Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout1995-11-07 PC minitesPLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION DATE: November 7, 1995 AT: Plainfield Library COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Sobkoviak K. O'Connell R. Schinderle W. Manning ALSO PRESENT: P. J. Waldock, Development & Zoning Director School District representative J. Durbin, Planner J. Djerf, Village Engineer 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, L. Kachel, T. Spika, A. Anderson, the Park, Fire and Library district representatives were absent. The October 17, 1995 minutes were approved as presented. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORT: The Village Board tabled the Bowling Alley to continue the discussions of facade issues, sidewalks, access to Joliet Road. Vintage Harvest Unit Three was continued because of discussions of the proper alignment of Fraser Road. Soho) Annexation and Eagle Chase Annexation Agreement were approved. The Comprehensive and Transportation Plans were removed from the Agenda as the agenda was so long. It will be on the November 20, 1995 meeting. Planner Durbin spoke of the Main Street Program and the Urban Innovation Award that the Village has received for its Comprehensive Planning Process. OLD BUSINESS: NEW BUSINESS: LAKELANDS UNIT FIVE CONCEPT PLAN Planner Waldock summarized his report as follows: The revised Preliminary Plat for Lakeland's Subdivision was approved on October 16, 1989. The Preliminary Plat called for Single-family residential development along Wood Duck Drive and along the east portion of 135th Street in annexation area number two. Overall, the Annexation Agreement for the Lakeland's project allows for up to 346 dwelling units, of which 139 may be single-family dwellings, 110 may be attached single-family, and 97 cluster single-family homes. Presently Lakeland's has 91 Single-family lots platted, 18 cluster units platted and 25 townhome units platted. The Unit Five concept plan includes 9 single-family home sites and 32 cluster single-family sites. The total number of residential units within this phase would be 41 detached dwelling units. The Annexation Agreement as written describes single-family homesites as lots with a minimum frontage of 80 ft. The Unit Five concept plan proposes 28 detached single-family homesites of less than 73 ft. in width. Therefore these lots are considered to be cluster units in accordance with the Annexation Agreement provisions. The bulk of the cluster lots are planned at 65 ft. in width and 125 in depth. Nine single-family homes are also proposed as part of Unit Five. Each of those lots are in substantial compliance with the provisions of the Preliminary Plat and Annexation Agreement. The only exception would be Lot E-5 which shows a frontage at the street of 75 ft. The frontage width at the set back however is 80 ft. as required in the Annexation Agreement. PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES November 7, 1995 Page 2 The concept plan appears to be in substantial compliance with the provisions of the Annexation Agreement for Lakeland's Subdivision. The concept plan, however, deviates from the Preliminary Plat by converting single-family homesites along 135th Street and the south end of Wood Duck Drive to cluster single-family homesites. Staff finds this amendment acceptable in that the Unit One Final Plat had previously converted cluster homesites along Lakeshore Drive to single-family lots. Therefore, the cluster sites shown in the Unit Five area appear to be simply a tradeoff shifting the cluster sites from Lakeshore Drive to Wood Duck Drive. This appears to be a reasonable amendment as presented. The proposed 32 cluster units will not exceed the total allotment for cluster units per the Annexation Agreement. If the Unit Five concept plan were approved, Lakeland's would then have 100 single-family sites, 50 cluster sites, and 25 townhouse units. The concept plan would provide for 16 single-family homesites along 135th Street for this reason, staff would encourage the applicant to provide a common access easement along adjoining property lines. This would allow for shared driveways for as many units as possible along 135th Street. Shared driveways could therefore cut in half the number of driveways otherwise resulting on 135th Street. Planner Waldock and Staff recommended approval of the concept plan for Lakelands Unit Five. This approval would constitute an amendment to the Preliminary Plat originally approved October 16, 1989. Concerns of the Plan Commission included: Setbacks and side yards, and the future destination of 135th Street. One Commissioner asked, what size house would be able to be built on a 65 ft. lot, was answered that the 65 ft. lots are cluster lots and the Annexation Agreement allows these cluster units setbacks of 15 ft. and side yards of 10 ft. There was no public comment. After discussion, the request for Seconded by W yes; Chairman COUNTY CASE R. Schinderle made a motion to recommend to the Village Board, the approval of Case No. 509-110395 Concept Plan, including the stipulations of the Planner. Manning. Roll call vote. K. O'Connell, yes; R. Schinderle, yes; W. Manning, Sobkoviak, yes. Motion carried. 4 yes 0 no. DRINKALL, ET.AL REZONING CASE This Will County Rezoning Application is subject to Village consideration, per Illinois State Statutes, because it is within one and one-half miles of the current Village boundary. The Closest Village Boundary is currently located at Walker's Grove, however, the Village is currently finalizing a pre- annexation agreement for a property that is contiguous with the subject properties. The subject properties are located on the North side of 127th Street approximately 500 feet west of Heggs Road. The subject properties are North of Wheatland Plains subdivision and the proposed R.L. Sohol 44 acre proposed development as shown on the attached context map. The property has already been subdivided as shown on the attached context map. The rezoning application applies to two lots, 07-1-30-300-008 and 07-1-30-300-009 (noted as -008 and -009 on the context map) PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES November 7, 1995 Page 3 Staff has identified several concerns related to this rezoning application. The first is in regard to the legality of the subdivision. The information submitted to date is not sufficient to determine whether the subdivision of the property fulfilled the statutory subdivision requirements. This should be confirmed by the applicant. Spot zoning that is designed primarily for the benefit of a single landowner should be avoided. While this case consists of two lots adjacent to another residentially zoned lot, it still proposes spot zoning. Approval of this rezoning would provide for the further introduction of well and septic residential development fronting directly on major roadways. The approval of this application would be contrary to the Intergovernmental Agreement between the Village of Plainfield and Will County. In October 1992 the Village of Plainfield entered an agreement with Will County which was intended to address problems related to land use planning, agricultural preservation, compact and contiguous growth, and development management and coordination. In article 3 of the agreement which addresses compact and contiguous growth (defined as those areas within the facility planning area of the Village which are economically feasible for extension and connecting of Village Sanitary sewer and water systems and are capable of annexation), the Village and County agreed to encourage phased development which proceeds outward from existing developed communities in a logical and orderly fashion. The current development proposal does not meet the definition of compact and contiguous growth and based on this agreement, both the Village and Will County should not approve this development. This proposal would also introduce further well and septic residential development into an area and would tend to discourage planned orderly development. This should be avoided. The Draft 1995 Comprehensive Plan for the Village proposes the Suburban District for this area, this proposal does not comply with the provisions of the Suburban District. Further well and septic development in this area would also frustrate the Village's planned utility extensions which have been designed to serve this area. The oversized pipes and associated costs could never be recaptured should the lines serve a smaller than planned service area. NIPC's area -wide water quality management plan also states that property within the Plainfield Facility Planning area should have water and sewer service. Approval of this rezoning would lead to well and septic development that would not be in conformance with this plan. Because of the importance of the Facility Planning Area in protecting the Village's boundaries from incursion by other communities, the integrity of the Facility Planning Area must be maintained. The Village is currently reviewing a development proposal for the 44 acre property east of Wheatland Plains and south of the subject properties. The 44 acre proposal is different from this rezoning as follows: 1. It provides a logical conclusion to an existing residential development. 2. It adds only one curb cut on 127th Street and provides for buffer areas along 127th Street and Heggs Road which will be important as these Roads become Minor (127th) and Major ( Heggs) Arterial Roadways. 3. It provides for stormwater management. PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES November 7, 1995 Page 4 4. The developer has agreed to provide a pre- annexation agreement for the 44 acre development, and more importantly, has agreed to provide a pre- annexation agreement for the 80 acre property at the southeast corner of Heggs and 127th Street. The developer has also agreed to develop the 80 acre property subject to Village codes which will ensure that further development in the area meets the compact and contiguous provisions of the intergovernmental agreement. The rezoning application would provide for residential development that would front directly on 127th Street, a future minor arterial roadway, probably with individual drives for each property. The Thoroughfare Plan states that curb cuts should be minimized on roadways of this classification. 1. This rezoning could be described as spot zoning and therefore should be discouraged. 2. The rezoning application is contrary to the provisions of the Intergovernmental Agreement between the Village of Plainfield and Will County and NIPC's Area wide Water Quality Plan. 3. The proposed development would result in inefficiencies in the Village's Utility Planning. 4. The proposed development does not meet the provisions of the Draft Comprehensive Plan. 5. The proposed development does not meet the provisions of the Draft Transportation Plan. Planner Durbin and Staff recommended that the Plan Commission recommend that the Village forward a Letter of Objection to the Will County Land Use Department. Peter Krenz, attorney for the applicant, stated that the subdivison is legal. It was divided under the plat act according to state statute. Questions of the Plan Commission included, the surrounding land uses, the present use of the property, the owner of the surrounding property. Public comments included: Jeff and Christine Ernst, live adjacent to the subject property, hope to buy one of the lots to build a new home. Christine Ernst, spoke about the Agricultural preservation concern in the Intergovernmental Agreement, and did not feel it was a fair thing, because the two parcels have never been farmed. So they are not "agricultural ". Mr. Drinkall spoke of the splitting of the family farm in 1988 and how it was decided. He spoke of the two lots as having $1000. per year taxes. He felt he should be able to use his property. One Commissioner asked what is a person suppose to do that doesn't want to live in a subdivision of 12,000 sq. ft. lots in the Village and can't afford a 40 acre plot? PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES November 7, 1995 Page 5 After discussion, W. Manning made a motion to recommend to the Village Board, to not object to the request for rezoning from Will County A-1 to R-2. Seconded by K. O'Connell. Roll call vote. K. O'Connell, yes; R. Schinderle, yes; W. Manning, yes; Chairman Sobkoviak, yes. Motion carried. 4 yes 0 no. FINDINGS OF THE PLAN COMMISSION: 1. If approved would not provide a negative impact on surrounding property. 2. The rezoning is an effort to address existing conditions at the property. ADJOURN: 8:45 Sharon Hart, Secretary PLAINFIELD WIII • ccUNTYB • -W • cc�vUNITY Would everyone attending this Plan Commission meeting on November 7, 1995. Please sign this sheet for our official records. Name Address Z,4 L 1A 1, /�5"l.��/7 /U;SZA 100 w - n6► n ���eK�e d" /23uG �;n i� /e�