The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About1992-05-05 PC minutesPLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION May 5, 1992 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: EX-OFFICIO PRESENT: ALSO PRESENT: AT: Plainfield Library Chairman Sobkoviak, W. Schempf, H. Bayer, E. Fortini. G. Krahn, M. Gehrke. P. J. Waldock, Village Planner S. Hart, Secretary Chairman Sobkoviak called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll call was taken. A. Consola, M, Krippel, D. Norris, G. Bott, J. Ray, R. Zimmerman, the School District, and J. Eichelberger were absent. There being no additions or corrections, chairman Sobkoviak declared the minutes of April 7, 1992 approved. OLD BUSINESS: NEW BUSINESS: CASE NO. 348-043092 FP OWNER: Anthony P. Consola. REQUEST: Final Plat Review. LOCATION: 407 Illinois Street. Mr. Waldock summarized his report as follows: The Zoning Board of Appeals considered this request as part of a Public Hearing for a variance last month. At that time the Board was informed that the site is fully developed with two wood frame structures, one a large ranch that encroaches from Lot 24 on to Lot 25, of the original Town Subdivision, to correct the encroachment situation, a subdivision of lots is necessary. The Zoning Board recommended approval of the variance, and the Village Board consensus was to agree with the Zoning Board of Appeals. Tonight we have the actual Final Plat of the subdivision that carries out the Lot division, it is really a re-plat of Lots 24 and 25 of the Original Town subdivision. The Subdivision now known as the Ottawa Street Subdivision, creates two lots, one 5900 square feet in area, the other now 18,000 square feet in area, originally both lots had been 12,000 square feet each, the re-plat is necessary to correct an encroachment problem. Variations are also necessary and have been reviewed by both the Zoning Board of Appeals, and the Village Board. PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES May 5, 1992 Page 2 Therefore Staff is recommending approval of the Final Plat for the Ottawa Street Subdivision, creating two Single-Family lots at the southeast corner of Ottawa Street and Illinois Street. CHAIRMAN SOBKOVIAK: The petitioner is not present. Does any one have questions for the Planner? Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak about this proposal? There being no questions or comments, the Chair will entertain a motion. W. SCHEMPF: I will make a motion that we approve the Final Plat. E. FORTINI: Second it. CHAIRMAN SOBKOVIAK: A motion has been made and seconded to recommend to the Village Board, the approval of the Final Plat for 407 Illinois Street. Roll call vote, please. Roll call vote: W. Schempf, yes; H. Bayer, yes; E. Fortini, yes; Chairman Sobkoviak, yes. Motion carried, 4 yes 0 no. DISCUSSION: 502 Division Street P. WALDOCK: I will read the body of the letter into the record: I am Kathy Bulian, broker sales person for Re/Max Joliet, and the representative agent for the property at 502 Division Street, the Collins property. Since we are the exact "sister" property to the Selfridge law firm across the street, we feel that a variance or complete change of zoning to business would be appropriate. Without this zoning change, procuring a residential purchases has become very difficult and burdensome to Mrs. Collins. I am requesting to be heard at your next meeting. Please inform me of your agenda, date and time as soon as possible. CHAIRMAN SOBKOVIAK: This is an informal discussion, there will not be any voting on this tonight, in order for us to vote, an application has to be made and it needs to be published 15 days in advance. But we can discuss it tonight. If you have something to add to Mr. Waldock's Mrs. Collins is present tonight, perhaps she would like to explain her concerns with the property, to the Plan commission. PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES May 5, 1992 Page 3 MRS. COLLINS: My real estate agent has told me that, the reason I can't sell my house, is because I am on Route 59. It has been a family home, but I am the only one in it now, and it is too large for me. I have had several offers from offices but it is not zoned for offices. CHAIRMAN SOBKOVIAK: You could sell it, contingent on re-zoning? MRS. COLLINS: I could sell it if I could put an office in it. During discussion, the Plan Commission, brought up some background points: In the past, Staf f was approached by an individual who was interested in purchasing the property and using it for office space. An informal pole of the Village Board was taken at that time, to see if there was any concern or interest in re-zoning this property. The Trustees that were asked, were not in favor of re-zoning the property for Commercial use. (BT) Business Transitional use would probably work at .. this property if it were favored by the Board, however, attempts to establish that type of zoning was supported at The Plan Commission level, but ultimately rejected by the Village Board. This site at 502 Division Street, is not within the area of the Comprehensive Plan that calls for the (BT) Business Transitional use. It was decided that the site was suitable for the BT, designation. Parking, screening, large lot, adjacent to an alley, and it can be segregated from surrounding properties. In 1988, there was consideration of a Business Transitional zoning request through a (Text Amendment); along both sides of Route 59, from Main Street, (Rt. 126) to Union. That request received a tremendous amount of opposition from property owners. The property owners opposition was based on; the home owners wanted to preserve the residential integrity of the property, they considered the area-as an asset. The Selfridge house (B-1) , and Reichart Towing (B-2) are across the street. That makes the site a little bit different, in that there is commercial in the area. From a Planning Perspective there are arguments against re-zoning; a spot zoning situation is a unique zoning to benefit an individual not a community. Another argument against re-zoning was, the Village's Comprehensive Plan does not include this site as part of the Business Transitional use area. There are also arguments for re-zoning, it is on a high traffic Highway, it is adjacent to Commercial zoning across the street. PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES May 5, 1992 Page 4 The reaction of each of the Plan Commission members to Mrs. Collins request was as follows: E. FORTINI: I could see where there would be something to both sides of the question. I think it would be worth hearing. W. SCHEMPF: I think it should be heard. CHAIRMAN SOBKOVIAK: I would be sympathetic, because of previous cases, (Rt. 126 and Rt. 59) H. BAYER: Not that I am not sympathetic, I am, but on a scale of 1 - 10, 1 would go with a 4 as to having it pass. P. WALDOCK: Next step from this point, is, would you like to either, take this up at the Village Board at a workshop, or begin a re-zoning application procedure. A re-zoning requires a Public Hearing, a Public Hearing requires you notify by Certified Mail, all of the adjoining land owners, (any one that shares your property line, and also those across the street). Mrs. Collins will make her decision as to whether to go before the Plan Commission with a formal request or the.Village Board with a workshop and will 'get back to the Planning Department with a decision. P. WALDOCK: Before we adjourn, I would like to discuss the Jehovah Witness case, just briefly. There is a Public Hearing coming up May 18, before the Village Board, to considered this Annexation Petition. Part...of- the Plan commission's responsibility is to consider Annexations to the Village. The Plan Commission has considered this petition, through previous discussions. What I didn't ask specifically was, is the Annexation of that site appropriate, once it becomes contiguous. The site for your refresher, is 157 Frederick Avenue, it is not contiguous at this time. CHAIRMAN SOBKOVIAK: I have no problem with that, they have complied with all requirements of the Village through the Site Plan Review. P. WALDOCK: I am not contemplating bringing the Annexation Agreement to the Plan Commission unless you inform me tonight that you would like to see it and do a formal review of it. The reason that I intended not to bring it here, was because there is nothing specific to zoning or planning issues in it. The only issue really left is related to sewer and water, and some costs associated with that, and contiguity. That is why I was not intending to bring it here, though I would be glad to if you want to consider it. CHAIRMAN SOBKOVIAK: I think it would be worthwhile. P. WALDOCK: Then, we will consider it June 2,, 1992. Adjourn 7:50 p.m. Would everyone attending this Plan Commission meeting Mau 1992. Please sign this sheet for our official records. Name ; �h—X/ Address fop A41&01,— 4 Je, REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS FIRST AND THIRD MONDAY EVENINGS OF EACH MONTH