Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout1988-11-01 PC minutesPLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION DATE: November 1, 1988 AT: Village Hall COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Simmons, Vice Chairman Sobkoviak, H. Bayer, R. Mentzer, J. Anderson, W. Schempf. EX-OFFICIO PRESENT: M. Gehrke, D. Norris. 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. L. Kelly, R. Russ, J. Eichelberger, G. Krahn, and J. Wilson were absent. There being no additions or corrections, Chairman Simmons declared the minutes of the October 4, 1988 meeting approved as presented. Case No. 192-106882 Frederick H. and Carolyn Martens requesting rezoning from Residence A to B-2 for property located at 819 Division Street. Mr. Waldock, Village Planner, reported to the Board that the subject site is located at 819 Division Street on the southeast corner of Division and Route 126. Basically it is staff's finding that the site is impacted by the heavy traffic loads running along 59 and 126. Surrounding land uses to the subject site include single-family residential to the south, commercially zoned properties in all other directions. Due to the significant impacts of the surrounding commercial uses and from the traffic staff believes that the highest and best use of the site would be a commercial designation. However, due to the adjacent residential property to the south, staff feels that B-1 zoning is most appropriate at this site rather than the B-2 petitioner is requesting. B-1 is the most restrictive zoning classification for commercial uses and would afford some protections in terms of land use controls for the adjacent residents to the south. Mr. Waldock summarized his findings: The subject on three sides by business land uses; the site is along a high traffic regional arterial street; an is the highest and best use of the subject site. is for the approval of B-1 business zoning at the B-2 as requested. site is surrounded impacted by frontage J a B-1 business use His recommendation site rather than Petitioner, Frederick Martens, was present and presented his case. He pointed out all the commercial surrounding their property. He then discussed some questions that might come up such as "what business will go in there?" He stated he doesn't know. PLAINFIELD November 1, Page Two PLAN COMMISSION 1988 He does not have a buyer for the property at the present. The land is approximately 1/3 acre, 14,600 square feet approximately. Major part of the value lies in the house itself, therefore he feels a buyer is not going to buy the land and tear down the house. Mr. Martens said they have listed with two realtors and have had a number of private inquiries from lawyers, other realtors, and interior decorators. When we tell them what the zoning is they politely back off. He feels they have been hampered in selling the property because of the zoning. The other question is "what about the neighbors", what do they think. Mr. Martens stated he invited all the residents on Division Street and some on Bartlett Street to a meeting at his home. Nine attended, others did not and stated they had no objection to the rezoning. Two homeowners refused to discuss it. There are 19 homeowners living on the 700 and 800 block of Division St. All of these have no objection. Some stated they would like low traffic, some could not be reached. All adjacent homeowners were notified by certified mail of this hearing. W. Schempf moved to recommend to the Village Board that they approve B-1 zoning rather than the B-2 that petitioner requested for property at 819 Division Street. Seconded by M. Krippel. Vote by roll call. Anderson, yes; Krippel, yes; Mentzer, yes; Schempf, yes; Sobkoviak, yes; Bayer, not present for roll call; Simmons, yes. 6 yes, 0 no, Mr. Bayer not present for roll call. Motion carried. Mr. Bayer stated, before the roll call, that in view of his acquaintance with the petitioner and that he lives in close proximity to the subject property he must leave the room. County Case - June S. Foster Farm Requesting rezoning from County A-1 to R-2A for property located on Indian Boundary Road. Mr. Waldock, Village Planner, gave his report to the Board stating that the subject site is located on Indian Boundary Road south of Wheeler and south of Renwick. It is approximately 268 acres and is currently used agriculturally, zoned County A-1. Requested is the rezoning of the site to residential R-2A which would allow for 30,000 square foot lot sizes on septic and well development of a residential nature. In looking at the recently adopted Village Comprehensive Plan, it projects very low density residential development at this site. One to two units per acre is specified for areas which will ultimately be served by Village sewer and water as they become annexed. If the Village makes a policy decision that no services are to be extended then even lower densities would be required according to the Plan. PLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION November 1, 1988 Page Three The issue in this request is the advisability of a very large septic and well subdivision not far beyond the Village boundary and that environmentally the installation of sewer and water is a protection to the area and underground water aquifers. The Village should receive assurance that the site will someday be annexed and served by Village sewer and water services. Further, the issue of access to the site by.a paved roadway must be addressed at the time of subdivision review. Development of such a large site without construction of pavement on Old Indian Boundary Road would be ill-advised and premature. Mr. Waldock summarized his findings: the subject site is within the Village's 1.5 mile jurisdiction area; the site is not served by paved road surfaces; the request conforms with the Village Comprehensive Plan for land use but does not follow the recommendation that closer parcels develop first; development of the subject site without Village sewer and water would discourage future annexation of the area. Staff recommends that action be tabled on this request until a pre-annexation agreement can be worked out to assure future annexation. Attorney, James Babcock, was present on behalf of petitioner June Foster. He stated the 260 acre site is within the 1.5 mile jurisdiction of the Village and they are seeking R-2A zoning. There is no property between the site and the Village that is willing to annex to the Village. If there was property between the site and the Village they would be willing to annex and get sewer and water. They are not opposed to annexing to the Village, but asked would the Village be willing to extend water and sewer lines to their property before annexation takes place. He stated that the costs for bringing sewer and water lines to the property were estimated at $750,000, which is not feasible for his client. Mr. Babcock stated they are proposing a subdivision similar to Graver Estates in style and design. If zoning is granted they will contact all adjoining landowners to ascertain what their concerns are regarding drainage and the proposed layout, and try to solve any problems or concerns they may have. There was some discussion regarding the fact that the access to the property is by a gravel surfaced road. Mr. Babcock said they would have to meet County regulations, the road will probably have to be improved. Mr. Babcock asked to amend petitioner's application to also include a Special Use Permit for floodplain development because approximately 9 acres is in the floodplain development along the Caton Creek on the .east side of Indian Boundary Road. PLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION November 1, 1988 Page Four There were several adjoining landowners present and commented on how this proposed development could affect their property. One of their main concerns is drainage, that the ground in the area has not been drained properly. This is a concern to the farmers. Petitioner's engineer, Terry Ruettiger, agreed that the farm's drainage needs to be improved and stated they will consult with the adjoining owners before and during the development. Another landowner commented that thousands of acres of prime farm land have gone out of production and feels we should preserve the farm land. There was a long discussion regarding a pre-annexation agreement. This will have to be researched. M. Krippel expressed concern about tabling this case because of a pre-annexation agreement. His concern was how long of a time are we looking at in annexing this property. It seems if we're going to discourage all development that's not contiguous, we are sending a message to developers in the area that Plainfield will oppose at the County level all developments not contiguous. W. Schempf moved to table this case to the November 15th meeting to research the future enforceability of future annexation agreement on purchasers of lots within the subdivision, whether or not the pre-annexation is legally binding and enforceable. Seconded by J. Sobkoviak. Vote by roll call. Anderson, yes; Krippel, no; Mentzer, yes; Bayer, yes; Schempf, yes; Sobkoviak, yes; Simmons, yes. 6 yes, 1 no. Motion carried. Chairman Simmons stated we need to make a recommendation to the Village Board that a policy be established which would require pre-annexation agreement within a mile and a half jurisdiction, if we can make them legally binding with future property owners. County Case - Township of Plainfield Requesting Special Use Permit for construction of governmental office building in A-1 zoning. Located at the southwest corner of 1-55 and Lockport Street, Plainfield, IL. Mr. Waldock, Village Planner, reported the Township proposes to construct a new office building at their land near 1-55 and Lockport Street. The 6.45 acre site contains two garages and a dog pound building. The proposal calls for construction of a 2,688 square foot office building and associated parking spaces. The subject site is within the Village's 1.5 mile jurisdiction area and the special use permit for government office will not cause negative impacts on the Village. Staff recommends no objection to this request. PLAINFIELD PLAN COMMISSION November 1, 1988 Page Five There was a short discussion. The Board had no objection to this proposed building. J. Sdbkoviak moved to recommend to the Village Board that they not object to the Plainfield Township's request for special use permit for government offices in the A-1 agricultural zone of Will County. Seconded by W. Schempf. Vote by roll call. Schempf, yes; Bayer, yes; Mentzer, yes; Krippel, yes; Anderson, yes; Sobkoviak, yes; Simmons, yes. 7 yes, 0 no. Motion carried. Adjourn: 9:50 p.m. K a y fai4l a 0 Secretary V- Would everyone attending this Plan Commission meeting please sign this sheet for our official records. N AM, L ADDRESS -302 Vxv REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS FIRST AND THIRD MONDAY EVENINGS OF EACH MONTH