HomeMy Public PortalAbout2002-05-21 PC minutesVillage of Plainfield Planning Commission Record of Minutes Date: May 21, 2002 Location: Village Hall Chairman Sobkoviak called the meeting to order at 7:03pm. Roll Call Present: Commissioners Kachel, Henry, Gehrke, Manning, Schinderle, Sobk oviak Absent: Commissioner Anderson, Park District, School District, Fire District, Library District Minutes The minutes for the May 7 th meeting were accepted as presented. Old Business CASE NO.: 941 -021502.RZ 709 DIVISION Request: Rezoning (Pub lic Hearing) (to be continued) Location: 709 Division Applicant: Angela Krueger Commenced: 7:06pm Planner Garrigan informed the commission that the applicant requested a continuance on this case. Commissioner Henry moved to continue the case to the June 18 meeting. Commissioner Manning seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Kachel, Henry, Gehrke, Manning, Schinderle, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0.
CASE NO.: 904 -083101.FZ/SU/SPR WAL -MART Reque st: Rezone and Special Use (Public Hearing) and Site Plan Review Location: Northwest corner of 127 th and Division Street Applicant: Estate of Francis Reibel and Pulte Homes Commenced: 7:09pm Mr. Garrigan gave the staff report. Chairman Sobkoviak asked th e petitioner why would you expect to receive a favorable decision this time around, considering the Village’s previous denial of the proposal? John Philipchuck, representing Wal -Mart, addressed the commission. The reason we are here tonight is because of some significant changes to the previous plans. We believe that, despite some objections of some people, most reasonable people recognized the assets to the Village that accompany this installation. Chairman Sobkoviak said that a zoning change must stan d on its own merit. The site plan cannot be used as a bartering tool. Mr. Philipchuck made several points: • The board gave us no input as to why this project was voted down. The case was voted on without discussion. • We would like to point out that commer cial nodes similar to this exist at several points along Route 59. • Staff, in its report, points out that the salient question is, “how much commercial zoning is necessary for this area”, the implication being that commercial zoning in itself is not inappro priate for this area. Mr. Philipchuck called Tracy Richards to the podium to briefly explain the changes to the plan that have been made. Mr. Richards outlined the changes that were made: • The stormwater detention area was moved to the Southern parts of t he site. • The Garden Center and TLE section configuration was changed. • Decreases in parking were made. • A 203’ (minimum) buffer now exists at the north extent of the site. • The western buffer is approximately 82’. • Berm height is slightly less than 10’. • A main access at Route 59 was determined to be necessary if a “Super Center” was constructed. • Lighting pole heights would be 27.5’ rather than the previous 38’ high. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if the commissioners had any questions. Commissioner Manning asked Mr . Richards about the necessity of a northern entrance.
Mr. Richards said that Wal -Mart could initially function without it, but if the facility becomes a “Super Center”, the entrance would be necessary. Commissioner Manning asked if Wal -Mart owned the pr operty at this time. Mr. Richards said that Wal -Mart does not have ownership of the property, but do have proprietary agreements with the owner(s). Commissioner Schinderle asked how many homes are directly adjacent to the site. Mr. Richards replied that the number was two or three. Commissioner Schinderle asked what is the distance from the lot line to the proposed street. Mr. Richards estimated that the distance is between 175’ and 200’. Commissioner Kachel asked how the water detention is being hand led. Commissioner Henry asked if it was wet retention, to which the reply was yes. Chairman Sobkoviak said that we need to determine whether this is appropriate. Commissioner Schinderle said that he feels strongly that this is appropriate. Commissioner Manning agreed, adding that he does not agree with staff’s position. Chairman Sobkoviak asked how the rest of the commission felt. Commissioner Henry said that, while he likes Wal -Mart, he is not convinced that this is a suitable location for one. Comm issioner Manning pointed out that the property was zoned residential at the request of the owner, and now that owner is requesting a rezoning. Mr. Kachel said that he is not opposed to a Wal -Mart being located in Plainfield, but he is not in favor of it b eing located in the proposed area. Commissioner Gehrke said that she is in favor of the proposal. Mare Daniels, counselor for the objectors (comprised of several homeowners opposed to this development) cross -examined petitioner’s witness. Mr. Daniels as ked Mr. Richards to explain: • The change (reduction) in berm heights • Elevation standards
" W h e t h e r t h i s p l a n r e f l e c t s c o n c e r n s v o i c e d p r e v i o u s l y b y h o m e o w n e r s " V o l u m e o f n o i s e c h a n g e s " W h e t h e r t h e i n t e n s i t y t o t h e n o r t h o f f u t u r e e x p a n s i o n h a s o r h a s n o t c h a n g e d s i n c e t h e l a s t p l a n M r . R i c h a r d s r e s p o n d e d , i n o r d e r o f q u e s t i o n s : " W i t h r e s p e c t t o b e r m h e i g h t s , b e c a u s e o f r e c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f t h e s i t e , a n d b e c a u s e i t i s n o t p o s s i b l e t o b e r m i n t o a l a k e o r a b a s i n , i t w a s n e c e s s a r y t o s l i g h t l y r e d u c e b e r m h e i g h t s " T h e e l e v a t i o n o f b u f f e r i n g b e h i n d L o t 6 6 i s t h r e e f e e t l e s s t h a n t h e p r e v i o u s p l a n s i n d i c a t i o n s . " A s f o r t h e r e f l e c t i o n o f p r e v i o u s c o n c e r n s , d e v e l o p e r s m a d e a n e f f o r t t o i n c o r p o r a t e c h a n g e s t h a t a d d r e s s e d h o m e o w n e r s c o n c e r n s . " N o i s e f i g u r e s w e r e n o t r e a n a l y z e d . " T h e i n t e n s i t y t o t h e N o r t h h a s n o t c h a n g e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y . C o m m i s s i o n e r H e n r y s a i d t h a t t h e n o r t h e a s t p o r t i o n o f t h e d e v e l o p m e n t s e e m s t o b e t h e s t i c k i n g p o i n t . C o u l d i t b e e l i m i n a t e d ? M r . R i c h a r d s s a i d t h a t t h e p r o p e r t y i s n o t i n W a l - M a r t s o w n e r s h i p . C o m m i s s i o n e r M a n n i n g a s k e d M r . P h i l i p c h u c k t o e x p l a i n a s t a t e m e n t t h a t h e h a d m a d e a t a n e a r l i e r m e e t i n g i n w h i c h h e s a i d t h a t h e h a s n o p r o b l e m w i t h k e e p i n g t h e p r o p e r t y z o n e d R - 1 , b u t t h a t a s p e c i a l u s e p e r m i t i s n e c e s s a r y . W h y d o y o u w a n t t o r e z o n e t h e n ? M r . P h i l i p c h u c k s a i d t h a t i t w a s s t r o n g l y f e l t t h a t t h i s i s t h e m o s t e f f i c i e n t m e t h o d b y w h i c h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t c o u l d t a k e p l a c e . C h a i r m a n S o b k o v i a k o p e n e d t h e m e e t i n g u p f o r p u b l i c c o m m e n t . K e n n e t h P a n a c h e s a i d t h a t h e a n d m a n y o t h e r s a r e v e r y m u c h i n f a v o r o f t h e W a l - M a r t b e i n g b u i l t . H e p r e s e n t t o t h e c o m m i s s i o n a p e t i t i o n s i g n e d b y 2 0 5 p e o p l e v o i c i n g s u p p o r t f o r a n d r e q u e s t i n g t h e a p p r o v a l o f t h e W a l - M a r t d e v e l o p m e n t . S a r a H a r d e n a s k e d M r . R i c h a r d s i f h e k n e w o f a n y o t h e r p r o p e r t i e s t h a t h a v e 2 4 - h o u r s e r v i c e i n r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s . M r . R i c h a r d s s a i d t h a t h e d i d n o t h a v e t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n a t h i s d i s p o s a l . A n o n y m o u s m a d e c o m m e n t s t o t h e s t a f f r e p o r t . I n p a r t i c u l a r , p a r t 4 , s e c t i o n C . H e s a i d t h a t t h i s w a s d e s i g n e d t o p r o t e c t t h e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e s u r r o u n d i n g c o m m u n i t i e s . B e v V i e r k e c i t e d a n d q u o t e d a n a r t i c l e i n t h e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e c t i o n o f t h e C h i c a g o T r i b u n e t h a t o u t l i n e d t h e u s e d c a r s a l e s l o t i n c o r p o r a t i o n a t a W a l - M a r t . S h e a s k e d w h y t h e W a l - M a r t i s n t p u t i n a l o n g R o u t e 3 0 .
Anonymous a sked whether this Wal -Mart would be open 24 hours. Mr. Richards said that he mainly revisited engineering issues, but that incidentally they would be requesting 24 -hour service. Anonymous asked the distance from the Route 59 access road and the adjacent properties. Daniel Edenburgh asked how many 24 -hour Wal -Marts exist in Illinois. Mr. Richards said that he did not know. Anonymous asked Mr. Richards the distance between the Wal -Mart and the western properties. Mr. Richards said that the distance woul d be 85’ with a 10’ buffer and a 6’ fence. Commissioner Henry asked how far is it from the property line and the building. Paula Gorsky asked whether the property owners to the west and the bike paths that will be there were considered. Mr. Richards ans wered that we have requirements with landscaping and buffering in relation to these structures. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if there were any final questions. Mr. Philipchuck reminded the commission that the request tonight also included special use and PUD . We feel that we have addressed most of staff’s concerns. As for seasonal outdoor sales, we only ask that we be treated in the same way that other stores are treated. We are willing to address architectural innovation requests. Regarding buffering, B -3 zoning requires only a 40’ minimum buffer. At any point on our site, buffering exceeds this requirements by at least double. Lighting at the site will be in compliance with all regulations. We feel that this development will be beneficial to the Plai nfield community in that the tax revenues generated by this facility will be substantial. As for property values, there will be no dramatic reduction in value (our expert indicated that there would be none) of surrounding properties. Chairman Sobkoviak a sked Mr. Daniels if he had any witnesses. Mr. Daniel called Linas Norusis to testify. He asked Mr. Norusis to explain how his services were solicited. Mr. Norusis said that he received a phone call requesting property value estimation. A 1 st phase stud y was agreed upon.
Mr. Daniels asked if he surveyed the impact this development would have on surrounding homes. Mr. Norusis said that he surveyed seven homes to the north. Mr. Daniels asked if the home on Lot 66 was the most greatly impacted. Mr. Noru sis said that he did not assign an impact level to each home. He said that he would expect it to have a reduced impact. Mr. Daniels asked Mr. Norusis his professional opinion of the study done by the contractor obtained by the petitioner and whether he a greed or disagreed with the findings. Mr. Norusis said that he disagreed with the findings. Mr. Daniels asked if there was anything Mr. Norusis wished to add. Mr. Norusis said that he has served on the Lemont Planning Commission and currently serves on the Zoning Board of Homer Township. Mr. Philipchuck briefly cross -examined Mr. Norusis. Mr. Norusis’ report is entered into public record. Commissioner Gehrke asked why all the samples were taken from Cook County and none from Will County. Mr. Norusis said that in doing this survey we were sensitive to cost management for the clients. That is why the samples were located close to the office. Commissioner Henry said that, looking at your credentials, you have a heavy accent on commercial studies. How much experience do you have with residential? Mr. Norusis said that he has done residential surveys, and that the process taken for both residential and commercial is not very dissimilar. Commissioner Schinderle asked if the results of a study using a sa mple of only four units can be extrapolated to represent what would happen to a number of units many times the size of the sample. Mr. Daniels made some closing remarks to the commission. He said that we do not believe that putting a special use in a res idential is as easy as Mr. Philipchuck suggests. He pointed out an ordinance that should, in their opinion, deny this application. He reminded the commission of previous (better) plans for this property. He noted that the
objectors that he represents do not take the position that there should be no Wal -Mart in Plainfield. Lastly, he said that it is insupportable that a landowner can do whatever he pleases with his property without any regard to surrounding neighbors. Chairman Sobkoviak reminded the com mission that the primary focus is the rezoning of the property. Commissioner Schinderle asked the Chairman what would have happened if land that was originally zoned agricultural was requested to be rezoned residential, and surrounding property owners voi ced strong objections. Chairman Sobkoviak stated that English common law indicates that a certain property use cannot have an undue impact on surrounding properties. Commissioner Manning moved that: • The commission concur with the findings of fact as iden tified in the Village of Plainfield Zoning Ordinance and recommend rezoning of the subject property from R -1 Single Family Residential to B -3 Community Shopping District. • The commission concur with the findings of fact as identified in the Village of Pla infield Zoning Ordinance and recommend approval of the special use for a Planned Unit Development for the subject property subject to the following stipulations: 1. Compliance with the requirements of the Village Engineer 2. Compliance with the requirements of t he Plainfield Fire Protection District 3. There shall be no seasonal exterior sales promotions 4. A car under repair can be parked on the property for a period no longer than fourteen (14) days. Additionally, all repair work should be conducted within the repai r facility and all outside storage is enclosed with fences or landscaping of 100 percent opacity. 5. The applicant work with Staff to use the landscaped parking islands to help meet detention requirements and NPDES II standards. • The commission recommend appr oval of the site plan for the subject property subject to the following stipulations: 1. Compliance with the requirements of the Village Engineer 2. Compliance with the requirements of the Plainfield Fire Protection District 3. The applicant increase the number of plantings to be in compliance with Village requirements and shall add shade trees in the recessed area of the front façade and foundation plantings along the front façade’s expanse 4. The applicant shall identify where shopping carts will be stored 5. The applic ant meet all Village of Plainfield Sign requirements and signs such as “We Sell For Less” and “Satisfaction Guaranteed” shall be removed.
6. The applicant construct a sidewalk along the north side of 127 th Street and the West side of Division Street (IL Route 59). Commissioner Schinderle seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Henry, Gehrke, Manning, Schinderle Nay: Kachel, Sobkoviak The motion is carried 4:2. CASE NO.: 935 -012502.AA/PP/RZ SHADOW WOOD SUBDIVISION Requ est: Annexation and Rezoning (Public Hearing) and Preliminary Plat Location: South of Ft. Beggs Drive and West of Division Street Applicant: Joe Keim Builders, Inc. Commenced: 9:05pm Planner Garrigan gave the staff report. Commissioner Manning requests c larification on some wording in the staff report, specifically regarding landscape easements. Planner Garrigan said that the trustees have directed staff to encourage landscape outlots rather than easements. Commissioner Manning asked who would be respon sible for the outlots’ maintenance. Planner Garrigan said that the Homeowners Association would be. Commissioner Schinderle asked how many homeowners associations are actually operational. Commissioner Manning asked Mr. Garrigan to clarify what “Dormant Special Service Area” means. Mr. Garrigan said this means that if the homeowners association fails to maintain the area, the Village can take care of it and bill the homeowners association. Commissioner Kachel asked if staff has spoken with the School D istrict about the plan. Henry Stillwell, representing the petitioner, identified his witnesses and they were put under oath.
Mr. Stillwell presented Exhibit 1, an aerial photo of the subject property; Exhibit 2, the preliminary plat; and Exhibit 3, an af fidavit. He noted that the primary full access is to the northwest section. He reviewed the locations of access points. He said that a landscape buffer to the south will be built, as well as an easterly buffer. Regarding the outlot versus easement issu e, it has been our experience that maintenance issues can be handled without an outlot. If a homeowner has land immediately to him that he does not own, he loses a control factor. Privilege of control is essential, so we recommend having landscape easeme nts privately owned by the homeowners. We have identified 15 key lots pursuant to staff’s request. We will also provide for the antimonotony requirements. The total lot count on cul du sacs is 17. Lot sizes vary from about 42,000 square feet to 86,000 square feet. Commissioner Kachel said that the aerial photo seemed to indicate that the roads to the south of the subject property are narrower – this could create traffic problems. He asked Mr. Garrigan to comment. Chairman Sobkoviak said that he think s that the roads are standard width, not narrower. Regarding easements v. outlots, lots that back up to James Street and Ft. Beggs Drive need to have no -access easements there. Chairman Sobkoviak asked Mr. Garrigan if personally owned easements would be satisfactory. The meeting was opened to public comment. Katie Child asked for a distinction between B -3 and B -4 zoning, saying that she was concerned about more fast food establishments being located in the area. Jeff Conrad has property in Spangler Far m. He said he is concerned with this development’s drainage. His property is consistently caused problems because of improper drainage in Spangler Farm. An engineer for the project explained how the drainage will work. A “naturalized” bottom to the p ond is being proposed. Chairman Sobkoviak asked Steve Amann to comment on the engineer’s comments. Bruce Corwin , representing Edward Medical Center, expressed concern about the entrance near their full access entrance. He also inquired about the possibi lity of having a future traffic light coincide with the medical center’s entrance as well. Chairman Sobkoviak directed staff to work with the medical center and the developer for alignment of the entrances.
Commissioner Manning addresses a memorandum in the petition. He asked if the developer will include traffic calming measures into this plan. The response was that yes, some have already been incorporated. Commissioner Henry asked if the purpose of the traffic calming measures was to prevent fast tra ffic from the high school. Commissioner Schinderle expressed concern that there was only one entrance to the subdivision from Ft. Beggs Drive, and there is no access to Route 59. Chairman Sobkoviak reviewed what needed to be decided tonight. Commissione r Schinderle moved to recommend to the Village Board approval of the annexation of this site with the requested R -1 and B -4 zoning. Commissioner Manning seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Kachel, Henry, Gehrke, Manning, Schinderle, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0. Commissioner Schinderle moved to recommend to the Village Board the approval of the Preliminary Plat with the following stipulations: 1. Compliance with the Village Engineer. 2. Compliance with the Plainfield Fire Protection District. 3. The creation of a Dormant Special Service Area at the time of the first final plat. 4. That the applicant incorporate some additional traffic calming devices into the design of Keim Drive. 5. That the applicant incorpora te a landscape easement with a minimum width of 20 feet along F. Beggs Road and Outlot B of this subdivision. Commissioner Manning seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for vote by roll call. Aye: Kachel, Henry, Gehrke, Manning, Schinderle, Sob koviak Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0.
New Business CASE NO.: 957 -041502.FP PRAIRIE PONDS Request: Final Plat Location: North of 135 th Street, West of Nature’s Crossing Applicant: Isenstein -Pasquinelli Commenced: 10:15pm Planner Garrigan gave t he staff report. The Village Engineer said that he has no major problems with the drainage. As for street widths, we have determine that 28 -foot width would meet requirements. – There was a small discussion of street widths – John Philipchuck represen ted the petitioner. An engineer for the developer stated that a sidewalk is planned to be constructed. Commissioner Henry moved to recommend to the Village Board approval of the final plat of Prairie Ponds subject to the following stipulations: 1. Complianc e with the requirements of the Village Engineer. 2. Compliance with the requirements of the Plainfield Fire Protection District. 3. Incorporation of no -access easements along all lots with frontage along 135 th Street. 4. Incorporation of 28 -foot street widths, exce pt for Blakely Street, which shall be 31 feet in width. 5. Incorporation of a sidewalk along the northern section of 135 th Street. 6. Change the name of Heron View Court as per the recommendations of staff. Commissioner Kachel seconded the motion. Chairman Sob koviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Kachel, Henry, Gehrke, Manning, Schinderle, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0. CASE NO.: KENDALL COUNTY CASE – DAVIS PROPERTY Request: Special Use Permit for a private soccer club etc. Location: 80 -acre property in unincorporated Kendall County south of Simons Road Applicant: Old Second National Bank Trust #5789 and Wheatland Township Athletic Association Commenced: 10:30pm
Planner Drayna gave the staff report. Dan Kramer represented the petition er. He explained the layout of the property and stated that they hope to start building in 2004. Commissioner Kachel moved to recommend forwarding a letter of no objection regarding the applicant’s request to obtain a special use permit to rezone 25 acre s from A -1 to A1 -SU for the use of Athletic fields on the property. Commissioner Schinderle seconded. Chairman Sobkoviak called for vote by roll call. Aye: Kachel, Henry, Gehrke, Manning, Schinderle, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0. Cha irman Sobkoviak declared the meeting adjourned at 10:39pm. _____________ Respectfully submitted, Warren Lindsay Warren Lindsay Recording Secretary Karick & Associates