Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2002-10-15 PC minutesVillage of Plainfield Planning Commission Record of Minutes Date: October 15, 2002 Location: Village Hall Chairman Sobkoviak called the meeting to order at 7:00pm. Roll Call Present: Commissioners Henry, Kachel, Gehrke, Schinderle, Manning, Anders on, Sobkoviak Absent: Park District, School District, Fire District, Library District Minutes The minutes for the October 1 st meeting were accepted as presented. Chairman Sobkoviak announced that case number 981 -080102.PP/RZ will be continued. Old Busi ness CASE NO.: 991 -083002.FP FARMSTONE RIDGE UNIT 2 Request: Final Plat Location: S.E. Corner of 127 th & Plainfield/Naperville Road Applicant: Dommermuth, Brestal Commenced: 7:04pm Planner Sheetz gave the staff report. The Applicant’s representative st ood to answer any questions the Commission might have. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if anyone in the audience cared to comment on the case. No member of public provided comment. Commissioner Manning moved to approve the final plat subject to the stipulation s identified in the staff report. Commissioner Henry seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Kachel, Henry, Gehrke, Schinderle, Manning, Anderson, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 7:0. New Business CASE NO.: 997 -091802.SU PLAINFIELD RETAIL CENTER Request: Special Use (Continued to November 5, 2002) Location: 119 th & Rt. 59 Applicant: Ryan Companies US, Inc. Commenced: 7:06pm Planner Garrigan announced that the case was to be continued to November 5 th . Commissioner Schinderle moved to continue the case. Commissioner Kachel seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Kachel, Henry, Gehrke, Schinderle, Manning, Anderson, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 7:0. CASE NO.: 992 -090402.FP CENTURY TRACE UNIT 4D Request: Final Plat Location: N.E. Corner of 119 th Street and Plainfield/Naperville Road Applicant: Pulte Homes Commenced: 7:11pm Planner Drayna presented the commission with the staff report. Chairman S obkoviak clarified whether the annexation agreement was the overriding authority in this case. Steven Pollack thanked the commission for the opportunity to address the commission. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if there were any members of the audience who wis hed to comment on this case. None did. Commissioner Henry noted that there should be no -access easements along the rear of the properties that are adjacent to Normantown Road. Chairman Sobkoviak said that that should probably be added as a stipulation. Commissioner Schinderle voiced reservations about the developer being allowed to pay the dues “at the time of final plat recording”. Commissioner Henry asked about key lots on the site. Commissioner Kachel moved to approve the final plat subject to the three stipulations outlined in the staff report as well as an added stipulation that states that the developer shall install rear -access easements along the rear of the properties parallel to Normantown Road. Commissioner Henry seconded the motion. Chair man Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Kachel, Henry, Gehrke, Schinderle, Manning, Anderson, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 7:0. CASE NO.: 994 -090302.FP GRANDE PARKE UNITS 3 & 7 Request: Final Plat Location: 135 th and Heggs Road & E. Community Park Applicant: Pasquinelli Development Group Commenced: 7:20pm Dale Drayna gave the staff report. Chairman Sobkoviak asked Steve Amann (Village Engineer) if he had any comments to add. Mr. Amann said he did not. Commissioner Kachel ask ed if the developer had a letter from the Oswego Park District providing their input. Edward Welch, attorney for the petitioner, addressed the commission. We are in agreement with the staff report, except that we have one comment: we will be building a p edestrian bridge over the main road. Chairman Sobkoviak asked what the design schedule would be in. Jean Nash , a resident owning property adjacent to the project site, asked the developer about the outlots on the project site. She was concerned that t he proposed bike path, which would run directly behind her property, would infringe on some of her privacy if her family was out in their back yard. Would the developer put up a fence to protect the privacy? A representative from Pasquinelli explained the outlots: all will be landscaped and maintained by the Oswego Park District. Commissioner Kachel asked a procedural question: is it customary to approve both the preliminary plat and the final plat at the same time? Chairman Sobkoviak said that this h as happened in the past. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if the Oswego Park District would maintain the pedestrian bridge. The commission discussed the creation of at Dormant Special Service Area (DSSA). Commissioner Manning suggested that the wording of stipu lation four (4) of the staff report should be amended. The wording should read “submit a check in the amount of $700,000 for annexation fees at the time of final plat ” (emphasis added). Commissioner Henry moved to approve the Preliminary Plat for Units 3, 7, and the East Community Park of the Grande Park Subdivision subject to the stipulations as outlined in the staff report. Furthermore he moved to approve the Final Plat for Units 3, 7, and the East Community Park of the Grande Park Subdivision subjec t to the stipulations iterated in the staff report as amended by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Kachel, Henry, Gehrke, Schinderle, Manning, Anderson, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 7:0. CASE NO.: 988 -082302.AA/SU/PP KINGS CROSSING Request: Zoning Annexation Agreement and Site Plan Review and Preliminary Plat Location: 127 th and Rt. 30 Applicant: Jim L. Stortzum, Attorney Commenced: 7:45pm Planner Garrigan gave the staff report. Steve Gregory, representative for the applicant, addressed the commission. He said that the staff report was very thorough, and we have little to add. Chairman Sobkoviak asked Steve Amann if he had any comments. Mr. Aman n noted that the developer was proposing to install a 60 -foot right -of -way instead of the standard 66 -foot right -of -way. This could make installing utilities difficult. Commissioner Kachel asked Mr. Gregory about the utilities along the central boulevard . Chairman Sobkoviak said that a stipulation should be added requiring the developer to install no -access easements along 127 th Street. Mr. Gregory commented that the “low key” park areas will be maintained by the Park District. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment at this time. No one volunteered comment. Chairman Sobkoviak commented on the issue of annexation, saying that it would appear that this would be a logical extension of Plainfield boundaries. Regarding the PU D, does anyone have a problem with the special use permit? Commissioner Henry asked Mr. Gregory about the architectural features of the units going into the project. Mr. Gregory said that they did not have that information yet. Chairman Sobkoviak sugg ested that this was not an appropriate time to discuss the issues of architectural features and design. Commissioner Henry said that certain architectural requirements should be put in place to ensure that design standards are being met. Mr. Gregory said that they can look at who will be building where. We are trying to establish a standard. Chairman Sobkoviak said that it is important to refrain from micro -managing these projects. Commissioner Manning asked staff about stipulation 7 in the staff repor t: do you really want to rob space from a key lot to meet the minimum square footage requirement? The commissioners engaged in a brief discussion on key lot issues. Mr. Garrigan said that he feels it is important to enforce the minimum square footage req uirement so that future developments can be held to the same standard. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if there were any other concerns. Commissioner Kachel moved to recommend approval the requested annexation of the King’s Crossing Subdivision into the Village of Plainfield. Furthermore he moved to recommend approval of the Special Use for Planned Unit Development subject to the stipulations outlined in the staff report. Finally, he moved to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat for the King’s Crossing S ubdivision subject to the stipulations iterated in the staff report excepting stipulation 3 which was stricken, the following amendment to stipulation four, which should now read, “The incorporation of a bike trail along 127 th Street and, if permission of the owner is secured, the developer will extend the bike -trail to the Commonwealth Edison line” and with the addition of a stipulation requiring the installation of no -access easements along 127 th Street. Commissioner Gehrke seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Kachel, Henry, Gehrke, Schinderle, Manning, Anderson, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 7:0. CASE NO.: 984 -080902.Z 407 DIVISION STREET Request: Zoning Location: 407 Division Street Applicant: Commenced: 8:30pm Planner Sheetz gave the staff report. Bob Graham, attorney for the applicants, addressed the commission. He noted that the applicants planned to have their store open during normal business hours (9 -5pm). Chairman Sobkoviak asked Ms. Sheetz a clarifying question: does the special use permit lapse with the sale of the property? Ms. Sheetz said that staff does not believe that the permit would lapse. Chairman Sobkoviak said that this could mean that another owner could come in and put in a different (possibly more intrusive to the neighbors) use in the future. Ms. Sheetz read part of the BTD ordinance relating to this issue. Commissioner Kachel said that we could require that the special use permit would lapse when the property was so ld. Ms. Sheetz said that she was not sure that such a requirement is legal. Chairman Sobkoviak said that the letter from Mr. Bates should be added to the public record. Commissioner Manning brought up the issue of lighting in the parking lot. The petit ioner was present and said that there were three parking spaces that he felt required lighting. He was amenable to the idea of motion sensors. Commissioner Henry asked if the lights would be the standard 8 -9 feet high, to which the petitioner responded i n the affirmative. Chairman Sobkoviak said that we need to know that the lighting won’t detrimentally affect the residents near the property. The lights should be directed downward or against the wall so that there is no glare. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment at this time. Mr. Bates stated that the staff report is misleading. He said he asked why the Village can’t enforce previously made promises. A previous promise was made that a certain property would only be so ld to another law office, and now is being used for retail use. This is wrong. Retail use requires a high level of traffic to be successful. We object to this strongly. Furthermore drainage in the alley behind the property does not exist. Flooding in his back yard occurs every time it rains. He suggested that an engineering study is required. Anonymous brought up issues of access to his driveway. His driveway is accessed via the alley. If traffic increases in the alley, moving in and out of his dri veway would be riskier. Commissioner Manning asked what would solve his problem. Chairman Sobkoviak said that staff should look into this problem. Commissioner Henry said that the parking configuration could be more creative. Ms. Sheetz said that she is open to any suggestions on how to improve the parking. Chairman Sobkoviak asked if anyone on the commission had problems with the re -zoning to BTD. Commissioner Schinderle asked Ms. Sheetz to read the uses allowed under BTD zoning. Ms. Sheetz read a loud the wording of the ordinance. Commissioner Kachel said that he had a problem with the possibility of another owner coming in and being able to continue using the special use permit. Commissioner Manning asked Ms. Sheetz what the issue was with the p arking. Ms. Sheetz said that she thought that the commission was uncomfortable with the traffic emptying into the alley. The petitioner said that this will be a very low impact use. This is not like we are putting in a Walgreens. We will do half the on -location business of an average gift shop, which does only 30% of the on -location business of a Walgreens. We want to be a member of the community. Competition is a good thing – we would like to be a part of the business community of Plainfield as well. Commissioner Kachel said that he has no real problem with this use going in, but he has concerns about the effect the sale of the property would have. Commissioner Schinderle asked if it would be possible to reconfigure the parking so that customers wou ld be able to enter and exit from Ottowa Street. Ms. Sheetz said that in that case customers would have to back out onto Ottowa in order to exit. Commissioner Kachel said that a stipulation should be put in requiring that the property would only be sold to a certain type of business. Commissioner Gehrke asked how can we treat this petitioner differently than others were treated in the past. Commissioner Kachel asked if it would be possible to make the alley 1 -way southbound. Ms. Sheetz said that that w ould be a good idea, but we can’t condition this project on that. Judy Lowe said that the parking lot that will be going in will look better than the fence that was there before. Chairman Sobkoviak said that the commission still needed to discuss bufferi ng. Mr. Bates said that he does not have screening that would block the view of the parking lot. The commission discussed what type of screening would be appropriate for this situation, namely sizeable trees that would provide immediate screening rather than eventual screening. Commissioner Manning moved to recommend approval of the requested rezoning from R -1 to BTD for the property commonly known as 407 Division Street, subject to the three stipulations in the staff report, with the third stipulation b eing amended to read “landscaping is to be completed in compliance with the site plan submitted as amended”. He furthermore moved to recommend approval of the requested special use for retail sales for the property commonly known as 407 Division Street, s ubject to the stipulation added by the Plan Commission, which reads, “limit retail to only retail for drapery, window treatment, accessory sales, and floral design. Commissioner Henry seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call . Aye: Kachel, Henry, Gehrke, Schinderle, Manning, Anderson, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 7:0. CASE NO.: 1000 -091802.SU LUBE CENTER SYSTEMS Request: Site Plan Review Location: S.W. Corner of 135 th Street & Rt. 59 Applicant: Edwards and Ke lcey Commenced: 9:45pm Planner Drayna gave the staff report. Ron Marsh addressed the commission. He made two points: (1) the proposed signage is not detrimental to the atmosphere of the area, and (2) the design for this proposal is exceptional. Commiss ioner Anderson asked if the developer has found that customers exhibit confusion as a result of the current sign configuration. The developer said that yes, customers that enter from the south do not even know the name of the facility. This proposal is v ery important to the business. Commissioner Henry asked what the south elevation was. Would the light from the sign provide glare to the surrounding neighbors? Mr. Marsh said that the distance to the nearest residence is over 100 yards, and that at th at distance the sign can’t even be read. Commissioner Manning pointed out that the case number printed on the agenda was different from the one on Mr. Drayna’s report. He asked which was correct, and the correct case number was recorded. Commissioner Sc hinderle moved to recommend approval of the special use to amend the PUD for the Plainfield Commons Development to allow additional signage for the Corssroads Auto Spa subject to the stipulations outlined in the staff report. Commissioner Manning seconded the motion. Chairman Sobkoviak called for a vote by roll call. Aye: Kachel, Henry, Gehrke, Schinderle, Manning, Anderson, Sobkoviak Nay: None The motion is carried 7:0. The commission entertained a small discussion following review of the cases. The topic of detention ponds and aeration was discussed for a short while. Regarding the codification of architectural controls (guidelines for key lots), Mr. Garrigan said that some guidelines exist, but we do not want to micro -manage these projects. Certa in guidelines have been incorporated in the past. Commissioner Henry asked Mr. Garrigan if he could, at some point in the future, provide some examples. Mr. Garrigan said he would. Commissioner Kachel said that the commission needs to identify how it wa nts the general look of a development to be, tell the developer to do it in whatever way he/she chooses, but that the guidelines must be incorporated. Commissioner Kachel also brought up the issue of a sidewalk at Lily Cache: why is there no none across t he bridge? Chairman Sobkoviak declared the meeting adjourned at 10:10pm. _________________ Respectfully submitted, Warren Lindsay Recording Secretary Karick & Associates, Inc.