Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2002-10-1 PC minutesVillage of Plainfield Planning Commission Record of Minutes Date: October 1, 2002 Location: Village Hall Chairman Sobkoviak called the meeting to order at 7:03pm. Roll Call Present: Commissioners Henry, Kachel, Gehrke, Anderson, Manning, S obkoviak, School District Absent: Commissioner Schinderle, Fire District, Library District Minutes The minutes for the September 17 th meeting were accepted as presented. Old Business CASE NO.: 989 -082602.TA DEMOLITION PERMITS (To be continued) R equest: Text Amendment Location: Village Wide Commenced: 7:08pm Since a continuance had already been requested, no discussion was necessary, and Chairman Sobkoviak immediately asked for a motion to continue. Commissioner Manning moved to continue the cas e. Commissioner Henry seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Henry, Kachel, Gehrke, Manning, Anderson, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0. 1 New Business CASE NO.: 981 -080102.Z/PP/SPR STREAMS UNITS 2 & 3 Request: Zoning (Public Hearing) and Preliminary Plat and Site Plan Review Location: West of Rt. 59 & South of Fraser Road Applicant: The Streams, LLC Commenced: 7:09pm Stephanie Houk Sheetz announced to the commission that the applicant was seeking a continuance. Chairman Sobkoviak voiced his objection to the request to change the zoning from B -2 to R -1. Patrick Branken, representing the applicant, asked to delay this discussion until the next appearance so as to allow applicant’s expert witnesses to speak to the matter. Chairman Sobkoviak asked the audience if anyone would care to comment. James Rile , of Wedgewood Court, asked what is planned for the development. Toni Bell , of Fraser Road, questioned what the effect the development would have o n Fraser Road. She asked if Fraser Road would be widened and, if so, where. Lastly, Ms. Bell inquired as to how property owners’ water and sewer would be affected by this development. Rebecca Vasik asked a question about zoning: will this development be B -2, R -1, or both? Where will the B -2 zoning be? J.R. Rizzi expressed his agreement with Chairman Sobkoviak’s concerns about Plainfield needing more commercial development. Robert Green said that the subdivision would lock in his property. If the cu rrent plans have not changed, he will need a stub street to prevent this from happening. Chairman Sobkoviak told him that his concerns will be met. Rebecca Vasik stated that, though the developer’s notice stated that a map was included with the notice, n one was provided. Chairman Sobkoviak requested a motion to continue. Commissioner Anderson moved to continue the case. Commissioner Manning seconded the motion. 2 Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Henry, Kachel, Gehrke, Manning, An derson, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 6:0. CASE NO.: 991 -083002.FP FARMSTONE RIDGE UNIT 2 Request: Final Plat Location: Southeast corner of 127 th and Plainfield Naperville Road Applicant: Macom Commenced: 7:20pm Planner Sheetz gave the sta ff report. Chairman Sobkoviak said that a Dormant Special Service Area (DSSA) needs to be automatic. This should be a requirement of all developments. Edward Welch, representative for Macom, addressed the commission. He said that a DSSA is no problem. As far as a bike path is concerned, this remains to be discussed as to who would pay for it (the developer would not). Rear -access easements also posed no problem for the developer. Since nothing glaring is at issue, we request approval so that this pro ject can move forward. Commissioner Kachel asked if Macom owned all the property associated with the project, to which Mr. Welch answered in the affirmative. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if anyone in the audience would care to comment on this case at this ti me. No public comment was entered. Chairman Sobkoviak said that it will have to be established who will pay for the bike path – this would probably fall to the Park District. Commissioner Kachel asked a clarifying question as to what exactly the develop er was doing to satisfy the Park Districts requirements: land donation or cash in lieu donation? Mr. Welch responded that two lots were being donated. Commissioner Manning wondered how this case could be held up by the commission for issues that weren’t even on the project property. Commissioner Kachel said that a continuation would allow us to get some requisite documents from the developer and then move forward. 3 Chairman Sobkoviak said that the DSSA requirement should really be part of the presentatio n to the Village Board. Mr. Welch pointed out that even if his client couldn’t get the property needed for the bike path, this case still shouldn’t be held up since the bike path wasn’t an original requirement. Commissioner Kachel said that we would like to have everything before us before we move forward. Chairman Sobkoviak said the when we hand a case off to the Village Board, the case should be complete. Commissioner Anderson asked how much the Park District had been involved in the development discu ssion. Planner Sheetz said that when this came up, the Park District said they were willing to accept lots 169 and 170. Mr. Welch said that the 127 th Street issue is not relevant to the discussion since 127 th Street isn’t even adjacent to Unit 2, the are a under discussion at that time. Commissioner Henry said that the Planning Commission is having to take a more proactive stance as of late, and so this case will have to be treated as such. Commissioner Henry moved to continue the case. Commissioner Kac hel seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Henry, Kachel, Gehrke, Anderson, Sobkoviak Nay: Manning The motion is carried 5:1. – A brief discussion arose following discussion of the cases – Chairman Sobkoviak sug gested that the aeration of ponds, if shown to be of significant use to the prevention of mosquito spawning, should be a part of DSSA requirements. Commissioner Kachel said that with the appearance of the West Nile Virus, this is an issue of great importa nce. 4 (Anonymous ) asked the commission, what about large areas of standing/stagnant water on undeveloped or developing land? Such an area exists near her property and she expressed concern that this could be a problem as well as un -aerated ponds on develo ped property. Planner Sheetz said that staff can provide information regarding the relative benefits of aeration for the commission to review. The issue of Planning Commission authority as it relates to negotiation with the developer was discussed briefl y. Chairman Sobkoviak declared the meeting adjourned at 8:02pm. ____________ Respectfully submitted, Warren Lindsay Warren Lindsay Recording Secretary Karick & Associates 5