Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout1990-02-06 PC minutesPLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION DATE: February 6, 1990 AT: Village Hall COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Simmons, Vice - Chairman Sobkoviak, W. Schempf, H. Bayer, J. Anderson. EX- OFFICIO PRESENT: L. Kelly, G. Krahn, D. Norris, E. Schrader, D. Neir ALSO PRESENT: P. J. Waldock, Village Planner K. Jania, Secretary Chairman Simmons called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Roll call was taken. M. Krippel, R. Mentzer, M. Gehrke, and J. Wilson were absent. There being no additions or corrections, the minutes of the December 19, 1989 and January 16, 1989 meetings were approved as presented. Case No. 250- 11590S - Floor, Store and More, Inc., Larry Kinsella, Manager. Requesting special sign approval in the Central Sign District for property at 609 N. Desplaines Street. Mr. Waldock reported the subject site is the former Scott Trucking building.— Proposed is the installation of two 3' x 16' signs (48 sq. ft.) on the structure. The building is a contemporary structure and sign style is also contemporary. Applicant proposes to install one sign along each street frontage adjacent to the building. Ordinance allows corner locations to have one wall sign for each wall facing the public street. Sign area is limited to one square foot for every lineal foot of facade frontage. In this case, 96 square feet of signage is allowable. There was a question as to ownership of the corner lot. It was found the building also owns the corner lot. It is a separate and buildable lot, but in the present status of one ownership it is seen by staff as being a common property and therefore the subject building would be considered as a corner building at this time. W. Schempf moved to recommend to the Village Board that they approve the sign request for Floor, Store and More, Inc. at 609 N. Desplaines Street. Seconded by J. Anderson. Vote by roll call. Sobkoviak, yes; Schempf, yes; Bayer, yes; Anderson, yes; Simmons, yes. 5 yes, 0 no. Motion carried. PLAINFIELD February 6, Page Two PLAN COMMISSION 1990 County Case - Anthony Cerra Requesting variance from County zoning regulations for frontage width from 300' to 177.671 and special use permit for a second residence on site. Location: Approximately one-half mile north of 127th Street in Section 29 of Wheatland Township. Mr. Waldock reported applicants previously had requested a rezoning and variance for the subject site. The application has now been amended to delete the zoning aspect and now includes only the frontage variance request. Will County Zoning Ordinance required 300' minimum frontage. Applicant is requesting .a frontage variance from 3001 down to 177.671. Subject site contains a horse stable and mobile home. Applicants are requesting a variance in order to build a permanent structure on the narrow portion of the site (eastern portion). Also requested is a special use permit to allow two residences on the site. The concerns regarding the previous­ . request mentioned at Village Board level focused on the proposed 2.5 acre E-2 rezoning area. It appeared that there was a possibility of subdividing the site to separate the acre E-2 area from the remainder of the site. This would have created two nonconforming parcels where one now exists. In staff's opinion it is generally felt that a single-family dwelling is appropriate land use in an agricultural property. Further, division of the tract is not permissible without future variances and would not be advisable. However, since no other permanent dwelling structure now occupies the subject site, staff find ' s no objection to the variance request in this case. It is felt that the existing mobile home as an accessory use (a caretaker's residence) for the stable facility is reasonable. Historically, mobile homes have been permitted in agricultural areas as a secondary residence. Attorney John Peterson was present on behalf of Petitioner, Anthony Cerra and presented copies of notices sent to adjoining landowners. He stated Mr. and Mrs. Cerra would like to build a home adjacent to the objector site. Mr. Cerra is retired. He and his wife do not intend to run the stable except as managers. Hired help will be living in the trailer. He stated in discussing this with the County, the County felt an amended request would be the best way to go. Mr. and Mrs. Cerra wish to build their home and do not wish-to change the zoning. Attorney Peterson also stated there is a long history to the discord between the objectors and the Cerras. PLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION February 6, 1990 Page Three Mr. Keeley, adjoining landowner, was present and stated his objections to the applicant's request. He feels the Cerras, knowing what the zoning was, went ahead and put a barn and trailer on the property violating County zoning ordinances. Knowing what the zoning was, the property was bought as a nonconforming piece of land, the Cerras bought it anyway. They knew what they were getting into. When they purchased the land they had ample opportunity to buy additional ground to the south of them and get the correct amount of frontage they wanted. They failed to do so. Mr. Keeley stated he is objecting because they knew what they were getting into when they started and feels this is a self-imposed hardship. Attorney Peterson answered the objector's statements with a history of the discord between the applicant and the objector. He also talked about the history on how the subject site was developed, and the zoning problems. He further commented the objectors are operating two homes on 6 acres and the petitioners cannot have two homes on 16 acres. There was some discussion regarding County zoning regulations. J. Sobkoviak moved to recommend to the Village Board to deny the amended County land use application for Anthony Cerra requesting • frontage variance from 300' to 177.67' and a special use permit for • second residence in an A-1 Agricultural zoning district. Seconded by H. Bayer. Vote by roll call. Anderson, no; Bayer, yes; Schempf, no; Sobkoviak, yes; Simmons, no. 2 yes, 3 no. Motion failed. Chairman Simmons stated the Plan Commission therefore has no objection to the Cerras' petition. Mr. Waldock reported Coilplus, Inc. is planning a building extension at their site. They plan to add 40.044 sq. ft. of steel coil storage to the existing building of 106,216 sq. fit— In a letter dated February 5, .1990 from Coilplus they state that since the project involves a building extension of less than 500 of the original building area, they feel that a full site plan review should be unnecessary. After discussion, it was the consensus of the Plan Commission that a site plan review is necessary according to our ordinance. Adjourn: 8:10 p.m. Kay Jania, cretary Would everyone attending this Plan Commission meeting please sign this sheet for our official records. NAML A A ADDRESS .1 Id 4 h(,