westmont where the school district was not asking for enough. Ms. Bonuchi said that the school district had looked into what other districts were getting, and this amount was compara ble, if not more. T -Mobile was also putting $6,000 up front for legal fees and other expenses. Chairman Sobkoviak noted that agreement of the variance to the ordinance said that the commission agreed with the findings of fact. At 7:17pm, Commissioner Fa zio moved to recommend approval of the height variance for a new antenna tower at the Plainfield Technology Center. Commissioner Renzi seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak N ay: None The motion is carried 5:0:0. This case would go forward May 1. CASE: 1228 -011106.RZ BTD REZONING & SITE PLAN REVIEW Request: Rezoning from R -1 to BTD, variance to landscape Buffer for B T D and site plan review (Public Hearing) Location: 15349, 15411 & 15415 S. Route 59 Applicant: Steve Martin (Lighthouse Management Group) Time: 7:18pm Jim Donahue read the staff report. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Carl Buck, the attorney for the petitioner, who said that the plan was prepared and filed on beh alf of Beacon Financial Planning and Lighthouse Management. This was proposed by two residents of Plainfield. He spoke a little about the business, the area, and the proposal. He said that this was not high -volume, high -traffic, or late at night. The B TD provided an architectural standard and buffers to protect the surrounding residences. With the widening of Route 59, a second access point would be created. Commissioner Renzi asked if there would be any changes to the design based on the 14 feet need ed for Route 59. Mr. Buck said that there would not. Commissioner Renzi asked if the second access would have a right -in/right -out access. Mr. Donahue said that 2
PLAN COMMISSION 4/20/06 MINUTES PAGE 3 there would be a full -access as the current curb cut would be used. Commissioner Renzi note d that the traffic engineer said a left -turn could be allowed, and Mr. Donahue said that if IDOT requested change, it would be looked at. Mr. Buck said that this would not create a problem for the petitioner. Commissioner Renzi asked if the lighting was acceptable, and Mr. Donahue confirmed that the only lighted area would be the parking area and a portion of the drive -aisle. Commissioner Renzi confirmed where the trees would be planted. Commissioner Lucenko asked if this was a home occupation, and Mr. Buck said that this was a standalone business. Commissioner Lucenko asked if the southern -most lot would require a new subdivision. Mr. Donahue said that when this was converted, it would come in for Site Plan Review but not subdivision. Chairman Sobkov iak said that the Village might want to ask for a cross -access easement. Mr. Buck thought about coming in under a PUD and said that it would not be a problem to do this. Commission Renzi said that if the property was sold, a new owner came in and nothing was recorded, nothing could be done. Mr. Buck said that when this came in for Site Plan Review a cross -access agreement could be required. Chairman Sobkoviak opened up the floor for public comment. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Arngeta Eldred who lived t o the east. She was against this because she did not want a driveway along the side of the house. She had an in -ground pool and was worried about safety issues. She had lived in the house since 1970 and was concerned about the amount of parking spaces o n the proposed property. If there were only four employees, she did not know why so many were needed. Chairman Sobkoviak said that this was a Village requirement. Ms. Eldred said that it made for a lot of cars coming in and out of the area, and the safe ty issue was her main concern along the fence. She also said that Union Street had a lot of traffic and did not need more. She was concerned about the run -off of water with that much parking lot. She had had a dry house since they had lived there, but i f run -off water went near the pool, it could affect the construction of the pool. She felt that this needed to be unobtrusive. Mr. Buck said that this was the site plan they were currently working on. When Route 59 expand, he said that 14 feet would be lost, and that would make any residences down to Fort Beggs impractical. He understood the arguments made but said that this was a BTD and would have a lower impact. He referenced several buildings in the area, and Chairman Sobkoviak confirmed that the b uilding was not changing. The driveway was going to be the impact, and a discussion ensued regarding the placement of the fence and driveway. Chairman Sobkoviak said that there would be a fence and landscaping. Ms. Eldred was concerned about the third b uilding and access. Chairman Sobkoviak said that cross -access would be required, but there would be a curb cut to Route 59. Commissioner Renzi asked what steps had been taken to contain run -off. Mr. Buck said that there was not any dedicated on -site det ention due to the existing storm sewer; however, if in the course of subsequent development, a detention needed to be created, it would be. The engineer did not see this. 3
PLAN COMMISSION 4/20/06 MINUTES PAGE 4 Commissioner Fazio said that a 6 -foot high fence existed and asked what the possibi lity was of a 10 -foot fence. Mr. Donahue said that this was against the ordinance, and Mr. Buck said that this was the purpose of the trees. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Helen Eldred who said that she lived on the corner of Union and Route 59. She said t hat there was a lot of traffic and more was not needed. She asked if customers would park on the street, and Mr. Buck said that customers would park on the lot. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Emily Bergner who lived at 315 W. Union (across the street to the north and east). She thought that the proposal of the driveway onto Union was bad idea. There was not a lot of traffic now, but she noted that children play on the street. She said that this was a major use and would not alter the essential character; however, she felt the driveway would. Mr. Buck said that, on a daily basis, there would be five employees and an average of three clients. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Richard Eldred who lived on the east lot. His biggest concern was putting a full acces s onto Union with a stop sign and the amount of people turning left onto Route 59. He said that this turn could barely be made now, and he felt it would put more congestion on a little street. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if the traffic engineer had reviewed this. Mr. Donahue had not received any comments back. Ms. Eldred wanted to point out that the other employees from the second building would generate more traffic, and a discussion ensued regarding this. Mr. Donahue said that with the additional drivew ay, traffic to the south would turn into the first available spot. He did not think everyone would use the Union Street entrance. Ms. Bergner said that Route 59 was such a mess that she would take the Union Street entrance. She wanted to know if the ent rances could be made off of Route 59. Chairman Sobkoviak said that the current entrances were the recommendation of the Village Engineer. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Dorothy Bergner of 315 W. Union who had lived there almost 19 years. Her trip onto Rout e 59 was difficult, so she felt that the site would have trouble with access. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Barb and Liz Kel who thought that IDOT and Plainfield were killing the people between Route 30 and Fort Beggs. She was having trouble selling her ho use due to it being residential. Chairman Sobkoviak said that the Village was working hard to address the issue of value on homes in this area which was why the BTD zoning was created. He spoke about the Corbin house and the house nearby as an example of what happened when surrounding conditions worsen. Ms. Kel said that people took pride in their yards through the area. Chairman Sobkoviak said that as time 4
PLAN COMMISSION 4/20/06 MINUTES PAGE 5 went on, this would not be an ideal place to reside; however, the Village could not go in and for ce this. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Brett Smith who lived at 100 N. Union Court. He was against this as it would set up a precedence, and he had no intention of moving. There was no further public response. Commissioner Fazio said that everybody made a strong case tonight; unfortunately, he felt that part of the problem was IDOT. This area was at the point where it was in a transitional period. Commissioner McKay asked about traffic, especially on the weekends. Mr. Buck said that the site would not have open office hours. Chairman Sobkoviak said that the commission had to remember that the use may change, but Commissioner McKay wanted to point out the weekend traffic as this might ease some concerns. Chairman Sobkoviak said that there was no limit on hours by rezoning, and a discussion ensued regarding retail versus BTD. Commissioner McKay said that her ears perk up when she hears issues about safety, and this was much safer than a retail use. She said that this was a difficult thing that was happ ening in this town, especially in rezoning. Commissioner Renzi said that he was going through variance A and had a concern regarding the word “minimal”. He said that this was not minimal, but the setback would be greater. A discussion ensued regarding t his. Commissioner McKay confirmed that the fencing was in place. Chairman Sobkoviak said that any positive motions needed to acknowledge the findings of fact as presented by Staff – for rezoning and variance. At 8:13pm, Commissioner Lucenko moved to rec ommend approval of the requested rezoning from R -1 to BTD for the properties commonly known as 15409, 15411, and 15415 S. Route 59. Commissioner Renzi seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, McKay, Luce nko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 5:0:0. At 8:14pm, Commissioner Lucenko moved to recommend granting a variance to the 10’ landscape buffer requirement of the Business Transition District, as shown on the site plan, for 15409 & 15411 S. Route 59. Commissioner Renzi seconded the motion. 5
PLAN COMMISSION 4/20/06 MINUTES PAGE 6 Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 5:0:0. At 8:15pm, Commissioner Lucenko moved to recommend approval of the site plan for 15409 & 15411 S. Route 59 subject to the following two (2) stipulations: 1. Compliance with the requirements of the Village Engineer. 2. Compliance with the requirements of the Plainfield Fire Protection District. Commissioner McKay seconded the motion . Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 5:0:0. This would go forward on May 1 at the earliest CASE: 1215 -101105.SPR LOT 2 IN CROSSROADS BUSINESS CENTER SU BDIVISION Request: Site Plan Review Location: Southwest Corner of 143 rd Street And Van Dyke Road Applicant: Combined Development LLC Time: 8:16pm Mr. Donahue read the Staff report. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Mark Pasek (for Combined Development) who had nothing to add. Commission Lucenko asked how parking was calculated for something like this. Mr. Donahue said that the ordinance requires two per three, but if the need arose, additional parking must be provided. He said that the setback requiremen ts provided for some wiggle room and elaborated on this. Chairman Sobkoviak opened up the floor for public comment. Mr. Pasek said that he lived in Patriot Square and had no problems with this. At 8:25pm, Commissioner McKay moved to recommend approval of the site plan for Lot 2 of the Crossroads Business Center Subdivision, subject to the following stipulations: 1. Compliance with the requirements of the Village Engineer. 6
PLAN COMMISSION 4/20/06 MINUTES PAGE 7 2. Compliance with the requirements of the Plainfield Fire Protection District. Commiss ioner Lucenko seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 5:0:0. CASE: 1236 -031006.TA SIGN ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT Request: Text Amendment to the S ign Ordinance To add language (Public Hearing) Location: Village Wide Applicant: Village of Plainfield Time: 8:27pm Mr. Donahue announced that 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 opened up the floor for public comment. Bill Lamb addressed the commission and said that a meeting would be held on Tuesday to review the zoning ordinance and asked if this should be part of that ordinance. Chairman Sobkoviak said that the zoning commission did not address any sign issues. Mr. Donahue said that this was a separate endeavor because nothing had been proposed; it was in addition to that ordinance. Mr. Lamb recommended the sign ordinance text amendments be reviewed on Tuesday as a total package, and a discussion ensued regarding this. Mr. Lamb did not want to pass an ordinance that over wrote the amendments. Commissioner Renzi asked if this could go t o the Village Board on Tuesday, and a discussion ensued regarding this being a Committee of the Whole meeting versus a Village Board meeting. Commissioner Renzi had a couple of concerns, like looking at issue 1, if someone had a corner courtyard developme nt. Currently, two signs could be put up (one on each street), but the amendments would reduce this to one. Mr. Donahue said that this was the intent due to pedestrian -geared developments. Commissioner Renzi asked, on issue 2 regarding snipe signs, wh at would stop McDonalds or Culvers from having these signs. Mr. Donahue said that the Village had an agreement with the company that provided this for developments or Village. Commercial uses could not approach this company, and a discussion ensued regar ding this. 7
PLAN COMMISSION 4/20/06 MINUTES PAGE 8 At 8:38pm, Commissioner Fazio moved to recommend approval of a text amendment to the Sign Ordinance, Section 9 -202, to include the following definition: Courtyard Developments: Developments having their main or public entrance facing a central public open space or parking area that serves the overall development. Such buildings shall be geared towards pedestrian traffic versus typical automobile traffic. Commissioner McKay seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll cal l. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 5:0:0. At 8:39pm, Commissioner Lucenko moved to recommend approval of a text amendment to the Sign Ordinance Section 9 -224 D (1) to add the following: Design criteria for sh opping centers, unified business centers, multi -tenant office, courtyard developments , or industrial developments. Commissioner Renzi seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Na y: None The motion is carried 5:0:0. At 8:39pm, Commissioner Fazio moved to recommend approval of a text amendment to the Sign Ordinance Section 9 -224 D (1) to add the following subsection: (e) All courtyard development signage shall be unified and shall face the central public space, pedestrian access way or public parking area serving the overall development. This signage would be in lieu of any other wall signage facing a public roadway. Signage for such developments shall be uniform in style. The V illage Planner or his/her designee shall have final say over whether the proposed development meets the requirements of a courtyard development as defined in Section 9 -202. Commissioner Lucenko seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None 8
PLAN COMMISSION 4/20/06 MINUTES PAGE 9 The motion is carried 5:0:0. At 8:41pm, Commissioner Fazio moved to recommend approval of a text amendment to the Sign Ordinance Section 9 -224 to add the following subsection: (G) Villag e Approved Sign Plazas Village approved sign plazas located within the Village of Plainfield Rights of Way shall be allowed as provided for in the most recent Village Board approved service agreement detailing such services. Signs shall conform to th e standards as outlined in the approved agreement and shall be allowed under this ordinance for so long as such time as an approved agreement is in effect. Commissioner Lucenko seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 5:0:0. At 8:42pm, Commissioner Fazio moved to recommend approval of a text amendment to the Sign Ordinance Section 9 -222 to add the following subsection: (G) Name Duplication – Sign age proposed for any residential subdivision shall not duplicate or mimic any existing subdivision name within the Village of Plainfield’s planning boundaries. Similar sounding or similarly spelled names may be denied at the discretion of the Village Plan ner or his/her designee. Commissioner Lucenko seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Renzi, Fazio, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 5:0:0. These would all go forward to the Village Board on May 1 or at a subsequent meeting. All interested parties should be in touch with Staff for more information. Chairman Sobkoviak adjourned the meeting at 8:44 p.m. __________________ Respectfully submitted, Laura Griffith -Recording Secretary Karick & As sociates, Inc. 9
PLAN COMMISSION 4/20/06 MINUTES PAGE 10 10