Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2005-10-04 PC MinutesVillage of Plainfield Planning Commission Record of Minutes Date: October 4 , 2005 Location: Village Hall Chairman Sobkoviak cal led the meeting to order at 7:0 4 . Roll Call Present: Commissioners Kachel, Henry, McKay, Renzi , Fazio, Lucenko, Sobkoviak, Ed O'Rou r ke and David Murawski , Park District, Library District Absent: School District , Fire District , Police Department Minutes On the minutes from the September 6, 2005 minutes, Commissioner Renzi requested that the last sentence be revised to: “He thought it was getting more towards objectivity, but he did not want to p u t one public entity against another.” The minutes were accepted as amended. The minutes from the September 20, 2005 meeting were accepted as presented. Development Report Michael Garrigan read the development report. - The Fairfield Project Final Plat was approved. - The Demolition Ordinance text amendment was discussed and tabled. - The Oswego Fire Station Special Use and Final Plat were approved. - The White Ash Final Plat was approved . New Business CASE: CC -GILMORE PELL MAP AMENDMENT KENDALL COUNTY Request: Kendall County Map Amendment (A -a to R -1) Location: North of Simons Road (127 th Street), west of Gilmore Road Applicant: Dianne Pell (owner) Time: 7:08 pm Jonathan Pr oulx read the staff report. PLAN COMMISSION 10/04/05 MINUTES PAGE 2 Chairman Sobkoviak said that they did not see this often as it was a county case. Most of their action is limited to a letter of objection (or non -objection). However, they can provide input as in the right -of -way situation. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Andrea Kastor who had nothing to add. She said this was a straight forward request on behalf of her parents. Commissioner Henry said that the area highlighted in red was the area that they have applied to be rezoned to R -1 . He asked if the applicant also own ed the area within the U -shaped parcel. Ms. Kastor said that she owns part of the area , and her uncle owns another part. Commissioner Henry confirmed that family owns this land. Ms. Kastor said that they continue to f arm around it except where her parents are building the house . Chairman Sobkoviak said that at some point, the applicant would be approached to allow an easement along Gilmore Road , but until that happened , it was their property. He just did not want to see something put in there. Ms. Kastor agreed and said that they anticipate some discussions on this and was moving the house back accordingly . Mr. O’R ourke asked if the right -of -way would come through an A nnexation Agreement and if so what to do if ther e are no A nnexation A greements or resubdivision s ? Mr. Proulx said that they would try to enter into a right -of -way acquisition dialogue. He said if this was a bigger development , they would seek a right -of -way , but this change does not impact traffic. C hairman Sobkoviak said that the petitioner recognizes this . Mr. O’Rourke j ust wanted to point out that this could end up costing the Village money . Chairman Sobkoviak said that this is the problem with the smaller properties as it doe s not generate benef it from the road , and they have a right to access it. So, it is difficult to do anythi ng other than purchase the road; although he said that sometimes they can negotiate a settlement with utilities. This was a consideration. Chairman Sobkoviak asked the Staff if they need to do anything with the right -of way other than to make the petitioner aware of it. Mr. Proulx did not believe that anything else was required. They have notified the petitioner, and the only other thing would be to possibly make this a stipulation . A discussion ensued regarding a possible right -of -way stipulation. Commissioner Henry clarified that 50 feet on each side was the right -of -way. Ms. Kastor said that they have not gotten this from the County . Mr. Proulx said that they can not attach a stipulation to the rezoning and this is ultimately a County case . Commissioner Renzi asked if there were bike paths on the east side. Mr. Proulx said that this will be part of the right -of -way. PLAN COMMISSION 10/04/05 MINUTES PAGE 3 At 7:2 6 pm, Commissioner Henry moved to recomme nd to the Village Board that the Village of Plainfield recommend to Kendall County approval of the requested Pell map amendment with a recommendation to the applicant of a proposed 50 -foot easement to Gilmore Road. Commissioner Kachel seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Fazio, Renzi, Henry, Kachel, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 7 :0:0. This will not go forward at the next V illage B oard meeting . CASE NO.: 1205 -082905.SPR/SU CROSSROADS BUSINESS CENTER LOT #4 Request: Special Use for PUD (Public Hearing) Site Plan Review Location: Route 30, south of 143 rd Street Applicant: Louis Karlis Started: 7:28 pm Mr. Garrigan announced that this is a public hearing being held in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations of the Village of Plainfield and the State of Illinois. He presented the Staff report. Chairman Sobkoviak swore in Paul Mitchell and the group of petitioners. Mr. Mitchell showed the location map and said that the subje ct property is Lot 4 of Crossroads Business Center at 143 rd Street and Route 30 (by Home Star Bank and Patriot Square). He said that this is the second building going into this center. They envisioned seven retail units and were requesting Site Plan appr oval and Special Use for PUD which would include a PUD that provides for a drive -thru. For access, there would be a full access onto Route 30, and he said that there was another full access onto Route 30 from Home Star. He said that they could also get o nto the access road to get onto 143 rd Street. They were proposing a drive -thru on the north side of the facility. There was adequate stacking potential as there was nothing high -volume anticipated in this unit. They exceeded the number of parking stalls required, and he said that they could work with staff on additional parking islands. However, he was concerned about losing parking spaces. To address the other issues, he said that there were no problems with landscaping issues (like increasing the tre e caliper) or with the brick color. Again, they offered to work with Staff on this. Project Architect Mark Nosky addressed the commission and reviewed the building elevations. Regarding the brick color, he said that they are working with Home Star PLAN COMMISSION 10/04/05 MINUTES PAGE 4 B an k and have had success in locating the same color. He had a sample of this brick and said that they w ill all be the same. He said that the s ignificant features were two color bricks with a few horizontal lines in the pilaster to accentuate the architectu re . There were t wo types of stone to accentuate the bases and pre -caste sills within the towers, and the p re -caste would also be around the circular windows. He w ent over the storefront areas and where the signage will occur. He said that decorative lig ht fixtures would be present. They were working with Staff on the design, but he said the facades were in character with the bank building. He showed the side elevations as well. On the back, there was a step -out to create a break in the façade, and t he y brought out the materials. He also noted that t here would be a mechanical room and recessed areas for gas meters. Commissioner Kachel asked if there was horizontal relief on the top of the side elevation. Ms. Nosky said no, that the drawing showed the pitch of the roof . Commissioner Kachel asked if the HVAC was on the back of the building . Mr. Nosky showed this and explained how the mechanicals would work . Mr. Garrigan said that a parking lot and inline space was all that was behind the building. C ommissioner Henry also confirmed that the whole development was zoned B -3. Commissioner Renzi asked how difficult it was to find matching brick. Mr. Nosky said that right from beginning, they worked with Home Star Bank and it took them about two months. Commissioner Kachel asked if they had a build -out , if they could have this on reco rd. Mr. Garrigan said that he could make a record of the brick specifications . Mr. Nosky had another brick selected if they did not come up with the one they had. However , this one seemed to be available from the manufacturer . He also showed different materials from throughout building and a sample of storefront . A discussion ensued regarding materials and features on the different elevations. Ms. Nosky said that he jus t needed clarification on the stone base on the back of the building . Mr. Garrigan just wanted this as an accent , and Mr. Nosky showed this on a drawing . He also showed small picture of the landscaped planter box es envisioned on the front of building. Mr. O’Rourke asked if there would be an awning over the drive -thru. Mr. Nosky said that it depended on the retailer – sometimes they want ed them and sometimes they did not. Chairman Sobkoviak asked to see the rear e levation and asked if they would agree with the request to get the light -colored aspect replaced with prairie stone . Mr. Nosky said that they are actually using a stone that is grade above , and Mr. Garrigan agreed to this . Commissioner Henry said that on the east elevation, the gables were e ffaced and the rest o f the elevations were brick . Mr. Nosky said that this was because of cost and carrying the weight of the roof . Mr. O’Rourke said that there were elaborate variances on the drive lanes, and Mr. Nosky explained where these were . Mr. O ’Rourke confirmed that on the southwest side of the building this was 25 feet, and on the southeast side of the building, this was 24 -1/2 feet. He said that 26 feet was standard, and Mr. Garrigan said that this was not a problem . Mr. PLAN COMMISSION 10/04/05 MINUTES PAGE 5 Nosky said that t her e were a large number of cars together near the restaurant building to accommodate possible traffic. Commissioner Kachel asked if they could have uni form benches or outdoor seating, and Mr. Garrigan said that they could increase the sidewalk width to acco mmodate this where agreeable . Commissioner Kachel asked about landscape islands and Mr. Nosky said that they find that when they have a 15 -foot sidewalk, they can accommodate this as they could in islands. However, with a 10 -foot sidewalk and planter box es, he thought it wa s hard to achieve this. He need ed an area to accommodate this. Commissioner Renzi asked, when looking at this, how they conceive d traffic merging in and out. He was worried car s backing into two -way traffic, the drive -thru, and cars going back and forth. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if the Engineer had looked at this. Mr. Garrigan said that this has gone through engineering and traffic committee s, and they have not identified any substantial areas of conflict . Commissioner Henry was worried about ped estrians, and Commissioner Renzi did not see how this was not a conflict. Mr. O’Rourke said that the southeast entrance could cause a problem coming in and out and asked if they could move this down to the property line. Mr. Nosky said t hat they did not really examine this as they were trying to match the curb cuts on the other side of the frontage road . Chairman Sobkoviak was h esitant to request changes without consulting the engineer. He said that it may seem like a good idea, but the Engineer could sometimes give a more professional opin ion Andy Heinen, the civil engin e er, addressed the commission and said that the access at the southeast was because an existing entrance to Home Star was there, and they wanted to get some separation . Commissioner Henry asked about the drive -thru area, but Mr. Heinen said that he was the civic engineer and not well -versed in traffic . However, he said that they could work with Staff. It was not a big building , and they did not expect a lot of traffic . They were s ure that staff was reviewing this. Mr. O’Rourke said that one elevation said 11 -feet and one said 9 -feet. He asked what was standard. Mr. Garrigan said that nine to ten feet is acceptable. The requirement was for 10 stacked cars , and Mr. Heinen explained the measurements for the drive -thru . Mr. O’R ourke just felt like they were shrinking drive -thru lanes . He thought this might be too big of a building for this site. Mr. Garrigan said that they have seen a number of these drive -thru buil dings throughout the V il l a g e and they are not high -use drive -thrus. He said i f it were more intense of a use, there would be a higher concern for stacking. Mr. O’Rourke said that they c annot control the end -use . Commissioner Lucenko said that the deve loper would not allow something detrimental to come in . Commissioner McKay said that t his kind of center is where the big companies are coming . However, Chairman Sobkoviak said that Burger King, McD onalds, and PLAN COMMISSION 10/04/05 MINUTES PAGE 6 Starbucks usually had buildings that were de signed from scratch. They generally did not go into pre -existing building . Mr. O’Rourke confirmed that the b uilding in fron t of Wal -Mart was for Starbucks. Commissioner Renzi said that any kind of restaurant with carry -out traffic (even a small one ) cou ld go in t here; however, he was not sure because the exit was only on one side. He was concerned but said that if the traffic engineer says it is fine, he would be okay with it . He just thought i t seemed like a lot of traffic. Mr. Garrigan said that t here are some discussions regarding cross -access still. Commissioner Renzi wanted one on the southwest corner too , so they could go to Home Star if they want ed . He said there was l imited access, so another cut would make more sense. Mr. Garrigan said th at the Menards lot is like this, and they receive substantial traffic . A discussion ensued r egarding acces s and traffic volume. Mr. Mitchell said that their initial designs had a pass -thru to Home Star, but there were no recorded easements for this. He said that Home Star was already developed, so they proceeded without it . This was not a huge development, so they did not anticipate a large amount or traffic. Louis Karlis, the owner, addressed the commission and said that there are no intent ions of hav ing two restaurants as they could not do this with the parking. He thought that there was a p ossibility for one re staurant with limited seating, but anything else would require more parking through the ordinance . He anticipated a d ry cleaners or pizza -ty pe places . He said that p eople desire to order the food, pick it up, and go home. They did not have the r oom or parking for anything else, and he did not think they had the demand for it. Commissioner Kachel asked what would be to the north as they c oul d have an access easement t here. Mr. O’Rourke thought this was the access road, and Mr. Garrigan said that there were also outlots . Mr. Mitchell said that the road to the north was already there . Commissioner Lucenko did not think that this circulation pattern was unique and did not think a restaurant would locate in the area as it would be detrimental. He thought staff would work diligently to work out the details. Mr. Murawski said that they have tendency to look at the bleak side of things and think too large. He pointed out that t hey would not have enough parking or space for what they were worried about. He said that they were a bove average on the parking but below on islands, and he thought that they should stick to working with this. Chairman Sobkoviak said that the petitione r has agreed to work with staff. Mr. Mitchell said that the requirements have been on th e high side which is why they went for a PUD. He said that the developer had reasons behind the standards. PLAN COMMISSION 10/04/05 MINUTES PAGE 7 Commissioner Henry had a personal rule never to approve a plan with too many stipulations , and Mr. O’Rourke said that some plans seem to be in conflict with each other. He asked Staff to look at this. Regarding unified colors , Commissioner Renzi asked if it was staff’s intention that the entire development be the same color brick. Mr. Garrigan said t here could be some variations, but they tried to unify architectural elements. Commissioner Renzi asked if it should be similar or complimentary . A discussion ensued regarding this . Commissioner Renzi asked about the cost differential between the 2 -1/2 inch and 3 inch caliper trees. Mr. Garrigan said that the three -inch trees are harder to get . Mr. Mitchell said that this was like a volume on a pipe . Mr. Garrigan said that this was in the PUD agreement for Crossroads. The Village generally prefer s 2 -1/2 inch caliper trees , but the PUD agreement asked for 3 -inch. A d iscussion ensued regarding the survival rate of the trees. Commissioner Renzi asked about suggested tree s and if there was a preferred list. Mr. Garrigan said that they could provide this as they provide suggestions for coloring, height, and buffer . Chairman Sobkoviak asked if they had someone who could come talk to them about landscaping. Mr. Garrigan said that t hey could have Jim Donahue come in to talk to them. Commissioner Fazio agree d with Commissioner Lucenko’s remarks . Commissioner Henry confirmed that there would be an awning over the drive -thru that would fall under the sign ordinance . MOTION Be in tou ch with Staff At 8:37pm , Commissioner Henry moved to recommend approval of the Special Use for PUD subject to the following stipulations : 1. Compl y with the requirements of the Village Engineer. 2. Compl y with the requirements of the Plainfield Fire Protection District. Commissioner Lucenko seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Fazio, Renzi, Henry, Kachel, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 7 :0:0. PLAN COMMISSION 10/04/05 MINUTES PAGE 8 At 8:38pm, Commissioner Henry moved to recommend a pproval of the Site Plan for Lot 4 of the Crossroads Commercial development subject to the following stipulations: 1. Comply with the requirements of the Village Engineer. 2. Comply with the requirements of the Plainfield Fire Protection District. 3. Submit a revis ed landscaping plan as per staff’s suggestions. Commissioner Renzi seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Fazio, Renzi, Henry, Kachel, McKay, Lucenko, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 7:0:0. Chairman Sobko viak encouraged the petitioner to be in touch with staff regarding when this would go forward. Chairman Sobkoviak asked that the Traffic Engineer and Mr. Donahue come in to talk about specialties on a light night ; although probably not the same night. Ch airman Sobkoviak declare d the meeting closed at 8:40pm . __________________ Respectfully submitted, Laura Griffith -Recording Secretary Karick & Associates, Inc.