HomeMy Public PortalAbout2006-05-16 PC MinutesVillage of Plainfield Planning Commission Record of Minutes Date: May 16 , 2006 Location: Village Hall Chairman Sobkoviak called the meeting to order at 7:15 . Roll Call Present: Commissioners Renzi (arrived at 7:22), Henry, Kachel, McKay, Sobkoviak , Ed O’Rourke, Fire District Absent: Commissioner Fazio , Lucenko, David Murawski , Park District , School District, Library District, Police Department Minutes The minutes from the April 18, 2006 meeting were accepted as presented. The minutes from the Apr il 20, 2006 meeting were accepted as presented. The minutes from the May 2, 2006 meeting were accepted as presented. Development Report Michael Garrigan read the staff report: - The Special Use for the Villas of Plainfield on Route 59 was a tie vote (3 -3 ). Since the Village ordinance requires a majority vote of the Board if it was rejected by the Plan Commission, this would come back for reconsideration. - The Rezoning to BTD for 15409 thru 15415 Route 59 was approved. - The Site Plan Review for 15409 and 15 411 was approved. Chairman Sobkoviak confirmed that on the BTD rezoning, the driveway was approved off of Union. New Business CASE: 1240 -032406.AA/RZ AVERY, KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS Request: Annexation and Map Amendment (Public Hearing) Rezoning (Public H earing) Location: North side of Renwick Road, west of the EJ&E Railroad, east of Lily Cache Creek Applicant: William Avery represented by Michael J. Martin
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES 5/16/06 PAGE 2 Time: 7:18 pm Michael Schwarz read the Staff report. Chairman Sobkoviak confirmed that this was strictly for rezoning and not the Site Plan Review. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Michael Martin and William Avery. Mr. Martin said that Mr. Avery was intending to donate this to the Knights of Columbus. The balance was not going to be developed for the most part. The developer had talked to the forest preserve district who did not have any objections to the meeting hall being located here. The uses were default uses, and if the church never went forward with this, he encouraged staff to limit the uses. He noted that the Site Plan Review would still need to come through, and right now, this would be on well and septic (unless the property to the south developed). Commissioner Kachel asked if this would be one story or two. Mr. Martin said that it woul d probably be one -story, but the Village would maintain control over this. Chairman Sobkoviak noted that the Village could put any limitation on the Annexation Agreement. Chairman Sobkoviak opened up the floor for public comment. There was no response. Mr. O’Rourke asked if the applicant had had conversations with the forest preserve. Mr. Martin confirmed he had, and that the survey was delivered to him as an adjoining land owner. T he lawyer said that they would not object to the site being used for t his purpose, and all of the information had been received. Mr. Schwarz added that Staff had also had conversations with the forest preserve and there was no request for delay . At 7 :3 0 pm, Commissioner Henry moved to adopt staff’s findings of fact and reco mmend approval of the request for annexation and Map Amendment (Rezoning) from the current Will County A -1 (Agricultural District) to the Village of Plainfield (B2) General Business District for the property located on the north side of Renwick Road, west of the EJ&E Railroad, and east of Lily Cache Creek . Commissioner McKay seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Henry, Renzi, Kachel , McKay, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 5:0:0. Chairman Sobkoviak asked t hat the a pplicant be in touch with staff regarding when this would go forward to the Village Board. Old Business 2
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES 5/16/06 PAGE 3 CASE: 1224 -122005.AA/SU GRANDE PARK SOUTH Request: Annexation Agreement (Public Hearing) Special Use (Public Hearing) Concept Plan Loc ation: South of Cherry Road, North of Wheeler and west of Ridge Road Applicant: MPI Partnership Time: 7:31pm Mr. Garrigan said that this was a continuation of a public hearing, and Mr. Vaupel was asked to be in attendance regarding the commercial area s. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Mr. Vaupel who was asked to take a look at Grande Park South regarding commercial and setting aside enough land for this. He said that this went back to the Comprehensive Plan updated to make sure that enough land was set a side for future needs. Major commercial wa s usually located on major roads with signif icant res idential density within three miles, and Plainfield had developed commercial to concentrate on intersection s. The Village had tried to design commercial within these criteria. He compared Route 30 to Route 59 and said that a lot of commercial entities did not feel that there wa s enough need to bring people off of Route 59 to Route 30. With low density in this area, he did not think density would be created to have commercial succeed west of the WIKADUKE. He believed that this development ha d set aside enough commercial based on adjoining properties and future development. Commissioner Renzi confirmed that the density going into Grande Park South was between 8 ,000 and 10,000 people. Commissioner Renzi asked if 40 acres wa s enough to service this amount of people as the residents would have to move up the rec onfigured Route 126 to shop. Mr. Vaupel said that there would be plenty of intersections along WIKADUKE for people to shop. He compared this to people living in the Lakelands that go to Route 59 for significant retail. Commissioner Renzi compared this to Caton Farm and Route 59 where people would travel to this same small commercial lot . A d iscussion ens ued regarding if this had a wide enough road and i f there was enough commercial. Commissioner Renzi wanted to foster a sense of local community at a small retail shop that was easier to get to . Mr. Vaupel said that as this wa s infilled between Grande Par k South and the WIKADUKE, it would be easier to get to. Commissioner Renzi said that Route 126 would be major east -west street , and Commissioner Kachel confirmed that there was a commercial plan south on Ridge through Joliet. A d iscussion ensued regardin g commercial nodes versus strip development . Chairman Sobkoviak said that the plans for WIKADUKE were counting on drawing potential patrons from the east and west . A further d iscussion ensued regarding commercial properties and estimates that the WIKADUK E would have large se ctions of road complete within five years. 3
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES 5/16/06 PAGE 4 Mr. O’Rourke said that, wh en looking at the Glen, this had an area that allowed walk ing to a sho pping center. Some of that would be in Grande Park South , but this wa s not surrounded by densi ty. A d iscussion ensued regarding commer cial and residential properties, and Mr. Martin asked Mr. Vaupel what he believed . Mr. Vaupel said that a large commercial development in the center of this property would lack a thru street , as this wa s a problem at 143 rd and Route 30. Commercial developers did n ot want to build here as it did not go anywhere. A neighborhood store would compete wi th the stores on the WIKADUKE, and he b riefly elaborated on the timing . Commissioner Henry said that the frustration was that the commission saw a lot of rooftops and not eno ugh roadway capita. Everyone was experiencing it, and it wa s difficult to balance. The concern was if this had been thought through. Commissioner McKay said that the viability of downtown and cros s streets having trouble developing was because Route 59 wa s one of the only places to go. The smaller retail areas we re being hurt by the roadways , and the cars from the other developments had not been seen yet. Mr. Vaupel said that he did struggle with this, and Plainfield was having major growing pains. He also said that it wa s hard to say that things would work out in five to ten years, when people we re sitting in traffic today. T he demands had not been met yet, and it took the density and traffic f or retailers to see Plainfield as the place to be. He noted that people would go to neighboring communities , and a brief discussion ensued regarding this. Commissioner McKay was very respectful of the job he was doing; she just felt that with this and ot her developments that retail, commercial, and industry would need to have the roadways happen . Commissioner Kachel said that, when talki ng about commercial, Shorewood wa s getting a lot more commercial. He wanted know why if Plainfield had more rooftops . Mr. Vaupel said that he had to look at , not just population , but how retailers look at it – which was a 10 -minute drive. Plainfield was able to capture some of the density that Joliet was building, but Plainfield did not have a significant intersection t o draw people away from Caton Farm Road. It wa s still too convenient for people to go south. He said that once Drauden was in place, it would be better. Commissioner Kachel said that Plainfield was losing the tax dollars and getting larger developments and this wa s a problem because the more congested t he Village was , the less commercial would come in. Mr. Vaupel said that the opposite situation w as occurring in the north, as Plainfield was taking people that wou ld shop at Fox Valley south on Route 59 . T he northern end of the Village was doing well because of this, and t his wa s because of a good grid network. Commissioner Kachel asked if Naperville had a pla n for another downtown area, and Mr. Vaupel said that that wa s at 95 th Street , and that wa s too far for a lot of regional people to travel. He felt that Plainfield’s time would come, and 119 th Street and areas like it would bring the commercial needed. Commissioner McKay asked if Plainfi eld had people actively court ing large commercial groups, and Mr. Vaupel confirmed that Plainfield ha d gone to a non -for -profit organization that handles this . 4
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES 5/16/06 PAGE 5 Commissioner Henry confirmed that Mr. Vaupel was asked t here by the V il l a g e Staff and not the applicant. Mr. Garrigan turned this over to Mr. Buck represent ing a number of property owners adjacent to the property . Chairman Sobkoviak reminded Mr. Buck he was under oath . Mr. Buck said that he represent ed homeowners along Ridge Road and Route 126 on the east and west side. He p rovided the commission with the restrictions and covenants recorded to the properties to the west of Ridge Road. Duri ng the course of testimony, he noted that the developer had talked about redevelopment of property under new urbanism, and one of the concepts was the eventual redevelopm ent of the adjacent property. The covenants list ed restrictions on density and - w ith the density proposed in Grande Park South – the developer would be putting 336 units behind 16 units. He showed the effect on new urbanism. Then, Mr. Buck submitted th e Land Resource Management Plan by Kendall County . This plan called for low estate residential in this area . When talking about minimizing impact, this plan outlined goals/parameters that call for property to be estate residential. He directed attention to the last page where the legend show ed Route 126 as estate residential. He said that t his w as meant to be very low density and now a low estate residential district was being created in this area. Mr. Buck said that the residents wanted the Villas to be single -family (not to hold up the development altogether). The residents also wanted to create a buffer between the estate residential homes by removing 51 units. Mr. Arndt had said a buffer w as appr opriate between these two uses, and the residents wa nted a real buffer by eliminating these houses. A par tial park wa s in the middle of the development, and the current homeowners wanted to extend that along the property line. The covenants protect ed these homeowners unless entire 16 a gree to change them . Mr. Buck provide d a CD -ROM as the Bambic Exhibit. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Bob Bambic who went through a presentation. He went over the history of the purchase and building of his home . He showed several pictures of the property. He had a hedgerow along the southern boundary that he wanted preserved as well as a 30% graded slope . H e had a concern regarding back ing up to the flood plain that wa s considerably lower than his property. His property accepts water from properties further uphill – he wa s worried about reversing the grade of the land. He went through the Ridge Road Subdivision specifications (open space, grasslands, woodlands, ponds, wildlife, and a bridle path). He noted that this is an equestrian subdivision tied together with a bridl e path. He showed pictures of the various views (including the undeveloped property and what it would look like when developed). Mr. Martin objected that this did not include th e 360 -degree architecture. Mr. Bambic showed a picture showing lower density for comparison . 5
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES 5/16/06 PAGE 6 Mr. Bambic asked for several alternates : reducing the density, lot size, construction material specifications, fully custom homes, and buildings with 50 -foot setbacks). He asked what they wanted for the future of Plainfield in this area. Mr. Martin had no questions, and Commissioner Renzi asked for clarification on the location of his property. Mr. O’Rourke confirmed the need for buffers and that these were different suggestions from what Mr. Buck had suggested . Mr. O’Rourke also asked about the west view. Commissioner McKay ask ed MPI a question regarding this presentati on and asked, from the last meeting, if there had been a ny changes to the original plan. Mr. Martin said that the developer was trying to provide a buffer. The Staff report refe renced the plans for this area and the developer was trying to accommodate this request. He felt that this neighborhood would be in agreement with the Comp rehensive Plan, and the developer had no objections to using brick, cedar, and stone for residences along this area. The pattern book would be changed accordingly. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in George Patterson (8301 Ridge Road) who said that he had been looking for a desirable area to move to and s ettled on Ridge Road . He and his family had been there for 30 yea rs, and he had received comments about enjoying the property as a vacation. This wa s country living, and h e paid the price in commuting. H e submitted that Plainfield wa s a great address. Family and friends visited him and took the m essage back that the attractiveness of Plainfield was a nice place to be. He was not naïve that life would go on the way it was and was supportive of reasonable expansion. He f elt that MPI was going beyond reasonable expansion. He wa s certain that there wa s a plan that could be amicable for both he and the developer and was heartened by comments that buffers were being worked on. He d id not feel that the developer would move until a sign was received from the commission. During his retirem ent process, he learned that legacy wa s what was done to make life better for other s. His challenge was to ask the commission to leave a legacy so future generations would dedicate a building to them for handling an opportunity the right way. On a personal note, he s aid that this wa s a great community and wanted to keep it that way. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in John Vidmar (1226 West State Route 126) who had lived in the subdivision for almost 30 years. He showed a picture of his h ouse and barn and said that he and h is family moved out there to live in the country. He gave some of the history and said that his land was probably one of the most rustic in the area. His primary concern was traffic because when he first moved out there, traffic was mostly on the weekend s. Now , traffic wa s constant, and since there wa s a spur that connected old and new Route 126 , he expected people to find that short -cut. He was worried about the amount of people taking this route in the area. He said that trying to turn into his driv e way was difficult, esp ecially in winter weather , so he was concerned about traffic. He was also concerned about drainage as he lived at the lowest point (on the northwest corner of Route 126) and all parcels drained down to him . In the spring when snow m elted or with heavy rains, he showed a picture of where the water stands. On the south end of the property, he showed pictures of the field and showed where the drainage was. He was concerned with the villas neighboring this. He was also concerned with the 6
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES 5/16/06 PAGE 7 drainage ditches by his driveway and across the street that sometimes drained to the north side of the road. He showed pictures of where the water was now and his concern of where this would collect. He said that Mr. Buck covered the new zoning updat es, and he noted that the Board endorsed the Kendall C ounty Open Space Plan. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Jean Perle (who lived at 8176 S. Ridge Road) and moved to Plainfield about 20 years ago . She chose the area over Naperville and b ought with an assura nce that five -acre lots would surround the property . She felt that she lived in a unique area and thought it would remain the same. She w ould appreciate the same flavor of properties. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Joe White who gr ew up next to George Patt erson as his parents bought the house 30 years ago . He had lived there for 13 years . He said that this was very unique and was a lot of hard work, and he had made a lot of changes to the home - like remodeling and adding trees. He did not know this new dev elopment would affect his life, and he did not understand how the buffering would work. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Robert Hartwell who came from Naperville . He moved to Naperville when it had a population of 26,000 people, and when it moved to 60,000 he moved to Plainfield . H e found a property on Ridge Road that he fell in love with. He built his off ice there in 1999 as the covenants stated that a n office was permitted with one non -family employee. This whole (Grande Park South) plan seemed to have been made without too much input from the adjoining proper ty owners. Regarding urbanism, he did not move to Plainfield for an urbanite view. He moved to Plainfield for suburban country and said to look at divisions closer to the property closer to the c ity. He knew this land would be developed, but the Comp rehensive Plan showed one -acre lots. However, he was looking at possibly eight different homes in his background, and it was just too close for his standard of living. The backdoors were 80 to 100 y ards from the property, and he did not feel that a developer should be able to use his backyard as a buffer. He compared this to building a 12 -flat in som eone’s backyard because it seemed to be good for ever yone except the neighbors. He stated that he sh op ped in Plainfield. He asked what the “real” open space was because when t alking about flood plain, if people saw how the water ran, he wanted to know who was responsible for a small child that might try to walk through the running water. He asked about water towers as there were a lot of questions in that area. He was concerned about the imp act of the restrictions on his property as there was 15 feet around the pro perty that neighbors could use . He said that ha d never been a problem as that is the com munity that he live d in. The current community was restricted to siding, fences, type of home, construction of home, and acres. He could not sell unless the other 15 people decided to go as well, so this probably would not work. The closest neighbor bei ng a football fi eld away, the current homeowners want ed to enjoy the friendship and the property. Commissioner Renzi said that he referenced the need to protect moral values and asked how this was impacted. Mr. Hartwell said that with six houses building adjacent to his property , he wa s worried about k ids coming through his property . Commissioner Renzi 7
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES 5/16/06 PAGE 8 also asked for examples about the areas around Chicago he referred to. Mr. Hartwell said that he referred to Oak Park as he had clients who built there a nd had moved out and lost money within a year due to problems. Mr. O’Rourke asked if he agree d with what the attorney was proposing. Mr. Hartwell said that he did as a worst -case scenario. Mr. Buck said that this concluded his testimony of residents and asked about other residents that may like to speak. Chairman Sobkoviak as ked how many people would like to give testimony and counted approx imately four. At 8:54pm, the commission took a 10 minute break. The meeting reconvened at 9:05 pm. Chairman Sobk oviak swore in Robert Sohol who moved to Plainfield in 1981 and built his first house in Whispering Creek. He ha d moved to various are as and started many businesses, and he moved on Johnson Road i n 1993. He had no problems with development but had a prob lem with th is plan. He was always told 12,000 square foot lots, and he di d not see any reason for 6,000 to 8,000 sq uare foot lots based on the estate area. He ha d met with Staff, and he was concerned about the traffic on the country roads. He was in sup port of 12,000 square foot lots. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Pete Pasteris (1998 Johnson Road) who owned a farm just to the west of the property. He grew up in the area and moved from Joliet in 1968. He had seen the change and was on the Na -Au -Say Towns hip Plan Commission. That commission said that the properties could not be less than one acre in size. He ha d a lot of concerns, esp ecially regarding density. He was worried about congestion around the million dollar homes and wanted a smooth transition keeping property values the same . He said that no matter what size lots were there, people would buy it. The l ots in Kendall County were selling starting at $250,000, and he wanted a piece of the pie with large lots. He wanted his kids to have the same opportunity but understood it was no t going to be farmland. Commissioner Kachel asked if, in Kendall County , there was a prob lem getting Lake Michigan water. Mr. Pasteris said that this stopped at Grove Road , but this was not chosen to be done yet . Com missioner Kachel asked if this was part of the reason why larger lot sizes were n eed ed. Mr. Pasteris did not think that this was due to water as this was part of the Kendall Comp rehensive Plan. A brief discussion ensued regarding this. Commissioner Renzi asked where and what subdivision was at $2 50,000. Mr. Pasteris said that this was White Tail Ridge on 126 just west of Grove Road , and the developer sold it in one day . Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Jim Hug e nin who scheduled a formal p resentation later, b ut wanted to talk about the commercial aspect of this development. In relationship to the commercial corridor, there was a lot of talk regarding the WIKADUKE and commercial develop ing along the intersections. However, the main commercial would be Route 1 26 , and he compared this to Route 34 in Fox Valley. He thought the Village would better spend the resources by attracting people to Route 126 - as opposed to 8
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES 5/16/06 PAGE 9 through residential properties. He wanted to keep this in consideration. Regarding e con omic de v e l o pm e nt , he said that people who own businesses around this area own substantial businesses within the town. That type of person and entity wa s looking for a particular type of lifestyle in Plainfield. R egarding the Route 126 corridor , Commissioner Renz i asked if the intersection Mr. Vaupel talked about on WIKADUKE and Route 126 would serve the same purpose. Mr. Hugenin said that, if look ing at a similar east -west street, the commercial continue d along it. D riving on these roads, he felt tha t the WIKAD UKE was a good idea, but in several County plans, the majority of the traffic on Route 126 came from Plainfield Road . He was concerned about connect ing Grande Park South to this. He felt it would make sense to connect this with 143 rd Street, so that Rout e 126 could remain and become a commercial corridor. Mr. Martin confirmed that his address was 22 Cheyenne Court . Mr. Hugenin confirmed where his property was and his occupation as a general contract or for residential developments. He worked on individu al homes and consulted for developers. Upon request from Mr. Martin, Mr. Hugenin said that he would forward his clients ’ names with their permission. Mr. Martin asked what commercial wa s between Oswego and Newark along Route 71 , and it was determined tha t there was none a s far as strip centers . Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Jeff Nakaerts (8605 S. Schlapp Road, Plainfield) who took a different view and wanted to know what portion would affect the School District . Chairman Sobkoviak asked that any immediate questions be addressed to Staff. Chairman Sobkoviak closed the floor for public comment. Chairman Sobkoviak confirmed that there were no further comments from Mr. Martin. Chairman Sobkoviak opened up the meeting for the commissioners. R egarding water coming after rain and after it’s been used; Commissioner Renzi wan ted to know about fresh water. H e did not remember anything regarding water towers, fresh water, or the impact on the wells everyone has. Mr. Amann said that it would be part of the Villag e’s water distribution system which currently gets its supply from Lak e Michigan. He was not sure about water towers on this site. He knew that there would be water storage, but those would get all of the water from Lake Michigan and would not withdraw a ny ground water . Paul Leader addressed the commission and said that the water for Grande Park South would be part of the Village’s water distribut ion system from Lake Michigan. He said that there would be two water towers (one on Grande Park and the seco nd wa s a future tower planned by the Village south - probably around Walker and Ridge). Commissioner Renzi asked if this would be in the line of sight of the neighbors, and Mr. Leader said the neighbors might be able to see it but was not sure how close. He also said that there would be some storage . Commissioner Renzi asked if there would be an impact on the aqua -filter and if the channeling of the water would go to the Aux Sable. Mr. Leader said that the properties drain ed toward Grande Park South, an d the development would pick up this water and drain it west to the Aux Sable. The drainage would be contained 9
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES 5/16/06 PAGE 10 through the stormwater management system. R egarding pictures, Commissioner Renzi asked if Mr. Leader saw an ything in the pictures that made him want to review any previous testimony. Mr. Leader said that some of his testimony reinforced that the ground water in that area was near the surface which wa s why single family homes with no basements were planned for this area. Commissioner Henry asked , procedural ly, what the next meeting would entail. Mr. Martin said that there would be an appraiser and Mr. Davidson’s witnesses ; Mr. Martin also had an appraiser he wanted to testify . Commissioner Henry wanted to formulate some questions that come to h im later . Chairman Sobkoviak said that the Planning Commission would have plenty of time to discuss this and said to note any questions . Mr. Martin said that questions could also be sent to him . Commissioner Kachel said that the commission had had testi mony during the Wal -M art case , and this wa s more . H e did no t know if they could give the developer some feedback if there was a consensus . Mr. Harvey did not think that they were far from the end , and a di scussion ensued regarding sending questions to Mr . Garrigan to filter and b e presented at a public hearing. Commissioner Henry noted that a lot of questions might be the same , and Chairman Sobkoviak said that Staff could sort them out. Commissioner McKay said that, regarding bonus system, some of this wa s open -end ed (like restoring a farmstead). Mr. Garrigan said that a lot of these issues we re still being worked out – specifically regarding preservation of a farmstead . Mr. Martin noted that this wo uld be a good example as there wa s a conservation eas ement and certain restrictions so some questions might already be answered by Staff. Commissioner McKay said that a lot of the public did not understand how the density worked and what the trade -offs we re. There was a lot of gray area that people were co ncerned about. Commissioner Henry said that if there had been so me change or discussion that had taken place that altered the plan, it should be shared at the start of the meeting. Commissioner Renzi asked if the commission could get an update summarizin g the changes , so the co mmission knew where negotiations were at . Mr. Garrigan said that the Staff report reflected the current plan. There had been discussions, so a revised plan ha d not been submitted to the Plan Commission. Commissioner Henry said th at the report could just be amend ed for what items had been modified , or Commissioner Renzi suggested submitting the parameters of discussion . Mr. Martin said that once Mr. Davidson and the appraiser talk, modifications could be discussed. Commissioner H enry suggested listing points agreed to and points being discussed . Commissioner Renzi said that this would affect the questions being asked; he also asked the timetable of the case. Mr. Martin said that he would also like a copy of what was being presen ted. Commissioner Renzi asked if a synopsis or timetable could be provided. Chairman Sobkoviak said that this was done at the beginning of the meeting as communication might be up to the point of the meeting. He d id not want to deny anyone due process. Mr. Harvey said that Staff could be asked to get this information, and Chairman Sobkoviak said that this does not take into account the meeting opening up for individuals not represented by attorneys . A discussion ensued regarding this. 10
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES 5/16/06 PAGE 11 Mr. Martin said that he had pretty much presented enough of their case, and the appraise r would be called to rebut. A ny further witnesses would be to answer questions. Chairman Sobkoviak offered the attorneys an opportunity for summation as well but would not expect tha t to take a lot of time. Commissioner Henry confirmed that the commissioners should have questions solidified to Staff by mid -June or the beginning of July . At 9:47pm, Commissioner Henry moved that this matter be continued for further discussion and cons ideration for the Plan Commission meeting of June 6 th , 2006. Commissioner Kachel seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Henry, Renzi, Kachel, McKay, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 5:0:0. Mr. Garrigan als o noted that the public hearing scheduled for Tuesday, May 23 for the Zoning commission/Planning Commission would here one case the same night . Chairman Sobkoviak adjourned the meeting at 9 :49 p .m. __________________ Respectfully submitted, Laura Griffith -Recording Secretary Karick & Associates, Inc. 11