Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout1995-06-20 PC minutesPLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION DATE: June 20, 1995 AT: Plainfield Library COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Sobkoviak K. O'Connell L. Kachel T. Spika R. Schinderle W. Manning A. Anderson ALSO PRESENT: P. J. Waldock, Development & Zoning Director Library District representative Fire District representative J. Durbin, Planner S. Hart, Secretary Chairman Sobkoviak called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., and led the pledge to the flag. Roll call was taken, The Park and School District representatives were absent. The June 6, 1995 minutes were approved as amended. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORT: Regarding the P. O. Office, locations are proposed on Lockport St. west of the river. The Post Office accepted the suggested position for the post office, if the Village would build the needed street. The Village declined, but did offer to spend up to $100,000 to provide the street scape to enchance the area for the residents. The post office will be responsible for its own street. Discussions on are going. Hunt Club Lane and Amber Subdivision were approved. A request by Cottonwood farms for vegetable stand, was tabled so the Development Committee could investigate, and draft an ordinance regarding such portable businesses. Planning Staff has been working with the Park and School Disrict to plan School sites, (with Bolingbrook, Joliet and School District 202). NEW BUSINESS; 488-052395.SPR MEGA SPORTS Planner Durbin summarized his report as follows: The use proposed complies with the Zoning Ordinance provisions in that sporting goods and gun shops are permitted in the B-2 and B-3 districts respectively, and accordingly are permitted in the B-4 district. Staff interpreted the Zoning Ordinance that an indoor shooting range is permitted in the B-4 district as a commercial recreation use of the same general character as bowling alleys, skating rinks, gymnasiums, and health clubs. The applicant proposes to construct a 15,750 square foot facility to provide for a retail store and indoor shooting range. The subject property is located in the Sandhurst Subdivision along U.S. Rt. 30 as indicated on the attached site plans. The applicant intends to relocate the existing business from the Lily Cache Plaza into the new facility. PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES June 20, 1995 Page 2 ANALYSIS: The following is a detailed summary analysis. PARKING AND DRIVE AREAS: The proposed plan has been changed from 15 stalls to 14 shooting stalls, and the area from 5000 sq. ft. to 6300 sq. ft. building. As only one shooter can be an an alley at a time, the requirement will be 1.25 parking spaces per alley. He suggested 68 total parking spaces. Utilization solely of the retail provisions would be excessive as 5,000 square feet (33% of the facility) is dedicated to the shooting range. The shooting range will only support a limited number of patrons at any one time. Typically, only person may shoot per alley at any one time. Thefore, the planner directed the first stipulation of the Staff Report be deleted. The Plainfield Fire Protection District has recommended that the service drive be widened from twelve feet to fifteen feet. The applicant has agreed to this request. Staff has also identified a minor concern related to the two points of entry to the site. While the entry is twenty six feet and the service drive will be fifteen feet, additional clarification should be provided to ensure effective traffic flow on the site. Staff would recommend directional signage at the entry as well as the service drive. The applicant should confirm that the site plan will provide for adequate semi access for deliveries to the rear service door. Even if Mega Sports does not currently receive deliveries from semis, it may in the future. This will also ensure long term use of the structure for potential users after Mega Sports. ARCHITECTURE: The proposed structure will be constructed of split faced concrete block on all four sides. The facade complies with the Site Plan Review Ordinance 25% masonry requirements. The applicant should confirm that color change will be associated with the textural changes shown on the building elevations. This would help in breaking up the monolithic facades. The north facade needs some additional treatment to reduce the scale of the facade as it, like the other facades, is highly visible from the street, possible treatments would include either additional color or landscape as discussed later in this report. Another treatment that would assist in reducing the scale of the facades would be to incorporate wall signage into the elevations replacing the ground mounted signage as proposed. Staff would recommend the applicant consider this approach as it would allow for greater sign area per the sign ordinance and the sign visibility would be improved as well. The applicant should also clarify the proposed roof treatments and treatment of rooftop mechanical equipment if so provided. Suggested wall signage rather than a monumnt sign, this would be handled through the sign permit. STORM WATER DETENTION: This proposal has been reviewed by the Village Engineer and no stormwater detention is required. The grading plan also meets Village requirements. The Village Engineer therefore recommends approval. PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES June 20, 1995 Page 3 LANDSCAPING: The Zoning Ordinance requires a 40 foot buffer yard with a minimum 20 foot landscape area for all commercial B-4 sites adjacent to residential districts. The Mega Sports site will require such a bufferyard to the rear of the site. The setback is in compliance, however, the 20 foot landscape area must be added to the landscape plan. Staff would also recommend provision of additional shade trees along the rear of the parking lot and along the service drive to reduce the heat island effects. This would be consistent with requirements of previous developments such as McDonalds and Thorton Oil. Additional shade trees along the north facade would also assist in reducing the scale of the north facade. TRASH ENCLOSURES: Trash enclosures are provided in compliance with the Site Plan Review Ordinance. EXTERIOR LIGHTING: The building wall lighting is provided in compliance with the requirements of the Site Plan Review Ordinance. Additional parking lot and site lighting is not provided. SIGNAGE: A ground sign is proposed. The sign must comply with the Sign Ordinance and permit approval would be handled through the sign permit process. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REVIEW: As outlined in a previous memo to the Plan Commission, staff met with the Planning and Development Committee to formalize the development review process. This process is not significantly different than the review process that occurred prviously, however, the process has been formalized. As you recall, the Planning and Development Committee will review cases and make recommendations regarding the case. The Planning and Development Committee has reviewed this case and recommended forwarding the case to the Plan Commission as it appears ready for formal review. The Committee recommends approval subject to the stipulations outlined below. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Mega Sports Site Plan subject to the following stipulations: 1 Provision of 12 additional parking spaces (four of which should be handicap accessible). (to be deleted). Widen the service drive be from 12 feet to fifteen feet. Provide directional signage at the entry as well as the service drive. 4. Provide a minimum 20 foot landscape area to the rear of the site and additional shade trees along the rear of the parking lot and the service drive. Amend the Landscape Plan accordingly. 5. Compliance with the requirements of the Village Engineer. 6. Compliance with the provisions of the Plainfield Fire Protection District. All stipulations must be in compliance before the case goes to the Village Board. Planner Durbin suggested the Plan Commission should support the B-4 Zoning finding for the site, and asked that the parking calculations be supported. PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES June 20, 1995 Page 4 Michael Martin, attorney for the applicant spoke. Ho felt the the applicant had spent time tosubmit aoiho plan that could be approved. This business would bring in twenty employees, the property is vacant, and will bring in more revenue for the Village. One of the Commissioners was concerned, the number of shooting ranges in the area, and the criminal elemnenttha1would be brought into the Village, people with guns. Aftera short discussion, Chairman Sobkoviak said the first thing the Commission should do is decide if an indoor shooing alley was appropriate for the B4 Zoning District. Randy Miller, attorney for the applicant, spoke, we will not stop the criminal element, by denying the shooting alley, for the B-4 zoning. W. Manning made a motion that "/\ shooting range is appropriate an a permitted use in the B-4 district". Seconded b«R.5Chinderlm. Roll call vote. K.O'ConnelLyes; L.KacheLy8s; T.5pika,yes; R. SChinderle' yes; W. Manning, yes A. Anderson, yes; Chairman Sobkovink yes. Motion carried. 0 yes 0 no. R. 5chinderle made a motion, that the Plan Commission agree with the parking calculations of 1.25 parking spaces per alloyfor shooting alleys made b« staff. Seconded b«VV. Manning. Roll call vote. K. O'Connell, yes; L. KacheL yes; T. Spika,yos; R.3Chindmrla, yes; W. Manning, yes; /\.Anderson, yes; Chairman Sobkoviai' yes. Motion carried. 6 yes O no. Concerns also included the protection of the people outside from the shooting. The applicant explained the bullets and noise are contained in the [aciliby by the ballistic envelope. The applicant was asked to explain the ballistic envelope. He was not prepared at that time with exact specifications, but forwarded materials tothe Plan Commission, and these are included in the minutes. The Plan Commission suggested another stipulation, Compliance with the Building Official and Police Chief stipulations in regard tosound abatement and ballistic envelope. After discussion, W. Manning made a motion to recommend tO the Village Board, the aproval of the Site Plan for Mega Sports, Case No. 488-052395.SPR.subjact bo the following stipulations: 1. Provide directional signage at the entry as well as the service drive. 2. Provide a nnininnUno 20 foot landscape area t0the rear ofthe Site and additional Shade trees along the rear Vf the parking lot and the service drive. Amend the Landscape Plan accordingly. 3. Compliance with the requirements of the Village Engineer. 4. Compliance with the provisions of the Plainfield Fire Protection District, widen the service drive be from 12 feet tnfifteen feet and address signs. 5. Compliance with the Building Official and Police Chief stipulations in nsAan] to sound abatement and ballistic envelope. Seconded by N. SChindenalm Roll call vote. K. O'Connell, yes) L. KaCh8L yes; T. 5pika,yeu; R. Schinderle, yes; VV.Manning, yes; A. Anderson, yes; Chairman SobkoviaL/ yes. Motion carried. 0 yes ono. PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES June 20, 1995 Page 5 CASE NO. 487- 052395.SPR HERON VIEW ESTATES. Planner Durbin summarized his report as follows: The applicant proposes to construct 46 single family dwelling units composed of two and four unit structures located in Sandhurst Subdivision. As you may recall, the applicant requested a rezoning from B -3 to R -3 which the Village Board approved subject to Site Plan Review Approval. Along with the rezoning request, the applicant submitted a concept plan for the development, a copy of this concept plan is attached. The Village Board approved the concept which had a density of 4.3 dwelling unit per acre subject to a maximum of 5.0 dwelling units per acre. The Site Plan proposed for development contains 46 dwelling units. All units access directly onto Waterfront Circle or onto private drives fronting onto Waterfront Circle. There will be no access to McClellan. Waterfront Circle is an existing public street. PARKING AND DRIVE AREAS: All units access Waterfront Circle either directly or through the use of a private drive. The applicant has agreed to a Planning and Development Committee recommendation regarding the provision of additional landscaping and grading to terminate the private drives on the northern portion of the site. This will visually enhance the appearance of these "dead end" streets. Adequate vehicle access and parking areas are provided. ARCHITECTURE: The structures proposed consist of 100% masonry or stucco. This meets and exceeds the requirements of the Site Plan Review Ordinance. The units are proposed to be 1600 square foot condominium units. The applicant intends to provide quality construction and consistent design details to increase the marketability of the development. STORM WATER DETENTION: The existing stormwater detention area to the northeast of the site will be utilized by the development. The Village Engineer has reviewed the proposal and identified several minor concerns that have been addressed by the applicant. The Village Engineer should confirm compliance. LANDSCAPING: As this is a condominium project, the owners will not be individually responsible for maintenance of the landscaping. This will be handled by the association. This creates the opportunity to provide substantial landscaping improvements with aconsistent theme. The applicant has submitted a landscape plan as included in your packet. Since submittal of the landscape plan, there have been discussions with the Planning and Development Committee and staff, the applicant desires to supplement that plan. The applicant brought the revised proposal to the meeting. The applicant suggests that the combination of masonry elevations and substantial landscaping will significantly increase the market appeal of the development. The landscape plantings shown on the berm along the east and north property lines will effectively screen the development from both the existing residential area to the east and Lake Renwick to the North. The applicant also proposes a fence along the west and south property lines to screen the existing and future commercial uses for the residential development. The Will County Forest Preserve had no objections to the proposal. TRASH ENCLOSURES: The applicant should confirm how trash collection will be addressed. EXTERIOR LIGHTING: The developer intends to specify ornamental streetlights to enhance the sense of community and character within the development. Street light locations appear to be acceptable. PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES June 20, 1995 Page 6 SIGNAGE: Sign details have not been submitted. This will be handled through the sign permit process. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REVIEW: As outlined in a previous memo to the Plan Commission, staff has worked with the Planning and Development Committee to formalize the development review process. The Planning and Development Committee has reviewed this case and recommended forwarding the case to the Plan Commission as it appears ready for formal review. The Committee recommends approval subject to the stipulations outlined below. COMMENTS: The applicant should confirm compliance with the stipulations of the Will County Forest Preserve due to the close proximity of the development to the Lake Renwick Heron Rookery. The applicant will be vacating the interior lot lines which will provide for better administration of the condominium development and eliminate concerns related to side yard setbacks in these locations. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure that all required setbacks have been provided. Finally, while there is some concern related to the change from the original concept plan to the submitted plan, staff has determined that the original plan, is not workable on the site. This is due to errors in scaling the drawing by the original preparer. This plan adequately addresses the goals of the original plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning and Development Committee recommend approval subject to the following stipulations: 1. Amend the landscape plan, which is being done. 2. Provide details related to building design, and site lighting. 3. Vacate interior lot lines. 4. Provide details regarding deck locations to confirm compliance with setback requirements. 5. Applicant must address the concerns of the Will County Forest Preserve 6. Compliance with the requirements of the Village Engineer. 7. Compliance with the provisions of the Plainfield Fire Protection District. 8. All stipulations must be in compliance before the case goes to the Village Board. Michael Petro the attorney for the applicant, and handed out new plans for the landscape to the Commission. and had handouts regarding the garage door, the lighting and had panels of the brick, he stated there are 9 ft. ceilings, and full basements, and Anderson windows. Concerns of the Commission included, the possibility of a Village standard for lighting, to match the lighting of the downtown, was there a sidewalk, a sidewalk was on both sides of Waterford Circle. PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES June 20, 1995 Page 7 Concerns of the Fire Department, were identification of the units on the curbs, and sidewalks along Renwick Road. After discussion, R. Schindrele made a motion to recommend to the Village Board, the approval of the Site Plan for Case No. 487-052395.SPR, including the stipulations of the Planner, and the 2 stipulations of the Plan Commission. 9. Restrict parking on shared driveways for a Fire Lane. 10. Sidewalks should be required on Renwick from Mc Clellen to the west edge of the property. Seconded by L. Kachel Roll call vote. K. O'Connell, yes; L. Kachel, yes; T. Spika, yes; R. Schinderle, yes; W. Manning, yes; A. Anderson, yes; Chairman Sobkoviak, yes. Motion carried. 6 yes 0 no. ADJOURN: 9:15 - &-r ��lAZ,n,2 haon Hart, Planning Secretary PLAINFIELD W11 . OUNTYu . OLO.T • o u " Would everyone attending this Plan Commission meeting on June 20, 1995. Please sign this sheet for our official records. dJ ✓C� t-'L.f-.D , C �(6 k4k ,? f i Lfcs- St L E �Q M AKK- DAK1�S 1 &gj ALL- Nl' %fit FD,